What's the worst gun?

[shotgunbob]

Not that in to guns, this is a really intriguing thread. Isn't the AK 47 pretty cheap though?

Cheap to make. But still one of the best guns ever made IMO

 

[qazcake]

Chauchat
WWI
your in the trenches
and you get a blessing from France! A super light machine that fires fast and has a large magazine, too bad the internals are made out of stamped tin and the clip is open on the side to let anything in the trench, get into your machine. Notorious for killing more allies than axis.
Truly the shittiest gun in history.

agreed it is look for your self
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chauchat

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

The Army was mainly in Europe and they did have some company's for "sit and shit" duties but after the marines took an Island the army would move in and set up more permanent structures.

Part of that was because at the time, due to it's smaller size (than the US Army), reputation and traditional role(s), it was seen as 'wasting' USMC troops they couldn't spare putting them on garrison duty when the Army not only had the numbers to supply garrison troops but also that such duty had always been one of the Army's traditional roles.

 

[Eren Murtaugh]

The AK-47 is one of the worst. Yeah, it's a quick fire rate, and it almost never jams, but that doesn't fix the terrible accuracy, the strength needed to wield it(it's not heavy, but start firing it and you have a real problem with it not jerking up and blowing YOUR face off) the enormous recoil, and when it DOES finally overheat and jam, you can NEVER use it again.

Also, and I know I'm gonna catch a TON of flak for this, but fragmentation grenades and shotguns. They're both VERY situational,. and with the frag grenade you have as much chance of injuring/killing yourself as others if you don't use it properly.
And shotguns are pretty much pathetic if someone's more than 10 feet away from you.

If your using a 3 inch sabo deer slugs your going to be able to kill at 220-250 meters.

I've answered this about a million times. I was taking liberties with the aiming, and hunting slugs are different than battle slugs. A battle slug sprays areas with a larger radius to nullify a room and put people down faster. A hunting slug keeps the pellets closer together to do more damage.

 

[WolfThomas]

The Liberator

Spoiler

Yes the liberator was crap, but that was kind of the point. At the peak of the war it cost perhaps 45cents (I think that's what I read somewhere) to produce one. They could then be dropped into occupied areas for partisans to use, with a cartoon explaining how to use it. Generally the idea is you only fired it once and hopefully took the weapon of the person you killed with it. So for a cheap and disposable gun it served it's purpose. It was also initially intended as a psychological weapon, because if you could arm enough of the populace the occupying troops would be sufficiently paranoid, though they never achieved this in great numbers.

 

[Canid117]

the M-16. considered the worst assault rifle in the world. any sort of melee with it would shatter the spring-loaded stock and the overly complex firing mechanism was a ***** to clean and jammed alot. the only reason it became the standard american infantry rifle was politics, "buy my gun and you get my vote". it was originally designed for MPs at stateside military bases

Those problems have all been fixed. Now it is an exemplary military rifle. As for what was wrong with the M-14 well... too expensive... too heavy and the recoil is just fucking awful on that fat bastard. Though it supposedly works beautifully as a sniper and semi-automatic battle rifle.

Worst gun? Desert Eagle, that thing is horrifically impracticable. Too heavy, nasty recoil, the bullets are too big and it has a horribly limited magazine capacity.

I love the M-14 if you cant handle the recoil get it with a recoil assist stock. I shoot .300's and .308's all day long and I just wear 2 of those tank top undershirts under my t shirt. It takes awhile to get used to it. They had a bunch of them made fully automatic so basically it was a deadlier version of the BAR that shot superior rounds and had amazing accuracy. They turned it into 2 sniper rifles and used it up until the 90's. You could actually qualify with it (in the USMC) until the mid 90's but Clinton ordered them to be melted down so very few survived, that's truly unfortunate because I think we need to go back and relearn why light machine guns shooting fast bullets isn't always the answer. For my last viewpoint I think they should have turned it into a carbine and put 3 shock absorbers in the stock.

