why out of all the tilting bolt weapons, has the FN MAG lasted?

why out of all the tilting bolt weapons, has the FN MAG lasted?

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >why out of all the tilting bolt weapons, has the FN MAG lasted?
    Me
    I keep buying them

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      1/3

      Based

      Juche

      Based

      it's the BAR bolt design

      Don't forget the M1919/M2-esque construction.

      >it is just minmaxing at that point
      >no shit, dumbass
      is what i'd say if this was about the weapon systems
      but this thread is a thread about WHY the tilting-bolt system has lasted, essentially, in the FN MAG
      (thanks for recognizing that)

      again, seriously, why is this system still alive in this gun?
      is it the shape?
      yet what makes it so good
      the SKS & MAS didn't survive, why?
      is it the seal that the receiver the provides along the feed system?
      that way if the feed if fricked the bolt assembly is fricked?
      so its seen as non-problem in this format?
      yet still, the fricking bren is still used, and so is the madsen, both tilting bolt systems
      so, why is the FN MAG still here? what makes it so great, specifically?

      >is it the shape?
      >yet what makes it so good
      You need to stop focusing on single aspects of the gun and take in the entire package, plus the context surrounding it. Tilting bolts aren't better than rotating bolts because the FN MAG continues to be popular, it's that the FN MAG is a really good GPMG. Other weapons may be better, but are they better enough to justify replacing them, especially when the hypothetical user has been using MAGs for the past 70 years, so they have parts full of warehouses, dozens of factories making parts on tooling that already exists, building a design that's had its' kinks worked out decades ago?
      >the SKS & MAS didn't survive, why?
      Because the SKS and MAS were both "normal" self loading rifles. When it came time to replace them with select-fire assault rifles, the USSR and France started from a clean slate. The inherent problem with tilting bolt firearms is that you need to make the whole receiver* out of steel due to the way it locks up. There are a million other little things when you compare tilting and rotating bolts but I have shit to do but that's the reason why tilting bolts aren't so common nowadays.Additionally, they were developed by different countries with different technical bases, different experiences/doctrine etc. When the MAG was being designed, FN had already been building BARs for decades, they were reliable and sold well, so it makes sense that Saive would start with what he knew (also note how the PKM is basically just beeg upside-down AK). The MAG also has a significant amount of primary extraction due to the link design - always a plus, much more relevant in a GPMG than in a rifle.

      *Or have a frickhuge trunnion like the STG44, compare the trunnion on an STG44 to that of an AK or the barrel extension on an AR16.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        This guy knows.

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    sks

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      -was replaced by the AK

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Too bad the FN MAG is fricking garbage.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      yeah, the NK Type 73 lmg is way fricking better

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        unironically yes

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          just figure out a way to add a picrail onto it & you got the "new next generation advanced squad machine rifle" of half the entire world

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Basically.
            PKM is better than any other machinegun out there.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              all i really needs ina few modifications, and its perfect
              i'd say a dual separated feedcover design is needed, if you look at the PKM design, it could easily be made into 2 covers, one that holds the entire feed assembly, and one that can be used to reload the feed assembly separately
              it would be way easier & allow the use of easily mountable optics, like how they do on M2 browning

              [...]
              [...]
              [...]
              Okay but why

              a multitude of reasons
              the PKM could also use a few addition off a FN MAG too, like the cupped gas piston head
              honestly, as they are now, i'd say they're basically even, but with enough modifications (simple ones mind you), the PKM could really do a great job overtaking it
              its not like an AK to AR situation, its just different

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >a multitude of reasons
                wow good answer anon you sure answered his question

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                yeah, i'm just gonna explain by fricking millimeter the exact dimensions of shit that doesn't even have a fricking name, let alone in english, the exact form of a 3D object in a text space, on a sengelalian pipe tobacco forum
                go frick yourself

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              It just works. Also the MAG/240 uses a linkage to lock, it's only arguably a tilting bolt system.

