>if he was able to understand them.
If he was capable of understanding the manufacturing and materials of his day, then he would be able to understand ours. A smart person is smart no matter what year they're in.
Even a simpleton with training can learn this stuff in 4-6 months, at least in theory how it works, not necessarily how to do great designs. Browning with a year of concentrated training in everything modern would be able to outdo most weapons designers today with him eyes closed.
Nah, CAD would be so easy for all of the pictured dudes to understand. They all knew how to do mechanical blueprints and drawings, take measurements, build jigs, etc... they essentially already know the fundamental principles that CAD software was built to interface with.
Learning to use a mouse and keyboard might be a bit jarring for them kek
My dad is in his 80s. He used to code punch card computer mainframes in the 70s. My 8 year old son had to teach him how to send a text message on his iPhone.
You'd have to assign Browning an assistant that know how to use CAD but modern CAD was based on Drafting techniques and Browning was well versed in Drafting.
>so it's like an infinite size drawing board, except you can change dimensions by typing in the numbers and get pretty images of finished design without actually making it with metal. Oh, and you operate it with this thing, we can get a 10yo to teach you how to use it or get you a digital pen if you want.
[...]
It just disappoints me when people make Browning out to be the be-all and end-all of gun design. Also its kind of easy to design hundreds of firearm designs if you never have to do any development work to it the moment it leaves your drafting board It just causes a lot of other designers to go underappreciated. I still have massive respect for Browning, iirc he allowed the US Government to use his designs royalty free during WWI because 'they needed to use that money elsewhere'. He was humble like pic related.
What you guys are forgetting..look at that picture of Garand! All those arbor mills and shape cutters......turn ANYONE lose with modern investment casting, 5 axis CNC and 3d printign to prototype the plastics before spending on the molds......The capability of the modern industrial world is 4 decimals when guys like Browning still drafted in FREACTIONS and everything was made to gauges....christ we have non contact 3d scanning and CMM.....WIRE EDM!!!!!!!
>the real question you should be asking:
With all this tech why are we getting moronic retrograde shit like the M&P FPC???
>It's like NO ONE other than Keltec is even trying!!!
hell...I'd be more tempted to buy THIS GUY's garage project than anything I see at SHOT.
That's why weird old wonder 9s are worth somuch, ppl want esoteric finicky shit that looks SWEET and has that 'prototype' feel. The gun market is VidyaGame Kidz not boomers, no one wants a glock unles sit looks like something from Halflife!
Rant concluded.
Also Russias best designers were pulling for the olympic effort int eh 60s-70s
>Mikhail Vladimirovich for his work at margolin (dude was blind)
>Prof. Efim Haiderov (google him) KHR-31 picrel
>the straight pull MTs-80 and 85-1!!! >the trigger in the MU-12-1 is a masterpiece!!!
They should be fine, as proficient engineers of their era. Nowadays most people don’t know how a computer or smart phone functions on a machine level, but learning how to use it is easy.
Browning was able to understand firearm design and manufacturing without the internet, CAD, CAE, DFSS, or anything. Imagine how fast he could pump out designs by just having a 3d printer to rapid prototype simple parts for fitment.
If Browning designed an AR-15 from scratch without ever learning about them himself, I would immediately default to it as the best firearm design of all time.
Browning was an ideas man, and since its one person only and you cant also bring back pedersen, I would go for E.F. Dragunov, inventor of the SVD rifle, the greatest firearm ever made, as well as several other excellent prototype guns and he is also a talented sport shooter.
If you HAD to bring a Russkie then bring fricking German Korobov. The only thing restraining his genius was that Soviets weren't interested in anything they couldn't produce by millions easily.
>for the American commercial market
none of them would accept having their designs cucked into the pavement
let them design their guns freely so they could make something cool
He didn't do shit, Browning literally created hundreds of designs and innovated firearms history and we still use his designs and cartridges to this day
Even the most innovative people don't create anything 100% in a vacuum. Since we can only bring back one person it's important to remember that anybody who Browning ever collaborated with is long dead, but Stoner's lead draftsman/accomplished firearm designer in his own right Jim Sullivan is still alive.
The M1917 was outdated before WW1 even ended.
And arguably was so as soon as it was issued in comparison to the Lewis Gun and the growing number of light automatics.
When the heavy automatic is >100lbs it is a problem.
The Lewis Gun was decent at sustained fire with its radiator, and was definitely far more mobile than a M1917. It was a better gun.
Browning only caught up with the BAR which is still arguably worse than the Lewis Gun, mainly because of ergonomics.
>The Lewis Gun was decent at sustained fire with its radiator, and was definitely far more mobile than a M1917.
The M1917 is better at sustained fire than the Lewis, its mobility is irrelevant because it was an emplaced weapon. Why are you trying to compare weapons of completely different roles?
>The Lewis Gun was decent at sustained fire with its radiator, and was definitely far more mobile than a M1917.
The M1917 was designed to be fired from fixed emplacements. It was WWI you dumbass. They weren’t repositioning often. It’s absolutely better at sustained fire.
Again, why are you deflecting from discussing the M2?
Because .30 cal HMGs suck. You can justify an unportable .50cal firearm, but not one in an infantry cartridge.
And it isn't like the Lewis couldn't sustain fire reasonably enough for defensive combat without giving up basically all offensive utility and maneuverability.
>The Lewis Gun was decent at sustained fire with its radiator, and was definitely far more mobile than a M1917.
The M1917 is better at sustained fire than the Lewis, its mobility is irrelevant because it was an emplaced weapon. Why are you trying to compare weapons of completely different roles?
Because there was no need for them to be different roles.
Any infantry machine gun that can be used defensively also needs to be able to be used offensively. That firepower should be portable and useful for the other half of the fight.
The FN MAG can be used on a tripod or mount for defense, or taken off and carried for combat. So too could the PKM and the MG34/42. Those are good multipurpose firearms.
There is a reason everyone threw out 90% of their Maxims and M1917s after WW1, because they realized the guns sucked for half of all combat.
>There is a reason everyone threw out 90% of their Maxims and M1917s after WW1,
homie, the Vickers was used until 1968, the M1917 was used through the Korean War and the PM.1910 is STILL in use. >The FN MAG can be used on a tripod or mount for defense, or taken off and carried for combat. So too could the PKM and the MG34/42. Those are good multipurpose firearms.
All of those guns have quick change barrels, they're capable of much greater sustained fire than the Lewis was. Water cooled .30 cal HMGs only fell out of use when actual alternatives were available. The Lewis and M1917 were different classes of weapons, there was a reason why they both got used.
11 months ago
Anonymous
Small stockpiles that are pulled out occasionally or when nations are scraping the barrel aren't that notable. Russia issued the Berdan rifle, an ancient single shot black powder rifle, in WW1 because they didn't have enough guns otherwise.
The Mosin was a bad rifle before WW1 even, but you'll still see people pulling it out of ancient arms depots today because it shoots.
The M1917 was used because both Browning and the US Ordnance board were outdated in their conceptions of what was the best gun for the front.
Quick change barrels are a plus and do add a lot of life to an automatic firearm's sustained fire capabilities, but the Lewis wasn't so bad at the job so as to be useless, and was still able to effectively be fed by a team semi-continuously. >https://uboat.net/allies/merchants/ship/1832.html
They could handle firing at least 12 drums in a row without overheating to the point of inoperability.
11 months ago
Anonymous
> The M1917 was used because both Browning and the US Ordnance board were outdated in their conceptions of what was the best gun for the front.