The first shot had amazing accuracy but every single one after that would be thirty feet or higher above the target. The problem isn't that recoil harms the shooters its that it messes up people's shots even in bursts your going to have awful accuracy after the first round on the M-14. It also had a weight problem. Both it and the ammunition it used weighed too much for fast moving fully automatic use. It is still used as a Designated Marksman rifle in the marine corps and as a sniper by special forces units. It's fantastic in a semi auto capacity but sadly doesn't work as well as a standard infantry rifle. The M-14 also costs a lot more to make.

the M14 costs more than the M16? That strikes me as backwards. But the ammunition costs I can see a substantial cost difference although Im a firm believer in making "whatever you hit the first time dead" so its not always about how much you shoot, its about how much you hit. Besides the .308 is a versatile round where as the 5.56 needs to be a direct center of mass hit to incapacitate. A .308 can put a hole the size of a grapefruit. Im not knocking the NATO small arms standard Im just giving a personal preference. I can argue its combat effectiveness through my dad and uncle. They talk about begging borrowing or stealing M14's because they would drop the target with one shot and when things got really close they could swing it like a damn baseball bat.

Carved wood costs more than molded plastic shocking I know. The M-16 and M-4 are extremely accurate for an assault rifle being capable of putting all three shots of a burst into a very small area and soldiers are trained to aim for center of mass anyway so it isn't that big a deal. They can also do something that the M-14 is a horrible choice for and that is suppression fire. A vast majority of the shots in a warzone no matter what weapon you are using is meant to keep the enemies heads down so that a squad can get into position to finish the enemy off which the AR-15 type weapons can do very well. Unlike the troops equipped with eh M-14, soldiers using an M-16 0r M-4 can actually carry enough bullets to compete with the AK series for suppression while being accurate enough to beat out most enemies in a long range shoot out. It does what it needs to do better than the M-14 would at a cheaper price. In war you just need to put a guy down and the hydrostatic shock from a 5.56 mm NATO will often do that just as well as the blood loss from a 7.62 mm bullet shearing off your arm.

 

[Atmos Duality]

The Liberator

Spoiler

Yes the liberator was crap, but that was kind of the point. At the peak of the war it cost perhaps 45cents (I think that's what I read somewhere) to produce one. They could then be dropped into occupied areas for partisans to use, with a cartoon explaining how to use it. Generally the idea is you only fired it once and hopefully took the weapon of the person you killed with it. So for a cheap and disposable gun it served it's purpose. It was also initially intended as a psychological weapon, because if you could arm enough of the populace the occupying troops would be sufficiently paranoid, though they never achieved this in great numbers.

Actually, they mass produced the weapon, but never actually delivered them as intended.
Most of them were used after WW2 ended, primarily around Asia.

 

[Serenegoose]

The Klobb, obviously. Did you ever use that thing?


What do you mean it's not a real gun?! I seen it in goldeneye!

 

[DefunctTheory]

The AK-47 is one of the worst. Yeah, it's a quick fire rate, and it almost never jams, but that doesn't fix the terrible accuracy, the strength needed to wield it(it's not heavy, but start firing it and you have a real problem with it not jerking up and blowing YOUR face off) the enormous recoil, and when it DOES finally overheat and jam, you can NEVER use it again.

Also, and I know I'm gonna catch a TON of flak for this, but fragmentation grenades and shotguns. They're both VERY situational,. and with the frag grenade you have as much chance of injuring/killing yourself as others if you don't use it properly.
And shotguns are pretty much pathetic if someone's more than 10 feet away from you.

If your using a 3 inch sabo deer slugs your going to be able to kill at 220-250 meters.

I've answered this about a million times. I was taking liberties with the aiming, and hunting slugs are different than battle slugs. A battle slug sprays areas with a larger radius to nullify a room and put people down faster. A hunting slug keeps the pellets closer together to do more damage.

For one, a slug is a shotgun round that is completely solid, in one piece.

For two... you are completely wrong. Combat shotguns are loaded with pretty much the same ammunition you hunt with: 7-9 pellets.

I don't even know where you got this crazy idea of a 'room clearing' shot gun. You'd need a 3x5 inch wide slug to even get close to such a thing.

 

[Eren Murtaugh]

The AK-47 is one of the worst. Yeah, it's a quick fire rate, and it almost never jams, but that doesn't fix the terrible accuracy, the strength needed to wield it(it's not heavy, but start firing it and you have a real problem with it not jerking up and blowing YOUR face off) the enormous recoil, and when it DOES finally overheat and jam, you can NEVER use it again.