              This but unironically. A colleague of mine used both in combat, said that the only real issue with the PK was the awkwardness of the non-disintegrating belts. Barrel changes look like a hassle though.

              yeah, i'm just gonna explain by fricking millimeter the exact dimensions of shit that doesn't even have a fricking name, let alone in english, the exact form of a 3D object in a text space, on a sengelalian pipe tobacco forum
              go frick yourself

              >let alone in english
              You are literally a pajeet who hasn't used either weapon.

              >it is just minmaxing at that point
              >no shit, dumbass
              is what i'd say if this was about the weapon systems
              but this thread is a thread about WHY the tilting-bolt system has lasted, essentially, in the FN MAG
              (thanks for recognizing that)

              again, seriously, why is this system still alive in this gun?
              is it the shape?
              yet what makes it so good
              the SKS & MAS didn't survive, why?
              is it the seal that the receiver the provides along the feed system?
              that way if the feed if fricked the bolt assembly is fricked?
              so its seen as non-problem in this format?
              yet still, the fricking bren is still used, and so is the madsen, both tilting bolt systems
              so, why is the FN MAG still here? what makes it so great, specifically?

              I'll give you a full answer based on my admittedly limited knowledge when I get back.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                I saw a demo of the PKM barrel change and it looked finnicky and mildly hazardous.
                On the plus, it looked like it retained the belt with the feed cover up, to a degree. M240 is all slip and slide.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                jew

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        unironically yes

        just figure out a way to add a picrail onto it & you got the "new next generation advanced squad machine rifle" of half the entire world

        Basically.
        PKM is better than any other machinegun out there.

        Okay but why

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Juche

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          The big thing it has is weight and durability. Most guns in it's class that are similarly light tend to suffer in durability. Also the rimmed cartridge really does a lot to improve extraction, ask any pole that had to use a UKM-2000, redesigning it for 7.62 NATO was a serious downgrade

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      yeah, the NK Type 73 lmg is way fricking better

      unironically yes

      Basically.
      PKM is better than any other machinegun out there.

      all i really needs ina few modifications, and its perfect
      i'd say a dual separated feedcover design is needed, if you look at the PKM design, it could easily be made into 2 covers, one that holds the entire feed assembly, and one that can be used to reload the feed assembly separately
      it would be way easier & allow the use of easily mountable optics, like how they do on M2 browning
      [...]
      a multitude of reasons
      the PKM could also use a few addition off a FN MAG too, like the cupped gas piston head
      honestly, as they are now, i'd say they're basically even, but with enough modifications (simple ones mind you), the PKM could really do a great job overtaking it
      its not like an AK to AR situation, its just different

      [...]
      [...]
      [...]
      Okay but why

      none of these morons have ever fired or used either weapon system so their opinion is dogshit. both the pk and fn are very good machine guns, both have things that are arguably superior or inferior than eachother but it is just minmaxing at that point.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >it is just minmaxing at that point
        >no shit, dumbass
        is what i'd say if this was about the weapon systems
        but this thread is a thread about WHY the tilting-bolt system has lasted, essentially, in the FN MAG
        (thanks for recognizing that)

        again, seriously, why is this system still alive in this gun?
        is it the shape?
        yet what makes it so good
        the SKS & MAS didn't survive, why?
        is it the seal that the receiver the provides along the feed system?
        that way if the feed if fricked the bolt assembly is fricked?
        so its seen as non-problem in this format?
        yet still, the fricking bren is still used, and so is the madsen, both tilting bolt systems
        so, why is the FN MAG still here? what makes it so great, specifically?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          My comment is mainly to address people making absolutist statements like "the FN MAG is shit, the PKM is shit" because non nuanced opinions when talking about specifics are annoying.

