Internet Movie Firearms Database - Guns in Movies, TV and Video Games - User contributions [en]

Talk:FN FAL

2022-02-16T18:17:23Z

RickB: /* FAL in 7th Dawn, 1964 */

==Additional Images==
[[File:FAL 50-42.jpg|thumb|none|500px|FN FAL 50.42 - 7.62x51mm NATO]]
[[File:L2A1 Bipod.jpg|thumb|none|500px|L2A1 - 7.62x51mm NATO]]
[[File:DSA SA58 with 18'' barrel.jpg‎|thumb|none|500px|DSA SA58 with 18" barrel - 7.62x51mm NATO]]
[[Image:DSA-58OSW.jpg|thumb|none|500px|DSA SA58 OSW with Eotech holosight and Sure Fire M900A Vertical Foregrip WeaponLight - 7.62x51mm NATO]]

===Photoshopped===
[[File:Imbelia2.jpg|thumb|none|500px|Photoshopped mock-up of IMBEL IA2 sniper rifle - 7.62x51mm. This image was made by the Small Arms Illustrated project.]]
[[Image:IA2-5.56mm-CQC.jpg|thumb|none|500px|Photoshopped mock-up IMBEL IA2 CQC Prototype With 265mm barrel - 5.56x45mm. This image was made by the Small Arms Illustrated project.]]
[[File:L1A1 Wild Geese custom.jpg|thumb|none|500px|'''Photoshopped''' Custom shortened L1A1 SLR (Self Loading Rifle) as used in [[The Wild Geese]] - 7.62x51mm]]

===Airsoft Variants===

[[File:King Arms L1A1 railed receiver.jpeg|thumb|none|500px|King Arms L1A1 AEG with railed receiver.]]

== What is a 50.50 ==

On the page for [[District 9]] it lists the specific FAL variant as a 50.50. This is not mentioned on this page, and I can't seem to find it online. Is this a misprint, or if not does anyone have any more information about it?--[[User:Commando552|Commando552]] 00:42, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

:: It is a mistype on the section title - The title is meant to read FAL 50-00, which it states so on the gun thumbnail. I've changed it, however I have to say I think the gun is actually an LAR, not a FAL 50-00. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 03:29, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

:::Actually it's only HALF of a FAL, thus the 50/50 remark! LOL! mpm
::::And Stan the man is right. It looks to be a FAL Light Automatic Rifle, not a 50.00 [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]]

:::::Thanks guys, wondered why I had no idea what the hell it was. I actually think that it is one of the early South African R1s that were Belgian made. Here is a pic of one for reference: http://www.saaaca.org.za/links/SIG/fal/PDC_0057.jpg. [[User:Commando552|Commando552]] 15:47, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

::::::Looks like we have a winner! Thanks! Now I have to replace the original LAR fore arm furniture and put the 50.00 forearm on it and 'build up' an R1 look a like for that page. Arghhh. The work never ends ;) [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 17:20, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

:: Doomed you are, Mastah! ;D [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 17:53, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

==FAL and FNC==

Based on their apparent similarities, are some components (specifically, stocks) interchangable between the FN FNC and FN FAL? For example, could one attach a FAL 50.00 stock to an FNC? [[User:MrOshimida27|MrOshimida27]] 19:30, 28 March 2011 (CDT)

== LAR/Romat parts swapping. ==

I found this particular gun in [[Ultimate Force]] and it seems to have the hand-guard of a Romat, but the barrel and flash hider of an LAR. Is it more likely (or even possible) that this is an LAR with Romat hand-guard, or LAR with Romat barrel? Can all FAL variants (assuming they are both metric/imperial) swap parts with one another? In the same episode, what appears to be a gun with the hand-guard of an LAR but the barrel of a Romat is also seen, suggesting they traded parts for some reason. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 16:07, 4 April 2011 (CDT)
[[File:UF 402 146.jpg|thumb|600px|none|]]

== Grenade launcher attachment ==

Is there some FN FAL paratrooper model with grenade launcher attachment? I suspect that it is used by Colonel in "Assault Girls".
[[User:Tomas|Tomas]] 14:28, 13 June 2011 (CDT)
:Might be wrong, as I am only going from the glimpses shown in the youtube trailer, but it looks like the FAL is fitted with a RIS handguard. If that is the case, it is relatively simple to attach a M203, CM203 or Airsoft replica (most likely in this case from the very unrealistic firing effects). Even if not RIS, a regular FAL can be fitted with an M203PI EGLM via use of an interbar mount. Film where similar mounts can be seen are ''[[The Postman]]'' and ''[[Escape from L.A.]]''. Although not relevant for this case as it is clearly an M203 type launcher, interesting tid bit is that the Australians used FAL variants fitted with xm148s during Vietnam. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:04, 13 June 2011 (CDT)
::I built the FAL's used in ''[[Escape from L.A.]]'' and ''[[The Postman]]'' when I was at Ellis Mercantile. I also machined the Cobray 203 mounts and made the flash hider/BFA for them.--[[User:Phoenixent|phoenixent]] 12:26, 24 March 2012 (CDT)

http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/Assault_Girls This help?--[[User:Mandolin|Mandolin]] 17:57, 8 February 2012 (CST)

== LAR question ==

Well it may be idiotic... but which is the country of origin of the '''LAR'''? Is Belgium like the FAL or another country? --[[User:Dannyguns|Dannyguns]] ([[User talk:Dannyguns|talk]]) 10:28, 25 April 2017 (EDT)
: The LAR is just the alternate name of the original version of the Belgian FAL. Right off the start of the describing paragraph: "The FN FAL (Fusil Automatique Léger) was designed by Dieudonné Saive and Ernest Vervier from 1947 to 1951. It is also called the FN LAR (Light Automatic Rifle), the English translation of its Belgian French name." [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan|talk]]) 13:47, 25 April 2017 (EDT)

Well thanks just feels weird that are called differently despite beign same thing. Why?--[[User:Dannyguns|Dannyguns]] ([[User talk:Dannyguns|talk]]) 14:08, 25 April 2017 (EDT)
PS : Even this site have some wrongness like the Bushmaster M17S described as American istead of Australian...
:They used the English name when they marketed it to other non French speaking countries, but it didn't catch on and most people just called it by the original French name. Similarly, I believe that the FALO was originally marketed to foreign countries as the LAR HB but again, people preferred the original French name. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] ([[User talk:Commando552|talk]]) 16:49, 25 April 2017 (EDT)

--[[User:RickB|RickB]] ([[User talk:RickB|talk]]) 13:17, 16 February 2022 (EST)== FAL in 7th Dawn, 1964 ==

FALs appear, in the hands of British (Commonwealth?) troops in 7th Dawn, a 1964 film about colonial problems in Malaya/Malasia, in 1945-1954. I noticed them in a scene in which soldiers are torching a village, and wondered if the FAL's appearance was anachronistic, in a film set in that time period?

Talk:FN FAL

2022-02-16T18:13:39Z

RickB: /* FAL in 7th Dawn, 1964 */ new section

==Additional Images==
[[File:FAL 50-42.jpg|thumb|none|500px|FN FAL 50.42 - 7.62x51mm NATO]]
[[File:L2A1 Bipod.jpg|thumb|none|500px|L2A1 - 7.62x51mm NATO]]
[[File:DSA SA58 with 18'' barrel.jpg‎|thumb|none|500px|DSA SA58 with 18" barrel - 7.62x51mm NATO]]
[[Image:DSA-58OSW.jpg|thumb|none|500px|DSA SA58 OSW with Eotech holosight and Sure Fire M900A Vertical Foregrip WeaponLight - 7.62x51mm NATO]]

===Photoshopped===
[[File:Imbelia2.jpg|thumb|none|500px|Photoshopped mock-up of IMBEL IA2 sniper rifle - 7.62x51mm. This image was made by the Small Arms Illustrated project.]]
[[Image:IA2-5.56mm-CQC.jpg|thumb|none|500px|Photoshopped mock-up IMBEL IA2 CQC Prototype With 265mm barrel - 5.56x45mm. This image was made by the Small Arms Illustrated project.]]
[[File:L1A1 Wild Geese custom.jpg|thumb|none|500px|'''Photoshopped''' Custom shortened L1A1 SLR (Self Loading Rifle) as used in [[The Wild Geese]] - 7.62x51mm]]

===Airsoft Variants===

[[File:King Arms L1A1 railed receiver.jpeg|thumb|none|500px|King Arms L1A1 AEG with railed receiver.]]

== What is a 50.50 ==

On the page for [[District 9]] it lists the specific FAL variant as a 50.50. This is not mentioned on this page, and I can't seem to find it online. Is this a misprint, or if not does anyone have any more information about it?--[[User:Commando552|Commando552]] 00:42, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

:: It is a mistype on the section title - The title is meant to read FAL 50-00, which it states so on the gun thumbnail. I've changed it, however I have to say I think the gun is actually an LAR, not a FAL 50-00. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 03:29, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

:::Actually it's only HALF of a FAL, thus the 50/50 remark! LOL! mpm
::::And Stan the man is right. It looks to be a FAL Light Automatic Rifle, not a 50.00 [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]]

:::::Thanks guys, wondered why I had no idea what the hell it was. I actually think that it is one of the early South African R1s that were Belgian made. Here is a pic of one for reference: http://www.saaaca.org.za/links/SIG/fal/PDC_0057.jpg. [[User:Commando552|Commando552]] 15:47, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

::::::Looks like we have a winner! Thanks! Now I have to replace the original LAR fore arm furniture and put the 50.00 forearm on it and 'build up' an R1 look a like for that page. Arghhh. The work never ends ;) [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 17:20, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

:: Doomed you are, Mastah! ;D [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 17:53, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

==FAL and FNC==

Based on their apparent similarities, are some components (specifically, stocks) interchangable between the FN FNC and FN FAL? For example, could one attach a FAL 50.00 stock to an FNC? [[User:MrOshimida27|MrOshimida27]] 19:30, 28 March 2011 (CDT)

== LAR/Romat parts swapping. ==

I found this particular gun in [[Ultimate Force]] and it seems to have the hand-guard of a Romat, but the barrel and flash hider of an LAR. Is it more likely (or even possible) that this is an LAR with Romat hand-guard, or LAR with Romat barrel? Can all FAL variants (assuming they are both metric/imperial) swap parts with one another? In the same episode, what appears to be a gun with the hand-guard of an LAR but the barrel of a Romat is also seen, suggesting they traded parts for some reason. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 16:07, 4 April 2011 (CDT)
[[File:UF 402 146.jpg|thumb|600px|none|]]

== Grenade launcher attachment ==

Is there some FN FAL paratrooper model with grenade launcher attachment? I suspect that it is used by Colonel in "Assault Girls".
[[User:Tomas|Tomas]] 14:28, 13 June 2011 (CDT)
:Might be wrong, as I am only going from the glimpses shown in the youtube trailer, but it looks like the FAL is fitted with a RIS handguard. If that is the case, it is relatively simple to attach a M203, CM203 or Airsoft replica (most likely in this case from the very unrealistic firing effects). Even if not RIS, a regular FAL can be fitted with an M203PI EGLM via use of an interbar mount. Film where similar mounts can be seen are ''[[The Postman]]'' and ''[[Escape from L.A.]]''. Although not relevant for this case as it is clearly an M203 type launcher, interesting tid bit is that the Australians used FAL variants fitted with xm148s during Vietnam. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:04, 13 June 2011 (CDT)
::I built the FAL's used in ''[[Escape from L.A.]]'' and ''[[The Postman]]'' when I was at Ellis Mercantile. I also machined the Cobray 203 mounts and made the flash hider/BFA for them.--[[User:Phoenixent|phoenixent]] 12:26, 24 March 2012 (CDT)

http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/Assault_Girls This help?--[[User:Mandolin|Mandolin]] 17:57, 8 February 2012 (CST)

== LAR question ==

Well it may be idiotic... but which is the country of origin of the '''LAR'''? Is Belgium like the FAL or another country? --[[User:Dannyguns|Dannyguns]] ([[User talk:Dannyguns|talk]]) 10:28, 25 April 2017 (EDT)
: The LAR is just the alternate name of the original version of the Belgian FAL. Right off the start of the describing paragraph: "The FN FAL (Fusil Automatique Léger) was designed by Dieudonné Saive and Ernest Vervier from 1947 to 1951. It is also called the FN LAR (Light Automatic Rifle), the English translation of its Belgian French name." [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan|talk]]) 13:47, 25 April 2017 (EDT)

Well thanks just feels weird that are called differently despite beign same thing. Why?--[[User:Dannyguns|Dannyguns]] ([[User talk:Dannyguns|talk]]) 14:08, 25 April 2017 (EDT)
PS : Even this site have some wrongness like the Bushmaster M17S described as American istead of Australian...
:They used the English name when they marketed it to other non French speaking countries, but it didn't catch on and most people just called it by the original French name. Similarly, I believe that the FALO was originally marketed to foreign countries as the LAR HB but again, people preferred the original French name. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] ([[User talk:Commando552|talk]]) 16:49, 25 April 2017 (EDT)

== FAL in 7th Dawn, 1964 ==

FALs appear, in the hands of British (Commonwealth?) troops in 7th Dawn, a 1964 film about colonial problems in Malaya/Malasia, in 1945-1954. I noticed them in a scene in which soldiers are torching a village, and wondered if the FAL's appearance was anachronistic, in a film set in that time period?

Talk:The Man in the High Castle - Season 3

2019-11-29T16:25:41Z

RickB: /* Double-barreled Shotguns */ new section

==Alternate history weapons==

Am I thinking that in this timeline, the G3 wouldn't exist in its current form because they won the war and the 7.62 was not forced upon NATO by the US. I think the Germans would have refined the kurz round in the STG44s and would have replaced all frontline bolt action rifles with those guns and later the G3 would be more like the G33 series but instead of 5.56, it'd be a German round. I'm thinking the CAL might be a thin since Belgium is under NAZI rule and all their weapon designs would have fallen into German hands

I also think that the Japanese would have eventually adopted a rifle like the Garand and before they lost, they were interested in a repeating rifle and had several prototypes, including one based on the Garand but chambered in their caliber.

[[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] ([[User talk:Excalibur01|talk]]) 17:13, 8 March 2019 (EST)

:I no longer think it makes sense to look for any logic here. Especially if you take into account what its creators, is tries to persistently “gather additionally” the DDR and communistic China (in the form of Japan, oh yeah) where it does not make sense. --[[User:Slon95|Slon95]] ([[User talk:Slon95|talk]]) 17:33, 8 March 2019 (EST)

Considering that in reality war shortages forced the Germans to develop the STG45 and the Volkssturmgewehr, it is safe to assume that if they have won the war that wouldn't have been needed. Being victorious and having abundant resources probably would have resulted in them continuing to use and develop the STG44. But I suppose that the use of the G3 was meant to convey the progress of technology after the war, you know if they simply gave them STGs in the supposedly more advanced 60s the audience would have cringed at the supposedly advanced Germans using "obsolete" WW2 weaponry. --[[User:Nanomat|Nanomat]] ([[User talk:Nanomat|talk]]) 17:46, 8 March 2019 (EST)
:My headcannon for the G3s and Howa Type 64s in this universe is that they are chambered in their nation's rifle/MG caliber (7.92x57mm and 6.5x50mmSR respectively), and that the G3 came about from the logical evolution from the StG 45 -> CETME Rifle -> G3. Then the Howa rifle was created when the Imperial Japanese saw the new 'space rifles' the Nazis were using and went like 'Holy onigiris, we need new rifles!'. ''Where'' they got the design for the Type 64 rifle however would be a riddle for the ages in this continuity; I choose to believe that they magically picked it up from the Black Ops Zombies' Mystery Box. --[[User:SSgt LuLZ|SSgt LuLZ]] ([[User talk:SSgt LuLZ|talk]]) 15:12, 10 March 2019 (GMT)
:::There's a fuck ton of weapons that shouldn't exist in this alternate timeline like an SVD in the previous season. The MP5 makes sense though it would have been nice to see them with straight mags. I think it would make sense that the Japanese would be using captured American weapons because soldiers during the war did like to use captured Garands. Also remember in season 1 where the Germans are still using MP40s and 98Ks? My head cannon is that the Germans would have developed Assault Rifles in smaller calibers instead of guns like the G3 because the German military has always tried to go behind Hitler's back in developing tech, which is how the MP44 came into existence. I personally think it would be interesting if the Japs use M16s in response to the German's newer weapons. They captured America and the AR-15 was developed in California during the 50s. Despite being harsh rulers over America, it would be interesting if the Japanese military reached out to find better tech to match the Germans and what better people than the Americans, who hate them just as much as they do [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] ([[User talk:Excalibur01|talk]]) 21:09, 10 July 2019 (EDT)

== Smith & Wesson revolvers ==

Griggs is using a K-frame, Military & Police or Model 10.--[[User:RickB|RickB]] ([[User talk:RickB|talk]]) 11:11, 29 November 2019 (EST)

== Double-barreled Shotguns ==

Trudy shoots the Lebensborn assassin with an over-under, maybe a Citori.--[[User:RickB|RickB]] ([[User talk:RickB|talk]]) 11:25, 29 November 2019 (EST)

Talk:The Man in the High Castle - Season 3

2019-11-29T16:11:42Z

RickB: /* Smith & Wesson revolvers */ new section

Talk:John Wick: Chapter 2

2019-06-02T18:00:09Z

RickB: /* 1911s */

SO MUCH YES --[[User:PyramidHead|PyramidHead]] ([[User talk:PyramidHead|talk]]) 21:24, 6 October 2016 (EDT)
:I KNOW!!! [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] ([[User talk:Excalibur01|talk]]) 10:43, 7 October 2016 (EDT)
::The hype is real!--[[User:AnActualAK47|AnActualAK47]] ([[User talk:AnActualAK47|talk]]) 20:44, 8 October 2016 (EDT)
:::And then there's me: I think the film looks generic.--[[User:SeanWolf|SeanWolf]] ([[User talk:SeanWolf|talk]]) 21:17, 8 October 2016 (EDT)
::::It really is, but it's not how original a story can be. The best thing you can do to a generic type of character is to have pretty good acting and for us here, awesome gun play and John Wick is awesome at the gun play. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] ([[User talk:Excalibur01|talk]]) 16:59, 12 October 2016 (EDT)
So, any special reason he's using some fancy Glock and AR-15 from a company no one has heard of? Why not give him his old P30 and HK416 back? Why do armorers keep buying overpriced Glocks with fancy aftermarket parts?--[[User:Mandolin|Mandolin]] ([[User talk:Mandolin|talk]]) 23:35, 8 October 2016 (EDT)
:::Taran Tactical isn't an unknown company. It might not be as famous or infamous as Salient, but it's known enough in some circles. They also trained Will Smith for Suicide Squad. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] ([[User talk:Excalibur01|talk]]) 11:11, 9 October 2016 (EDT)
:I'm pretty sure Keanu Reeves trained with them for the movie.--[[User:Quarax|Quarax]] ([[User talk:Quarax|talk]]) 00:35, 9 October 2016 (EDT)
::I've heard somewhere that Keanu Reeves has some sort of share in Taran Tactical. --[[User:Aidoru|Aidoru]] ([[User talk:Aidoru|talk]]) 01:12, 13 October 2016 (EDT)
:[https://www.facebook.com/TaranTactical/videos/1129178030434266/ Yep]. They even had a [https://www.facebook.com/TaranTactical/posts/1291057160913018 contest perfect for us].--[[User:Quarax|Quarax]] ([[User talk:Quarax|talk]]) 00:39, 9 October 2016 (EDT)
::Here's the same [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpr8oqyjKIc video]on youtube for those who loathe facebook. Anyway, i think those tacticooled glocks sorta fit in a silly movie like John Wick. Then again, the only other movies where i've ever seen these types of pimped guns are the Transformers movies and 13 hours.--[[User:AnActualAK47|AnActualAK47]] ([[User talk:AnActualAK47|talk]]) 09:23, 9 October 2016 (EDT)
:::It makes a sort of sense in a way of people of expensive groups will buy expensive things, including guns if need be. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] ([[User talk:Excalibur01|talk]]) 09:59, 10 October 2016 (EDT)
::: One of the unseen henchmen on the poster (on the right) appears to be holding a P30L with the same compensator from the first film. --[[User:Sergeant Simpleton|Sergeant Simpleton]] ([[User talk:Sergeant Simpleton|talk]]) 11:00, 9 October 2016 (EDT)

Here's another vid of him training with Aaron Cohen, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RKISkjMtPU [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] ([[User talk:Excalibur01|talk]]) 17:00, 12 October 2016 (EDT)

==Poster Weapons==
[[Image:JohnWick2 cover.jpg|thumb|none|400px|The film's first official poster features several firearms: a sawed-off [[Remington 870]], a [[Heckler & Koch P30L]] (fitted with the same compensator from the [[John Wick|first film]]), a [[Beretta 92FS]], two [[Beretta 92FS Inox]]es, two [[Beretta 90Two]]s, and several customized [[Colt M1911]] variants (one of which is obviously a replica with a visible parting line).]]

== Please help ID ==

Please help ID this launcher. --[[User:Ben41|Ben41]] ([[User talk:Ben41|talk]]) 14:30, 19 December 2016 (EST)
[[File:JW2 304.jpg|thumb|none|600px|]]
[[File:JW2 305.jpg|thumb|none|600px|]]
::Looks like an [[ARWEN 37]] to me.--[[User:BlackHawk510|BlackHawk510]] ([[User talk:BlackHawk510|talk]]) 15:09, 19 December 2016 (EST)
::: It was definitely an ARWEN 37, even got to see the loading process. --[[User:Insertjjs|Insertjjs]] ([[User talk:Insertjjs|talk]]) 07:39, 13 February 2017 (EST)

== Glock ==
Looks like the Glock that was used in this film is currently on display at SHOT Show:
https://scontent.fdet1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/15977767_10154301140996134_2975412249705260393_n.jpg?oh=e720456e623db93a6644ca3c46a432c9&oe=591FE97A

[[User:Lynx|Lynx]] ([[User talk:Lynx|talk]]) 12:05, 19 January 2017 (EST)
:Cool--[[User:AnActualAK47|AnActualAK47]] ([[User talk:AnActualAK47|talk]]) 12:38, 19 January 2017 (EST)
::Apparently he's also carrying a Taran Glock 26 too, if Glock themselves are to be [http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2017/01/26/glock-movies-shot-2017/ believed.]--[[User:AnActualAK47|AnActualAK47]] ([[User talk:AnActualAK47|talk]]) 10:07, 27 January 2017 (EST)

:There's a short clip ad of the scene where John Wick talks to the gun guy about what gun recommendations. He suggested a Glock 34, a Glock 26 as well as an "AR-15" and Benelli M4 [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] ([[User talk:Excalibur01|talk]]) 10:57, 27 January 2017 (EST)
::Got a link to that clip?--[[User:AnActualAK47|AnActualAK47]] ([[User talk:AnActualAK47|talk]]) 11:36, 27 January 2017 (EST)
::I've been trying to look for it, but it only appears as an ad every time I watch a Youtube vid. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] ([[User talk:Excalibur01|talk]]) 14:28, 27 January 2017 (EST)

Nevermind. Found it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgxWQADcWXI [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] ([[User talk:Excalibur01|talk]]) 14:29, 27 January 2017 (EST)
:That's neat. I guess all those guns have some Taran tactical thing going on with them...--[[User:AnActualAK47|AnActualAK47]] ([[User talk:AnActualAK47|talk]]) 15:18, 27 January 2017 (EST)

== Armory ==

[[File:JW2Armory1.jpg|thumb|none|600px|]]
[[File:JW2Armory2.jpg|thumb|none|600px|]]

Grabbed a couple more shots of the armory from the trailer. Does anyone know what the rifles that are hanging horizontally are? I can't place them, and it's bugging me.
--[[User:Lynx|Lynx]] ([[User talk:Lynx|talk]]) 11:45, 3 February 2017 (EST)
:Beretta AR70/90?--[[User:AgentGumby|AgentGumby]] ([[User talk:AgentGumby|talk]]) 12:16, 3 February 2017 (EST)
:: Yep, seems like a AR70/90--[[User:Flavio|Flavio]] ([[User talk:Flavio|talk]]) 13:56, 3 February 2017 (EST)
:::Looks like the 90 to be specific.--[[User:AnActualAK47|AnActualAK47]] ([[User talk:AnActualAK47|talk]]) 14:31, 3 February 2017 (EST)

: In Picture #1 I see several Glock 17s on the top shelf and what looks like a Glock 17L on the very far right. The shelf below that has a compact SIG P220 series handgun (not sure which), a VP9, and two empty spots which is likely where John got his two Glocks below. The one below that has two Beretta 92 handguns, and another that I can't identify (looked ''kind of'' like a compact Walther P99 or Springfield XD but I don't think it is.) The bottom shelf is mostly unidentifiable but the one on the furthest right looks kind of like a HK Mark 23 to me. Leaning against that shelf is an M79. The right most shelf has more Glock 17s, two two-tone SIG-Sauer P226s, and a Beretta 93R. There's another 93R and a Px4 on the one below that.
: In Picture #2 I see MP5Ks, two of which have compensators attached and several Uzis/Mini-Uzis. To the right of those are a bunch of MP5s, some of which have Surefire lights installed. Can't identify the shotguns, sadly.
--[[User:Sergeant Simpleton|Sergeant Simpleton]] ([[User talk:Sergeant Simpleton|talk]]) 21:02, 3 February 2017 (EST)
::There's also a Beretta PM12 in between the MP5Ks and Uzis. Most of the guns on the bottom are hard to ID, but there's a couple of obvious M4/M16 variants.--[[User:Lynx|Lynx]] ([[User talk:Lynx|talk]]) 10:58, 5 February 2017 (EST)
:::Two of those tall shotguns are Benelli M4s, and it looks like there are two SG553s behind them, in addition to regular Beretta AR 70s.--[[User:AgentGumby|AgentGumby]] ([[User talk:AgentGumby|talk]]) 11:47, 5 February 2017 (EST)

== Just saw it ==

So let me start by saying that if you're a fan of the first, chances are you'll love this one, I did. The action was beautifully choreographed and shot, and the world of the continental was expanded upon really well. Now for the guns I saw. Bear with me because the movie moved really fast and a lot of guns were used, but this is what I remember.