Also, and I know I'm gonna catch a TON of flak for this, but fragmentation grenades and shotguns. They're both VERY situational,. and with the frag grenade you have as much chance of injuring/killing yourself as others if you don't use it properly.
And shotguns are pretty much pathetic if someone's more than 10 feet away from you.

If your using a 3 inch sabo deer slugs your going to be able to kill at 220-250 meters.

I've answered this about a million times. I was taking liberties with the aiming, and hunting slugs are different than battle slugs. A battle slug sprays areas with a larger radius to nullify a room and put people down faster. A hunting slug keeps the pellets closer together to do more damage.

For one, a slug is a shotgun round that is completely solid, in one piece.

For two... you are completely wrong. Combat shotguns are loaded with pretty much the same ammunition you hunt with: 7-9 pellets.

I don't even know where you got this crazy idea of a 'room clearing' shot gun. You'd need a 3x5 inch wide slug to even get close to such a thing.

*facepalm* It's just a name. It doesn't actually mean the thing hits every corner of a room.
Combat shotguns are used to provide suppressive fire because they lay out a wide horizontal spread of pellets. They're called room cleaners because you can point it into a room and expect to hit just about everyone in there.
P.S. Combat shotguns have 15-20 pellets. Not 7-9, thus the wider spread.

 

[TheDukes]

Id have to go with the Penny Launcher.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KNZZ9qDJtQ&feature=related

Basicly unless your a plastic bottle or smaller, this thing its pretty much useless.
I am considering this a gun based off the fact I typed in "penny gun" and got an endless sea of pages

 

[Ironman126]

What's with all the hate on the Desert Eagle? Sure the .50 cal AE version is totally pointless as a sidearm, but the gun comes in like two other flavors (.44 magnum and .357 magnum).

Worst firearm in modern history: The M16/M4 and it's variants (not including the HK M416/417). Probably caused the deaths of more Americans than any firearm the enemy (if your in the US) ever used. Indirectly of course, but a jammed gun might as well be a bullet to the face.

And i'm also a little confused as to the hate on the XM8. The thing beat out all the other rifles in the US trials. That is to say, it beat the FN SCAR, Colt M4, and HK M416. Personally, I'd rather have a rifle that jams once every 10,000 rounds that one that jams ever time it see a speck of dirt or sand. (unless the issue is the NATO 5.56mm round, which is shit.)

Update your rifle knowledge. The M16 and the M4 have been upgraded substantially and are absolutely fine for being around for 30 years. The only real issue now is that the 5.56 is just too small to have put down power. Sure if you get a center mass hit the hydrostatic shock is strong enough to cause cavitation and damage organs but I;d rather blow them over with a 12 gauge deer slug or a .308. Either one of those can kill even if it hits you in a limb.

Yes, yes, it's true the M family has gotten some upgrades, but the fact that they STILL jam so frequently is the issue. Last year, a Marine way station was hit by insurgents in Afghanistan. over 50% Marines stationed there were wounded or killed when their rifles (M4s) jammed. And it isn't a matter of poor maintenance, they're Marines. They take care of their weapons. M4s are good to about six thousand rounds. Six thousand rounds isn't much when you are have to train in marksmanship with you rifle. Then add in sand and dirt and you have a mess. The M series rifles are obsolete. They need to be replaced with rifles that don't fire the NATO 5.56 round and don't jam after so few rounds are fired thru them. And that makes them one of the worse modern firearms.

I know the Marines, there my boys, I'm training to become one and LEAD them. But also remember that the Marines always get equipment that's been used or its been in storage for years. I also agree that they need to be replaced but they are still by no means the worst.

Maybe not the worst EVER. Definitely the worst the US military was ever issued. Give our boys some M14s or maybe the HK M417 (it's in NATO 7.62mm like the M14). The fact that you can't drop someone (that is to say you can't knock them down) with an M4 leads me to believe it is inadequate for it's job. The largest thing i'd shoot with a .223/5.56mm round is like a deer. MAYBE. If i had to go into combat, id want a full rifle round or maybe something like the 6.5mm round made my Alexander Arms. That's why i hold the M16 in such low regard. I suppose it'd be cool to plink around with, even if it is expensive.