Dozens of countries bought variants of the M1917 in various calibers in the interwar period. Sweden didn’t retire the last of them until 1995. It is quite possible that the ordnance departments of these countries knew more than you do. Especially, considering you keep spouting exaggerations and falsehoods to make a fundamentally moronic point. >They could handle firing at least 12 drums in a row without overheating to the point of inoperability.
A Vickers gun could fire for 12 hours without breakdown. Marines on Guadalcanal kept their M1917s firing for days without reprieve.
11 months ago
Anonymous
And every relevant military was moving away from it and the Maxim.
The US dropped the water jacket and mass issued the BAR, the British relegated the Vickers to some aircraft and moved to the Bren, the Germans developed the MG34/42, the Russians the DP27, the Japanese the Type 96, etc.
Everyone realized that HMGs below .50 cal, were shit. Underwhelming guns not good for anything but parking in place in a way that was extremely vulnerable to artillery, aircraft and armor.
It doesn't matter if the Vickers could run forever, I've seen that durability testing data. It is extremely impressive. But it isn't relevant for combat outside of some zombie apocalypse. What you can't do with a Vickers is carry it in combat across a field on the offensive.
Guns are always decommissioned slowly. The M14 was adopted for a few years in the 1950s and stayed in reserve long enough to be brought out for Afghanistan and Iraq.
Ukrainians and Russians keep raiding storehouses full of Tommy Guns and PPSh SMGs. Shit stays in storage forever in the military.
11 months ago
Anonymous
Every single gun you listed except for the MG34/MG42 fulfilled a different role than the HMGs. The Vickers was still issued to Infantry during WW2. The Bren, BAR and Type 96 all fulfill the role of a squad automatic weapon. Yes, GPMGs like the MG34/MG42 replaced the .30 caliber HMGs. But they did that because they offered enough of both mobility and sustained firepower that neither the HMGs or their more mobile brothers did. You’re literally comparing apples to watermelons, it’s a stupid comparison on a fundamental level.
11 months ago
Anonymous
Nta, but the bren was clearly intended as a general purpose machine gun, used from the bipod, mounted to tripod, in vehicle mounts or even for anti-aircraft use.
11 months ago
Anonymous
>Sweden >1995
The Cold War was over, the eternal peace had arrived. Sell everything, shut down fortifications & command centers & warehouses, disband entire regiments. Russia won't attack anyone again and will be brought into the EU market, ensuring peace.
t. morons, Swedish politicians
11 months ago
Anonymous
Basically all western and western-aligned politicians fell for the Russia will stop being a backwards shithole meme.
11 months ago
Anonymous
That was everyone back then, anon. The unexpected collapse of the Soviets led to a little too much giddy celebration, in hindsight. C'est la vie.
11 months ago
Anonymous
The point was that just because we used ancient shit up to 1995, it wasn't necessarily because it was great, just what could be afforded during endless budget cuts. >we can't get rid of these ruskie shit battle taxis, what do we do? >we found a buyer in Germany >deal!
The fine print stipulated that every bmp or whatever the frick it was we had was to be filled up with diesel, resulting in a loss for every sold APC. And bunkers were filled with cement. Fricking Christ...
11 months ago
Anonymous
Yeah but you used that stuff through when your budget was a lot higher.
11 months ago
Anonymous
You didn’t even acquire the BMPs until 1994 and you bought them FROM Germany. You’re one of the unfortunate countries that ended up with Russian shit because it was cheap or Russia owed you a debt.
11 months ago
Anonymous
>The point was that just because we used ancient shit up to 1995, it wasn't necessarily because it was great, just what could be afforded during endless budget cuts >have higher defense budget until 1991 because rooskies >still use M1917 in 1991 >nooooo it being decommissioned in 1995 was only because budget cuts
Orrrrrr maybe it was a great machine gun for fixed positions. Like it was made for.
The M1917 was outdated before WW1 even ended.
And arguably was so as soon as it was issued in comparison to the Lewis Gun and the growing number of light automatics.
when the ma deuce is finally retired, THEN it will be obsolete and outdated.
not before.
Ithaca 37 is arguably the best pump shotgun ever made. It's simple, has few parts, easy to work on, very reliable, ambidextrous, smooth as glass action and lightweight (for it's time).
My brother in christ he invented Browning short recoil.
As used by 99% of post WW2 handguns in various forms.
Man also invented the gas operated machine gun out of one of his lever action rifles because he GOT BORED and then had to be cajoled into turning it into a viable product because he didn't want to bother.
You can choose between: >a genius unsurpassed more than a century later >some pretty good weapon designers >drunk moron with NKVD connections that never designed anything himself
Really hard choice there, OP. Totally not a shitpost.
Browning only ever penned up basic concepts and did very little, if any, actual development work with his ideas. Everyone else on that list actually saw their designs from concept all the way through to implementation. Outside of that list I would either want to give Jim Sullivan more time on this Earth given tmk he is still alive or bring back pic related.
>Everyone else on that list actually saw their designs from concept all the way through to implementation.
Who gives a damn? If browning comes up with the idea, someone else builds it, and it’s a great gun, why is that bad? He’s created more designs and had more influence than anyone else. So much so that they are still being used today.
>Browning only ever penned up basic concepts and did very little, if any, actual development
Is this shitty bait?
It just disappoints me when people make Browning out to be the be-all and end-all of gun design. Also its kind of easy to design hundreds of firearm designs if you never have to do any development work to it the moment it leaves your drafting board It just causes a lot of other designers to go underappreciated. I still have massive respect for Browning, iirc he allowed the US Government to use his designs royalty free during WWI because 'they needed to use that money elsewhere'. He was humble like pic related.
>Also its kind of easy to design hundreds of firearm designs if you never have to do any development work
Then why hasn't anyone else done it. Before or after him? He’s the best gun designer in history and it’s not even close. You can argue others are under-appreciated, sure. But he’s the best.
Wayne Gretzky is the best hockey player ever, Jerry Rice is the best receiver, Tom Brady is the best quarterback. John Browning is the best small arms designer. You can argue other people but you’re wrong.
Browning made physical versions before making blueprints.
Often with Winchester he would show up with the prototype and they would do all the drafting and tooling design for him.
Most companies want designers are retained by the company to mature the design. My only retort to that.
>Also its kind of easy to design hundreds of firearm designs if you never have to do any development
What a naive thing to say.
Unrelated but the wood grain on that m1 garand is probably the best I've ever seen I wish it was in color.
It was John Garand's personal M1, serial number 1,000,000.
>Most companies want designers are retained by the company to mature the design. >Winchester buys 1892 design from JMB >sells a gorillion copies >noooo thats not a good decision by the business
He has multiple designs which are being produced and sold today and aren’t significantly different than when introduced. How much more “mature” do you want it?
It’s boring to default to JMB but it’s the objectively correct answer.
Browning made physical versions before making blueprints.
Often with Winchester he would show up with the prototype and they would do all the drafting and tooling design for him.
Stoner but encourage his modularity autism further, otherwise I think he'd just give up upon seeing the current AR aftermarket and not give us another Stoner 63
>stoner
Made one gun really well. Borrowed heavily from existing designs. Biggest innovation I feel was making a rifle that was ready for CNC due to working for a subsidiary of an aircraft manufacturing company, which was just beginning to see the dawn of CNC. By the time it became mainstream, his rifle was perfect for it. His gas system was really good and principles like constant recoil are useful to understand for gas system tuning. Ultimately, I think he achieved what he could and there's no point bringing him back.