-HK P30L - Same gun from the first movie, used by John in the opening fight briefly. Later seen buried under John's floor.

-Kel-Tech KSG - Seen briefly being buried underneath John's floor in the beginning.

-Coharie Arms CA-415 - Buried alongside the KSG and another gun I couldn't identify.

-Glock 26 - Also seen alongside the P30L being buried.

-ARWEN 37 - Used by Santino in the beginning of the film. Portrayed as an explosive grenade launcher.

-Glock 34 - Main sidearm used by John in Rome, Had either the TTI or Salient modification. It was specifically referred to as the Glock 34 by "The Sommelier" (armorer). He also mentioned it's Austrian roots as well as the German roots of the P30.

-Glock 27 - Also used by John in Rome. Also provided by The Sommelier. It may have been a Glock 26 but I seem to remember him calling it the 27, I could be wrong though. Used in a fistfight with Cassien.

-Benelli M4 - Also used by John in Rome. Also provided by The Sommelier. Referred to by name and it's Italian roots are directly mentioned.

-TTI TR-1 - Final weapon used by John in Rome (I believe). Once again, provided by The Sommelier. He refers to it as an AR-15, and the specifications of it's attachments were mentioned but unfortunately I cannot remember them. Also appears to be used by Ares men in the final battle

-Kimber Warrior - Used by John as well as countless other assassins including Ares ([[Ruby Rose]]). Seen in both suppressed and unsuppressed modes, both of which are used by John. The Bowery King ([[Laurence Fishburne]]) provides one to John before the climax. He specifically refers to it as a "Kimber 1911" and also mentions it's seven round capacity, which also annoys John. The final gun John handles in the film.

-Grey Glock? - Used by Cassien ([[Common]]) while pursuing John through New York. Appeared to be a grey Colored Glock with a matching grey suppressor. Could be a custom gun or could be something entirely different, I didn't get a clear look at it.

-Various handguns - Used by multiple assassins attempting to kill John in New York. Appeared to be an assortment of Glocks, Kimbers, and HKs in suppressed and unsuppressed forms. Didn't get a clear view of them. John procures many of them from the assassins he kills throughout.

-Beretta Cheetah - Appeared to be used by one of The Bowery King's men who saves John. Seen suppressed. Also used, unsuppressed, by Santino D'Antonio ([[Riccardo Scamarcio]])

-Bowery King arsenal - Various weapons, many the same as seen earlier in the film, however I did notice what appeared to be an RPG-7 in one of the racks.

-Glock 17 - Carried by nearly all of Santino's men. Multiple are used by John in the finale, with him procuring a new one every time he runs out of ammo in the previous one.

-Sig SG 550 and 552 - Used by Ares' men in the finale. Some appeared to lack rear iron sights.

Thats about it. Cassien used a handgun during his fight with John in Rome, but I never got a clear view of it. Also in the finale Ares's men used a collection of AR-15s and I believe a few SMGs. I couldn't quite tell what models the SMGs were, however they appeared to be HKs and also lacked rear iron sights, though I could just be rememebering the Sigs and imagining that they used SMGs (Quite likely to be honest, It was a late showing and I'm fairly tired). I'm sure I missed several guns, as like I said this was a gun heavy movie, however i will comment that many of the same models appeared repeatedly, probably props being reused. Both The Bowery King and The Sommelier had large arsenals with numerous guns I was unable to Identify. Sorry for missing some things, the movie moved at a breakneck pace and I didn't always have time to appreciate the action on screen and notice what guns we're being used.--[[User:1911isthebestgunever|One shot is all it takes.]] ([[User talk:1911isthebestgunever|talk]]) 05:09, 10 February 2017 (EST)
:The Sommelier mentions that Wick's AR-15 has a Trijicon Accupoint, but I don't remember him specifying the exact model. Also, regarding The Sommeliers arsenal, I believe the rifles in the background are Beretta AR70/90's.--[[User:Aidoru|Aidoru]] ([[User talk:Aidoru|talk]]) 17:43, 13 February 2017 (EST)

I just saw it and I am pretty sure Cassien's grey glock was actually an Arsenal Strike One, It had a distinctive step down forward of the ejection port. You get a short but clear view of it when Cassien does an ammo check in the subway shootout. --[[User:Insertjjs|Insertjjs]] ([[User talk:Insertjjs|talk]]) 14:34, 12 February 2017 (EST)

We also need a photo of TTI's Glock 34 [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] ([[User talk:Excalibur01|talk]]) 15:23, 14 February 2017 (EST)

:They showed them off at the SHOT Show
:TTI Glock 34
:http://truthaboutguns-zippykid.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/20170117_124643-600x537.jpg
:TTI Glock 26
:http://truthaboutguns-zippykid.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/20170117_124607-600x341.jpg
Also there was a picture (cut away drawing?) of a H&K MG4 with a G36 Hensoldt AG Sight/carrying handle in Laurence Fishburne's office.
:--[[User:Insertjjs|Insertjjs]] ([[User talk:Insertjjs|talk]]) 15:40, 15 February 2017 (EST)

The 1911 that Ares uses is a S&W 1911 either a PD or an SC model I'm leaning towards a PD full size. Also the gun John uses at the very end seems to be some kind of Kimber with a custom compensator. [[User:Serpico1911|Serpico1911]] ([[User talk:Serpico1911|talk]] 03:38, 15 February 2017 (CST)
:Finally got to see it. To think they weren't going to show this movie in sweden! Thank god they did! It blew my dick off! Liked alot of things in it, but one thing that stood out to me was that i've never seen an action movie like this were the main character reloads as often as he does. Also, don't know if this is the case, but i watched this with a friend and he counted that in the Museum scene (when Wick is switching between guns left and right) he only shot the various pistols he picked up ten times before they ran out.--[[User:AnActualAK47|AnActualAK47]] ([[User talk:AnActualAK47|talk]]) 18:07, 24 February 2017 (EST)
::Just saw it too, my jaw hit the floor when Keanu did the [[Killing Floor 2]] style ''one-handed'' brass check on a 1911 before entering the hall of mirrors towards the end.--[[User:AgentGumby|AgentGumby]] ([[User talk:AgentGumby|talk]]) 01:31, 25 February 2017 (EST)
:::The only other movie ive seen someone do that style of brass check before is The way of the gun. Can't think of any movie where someone brass checked guns as often as this one--[[User:AnActualAK47|AnActualAK47]] ([[User talk:AnActualAK47|talk]]) 16:28, 25 February 2017 (EST)
::::Only movies that come to mind for brass checking is pretty much anything by Michael Mann, particularly Heat, but not as much as this film. [[User:Bristow8411|Bristow8411]] ([[User talk:Bristow8411|talk]]) 18:29, 25 February 2017 (EST)

I'd say that Ares's pistol is a SW1911SC variant. I say this because we get a good look at the slide a few times, and it has the particular slide serrations of the SC series of SW1911's. It also seemed to have a black slide, but a stainless steel frame, but I could be wrong, saw the film last night. Loved it.--[[User:Bauer2121|Bauer2121]] ([[User talk:Bauer2121|talk]]) 13:05, 26 February 2017 (EST)

== 1911s ==

I'm pretty sure that the 1911 used by Ares is a S&W. I remember in one shot you could clearly see the extractor and the fish scale type serrations. I can't recall exactly what happened, but after John beats Ares to a pulp, he takes her 1911, but later when he's at the continental and shoots that guy with it, the 1911 he used is some variant with a compensator. Unless she was carrying two different 1911s, this might be a continuity error.--[[User:AnActualAK47|AnActualAK47]] ([[User talk:AnActualAK47|talk]]) 12:19, 2 March 2017 (EST)

Your right. I remember watching this a second time that Ares had a suppressor on hers and clearly no compensator so...either a deleted scene or he just got a completely different 1911. I remember he frisked Ares for a spare mag and reloaded it since it was empty but when he used it at the Continental, it locked back, meaning he had fired all but one round so...I think there must be a deleted scene involved or something or just bad continuity, which is surprising for a movie like this. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] ([[User talk:Excalibur01|talk]]) 15:46, 2 March 2017 (EST)

Other than the final scene where we know for a fact that it's a Kimber 1911 as we can plainly see, I think all other 1911s should be in a separate section under 1911. Cassian's 1911, Ares' and the one John used in the subway fight [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] ([[User talk:Excalibur01|talk]]) 15:58, 2 March 2017 (EST)
:Yeah, lumping the S&W 1911 together with the Kimber is just confusing.--[[User:AnActualAK47|AnActualAK47]] ([[User talk:AnActualAK47|talk]]) 16:27, 2 March 2017 (EST)

I have a pic. that could be from the supposed deleted scene but not sure how to upload the photo to here if anyone could help with that. [[User:Serpico1911|Serpico1911]] ([[User talk:Serpico1911|talk]] 00:37, 4 March 2047 (CST)
: On the left side of the screen, Toolbox, Upload File.--[[User:Mandolin|Mandolin]] ([[User talk:Mandolin|talk]]) 05:46, 4 March 2017 (EST)
[[File:FB IMG 1487413440638.jpg|thumb|600px|none|]]
[[File:FB IMG 1488634970915.jpg|thumb|600px|none|]]
[[User:Serpico1911|Serpico1911]] ([[User talk:Serpico1911|talk]] 07:41, 4 March 2017 (CST)

Smith and Wesson SW1911 E-Series?
[[File:SW1911SC E series stainless slide.jpg|thumb|600px|none|]]
--[[User:Mandolin|Mandolin]] ([[User talk:Mandolin|talk]]) 18:26, 4 March 2017 (EST)

I have found what resembles the compensated reversed two-tone 1911 John used in the final scene. As far as I can see, the grips are unique to the Kimber Team Match II and I couldn't find any other after market grips that looks like it. Take a look at the screencap I took from youtube below (sorry for low quality).
[[File:Kimber Team Match II.jpg|thumb|600px|none|]]
[[File:John wick 2 compensated 1911.jpg|thumb|600px|none|Note the grips and the black ambi safety. The markings on the slide are missing, though.]]
Still, we have to wait until the DVD is released to be able to correctly Identify it.
--[[User:Kliwher|Kliwher]] ([[User talk:Kliwher|talk]]) 21:40, 6 May 2017 (EST)
:OK, got an update on the compensated 1911 it is definitely not a Kimber, it has slanted rear serrations, no front serrations, black controls, slide cuts, wood and rubber/plastic hybrid grips, and bushing compensator. It is also loaded with 10-round magazine.
:--[[User:Kliwher|Kliwher]] ([[User talk:Kliwher|talk]]) 20:34, 11 June 2017 (EST)
--[[User:RickB|RickB]] ([[User talk:RickB|talk]]) 14:00, 2 June 2019 (EDT)The original two-tone 1911 was the Pachmayr Combat Special, with a blued slide over a hard-chromed frame, so silver-over-black is "reverse two-tone".

== The Custom AR-15 ==

The Sommelier refers to the Taran Tactical AR-15 as "11.5" inch - assuming he's referring to the barrel length, that can't be right surely? It looks much longer than that - closer to a regular size, 14.5 inch M4, if not longer.
Am I seeing things, or did someone make a mistake?
--[[User:Stickie|Stickie]] ([[User talk:Stickie|talk]]) 23:17, 28 May 2017 (EDT)

I sent a message to TTI to confirm, but it could be an 11.5 in barrel with a big compensator that's throwing off the overall length. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] ([[User talk:Excalibur01|talk]]) 14:47, 5 June 2017 (EDT)

== Shooting like a 3 gunner ==

Is it me or compared to the nightclub scene from the first movie and the Vania scene in this one, John either tac reloads his gun and then shoots until he's out of bullets and out of spare mags while in this movie, I counted, he shot roughly half a mag, barely with those TTI extensions before dumping the mags entirely, most likely still with a lot of bullets and then retrieving a fresh mag from basically an unlimited supply unlike the first movie where he had a very limited amount. Let's give him the benefit of the doubt and say he's got 4 spare mags PLUS a spare AR mag...that's still not enough mags for the many reloads he did with his Glock. Compared to the first movie on how he reloads his pistol, it looks like the habits from competition target shooting (the idea to just dump your mag and get a fresh one, regardless of how many rounds are left) were carried over to this movie. The only time he didn't constantly reload his gun is during the final shootout where he kept picking up guns after emptying a new one he picks up. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] ([[User talk:Excalibur01|talk]]) 14:16, 5 June 2017 (EDT)

I also question why a shotgun? He could of hid caches of extra AR mags all along his escape route. It's very cool how he worked the M4, but it illustrates how he ran out of ammo quick and had to do reloads more often than if he had hidden more AR mags. It even showed that during his quick reloads, he was exposed. I wonder why Taran Butler didn't teach him a more combat reloading technique like chambering a shell and loading the rest with the thing tucked under instead of over the shoulder that's more akin to competition shooting. I bet if the prop guys also sourced High Threat Concealment, they could of had John wearing a metal plate under his shirt and get one of their magnetic chest carriers for AR mags and just slap it on, giving him more rounds [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] ([[User talk:Excalibur01|talk]]) 14:16, 5 June 2017 (EDT)

To add more, I'm looking at the final fight in the mirror room (reminded me of something from a Bond movie and a Bruce Lee movie, especially with the villain taunt). There were multiple chances for him to pick up a long gun or additional handguns when his 1911 ran empty, but he didn't even though he had plenty of time. Also before entering the mirror room, he reloaded his 1911, which was good because the holster he's wearing is most likely only for a 1911, but why didn't he pick up another Glock as his primary until it ran dry? Or stuff extra mags from the dead guy in his pocket?[[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] ([[User talk:Excalibur01|talk]]) 14:28, 5 June 2017 (EDT)

:Yeah, it kinda bugged me that he didn't just bring a bag of mags along for his AR-15. You can get [https://www.cheaperthandirt.com/product/galati-gear-rifle-magazine-pouch-30-40-round-mags-six-pocket-shoulder-strap-nylon-black-glmp40-753182476940.do?green=54F3E6C9-EA95-5836-01AB-54A906029273 bandoleers] [https://www.cheaperthandirt.com/product/voodoo-tactical-m4-ar-15-six-magazine-bandolier-nylon-od-green-20-992804000-783377097476.do?sortby=ourPicksAscend&refType=&from=fn or] small [https://www.cheaperthandirt.com/product/blackhawk-rifle-bandoleer-holds-6-m4-ar15-mags-black-55sos1bk-648018019951.do?sortby=ourPicksAscend&refType=&from=fn chest rigs] that hold 6 mags. And I will always consider the use of a magnifying optic in a nighttime CQB situation stupid. Worse, the entire scene was pointless. John ninjaed his way in undetected and then didn't leave the way he came. Alternatively, just carrying a subcompact he might have convinced Cassian he wasn't there to fight. Or just don't admit you're working. --[[User:Mandolin|Mandolin]] ([[User talk:Mandolin|talk]]) 18:02, 5 June 2017 (EDT)

::Again, I go back to HTC with their magnetic chest rigs that you can just slap over your body armor plate. The movie allowed John to attach a fancy 3 gun style belt with spare shotgun shells. You're telling me, he couldn't throw on some kind of bandoleer for extra AR mags? If they really wanted him to go all out with the shotgun, he could of had a sling with shells attached to it for extra firepower. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] ([[User talk:Excalibur01|talk]]) 00:42, 6 June 2017 (EDT)

:And yes, only in three-gun would you use a 16" carbine with a scope and side-mount red dot. Really the whole use of custom guns from TTI screams "three-gun with little real-world value". Unless I missed something, nobody actually uses angled foregrips, side-mount red dots/iron sights, or $2k in parts on a $500 pistol. And the entire point of a 16" barrel is going as short as legally possible without extra paperwork. The one three-gun accessory he didn't use but should have is a pistol red dot. They're finally at the point you can depend on them to work reliably without being too large (seriously, go look up some of the older movies on here. 80s/90s attempts at lasers and red dots are hilarious) and work better in low light and are more accurate. Oh, and buy yourself a 40 round PMag, not a mag extension. On a side note, caching a Minimi Para with an 200 round belt means no reloads and hilarious firepower.--[[User:Mandolin|Mandolin]] ([[User talk:Mandolin|talk]]) 18:19, 5 June 2017 (EDT)

::I have actually seem some US Army training vids where there was actually an angled red dot. I've seen Marines with AFGs on their rifles. There's nothing wrong with a 1x6 power scope on your fighting rifle but that's for varied ranges outdoors. He KNEW he was gonna be fighting in the catacombs at extremely close range, so just a simple red dot would work just fine or if he really needed range, a magnifier that he can flip on and off could work. Realistically, they should have just slapped John with the same 416 clone from the first movie with a micro red dot with the same short 10.5 in barrel and he'd still perform just as well. For flare, they could of added a silencer to it. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] ([[User talk:Excalibur01|talk]])

I do like the idea that he should have set up traps. Remember in Shoot'em Up where Cllve Owens basically turned an entire gun factory into an automatically shooting gallery of guns all over the place? You're telling me John fucking Wick couldn't afford some well placed claymores or grenades? I'm still harping on the M4 shotgun. It's a good gun and even ghost loading it with an extension tube. He had like what? 9 + 1 shells maybe? Couldn't the Sommelier have recommended something bolder and bigger like say a Saiga 12 or bring back the AA-12 with frag-12s? Both being magazine fed shotguns that gives you a faster reload time and higher capacity?

I mean, I understand these fantasy assassins are like fantasy knights where instead of custom designer fantasy swords of epic loot, they got custom guns. If money didn't matter, the TTI handguns are awesome, just as cool and functional as Salient or Agency Arms but to us lowly average joes, we can't afford all most of them. I've got mag extensions for my Glock and more as a fashion than practicality. There are much cheaper options for mag extensions that don't cost the price of 2 mags. The price for the TTI Pmag extensions is about the exact same price as a Pmag 40. I don't have mag extensions on any of my rifles because they are just pricey and if I really needed more rounds, I got a couple PMAG40s lying around. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] ([[User talk:Excalibur01|talk]]) 00:29, 6 June 2017 (EDT)

Also remember at the end of the movie, he was shooting stock guns with no fancy trigger jobs done to them and he still performed just as good. In fact, it's because he was shooting stock guns is that we aren't so distracted by the guns he's using. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] ([[User talk:Excalibur01|talk]]) 00:45, 6 June 2017 (EDT)

Good point about the accessories. The 1-6x would have been fine in another setting. He couldn't use his 416 this time, but any AR platform would have been fine. Giving a professional a 16" AR is kinda SOD-breaking, he has no reason to use that length. And I have no idea why they had to give John all the super cool name-brand custom stuff this time. He did just fine with stock guns in the first movie. And yeah, PMag 40 would be better than some extensions. Mini-claymores are a thing BTW.--[[User:Mandolin|Mandolin]] ([[User talk:Mandolin|talk]]) 19:09, 9 June 2017 (EDT)
:Like I've pointed out before, I think they are going with this "fantasy assassin" world where it's more spectacular than actually realistic and when I mean fantasy, I mean stuff that real assassins really shouldn't use, like flashy weapons. I can totally see someone in RPG give gaming stats to his guns because of how special they look like if you picked up some kind of hero sword. If this was like fictional tactical, we'd be seeing him rocking NODs and an MK18 with IR lasers [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] ([[User talk:Excalibur01|talk]]) 10:24, 12 June 2017 (EDT)
::He actually fired 11 shells from the Benelli M4 before it got emptied. Also, any news about the statement of the 11.5 inch barrel for the TTI TR-1 AR-15? (pretty sure it's incorrect) --[[User:Ultimate94ninja|Ultimate94ninja]] ([[User talk:Ultimate94ninja|talk]]) 18:19, 25 June 2017 (EDT)
: There's a decent number of PDs with 16 inch trunk rifles, but all those are going to be semi-only (but a non-government professional could totally have stolen one and tacticooled it up himself. That would be a good scene for a film). --[[User:VladVladson|VladVladson]] ([[User talk:VladVladson|talk]]) 19:37, 25 June 2017 (EDT)
:::Also, I see that someone added to the page that the Benelli can hold a maximum 7+1 shells in reality, but there are actually 10-round tubes in existence. In this regard, do they hold 9+1 shells or 10+1? ---[[User:Ultimate94ninja|Ultimate94ninja]] ([[User talk:Ultimate94ninja|talk]]) 07:25, 2 July 2017 (EDT)
::::EDIT: I think it's 9+1, so Wick fired one round more than possible. --[[User:Ultimate94ninja|Ultimate94ninja]] ([[User talk:Ultimate94ninja|talk]]) 06:05, 3 September 2017 (EDT)

==The Catacombs==

Overall I have to say I just didn't enjoy this movie as much. John isn't anywhere near as sympathetic, for one thing, and the choreography for the fights doesn't seem as good, with lots of extras reacting to getting shoot really poorly, before slowly getting back up and keeping on (the mirror fight specifically comes to mind). What really brings this home, though, is the fight in the catacombs. The idea itself doesn't really make a whole lot of sense, and on top of that it's too dark to see what's going on a lot of times. It feels more like an effort to show off Keanu Reaves's impressive three gun credentials, like the Red Circle fight was to show off how cool CAR can be, except, again, the Red Circle scene is better executed. Like the post above, I'm seriously questioning his weapon choices.

For handguns, the Glock at least sort of makes sense, although I don't get why he didn't just dig up his P30 and Glock 26 from the first film, since honestly both are much cooler weapons. For that matter, why a 17 and not an 18? Is there any reason you can't do any of the recoil compensation on a machine pistol like that, because I'd think the selective fire would be more useful as a primary weapon, which Wick seems to favor the handgun for.

I don't get the shotgun at all. The M4 is just ''big'' and despite being semiauto it's also cumbersome, especially since Wick expends at least two shells per target because of his silly habit of double tapping everyone (I'd think if you shot a man at point blank with a twelve gauge in the chest, you probably don't need to shoot him in the head too). Even with that in mind, I think a KSG (like he used in the first film) or even better, a DP-12, would be a much better choice, because of the bullpup layout. He almost loses the M4 because he corners with it and someone grabs the barrel, which wouldn't be as likely with a shorter gun; the DP has the added bonus of letting him still double tap people despite being pump action, and it's an unusual and exotic enough gun it fits him a lot more than a run of the mill M4.