 

[TheYellowCellPhone]

Chauchat
WWI
your in the trenches
and you get a blessing from France! A super light machine that fires fast and has a large magazine, too bad the internals are made out of stamped tin and the clip is open on the side to let anything in the trench, get into your machine. Notorious for killing more allies than axis.
Truly the shittiest gun in history.

/thread, really.

Not only was it prone to jamming, its parts really were custom made - if a screw was destroyed, well, tough shit.

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

P.S. Combat shotguns have 15-20 pellets. Not 7-9, thus the wider spread.

No, combat shotguns have whatever you load them with. Most common military round is 00 buck, if memory serves, and that's 8 pellets for a standard 12 gauge round.

 

[dthvirus]

Probably that rifle the Canadian army issued its solders in WWI. I forget what it was called but it jammed every two shots and basically got people killed.

 

[Berethond]

Also, and I know I'm gonna catch a TON of flak for this, but fragmentation grenades and shotguns. They're both VERY situational, and with the frag grenade you have as much chance of injuring/killing yourself as others if you don't use it properly.
And shotguns are pretty much pathetic if someone's more than 10 feet away from you.

Yeah grenades are dangerous to the user, but the people who use them are pros, trained in their use.

Have you ever used a shotgun? or is your knowledge of them gleaned entirely from CoD? In that game they are useless, but in real life with the correct ammunition and chokes they are capable of shooting a lot further than that. Mine certainly is, and thats just a basic over/under.

I've used a shotgun, I took liberties with the range. Not all grenades are used by professionals. You'd be surprised at what gang members get their hands on. And yea, I know shotguns are decent weapons, but they're still very situational. Even the S.C.A.R. Shotgun is unreliable when attempting to get a wound/kill. Hunting slugs are different from regular shotgun shells. They have less of a spread. There's a reason shotguns are called "room sweepers." Large area of effect, not a lot of aiming.

That being said, if you're looking for a very good weapon, you can't do much better than the M-16 or M-15

Uh....
What? Slugs don't HAVE spread, they're single projectiles. And, a standard 12-gauge buckshot shell will have an 8-inch spread at 100 feet. EIGHT INCHES.

 

[Eren Murtaugh]

P.S. Combat shotguns have 15-20 pellets. Not 7-9, thus the wider spread.

No, combat shotguns have whatever you load them with. Most common military round is 00 buck, if memory serves, and that's 8 pellets for a standard 12 gauge round.

In a standard combat situation, combat shotguns will be loaded with cartridges that hold from 15 to 20 pellets to allow them to be of a greater effect at close and mid range. The spread ensures decent cover with minimal ammo waste at mid range and at close range it leaves no room for question as to your opponent's death. While some people still use the lesser pelleted cartridges, the 15-20 is the most common place.

 

[Eren Murtaugh]

Also, and I know I'm gonna catch a TON of flak for this, but fragmentation grenades and shotguns. They're both VERY situational, and with the frag grenade you have as much chance of injuring/killing yourself as others if you don't use it properly.
And shotguns are pretty much pathetic if someone's more than 10 feet away from you.

Yeah grenades are dangerous to the user, but the people who use them are pros, trained in their use.

Have you ever used a shotgun? or is your knowledge of them gleaned entirely from CoD? In that game they are useless, but in real life with the correct ammunition and chokes they are capable of shooting a lot further than that. Mine certainly is, and thats just a basic over/under.

I've used a shotgun, I took liberties with the range. Not all grenades are used by professionals. You'd be surprised at what gang members get their hands on. And yea, I know shotguns are decent weapons, but they're still very situational. Even the S.C.A.R. Shotgun is unreliable when attempting to get a wound/kill. Hunting slugs are different from regular shotgun shells. They have less of a spread. There's a reason shotguns are called "room sweepers." Large area of effect, not a lot of aiming.

That being said, if you're looking for a very good weapon, you can't do much better than the M-16 or M-15

Uh....
What? Slugs don't HAVE spread, they're single projectiles. And, a standard 12-gauge buckshot shell will have an 8-inch spread at 100 feet. EIGHT INCHES.