>kalashnikov
no
>mauser
Another case of did one thing really, really, really well. The Stoner of the late 1800s.
>Browning
Literally created the modern firearm. Many of the guns he created are still produced to this day. If you own a pistol, pump action shotgun, or lever action rifle, chances are it owes its existence to Browning. I'd like to bring him to the present just so he could see how many of his guns are still in production nearly a hundred years after his death. Any gun store in America has guns that use actions he invented.
I'd like him to work on a gas-operated shotgun and rifle, things that were not practical in his lifetime.
>I'd like him to work on a gas-operated shotgun and rifle
He already made a gas-operated shotgun, it just got forgotten because it had a fixed choke when everybody was changing to screw in chokes. It's still pretty cool though, basically a gas-operated A5
Probably browning since he was an actual genius. Kalashnikov had a "my guns le kill people?!" moment and would probably advocate to stop them, and the other two are just not comparable to browning
Anon, you really think the soviet union would lie?
About a rural farmer turned conscript who was wounded in battle and suddenly had an epiphany about firearm design?
When there were captured German engineers working in the same facilities as him?
Who couldn't even answer basic questions about gunsmithing during interviews?
>Who couldn't even answer basic questions about gunsmithing during interviews?
Lies. I watched an interview where he said that he spend a lot of time making sure that all the parts worked well and fit together.
Man knows his shit.
Kalashnikov is right out, he will just build another AK or similar.
Mauser was a perfectionist, a machinist and an industrialist, or at least more than he was a designer and inventor. The Mauser pattern rifle took him and his brother three decades to perfect, and his other designs did not really show the same longevity.
That leaves Stoner and Browning: the engineer who struck gold several times, or the inventor who struck gold so many times it's not fun anymore. The problem is that the market is saturated nowadays: either would need to bring their A-game to provide actual, useful innovations. Browning could have brought the best idea, Stoner the best execution thereof. Stoner could probably hang with modern designers with some training, it would be much harder for Browning - but still, the sheer inventiveness of Browning alone does it for me.
Based.
Mauser. I want him to see the roller delayed system and perfect it.
Good idea, German autism requires further German autism.
Kalashnikov can only make AK's, which already exist
Stoner only makes AR's, which already exist
Mauser might make some high-end hunting rifles or something. There isn't a market for ridiculously overcomplicated pistols.
Browning was a genius who created and innovated until the day he died, and revolutionized rifles, shotguns, handguns, seni-automatics, automatics, and machine guns. He is the clear choice. I want to see Browning's 5.56 assault rifle.
>I want to see Browning's 5.56 assault rifle.
Now I want to see it, too.
Eugene Stoner and task him with making a caseless rifle. Everyone else is too antiquated. Now on the other hand if you were to ask me who I would give a blowjob to I
Kalashnikov can only make AK's, which already exist
Stoner only makes AR's, which already exist
Mauser might make some high-end hunting rifles or something. There isn't a market for ridiculously overcomplicated pistols.
Browning was a genius who created and innovated until the day he died, and revolutionized rifles, shotguns, handguns, seni-automatics, automatics, and machine guns. He is the clear choice. I want to see Browning's 5.56 assault rifle.
Mauser would take all the interesting ideas already in existence and combine them into one gun.
Kind of useless with only the marketing Mauser though, need his brother and cousin as well.
AR-7 is cool in concept. It's terrible in execution. It's inaccurate, unreliable, the magazines are terrible. The modern versions on the market are even worse, thanks to their plastic jacketed barrel and the fact that they don't even float effectively anymore. Really the only thing the AR-7 was good for was its intended purpose: emergency survival if you happened to need a gun that would float. That's probably the most narrow firearms niche there ever was....and now they can't even fill that niche reliably, as they sink after floating for a little while.
I'm not saying this was a bad idea on Browning's part. Hell, there really isn't much design involved, it's just a simple blowback 22 with an oversized stock to hold its parts inside. The problem is its execution which is tied to its role as an emergency gun-- "cheap" and "light" being all-important. Unless we're talking the M30 Drilling survival guns are always pretty crappy.
>There isn't a market for ridiculously overcomplicated pistols.
You shut your prostitute mouth, I want a magloader-toploader neo-C96 machined PDW with modern metallurgy, modern plastics that look like pretty phenolic resin, and some fricked up overpowered possible bear-stopper meme caliber that better belongs in a heavy SMG, that isn't also probably made by chinks in the '70s with no export. I want that. Me.
>Mauser might make some high-end hunting rifles
hunting rifles for days, with a shitload of new cartridges for everything possible >so you want to hunt BMP's? No problem, we got you covered
Yeah
That was funny
Although Einstein's stuff is a bit weird
Tesla had more immediate real world applications, like not having to have a spinning MG set at every corner to step down the voltage.
he was supposedly working on a death ray, but who knows
Protestants are wayward children. Mormons are literally American Muslims. They don't believe in the divinity of Christ, have a prophet that received a new dispensation from Gabriel. Islam is probably closer to Christianity considering Moorman are polytheists and believe that God has a wife the Heavenly Mother, and that when they die they will become the gods of their own universe.
could you guys come up with a code word so i can ignore you earlier? like, instead of "my religion literally used incest and rape to progess its values" like, "we believe in spaghetti"? turn the other cheek, and save me like 45 seconds
11 months ago
Anonymous
>t. moron
11 months ago
Anonymous
rude way to talk about king-hang on, hang on, he he first throws the first stone? you tell me, frickwad, your belief system relies on it
11 months ago
Anonymous
>rude way to talk about
You can't even form a cohesive sentence you illiterate yank
11 months ago
Anonymous
i dont have to. my opponent, says he made the tide, before the moon
11 months ago
Anonymous
>"my religion literally used incest and rape to progess its values"
The absolute state of american public education lmfao
11 months ago
Anonymous
>t. moron
2 Samuel 13
11 months ago
Anonymous
>Prince rapes sister >King gets mad and orders his murder >Trusted right hand of the king kills the prince
The whole story was written as a tragedy illiterate atheistBlack person
>and that when they die they will become the gods of their own universe.
they fricking WHAT?
11 months ago
Anonymous
The Mormons believe that they will get their own planets and everyone who isn't a Mormon (or is a Mormon but is black) will become their slaves. They are an insane cult. The reason why they practice polygamy is because the more wives you have, the greater your standing in their idea of heaven. It's why they kick their sons out after they have had one because the extras take on the role of Ham from the Bible, and they believe Canaanites are black people, and yada yada yada. They're an insane combination of israelites and Muslims and Scientologists.
Sam Wong of DARPA CAme to TRW (just lost he M14 contract when the AR was adopted) and he asked for the LMR. It was the perfect Grease Gun...Open bolt, roller LOCKED >not delay
Full auto ONLY... at 200RPM. it was dry lubed and hard chromed in the necessary areas (lasted 10k rds)
The design was picked up by Davis& Salsby at Colt, and modified to take more off the shelf AR parts... Called it the "IMP-221" (you may recognize it as the "Bushmaster Gwinn Arm pistol")
>robbed of cheap gun-launched satellites & space cargo for a potential space age boom by the mid-90s >robbed of Ba'athists bombing the Israeli military into the stone age with impunity with superguns and neo-SCUDs >Israelis instantly and shamelessly tried to blame Iraq for shooting Bull, who was contracting FOR them
I hate the Mossad, I hate Yitzhak Shamir, we could've been supergunning shipments to an actual moon base for 20 years by now
>enter the cellphone era and miniaturization means the Martlet is a viable launch vehicle...Bull could put up a full Skynet wifi array in like 6mo and do it for pennys on the dollar
These questions are always useless because everyone just imagines you're bringing back the old fart version of the guy. In reality, he would get you nowhere and would only have a bit of time left to design in terms of rebooted career because for some reason you decided to bring their ass back when they were already old as shit. Ideally you'd bring them back when they are like 18, 19, 20 so you can throw them into a modern design and engineering program and they have a glut of time to dedicate toward understanding how modern design works and how to do it, the materials they have access to, and more than ample time to study what ideas have been tried since they died.