The rifle is completely unnecessary. He stashes it specifically for CQB, which makes no sense given that it's got a long barrel and a semi-fixed stock; it feels very much like a medium engagement weapon which isn't what it's used for ''at all.'' It's big and cumbersome and it doesn't really feel like it's employed the way it should've been. Why not carry a carbine, like an actual M4, or a PDW like the UMP or I dunno, a P90? The last one seems the best choice for the ranges he's engaging in, since it's smaller, is going to perform comparably to the AR at the ranges he's firing (if not better, since a few times he's almost at point blank and a rifle round, so far as I know, would be more likely to over penetrate and do minimum damage), and has a higher capacity. The only real advantage an AR has over the P90 in this area is the AR is easier to reload, but the P90 has almost twice the capacity, so reloading wouldn't be as big a deal. Plus, I want to see John Wick tactically reload one, so I have some idea how you actually accomplish that.

In all, I feel like the Glock is reasonable, the M4 is a adequate, and the AR is a poor choice. If nothing else, I can see justifying the AR for potential ranged engagements (and Wick, to the films' credit, seems to eschew automatic weapons) but I'd dump the M4 in favor of something more practical, like a P90 or MP7 (for flexibility's sake). The M4's only real advantage over either is it can be used as a club in CQC when it's empty, which isn't really an advantage at all since it highlights the weapon's low capacity, cumbersome size, and awkward reloading process. Anyone agree?--[[User:Godzillafan93|That's the Way It's Done]] ([[User talk:Godzillafan93|talk]]) 20:15, 7 August 2017 (EDT)

:I don't think he could "dig up" his old weapons from the first film because his house got blown up by Santino, which would probably make that a wee bit difficult. I also think his AR does have a carbine length barrel if I recall correctly, and there isn't any real difference if he was using an "M4" in semi-auto versus an AR15.--[[User:AgentGumby|AgentGumby]] ([[User talk:AgentGumby|talk]]) 00:49, 8 August 2017 (EDT)

:: The Glock and P30 are both under concrete in the basement, while Santino only destroyed the house down to its foundations, so there's no reason to think anything below that would've been damaged. I still think the AR just by nature was a poor choice even so, since he doesn't really have any reason to be carrying a rifle in that situation. By "long barrel" I mean it's still a rifle: it's still big and hard to corner with. --[[User:Godzillafan93|That's the Way It's Done]] ([[User talk:Godzillafan93|talk]]) 00:03, 9 August 2017 (EDT)

::A P90 is a pretty poor choice, mostly because of the round. It's been shown to not be much of a man stopper and would need to dumb several rounds into someone to be as effective as a full rifle round, same with the MP7. These are very specialized guns meant for certain situations, not a full blown fire fight in reality, especially the MP7. An AR is a pretty ideal weapon, but in the catacombs, he really should have gotten a shorter weapon. His 416 looking weapon was an actual 10.5 inch barrel rifle. That's pretty good for close quarters. Taran Tactical, the company that designed the weapon, did make a shorter barrel gun that was shown in The Fate of the Furious. He really did not needed a scope underground and in close quarters. He should have gotten more mags stashed away for the AR since it was much more effective than the slower firing and less capacity shotgun he got. Most likely they gave him these guns is because he trained to hell with them in the video. He used the exact same set up in those training videos and that's why all his moves are very competition style, which I had pointed out. The slide in his Glock did not lock back once during the initial fight and he was not retaining partially empty mags and seemed to have an endless supply of them compared to the first movie where he actually ran out of ammo during the Red Circle fight. I think it was discussed before where there's a ton of options for a cheap mag carrier where he can just throw on during the chaos and have several more mags to feed his AR.

I think an MPX would have been a good choice as a secondary gun over the shotgun he decided on. He did train with the MPX, at least a longer barreled on in the vids, but he could totally use the shorter barrel on and go to town. It really wouldn't be heard for him to put a Magpul D60 for his AR and then switch to Pmags [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] ([[User talk:Excalibur01|talk]]) 00:47, 11 August 2017 (EDT)

:::Actually, he didn't have THAT much of ammo supply for the Glock. He reloads two times in the party, and then fires 13 rounds (after that he ejects the magazine, checks the ammo and loads it back before entering the catacombs). Then in the catacombs, he must have fired 9 rounds (or 8 if it's Ares who unintentionally shot her own henchman lol); assuming he didn't previously reload, that's 22 rounds (or 21); I'm not sure what capacity the particular extended baseplate is supposed to give to the G34, though. He reloads afterwards, and then (also assuming he doesn't reload between using the AR-15 and the Benelli) he fires exactly 22 rounds. He must have reloaded off-screen when he exited the catacombs since he fires around 13 rounds when Cassian arrives with his car. That would be reasonably 4 spare mags. Weird thing though, is that before falling down the stairs, Wick tried to run away despite the fact that he had AMPLE time to draw his backup Glock 26. --[[User:Ultimate94ninja|Ultimate94ninja]] ([[User talk:Ultimate94ninja|talk]]) 09:34, 17 August 2017 (EDT)
::::EDIT: The TTI website indicates the availability of Glock +3/4 and +5/6 base pads (the former adds 4 extra rounds in 9x19mm and 3 in .40 ACP, while the latter adds 6 in 9x19mm and 5 in .40 ACP). With the latter, it would be reasonably 23+1 rounds for the Glock 34. --[[User:Ultimate94ninja|Ultimate94ninja]] ([[User talk:Ultimate94ninja|talk]]) 06:05, 3 September 2017 (EDT)

:: The P90 and MP7 are by definition designed for CQC so I'm not really sure where you're getting they'd be bad for close quarters (if a personal ''defensive'' weapon isn't good for close up, what exactly do you do with it?). From what I've gathered (and this is why SWAT teams, the FBI, and the Secret Service use P90s and MP5s instead of M4s for breaching) a rifle round is far more likely to pass right through someone in close quarters without actually delivering enough lethal force to drop them. This is something you don't want for a number of reasons: if you're a cop you run the risk of that round going on to kill someone you didn't actually mean to shoot, and for John Wick, you run the risk of shooting someone ''several'' times and not actually killing them. ''Black Hawk Down'' mentions the Rangers having this problem during the Battle of Mogadishu, and they were engaging the Somalis at more logical ranges. Plus, he makes it a point of shooting everyone at ''least'' twice (usually once in the leg or chest and then in the head) so arguing against the PDW because he'd have to shoot someone more than once is anti intuitive, since he was doing that anyway, and at least with the PDWs he also would've had considerably more rounds at his disposal before he needed to reload. I do agree with you, though; his weaponset here is very clearly to showcase Keanu Reeves' badass three-gun skills, but given how poorly choreographed the scene itself is, if anything it feels more like an example of "this is how ''not'' to fight in CQC" than anything else. For the ranges he was shooting at most of the time, he would've probably been okay with just the Glock, and then maybe the M4 Super 90 for longer ranges. --[[User:Godzillafan93|That's the Way It's Done]] ([[User talk:Godzillafan93|talk]]) 21:56, 16 August 2017 (EDT)

::Actually, the trend for the passed decade is away from SMGs of any kind in favor of assault rifles because they fire a larger and more potent round.

Going on a tangent here. Forgive me.

The problem with the P90 and even the MP7 is they were developed with the then current mindset and ammunition technology. You mention the Secret Service but even though they also use MP5s and P90s, that's more for firepower offered by a small package than actual effectiveness of the round it shoots as in full auto shooting of a bunch of bullets at something. Think about it. PDW rounds vs a 55.6 are smaller caliber, uses a lighter bullet, has a lower velocity, lower energy and has a lower sectional density. To be as effective as a 5.56, you would need to dump a bunch of rounds onto a target. All of these properties suggest that the PDW rounds will be more prone to drop and wind drift than the 5.56mm and have a more curved trajectory and longer flight time. This suggests a lower hit probability. The terminal effects of these rounds is also likely to be less than the 5.56mm, given that both rounds have considerably less energy and momentum at the muzzle than the 5.56mm has. Comparatively, a 9mm is actually more powerful than any PDW round, especially against unarmored targets unlike how PDWs are designed to penetrate body armor. Their purpose and energy is meant for getting passed the body armor and everything else is secondary, despite what advertisements have shown you. Remember, there is no off switch when you shoot a man in real life. We can add that to movie cliche, but in real life, getting shot even center pass is not what stops you and considering that John Wick likes to shoot people in the head, it kinda doesn't matter what caliber he's shooting because the character is so perfect at making effective kill shots.

Your brought up Blackhawk down, but remember the military uses FMJs that are general ok against most people despite the stigma surrounding it. Any type of bullet less than a 50is gonna have a problem against drug crazed fiends and savage fighters. It doesn't matter if you shoot a 5.56 with JHPs or a .45 out of a UMP. If the guy's rampaging towards you, it isn't like the movies where 1 shot to the chest from the big boy round would stop them, let alone a round that's much smaller, faster but designed to fly straight through heavy things like armor than soft things like flesh.

If you want a close range anti-body armor weapon why buy a new weapon and round that doesn't perform as well as the weapons and rounds that you have already? The argument that the PDWs are shorter than an assault rifle doesn't hold when there are so many short-barreled versions of assault rifles on the market. There are also 5.56mm weapons of similar size to a Machine Pistol and capable of being fired one handed even. In addition to using a more effective and widely available round there are other advantages to using 5.56mm, such as the weapon having exactly the same controls as the rifle the Soldier did his basic training with. The argument that PDWs are lighter can also be questioned given that there are rifles on the market that weigh only 4lb with a 16” barrel. Many 5.56 assault rifles only weigh a pound or so more than the MP-7 or P90 yet fire rounds with around four times the muzzle energy, greater penetration and greater terminal effectiveness.

For the role that the PDWs were supposedly designed for, the defense of support troops, the P90 and MP-7 are inferior to a 5.56mm carbine. 5.56mm carbines of similar weight and bulk to the P90 and MP-7 already exist. As CQB weapons against unarmored targets the MP-7 and P90 are inferior in performance to 9x19mm, .45ACP and 5.56mm weapons. Whether a weapon with such a low level of incapacitation can legitimately be called a defensive weapon is debatable.

As a CQB weapon against armored targets the MP-7 and P90 are inferior to 5.56mm weapons.

An argument that has been made is that the lighter weight of the 4.6mm ammo reduces the soldier's load. A MP-7 and six 40rd magazines weighs less than a 5.56mm rifle and six 30rd magazines. Less weight and a third more ammo sounds pretty good.

The flaw in this argument is the assumption that ammo expenditure for 4.6mm and 5.56mm will be the same.

Be it a video game or real life psychologically you tend to keep shooting a target until it goes down or demonstrates that it is out of the fight in some other way (Known charmingly as “F3” or “Fire till the F**ker Falls”).

Given the very large difference in terminal effects between these two rounds I'd say it is highly probable that the 4.6mm shooter is going to fire more rounds at a given target than 5.56mm, especially if the low-recoil automatic capabilities of the MP-7 are used. The target will take longer to fall, so the shooter will keep firing for longer.

Exterior ballistics also are a concern. All its physical characteristics suggest that for shots other than a close range the 4.6mm will be more prone to drop, wind drift and have a longer time of flight and more curved trajectory than 5.56mm. All of that seems to suggest decreased hit probability and a higher expenditure of ammo per target.

The MP7 gunner will probably need twice as many rounds as a 5.56mm rifleman and twice as many would be a very conservative estimate. I wouldn't be surprised if MP7 users end up firing three to four times as much ammo per target.

The P90 and MP-7 are weapons that many members of the military and police are interested in. Claims that the 5.7mm and 4.6mm rounds are superior to those of older weapons do not seem to be borne out by either the manufacturer's own data on the rounds or by testing. These rounds are inferior to the 5.56mm in all respects and 5.56mm weapons exist to fill any niche that the P90 and MP-7 can. The very small levels of permanent damage that these rounds inflict makes them a very questionable choice for many of the applications. The possible medical complications that may arise from the difficulty of treating these wounds may also be a concern.

A lot of people want P90s or MP-7s in their armory. FN and HK are pushing the products hard. Web pages and Reviews sing their praises and some impressive claims are made for the performance of these rounds but the data and testing tell as different story.

These weapons appear to have no military role that cannot be better met by other weapons. How can it be justified to adopt a weapon system that offers no advantage over current and alternate systems?

Also, just because "insert group" uses this weapon, does not mean it is the best for the job because the people that approve and purchase said weapons might not fully understand the system and did their own research but instead got lured in by advertisements. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] ([[User talk:Excalibur01|talk]]) 11:03, 17 August 2017 (EDT)

Going back to the Catacombs, I'm still going with what I said before that John Wick should have used a rifle similar to his 416 clone from the first movie and firing in bursts to push back the enemy as he retreats. Yes, he's John fucking Wick, a man who can take everyone out in the room, but the situation really called for a short rifle and tactics that should have been more military than 3-gun target range shooting. In the first movie, he not only took on more guys after he burned the church vault, but he effectively kept their heads down and suppressed them until one guy had the bright idea of throwing a car at him. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] ([[User talk:Excalibur01|talk]]) 11:29, 17 August 2017 (EDT)

Also, strange is that if he was fully expecting a fight in the catacombs, why did he not put his big guns at the entrance after he escaped Cassian? He basically walked away casually back into the catacombs. He knew ahead of time that they were gonna burn him and brought some bigger guns than his Glock but didn't think hiding his rifle at the entrance before he ran into Ares was a good idea? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] ([[User talk:Excalibur01|talk]]) 11:29, 17 August 2017 (EDT)

:: My main argument in favor for the PDWs was due to size; stopping power is a factor but given all the times he's struggling with both his long guns (especially that M4, which is a ''really'' poor choice for what he's doing) I have to say having a smaller gun wouldn't have been remiss. There's also the fact Wick ''reliably'' shoots everyone twice, whether it's with the Glocks, the P30, the M4, or the AR. Doesn't matter what gun he's carrying, doesn't matter how close he is, he's gonna double tap. Ergo, a big cumbersome rifle only capable of holding 30+1 rounds and a big, cumbersome shotgun capable of holding at ''most'' barely a double digit's worth of shells is automatically going to require more reloading than a PDW capable of carrying at least 40+1 rounds. Remember, Wick shoots everyone twice, so his ammunition consumption is going to be the same for every weapon he uses; therefore, going for compact, high capacity weapons would be a lot more practical than carrying big weapons completely ill-suited for CQC. The AR, given his shooting tendencies, can kill reliably 15 guys, assuming he completely empties his magazine (which he never does), while the M4 can reliably kill less than ''ten.'' The MP7, on the other hand, could drop at least 20, and the P90 could be expected to dispatch 25 enemies, assuming he emptied the weapon; this is fairly close to the number of people he kills during the shootout. As far as the inferiority of the PDW rounds, remember, Wick's weapon of choice is a regular 9x19mm handgun, a round a lot of .45 cultists and other Luddites will insist exists purely for target-shooting; however in the world of John Wick, this is a completely viable primary weapon, capable of getting you through the fight in just about every situation (Wick spends more time shooting 9mms than any other caliber, remember). Given the way the films are made, we could expect Wick to fire no more than two rounds per enemy, and those two rounds to be enough to dispatch that enemy. The more I think about it, the less I think actual ballistics have much to do with how these films are made. --[[User:Godzillafan93|That's the Way It's Done]] ([[User talk:Godzillafan93|talk]]) 21:36, 3 September 2017 (EDT)

Again, going to argue against the fact that PDW rounds are meant to be fired in bursts. You need to unload more than 2 for enemies. In fact, a lot of videos of guys like Larry Vickers would say that these basically varmint rounds need be dumped heavily into a target for them to be effective. PDWs are meant to be show stoppers. Close quarter hoses to beat down enemies, but debatable in the sense if they were effective combat weapons. Shooting a person multiple times is part of good training. You don't just shoot a man once or even twice. But the way the P90 and MP7 are built, they were designed to be fired in bursts to hose down enemies in certain situations. An short barreled AR would of been a better choice than his longer gun. I wouldn't say he was struggling with the longer AR, but he did have to swing it around harder because of its length. The corridors of the catacombs were not too narrow for a 10.5 in barrel gun or shorter. As I have written above, a rifle caliber is more powerful even with lost of velocity in a shorter barrel paired with the right ammo. John also employed the over priced Taran Tactical base plates on all his Pmags, giving them 5 more rounds each. There's an awkwardness to reloading and loading the P90 because of how the mag is placed. There is a lost of speed when even you try to speed reload it. I think what we can all agree on is bringing the Benelli M4 was entirely not worth the cool factor. He kept running out of ammo so fast and even the scene pointed out how dangerous it was for him while reloading because of how relentless the enemy were coming. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] ([[User talk:Excalibur01|talk]]) 14:06, 4 September 2017 (EDT)
:Wouldn't the 5.7x28mm round be technically more deadly at close range? I heard that it somehow goes through a diagonal-like trajectory in the human body rather than a straight one like the 5.56x45mm round. --[[User:Ultimate94ninja|Ultimate94ninja]] ([[User talk:Ultimate94ninja|talk]]) 16:15, 4 September 2017 (EDT)
::Deadlier is subjective as I've pointed out above. Because of the bullpup trigger pull in the P90, it's still not that good in single shot compared to traditional guns. Holding it down to bursts and full auto is really the best thing for counter ambush tactics. I think TV and movies make these PDW rounds more powerful than they really are and make us still think 9mm is nothing special when defensive ammo for 9mm have greatly improved over the passed decade. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] ([[User talk:Excalibur01|talk]]) 10:29, 6 September 2017 (EDT)

Remember Wick was forced to use a 1911 at the end of the movie and actually kept on using it at the end when he found a single reload instead of, I don't know....kept the loaded 1911 holstered and pick up a different gun to use as a primary so he would have more ammo by the end. Also surprisingly despite he was picking guns left and right, he had at least 2 chances to pick up rifles from dead guys in the mirror room but decided to stick with his 1911 [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] ([[User talk:Excalibur01|talk]]) 14:06, 4 September 2017 (EDT)

==Found something pretty fun==
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9MrnAJsxL8c

--[[User:Ultimate94ninja|Ultimate94ninja]] ([[User talk:Ultimate94ninja|talk]]) 05:19, 15 September 2017 (EDT)

That was great. :D [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] ([[User talk:Spartan198|talk]]) 09:37, 4 March 2019 (EST)

Talk:Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull

2018-06-11T22:41:40Z

RickB: /* "M1" Carbine */ new section

That's a Webley Mk.VI if anything - the Mk.VI had the square butt and 6" barrel, the Mk.IV had a 4" barrel and bird's head grip.

If you look closely at the weapon the warhead is clearly that of the RPG-2...the 7's predecessor. However I will admit the launcher itself has been modified to look like a 7's launcher with the addition of the rear blast cone as opposed to the 2's straight pipe configuration.

:Just saw the movie 2 nights ago. The launcher is definitely a -7, and more specifically, the Chinese Type 69 version (all of the "Russian" weapons in this movie are actually Chinese copies, including the Tokarevs, the AKs, and the RPG). However, it looks like the rocket used in the launcher (which would have been inert and non-functional, as is customary in cinema) is the PG-2, which only the RPG-2 can fire. It's more likely they'd use the wrong rocket (which is easier to do) than visually modify the launcher. But that's not an RPG-2, and not just because of the cone in the back; you can tell the body of the launcher and everything else are completely unlike that of the -2. That would be a hell of a modification.

I don't know who changed the M2 Carbine into an M1A1 Carbine but that isn't right. While being fitted with a 30 round mag doesn't make it an M2, it would be an M1 not an M1A1. An M1A1 is the paratrooper folding stock model. - [[User:Gunmaster45|Gunmaster45]]

What is İrina Spalko's sword?

The KGB? agents pulling their Tokarevs on Mutt are clearly carrying either real Russian TT-30 or TT-33s OR more likely Polish Wz48s as they are more common in the states. (The serration pattern on the slide matches Russian or Polish guns.) They are also fully cocked with fingers on the triggers. Eek!

I'm dubious that the "Used in the film" props were used in the film. All of the M1 Carbines seen in the film stills have bayonet mounts, which were added after WW2, however the framed prop does not. - [[User:Rugerlvr|Rugerlvr]]

== Getting soft in old age? ==

Indy does not fire one shot in anger the entire movie, except some rocket. How can this be?

:"Directed by Steven Spielberg," that's how. You know, the modern one who airbrushed the guns out of ''ET'' rather than the old one who let Indy remember he'd bought a gun to a swordfight. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 16:12, 14 July 2011 (CDT)

::Too right mate. What is with the whimpification of all things?

:::In real life you shouldn't fire a gun in anger, that's just stupid, if someone fired a gun in anger around me I would take it away from them. :P - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 18:36, 14 July 2011 (CDT)

::::Movie.

== Soviet uniform ==

The interesting fact: in the film soviet soldiers are dressed in model 1970 uniform (I will remind - action of this film occurs in 1957.).
Besides - the field peak-cap for soldiers and sergeants didn't exist.
Peak-caps were dressed only by officers.
Soldiers and sergeants put on only field caps (or hats - in tropical countries).
And the last: many of soldiers - people of middle age and it is absurd.
I am sorry for my bad English. [[User:Flexo|Flexo]] 14:27, 30 September 2011 (CDT)
:As for the older troops, I guess maybe since this is a super secret mission into one of the most secret sites of a rival super-power, the Soviets would want to only take the most experienced and reliable men and not young conscripts. Not a great theory, given how easily an aging archeologist takes them out, but it's something. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 15:59, 30 September 2011 (CDT)
:: Yeah, most experienced… especially one of them. He looks like Brezhnev in 1957 :)

http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/5814/52559991.34/0_68105_c9d122f8_L.jpg

::Generally, this is a common thing in movies. Just look at the [[GoldenEye]] . There's a section about Norinco and AK-74 a lot of amazing photo that depict soviet conscripts soldiers (is clearly on their uniforms, because the professionals sergeants had another uniforms). The soviet conscripts soldiers could not be older than 29 years, but there you can see people who are over 50 years (besides, some of them is hairy like “Deep Purple”). [[User:Flexo|Flexo]] 15:19, 1 October 2011 (CDT)

Good points, but remember, the production is limited to what they can actually get hold of or reasonably recreate.[[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 15:52, 30 September 2011 (CDT)

: Actually it’s not so difficult for recreate. Just the director does not pay attention to such trifles (Besides very few spectators knows about it). If you are interested, I can show photo of a real uniform of that period:

http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/4521/52559991.35/0_68106_a33491bd_XL.jpg

: On the left shows the field uniform for the soldiers and sergeants. On the right you can see uniform for the officers. But after 1945 (and before replacement by new type of a uniform in 1970), soldiers and sergeants had the same field uniforms (with pockets on the chest) as officers.

:Some more photos of field uniform М1943. Most likely they are made in 1945. Last photo, by the way, is rather amusing.

http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/4521/52559991.35/0_68109_90c8a20d_XL.jpg

http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/5411/52559991.35/0_68108_43938ac5_XL.jpg

http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/5814/52559991.35/0_68107_b7f27e0e_L.jpg

http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/5813/52559991.35/0_6810b_e616f348_XL.jpg

http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/5813/52559991.35/0_6810a_7d3049b5_XL.jpg

: [[User:Flexo|Flexo]] 15:44, 1 October 2011 (CDT)

== "M1" Carbine ==

--[[User:RickB|RickB]] ([[User talk:RickB|talk]]) 18:41, 11 June 2018 (EDT)There seems to have been editing and reediting of the M1 Carbine verbiage? It was identified as an M2, then changed to an M1A1, then (back?) to M1? The photo caption points out the selector, but identifies the gun as M1. The presence of the selector indicates it is an M2.

Talk:The Eiger Sanction

2018-02-25T02:31:13Z

RickB: Created page with "--~~~~ The Lahti is a Swedish M40, as pictured, not a Finnish L35."

--[[User:RickB|RickB]] ([[User talk:RickB|talk]]) 21:31, 24 February 2018 (EST) The Lahti is a Swedish M40, as pictured, not a Finnish L35.

Talk:Murder on the Orient Express (2017)

2017-12-18T03:57:40Z

RickB: /* Official Police revolver */

== Official Police revolver ==

--[[User:RickB|RickB]] ([[User talk:RickB|talk]]) 13:22, 17 November 2017 (EST) I thought Poirot identified the revolver as a "Police Positive"? While watching the movie, I was thinking, "The cylinder looks loo long for a Police Positive", which would indicate it was a Police Positive Special.
:I'm pretty sure he did say "Police Positive". I'll add that to the description. --[[User:Maxman|Maxman]] ([[User talk:Maxman|talk]]) 15:48, 17 November 2017 (EST)

--[[User:RickB|RickB]] ([[User talk:RickB|talk]]) 22:57, 17 December 2017 (EST)I think the close-up still reveals that Poirot was correct; the inside of the trigger guard is oval in shape, while the Official Police has a "wave", for lack of a better term, where the trigger protrudes from the frame.