          I'm not a mechanical engineer, but the tilting bolt system is very difficult to wear pressure bearing parts, it is the oldest machine gun operating system and at least mathematically the simplest one. I'm also not a Soviet Machine gunner so again not an expert, but I have had trigger time on a Bulgarian PKM during a foreign weapons course which is more experience than probably anyone on this board unless if we have some people from the eastern block on here. The maxim belt is just objectively antiquated, disintegrating links are superior, also the tangent leaf sight is worse than a rear aperture. I've never used or even seen in person a modern PK with their rail systems (then again who has) but the 240 top rails I've used have been reliable and effective. the barrel change on the MAG or 240 is also in my opinion superior but still bested by modern guns.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            The tilting bolt is a shit garbage ass feature because it necessitates a big heavy long bolt and a similarly big heavy long receiver. Also the belt feed mechanism on the PKM is great and much better than the MG42 derived track and roller style.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >why is the FN MAG still here? what makes it so great, specifically?
          They're built like tanks so they've never worn out and needed replacement. More modern machine guns that should be better than the MAG aren't better by enough to justify throwing out perfectly good machine guns. It's similar story to the M2.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        The fn weighs 4kg extra for no reason other than inferior engineering.
        The PKM with 200-300 rounds weighs the same as the FN MAG. The mag is a shit garbage inefficiently heavy design.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          it weighs 4kg more because it has a heavier barrel and thicker receiver, making it more robust, it can also sustain higher round counts due to its simpler bolt mechanism (as in performs less actions), thicker receiver, and barrels. The PKM is higher than the M240, but the maxim belt means that to properly carry it you must have the heavier feeding box, or else carry loose belts (which you should not do). Which is a semantic point but still the carrying weight of the gun is not that big of a difference.

          Also the PKM receiver also has to be very long to accommodate the rimmed cartridge and the feeding mechanism, the MAG is only 2 inches longer than the PKM (even shorter on the 240 which has a shorter flash hider). The only real viable complaint is the weight difference which is either a detriment or a benefit depending on who you ask. It seems to me that this doesn't relegate the M240 into a "garbage gun" because you have some sort of beef against the extremely durable lever mechanism.

          also if you're b***hing and moaning about this and haven't actually held, shot, or carried either you're gay and moronic.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            lighter* not higher

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >it weighs 4kg more because it has a heavier barrel and thicker receiver
            Wrong. The fn has an inefficient locking system and general design which requires more steel to achieve the same effect.
            >the maxim belt means that to properly carry it you must have the heavier feeding box
            Wrong. Not only can the PKM also use disintegrating belts if desired nothing about the belt necessitates feeding boxes any more than a disintegrating belt.
            >else carry loose belts (which you should not do)
            (you should)
            >weight difference which is either a detriment or a benefit
            >additional weight a benefit
            you are delusional

            But I guess I wouldn't expect any less from a fcuking murheen

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >Wrong
              the M240 barrel is 640mm and weighs 6.6 pounds, the PKM weighs 5.3 pounds and is 5mm longer meaning is a thinner barrel profile and not capable of as high of a volume of sustained fire on a si gle barrel. this would necessitate the carrying of another barrel for the PKM to achieve the same effective rate of sustainable fire (again increasing the actual carry weight)
              >disintegrating belts
              didn't know this was a thing tbh but upon some cursory reading it seems this is a recent Ukranian invention and I have never seen an image or video of one being used. functionally 99% of users are probably still using maxim belts which do necessitate ammunition boxes because
              >(you should
              you absolutely should not run around with loose belts hanging off your gun if you can help it, because dirty belts break and jam guns.
              You would know this if you've ever run a belt fed machine gun
              >you are delusional
              if you had run a belt fed machine gun you would know that off the tripod weight is absolutely your friend when trying to lay a tight beaten zone.

              I readily acknowledged that MAG is heavier, but like anything else in design it is a compromise, the thicker receiver, heavier barrel, and elbow bolt means you have a longer mean service life and rate of sustained fire. I almost forgot to mention that the ability to disassemble the chrome lined gas block and regulator on the MAG is a nice benefit.

