Shootout: Meet the 5 Worst Guns That Ever Fired a Shot

I'll kick your ass

Meet the single worst poster that ever posted
1. 26b084

What version of the chauchat the french or the american version? The American version was the one that was dogshit while the French version was actually pretty good.

Attached: chauchat.jpg (1280x583, 37.38K)

Why is glock bad? It's highly functional, generally has a good capacity, it's reliable, not expensive, not heavy and very safe. You can't say that Glock is bad because there is are a lot more bad things out there to put into your equation and to make such an affirmation you present yourself as very ignorant.

Attached: 37225815.jpg (1920x1280, 1.08M)

All of them. G*ns are evil and should never have been invented.
I'm so glad that it's only a matter of time before common sense will win, and nobody will be allowed to touch them. Before too long, nobody will even know what a g*n is, only that the authorities have a special tool to deal with illegal toxicity like this board.

You don't belong here. Go back to your tankie shithole.
>>>/cuckchan/

Nambu
Arguable, and I don’t see how this pertains to the matter at hand. For arguments sake, when the Nambu was developed was developed (1896~1904 iirc) and accepted into service (1906), the IJA had seen land victories against China and Russia; I don’t see how the IJA was a “hopeless mess”.
Perhaps not ergonomic, but the author states that its only one among many of the ergonomic pistols built. The author could have chosen any of these unergonomic pistols he mentions. Although this mistake does not detract from the argument the author attempts to make, the adjective form of “Ergonomic” is not “ergonomical”, it’s “ergonomic”.
The author should perhaps consider how, at the turn of the century, semi-automatic pistols were still in its infancy, and the copying of designs and operations were rampant, even if those are now considered obsolete and overly-complex; should this not apply for other pistols designed at the same time? Why should the author insist on calling the Nambu one of the “worst” guns? Regarding the safety, this is a very valid complaint, but again, can it be used to hold up the idea that “Nambu bad”? I doubt it.
Again, some of these issues exist among other firearms designed at the same time, including the aforementioned Luger, in fact, does this difficulty of removing spent mags exist with most the heel release magazines on European semi-autos of the same era?
I concede, this is a design flaw that should have been rectified
At this point the author has lost all credibility; the 8mm Nambu cartridge is comparable to any 32. ACP/.380 ACP round used by European armies in the early 20th Century; perhaps it did not have “muh stopping power” like the 45. ACP or 9mm Para, but it functioned as a pistol designed for commissioned officers should function; out of the way in day to day tasks, and there when all shit hits the fan and the officer has to fend for himself.

anyway op a fag, and so is his gay article by some george take wannabe nissei traitor

Attached: 0bea97d758c03002bd5efef3492933ef160b7008c47141b44e9634b1dbffc88a.png (422x493, 178.72K)

Amerimutts would put 30-06 in their Chauchats and would jam the damn thing.

Fixed.

If those are the worst guns this author can think of, they don't know shit. Where is the zipgun? FP-45 Liberator? Cobray Terminator? Even the Nambu is better than those pieces of shit.
Now that's how you fucking bait people. Well done.

You heard wrong, the US military temporarily used them because at the time they had no comparable US-specific LMG, and the French had a gorillion. It was notoriously bad.

Literally the opposite, but unless the US revamped it to the point where it wasn't even recognizable as a chauchat, it was still absolutely dogshit. In fact the French version was the one with the open fucking magazine.

Attached: 631ce43037137656bf2601436dd82e008a83be6a03483cfde3be926bcd5c8815.jpg (451x463, 20.6K)

The US conversions were contracted out to a literal bicycle shop with no relevant mechanical experience that didn't get the chamber headspace, feed angle, or the tolerances between working surfaces even close to passable. They would jam from the heat of a few dozen rounds, and that was if they didn't suffer from failures to feed. However, the biggest problem with the Chauchat in 8mm Lebel was 8mm Lebel, and functionally those guns have been proven time and time again to be very nice for a World War I design. If debris doesn't get inside the action, they're nearly as reliable as a Potato Digger. The US didn't improve jack shit, you moron, where could you have possibly heard such falsehood?

love mine

The 1911 was never used to kill anyone in military service.

You have brain damage? Its reliability means jack when the entire gun is this huge unwieldy long recoil shit that completely cycles backwards every shot, and it's supposed to serve as an LMG. The .30-06 versions were shit too for sure, but a caliber conversion can't fix an entire shit gun.

The caliber conversion wasn't meant to fix anything, you Reddit-browsing numbskull. It was a shitty one-off production contract because the US Army had exactly zero weapons to supplement that combat role. None. On top of that historical note that you've somehow managed to understand completely upside-down, if you actually knew anything about firearms, you would know that there is nothing inherently wrong with recoil operation and that a huge amount of very successful guns, both commercial and military, have been recoil operated. Yes, including long recoil.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Browning_Auto-5
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remington_Model_8
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madsen_machine_gun
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gepárd_anti-materiel_rifle

Since you're nogunz, I'll go to the effort of telling you that long recoil's main drawback is that tight tolerances are a must due to the reciprocation of the barrel, so that you ensure the best possible accuracy through repeated shooting. Weighing against that are its benefits such as slowing the felt recoil impulse to reduce muzzle kick and wear on the gun, longer service life of parts, better handling of higher pressure ammo than short recoil, and a tradeoff, which is that it necessarily puts a hard limit on the gun's rate of fire that is directly tied to whatever ammo you're currently using. A low cyclic rate is not a bad thing, though, and machine gunners from many militaries have noted this throughout history. That's why the Madsen stayed in service for so long, it was effective.

Faggot.

Australia.