Talk:Murder on the Orient Express (2017)

2017-11-17T18:22:53Z

RickB: /* Official Police revolver */ new section

Talk:Shooter - Season 2

2017-08-23T17:22:35Z

RickB: /* Mrs. Swagger's gun */ new section

== Please help ID ==

Please help ID this pistol. --[[User:Ben41|Ben41]] ([[User talk:Ben41|talk]]) 03:36, 3 August 2017 (EDT)
[[File:ShooterS2E03 10.jpg|thumb|none|600px|(S2E03).]]
: [[Springfield Custom Professional 1911-A1]] would be my best guess - I can't tell the markings but several features match up with the SA. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan|talk]]) 13:43, 3 August 2017 (EDT)

== Swagger's AR ==

Anyone got any screenshots of the AR Bob Lee is shown using? I know it's equipped with a scope and off set iron sights. --[[User:Sasquatch the Reaper|Sasquatch the Reaper]] ([[User talk:Sasquatch the Reaper|talk]]) 18:20, 11 August 2017 (EDT)

Please help ID --[[User:Ben41|Ben41]] ([[User talk:Ben41|talk]]) 19:00, 13 August 2017 (EDT)
[[File:ShooterS2E04 05.jpg|thumb|none|800px|(S2E04).]]
[[File:ShooterS2E04 06.jpg|thumb|none|800px|(S2E04).]]

== Mrs. Swagger's gun ==

--[[User:RickB|RickB]] ([[User talk:RickB|talk]]) 13:22, 23 August 2017 (EDT)--[[User:RickB|RickB]] ([[User talk:RickB|talk]]) 13:22, 23 August 2017 (EDT)
Her pistol has a fixed rear sight, apparently a Swensight, so probably isn't a Gold Cup.

Talk:Suave Patria

2016-02-28T22:11:09Z

RickB: /* Colt M1911A1 */

== Astra Terminator ? ==
I doubt that Oscar Alvidrez's revolver is Astra Terminator. Astra Terminator has much more rounded shape of the frame than this one. It seems to me that it looks more like a 3rd Gen Colt DS. [[User:Greg-Z|Greg-Z]] ([[User talk:Greg-Z|talk]]) 14:42, 23 June 2013 (EDT)
: It looks like a Colt DS indeed. Something Off-Topic: I joined the site to help identify weapons of Mexican films, but for various reasons I haven't had the time, damn.--[[User:Dillinger|Dillinger]] ([[User talk:Dillinger|talk]]) 22:40, 23 June 2013 (EDT)

--[[User:RickB|RickB]] ([[User talk:RickB|talk]]) 17:10, 28 February 2016 (EST)== Detonics Combat Master ==

Definitely not a Combat Master; possibly a Star BKM.

--[[User:RickB|RickB]] ([[User talk:RickB|talk]]) 17:11, 28 February 2016 (EST)== Colt M1911A1 ==

Definitely not; but if it's a Colt, and it's a .45, then it's a M1905.

Talk:Suave Patria

2016-02-28T22:10:47Z

RickB: /* Detonics Combat Master */

== Astra Terminator ? ==
I doubt that Oscar Alvidrez's revolver is Astra Terminator. Astra Terminator has much more rounded shape of the frame than this one. It seems to me that it looks more like a 3rd Gen Colt DS. [[User:Greg-Z|Greg-Z]] ([[User talk:Greg-Z|talk]]) 14:42, 23 June 2013 (EDT)
: It looks like a Colt DS indeed. Something Off-Topic: I joined the site to help identify weapons of Mexican films, but for various reasons I haven't had the time, damn.--[[User:Dillinger|Dillinger]] ([[User talk:Dillinger|talk]]) 22:40, 23 June 2013 (EDT)

--[[User:RickB|RickB]] ([[User talk:RickB|talk]]) 17:10, 28 February 2016 (EST)== Detonics Combat Master ==

Definitely not a Combat Master; possibly a Star BKM.

== Colt M1911A1 ==

Definitely not; but if it's a Colt, and it's a .45, then it's a M1905.

Talk:Band of Brothers

2016-02-28T22:01:41Z

RickB: /* New Service revolver */

==Too many screencaps. Seriously.==

- Is it just me, or does there seem to be a slightly excessive amount of screencaps with the M1 Garand, notably the ones from the episode 'Crossroads', where they act as almost a blow-by-blow telling of a whole sequence in the episode? [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 02:46, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

:- Ok, far from there being less, it seems that ''even more'' screencaps have been posted. There's now about 2 dozen or so showing the Thompson, and about '''three dozen''' showing the Garand. Now it's just plain ridiculous. Do we really need that many images? [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 03:10, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. I left a message for Crackshot about this. I was thinking of taking some of the excess shots and putting them in the discussion section. --[[User:Ben41|Ben41]] 06:43, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

- That sounds cool to me - most of the images are good ones. Just there's too damn many on the page is all. Forgive me, but I get a bit irked when I have a 20in monitor and still have to scroll down a mile or two for the next gun on the list. :b [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 20:32, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

== Springfields ==
''This is the only piece of kit in this production that bothered me. Why was this guy carrying a Springfield? There is no evidence of a scope mount and by this time, if I am correct, the Springfield had been phased out of frontline service in favour of the Garand.'' [[User:Charon68|Charon68]]

There is a famous picture of US troops of the 2nd Infantry Division walking up a hill after storming the Normandy beaches, and all of them have Springfield 03 rifles slung over their shoulders. So they obviously were still using them.

There were still a few soldiers using Springfields without scopes during World War 2, due to a very slight shortage of M1 Garands. The shortage would have stopped by 1944 (in which ''Band of Brothers'' takes place. This guy just must have either decided to keep his Springfield or didn't get reissued with an M1--[[User: Colt Revolver Fan]]

Actually the Springfield was widely used due to several M1 Garands shortages because soldiers favoured it due to it's rate of fire. - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]]
:The 1903 was widely used by US Army and US Marine Corps personnel in from 1942 until late 1944. Garands were nonexistent in US Military hands that were in the shit in 1941 and early 1942 (January). By the time of the Battle of Guandacanal and the Begin of the African Campaign, M1 Garands, M1 Carbines and 1903s were widely used by the US Marine Corps and the US Army. By 1943 the Springfields, Carbines and the Garands were still being used but by Late 1943, springfields were being "retired" and the Garands and M1s completely replacing them. By the Invasion of Normandy, there were still 1903s being used but, less than Garands. I don't know if Airborne units used 1903s however they probably used them. Back to the Garand and 1903s, by 1945 the Garand and the M1 Carbine completely replaced the 1903.-[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 20:11, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
*It appears that the M1903 Springfield was lastly used in the Korean war and was used in the early stages of the Vietnam war limited. The M1 Garand remained in service until it was replaced by the M2 carbine and the M1 Carbine during the Vietnam war. Also, I found [http://www.bandofbrothers.wikia.com this website while searching for Band of Brothers online]. - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 03:03, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

The Springfield was still issued at a rate of one per rifle squad to launch anti-tank Grenades. Source: http://www.olive-drab.com/od_other_firearms_rifle_m1903.php3

I don't think paratroopers still used the Springfield in 1944. This particular guy was probably issued the M1 Garand but still favored the 1903 since he was seen carrying BOTH weapons earlier in the Episode

== M3 greasegun. ==

Not that it matters but,

A. I think the ones used in this were A1s, an error when Cobb has one in Holland, as they didn't exist until later in the year, and

B. Lipton never uses one. He jumps into Normandy with a Thompson which he loses. Briefly carries a Mp-40 which he swaps for an M1A1 carbine which hes uses for the rest of the fighting in France, and swaps for a Garand which he uses till he gets a battlefield commision, and switches back to a carbine.

Wrong: Lipton is seen doing something (something involving the magazine) with a Greasegun when they prepare the jump in part 1

==Winters' Garand==
Towards the end of the book Winters mentioned how his Garand had been modified for full auto fire and that the sergeant who had accomplished the feat had since forgotten how he managed the mod to the weapon. I did question the practicality of it since, with the 8 round en bloc mag...you would empty the weapon in 2 seconds if that.--[[User:Charon68|Charon68]] 02:18, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

That thing would be a monster in close quarters, although its size and kick might hamper it. But I agree, that would be quite impractical. Was he said to use that same Garand throughout his tour in the book?

That's weird, never heard of that. So it would basically be a BAR with only 8 rounds. Why didn't he just swap his Garand for a BAR?

:I wouldn't worry about it as I think the OP got the wrong end of the stick as the modifications were carried out by Forrest Guth on M1 ''Carbines'', not Garand rifles. There is a chapter in Buck Comptons memoirs about the Normandy drop where he laments the fact that when he lost his leg bag he lost his full automatic M1 carbine. Just FYI, there was a trick that soldier did with the M1 Garand to make it temporarily fully auto(ish) involving a [http://www.saysuncle.com/images/shoestringmg.JPG shoestring]. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 11:52, 25 August 2012 (CDT)

== Stug III / Stug IV ==

that Assault Gun, which is hit by the Bazooka is not a StuG IV, its a StuG III

Which was built on the hull of a FV432 APC. It doesn't look quite right to someone who knows WW2 armour, but it is a very good look-a-like. Much better than the T-34s dressed up as Tigers in Kelly's Heroes and Saving Private Ryan. And the Marder mobile AT gun looks very good too.

== Additional Screenshots ==
[[Image:Bob1m1a11.jpg|left|thumb|400px|An Easy Company soldier fires during training]]
[[Image:Bob2tm1a12.jpg|none|thumb|400px|Bill Guarnere ducks with his Thompson]]
[[Image:GuarnereThompson.jpg|left|thumb|400px|Guarnere fires his Thompson as he chews Donald Malarkey ([[Scott Grimes]]) for being a "Stupid Mick".]]
[[Image:WelshThompson.jpg|none|thumb|400px|Harry Welsh ([[Rick Warden]]) with his Thompson in "Carentan."]]
[[Image:GuarnereThompson2.jpg|left|thumb|400px|Bill Guarnere ([[Frank John Hughes]]) with his Thompson.]]
[[Image:Bob4tm1a1.jpg|none|thumb|400px|Johnny Martin ([[Dexter Fletcher]]) fires his Thompson]]
[[Image:Bob1m1g2.jpg|left|thumb|400px|The men of Easy Company fire their Garands in training during "Curahee".]]
[[Image:Bob2m1g2.jpg|none|thumb|400px|Lt. Winters reloads his Garand.]]
[[Image:WintersGarand2.jpg|left|thumb|400px|Winters aims his Garand. Note that it is unloaded.]]
[[Image:Bob2m1g3.jpg|none|thumb|400px|Another shot of Winters firing his Garand.]]
[[Image:WintersGarand.jpg|left|thumb|400px|Winters fire his Garand at fleeing German soldiers.]]
[[Image:ParatrooperGarand.jpg|none|thumb|400px|A Paratrooper fires his Garand.]]
[[Image:Bob4m1g1.jpg|left|thumb|400px|Paratroopers firing their Garands during the episode "Replacements".]]
[[Image:Bob5m1g8.jpg|none|thumb|400px|''"Joe, knock it off!"'' Leibgott is told to stop shooting at German soldiers.]]
[[Image:Bob5m1g9.jpg|left|thumb|400px|''"Take these prisoners back to Battalion CP."'' Liebgott is ordered by Winters.]]
[[Image:Bob5m1g10.jpg|none|thumb|400px|''"Drop your ammo. Give me your weapon."'']]
[[Image:Bob5m1g11.jpg|left|thumb|400px|Winters unloads Joe's weapon.]]
[[Image:Bob5m1g12.jpg|none|thumb|400px|''"You have '''one''' round. If you drop a prisoner, the rest will jump you."'']]

[[Image:Bob6m1g1.jpg|left|thumb|400px|A paratrooper blind fires his Garand during the battle of Bastogne.]]
[[Image:Bob8m1g2.jpg|none|thumb|400px|Another paratrooper cleans his Garand in the episode "The Last Patrol".]]
[[Image:Bob1mb.jpg|none|thumb|400px|M1 bayonet]]
<br clear=all>

== Thompson Mags ==

Why is the Thompson only seen with the 30rd mag attached altough many soldiers, such as Martin, Lipton or Welch, are seen carrying the 5 cell pouch for 20rd magazines? Same in Saving Private Ryan. The used some 20rd Magazines in The Pacific though

== Mortars ==

Due to a lack of BoB on my computer, i'd like to ask you one thing.

In parts 3, 5, and 7 the mortar (I'm not sure wether it is an M1 or an M2) is clearly used. But, as a matter of fact, I don't see any picture of it on this page. Maybe an idea to poston the page?

Greetings from Holland --[[User:Wouter98|Wouter98]] 10:12, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

== Lighters ==
When the soldier puts the lighter to the sight on his M1 Garand, how would darkening the sight help with the weapon and does it make a significant difference? --[[User:MarineCorps1|MarineCorps1]] 20:43, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

@MarineCorps1

The soldier isn't darkening the sight, he's just burning the dirt away from it ;) --[[User:Wouter98|Wouter98]] 12:09, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
:I always thought he was burning it so it blackened and wouldn't glint in any light during the night time mission? --[[User:RedRobinAlpha|RedRobinAlpha]] ([[User talk:RedRobinAlpha|talk]]) 01:59, 14 June 2015 (GMT)

== Richard "Dick" Winters ==
I just heard that Richard "Dick" Winters passed away on January 2,2011. May his soul rest in peace for everything he did for Easy Company 506th of the 101st Airborne. --[[User:MarineCorps1|MarineCorps1]] 21:34, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
:A true hero. Rest In Peace, Major. --[[User:Crackshot|Crackshot]] 23:56, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

== M1 or M9 Bazooka? ==

Although throughout the series it does not appear much, but may I know which is better, as in comparing of its power, weight, penetration, explosion radius and accuracy. Which is a better choice of equipment during the war? - S9771773G 10:40, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

:Well, the M9, being as it was just generally better than the M1A1. Reinforced tube, optical sight, a more powerful rocket, etc. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 05:51, 4 November 2011 (CDT)

== Walther PPK appearance? ==

In episode 4, Easy Company meet up with a Dutch Resistance Member who appears to have a handgun stuffed down his trousers, ironically at such an angle that if it misfires, he won't be able to have 'kinderen'. Judging by the grip, and the fact that it was used by many resistance groups in WWII, it's probably a Walther PPK. Can anyone confirm?

== Sobel, his 1911, and firearm safety. ==

Watching episode 1, it's interesting how Sobel's use and handling of his 1911 sidearm provides further indication of his poor suitability for field command. Of the junior officers, only Sobel does not carry a shoulder weapon of some type; all the others carry a Garand, carbine, or Thompson in addition to their sidearm. Furthermore, though Sobel is never seen firing his .45, his finger seems to always be on the trigger whenever he has it in hand, including while running with it and - in a particularly glaring example of poor safety habits - when he points it at his men while selecting "wounded" during a training exercise. [[User:Guy Incognito|Guy Incognito]] 20:30, 16 October 2013 (EDT)

== My review of Band Of Brothers ==

★★★★★

Epic! Breathtaking! Emotional! Thrilling! These are just some of the words that I would use to describe the 10 part HBO mini series Band Of Brothers. Executive Produced by Steven Spielberg and Tom Hanks Band Of Brothers follows the story of the men in the 101st Airborne Division, Easy Company from their initial training, through to the end of the war. This incredible series has an ensemble cast of fantastic actors, each of whom brings something totally different to the story. It's hard to describe this in terms of episodes for me because I usually end up watching the whole series in 1 or 2 sittings, so to me it feels like one huge 11 hour movie.

The series' look takes it's cue from Spielberg's Saving Private Ryan, and it is equally as brutal, if not more brutal than that film. The special effects look fantastic, with genius techniques used to capture the look and feel of battle. They used compressed air blowing dirt and other things out of a cone for a lot of the explosions which meant they could safely have actors and stuntmen standing right on top of a blast when it went off. These techniques keep you fully lodged into the reality of the battles as there is no obvious moment where an explosion is no where near the actor or it has been added in post production. The sound design as well is particularly fantastic as it manages to make you feel like you are in the middle of the battle, especially if viewed on a surround sound system where the sounds of the battle are literally coming at you from all angles. The music in the series is simply outstanding, Michael Kamen truly excelled himself with the score, the opening theme alone is a stunning piece of work. The CGI used for the most part is impressive, the paradrop sequence for the Market Garden operation looks awe inspiring, the only piece of bad CGI I noticed was the blue screen used for the first paradrop where it follows Dick Winters on his first combat jump, although this is totally forgiveable as blue screen was still relatively new to TV productions back in 2001 and because it is only this short sequence that really stands out it doesn't ruin the whole experience.

Damien Lewis gives an utterly convincing and quite frankly incredible performance as Lt./Capt./Major Dick Winters, he manages to portray the changes that the character goes through because of his experiences perfectly, there is no overacting on his part and no melodrama. The subtleties to his performance make it all the more convincing. Because this is an ensemble piece it would take far too long to go through each individual character as there are about 20 in total so what I will say about them as a group is that each actor and character brings a different level to this series, their portrayals add an extra depth to the story, and give a bigger reality to the events, not only as viewers do we know that the events we are witnessing really happened but through the actors performances we believe that what we are seeing is what actually happened. Their performances invoked more emotional responses from me than any weepy dreary movie has ever done. The sequence in Part 9 at the Concentration Camp almost moved me to tears when Liebgott had to tell the Jews they found that they were had to remain in the camps whilst appropriate care was provided. Where the reactions of the people in the camps was moving, I found Ross McCall's performance to be the most emotionally impacting moment of the scene. My favourite character was probably George Luz portrayed by Rick Gomez. Gomez's character seems to be the comic relief of the group for when it is needed but that doesn't mean that he spends his time cracking jokes all the time, only about 10% of his screen time is taken up with the moments of comedy, and most of them involve impressions of officers, in the first episode there is an incredibly funny moment on a training exercise involving Luz.

What makes this series stand apart from a lot of other war films or series is that at the start of every episode there would be interviews with surviving members of the real Easy Company, I think that these short interviews help to build up the realism and they help us to connect with the characters in the series, you can't help but feel something when you see these old men remembering their lost friends and almost crying just because of their memories. It helps to add an emotional connection between the viewer and the series as you are seeing how these events affected these men and when you see something that was talked about in one of the interviews it makes a bigger impact.

To sum up, if you are a fan of war movies and haven't seen this then it should go to the top of your list of things to watch. From a film maker's stand point this is a how to manual on creating the perfect war story. --[[User:Cool-breeze|cool-breeze]] 07:34, 3 March 2012 (CST)
:Too many words, but +1 to 5 star rating and last sentence.--[[User:Crazycrankle|Crazycrankle]] ([[User talk:Crazycrankle|talk]]) 00:27, 17 October 2013 (EDT)

== M1917? ==

Anybody else think this rifle ID'd as an M1917 is just the same Springfield M1903 that is used used at other points in "Carentan"?
[[File:P17BOB.jpg|none|thumb|602px|The far right soldier in front of Smokey's Browning M1919 is seen with a P17 slung over his back.]]
[[File:BoBEp3_03CU.jpg|none|thumb|600px|Closeup.]]
The front sight looks more like an M1903 than and M1917 to me, plus it is more likely that it will be a rifle that appears in other scenes rather than just randomly something else. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] ([[User talk:Commando552|talk]]) 20:17, 3 September 2014 (EDT)

The original one I posted, while blurry, seems to show that it shows the P17's iron sights better, you can tell there are opened holes in the front sight, something none of the Springfield rifles had, plus on close examination, the rifle has a longer exposed barrel than the Springfield. It's barely noticable, but, zoom in on both pictures to see ----[[User:Bosoxboy521|Bosoxboy521]] ([[User talk:Bosoxboy521|talk]]) 22:27, 3 September 2014 (EDT)

: I added a closeup shot. Is it possible it's a SMLE? It would seem more likely since that rifle was seen later in the episode. --[[User:Ben41|Ben41]] ([[User talk:Ben41|talk]]) 03:44, 4 September 2014 (EDT)
::No, the barrel band is wrong for a No.4 Mk.1 and the sight would be farther back right up against the cap. From the general design of the barrel band, it is either (and I'm just narrowing down to the more likely possibilities here) an M1903 or an M1917:[[File:M1917enfield.jpg|thumb|500px|none|M1917]][[File:Springfield03A3.jpg|thumb|500px|none|M1903A3]]The only parts that are visible really are the front sight and the barrel band, so these are the only parts I will talk about. On the M1917, the front and rear of the front sight are vertical and parallel. On the show gun the front is vertical, but the back has a general sort of sloped profile to it, suggesting that it is an M1903A3. As for the barrel band, on the top of it there is a distinct step at the back which is more indicative of the M1903A3 one. Also, if you look at the bottom edge you will see that there are two distinct parts to the bayonet lug and there is a sling swivel behind it (directly under the stepped portion at the back) making it a match for the M1903A3. I don't know if this secondary part to the bayonet lug is actually anything to with the bayonet, but whatever it is, it is indicative not only of an M1903A3 over and M1917, but also over an original M1903. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] ([[User talk:Commando552|talk]]) 05:04, 4 September 2014 (EDT)

My apologies, I looked back and it is an M1903A3. In fact, Alton Moore carries it in Carentan, but drops it to help Smokey feed the gun and switches over to an M1 Garand with a rifle grenade --[[User:Bosoxboy521|Bosoxboy521]] ([[User talk:Bosoxboy521|talk]]) 16:22, 4 September 2014 (EDT)

==More Weapons Needed==
Someone needs to add the 105 Gebirgshaubitze cannons from Brecourt Manor and the 88mm cannons from Foy to the German Heavy Weapons section. I would, however, I am not too sure how to upload photos on this site. It seems very difficult. If someone knows how, please tell me how.
:On the left, you should see "Upload file" under toolbox. Select the source file at top (or you can click and drag) and add the appropriate tags below it. Then click "Upload file". --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] ([[User talk:Funkychinaman|talk]]) 21:01, 18 April 2015 (EDT)

==Black B.A.R==
In the episode, "The Last Patrol" I believe Sgt. Martin hands off a black painted B.A.R to a soldier as he walks into a room. That same soldier (the one who received the B.A.R) is also one of the men who's boat flips over. On Martin's actor's page it is listed that he used/held a B.A.R but we do not have a picture of this. [[User:Majorcamo|Majorcamo]] ([[User talk:Majorcamo|talk]]) 20:44, 13 June 2015 (EDT)

== Vehicle Section ==
Is there anyone who could upload some pictures of the tanks and such as some of them are really unique i.e the Jagdpanther, Stugs, ands Marders. [[User:Majorcamo|Majorcamo]] ([[User talk:Majorcamo|talk]]) 22:17, 19 August 2015 (EDT)
:There's a [http://www.imcdb.org/movie_185906-Band-of-Brothers.html site] for that. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] ([[User talk:Funkychinaman|talk]]) 00:08, 20 August 2015 (EDT)

== New Service revolver ==

The revolver sent from home that's still described as a New Service is a small-framed Colt, probably a Police Positive. The New Service is a really big gun, and the trooper has his hand wrapped almost completely around the frame. Even if the gun's small size is not enough, the shape of the frame forward of the trigger guard is not New Service.

:First, mark your posts RickB, second I don't think it's a Police Positive. Yes, the New Service is a pretty big revolver, but it's not impossible for it to be that size. The barrel seems to be too big to be a standard Police Positive caliber. What I guess is that the revolver is a Colt New Service in .38 Special, much easier to get for a US GI going into Europe, and a lot easier than a Police Positive in .38 S&W. -- [[User:PaperCake|PaperCake]] 14:11, 2 February 2016 (EST)

Sorry, I don't know what you mean by "mark my posts"? If you watch episode three, in the scene where Talbert is bayoneted, he's using the revolver to rap on a sleeping trooper's helmet, and you can see that the inside of the trigger guard is oval; the New Service trigger guard isn't oval on the inside. That, and, again, it's not big enough to be a New Service. Not trying to be difficult, but am interested in the info being correct.