The problem with picking Browning is that he's a Mormon, and the modern LDS would probably mindfrick him. Mikhail was a patriot, so he wouldn't work for you. Mauser's German autism, or Stoner's Cold War Boomerism are probably your safest bets.
Browning was a Mormon, so he'd probably be weird about it. Not a good choice, tbh.
Kalshnikov was Russian, and a tanker, so unless you like it rough (and I mean really rough) he's probably a bad choice too.
I don't know enough about Mauser personally to be able to say about him. Judging by the moustache, he'd either be a perfect gentleman and make you feel very special, or use you as his jizzrag and then go about his day.
My money's on Stoner. Right era to know how to treat you right without being feminized himself.
I agree with this. However Browning had 10 children and had 21 siblings. He’s very accustomed to consensual sex in the missionary position for the purpose of procreation.
I hate ARs but I'll have to go with Stoner here. Browning's designs had flaws that were improved upon even while he was alive. Stoner's designs are still ubiquituous.
I once stumbled upon what by its title seemed like an extremely detailed and interesting take on ol' JB. The sentence kept going, but I just read "John Moses Browning was a genius." immediately closed the tab satisfied.
Probably Browning just to see what he could do with modern technology. Shit's evolved quite a lot since his days. Can't say the same for Stoner and Kalashnikov since firearms have development has stagnated since the Cold War era. Mauser is literally only known for bolt-action rifles and the C96.
Kalashnikov has no relevance. His "achievement" is a mediocre design whose only quality is the production numbers. Ditch him from the list. Replace with Hugo Schmeisser. Then the order is Browning
Honestly, Kalashnikov is impressive because he had no formal education in gunsmithing and managed to make a solid, dependable design. Practically speaking, you don't hear about tractor mechanics designing world class assault rifles.
You’d be surprised what a farmer can do to make something work with the limited resources they have and the life or death need to make it work.
Regardless, Its less about him being a farmer and more about him being a braindead slav who took apart an STG44 and couldn’t put it back together. He took a superb piece of engineering and made a slav knockoff
When people say the AK is a copy if the STG it really reveals their midwit status.
11 months ago
Anonymous
Oh wow you saw that one jootoob video where literally who said the AKs functionality is similar to that of the garand than the stg… so did everyone else homosexual. It doesn’t negate from the fact that the slavBlack person basically copied it to an inferior degree.
In any case, him copying the simpler garand bolt is a testament to how stupid he was because he couldn’t fathom the superior engineering on the stg
11 months ago
Anonymous
>stg >superior
Wehraboos are the only people more insufferable than tankies
11 months ago
Anonymous
>Wehraboos are the only people more insufferable than tankies
>That post >Those digits
Checked, Based and Sieg Heil!
Well I'll be damned. Not quite as handy as the MG-08/15 by the looks of it. But if it does what you want it to, I don't think there'd be many complaints.
Have it like a second man in the room. You'd throw it ideas and it'd give you opinions on how they'd work. These opinions aren't gonna be detailed, and are also unlikely to pick one option over another unless you force it to, but it can help you work through your own thinking and get past mental blocks faster.
I get why everyone is saying JMB, but as a Mormon, he would be impossible to work with.
Stoner would be the best, but his designs would all be painfully boring, sterile, and thoroughly optimized.
Mauser would be afraid to drill anything, and Kalashnikov would probably be too drunk and rapey.
Honestly? Bring back Pederson and resurrect the Iver-Johnson company if the goal is commercial and recreational.
I would pick Richard Gatling.
Honestly there's not much he'd be able to do to improve his gun over the versions we have now, but I think it would be funny to see his reaction to the mass amount of slaughter his weapons have done, when he explicitly created the gatling gun in an attempt to make wars less bloody.
Browning
Whitening
Stoner would go hard, let him work with keltech
Hard choice between Stoner and Browning. Imagine what Browning could make with modern manufacturing and materials if he was able to understand them.
>if he was able to understand them.
If he was capable of understanding the manufacturing and materials of his day, then he would be able to understand ours. A smart person is smart no matter what year they're in.
Imagine learning modern computers, a concept so alien and different than the tech of your era. Not to mention complex CAD and engineering.
Even a simpleton with training can learn this stuff in 4-6 months, at least in theory how it works, not necessarily how to do great designs. Browning with a year of concentrated training in everything modern would be able to outdo most weapons designers today with him eyes closed.
Nah, CAD would be so easy for all of the pictured dudes to understand. They all knew how to do mechanical blueprints and drawings, take measurements, build jigs, etc... they essentially already know the fundamental principles that CAD software was built to interface with.
Learning to use a mouse and keyboard might be a bit jarring for them kek
this. the mouse would filter them for a few months. oldheads have a hard time with the mouse.
My dad is in his 80s. He used to code punch card computer mainframes in the 70s. My 8 year old son had to teach him how to send a text message on his iPhone.
You'd have to assign Browning an assistant that know how to use CAD but modern CAD was based on Drafting techniques and Browning was well versed in Drafting.
>so it's like an infinite size drawing board, except you can change dimensions by typing in the numbers and get pretty images of finished design without actually making it with metal. Oh, and you operate it with this thing, we can get a 10yo to teach you how to use it or get you a digital pen if you want.
What you guys are forgetting..look at that picture of Garand! All those arbor mills and shape cutters......turn ANYONE lose with modern investment casting, 5 axis CNC and 3d printign to prototype the plastics before spending on the molds......The capability of the modern industrial world is 4 decimals when guys like Browning still drafted in FREACTIONS and everything was made to gauges....christ we have non contact 3d scanning and CMM.....WIRE EDM!!!!!!!
>the real question you should be asking:
With all this tech why are we getting moronic retrograde shit like the M&P FPC???
>It's like NO ONE other than Keltec is even trying!!!
hell...I'd be more tempted to buy THIS GUY's garage project than anything I see at SHOT.
That's why weird old wonder 9s are worth somuch, ppl want esoteric finicky shit that looks SWEET and has that 'prototype' feel. The gun market is VidyaGame Kidz not boomers, no one wants a glock unles sit looks like something from Halflife!
Rant concluded.
Also Russias best designers were pulling for the olympic effort int eh 60s-70s
>Mikhail Vladimirovich for his work at margolin (dude was blind)
>Prof. Efim Haiderov (google him) KHR-31 picrel
>the straight pull MTs-80 and 85-1!!!
>the trigger in the MU-12-1 is a masterpiece!!!
>Also Russias best designers were pulling for the olympic effort int eh 60s-70s
You forgot the TOZ-36/49 here.
They should be fine, as proficient engineers of their era. Nowadays most people don’t know how a computer or smart phone functions on a machine level, but learning how to use it is easy.
>complex CADD
Yeah dude I find drawing hard too especially when they gave me crayons.