Clearly, you literal retard. Almost like that's my point.
Right, as I said.
You are a literal snot-eating 5 iq jungle monkey, you know nothing about what your talking about you and know nothing about what I'm saying. I don't know if you're illiterate or just plain stupid, but try harder to actually comprehend the things you read. Nothing is wrong with "recoil operation", wow, I'm so very impressed you knew that term. You know, it's almost possible that every semi-automatic and automatic gun in existence is operated via recoil. But you don't seem to understand what long recoil is, nor do you understand what it would mean for an LMG, or they implemented it in and how it affected the chauchat besides more restricted quality control. I'm so absolutely confused, in fact, I'm boggled that some teenager who has no understanding of the topic they're talking about, sitting on the peak of mount stupidity, would blindly go for contrarianism on a gun that's wildly known as, for good reason, being a hunk of garbage.

That almost every.
Your next move will be to ignore the point and screech about gas impingement.

You have just not only completely flipped your position (you went from disagreeing that the American Chauchat was bad and claiming it was an improvement in your first post, to the opposite claim in this post), but you're backpedalling and moving the goalposts after being proven to be an idiot. Your response to that is a giant paragraph of cheap insults with zero arguments made and zero points of information brought up to support your stance. Vid related, and reported.

Nigger.

I've not moved a single goalpost nor have I changed my opinion, and it's telling that your only response is 'no ur wrong' and 'reported'. Flail more, retard.

Shouldn't this list have those shitty bryco/jennings/whatever guns?

Attached: 2ff19086d2334433b6af3b648ffb352bc2bcd9135dd2c52440703193b4471a70.jpg (1000x1000, 231.19K)

Imagine being so assblasted that this is your only line of defense

I will quote your own first post:

In response to:

You have no knowledge about guns, you have never researched the Chauchat, and you have contradicted yourself by switching positions, nigger. Imagine being this emotionally invested in trying to defend your ego on an anonymous imageboard instead of bowing out like a man when proven wrong, and admitting you don't know what you're talking about. Go back to Reddit.

Yes, the american version was more or less better than the french version, but it was still dogshit because it's a chauchat. How dumb are you that you can't understand this?

Only guns I've ever fired and didn't like either had really fucking fat grips or had a mushy trigger that felt like shit. Both were fixable.

Except it wasn't. All historical accounts say that it wasn't, all modern testing of the guns says it wasn't, the fact that they were haphazardly built by peasant bike manufacturers who didn't even have the right measurements says it wasn't. Ian McCollum owns a Chauchat, and guess which one he has? Guess how well it operates? All the data available disproves your position that you've weaseled around trying to argue for. It is universally known that the incorrectly built .30-06 Chauchats were what gained a terrible reputation from US Army servicemen. You do not have a single inch to stand on for the claim that it was the better version. Stop shitposting.

So now after you realized your retardation you're hopping from 'y-you switched position!' to 'no it wasn't!'. Now you have to play mental gymnastics with yourself until you believe that a long recoil LMG that a. has low rate of fire b. completely operates backwards and throws the shooter around, c. is unreliable according to all instances, and d. is extremely heavy and unwieldy for its capabilities actually as a matter of fact is great and awesome just because you're so desperate to disagree with me disagreeing with your contrarianism.

Every single word of that was a strawman, and not even coherent. You have changed the position you're defending yet again. Are you seriously trying to damage control this desperately? You're projecting like a madman, too, it's almost kind of sad. Is that what it's like to take a look inside your head for a few seconds? Please, stop, you're frightening me.

Attached: 72bb36bc621112e6bfcae9590db06b8a7b833f2289ab69c53b081e55c4395078.jpg (224x255, 13.91K)

Extremely pathetic

Attached: 1540046326080.jpg (651x555, 75.44K)

I don't have to argue against a non-argument, famalam.

Attached: 1993bbaa64e887b3273e4b31ffce191a9d11758e45101ba97f79255331065dc0.png (412x540, 219.14K)

Room temp iq

Attached: negro meltdown.jpg (458x508, 69.3K)

i will fight you, saunanigger

those were French manufacture. although supposedly there was some communication failure that resulted in all the chamber tolerencing error. Gladiator was probably the most at fault party. US troops ended up using the 8mm Lebel version, anyway.

pic is an insult to Rhodok

you remind me of that know-it-all kid that can't stop bullshitting. quit Lindybeiging and read a book.

The chauchat gets my penis hard because of its action and low rate of fire. I wish I had one myself.

Attached: be125f863ed38fefb7a3b8e59c881c7bf4f4a8e04fd3b056b9902a97a7dcb32c.jpg (1500x999, 229.76K)

Jesus Christ. The brunt of the Chauchat's problems stem from the terribly done 30.06 conversions where they miss-converted the prints from metric to imperial. The other issues found with the magazines filling with mud and the aluminum jacket catching the barrel as it overheated come from it being misused as a heavy emplaced machine gun in a mud filled trench environment. When used in its intended mobile squad automatic weapon role it suffered none of these issues, though not to say that the open mags were a particularly good idea. It wasn't fit for heavy trench fighting, but nothing else really was ether as no one could have predicted such a disastrous war that would drag on for years. There are far worse weapons that were pressed into service that failed even when made correctly and used in perfect conditions.

Attached: 9af.gif (640x360, 393.35K)

Honestly, I didn't even want to point out that it's an automatic rifle and not a machine gun because it was funnier to watch the guy sperg out over indefensible nonsense. I mean, the damn thing has a foregrip, and practical prone usage is inconvenient at best because of the magazine design. It's not rocket science.

Did everyone forget what IDs are

Attached: c6d331963be1e4a3abcbf9dbbfb2c43a6a04f7efe8b42a30744d37f9535339e6.gif (320x240, 63.45K)

Fuck IDs. It's an imageboard, ffs