:He means to sign your posts, which is done by either pressing the "Signature and timestamp" button at the top of the edit window (looks like a pencil doing a signature), or by just typing in <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>. This way it signs your name, links to your talk page and puts in a timestamp. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] ([[User talk:Commando552|talk]]) 18:07, 14 February 2016 (EST)

Thanks.--[[User:RickB|RickB]] ([[User talk:RickB|talk]]) 17:01, 28 February 2016 (EST)

== German Heavy Weapons ==

I got some screencaps of the Gebirgshaubitze and the Flak 88 that I would add to the page. Can anyone identify the type of the Flak 88 canon (Flak 36 or 37?)--[[User:HighPhigh|HighPhigh]] ([[User talk:HighPhigh|talk]]) 07:35, 7 February 2016 (EST)

===10.5 cm Gebirgshaubitze 40===
In "Day of Days" (Ep.2), four 10.5 cm Gebirgshaubitze 40 Howitzers are in the German artillery position at Brecourt Manor.
[[Image:BOB_gebirgs1.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The first Gebirgshaubitze captured by Easy Company.]]
[[Image:BOB_gebirgs2.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Destroyed Gebirgshaubitze.]]

===8,8 cm Flak===
German soldiers defending the town of Foy with various 8,8 cm Flak canons in "The Breaking Point" (Ep.7).
[[Image:BOB_flak881.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The Flak before fired by the Germans.]]
[[Image:BOB_flak882.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Firing the canon.]]
[[Image:BOB_flak883.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Closer shot of the canon.]]
[[Image:BOB_flak884.jpg|thumb|none|600px|A total view of the flak as the German sniper opens fire.]]

Talk:Suave Patria

2016-02-28T21:55:55Z

RickB: /* Colt M1911A1 */ new section

== Astra Terminator ? ==
I doubt that Oscar Alvidrez's revolver is Astra Terminator. Astra Terminator has much more rounded shape of the frame than this one. It seems to me that it looks more like a 3rd Gen Colt DS. [[User:Greg-Z|Greg-Z]] ([[User talk:Greg-Z|talk]]) 14:42, 23 June 2013 (EDT)
: It looks like a Colt DS indeed. Something Off-Topic: I joined the site to help identify weapons of Mexican films, but for various reasons I haven't had the time, damn.--[[User:Dillinger|Dillinger]] ([[User talk:Dillinger|talk]]) 22:40, 23 June 2013 (EDT)

== Detonics Combat Master ==

Definitely not a Combat Master; possibly a Star BKM.

== Colt M1911A1 ==

Definitely not; but if it's a Colt, and it's a .45, then it's a M1905.

Talk:Suave Patria

2016-02-28T21:54:15Z

RickB: /* Detonics Combat Master */ new section

== Astra Terminator ? ==
I doubt that Oscar Alvidrez's revolver is Astra Terminator. Astra Terminator has much more rounded shape of the frame than this one. It seems to me that it looks more like a 3rd Gen Colt DS. [[User:Greg-Z|Greg-Z]] ([[User talk:Greg-Z|talk]]) 14:42, 23 June 2013 (EDT)
: It looks like a Colt DS indeed. Something Off-Topic: I joined the site to help identify weapons of Mexican films, but for various reasons I haven't had the time, damn.--[[User:Dillinger|Dillinger]] ([[User talk:Dillinger|talk]]) 22:40, 23 June 2013 (EDT)

== Detonics Combat Master ==

Definitely not a Combat Master; possibly a Star BKM.

Talk:Band of Brothers

2016-02-14T20:34:00Z

RickB: /* New Service revolver */

==Too many screencaps. Seriously.==

- Is it just me, or does there seem to be a slightly excessive amount of screencaps with the M1 Garand, notably the ones from the episode 'Crossroads', where they act as almost a blow-by-blow telling of a whole sequence in the episode? [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 02:46, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

:- Ok, far from there being less, it seems that ''even more'' screencaps have been posted. There's now about 2 dozen or so showing the Thompson, and about '''three dozen''' showing the Garand. Now it's just plain ridiculous. Do we really need that many images? [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 03:10, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. I left a message for Crackshot about this. I was thinking of taking some of the excess shots and putting them in the discussion section. --[[User:Ben41|Ben41]] 06:43, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

- That sounds cool to me - most of the images are good ones. Just there's too damn many on the page is all. Forgive me, but I get a bit irked when I have a 20in monitor and still have to scroll down a mile or two for the next gun on the list. :b [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 20:32, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

== Springfields ==
''This is the only piece of kit in this production that bothered me. Why was this guy carrying a Springfield? There is no evidence of a scope mount and by this time, if I am correct, the Springfield had been phased out of frontline service in favour of the Garand.'' [[User:Charon68|Charon68]]

There is a famous picture of US troops of the 2nd Infantry Division walking up a hill after storming the Normandy beaches, and all of them have Springfield 03 rifles slung over their shoulders. So they obviously were still using them.

There were still a few soldiers using Springfields without scopes during World War 2, due to a very slight shortage of M1 Garands. The shortage would have stopped by 1944 (in which ''Band of Brothers'' takes place. This guy just must have either decided to keep his Springfield or didn't get reissued with an M1--[[User: Colt Revolver Fan]]

Actually the Springfield was widely used due to several M1 Garands shortages because soldiers favoured it due to it's rate of fire. - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]]
:The 1903 was widely used by US Army and US Marine Corps personnel in from 1942 until late 1944. Garands were nonexistent in US Military hands that were in the shit in 1941 and early 1942 (January). By the time of the Battle of Guandacanal and the Begin of the African Campaign, M1 Garands, M1 Carbines and 1903s were widely used by the US Marine Corps and the US Army. By 1943 the Springfields, Carbines and the Garands were still being used but by Late 1943, springfields were being "retired" and the Garands and M1s completely replacing them. By the Invasion of Normandy, there were still 1903s being used but, less than Garands. I don't know if Airborne units used 1903s however they probably used them. Back to the Garand and 1903s, by 1945 the Garand and the M1 Carbine completely replaced the 1903.-[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 20:11, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
*It appears that the M1903 Springfield was lastly used in the Korean war and was used in the early stages of the Vietnam war limited. The M1 Garand remained in service until it was replaced by the M2 carbine and the M1 Carbine during the Vietnam war. Also, I found [http://www.bandofbrothers.wikia.com this website while searching for Band of Brothers online]. - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 03:03, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

The Springfield was still issued at a rate of one per rifle squad to launch anti-tank Grenades. Source: http://www.olive-drab.com/od_other_firearms_rifle_m1903.php3

I don't think paratroopers still used the Springfield in 1944. This particular guy was probably issued the M1 Garand but still favored the 1903 since he was seen carrying BOTH weapons earlier in the Episode

== M3 greasegun. ==

Not that it matters but,

A. I think the ones used in this were A1s, an error when Cobb has one in Holland, as they didn't exist until later in the year, and

B. Lipton never uses one. He jumps into Normandy with a Thompson which he loses. Briefly carries a Mp-40 which he swaps for an M1A1 carbine which hes uses for the rest of the fighting in France, and swaps for a Garand which he uses till he gets a battlefield commision, and switches back to a carbine.

Wrong: Lipton is seen doing something (something involving the magazine) with a Greasegun when they prepare the jump in part 1

==Winters' Garand==
Towards the end of the book Winters mentioned how his Garand had been modified for full auto fire and that the sergeant who had accomplished the feat had since forgotten how he managed the mod to the weapon. I did question the practicality of it since, with the 8 round en bloc mag...you would empty the weapon in 2 seconds if that.--[[User:Charon68|Charon68]] 02:18, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

That thing would be a monster in close quarters, although its size and kick might hamper it. But I agree, that would be quite impractical. Was he said to use that same Garand throughout his tour in the book?

That's weird, never heard of that. So it would basically be a BAR with only 8 rounds. Why didn't he just swap his Garand for a BAR?

:I wouldn't worry about it as I think the OP got the wrong end of the stick as the modifications were carried out by Forrest Guth on M1 ''Carbines'', not Garand rifles. There is a chapter in Buck Comptons memoirs about the Normandy drop where he laments the fact that when he lost his leg bag he lost his full automatic M1 carbine. Just FYI, there was a trick that soldier did with the M1 Garand to make it temporarily fully auto(ish) involving a [http://www.saysuncle.com/images/shoestringmg.JPG shoestring]. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 11:52, 25 August 2012 (CDT)

== Stug III / Stug IV ==

that Assault Gun, which is hit by the Bazooka is not a StuG IV, its a StuG III

Which was built on the hull of a FV432 APC. It doesn't look quite right to someone who knows WW2 armour, but it is a very good look-a-like. Much better than the T-34s dressed up as Tigers in Kelly's Heroes and Saving Private Ryan. And the Marder mobile AT gun looks very good too.

== Additional Screenshots ==
[[Image:Bob1m1a11.jpg|left|thumb|400px|An Easy Company soldier fires during training]]
[[Image:Bob2tm1a12.jpg|none|thumb|400px|Bill Guarnere ducks with his Thompson]]
[[Image:GuarnereThompson.jpg|left|thumb|400px|Guarnere fires his Thompson as he chews Donald Malarkey ([[Scott Grimes]]) for being a "Stupid Mick".]]
[[Image:WelshThompson.jpg|none|thumb|400px|Harry Welsh ([[Rick Warden]]) with his Thompson in "Carentan."]]
[[Image:GuarnereThompson2.jpg|left|thumb|400px|Bill Guarnere ([[Frank John Hughes]]) with his Thompson.]]
[[Image:Bob4tm1a1.jpg|none|thumb|400px|Johnny Martin ([[Dexter Fletcher]]) fires his Thompson]]
[[Image:Bob1m1g2.jpg|left|thumb|400px|The men of Easy Company fire their Garands in training during "Curahee".]]
[[Image:Bob2m1g2.jpg|none|thumb|400px|Lt. Winters reloads his Garand.]]
[[Image:WintersGarand2.jpg|left|thumb|400px|Winters aims his Garand. Note that it is unloaded.]]
[[Image:Bob2m1g3.jpg|none|thumb|400px|Another shot of Winters firing his Garand.]]
[[Image:WintersGarand.jpg|left|thumb|400px|Winters fire his Garand at fleeing German soldiers.]]
[[Image:ParatrooperGarand.jpg|none|thumb|400px|A Paratrooper fires his Garand.]]
[[Image:Bob4m1g1.jpg|left|thumb|400px|Paratroopers firing their Garands during the episode "Replacements".]]
[[Image:Bob5m1g8.jpg|none|thumb|400px|''"Joe, knock it off!"'' Leibgott is told to stop shooting at German soldiers.]]
[[Image:Bob5m1g9.jpg|left|thumb|400px|''"Take these prisoners back to Battalion CP."'' Liebgott is ordered by Winters.]]
[[Image:Bob5m1g10.jpg|none|thumb|400px|''"Drop your ammo. Give me your weapon."'']]
[[Image:Bob5m1g11.jpg|left|thumb|400px|Winters unloads Joe's weapon.]]
[[Image:Bob5m1g12.jpg|none|thumb|400px|''"You have '''one''' round. If you drop a prisoner, the rest will jump you."'']]

[[Image:Bob6m1g1.jpg|left|thumb|400px|A paratrooper blind fires his Garand during the battle of Bastogne.]]
[[Image:Bob8m1g2.jpg|none|thumb|400px|Another paratrooper cleans his Garand in the episode "The Last Patrol".]]
[[Image:Bob1mb.jpg|none|thumb|400px|M1 bayonet]]
<br clear=all>

== Thompson Mags ==

Why is the Thompson only seen with the 30rd mag attached altough many soldiers, such as Martin, Lipton or Welch, are seen carrying the 5 cell pouch for 20rd magazines? Same in Saving Private Ryan. The used some 20rd Magazines in The Pacific though

== Mortars ==

Due to a lack of BoB on my computer, i'd like to ask you one thing.

In parts 3, 5, and 7 the mortar (I'm not sure wether it is an M1 or an M2) is clearly used. But, as a matter of fact, I don't see any picture of it on this page. Maybe an idea to poston the page?

Greetings from Holland --[[User:Wouter98|Wouter98]] 10:12, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

== Lighters ==
When the soldier puts the lighter to the sight on his M1 Garand, how would darkening the sight help with the weapon and does it make a significant difference? --[[User:MarineCorps1|MarineCorps1]] 20:43, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

@MarineCorps1

The soldier isn't darkening the sight, he's just burning the dirt away from it ;) --[[User:Wouter98|Wouter98]] 12:09, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
:I always thought he was burning it so it blackened and wouldn't glint in any light during the night time mission? --[[User:RedRobinAlpha|RedRobinAlpha]] ([[User talk:RedRobinAlpha|talk]]) 01:59, 14 June 2015 (GMT)

== Richard "Dick" Winters ==
I just heard that Richard "Dick" Winters passed away on January 2,2011. May his soul rest in peace for everything he did for Easy Company 506th of the 101st Airborne. --[[User:MarineCorps1|MarineCorps1]] 21:34, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
:A true hero. Rest In Peace, Major. --[[User:Crackshot|Crackshot]] 23:56, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

== M1 or M9 Bazooka? ==

Although throughout the series it does not appear much, but may I know which is better, as in comparing of its power, weight, penetration, explosion radius and accuracy. Which is a better choice of equipment during the war? - S9771773G 10:40, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

:Well, the M9, being as it was just generally better than the M1A1. Reinforced tube, optical sight, a more powerful rocket, etc. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 05:51, 4 November 2011 (CDT)

== Walther PPK appearance? ==

In episode 4, Easy Company meet up with a Dutch Resistance Member who appears to have a handgun stuffed down his trousers, ironically at such an angle that if it misfires, he won't be able to have 'kinderen'. Judging by the grip, and the fact that it was used by many resistance groups in WWII, it's probably a Walther PPK. Can anyone confirm?

== Sobel, his 1911, and firearm safety. ==

Watching episode 1, it's interesting how Sobel's use and handling of his 1911 sidearm provides further indication of his poor suitability for field command. Of the junior officers, only Sobel does not carry a shoulder weapon of some type; all the others carry a Garand, carbine, or Thompson in addition to their sidearm. Furthermore, though Sobel is never seen firing his .45, his finger seems to always be on the trigger whenever he has it in hand, including while running with it and - in a particularly glaring example of poor safety habits - when he points it at his men while selecting "wounded" during a training exercise. [[User:Guy Incognito|Guy Incognito]] 20:30, 16 October 2013 (EDT)

== My review of Band Of Brothers ==

★★★★★

Epic! Breathtaking! Emotional! Thrilling! These are just some of the words that I would use to describe the 10 part HBO mini series Band Of Brothers. Executive Produced by Steven Spielberg and Tom Hanks Band Of Brothers follows the story of the men in the 101st Airborne Division, Easy Company from their initial training, through to the end of the war. This incredible series has an ensemble cast of fantastic actors, each of whom brings something totally different to the story. It's hard to describe this in terms of episodes for me because I usually end up watching the whole series in 1 or 2 sittings, so to me it feels like one huge 11 hour movie.

The series' look takes it's cue from Spielberg's Saving Private Ryan, and it is equally as brutal, if not more brutal than that film. The special effects look fantastic, with genius techniques used to capture the look and feel of battle. They used compressed air blowing dirt and other things out of a cone for a lot of the explosions which meant they could safely have actors and stuntmen standing right on top of a blast when it went off. These techniques keep you fully lodged into the reality of the battles as there is no obvious moment where an explosion is no where near the actor or it has been added in post production. The sound design as well is particularly fantastic as it manages to make you feel like you are in the middle of the battle, especially if viewed on a surround sound system where the sounds of the battle are literally coming at you from all angles. The music in the series is simply outstanding, Michael Kamen truly excelled himself with the score, the opening theme alone is a stunning piece of work. The CGI used for the most part is impressive, the paradrop sequence for the Market Garden operation looks awe inspiring, the only piece of bad CGI I noticed was the blue screen used for the first paradrop where it follows Dick Winters on his first combat jump, although this is totally forgiveable as blue screen was still relatively new to TV productions back in 2001 and because it is only this short sequence that really stands out it doesn't ruin the whole experience.

Damien Lewis gives an utterly convincing and quite frankly incredible performance as Lt./Capt./Major Dick Winters, he manages to portray the changes that the character goes through because of his experiences perfectly, there is no overacting on his part and no melodrama. The subtleties to his performance make it all the more convincing. Because this is an ensemble piece it would take far too long to go through each individual character as there are about 20 in total so what I will say about them as a group is that each actor and character brings a different level to this series, their portrayals add an extra depth to the story, and give a bigger reality to the events, not only as viewers do we know that the events we are witnessing really happened but through the actors performances we believe that what we are seeing is what actually happened. Their performances invoked more emotional responses from me than any weepy dreary movie has ever done. The sequence in Part 9 at the Concentration Camp almost moved me to tears when Liebgott had to tell the Jews they found that they were had to remain in the camps whilst appropriate care was provided. Where the reactions of the people in the camps was moving, I found Ross McCall's performance to be the most emotionally impacting moment of the scene. My favourite character was probably George Luz portrayed by Rick Gomez. Gomez's character seems to be the comic relief of the group for when it is needed but that doesn't mean that he spends his time cracking jokes all the time, only about 10% of his screen time is taken up with the moments of comedy, and most of them involve impressions of officers, in the first episode there is an incredibly funny moment on a training exercise involving Luz.

What makes this series stand apart from a lot of other war films or series is that at the start of every episode there would be interviews with surviving members of the real Easy Company, I think that these short interviews help to build up the realism and they help us to connect with the characters in the series, you can't help but feel something when you see these old men remembering their lost friends and almost crying just because of their memories. It helps to add an emotional connection between the viewer and the series as you are seeing how these events affected these men and when you see something that was talked about in one of the interviews it makes a bigger impact.

To sum up, if you are a fan of war movies and haven't seen this then it should go to the top of your list of things to watch. From a film maker's stand point this is a how to manual on creating the perfect war story. --[[User:Cool-breeze|cool-breeze]] 07:34, 3 March 2012 (CST)
:Too many words, but +1 to 5 star rating and last sentence.--[[User:Crazycrankle|Crazycrankle]] ([[User talk:Crazycrankle|talk]]) 00:27, 17 October 2013 (EDT)

== M1917? ==

Anybody else think this rifle ID'd as an M1917 is just the same Springfield M1903 that is used used at other points in "Carentan"?
[[File:P17BOB.jpg|none|thumb|602px|The far right soldier in front of Smokey's Browning M1919 is seen with a P17 slung over his back.]]
[[File:BoBEp3_03CU.jpg|none|thumb|600px|Closeup.]]
The front sight looks more like an M1903 than and M1917 to me, plus it is more likely that it will be a rifle that appears in other scenes rather than just randomly something else. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] ([[User talk:Commando552|talk]]) 20:17, 3 September 2014 (EDT)

The original one I posted, while blurry, seems to show that it shows the P17's iron sights better, you can tell there are opened holes in the front sight, something none of the Springfield rifles had, plus on close examination, the rifle has a longer exposed barrel than the Springfield. It's barely noticable, but, zoom in on both pictures to see ----[[User:Bosoxboy521|Bosoxboy521]] ([[User talk:Bosoxboy521|talk]]) 22:27, 3 September 2014 (EDT)

: I added a closeup shot. Is it possible it's a SMLE? It would seem more likely since that rifle was seen later in the episode. --[[User:Ben41|Ben41]] ([[User talk:Ben41|talk]]) 03:44, 4 September 2014 (EDT)
::No, the barrel band is wrong for a No.4 Mk.1 and the sight would be farther back right up against the cap. From the general design of the barrel band, it is either (and I'm just narrowing down to the more likely possibilities here) an M1903 or an M1917:[[File:M1917enfield.jpg|thumb|500px|none|M1917]][[File:Springfield03A3.jpg|thumb|500px|none|M1903A3]]The only parts that are visible really are the front sight and the barrel band, so these are the only parts I will talk about. On the M1917, the front and rear of the front sight are vertical and parallel. On the show gun the front is vertical, but the back has a general sort of sloped profile to it, suggesting that it is an M1903A3. As for the barrel band, on the top of it there is a distinct step at the back which is more indicative of the M1903A3 one. Also, if you look at the bottom edge you will see that there are two distinct parts to the bayonet lug and there is a sling swivel behind it (directly under the stepped portion at the back) making it a match for the M1903A3. I don't know if this secondary part to the bayonet lug is actually anything to with the bayonet, but whatever it is, it is indicative not only of an M1903A3 over and M1917, but also over an original M1903. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] ([[User talk:Commando552|talk]]) 05:04, 4 September 2014 (EDT)

My apologies, I looked back and it is an M1903A3. In fact, Alton Moore carries it in Carentan, but drops it to help Smokey feed the gun and switches over to an M1 Garand with a rifle grenade --[[User:Bosoxboy521|Bosoxboy521]] ([[User talk:Bosoxboy521|talk]]) 16:22, 4 September 2014 (EDT)

==More Weapons Needed==
Someone needs to add the 105 Gebirgshaubitze cannons from Brecourt Manor and the 88mm cannons from Foy to the German Heavy Weapons section. I would, however, I am not too sure how to upload photos on this site. It seems very difficult. If someone knows how, please tell me how.
:On the left, you should see "Upload file" under toolbox. Select the source file at top (or you can click and drag) and add the appropriate tags below it. Then click "Upload file". --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] ([[User talk:Funkychinaman|talk]]) 21:01, 18 April 2015 (EDT)

==Black B.A.R==
In the episode, "The Last Patrol" I believe Sgt. Martin hands off a black painted B.A.R to a soldier as he walks into a room. That same soldier (the one who received the B.A.R) is also one of the men who's boat flips over. On Martin's actor's page it is listed that he used/held a B.A.R but we do not have a picture of this. [[User:Majorcamo|Majorcamo]] ([[User talk:Majorcamo|talk]]) 20:44, 13 June 2015 (EDT)

== Vehicle Section ==
Is there anyone who could upload some pictures of the tanks and such as some of them are really unique i.e the Jagdpanther, Stugs, ands Marders. [[User:Majorcamo|Majorcamo]] ([[User talk:Majorcamo|talk]]) 22:17, 19 August 2015 (EDT)
:There's a [http://www.imcdb.org/movie_185906-Band-of-Brothers.html site] for that. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] ([[User talk:Funkychinaman|talk]]) 00:08, 20 August 2015 (EDT)

== New Service revolver ==

The revolver sent from home that's still described as a New Service is a small-framed Colt, probably a Police Positive. The New Service is a really big gun, and the trooper has his hand wrapped almost completely around the frame. Even if the gun's small size is not enough, the shape of the frame forward of the trigger guard is not New Service.

:First, mark your posts RickB, second I don't think it's a Police Positive. Yes, the New Service is a pretty big revolver, but it's not impossible for it to be that size. The barrel seems to be too big to be a standard Police Positive caliber. What I guess is that the revolver is a Colt New Service in .38 Special, much easier to get for a US GI going into Europe, and a lot easier than a Police Positive in .38 S&W. -- [[User:PaperCake|PaperCake]] 14:11, 2 February 2016 (EST)

Sorry, I don't know what you mean by "mark my posts"? If you watch episode three, in the scene where Talbert is bayoneted, he's using the revolver to rap on a sleeping trooper's helmet, and you can see that the inside of the trigger guard is oval; the New Service trigger guard isn't oval on the inside. That, and, again, it's not big enough to be a New Service. Not trying to be difficult, but am interested in the info being correct.

== German Heavy Weapons ==

I got some screencaps of the Gebirgshaubitze and the Flak 88 that I would add to the page. Can anyone identify the type of the Flak 88 canon (Flak 36 or 37?)--[[User:HighPhigh|HighPhigh]] ([[User talk:HighPhigh|talk]]) 07:35, 7 February 2016 (EST)

===10.5 cm Gebirgshaubitze 40===
In "Day of Days" (Ep.2), four 10.5 cm Gebirgshaubitze 40 Howitzers are in the German artillery position at Brecourt Manor.
[[Image:BOB_gebirgs1.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The first Gebirgshaubitze captured by Easy Company.]]
[[Image:BOB_gebirgs2.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Destroyed Gebirgshaubitze.]]

===8,8 cm Flak===
German soldiers defending the town of Foy with various 8,8 cm Flak canons in "The Breaking Point" (Ep.7).
[[Image:BOB_flak881.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The Flak before fired by the Germans.]]
[[Image:BOB_flak882.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Firing the canon.]]
[[Image:BOB_flak883.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Closer shot of the canon.]]
[[Image:BOB_flak884.jpg|thumb|none|600px|A total view of the flak as the German sniper opens fire.]]

Talk:Patton

2016-02-09T06:53:44Z

RickB: /* Tank trivia */ new section

=Extra Info=
== Patton's guns and the actual hero guns from ''Patton'' ==
[[Image:Pattoncoltright.JPG|thumb|none|350px|Colt Single Action Army w/ 4.75" barrel, custom engravings, and ivory grips as carried by the real Gen. Patton - .45 Long Colt]]

I've been to the Patton museum and seen these handguns. It's a great museum if you ever get the chance.
All photographs below courtesy of the Patton Museum of Cavalry and Armor, Fort Knox, KY.--[[User:Jcordell|Jcordell]] 00:59, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

[[Image:Holster 02.jpg|thumb|350px|none| General Patton's sidearms and his actual leather gear]]
[[Image:PattonPistol 02.jpg|thumb|none|350px| the top revolver is the prop from the movie. The bottom one is Patton's]]
[[Image:PattonPistol 03.jpg|thumb|none|350px| the top is Patton's registered magnum and the bottom is the hero gun.]]

:- Awesome stuff, Jcordell - Thanks for sharing! [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 17:25, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Glad you liked it. A little more info. The Colt Single Action is serial number 332088. It was manufactured in 1916 and purchased by Patton that same year. I believe it was a special order by him.

The S&W .357 Registerd Magnum was purchased by Patton in 1935 when he was stationed in Hawaii. The .357 Registerd Magnum was strictly customer order only and would have been very expensive for 1935. So that revolver was made strictly for him and all the features (trigger adapter, patridge front sight,3.5" barrel)were what he ordered. The Registered Magnum model was introduced in 1935 which makes Patton's probably one of the first ones made. Patton was actually very well off and sometimes irritated his fellow officers with his luxurious lifestyle. Especially during the depression when money was so tight for many. To include the U.S. Army. --[[User:Jcordell|Jcordell]] 00:17, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Patton actually bought his Colt Single Action Army when he was serving under General John "Black Jack" Pershing and first used it in the pursuit of Pancho Villa. Patton killed three of Villa's men and brought them back to Pershing. Pershing dubbed Patton his "Little Bandito".[[User:GaBoy45|GaBoy45]] 16:48, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

=Discussion=
==Moved From Main Page==

''Correction: this was not a 27, it was a Registered Magnum==''
''The Model 27 did not exist until 1959. Prior to WW2 the pistol was named "The Registered Magnum".''

''The Smith & Wesson Patton carried wasn't yet called the Model 27. They were known as Registered Magnums, the first of the 357s and special order. I'm not sure about the one in the movie, but notice the hammer difference in the movie picture. Patton I believe called his Registered Magnum his "killing gun."''

: For the record I think we know the gun is a "Registered Magnum", but I think it was noted under 'Model 27' since all the RM is is an early variant of it, and the Model 27 made it easier to list and categorize (We do the same for M&P revolvers, which are merely early Model 10s). ''That said'', we do still note early M&P guns as M&P in the articles so perhaps we should note the gun as 'Registered Magnum' here, which is what I've done. However, I should note that is not appropriate to correct the entry solely because it fits the time-line on a film/media that takes place in the past, as movies often use newer (often anachronistic) guns to take their place as long as they're similar, there are many examples. In this case, the above picture of the movie gun looks like an actual RM so the commenters are correct in this case. Still, you can't assume they HAVE to use a certain gun because of the film's setting. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 16:01, 29 July 2011 (CDT)

Very true. The guns are still at the museum by the way even though the armor school as moved to Fort Benning down in Georgia. Doesn't seem riht to move the armor school to the home of the infantry, but there it is. --[[User:Jcordell|Jcordell]] ([[User talk:Jcordell|talk]]) 15:22, 4 September 2014 (EDT)

== M14? ==

According to IMDb, one of the soldiers in the congestion has an M14. Can anyone confirm this? I think the picture is on this page.

''At 2:08:46 in the movie, during the congestion at a crossroads there is a close up of the chaos. A soldier with rolled up sleeves can be seen standing on the hood and fender of a Command Car number 378(?)554 holding what appears to be an M14 Rifle. This weapon is a modified M1 Garand, and is visibly similar to the M1 Carbine used in WWII except that it is bulkier, the sling is attached to the bottom of the butt with a swivel, and the magazine is larger than that of the M1 Carbine due to the longer ammunition it uses. The M14 came into use in the 1957, and not during WWII.''

: Here's some stills. --[[User:Ben41|Ben41]] 19:55, 20 March 2012 (CDT)
[[File:Patton 1305.jpg|thumb|none|800px|The soldier on the far left.]]
[[File:Patton 1306.jpg|thumb|none|800px|Another still.]]

:: As far as I can tell, the soldier on the hood is just carrying a Garand. The article currently says the soldier far-left is carrying a Beretta BM59, but I don't see that either. His rifle clearly has the side-mounted sling of an M1 Carbine, and lacks the characteristic tilted-forward magazine of both the M14 and BM59. From the pictures here, I honestly have my doubts about this scene. I'd have to watch the movie again to be sure, though. [[User:RedXIV|RedXIV]] 05:58, 31 May 2012 (CDT)

== Proper weapon placement ==

Why is the MAS-36 under the submachine gun category when it is clearly a rifle? Please move.

== Plane ==

since when does a bomber plane do a strafe mission (i also think these are spanish planes taken from their airforce like battle of britian did)[[user:ModWeaponChecker]]

:Pretty much all of the non-CGI ME-109s and HE-111s in post war movies were Spanish Air Force planes. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 10:05, 4 April 2012 (CDT)

== Patton pulls his S&W to clear some mules ==

The pic clearly shows the SAA being pulled. I've seen the movie many times since 1970, and I don't think the magnum is ever shown outside the holster?

== Flamethrower scene reused by Ralp Bakshi ==

The scene of the German soldier using a flamethrower on an American halftrack was used as "stock footage" in Ralph Bakshi's film ''Wizards'', along with real wartime footage. Should we note this on the page? --[[User:Maxman|Maxman]] ([[User talk:Maxman|talk]]) 20:33, 12 May 2014 (EDT)
:''Wizards'' borrowed a lot from many movies. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] ([[User talk:Funkychinaman|talk]]) 00:44, 13 May 2014 (EDT)
::So should we make a note of it? --[[User:Maxman|Maxman]] ([[User talk:Maxman|talk]]) 02:17, 23 May 2014 (EDT)

== Tank trivia ==

The last photo of U.S.-marked tanks, identified as Walker Bulldogs, appear to be the same M48s, here painted green, that were used to simulate German Panzers. The M41 has five bogey wheels, while the M48 has six.

Talk:Band of Brothers

2016-02-02T18:53:44Z

RickB: /* New Service revolver */ new section

Talk:The X-Files - Season 7

2016-01-18T04:12:55Z

RickB: /* Bang-flag gun */ new section

__TOC__<br clear="all">

=Additional Images=
[[Image:XF-S7E01-AKM-4HD.jpg|thumb|none|600px|"The Sixth Extinction" (S7E01).]]
[[Image:XF-S7E18-SIGP226-1A.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Assistant Director Walter Skinner ([[Mitch Pileggi]]) enters a room with a SIG P226 in "Brand X" (S7E18). Another agent in the background also appears to wield a P226.]]

== Bang-flag gun ==

The caption says the gun does not have the "underbarrel lug" characteristic of single action revolvers, but the ejector rod housing
(correct name for the part) is clearly present, as the finger-piece of the ejector rod, and the screw that attaches the housing to the barrel are both clearly visible.

Talk:The X-Files - Season 1

2016-01-17T17:16:03Z

RickB: /* Rifles identified as Remington 700s */ new section

__TOC__<br clear="all">

=Discussion=
==Unknown Pistol==

[[File:XF-S1E16-StainlessPistol.jpg|thumb|none|500px|A stainless semiauto pistol is seen carried (in the right hand) by Deep Throat here in "E.B.E." (S1E16). Sadly there is no better showing of the gun. In his left hand is Mulder's Glock 19.]]

Pretty sure this is a [[Ruger P89|Ruger KP89]], because that's what he is later seen carrying during a flashback in Season 4. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] ([[User talk:MT2008|talk]]) 17:55, 26 July 2014 (EDT)
: Well, I normally wouldn't like going by a flashback, as those aren't always accurate or reliable in terms of listing for other episodes/seasons - That said, at least it's something, and I really see no reason to not go with that ID, it does look like a Ruger as much as anything else, barring a more positive ID, seems a reasonable enough guess actually. I'll change that section in due course. Thanks BTW for the help on the Beretta blank-gun entry - I had thought it might be something of that sort but wasn't sure, so thanks for that. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan|talk]]) 16:05, 4 August 2014 (EDT)
:: Update - Thanks to the HD image provided by Ben, the gun appears to have a stainless trigger guard, which the Ruger doesn't have. Ben suggested a [[Smith & Wesson 5906]], which, given the general look of what we can see, included the squared trigger guard, I'm inclined to agree with. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan|talk]]) 22:13, 18 August 2014 (EDT)

==Tranquilliser Rifle==
I'm fairly sure this isn't the Anschtuz, as from the front view you can see what appears to be the chamber for a CO2 cartridge. My guess si that it is a Palmer Cap-Chur Long Range Projector, as this has the tube under the barrel for the CO2 cartridges, there is that nob a couple of inches in front of the trigger guard, and what appears to be a pair of bolt handles (not sure why it has two, I think the bottom one might be something to do with piercing the CO2 cartridges to charge the rifle, or possibly the bottom one is for cocking whilst the top is simply for loading a dart). The square end to front of the stock is also seen on some Palmer rifles, not so much the current stock image but it looks like a match for this one:[[Image:Palmer Cap Chur Long Range Projector.jpg|thumb|500px|none|]]For comparison:[[File:XF-S1E04-TranqRifle-1.jpg|thumb|600px|none|]]--[[User:Commando552|commando552]] ([[User talk:Commando552|talk]]) 18:36, 21 August 2014 (EDT)

==S&W 5904==
Looking at it now (especially with Ben's somewhat better images), it doesn't seem to have the frame bulge of the hi-cap 5904. Given that we have just figured out the 5904 in [[The_X-Files_-_Season_2#Smith_.26_Wesson_3904|Season 2]] is actually a 3904, could this also be a 3904 (possibly even the same gun)? [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan|talk]]) 14:30, 22 August 2014 (EDT)

:I agree, it looks this is the same 3904 seen in Season 2. Can't tell for sure, but it would make sense. Anyone know what a 3904 mag looks like? That would be one way to tell, because his fingers are covering up the frame and making it hard to tell whether it's a single- or double-stack frame. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] ([[User talk:MT2008|talk]]) 13:38, 25 August 2014 (EDT)

:: The first image doesn't show the frame bulge, however it is a bit blurry. That said, in the second image, neither the grip nor the mag looks fat enough, the mag especially doesn't seem wide enough to be a double-stack mag, and I would assume the 3904 uses a single-stack. Wouldn't swear to that though. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan|talk]]) 21:57, 25 August 2014 (EDT)

:::Well, I suppose that is enough evidence to label it a 3904. Alternately, we could use the heading "Smith & Wesson 3904/5904" and explain our confusion. I watched this episode on Netflix, and unfortunately, the gun is never shown clearly enough to make a definite ID through visual evidence alone. But this is a case where common sense can be our guide. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] ([[User talk:MT2008|talk]]) 22:57, 25 August 2014 (EDT)

::::Almost certain that is the same 3904, the mag looks like a skinny single stack which is correct, and am pretty sure it doesn't have the double stack frame. If the image was a bit brighter you would be able to tell for sure, as the double stack 5906/5904 mags have an indent on each side at the bottom of the magazines to keep the compressed spring centred in the wider body, which is not necessary on the narrower 3906/3904 mags. I cant find a pic of a 3904 magazine, but if you google a 909 magazine it is the same, but is blued and lacks the hole for the 9th round (they are exactly the same size, S&W had just realised by this point that a 9th would fit in). --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] ([[User talk:Commando552|talk]]) 05:37, 26 August 2014 (EDT)
::::: Since such a weapon is in Season 2 and that is a given, I think that, combined with what evidence we do have here seems to support this ID and we all seem to be in agreement. I'm gonna go ahead and change the listing to a 3904. That said, that makes two appearances of this gun (granted they're both in the same show, but still), plus the possible appearances stated on the S2 talk page. I'm sure that an actual gun page/listing is being worked on but for the time being I'm also gonna post up that 3904 image somewhere in the S&W stuff (probably on the S&W main page's talk page, where there are several images of other guns without actual gun pages for them). [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan|talk]]) 12:42, 26 August 2014 (EDT)
::::::I've moved the 3913 page to a 3900 pistol series page and have put it there. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] ([[User talk:Commando552|talk]]) 13:08, 26 August 2014 (EDT)

== Rifles identified as Remington 700s ==

I don't think either of those bolt action rifles is a Remington. They both look like Mauser actions, and neither rifle has the 700's characteristic contrasting forearm tip with vertical joint; the upper rifle doesn't appear to have a contrasting tip, and the lower rifle's tip is joined to the forend at a sharp angle. I think they're both sporterized Mauser 98s.

Talk:Saving Private Ryan

2015-12-04T18:54:28Z

RickB: /* M1 Garand */

\/ Why are these here? Explosives aren't talk page only last I checked, I thought that was just knives and suchlike. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 09:12, 20 April 2011 (CDT)

==Explosives==

=== Sticky Bomb ===

While planning the defense of Ramelle, Captain Miller comes up with a improvised explosive device he calls a "sticky bomb". It consists of a sock filled with Composition-B explosive with a fuse attached and covered in grease so it sticks where it's placed. Deploying it is a hazardous proposition though; as one soldier is killed when the fuse runs out while he is trying to place it on one of the German tanks, though the bombs do succeed in immobilizing one Tiger tank by destroying its treads. The improvised explosive is apparently inspired by the actual "sticky bomb", the short-lived British No. 74 ST Grenade, which used a purpose-designed super strong resin adhesive instead of axle grease, which was tested and found to be insufficiently sticky. The sticky bomb also had several other problems, not the least of which was a habit of sticking to the soldier using it.

[[Image:SPRStickybomb-1.jpg|thumb|none|600px|A paratrooper lights a sticky bomb with his Zippo but take too long to attach it and...]]
[[Image:SPRStickybomb-2.jpg|thumb|none|600px|...ends up getting blown up by his own sticky bomb.]]
[[Image:SPRStickybomb-3.jpg|thumb|none|600px|These two paratroopers fare better and take out a Tiger tank's treads with two of these sticky bombs and render it immobile.]]

=== Mk-II No. 75 Hawkins Grenade/Mine ===
Prior to the climactic battle Cpl. Henderson relays to Cpt. Miller that their arsenal of "spitwads" includes Hawkins mines. Later a 101st Airborne soldier is seen placing one on the main street and camouflaging it.
[[Image:Hawkinsmine.JPG|thumb|none|400px|Although manufactured as a grenade the Mk-II No.75 Hawkins Grenade was utilized more efficiently as an anti-tank/vehicle mine. Partly because its shape and weight made accurate throwing difficult.]]
[[Image:SPRMKII75-1.jpg|thumb|none|600px|A paratrooper brings over a helmet full of Mk-II No. 75 grenade mines to set up on the road.]]
[[Image:SPRMkII75-2.jpg|thumb|none|600px|A paratrooper readies the No. 75 mines detonator by wrapping the arming fuse.]]
[[Image:SPRMkII75-3.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The paratrooper detonates the No. 75 mines....]]
[[Image:SPRMkII75-4.jpg|thumb|none|600px|...which devastates the German infantry. (Even though the explosion is clearly hidden debris jets.)]]
[[Image:SPRMkII75-5.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Cpt. Miller readies the No. 75 mines detonator when they fall back to "The Alamo".]]
[[Image:SPRMkII75-6.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Cpt. Miller looks over at the detonator before trying to retrieve it. Captain Miller is fatally wounded before he can reach it.]]

I hope everyone likes the completed SPR page. - GM

===M1 Garand===
Some comments in the article are made about soldiers holding their M1 rifles with one hand. The comments say that the weapons shown are replicas due to their obvious light weight. While I've never held an M1, I have held an M14 with one hand. It is not difficult to hold such a weapon with one hand, especially for brief periods. [[User:Axeman|Axeman]] 22:10, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

:An M14 is maybe a pound or two lighter (less wood and a little smaller) but Garands are bulky and heavy. They may have been accurate and reliable but they were very cumbersome. For maybe a few seconds you can hold an M1 with one hand but it is terribly uncomfortable and definitely not how someone would hold a Garand comfortably when not reading it. Plus many of those soldiers hold the gun with one hand at an forward tilted angle, which would cause quite some strain on the wrist. (I repeated everything they did with their Garands in the movie and most of it is not that easy) And what I mean to say by lightweigh replicas is that it is likely the extras were using resin replicas that were nice and light but even the main characters had lighter rifles, they were considerably gutted in heavy spots to make them easier to carry. -[[User:Gunmaster45|GM45]]

::Something else I realized he said that is bullshit; 'An m14 is maybe a pound or two lighter'. A GI M14 weighs ~2 pounds more than an M1 garand. It is EASIER to hold an M1 than an M14. M1s are lighter due to being SHORTER and having a much smaller magazine (8 rounds of 30 caliber ammo versus 10-20 rounds of 30 caliber ammo). GM, it appears you have no fucking clue what you're talking about, and I really question if you ever held either of the firearms in question. --[[User:Asmkillr323|Asmkillr323]] 16:51, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

::An M1 Garand weighs less than 10 pounds. It is not hard to hold 10 pounds in one hand, and if you really think its some sort of feat of strength, you need to go to a gym. --[[User:Asmkillr323|Asmkillr323]] 13:34, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
:::Was about to say the same. But if you're happen to be that weak, you should carry something like M1 carbine or a Grease gun. Or sit and fill the blanks in HQ.

Holding the thumb to the offside, as shown in the illustration of Upham firing his Garand, is actually the "proper" way to hold the rifle to AVOID getting hit in the nose by one's own thumb in recoil. While the gas operation of the Garand somewhat tames the recoil impulse, there's still plenty. Also, the stock and upper handguard will protect the hand from being pinched by the reciprocating operating rod, as long as the finger tips are not actually stuck in the gap between the two parts of the stock. Upham shows good form, for a guy who appeared to have no prior experience as a rifleman.

Okay I'll be contentious just for the heck of it. I would argue that in combat with adrenalin blasting through your body you might just be able to hold the M1 Garand with one hand for awhile. Not only would you be having a temporary increase in strength but you probably wouldn't notice the discomfort for awhile. Adrenalin is a weird thing. Many stories from wars of soldiers getting shot and not even realizing it until minutes after the fact.Just thought I would put that at there. --[[User:Jcordell|Jcordell]] 23:05, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

I have to agree that it's not that far fetched to hold an M1 Garand one handed. I own a Mossberg 500 with a 28" barrel and a Mosin Nagant 91/30. The Mossberg is about 7.5lbs and I do one hand hold reloads, holding the shotgun on target. The Mosin is 8 1/2 lbs and I have no trouble holding it one handed. I'm not a trained soldier, nor a weight lifter. But, it seems to me that a trained soldier should have no problem lifting one more pound than I can.

::Actually, the M1 Garand is about 9 to 11 pounds and the M14 is 11.5 pounds. - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 16:47, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
:::While this discussion is relatively dead now, my point at the time was that it's not comfortable to carry the weapon like that. It's not impossible, but the weight is enough that carrying it like that (especially at enough of an angle that the front end would direct the weight forward, giving the wrist more work) would be uncomfortable. That was my reason to assume that some of the rifles were lighter weight props (seeing as some of these are for sale, they were present for filming along with the firing props). As for the M14 info, I fucked up there. It's not hard to correct someone without being a dick about it. Grow up. - [[User:Gunmaster45|Gunmaster45]]

I can carry my Grandfather's M1 with one hand no problem. But then again I'm a pretty big guy. Everybody be friends. --[[User:Ardtanker14|ardtanker14]] 16:17, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Remember, too, that the typical WWII G.I. was about 5'9", 150-160 pounds, or about the size of an American woman today. I'm 6'4", 240, and absolutely cannot easily hold/carry a Garand by gripping it with one hand at the pistol grip. Anyone who did hold the gun like that would carry it with the muzzle up to relieve the strain on the wrist, not horizontally as repeatedly shown in the movie; it's not so much the total weight, as it is having 90% forward of the gripped area. The Garand and M14 are close enough to being the same weight that it wouldn't matter.

==Guy Blowing Up==
Do we rely need a picture of a guy getting blown up? Frankly, I think it's disgusting and unnecessary. There's really no point, IMO, to have the picture on here. I know we censor nudity (''The Whole Nine Yards'', for example and I think extremely gory images should go or, if image has a nice shot of the gun, possibly cover the gore with a blck box. Seriously, there's no need for a gratuitous shot of a guy blowing up here. --[[User:Mandolin|Mandolin]] 02:04, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

- I would say you're being a bit prudish personally (A guy gets blown up and that's sick but all the other images of blood-spraying bullet hits are ok?), but your comment has merit. If the dude got blown up but the image had a good shot of a firearm, that would be one thing I guess, but the point stands that that particular image is indeed unnecessary in terms of the informational value of it's section. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 02:37, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Prude? if the picture wasn't this:
[[Image:SPRStickybomb-2.jpg|thumb|none|600px|...ends up like this.]]
I'd agree with you, but the picture is a bit extreme--[[User:Mandolin|Mandolin]] 03:11, 8 September 2010 (UTC).

: I'm not saying it isn't. Guess I'm just not as disgusted, I don't know. But it is gruesome, and it is unneeded. I don't agree the content itself warrants removal, but that, plus it's lack of informational contribution does. Graphic detail aside, the guy getting blown up doesn't help the section, in terms of describing the weapon. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 03:25, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

:Actually yes it is informative, it shows what happens if you hold the weapon for too long with a lit fuse.[[User:Kornflakes89|Kornflakes89]] 03:11, 12 April 2011 (CDT)

[[Image:SPR-stickybombcensored.jpg|thumb|none|600px|...ends up getting blown up.]]
Here's a censored one. Noticed that I removed the meat chunks flying around. - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 03:40, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

== B.A.R. pronouncing ==

I'm still trying to understand why some particular gun people would rather spell the acryomn B-A-R, instead of just calling it "BAR". It's abbrieviated like a word that anyone recognize. I don't see why some gun nuts find it semi offensive when someone doesn't "pronounce" it right. It's like if ppl started calling NATO "N.A.T.O." cause it stands for something instead of just one flowing "word" NATO, or NORAD by each letter. I just don't get it [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 16:37, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
:It's just how it is. Everyone called it a B.A.R. and Bar just doesn't sound profesional. Personally I find it annoying when people call an A.C.O.G. an Acog, although this is okayed by most people so it's just a pet peeve of mine. - [[User:Gunmaster45|Gunmaster45]]

Wow you can see the decimal points and dashes in a "pronunciation" of a word" ?? You sir are gifted.

Maybe cos 'bar' is a word and people could think you're refering to a pub or a metal rod, whereas NATO, NORAD and ACOG etc. aren't similar to real words.

How it's pronounced is irrelevant. The site wants to appear professional, so it's best to properly punctuate the abbreviation. [[User:Acora|Acora]] 04:06, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

I like to go back on this and ask, why not pronounce the acronym as it is? It is really so wrong? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 15:36, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
:Again, because it's not the way it was done. It's an old weapon. Someone back in the twenties decided to spell it out. It may not make sense, but that's the way it is, and we shouldn't change it. Now, if you want to change the way we pronounce a modern weapon like the HK UMP, and just start calling it "ump," then go ahead. As a social experiment, I'd truly like to see how far it goes. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 15:53, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
::BTW, I've heard some of the kids I played WaW with refer to the BAR as a bar (rhymes with car.) These are the same kids who refer to the G43 as the gew-er (rhymes with sewer.) Do the kids playing MW2 refer to the UMP as an ump (rhymes with hump?) --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 19:09, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

That just show you that unless your homeschooled in this day and era (like me) or just pretty damn smart (like me), you turn into a damn moron. Kids have become so damn stupid that they think Karabiner sounds like car with an a at the end and beaner. - [[User:Kilgore|Kilgore]] 20:05, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Internet Argument Phenomena #37 - In 97% of observed cases, when attacking their opponent's spelling, grammar or punctuation, participants in bitchy Internet Arguments will make a blunder of their own. Cause is undetermined, but is suspected to be related to excessive smugness which leads to a lack of care in checking for mistaked.
Observations continue. [[User:Stickie|Stickie]] ([[User talk:Stickie|talk]]) 08:26, 15 March 2013 (EDT)

==Thompson Submachine Gun==
The nickname "Tommy Gun" is derived from either it's use by British troops ("Tommies") early in WWII, or is a reference John T. Thompson, who inspired its development.
The M1 and M1A1 were both easier and cheaper to make successors to the earlier M1928 model. The most obvious difference between the earlier M1928 and the two later models was the bolt cocking handle being moved to the side of the later models - it was on top on earlier Thompson versions - and the most obvious visible difference between the M1 and the M1A1 was the protective "ears" around the rear sight of the latter. Late-production M1928s and M1s had just an L-shaped piece of sheetmetal, with the peep sight drilled through it, welded to the top of the receiver.
::Um thanks, but why? We all know this information.... [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 18:45, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Then why is differing or contrary information still on the site? Attention is specifically drawn to Upham's holding his Garand with his thumb off to the side, with the comment that it would cause the very problem that holding the rifle that way will prevent. As you can see in the pic of Vin Diesel, wrapping the thumb around the pistol grip is the way to get a big rap on the nose from your own thumb.
My comments about the Thompson (other than the Tommy Gun reference, which wasn't really specific to anything), is that the currently posted information says the M1A1 replaced the more expensive/complicated M1, when the M1 was actually the first of the "cheap" Thompsons, with the M1A1 being merely the definitive cheap Thompson. The Blish lock deletion, side cocking knob, fixed sight, smooth barrel, and other mods were already present on the M1.
::Then FIX it. I'm sure there are tons of little mistakes all over IMFDB and we can't catch them all. And users are supposed to catch mistakes when they see them. Sure, sometimes there will be 'contention' regarding an edit, but it it's an obvious mistake, then no one will complain. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 22:47, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

== M2 Mortar ==

I think the opinion on which end of the mortar shell to bang is incorrect. If the mortar shells are time fused (for airburst) the impact on the tail would simulate the high g-forces experienced when firing the shell from the tube. The time element would start burning/turning and then detonate later. If the shells are impact detonated the tail tap would arm the impact fuzing, the next shock would be the shell coming back to earth.

You are correct , mortar roundsare armed when they drop to the bottom of the mortar tube at the instant of firing. The movie is correct, the caption under the pic is wrong. Hitting the nose of the mortar against the base plate as the caption suggest would either do nothing if the fuse is not armed or would cause it to detonate in the guys hand.

Hitting the tail of any mortar will not arm it, it doesn't function by just applying force. The tail section would need a typical pin ignition, there's a spike in the tube that does this. It's a relatively simple concept. [[User:Thursday|Thursday]] ([[User talk:Thursday|talk]]) 04:23, 21 June 2013 (EDT)

:The firing pin strikes the tail of the mortar which initiates the propellant charge, it doesn't directly do anything to arm the impact fuse on the warhead. The fuse in mortars like this was armed by setback, which is where a part within the fuse is forced relatively backwards due to inertia when it is launched, hence why striking it hard on a plate can simulate this. In fact I would agree with what the above comment says (unless someone knows something I don't about how this fuse specifically works), in that it is not incorrect that they are striking the base rather than the nose against a hard surface, as this is what would simulate a launch and cause the required setback. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] ([[User talk:Commando552|talk]]) 19:33, 21 June 2013 (EDT)

== Scope differnces ==

by the looks of things jackson uses three different scopes in some of the pics, i the scene where he is adjusting his scope for windage the scope clearly has a wider front end , in the stand-off scene where wall colapases he is using one the has a wider back end and a completely round front, and in the bell tower the scope has two vertical bars sticking out of the rifle which arent present in the previous scenes

A big problem I see is the caption under the unertl scope states he s twisting the front objective to adjust the elevation . The front objective is adjustable but just like all other scopes with adjustable objective all he is doing is adjusting the parallax. This adjustment keeps the cross hairs from apearing as if there floating around by properly focusing the scope for the range its being used at. Just because there are distance markings on the part he is turning it has nothing to do with elevation. You can clearly see the elevation and windage knobs, which he does adjust at one point , on the top and side of the rear scope mount.

As far as bullet impact and crosshair relationship at the moment of impact for the bullet, of course they dont match , forgetting the fact that its a movie we're talking about the simple fact that it take some length of time between when the shot is fired and the bullet impacts makes this a reality and historicly accurate. Simply put when you pull the trigger on any gun there is a delay before the bullet impacts your target , during this time the gun has begun to recoil, muscles contarct etc and the sights will not be pointed at the same object as they were at the moment of firing, simple physics. [panaceabeachbum]
==Prop Guns==
I almost bought a prop gun used in this movie from a guy with around 20-30 of them at a gun show about 7 years ago-[[User:S&Wshooter|S&Wshooter]] 04:21, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

:I'd say none but MPM can be MPM, but we could always use more screen-used guns.-protoAuthor

==Inaccuracy==
:My teacher showed us the begining of this movie in History when we started our '''WW1''' unit! You would think that a US history teacher would know that D-Day didn't occur in WW1-[[User:S&Wshooter|S&Wshooter]] 01:47, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Have you considered that your teacher was showing you that part of the movie becasue it demonstrates what is involved when the infantry does a frontal assault against troops that are in heavily fortified positions? He might not have been able to find a WWI movie that recreated a frontal assault as effectively. Just an idea. --[[User:Jcordell|Jcordell]] 23:53, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
:Back when I was in college, we watched the end of Gallipoli for a demonstration of WWI tactics. Paths of Glory and All Quiet on the Western Front would've worked too. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 10:52, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

My 7th grade history teacher was the dumbest bastard I've ever seen. He didn't even know the difference between World War I and World War II. He also called Vietnam Soldiers "Baby Killers". I got suspended later when I beat him up for saying that. Just show you that school teachers are stupid. - [[User:Kilgore|Kilgore]] 22:45, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

The mini-series '''ANZACS''', starring Paul Hogan, is also another good source of recreated WW1 battles. Don't watch the stripped down movie version. You have to watch the full mini-series (nearly 10 hours long) to appreciate the story and attention to period detail. Does ANZACS have it's own page? If not, it deserves one. It was one of the first war movies/series where strict attention to detail with regard to weapons, uniforms, tactics, vehicles, etc, was used. Also '''The Light Horsemen''' is a good example of the fighting in Palestine later in WW1. Other movies to consider are '''All The King's Men''' and '''Lawrence of Arabia'''.

==Helmet Throwing==
I watched this again for old times sake, and I had to laugh at the scene where Horvath and a German both have rifle jams, so what else could they do but pitch their helmets at each other and go for their sidearms? Unnecessary, but anything to stop your enemy from killing you I guess. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]
:I remember another movie, I think it was set in Vietnam, where a guy bludgeoned someone with his helmet. And Horvath only threw his because he was pissed the German threw his first. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 18:21, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
I think it was platoon when the soldier killed someone with his helmet[[Special:Contributions/71.59.54.184|71.59.54.184]] 19:35, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

We Were Soldiers had a character to beat NVA soldier to death with his helmet, when the stranded platoon was engaged in close quarters combat at night. --[[User:AlkoTanko|AlkoTanko]] 08:46, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

:Definitely We Were Soldiers, I don't even remember a part in Platoon where anyone uses a helmet as a weapon.[[User:Kornflakes89|Kornflakes89]] 03:25, 12 April 2011 (CDT)

Funkychinaman, the movie you're referring to is Hamburger Hill. --[User:BigD]] 17:30, 6, June 2011

==The Pacific==
Is The Pacific a spin off of this movie?
:Band of Brothers was sort of a spin off, in that in involved a lot of the production people. And those same people did the Pacific.--[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 18:21, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

::Funnily enough, SPR is the only one in this discussion NOT based entirely on real events.-protoAuthor 23:56, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

== Color Saturation ==

The movie itself has a purposeful 60% reduction in color saturation, giving it that bleached and washed out look, this is present in many of the screenshots, but some others have the regular color levels associated with some TV broadcasts of the film which are due to complaints about color problems from television owners unfamiliar with the look of the film. I was just wondering which color level is the preferred for this page?

I.E. :
This shot, with seemingly corrected color.
[[Image:SPRM1A1Thompson-Ben41s.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Cpt. Miller with his Thompson at the ready.]]
As opposed to this shot, from my copy of the movie, with the washed out bleached look.
[[Image:SPRcolortest.jpg|600px|thumb|none]]

--[[User:Toadvine|Toadvine]] 07:08, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Yes, but it is suppose to look desaturated and old. It was done to give it that look of old film style. Also, when you place a picture from this movie that is "corrected color", it just doesn't look right. - [[User:Kilgore|Kilgore]] 22:34, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
[[Image:20100616144428!SPRM1A1Thompson-3.jpg|600px|thumb|none|original pic]]
This was the original pic that Gunmaster uploaded, it has even more grain than yours, Toadvine. I'm not sure if Ben41 color corrected his new image or got it off Blu-Ray. --[[User:Predator20|Predator20]] 22:53, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

[[Image:SPRM1A1Thompson-3.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Current pic with decreased saturation.]]

I just think the "corrected" colors looks over colored. I think somebody should upload some pictures that are better colored then the actual movie colors, but are not over colored like Ben41's uploaded pics. I wish I had a DVD of Saving Private Ryan (I've got it on VHS) - [[User:Kilgore|Kilgore]] 18:50, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

::The Color saturated NEW PICS are TOO saturated. They even look more color saturated than other regular Modern Color movies (see the Ed Burns pic). This really makes the Screenshots look even LESS like the stylized look of the original FILM. I vote to keep 'some' color saturation' but DIAL IT BACK a bunch. Split the difference between the original Desaturated look and the new super saturated look. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 20:05, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Some of the movies Ben41 screencaps had a similar effect, too. I'll try to remove some of his pics and put it back to its original quality. - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 03:08, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Steven Spielberg make the color of his movies this way on purpose. Example: War of the Worlds has and unusual color to it to give the supernatural, extraterrestrial feeling. Schindlers List is Black and white so people get that dark, sad feeling to the movie.--[[User:Gunner5|Gunner5]]

==SS Got Issued More Lugers?==

I'm curious as to who posted the comment about pictorial evidence suggesting the SS got more Lugers than the Wehrmacht, and what your source is for that? The Wehrmacht controlled procurement, which put the SS at the bottom of the chain for new weapons, espescially in the beginning of the war. That's why they ended up with so much foreign equipment, like the ZB-26 LMG and the Radom and Hi Power pistols. Almost all of the German produced Radoms and Hi Powers went to the SS so I doubt very much they'd have more Lugers than the regular army. More pistols maybe, but because they were getting the non-German ones I doubt Lugers. - [[User:Nyles|Nyles]]

Remember that the army adopted the P38, so it makes sense to have older handguns in the SS. [[User:Markost|Markost]] 21:36, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
:The SS also got all the money from running the concentration camps, which included whatever money they can make from harvesting raw materials (by which I mean gold teeth, jewelry, hair, etc) and contracting out the labor. This allowed them to get a lot of stuff the army didn't get, or got later, like camo, because they actually owned or operated the factories. Small arms were probably included. I'm not saying whether or not the were or were not first in line to get Lugers, I'm just saying they probably could have if that's what they wanted. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 22:00, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

::In fact, non-standard weapons come mostly in the foreign SS units - Balkan, Baltic, Ukrainian, Russian, Belarussian and other entities in which the Germans were in the minority. German Waffen-SS units (1,2,3,5,9,10,17 SS Division) received a standard weapon, the same as the Wehrmacht.[[User:Flexo|Flexo]] 22:44, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

==Arming Mortars by Banging==
Is it really inaccurate that they are banging them on the base to arm them? The arming process occurs when the projectile is launched from the tube and the arming mechanism senses a sudden acceleration. Hitting the base should make the round think it was launched, and activate the detonation fuse in the nose which is sensitive to the sudden deceleration of impacting something. Banging it on the nose would provide a deceleration force, which would set it off if already armed, but in theory do nothing if it was still safed.[[Special:Contributions/207.98.198.136|207.98.198.136]] 02:33, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
:A (retired) USMC mortarman on a Mythbusters forum told me the method depicted is correct: Hitting the base arms them. The scene is not a goof. -- [[User:Maxman|Maxman]] ([[User talk:Maxman|talk]]) 00:43 06 November 2013 (EST)

== M1 Carbine ==
In the Neuville scene, I saw a paratrooper with a full stock M1 Carbine. I don't know how to screencap but it's at the part where Jackson is creeping around the car to get to a position to kill the sniper. The paratrooper is leaning against a wall. --[[User:Ardtanker14|ardtanker14]] 23:13, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Here you go: - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 13:53, 23 December 2011 (CST)
[[Image:SPR-M1CarbinePara.jpg|thumb|none|600px|A U.S. paratrooper taking cover behind a wall with his M1 Carbine during the sniper ambush. Note that it would be more accurate for this paratrooper to be seen with an M1A1 Carbine, a variant of the M1 Carbine that features a folding stock and is commonly issued to paratroopers.]]

== Fake Tigers ==

The Tigers in this movie are actually built on T-34/85s. You can tell in some shots because they don't have interleaved roadwheels and the turrets are too far forward (or rather the engine deck is too long compared to the rest of the tank), but they're ''very'' good fakes. The Marder III Ausf. H, Marder III Ausf. M, Shermans, M5 halftrack and Kettenkrad halftrack-motorcycle are all real. The Hanomag (Sd.Kfz.251 Ausf.D, the German halftrack) is a postwar Czech chassis with the roof cut off; it's missing the external hull stowage compartments of a real 251, and has all-steel treads with no rubber pads for travelling on road. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 04:47, 4 July 2011 (CDT)
:You Sir are correct. Too bad this is Guns in Movies and not Tanks in Movies ;) [[User:Dudster32|Dudster32]] 13:03, 29 August 2011 (CDT)
::We do military vehicle IDs as well, especially if they're one vehicle dressed as another. See [[Rambo III]], for example. Another little trivia note; the radar bunker seems to be a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mammut_radar Mammut], the world's first phased-array radar. Probably built for the production, I don't think any have been preserved and if they had I doubt they'd be willing to rip a hole in it for a movie. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 20:48, 27 September 2011 (CDT)

== M1 Garand mechanical mockup? Airsoft?==

Hey all! I've been wondering about the M1 Garand Mellish uses in one scene in the Normandy Invasion sequence. More specifically the scene featured in the photo below.
[[Image:SPR_303.jpg‎|thumb|none|250px|Mellish and Carparzo watching the entrance of a bunker.]]
When Mellish fires his Garand it looks odd. Specifically it looks like the bolt-handle moves very VERY slowly. When a real garand is fired the bolt-handle move so swiftly you can barely see it because its so fast.
Second: There is practically zero gunsmoke coming from the chamber. Even with blanks there should have been at least SOME smoke. There is also almost no recoil whatsoever.
So based on those observations I have to ask if Mellishes Garand in this scene was a sort of mechanical special effects weapon that, for safety issues due to the very short distance between the actors gun and the german extras, simulated a real gun: blast (maybe propane), brass ejection and bolt-handle movement.
[[User:Dudster32|Dudster32]] 07:01, 29 August 2011 (CDT)
:If it was a flashpaper Garand, would the bolt handle be moving at all? --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 09:05, 29 August 2011 (CDT)
::Well thats my point: If the bolt-handle didnt move because of a gunpowder explosion from a blank cartridge, then that blowback would have had to be mechanical or maybe pneumatical. [[User:Dudster32|Dudster32]] 09:45, 29 August 2011 (CDT)
:::[http://youtu.be/S3_zG7fsfsA?t=8m50s | Found it on Youtube.] Is it ejecting casings as well? Weird. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 10:02, 29 August 2011 (CDT)
::::Yeh exactly! There you can see how the bolt-handle moves extremely slow in comparison to live or even blank round firing. No gunsmoke or anything.
::::It wouldn't be impossible to build a mockup, but still mechanical weapon capable to display flash, bolt-movement and even casing-ejection, for safety reasons. Even if you are firing a blank at someone there is always a risk there might be some foreign material being propelled by the blanks gasses to such high velocity thus making a penetration on the person being fired at. Normally when firing blanks the actors fire away from the target as to minimize the risk. If this M1 garand is a mockup like I'm speculating then the risk would be extremely minimal and it would allow the actors to fire straight at their target, in this case two extras portraying german soldiers. [[User:Dudster32|Dudster32]] 12:59, 29 August 2011 (CDT)
::::So what do you veterans think? Is it a genuine M1 Garand in the scene displayed above? [[User:Dudster32|Dudster32]] 14:53, 30 August 2011 (CDT)

Guys! I stumbled upon a youtube vid showing a M1 Garand airsoft rifle: [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wE12jF2jjtE "Marushin M1 Garand Video Review - RedWolf Airsoft - RWTV "]
Note how it behaves like Mellishes M1 Garand in the movie, minus the case ejector and muzzle flash. [[User:Dudster32|Dudster32]] 09:39, 12 September 2011 (CDT)

== Faulty scope ==

Subsection "1.4.1 Faulty Scope" states the following: "During the bell tower sequence, Jackson's Unertl scope appears to be very off from where the bullets hit, likely because he didn't zero it when switching it with his other scope."

There's nothing in the film to suggest what the Jackson character did or didn't do to the scope. In addition, each shot's landing is irregular. Even if the scope wasn't zeroed, we could still expect placement to be consistent relative to the reticle. Wouldn't it be more reasonable to attribute this phenomenon to filmmaker's error, rather than an unsubstantiated back-story? [[User:Armandthecorsair|Armandthecorsair]]

:That section's always bothered me too. Yes, it's an error in the film, but it's got nothing to do with the weapon Jackson's using. It's clearly a result of the filming technique. I'm guessing they just filmed the shots normally and simply super-imposed the crosshairs onto the footage in post-production, without bothering to centre the image on where the bullets actually hit. I keep wanting to change the article to reflect that, but obviously the page is locked.--[[User:Leigh Burne|Leigh Burne]] 07:54, 25 May 2012 (CDT)
:Actually, every time I watch the scene, it seems to me he's simply missing. -- [[User:Maxman|Maxman]] ([[User talk:Maxman|talk]]) 00:49 06 November 2013 (EST)

== MG 42 ==

The correct german spelling is: "Maschinengewehr". Original naming by the Heereswaffenamt was "Universal-Maschinengewehr Modell 42".
The caliber is 7,92x57mm wich was known as 8x57IS (Infantrie spitz).
The term "8mm Mauser" is not commonly used nor was it commonly used in the Wehrmacht.

:8mm Mauser is a common ''American'' name for the cartridge, and the site generally defaults to US terminology (same with using NATO designations for Soviet hardware, for example). [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 21:36, 7 November 2011 (CST)
Why are other weapons like the Karabiner 98k and their ammunitions described correctly while this must have a branch expression from post war private business manufacturers?

:It's only in brackets to identify another common name for that cartridge in the US. It's not like it doesn't also have the full name. Also, sign your comment with four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 01:12, 8 November 2011 (CST)

:I like the changes you've made

::Oh, you're not supposed to copy the "nowiki" tags. Those are usurp because if I didn't use them it would just sign my list again. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 15:18, 8 November 2011 (CST)

==MG34 machine gun==
Can someone add the section below to the machine gun section on the Saving Private Ryan page now that Ben41 locked it down?

The Tiger tanks (in reality, mocked-up T-34/85s) in the movie are seen with a hull-mounted [[MG34]]s.
[[Image:MG34-SPr.jpg|thumb|none|600px|A Tiger tank with a hull-mounted MG34 (circled in red).]]
:Since the Tiger was a mocked up T-34, could it be a fake barrel to mimic an MG-34? --[[User:Maxman|Maxman]] ([[User talk:Maxman|talk]]) 22:09, 12 May 2014 (EDT)

==Caps from special features==
I finally went through all the special features on the second disc of the 60th anniversary edition that I bought years ago. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 19:52, 14 July 2012 (CDT)
:The AKs might have been used to provide muzzle flashes or just for sound effects, I guess. Paintball guns might be to cue actors in the boat to react? I doubt they'd sound right for ricochets. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] ([[User talk:Evil Tim|talk]]) 20:18, 19 September 2014 (EDT)

:: As for the AK's, they look like the stocks are being removed. Do they resemble the folding stock for the MP40? I believe that sometimes paintballs fill with dust are used to simulate ricochets. --[[User:Ben41|Ben41]] ([[User talk:Ben41|talk]]) 20:39, 19 September 2014 (EDT)
:::I believe the stock for the original AKM was derived from the folding stock of the MP40. And I think the paintball guns were for sound effects. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] ([[User talk:Funkychinaman|talk]]) 11:22, 20 September 2014 (EDT)
::::Although they are similar in shape and concept, the construction and way they work is different enough that I am fairly sure you would never be able to get them to interchange, to the point where I think it would be easier to build one from scratch. Also, there is nothing about this picture that suggests they are doing anything to the stocks, all they have done is strip them down. The parts on the table are just the top cover and the recoil spring assembly, and although these so have to be taken off to remove the stock this is a hell of an assumption. The part that is curiously absent though are the bolt carrier groups, which are absent on all of the guns yet are not on the table. Might be that these are put somewhere more secure so that the guns are not operational, and they are just stored unassembled like this so that they do not have to do the job twice. As to why AKs are here at all I have no idea. i doubt it would be anything to do with muzzle flashed or sound, as these will be added digitally after the fact so I don't know why they would have to actually be on set, or why they would need to many. I'm unfamiliar with the context of this special feature, is this actually on set? If not it could just be where the armourer stores his weapons and these are just other things in his inventory. If this is on set, I have no idea. Maybe familiarisation and training? If the armourer had 500 blank fire Garands I don't see the point, as its not like thy were in short supply on set and they are very different weapons to operate. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] ([[User talk:Commando552|talk]]) 12:23, 20 September 2014 (EDT)
[[Image:SPR_BTS_sling_01.jpg|thumb|none|500px|Barry Pepper demonstrating how to shoot with a sling. I don't remember him doing it in the film though. Note the M1911 stuck in his pants.]]
[[Image:SPR_BTS_shoot_01.jpg|thumb|none|500px|The actors fire their weapons towards the sea. This was from the boot camp featurette.]]
[[Image:SPR_BTS_Maxson_01.jpg|thumb|none|500px|Steven Spielberg and Tom Hanks talk in front of an M33 dual .50 cal AA mount on Omaha Beach.]]
[[Image:SPR_BTS_tank_01.jpg|thumb|none|500px|The faux Tiger test fires its "gun" before the scene where it blows apart the building behind Ryan. Notice how there is no recoil or concussion blast.]]
[[Image:SPR_BTS_rifles_01.jpg|thumb|none|500px|The Irish extras, some with modern shades, are issued their plastic-wrapped M1s. The M1s appear to be rubber, given how easily they're being handled. There were 750 extras, 250 of which had blank firing weapons, the rest with rubber replicas.]]
[[Image:SPR_BTS_flak_01.jpg|thumb|none|500px|A Flak 38 overlooking the Omaha Beach set. Possibly the same one that was used in the final battle sequence.]]
[[Image:SPR_BTS_armorer_01.jpg|thumb|none|500px|Armorer Simon Atherton.]]
[[Image:SPR_BTS_armorer_02.jpg|thumb|none|500px|A table of M1 Garands. According to Atherton, he prepared two thousand weapons, five hundred of which were blank firing, 1500 of which were rubber replicas.]]
[[Image:SPR_BTS_armorer_03.jpg|thumb|none|500px|Whoa, where did THOSE come from?]]
[[Image:SPR_BTS_armorer_04.jpg|thumb|none|500px|Some SMGs.]]
[[Image:SPR_BTS_armorer_05.jpg|thumb|none|500px|These weapons have seen better days. Atherton said much time had to be devoted to cleaning and repairing the weapons after exposure to the salt water and sand.]]
[[Image:SPR_BTS_armorer_06.jpg|thumb|none|500px|Atherton himself unloading an M1 Garand.]]
[[Image:SPR_BTS_armorer_07.jpg|thumb|none|500px|One of the armorers reassembling an M1 Garand.]]
[[Image:SPR_BTS_RG_01.jpg|thumb|none|500px|An extra or actor tries to shake out the sand from his rifle grenade so he can attach it to the rifle.]]
[[Image:SPR_BTS_paintball_01.jpg|thumb|none|500px|Crew members fire paintballs at a Higgins boat. For sound effects maybe?]]
[[Image:SPR_BTS_bunker_01.jpg|thumb|none|500px|Another angle for the scene where Miller's men clear a bunker with a flamethrower. Since the scene was filmed from a low angle, the firemen and the pads were not visible. The black smoke overhead is from fires on the beach lit for that purpose.]]
[[Image:SPR_BTS_flame_01.jpg|thumb|none|500px|The scene where the flame thrower blows up from another angle. That jet coming in from the left is actually propane, designed to enhance the exploding gas tank on the flamethrower.]]