              >fcuking murheen
              lol you mean the people that actually use these weapons? Military service doesn't guarantee you are an expert on anything, especially small arms related. But we can read the same literature you can and we actually use these weapons and learn about them because it's our job.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Barrel changes are a meme. If you're shooting so much that you're in the need of a barrel change it would be a better idea to carry more ammo than an extra barrel anyhow.
                >didn't know this was a thing tbh but upon some cursory reading it seems this is a recent Ukranian invention and I have never seen an image or video of one being used
                Because it doesn't make any fricking difference, don't you understand?
                >you absolutely should not run around with loose belts hanging off your gun if you can help it, because dirty belts break and jam guns.
                This applies to all belt feds and is therefore irrelevant when making comparisons between them
                >thicker receiver
                Doesn't affect service life
                >heavier barrel
                There's a one pound difference and barrel weight is not very useful for making comparisons since people could just make a thicker barrel for the PKM if they wanted to without changing anything else.
                >elbow bolt
                This is you just guessing. There's a reason (almost) literally every new design that comes out uses a rotating bolt, it is the superior locking design, it is stronger, it is lighter. There is no reason to believe that an antiquated linkage lockup mechanism had a longer lifespan than a rotating bolt design with chunky AK locking lugs.

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    It was desgined by john Browning.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >It was desgined by john Browning.
      From beyond the grave?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        it's the BAR bolt design

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Yeah

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Because replacing the machine gun will never impact the outcome of a war. For small arms what matters is the numbers you can stockpile and produce them and the things you use with them like a radio, night vision, thermals, optics, ballistic computer. Then any rifle or machinegun can become great.

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Because it works fine and everybody already uses it
    Why change to something "better" and buy all new guns and redo all your training when you already have "good enough" and can just replace guns or parts piecemeal?

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Simple.
    Cheap.
    Reliable.

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    No I'm not from the fricking east I'm a mechanical engineer and inefficiency in mechanical structural design infuriates me to no end. Especially if it's a product still being manufactured and used worldwide because it produces people like fricking you who think that it is a good design and that there couldn't possibly be anything else as good ever.

    And yes I hate the M2 for all the same reasons.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >like fricking YOU
      Hmm, assuming your self-description is true, I guess you could also just be a hormonal 19 year old, or thereabouts.

      >who think... there couldn't possibly be anything else as good ever
      Posts like

      >why is the FN MAG still here? what makes it so great, specifically?
      They're built like tanks so they've never worn out and needed replacement. More modern machine guns that should be better than the MAG aren't better by enough to justify throwing out perfectly good machine guns. It's similar story to the M2.

      and another that calls the MAG "good enough" dispel your strawmanning.
      You know, I actually have pics saved of the XM guns from ~2005-12 that were potential M2 replacements. And I tried asking people about KORD a month ago, because I'm aware of the M2's clunkiness.

      I wouldn't want any discussion from you, though. You're some kinda yappy ankle biter.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Where did you find that picture of me?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        [...]
        No I'm not from the fricking east I'm a mechanical engineer and inefficiency in mechanical structural design infuriates me to no end. Especially if it's a product still being manufactured and used worldwide because it produces people like fricking you who think that it is a good design and that there couldn't possibly be anything else as good ever.

        And yes I hate the M2 for all the same reasons.

        >I'm a mechanical engineer
        lol dude you hate how inefficient the locking mechanism is when in real life it works extremely well, has minimal parts wear, and fewer moving actions? You're calling it a shit gun but are ignoring literally everything else about the gun, and are trying to tell people who use this gun how bad it is. Quit being outraged so easily, they're both fine guns, both have advantages and disadvantages, in the field it is a great weapon.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >works extremely well
          The world is full of antiquated things that work extremely well
          >has minimal parts wear
          Just like any well designed rotating bolt lock
          >fewer moving actions
          Are you shitting me right now?

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    >Does that factor in the barrel etc though?
    yes see my other reply above, the 240/MAG has a heavier barrel than the PKM and is capable of a higher sustained rate of fire.

