Ameritards such as myself have never really had access to fullauto or selct fire weaponry. Even before the Hughes amendment, NFA regulation of auto-gats made them both expensive, and easily traceable.
My question is, if you pitted to group against each other, assuming both has the same relative experience and capabilities, one group semi-only (or maybe with echo triggers and cranks), and another with access to full auto weapons, how much of an advantage do the full-auto guys have, if any in your opinions?
Semi-Only vs Select fire
Ryan Torres
Oliver Stewart
Go to any paintball match.
Go to any laser tag match.
Go to any airsoft match.
Go to any sim-ammo war games.
Full auto wins.
Every
Single
Time.
The "muh uncontrolalble" meme needs to die. True, it isn't good at suppressing fire across Afghan mountains, but if you need to engage in CQC, full-auto is the only option.
Lincoln Wilson
You could at least add what kind of trigger group and lower your particular bottle opener is for.
Mason Anderson
Assuming everyone had ARs / AKs and the only difference was a giggle switch I think it would be pretty even at range but full auto would have a big advantage in CQB.
If you are going to give the full auto side SAWs that changes things as they are much more effective at range for both suppression and engaging targets. Leading a target is much easier when you can just hold on one spot and fire until the target runs into the fire.
Elijah Thomas
My official opinion is that machine guns should be select fire (heavy machine guns, light machine guns, submachine guns, automatic rifles) absolutely, they are built for the very purpose and can handle full automatic and gain something from it. I posted elsewhere I would like, and may one day acquire, a semi auto no NFA stamp MG3/MG42, even without full auto. But damned if it doesn't really doesn't take a lot of potential out of the gun. Such guns are of the weight, build, caliber to be controlled on full auto, are used for suppression (save for SMG) that enjoys controlled bursts full auto offers, can maintain high rates of fire (save for SMG), are at their best at full automatic. The SMG handles full auto well and is best with it, skilled shooters who choose single shot aren't hurt with the option.
As far as battle rifles and assault rifles, that's a tougher one. Assault rifles can gain something out of it CQB as mentioned in this thread, sometimes close range controlled automatic has its place. As much as I don't like the AR so much, I do agree with the three round burst idea for the assault rifle, even at range it offers a controlled, single trigger pull burst to help improve hits and not a full on, burn through a magazine to accomplish nothing but burn the barrel idea. Civilian binary triggers can do something similar (if they aren't/don't get banned), the three round burst is good for close range as well. So, assault rifles do have something to be gained in certain situations, but then again full auto is a barrel burning ammo waster in ranged combat, taking it off may "idiot proof" the gun in some sense.
Battle rifles are interesting in the fact that Britain ACTUALLY fucking did it to their rifles. They took away full auto on their battle rifles out of choice to their troops. Wither this should be left as an option, wither this should be a matter of training and not taking away the option, is an interesting bit. But the fact a major world power did it shows you the nature of the rifle, standard battle rifles simply do not have the moxy to control the weapon in a meaningful way. To control the weapon, even in CQB, might just be better off with trained rapid fire single shot instead of a full auto string. Their firepower means they can do well without full auto, in theory, and especially in civilian cases, and have the least to be gained from full automatic because of control, even at closer ranges under combat conditions. I don't think the Argentinians gained an unstoppable advantage with full auto FAL's vs. the British rifles.
I classify purpose built heavy barrel rifles like the HB FAL and M14 variants to fit closer to the automatic rifle category than a battle rifle. Its intended for auto fire and as a support weapon, so more like the BAR. They are best off with full auto, of course.
And another point, as mentioned in battle rifle paragraph, in civilian and police situations where the Hague is off the table, the battle rifle will do very well without full automatic. If allowed to use soft points, the cartridges in battle rifles are almost guaranteed one stop shots, even minor hits can be crippling. The sheer advantage of firepower gained from increased terminal effect can offset the lack of full automatic fire. I have my battle rifles selected for home defense, even though the possibility is extremely low someone will attack, and I am not bothered by the lack of full automatic on my FAL, PTR, or M1a. Some of this is my capability, but also the fact that hunting rounds will render any crackhead useless with one or two shots with ease.
tl;dr I don't mourn the lack of full auto on my battle rifles, I would think heavily about getting a binary trigger for my assault rifles, and I am fucking sore about not having full auto capabilities on my subguns. I'm actually very upset about the possiblity of getting a MG3 like I want and not having it full auto. Reasons why are explained above.
Sebastian Robinson
It honestly depends on what kind of group we are talking about and the logistical requirements each group has. But assuming both are equal, it comes down to range.
A semi auto AK/AR will be equal to a full auto gun at ranges beyond 75m. A semi auto AK/AR with an echo trigger is essentially a burst weapon, and as such can have a rate of fire matching that of their full auto cousins. The beltfeds, especially the non heavy weapons such as GPMGs and SAWs are going to be heavily in favor of full auto. And I say this a someone who owns a semi auto x54r belt fed. HMGs and semi-auto belt fed .50s are about equal if a crank is used on the semis.
A lot of the disadvantages semi autos have can be mitigated through proper tactics.
Lincoln Edwards
As the owner of a semi auto UK-59, it actually doesn't. Most GPMGs are uncontrollable in full auto unless they are mounted or tripoded. I've been to Big Sandy and I've shot some beltfeds at other venues, and I can assure you that any tactical advantage you have will be negated by the cost and weight of ammo, especially in a patrol/freehand setup. The average MG belt is 100 rounds. The average MG has a cyclic rate of 600+ rounds per minute. The cheapest x54r I can find is $120 per 440rnd tin. That means I would need to spend a shit load of money to feed the gun since the US taxpayer isn't subsidizing my training. This means you or I won't be doing mag dumps if you are freehanding the gun. You'll be bursting, something that can be closely approximated in semi auto with a very light trigger. The don't make echo triggers for any of the semi-auto full power beltfeds on the market, but with the cost of ammo, I wouldn't install it if they did.
Brody Bailey
Just looking at it, I would assume that specific opener is for M16 type soda bottle caps, not the AR15 twist type. Trigger group looks like standard typical milspec food group.
Zachary Flores
Depends on so many factors it renders the question a pointless argument starter with no real hope of resolution.
There are weapons and tactics where having the capability for automatic fire is an advantage. The side with machine guns is naturally going to favor those factors, and favor scenarios where their strengths can be utilized. Conversely, there are weapons and tactics where having the capacity for automatic fire is NOT an advantage. The side without access to machine guns is going to favor scenarios where they can play to the strengths they do have, mitigate any disadvantages, and deny the enemy the full utility of their own strengths.
Attempting to use a self loading rifle like a SAW, using fire-and-movement tactics against an enemy with real machine guns is just giving yourself a handicap and asking to get killed. But if you take that same self loading rifle and use it to perform a sniper ambush, that's thinking smart.
Charles Gomez
How useful is hyperburst for regular infantry?