Browning was able to understand firearm design and manufacturing without the internet, CAD, CAE, DFSS, or anything. Imagine how fast he could pump out designs by just having a 3d printer to rapid prototype simple parts for fitment.
>inb4 he just remakes an AR
If Browning designed an AR-15 from scratch without ever learning about them himself, I would immediately default to it as the best firearm design of all time.
Browning was an ideas man, and since its one person only and you cant also bring back pedersen, I would go for E.F. Dragunov, inventor of the SVD rifle, the greatest firearm ever made, as well as several other excellent prototype guns and he is also a talented sport shooter.
you are slavic and gay
If you HAD to bring a Russkie then bring fricking German Korobov. The only thing restraining his genius was that Soviets weren't interested in anything they couldn't produce by millions easily.
Korobov is also my pick, give me a full lineup of wacky Slavic bullpups dammit.
Why Korobov?
Soviet Keltech.
But aren't bullpups a meme?
How about a triple barrel, triple magazine meme that ejects spent cartridges backwards
I'll take 4
So more shoddy QC and even more vaporware?
Post gun
I want korobov back. His ideas were wild and it's a shame they never got anywhere
>bring back Korobov
>send him to Kel-Tec
>find someone to fix their QC
It’s funny when I think about OP’s question, the very next followup question I ask myself is ”what could they do if they partnered with Kel-Tec”.
Browning easily. At minimal to make the M2 Browning more modern. I bet he could make telescopic rifle munitions work too.
>for the American commercial market
none of them would accept having their designs cucked into the pavement
let them design their guns freely so they could make something cool
Only one choice.
You should know the real answer here anon
Yeah, it's Browning.
He didn't do shit, Browning literally created hundreds of designs and innovated firearms history and we still use his designs and cartridges to this day
Even the most innovative people don't create anything 100% in a vacuum. Since we can only bring back one person it's important to remember that anybody who Browning ever collaborated with is long dead, but Stoner's lead draftsman/accomplished firearm designer in his own right Jim Sullivan is still alive.
Browning made a ton of good guns, but never a great gun.
You shut your stupid prostitute mouth.
The M1917 was outdated before WW1 even ended.
And arguably was so as soon as it was issued in comparison to the Lewis Gun and the growing number of light automatics.
Light automatics are not a replacement for heavy automatics.
When the heavy automatic is >100lbs it is a problem.
The Lewis Gun was decent at sustained fire with its radiator, and was definitely far more mobile than a M1917. It was a better gun.
Browning only caught up with the BAR which is still arguably worse than the Lewis Gun, mainly because of ergonomics.
>The Lewis Gun was decent at sustained fire with its radiator, and was definitely far more mobile than a M1917.
The M1917 is better at sustained fire than the Lewis, its mobility is irrelevant because it was an emplaced weapon. Why are you trying to compare weapons of completely different roles?
>The Lewis Gun was decent at sustained fire with its radiator, and was definitely far more mobile than a M1917.
The M1917 was designed to be fired from fixed emplacements. It was WWI you dumbass. They weren’t repositioning often. It’s absolutely better at sustained fire.
Again, why are you deflecting from discussing the M2?
Why are you comparing HMGs to LMGs?
Because .30 cal HMGs suck. You can justify an unportable .50cal firearm, but not one in an infantry cartridge.
And it isn't like the Lewis couldn't sustain fire reasonably enough for defensive combat without giving up basically all offensive utility and maneuverability.
Because there was no need for them to be different roles.
Any infantry machine gun that can be used defensively also needs to be able to be used offensively. That firepower should be portable and useful for the other half of the fight.
The FN MAG can be used on a tripod or mount for defense, or taken off and carried for combat. So too could the PKM and the MG34/42. Those are good multipurpose firearms.
There is a reason everyone threw out 90% of their Maxims and M1917s after WW1, because they realized the guns sucked for half of all combat.
>There is a reason everyone threw out 90% of their Maxims and M1917s after WW1,
homie, the Vickers was used until 1968, the M1917 was used through the Korean War and the PM.1910 is STILL in use.
>The FN MAG can be used on a tripod or mount for defense, or taken off and carried for combat. So too could the PKM and the MG34/42. Those are good multipurpose firearms.
All of those guns have quick change barrels, they're capable of much greater sustained fire than the Lewis was. Water cooled .30 cal HMGs only fell out of use when actual alternatives were available. The Lewis and M1917 were different classes of weapons, there was a reason why they both got used.
Small stockpiles that are pulled out occasionally or when nations are scraping the barrel aren't that notable. Russia issued the Berdan rifle, an ancient single shot black powder rifle, in WW1 because they didn't have enough guns otherwise.
The Mosin was a bad rifle before WW1 even, but you'll still see people pulling it out of ancient arms depots today because it shoots.
The M1917 was used because both Browning and the US Ordnance board were outdated in their conceptions of what was the best gun for the front.
Quick change barrels are a plus and do add a lot of life to an automatic firearm's sustained fire capabilities, but the Lewis wasn't so bad at the job so as to be useless, and was still able to effectively be fed by a team semi-continuously.
>https://uboat.net/allies/merchants/ship/1832.html
They could handle firing at least 12 drums in a row without overheating to the point of inoperability.
> The M1917 was used because both Browning and the US Ordnance board were outdated in their conceptions of what was the best gun for the front.
Dozens of countries bought variants of the M1917 in various calibers in the interwar period. Sweden didn’t retire the last of them until 1995. It is quite possible that the ordnance departments of these countries knew more than you do. Especially, considering you keep spouting exaggerations and falsehoods to make a fundamentally moronic point.
>They could handle firing at least 12 drums in a row without overheating to the point of inoperability.
A Vickers gun could fire for 12 hours without breakdown. Marines on Guadalcanal kept their M1917s firing for days without reprieve.
And every relevant military was moving away from it and the Maxim.
The US dropped the water jacket and mass issued the BAR, the British relegated the Vickers to some aircraft and moved to the Bren, the Germans developed the MG34/42, the Russians the DP27, the Japanese the Type 96, etc.
Everyone realized that HMGs below .50 cal, were shit. Underwhelming guns not good for anything but parking in place in a way that was extremely vulnerable to artillery, aircraft and armor.
It doesn't matter if the Vickers could run forever, I've seen that durability testing data. It is extremely impressive. But it isn't relevant for combat outside of some zombie apocalypse. What you can't do with a Vickers is carry it in combat across a field on the offensive.
Guns are always decommissioned slowly. The M14 was adopted for a few years in the 1950s and stayed in reserve long enough to be brought out for Afghanistan and Iraq.
Ukrainians and Russians keep raiding storehouses full of Tommy Guns and PPSh SMGs. Shit stays in storage forever in the military.
Every single gun you listed except for the MG34/MG42 fulfilled a different role than the HMGs. The Vickers was still issued to Infantry during WW2. The Bren, BAR and Type 96 all fulfill the role of a squad automatic weapon. Yes, GPMGs like the MG34/MG42 replaced the .30 caliber HMGs. But they did that because they offered enough of both mobility and sustained firepower that neither the HMGs or their more mobile brothers did. You’re literally comparing apples to watermelons, it’s a stupid comparison on a fundamental level.
Nta, but the bren was clearly intended as a general purpose machine gun, used from the bipod, mounted to tripod, in vehicle mounts or even for anti-aircraft use.
>Sweden
>1995
The Cold War was over, the eternal peace had arrived. Sell everything, shut down fortifications & command centers & warehouses, disband entire regiments. Russia won't attack anyone again and will be brought into the EU market, ensuring peace.
t. morons, Swedish politicians
Basically all western and western-aligned politicians fell for the Russia will stop being a backwards shithole meme.
That was everyone back then, anon. The unexpected collapse of the Soviets led to a little too much giddy celebration, in hindsight. C'est la vie.
The point was that just because we used ancient shit up to 1995, it wasn't necessarily because it was great, just what could be afforded during endless budget cuts.
>we can't get rid of these ruskie shit battle taxis, what do we do?
>we found a buyer in Germany
>deal!
The fine print stipulated that every bmp or whatever the frick it was we had was to be filled up with diesel, resulting in a loss for every sold APC. And bunkers were filled with cement. Fricking Christ...
Yeah but you used that stuff through when your budget was a lot higher.
You didn’t even acquire the BMPs until 1994 and you bought them FROM Germany. You’re one of the unfortunate countries that ended up with Russian shit because it was cheap or Russia owed you a debt.
>The point was that just because we used ancient shit up to 1995, it wasn't necessarily because it was great, just what could be afforded during endless budget cuts
>have higher defense budget until 1991 because rooskies
>still use M1917 in 1991
>nooooo it being decommissioned in 1995 was only because budget cuts
Orrrrrr maybe it was a great machine gun for fixed positions. Like it was made for.
the fn mag is just an upside down bar
> outdated
> still in use in European war today
>mentions a gun other than the M2
What did he mean by this?
>post is about m2
>brings up m1917
are you stupid
when the ma deuce is finally retired, THEN it will be obsolete and outdated.
not before.
Ithaca 37 is arguably the best pump shotgun ever made. It's simple, has few parts, easy to work on, very reliable, ambidextrous, smooth as glass action and lightweight (for it's time).
1894 Winchester
My brother in christ he invented Browning short recoil.
As used by 99% of post WW2 handguns in various forms.
Man also invented the gas operated machine gun out of one of his lever action rifles because he GOT BORED and then had to be cajoled into turning it into a viable product because he didn't want to bother.
Good bait
1911 is the greatest handgun.
1911 is so shit browning immediately started designing the hi-power after it was made.
You can choose between:
>a genius unsurpassed more than a century later
>some pretty good weapon designers
>drunk moron with NKVD connections that never designed anything himself
Really hard choice there, OP. Totally not a shitpost.
Imagine Browning working together with Stoner with modern manufacturing processes
And then Iron Man showed up and they made a supersuit O:
and then Russia takes Bakhmut@
What does your need to see heroes have to do with Russia's failings in Ukraine?
I thought we were posting moronic, childish fantasies.
holy owned
Browning only ever penned up basic concepts and did very little, if any, actual development work with his ideas. Everyone else on that list actually saw their designs from concept all the way through to implementation. Outside of that list I would either want to give Jim Sullivan more time on this Earth given tmk he is still alive or bring back pic related.
>and did very little
did very little design work**
>Everyone else on that list actually saw their designs from concept all the way through to implementation.
Who gives a damn? If browning comes up with the idea, someone else builds it, and it’s a great gun, why is that bad? He’s created more designs and had more influence than anyone else. So much so that they are still being used today.
It just disappoints me when people make Browning out to be the be-all and end-all of gun design. Also its kind of easy to design hundreds of firearm designs if you never have to do any development work to it the moment it leaves your drafting board It just causes a lot of other designers to go underappreciated. I still have massive respect for Browning, iirc he allowed the US Government to use his designs royalty free during WWI because 'they needed to use that money elsewhere'. He was humble like pic related.
>Also its kind of easy to design hundreds of firearm designs if you never have to do any development work
Then why hasn't anyone else done it. Before or after him? He’s the best gun designer in history and it’s not even close. You can argue others are under-appreciated, sure. But he’s the best.
Wayne Gretzky is the best hockey player ever, Jerry Rice is the best receiver, Tom Brady is the best quarterback. John Browning is the best small arms designer. You can argue other people but you’re wrong.
Most companies want designers are retained by the company to mature the design. My only retort to that.
It was John Garand's personal M1, serial number 1,000,000.
>Most companies want designers are retained by the company to mature the design.
>Winchester buys 1892 design from JMB
>sells a gorillion copies
>noooo thats not a good decision by the business
He has multiple designs which are being produced and sold today and aren’t significantly different than when introduced. How much more “mature” do you want it?
It’s boring to default to JMB but it’s the objectively correct answer.
Browning made physical versions before making blueprints.
Often with Winchester he would show up with the prototype and they would do all the drafting and tooling design for him.
>Also its kind of easy to design hundreds of firearm designs if you never have to do any development
What a naive thing to say.
Unrelated but the wood grain on that m1 garand is probably the best I've ever seen I wish it was in color.
>french leaf
>Browning only ever penned up basic concepts and did very little, if any, actual development
Is this shitty bait?
I want more wheel guns. Plus he can see how cucked his home state got
Maxim
Stoner but encourage his modularity autism further, otherwise I think he'd just give up upon seeing the current AR aftermarket and not give us another Stoner 63
>stoner
Made one gun really well. Borrowed heavily from existing designs. Biggest innovation I feel was making a rifle that was ready for CNC due to working for a subsidiary of an aircraft manufacturing company, which was just beginning to see the dawn of CNC. By the time it became mainstream, his rifle was perfect for it. His gas system was really good and principles like constant recoil are useful to understand for gas system tuning. Ultimately, I think he achieved what he could and there's no point bringing him back.
>kalashnikov
no
>mauser
Another case of did one thing really, really, really well. The Stoner of the late 1800s.
>Browning
Literally created the modern firearm. Many of the guns he created are still produced to this day. If you own a pistol, pump action shotgun, or lever action rifle, chances are it owes its existence to Browning. I'd like to bring him to the present just so he could see how many of his guns are still in production nearly a hundred years after his death. Any gun store in America has guns that use actions he invented.
I'd like him to work on a gas-operated shotgun and rifle, things that were not practical in his lifetime.
>I'd like him to work on a gas-operated shotgun and rifle
He already made a gas-operated shotgun, it just got forgotten because it had a fixed choke when everybody was changing to screw in chokes. It's still pretty cool though, basically a gas-operated A5
Probably browning since he was an actual genius. Kalashnikov had a "my guns le kill people?!" moment and would probably advocate to stop them, and the other two are just not comparable to browning
Unironically Schwarzlose. Really cool guns
Finally, someone that gets it
I bring back Joseph Enouy. Give him a modern machine shop and a suitcase of cocaine. Come back in a few months and see what happens.
Kalashnikov, just to confirm that he is a fricking fraud.
Anon, you really think the soviet union would lie?
About a rural farmer turned conscript who was wounded in battle and suddenly had an epiphany about firearm design?
When there were captured German engineers working in the same facilities as him?
Who couldn't even answer basic questions about gunsmithing during interviews?
its a huge bummer to think that mad lad was fictional. i wish i didnt believe
He was literally a mechanic pre-war, guns aren’t that complex. It doesn’t take an incredible engineer to design one.
>Who couldn't even answer basic questions about gunsmithing during interviews?
Lies. I watched an interview where he said that he spend a lot of time making sure that all the parts worked well and fit together.
Man knows his shit.
Kalashnikov is right out, he will just build another AK or similar.
Mauser was a perfectionist, a machinist and an industrialist, or at least more than he was a designer and inventor. The Mauser pattern rifle took him and his brother three decades to perfect, and his other designs did not really show the same longevity.
That leaves Stoner and Browning: the engineer who struck gold several times, or the inventor who struck gold so many times it's not fun anymore. The problem is that the market is saturated nowadays: either would need to bring their A-game to provide actual, useful innovations. Browning could have brought the best idea, Stoner the best execution thereof. Stoner could probably hang with modern designers with some training, it would be much harder for Browning - but still, the sheer inventiveness of Browning alone does it for me.
Based.
Good idea, German autism requires further German autism.
>I want to see Browning's 5.56 assault rifle.
Now I want to see it, too.
Incorrect. The only correct answer is Wernher Von Braun to design “home defense munitions”
Mannlicher is probably the most underrated of the cartridge firearm designers.
Didn't he invent the En Bloc clip?
Eugene Stoner and task him with making a caseless rifle. Everyone else is too antiquated. Now on the other hand if you were to ask me who I would give a blowjob to I
Mauser. I want him to see the roller delayed system and perfect it.
Kalashnikov can only make AK's, which already exist
Stoner only makes AR's, which already exist
Mauser might make some high-end hunting rifles or something. There isn't a market for ridiculously overcomplicated pistols.
Browning was a genius who created and innovated until the day he died, and revolutionized rifles, shotguns, handguns, seni-automatics, automatics, and machine guns. He is the clear choice. I want to see Browning's 5.56 assault rifle.
Mauser would take all the interesting ideas already in existence and combine them into one gun.
Kind of useless with only the marketing Mauser though, need his brother and cousin as well.
>Kalashnikov can only make AK's, which already exist
Stoner only makes AR's, which already exist
moron
Post one of their designs that a. isn't an AK/AR, and b. isn't a piece of shit
You're a moron.
It's literally just a belt fed AK
quite literally an upside down AK with a belt-fed
>AR18
>Stoner 63
>AR7
>TRW model 6425 (which became the Oerlikon KBA 25mm autocannon)
You are a moron. Kalashnikov was a hack. Stoner was a genius.
AR7 sucks
I totally forgot the AR18 existed, you got me there
Frick you queer, the AR-7 is cool.
AR-7 is cool in concept. It's terrible in execution. It's inaccurate, unreliable, the magazines are terrible. The modern versions on the market are even worse, thanks to their plastic jacketed barrel and the fact that they don't even float effectively anymore. Really the only thing the AR-7 was good for was its intended purpose: emergency survival if you happened to need a gun that would float. That's probably the most narrow firearms niche there ever was....and now they can't even fill that niche reliably, as they sink after floating for a little while.
I'm not saying this was a bad idea on Browning's part. Hell, there really isn't much design involved, it's just a simple blowback 22 with an oversized stock to hold its parts inside. The problem is its execution which is tied to its role as an emergency gun-- "cheap" and "light" being all-important. Unless we're talking the M30 Drilling survival guns are always pretty crappy.
But imagine Mauser with Kel-Tec…
>Browning was a genius who created and innovated until the day he died
Literally. They found him dead at his desk.
With what would eventually become the Hi-Power sitting next to him...
>There isn't a market for ridiculously overcomplicated pistols.
You shut your prostitute mouth, I want a magloader-toploader neo-C96 machined PDW with modern metallurgy, modern plastics that look like pretty phenolic resin, and some fricked up overpowered possible bear-stopper meme caliber that better belongs in a heavy SMG, that isn't also probably made by chinks in the '70s with no export. I want that. Me.
>There isn't a market for ridiculously overcomplicated pistols
>Mauser might make some high-end hunting rifles
hunting rifles for days, with a shitload of new cartridges for everything possible
>so you want to hunt BMP's? No problem, we got you covered
tesla was a hack
Frick you Einstein with your magickery
You are using his technology right now
Yeah
That was funny
Although Einstein's stuff is a bit weird
Tesla had more immediate real world applications, like not having to have a spinning MG set at every corner to step down the voltage.
he was supposedly working on a death ray, but who knows
No Mormons.
Mormons are the only respectable sect of protestantism
They aren't even Christians.
Neither are any of the other protestant denominations
Protestants are wayward children. Mormons are literally American Muslims. They don't believe in the divinity of Christ, have a prophet that received a new dispensation from Gabriel. Islam is probably closer to Christianity considering Moorman are polytheists and believe that God has a wife the Heavenly Mother, and that when they die they will become the gods of their own universe.
could you guys come up with a code word so i can ignore you earlier? like, instead of "my religion literally used incest and rape to progess its values" like, "we believe in spaghetti"? turn the other cheek, and save me like 45 seconds
>t. moron
rude way to talk about king-hang on, hang on, he he first throws the first stone? you tell me, frickwad, your belief system relies on it
>rude way to talk about
You can't even form a cohesive sentence you illiterate yank
i dont have to. my opponent, says he made the tide, before the moon
>"my religion literally used incest and rape to progess its values"
The absolute state of american public education lmfao
2 Samuel 13
>Prince rapes sister
>King gets mad and orders his murder
>Trusted right hand of the king kills the prince
The whole story was written as a tragedy illiterate atheistBlack person
>and that when they die they will become the gods of their own universe.
they fricking WHAT?
The Mormons believe that they will get their own planets and everyone who isn't a Mormon (or is a Mormon but is black) will become their slaves. They are an insane cult. The reason why they practice polygamy is because the more wives you have, the greater your standing in their idea of heaven. It's why they kick their sons out after they have had one because the extras take on the role of Ham from the Bible, and they believe Canaanites are black people, and yada yada yada. They're an insane combination of israelites and Muslims and Scientologists.
Evidently, I'm in the wrong religion
Catholics pray to saints and protestants are the heretics ?
And lets be honest here , the only Christians going to heaven here are the anabaptists.
Finally, someone who gets it.
>Catholics pray to saints
We do?
Your exhaltation of saints and the Virgin Marry are seen as worship by most other sects of Christianity.
>t. moron
Mauser at kel-tec just to see what kind of wacky thing they would come up with
I wish I could erase Stoner from history
Guns, and a whole lot more
If I was in a cyberpunk 2077 sitiation with Browning taking over my mind, I'd take the pill that speeds it up.
WE LOST EVERYTHING
WE HAD TO PAY THE PRICE
>esl Black person
You're speaking my language right now you gyno shitskin lmao
Really wish the guy responsible for the Mateba and rhino was still around….
Browning, obviously
what a stupid question
Mauser, I desire to see what the C96 lineage would look like today
I want to put my semen inside of it
John Sellars
Donald Stoehr
Thomas Rogers
Sam Wong of DARPA CAme to TRW (just lost he M14 contract when the AR was adopted) and he asked for the LMR. It was the perfect Grease Gun...Open bolt, roller LOCKED
>not delay
Full auto ONLY... at 200RPM. it was dry lubed and hard chromed in the necessary areas (lasted 10k rds)
The design was picked up by Davis& Salsby at Colt, and modified to take more off the shelf AR parts... Called it the "IMP-221" (you may recognize it as the "Bushmaster Gwinn Arm pistol")
>200RPM
No
its 450rpm in rifle length, 600 in carbine.
>IMP-221
was in 221 fireball. they also tried 17mach4/.17 fireball
Stoehr was into some wild shit tho. picrel
Gerald Bull
His death alone is reason enough to glass Israel.