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    Give me $3 000 000 and three years and I'll give you a better GPMG than the FN MAG.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Barrel changes are a meme. If you're shooting so much that you're in the need of a barrel change it would be a better idea to carry more ammo than an extra barrel anyhow.
      >didn't know this was a thing tbh but upon some cursory reading it seems this is a recent Ukranian invention and I have never seen an image or video of one being used
      Because it doesn't make any fricking difference, don't you understand?
      >you absolutely should not run around with loose belts hanging off your gun if you can help it, because dirty belts break and jam guns.
      This applies to all belt feds and is therefore irrelevant when making comparisons between them
      >thicker receiver
      Doesn't affect service life
      >heavier barrel
      There's a one pound difference and barrel weight is not very useful for making comparisons since people could just make a thicker barrel for the PKM if they wanted to without changing anything else.
      >elbow bolt
      This is you just guessing. There's a reason (almost) literally every new design that comes out uses a rotating bolt, it is the superior locking design, it is stronger, it is lighter. There is no reason to believe that an antiquated linkage lockup mechanism had a longer lifespan than a rotating bolt design with chunky AK locking lugs.

      >Barrel changes are a meme. If you're shooting so much that you're in the need of a barrel change it would be a better idea to carry more ammo than an extra barrel anyhow.
      And then your barrel explodes/your ammo starts cooking off/your gun seizes. You know, the reasons that these guns have quick change barrels in the first place. Surely though, you said that barrel changes are a meme with such authority. Please, tell me more about how you came to that conclusion. Surely, you must have been in multiple extended firefights, seeing as you know so much more than literally every firearms designer, ordinance board, and infantryman in the post-war period.

      >Because it doesn't make any fricking difference, don't you understand?
      Not qualified to say personally, but there are a million other reasons as to why it isn't standard. It also sounds very convienient, and I know for a fact that having a frickhuge non-disintegrating belt hanging off the side of your gun makes moving with it much harder.
      >This applies to all belt feds and is therefore irrelevant when making comparisons between them
      Fair enough.
      >Doesn't affect service life
      Not informed enough to say so decisively, but the M60 does have issues with receiver stretch and battlefield vegas does report that their stamped AK receivers tend to fail after a while. It's definitely something that can be designed around, but it's certainly a factor on some level.
      >There's a one pound difference and barrel weight is not very useful for making comparisons since people could just make a thicker barrel for the PKM if they wanted to without changing anything else.
      True.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >This is you just guessing. There's a reason (almost) literally every new design that comes out uses a rotating bolt, it is the superior locking design, it is stronger, it is lighter. There is no reason to believe that an antiquated linkage lockup mechanism had a longer lifespan than a rotating bolt design with chunky AK locking lugs.
        And? The MAG still works, so people still buy them. You're not wrong, which is why FN's newer products use rotating bolts and why designers have moved away from tilting bolts, but the MAG still fricking works.

        https://i.imgur.com/Ggxj4Vl.jpg

        [...]
        >Does that factor in the barrel etc though?
        yes see my other reply above, the 240/MAG has a heavier barrel than the PKM and is capable of a higher sustained rate of fire.

        Gotcha. How's the PK handle? I've heard that they're pretty easy to swing around due to the lighter weight and center of mass closer to the firing hand.

        [...]
        Give me $3 000 000 and three years and I'll give you a better GPMG than the FN MAG.

        Make a SLDASM file of your design, calculate the weight, then make a powerpoint explaining what your design does better than current designs, send it to me, and I will send you all of my $OGSM.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >then make a powerpoint explaining what your design does better than current designs
          Why anon, the advantages of the gomutra cooled barrel are self evident. And let's face it, it can't turn out worse than insas, right?
          Right?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Maybe it's because I'm tired but I thought you were OP for a second lmao.

            This guy knows.

            Y-you too

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Because they're sturdy as frick.

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I seem to remember the 240s breaking firing pins all the time. They were far from troublefree even with modest yearly qualification firing schedules

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The brits really miss their Vickers guns

  14. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    frick ya mudda

  15. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Frick ya mudda

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *