>build this feature into millions of firearms
>turns out it was never any use
>finally ditch it decades later
Why didnt anyone bother testing it first?
3-round burst
>build this feature into millions of firearms
>turns out it was never any use
>finally ditch it decades later
Why didnt anyone bother testing it first?
it was the cold war, there was no one to shoot.
I mean, how is four not better?
Wastes even more bullets.
M16s should have 30-round burst
I’m glad you specified that you mean what you say!
Maybe in a last ditch full on conscription with minimal training being given situation it makes sense.
>watch garandthumb
>make this thread
Why don't you just frick off?
They told the grunts to have better trigger discipline instead and saved money.
it was an experiment to try and handhold people into controlled bursts and increase hit probability originally, I think.
it was certainly tested.
but combat data from those millions of rifles is far better testing.
This. 3RB is a better semi for the 150-250m bracket when shooting under combat stress, auto is for covering the SAW while it reloads and door kicking drug addicts.
had nothing to do with hit probability, and everything about conserving ammo for panicky low rank soldiers
They read world war z and knew that single fire is better for taking out zombies and Arabs and whoever
The Army was going to make the M16A2 ~~*semi-auto only*~~ when the burst was offered as a compromise, with a shitty mechanism.
The guy who designed the M16A2 had a large discussion on over barfcom on why the changes were performed. Only the A2 stock LOP was shit tbh
Rented a full auto MP5 and played around with it for a few hundred rounds, mostly full auto for fun, but some 3 round burst...where it seemed to do pretty well. In just a few mags it was quite easy to stay center of mass accurate out to 50 yards. So...maybe good for SMGs but nor Rifles?
>most people that b***h about burst haven't used it at all or only used it a couple times in a non combat situation. These people are fake experts with little experience but strong opinions
Welfare queen here;
>Unit gets issued pre-A1 M4s
>No one, absolutely no one, likes the burst mode and even when qualing we were screamed at to not even bother with it or we would all get frickfrick duty for the rest of the week
>What times we did use it we quickly found that all it did was allow us to string our shots upwards and expend our mags faster
>Not even going to get into the unique dogshit mechanics of the A2 FCG burst mechanism
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see why burst fire sucks.
That's odd.
I was in 8 years, we never once used burst during rifle qual.
I used it one time during a close ambush and had no problems.
Good for you.
>>Not even going to get into the unique dogshit mechanics of the A2 FCG burst mechanism
what if I asked you very nicely
the 3 round burst works pretty good in Halo infinite. Battle Rifle literaly best gun in Halo
They thought military men were dumb, stupid animals etc because the nuclear age and computer age hadn't yet fully erased the prejudices of the musket era.
I was told by several veteran boomers its meant to be used like you would single shot mode, but with a better probability of piercing armor than single shot mode would
Most veterans are morons. Don't listen to them. Most scientists who theorize about how these things should work, are not there and are just trying to sell something to the military who are run by a bunch of bureaucrats who will never see combat. But who cares if it doesn't work? Only people who have voluntarily identified themselves as low status expendable like
have will die if things don't work out.
Did a Joe frick your girl or something?
Doesn't the burst setting result in an absolutely atrocious trigger pull?
Hahahahahha no. It results in THREE different atrocious trigger pulls!
no it doesnt. it just changes the disconnector
Okay.
Is a 2 round burst a meme then?
Assuming that both shots practically land on the same place?
Forgot pic
>SUPER SLAV PULLEY MAGIC MENTIONED
>U SEE IVAN IF SHOOT BOOLET FORWARD THEN BACKWARD THEN NEVER INACCURATE
I fricking kek'd but this anon is actually right.
>assuming both shots land in the same place
Throw out the "practically", then stop assuming, instead understand that nobody in combat is ever going to manage recoil that precisely,
And finally ask yourself what are the odds a battle-ready rifle with mass produced military grade ammo, which is designed "as a system" to effectively be 3-5MOA, would ever hit the same place twice with a burst fire.
When do you use full auto fire in any shoulder arm, then, besides a point-blank freakout? I recall a certain Mr. Stone opined that this was just an emergency-only function to disrupt enemy ambushes, which is why he built it into his rifle. Has that changed in the light of decades of real-world experience?
Imagine seething this much while having 0 idea of what you're talking about.
Absolutely worthless, all the same recoil of a burst but with less shots on target. I’m convinced Russia only made it because some huge arms company fricked up their autosears and couldn’t get it to time itself correctly so just rolled with it
I think that one WAS for hit probability to see if it would just make things more accurate.
it didn't work.
not even burst, it was a limiter. If you only let off two rounds, next pull was one round. How fricking moronic.