Slug, pellet I don't really care. I don't like them. End of story. They're situational weapons! Give me anything against a shotgun, and I WIN UNLESS I'M A TOTAL DUMB ASS AND GET RIGHT IN YOUR FACE. THEY'RE TOO SITUATIONAL TO BE DEEMED AN OVER ALL EFFECTIVE COMBAT WEAPON.

 

[Berethond]

Also, and I know I'm gonna catch a TON of flak for this, but fragmentation grenades and shotguns. They're both VERY situational, and with the frag grenade you have as much chance of injuring/killing yourself as others if you don't use it properly.
And shotguns are pretty much pathetic if someone's more than 10 feet away from you.

Yeah grenades are dangerous to the user, but the people who use them are pros, trained in their use.

Have you ever used a shotgun? or is your knowledge of them gleaned entirely from CoD? In that game they are useless, but in real life with the correct ammunition and chokes they are capable of shooting a lot further than that. Mine certainly is, and thats just a basic over/under.

I've used a shotgun, I took liberties with the range. Not all grenades are used by professionals. You'd be surprised at what gang members get their hands on. And yea, I know shotguns are decent weapons, but they're still very situational. Even the S.C.A.R. Shotgun is unreliable when attempting to get a wound/kill. Hunting slugs are different from regular shotgun shells. They have less of a spread. There's a reason shotguns are called "room sweepers." Large area of effect, not a lot of aiming.

That being said, if you're looking for a very good weapon, you can't do much better than the M-16 or M-15

Uh....
What? Slugs don't HAVE spread, they're single projectiles. And, a standard 12-gauge buckshot shell will have an 8-inch spread at 100 feet. EIGHT INCHES.

Slug, pellet I don't really care. I don't like them. End of story. They're situational weapons! Give me anything against a shotgun, and I WIN UNLESS I'M A TOTAL DUMB ASS AND GET RIGHT IN YOUR FACE. THEY'RE TOO SITUATIONAL TO BE DEEMED AN OVER ALL EFFECTIVE COMBAT WEAPON.

Based on your ignorance of shotguns, I would bet you don't even know how to use a gun, in which case I would most definitely win.

 

[DefunctTheory]

The AK-47 is one of the worst. Yeah, it's a quick fire rate, and it almost never jams, but that doesn't fix the terrible accuracy, the strength needed to wield it(it's not heavy, but start firing it and you have a real problem with it not jerking up and blowing YOUR face off) the enormous recoil, and when it DOES finally overheat and jam, you can NEVER use it again.

Also, and I know I'm gonna catch a TON of flak for this, but fragmentation grenades and shotguns. They're both VERY situational,. and with the frag grenade you have as much chance of injuring/killing yourself as others if you don't use it properly.
And shotguns are pretty much pathetic if someone's more than 10 feet away from you.

If your using a 3 inch sabo deer slugs your going to be able to kill at 220-250 meters.

I've answered this about a million times. I was taking liberties with the aiming, and hunting slugs are different than battle slugs. A battle slug sprays areas with a larger radius to nullify a room and put people down faster. A hunting slug keeps the pellets closer together to do more damage.

For one, a slug is a shotgun round that is completely solid, in one piece.

For two... you are completely wrong. Combat shotguns are loaded with pretty much the same ammunition you hunt with: 7-9 pellets.

I don't even know where you got this crazy idea of a 'room clearing' shot gun. You'd need a 3x5 inch wide slug to even get close to such a thing.

*facepalm* It's just a name. It doesn't actually mean the thing hits every corner of a room.
Combat shotguns are used to provide suppressive fire because they lay out a wide horizontal spread of pellets. They're called room cleaners because you can point it into a room and expect to hit just about everyone in there.
P.S. Combat shotguns have 15-20 pellets. Not 7-9, thus the wider spread.

Double checked, actually. 9 to 12 pellet 00 buckshot cartridges. And they do not have increased spread.

Perhaps your thinking of riot ammo, which indeed has a wider spread, mostly because your outside and not REALLY trying to kill people.

By the way... 5 year veteran here. I've used combat shotguns. Keep arguing if you must, I'll go find the Technical Manual if you really want to drag this out.

EDIT: SUPPRESIVE fire? Suppressive fire is provided by RAPID FIRE weapons. Like this.

EDIT EDIT: I just looked closer at the photo I posted. No heat shield on the barrel? What the hell!?