>robbed of cheap gun-launched satellites & space cargo for a potential space age boom by the mid-90s
>robbed of Ba'athists bombing the Israeli military into the stone age with impunity with superguns and neo-SCUDs
>Israelis instantly and shamelessly tried to blame Iraq for shooting Bull, who was contracting FOR them
I hate the Mossad, I hate Yitzhak Shamir, we could've been supergunning shipments to an actual moon base for 20 years by now
>enter the cellphone era and miniaturization means the Martlet is a viable launch vehicle...Bull could put up a full Skynet wifi array in like 6mo and do it for pennys on the dollar
YESSSS
Browning
Stoner, for sure. Browning would join up with the mormons at desert tech and would go full moron- never trust cults with anything of value.
Never.
Stoner
that tard couldn't even get the charging handle placement worth a shit.
hes not charging your mom, hes charging a weapon of war
>Stoner
Why? He designed the SR-15 and SR-25, that is his peak and final work. Mikhail and Browning are probably the only real answers
herman korobov
out of those, bring back Browning.
But I'd like to see what kind of crazy shit Nikonov can cook up with a decent budget.
*sigh*
The answer is Stoner, because it's the American commercial market. There might be some debate if it were "to design really nice guns".
These questions are always useless because everyone just imagines you're bringing back the old fart version of the guy. In reality, he would get you nowhere and would only have a bit of time left to design in terms of rebooted career because for some reason you decided to bring their ass back when they were already old as shit. Ideally you'd bring them back when they are like 18, 19, 20 so you can throw them into a modern design and engineering program and they have a glut of time to dedicate toward understanding how modern design works and how to do it, the materials they have access to, and more than ample time to study what ideas have been tried since they died.
The problem with picking Browning is that he's a Mormon, and the modern LDS would probably mindfrick him. Mikhail was a patriot, so he wouldn't work for you. Mauser's German autism, or Stoner's Cold War Boomerism are probably your safest bets.
Ill take the Beretta team from the 1950s
One of these things is not like the others..
Should've swapped him out for Colt, would've been a more interesting question.
None of them
His design performs objectively worse in adverse conditions compared to both Kalashnikov and Stoner. Explain.
The bullet he designed deserves to exist
In the men's bathroom in the velvet clam in New province, waiting for a man to lick
wich one would been the best in bed?
Browning was a Mormon, so he'd probably be weird about it. Not a good choice, tbh.
Kalshnikov was Russian, and a tanker, so unless you like it rough (and I mean really rough) he's probably a bad choice too.
I don't know enough about Mauser personally to be able to say about him. Judging by the moustache, he'd either be a perfect gentleman and make you feel very special, or use you as his jizzrag and then go about his day.
My money's on Stoner. Right era to know how to treat you right without being feminized himself.
I think this is a good assessment, Stoner strikes me as a bit of a surfer boy too (despite not knowing anything about where he came from)
After looking him up, he did in fact live in Long Beach for a time, my intuition was correct
I agree with this. However Browning had 10 children and had 21 siblings. He’s very accustomed to consensual sex in the missionary position for the purpose of procreation.
Touche. I hadn't considered that Mormonism was one of those branches of Christianity.
I hate ARs but I'll have to go with Stoner here. Browning's designs had flaws that were improved upon even while he was alive. Stoner's designs are still ubiquituous.
>imagine how long i could make the barrel with these metals
Stoner didn't even design the AR15, it was Colt/Jim Sullivan.
>bring back Kalashnikov
>he sees the ABSOLUTE STATE of KC and how it's taken them a decade to design an AK that does what a Zenitco 74M does
>finds nearest silovik, proceeds to send them all to gulag
I once stumbled upon what by its title seemed like an extremely detailed and interesting take on ol' JB. The sentence kept going, but I just read "John Moses Browning was a genius." immediately closed the tab satisfied.
Probably Browning just to see what he could do with modern technology. Shit's evolved quite a lot since his days. Can't say the same for Stoner and Kalashnikov since firearms have development has stagnated since the Cold War era. Mauser is literally only known for bolt-action rifles and the C96.
John Moses Browning
Kalashnikov has no relevance. His "achievement" is a mediocre design whose only quality is the production numbers. Ditch him from the list. Replace with Hugo Schmeisser. Then the order is Browning
>>>
>Stoner.
Honestly, Kalashnikov is impressive because he had no formal education in gunsmithing and managed to make a solid, dependable design. Practically speaking, you don't hear about tractor mechanics designing world class assault rifles.
Neither did Browning.
Browning's father was a gunsmith who taught his son the fundamentals of engineering and manufacture.
Kalashnikov objectively stole the design from superior beings and made it worse because he’s a moronic slav. Lobotomize yourself
That doesn't contradict my point. How many peasant farm mechanics understand firearm design enough to make a copy of the M1 Garand.
You’d be surprised what a farmer can do to make something work with the limited resources they have and the life or death need to make it work.
Regardless, Its less about him being a farmer and more about him being a braindead slav who took apart an STG44 and couldn’t put it back together. He took a superb piece of engineering and made a slav knockoff
When people say the AK is a copy if the STG it really reveals their midwit status.
Oh wow you saw that one jootoob video where literally who said the AKs functionality is similar to that of the garand than the stg… so did everyone else homosexual. It doesn’t negate from the fact that the slavBlack person basically copied it to an inferior degree.
In any case, him copying the simpler garand bolt is a testament to how stupid he was because he couldn’t fathom the superior engineering on the stg
>stg
>superior
Wehraboos are the only people more insufferable than tankies
>Wehraboos are the only people more insufferable than tankies
>That post
>Those digits
Checked, Based and Sieg Heil!
Answer E: Hiram Maxim
Inventor of the belt-fed machine gun, made in Maine.
I'd love to see what this fricker could do with a 3D printer, a 7-axis CNC and Chat-GTP.
Is that an old Tsarist-era Maxim, converted to a quasi-light machine gun in your pic?
You are correct
Well I'll be damned. Not quite as handy as the MG-08/15 by the looks of it. But if it does what you want it to, I don't think there'd be many complaints.
>Chat-GTP.
Black person what the frick is a language model going to do to help gun design?
Have it like a second man in the room. You'd throw it ideas and it'd give you opinions on how they'd work. These opinions aren't gonna be detailed, and are also unlikely to pick one option over another unless you force it to, but it can help you work through your own thinking and get past mental blocks faster.
I can't answer your question OP, but if there was ever a famous gunsmith I could identify with it would be this man right here.
I get why everyone is saying JMB, but as a Mormon, he would be impossible to work with.
Stoner would be the best, but his designs would all be painfully boring, sterile, and thoroughly optimized.
Mauser would be afraid to drill anything, and Kalashnikov would probably be too drunk and rapey.
Honestly? Bring back Pederson and resurrect the Iver-Johnson company if the goal is commercial and recreational.
Based. I want an Iver-Johnson just because of webm related.
Really? You put that fricking moronic thieving slav mutt in this debate? Against legitimate geniuses? Frick you op you fricking moron.
Pederson.
I'm curious as to what Kalashnikov could design without the restriction that it has to be easily produced by the millions.
I did not realize that Mauser looked like a thin David Mitchell
I would pick Richard Gatling.
Honestly there's not much he'd be able to do to improve his gun over the versions we have now, but I think it would be funny to see his reaction to the mass amount of slaughter his weapons have done, when he explicitly created the gatling gun in an attempt to make wars less bloody.
I honestly have a hard time believing that he thought this genuinely. It makes no real sense.
>my gun...le kills people more efficiently?
>HOW COULD THIS HAVE HAPPENED
no.
the answer is Paul Luger.
9mm and the Luger
para bellum motherfrickers
>toggled-locked ARs