== Fake Omaha Beach ==

The actual fortifications at Omaha Beach were nothing like the ones depicted in the movie. For whatever reason, there are two Leitstands overlooking the beach. There weren't any Leitstands at Omaha Beach, there were just fortifications. The beach was also much longer, about three football fields long.
:The Omaha Beach scene was filmed in Ireland on Curracloe Beach in Ballinesker, County Wexford. -- [[User:Maxman|Maxman]] ([[User talk:Maxman|talk]]) 00:53 06 November 2013 (EST)

==Panzerschreck faulty shield==

If you look at the first image of the German with the Panzerschreck, you can see that the shield has slipped around on its mount, it's no longer in line with the launcher's pistol grip/sights. Yet in the next shot it's vertical again. I'd add something mentioning this, but, obviously, the page is locked.--[[User:Leigh Burne|Leigh Burne]] ([[User talk:Leigh Burne|talk]]) 11:46, 8 January 2013 (EST)
:I added the note. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] ([[User talk:Funkychinaman|talk]]) 11:51, 8 January 2013 (EST)

== Request to add link for actor's name ==

It's just a little thing, but could somebody with access to the editing function for this page, make a small revision in the section for the M1 Flamethrower? The actor playing Doyle is Glenn Wrage and currently there's no brackets around his name to make a link to his actor page (like [[Glenn Wrage]]). Thanks in advance, --[[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]] ([[User talk:PeeWee055|talk]]) 04:46, 31 January 2013 (EST)
:Done. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] ([[User talk:Commando552|talk]]) 05:01, 31 January 2013 (EST)

== Lyman Super TargetSpot scope ==

The Springfield 1903's scope shown as "Unertl scope" in the movie is a pre or post-war Lyman Super TargetSpot (undefined power).
That's identifiable thanks to the objective which is different than Unertl scopes.

Lyman Super TargetSpot :
[[File:Lyman sts objective.JPG|thumb|none|400px]]

Unertl :
[[File:Unertl objective.jpg|thumb|none|400px]]

The 1903 A4 are never used with these models.

== Request to add a link to the FLAK 38 ==

Can you please add a link to the Flak 38 page? Looks like the page is locked so I cannot do it. -hchris

== M1919A4 belts ==

The 1919 in the tower uses a disintigrating belt, and Mellish and Henderson's uses a fabric belt. The description reflects this and has done so for three years, but the image captions refer to them as if they were one gun using different belts in a continuity error when they are clearly two seperate guns in different locations. -- [[User:Maxman|Maxman]] ([[User talk:Maxman|talk]]) 00:58 06 November 2013 (EST)

== M1 Flamethrower on Omaha Beach? ==

I thought it was a little strange to see US soldiers carrying flamethrowers on Omaha Beach. Would they have been issued flamethrowers for the invasion? I thought the US used flamethrowers mainly in the Pacific Theater, not the European. And I heard that it is impossible for a flamethrower fuel tank to explode when hit, being that the chemicals in both tanks have to mix in order to become flammable.
:The purpose remains the same, for clearing out bunkers and fortifications. And if you look above, there's a cap from the special features showing how they enhanced the explosion with a jet of propane. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] ([[User talk:Funkychinaman|talk]]) 15:18, 21 February 2014 (EST)
*There is an excellent series of militaria magazines (English translations available); some published in book form by the late French journalist Yves Debay. He interviewed many veterans for his works and came across lots of interesting facts. His work on D-Day said with the invasion of Normandy flamethrowers were issued to members of assault teams but none were known to be used; they probably were jettisoned when the troops landed in deep water.
http://www.cpj.org/2013/01/military-correspondent-yves-debay-killed-in-aleppo.php
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yves_Debay
[[User:Foofbun|Foofbun]] ([[User talk:Foofbun|talk]]) 16:11, 21 February 2014 (EST)
: The chemicals in the tanks don't need to mix, it's just gas/napalm in one tank and compressed air/nitrogen in the other. Fuel and propellant. It's only ignited when either a pilot light or igniter cartridge in the nozzle ignites the gasoline. Shooting the tank probably won't detonate the gas unless you're using tracer or incendiary rounds, but the pressurized gas venting will probably knock you down. And while flamethrowers were mostly used in the Pacific, the D-Day landings offered flamethrowers good targets in the bunkers and trenchlines. Being clumsy, bulky, and generally a pain, they got very little use since, as Foofbun mentioned, the troops wound up in deep water.--[[User:Mandolin|Mandolin]] ([[User talk:Mandolin|talk]]) 20:01, 21 February 2014 (EST)

Talk:55 Days at Peking

2015-10-29T20:07:55Z

RickB: /* U.S. Marines rifle circa 1900 */ new section

== Revolver ==

What revolver is this? Note the strange angled "roof" on top of the cylinder.
(couldn't get a better screencap than this one) [[User:Dudster32|Dudester32]] ([[User talk:Dudster32|talk]]) 05:22, 12 July 2015 (EDT)
[[File:55DaysPekingRevolver6.jpg|thumb|none|601px|]]

== U.S. Marines rifle circa 1900 ==

Shouldn't the U.S. Marines be armed with the 6mm Lee rifle, rather than the Krag? The Enfield looks a lot more like the Lee than does the Krag, so thinking it was intentional. John Milius lamented the need to arm "his" Marines with Krags in the The Wind and the Lion, set at about the same time period as 55 Days.

Talk:The Man Who Knew Too Much (1956)

2015-07-07T17:15:45Z

RickB: /* Finnish Lahti L-35 */ new section

== Finnish Lahti L-35 ==

The gun appears to be a Swedish L40. There's a heavy "nut" on the barrel where it screws into the front of the cannon, and that's characteristic of the Swedish version of the Lahti.

Talk:Saints and Soldiers

2014-09-26T21:23:59Z

RickB: /* Winchester 1897 */ new section

Hi everybody,
I was totally surprised that there was no article about this fantastic and really realistic movie so I just wrote down what I remembered. I have no idea how to upload pictures so I hope someone will take care of that. But still, does nobody know this movie or why hasn't there been a page?

P.S. There are probably spoilers in what I wrote down. For example: I didn't remember if the british Pilot was using a Enfield or a Webley Revolver

Well, I was bored so I did a little researched and uploaded all the pictures. I hope you folks like it!

==NO SPOILERS!!!!==
It is against IMFDB rules. If a major character gets killed you don't list it here. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 22:18, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Well I didn't say wether he got killed or not I just said he was shot a couple of times. Anyways, did anyone notice anything odd about this movie? Altough it's highly realistic I noticed that the pilot's carbine has a Type II barrel band and for some reason, Deacon is wearing a M1 swivle bale helmet, not a M2 D-Bale helmet since he is a paratrooper.

P.S. Excuse me english, I'm German

==Wrong weapons listed here?==

I think this is a Panzerfaust 60 or 100, not the 30. There were two versions of the 30, the small one and the big one. The iron sight however looks like a Panzerfaust 60 or 100...

Also it looks like a Stielhandgranate 43 with a frag sleeve attached, not the 24. You can tell this by the missing pull cord at the end of the handle. The 43 had the launching mechanism at the top of its explosive head.

[[User:hchris|hchris]] 00:21, 22 April 2012

== Winchester 1897 ==

The shotgun slung over the MP's shoulder looks like a Winchester Model 12, rather than 1897?

Talk:Patton

2014-04-21T19:57:01Z

RickB: /* Patton pulls his S&W to clear some mules */ new section

== Patton's guns and the actual hero guns from ''Patton'' ==
I've been to the Patton museum and seen these handguns. It's a great museum if you ever get the chance.
All photographs courtesy of the Patton Museum of Cavalry and Armor, Fort Knox, KY.--[[User:Jcordell|Jcordell]] 00:59, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

[[Image:Holster 02.jpg|thumb|350px|none| General Patton's sidearms and his actual leather gear]]
[[Image:PattonPistol 02.jpg|thumb|none|350px| the top revolver is the prop from the movie. The bottom one is Patton's]]
[[Image:PattonPistol 03.jpg|thumb|none|350px| the top is Patton's registered magnum and the bottom is the hero gun.]]

:- Awesome stuff, Jcordell - Thanks for sharing! [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 17:25, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Glad you liked it. A little more info. The Colt Single Action is serial number 332088. It was manufactured in 1916 and purchased by Patton that same year. I believe it was a special order by him.

The S&W .357 Registerd Magnum was purchased by Patton in 1935 when he was stationed in Hawaii. The .357 Registerd Magnum was strictly customer order only and would have been very expensive for 1935. So that revolver was made strictly for him and all the features (trigger adapter, patridge front sight,3.5" barrel)were what he ordered. The Registered Magnum model was introduced in 1935 which makes Patton's probably one of the first ones made. Patton was actually very well off and sometimes irritated his fellow officers with his luxurious lifestyle. Especially during the depression when money was so tight for many. To include the U.S. Army. --[[User:Jcordell|Jcordell]] 00:17, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Patton actually bought his Colt Single Action Army when he was serving under General John "Black Jack" Pershing and first used it in the pursuit of Pancho Villa. Patton killed three of Villa's men and brought them back to Pershing. Pershing dubbed Patton his "Little Bandito".[[User:GaBoy45|GaBoy45]] 16:48, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

==Moved From Main Page==

''Correction: this was not a 27, it was a Registered Magnum==''
''The Model 27 did not exist until 1959. Prior to WW2 the pistol was named "The Registered Magnum".''

''The Smith & Wesson Patton carried wasn't yet called the Model 27. They were known as Registered Magnums, the first of the 357s and special order. I'm not sure about the one in the movie, but notice the hammer difference in the movie picture. Patton I believe called his Registered Magnum his "killing gun."''

: For the record I think we know the gun is a "Registered Magnum", but I think it was noted under 'Model 27' since all the RM is is an early variant of it, and the Model 27 made it easier to list and categorize (We do the same for M&P revolvers, which are merely early Model 10s). ''That said'', we do still note early M&P guns as M&P in the articles so perhaps we should note the gun as 'Registered Magnum' here, which is what I've done. However, I should note that is not appropriate to correct the entry solely because it fits the time-line on a film/media that takes place in the past, as movies often use newer (often anachronistic) guns to take their place as long as they're similar, there are many examples. In this case, the above picture of the movie gun looks like an actual RM so the commenters are correct in this case. Still, you can't assume they HAVE to use a certain gun because of the film's setting. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 16:01, 29 July 2011 (CDT)

== M14? ==

According to IMDb, one of the soldiers in the congestion has an M14. Can anyone confirm this? I think the picture is on this page.

''At 2:08:46 in the movie, during the congestion at a crossroads there is a close up of the chaos. A soldier with rolled up sleeves can be seen standing on the hood and fender of a Command Car number 378(?)554 holding what appears to be an M14 Rifle. This weapon is a modified M1 Garand, and is visibly similar to the M1 Carbine used in WWII except that it is bulkier, the sling is attached to the bottom of the butt with a swivel, and the magazine is larger than that of the M1 Carbine due to the longer ammunition it uses. The M14 came into use in the 1957, and not during WWII.''

: Here's some stills. --[[User:Ben41|Ben41]] 19:55, 20 March 2012 (CDT)
[[File:Patton 1305.jpg|thumb|none|800px|The soldier on the far left.]]
[[File:Patton 1306.jpg|thumb|none|800px|Another still.]]

:: As far as I can tell, the soldier on the hood is just carrying a Garand. The article currently says the soldier far-left is carrying a Beretta BM59, but I don't see that either. His rifle clearly has the side-mounted sling of an M1 Carbine, and lacks the characteristic tilted-forward magazine of both the M14 and BM59. From the pictures here, I honestly have my doubts about this scene. I'd have to watch the movie again to be sure, though. [[User:RedXIV|RedXIV]] 05:58, 31 May 2012 (CDT)

== Proper weapon placement ==

Why is the MAS-36 under the submachine gun category when it is clearly a rifle? Please move.

== Plane ==

since when does a bomber plane do a strafe mission (i also think these are spanish planes taken from their airforce like battle of britian did)[[user:ModWeaponChecker]]

:Pretty much all of the non-CGI ME-109s and HE-111s in post war movies were Spanish Air Force planes. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 10:05, 4 April 2012 (CDT)

== Patton pulls his S&W to clear some mules ==

The pic clearly shows the SAA being pulled. I've seen the movie many times since 1970, and I don't think the magnum is ever shown outside the holster?

Talk:No Country for Old Men

2014-02-10T03:10:54Z

RickB: /* Colt Delta Elite or a smaller frame 1911? */

==Colt Delta Elite or a smaller frame 1911?==

I thought the Delta Elite wasn't manufactured until 1987. Could this be another anachronism?

:I'm a little more curious to know what makes us think this is a Delta Elite to begin with. It looked to me like it might have just been a regular Commander-type 1911. But if it is a Delta Elite, then yes, it is yet another of the movie's many firearms-related anachronisms.

:I thought it was a 1911 myself.

:I agree, does not look like a Delta Elite to me. Don't know why it is considered to be one.

:It also seems like a 1911 would be way more common for a sheriff to carry than a Delta Elite.

:I don't mean to be rude to the person that made this page, but unless we can find a good reason to state this is a Delta Elite, I think we should change the section to a 1911.

::It's definitely not a regular 1911 or 1911A1. It has a circular hammer, so it's gotta be a Commander variant such as the Series 80. The only question is whether it's the Delta Elite (which is similar externally to the Commander line, but chambered for 10mm).

:::Agreed. Mabey it would be better if we moved this to the discussion page so we do not clutter up the page?

Sheriff Ed Tom's gun has a high-rise beavertail grip safety, visible when he thumb-cocks the gun before entering the El Paso motel. Such grip safeties were not available in 1980, and became popular in the '90s.
I can see why someone could think the gun was a Delta Elite, as that was probably Colt's best-known, older 5" gun that came from the factory with a rowel hammer, but, as noted, it wasn't available in 1980. The Combat Government Model was available then, but had neither a beavertail nor rowel hammer. The later Special Combat Government Model does have a rowel hammer, but no beavertail. The Combat Elite - also not available in 1980 - had the rowel hammer, but no beavertail until reintroduced in 2008. Any "1911" can have the hammer switched out, so the presence of the rowel hammer isn't anachronistic, but the beavertail is.

Definitely appears to be a Commander with a 1980-inappropriate beavertail grip safety. All the "Elites", Delta and otherwise, are 5" guns.

==The Book==
The ending of the book was way better. The sheriff hunts Anton down and puts a slug in his face-[[User:S&Wshooter|S&Wshooter]] 04:44, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Actually Anton is arrested. It's hard to tell because of the writing style.[[User:DRC92|DRC92]]

==Remington 11-87==
Unless this movie is going for historical inaccuracy, the gun would be a [[Remington 1100]]. It's not a Remington 11 since it doesn't have the same exterior design. Doubt it would be an 11-48 since the recoil seems too low. The 1100 is the most likely gun, since the Remington 11-87 wasn't produced until 1987, hence the name "Remington 11-'''87'''". [[Special:Contributions/70.157.131.56|70.157.131.56]] 02:27, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

== Book Guns ==

So far I'm only about a third of the way through the book but I'm pretty surprised as to how close the two follow each other, even in terms of guns used. For example, so far I've seen:
* Moss's "heavybarreled .270 on a '98 Mauser action with a laminated stock of maple and walnut... Unertl telescopic sight of the same power as the binoculars", reflected as a Remington 700 in the film
* the "shortbarreled H&K machinepistol with a black nylon shoulderstrap" that Moss picks up in the book is an H&K SP89 in the film
* Moss finds a "nickelplated government .45 automatic" in the hands of a dead drug dealer, which is what he finds in the film as well (with mentions in the book of the grip safety, etc.)
* Chigurh shoots the two men at trucks with a "nine millimeter Glock", as seen in the film
* Moss buys a "twelve gauge Winchester pump gun and a box of double ought buckshot shells" with references later made to the hammer and his sawing-down process seen exactly duplicated in the film with the Winchester '97 that Moss purchases
* Chigurh carries a "twelve gauge Remington automatic with a plastic military stock and a parkerized finish... fitted with a shopmade silencer fully a foot long and big around as a beercan", fitting the description of the Remington 11-87 he carries in the film
* however, instead of a TEC-9 as he carries in the film, Chigurh uses a "shortbarreled Uzi" with a 25-round magazine in the book during the hotel shootout
Several other guns are mentioned, such as Bell reflecting on "Colts .44-40" and how "if that won't stop him you'd better throw the thing down and take off runnin'" and how he "likes the old Winchester model 97. I like that it's got a hamer. I don't like havin' to hunt the safety on a gun."
All in all, safe for the unforgivable error of constantly referring to magazines as "clips", Cormac McCarthy did a good job incorporating guns into the story and the filmmakers did a good job sticking to the ones in the book. (I'll update later once I've read further on.) [[User:Speakeasy804|Speakeasy804]] 22:19, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

== Cobray not MAC-10? ==

The gun used in the motel doesnt look like a MAC-10, looks more like a Cobray M11. --[[User:Mauser|Mauser]] 04:15, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
:You may be right the receiver looks longer on the back like on the Cobray. -[[User:Predator20|Predator20]] 04:18, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

== Shotgun Suppressor ==

Can you even shoot buckshot out of a shotgun with a suppressor? I've never scene one in real life, but my understanding is that the inside is not exactly barrel like, or as durable, couldn't the buckshot possibly scatter enough while inside to damage it? [[Special:Contributions/174.112.18.193|174.112.18.193]] 22:44, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
:http://www.saddleryandgunroom.co.uk/Gunroom/SG_Hushpower.htm --[[User:Joffeloff|Joffeloff]] 16:17, 16 April 2011 (CDT)

When a shotgun fires buck shots, the metal balls don't bounce around the barrel, otherwise, the first time you shoot it, the barrel would be ruined. What happens with a shotgun shot is that the balls stay clustered together for a time and the farther away it goes, the more spread pattern is. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 22:50, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

:From what I've read on this, the problem is that a suppressor is ''supposed'' to encourage the stuff going through it to expand and slow down while a barrel's job is to keep the stuff in it contained and make it speed up. It's fine having stuff expand inside the suppressor when it's just gas, but not so much when it's lots of metal balls that can end up shooting through baffles and suchlike. IIRC it would work with a shot cup, though. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 03:57, 17 April 2011 (CDT)

In the new show Sons of Guns a guy was able to suppress a Saiga 12 shotgun. However, I couldn't tell if he was shooting buckshot or slugs. -SasquatchJim.

In the beginning of the suppressor project on Sons Of Guns, they use a high-speed camera to determine how far it takes shot to spread after it exits the barrel to find out how much of the suppressor can project from the barrel itself. I believe it was something like ~2 inches. I think I can safely say they were using buckshot. For that show's sake, however, I hope a lot of it was dumbed-down for the audience. There were a couple of annoyances that kept me from taking the show seriously (calling a Cobray CM203 a grenade launcher? Attaching a Saiga to a M4 is a new thing?). But I digress. --[[User:Graybass 20x6|Graybass 20x6]] 22:18, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Agreed on attaching the shotgun to the M4. I laughed when they kept saying they'd never heard of it, yet he repeatedly mentions the masterkey. -SJ

Right. And I believe the M26 accomplishes the same task as a Saiga under-mounted on an M4. Granted, the MASS is still in the preliminary phases of military testing, but it's not necessarily a brand-new concept. It was in Vegas 2, for crying out loud. --[[User:Graybass 20x6|Graybass 20x6]] 09:11, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

:At least the Saiga is semi-auto, do they plan on changing the M26 from straight-pull bolt-action to semi-auto? If not, a Saiga makes some sense.--[[User:Mr-Jigsaw|Mr-Jigsaw]] 10:13, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

::I can agree with a Saiga making sense. For example, the following shots after the breech shot could be buckshot, or possibly nonlethal loads such as beanbags. It could add another dimension to breaching and the follow-up, considering the Saiga could execute a second shot much faster than the straight-pull bolt-action M26. For the show to make the concept sound revolutionary was a bit of a stretch for my taste, though. --[[User:Graybass 20x6|Graybass 20x6]] 12:07, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

==Anachronisms all throughout==

I watched this again not very long ago. Seems the movie's full of anachronisms. Many of the guns are obvious here of course, but there are several anachronistic vehicles present as well. Of course it is inherently somewhat difficult to get many older vehicles and weapons, other issues (such as budget) notwithstanding, but there are a few that are quite obvious. BUT, most people won't pick them up so whatever I suppose. That said, this was indeed a good movie and fairly intense, though I would have preferred a bit more conclusive of an ending myself, probably closer to the book (as noted a few comments up). [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 18:07, 1 July 2011 (CDT)

:Well that's not as bad as COD: Black Ops which had a 2010 Jeep Wrangler in 1968 Vietnam. :D - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 18:20, 1 July 2011 (CDT)

:: Good point. I guess I'm kind of a stickler for accuracy sometimes. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 23:23, 1 July 2011 (CDT)

:::Aren't we all. :) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 00:43, 2 July 2011 (CDT)

==Was the suppressor meant to be some sort of technological device?==

I ask because the sound it makes was rather computer-like, very different from how silencers are usually rendered in movies. - [[User:2wingo|2wingo]]

Talk:Goldfinger

2014-02-02T18:37:05Z

RickB: /* Unidentified revolver in Boothroyd's shoulder holster */ new section

Is it just me, or is that the most ill conceived shoulder holster ever?

==Can anyone identify these weapons?==
1) What type of weapon was used to launch a grappling hook in the pre credits sequence?
[[File:Goldfingerpiton.jpg]]
Sold for £5,750/US$9,683 17 September 1998 auction in London by Christies.[[User:Foofbun|Foofbun]] ([[User talk:Foofbun|talk]]) 17:35, 11 December 2013 (EST)

2)What Air Pistol was used to put Bond to sleep just after the laser bean sequence? Possibly a Webley Mk 1?[[User:Foofbun|Foofbun]] 12:09, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Modified [[Crossman 2240 CO2 Pistol]][[User:Foofbun|Foofbun]] ([[User talk:Foofbun|talk]]) 17:35, 11 December 2013 (EST)

==Aston Martin's machine guns==
If anyone is interested, according to several books on Bond (including "The History of James Bond") the machine guns used by the Aston are (meant to be) modified Browning .30 Cals. Different books list them as either cut-down water cooled .30's or the air cooled M1919A3s. In actual fact, IRL the guns in the film are gas powered blanks.

* I have one of these books, and the big problem with the depiction is that the artwork depicts the guns as extremely small (almost SMG size) to let them fit in the required space.

== Derringer? ==

It looks like there's a Derringer at the bottom of the left column, under the 1908 Vest Pocket. [[User:Maxman|Maxman]] ([[User talk:Maxman|talk]]) 03:06 20 October 2013 (EST)
[[Image:Goldf-wall1.jpg|thumb|none|601px|]]
:Yes, it is. Most likely a [[Remington 1866 Derringer]]. [[User:Greg-Z|Greg-Z]] ([[User talk:Greg-Z|talk]]) 03:24, 20 October 2013 (EDT)
Note: The gentleman in the photo is Bond Stuntman George Leech[[User:Foofbun|Foofbun]] ([[User talk:Foofbun|talk]]) 17:36, 11 December 2013 (EST)

== Unidentified revolver in Boothroyd's shoulder holster ==

Geoffrey Boothroyd's book The Handgun pictures a number of "Bond guns", including one identified as, "A considerably modified Smith and Wesson (sic) Military and Police Model which appeared on the dust jacket of Ian Fleming's From Russia with Love." The pictured gun has the same style of grips, round-butt magna with S&W medallion, as shown in the still from the Guns of Bond short. The gun pictured in the book has a barrel shortened to the length of the ejector rod, jeweled hammer and trigger, and "Fitz Special" style cut-away trigger guard.

Talk:Taxi Driver

2013-02-18T23:11:22Z

RickB: /* Sport's nickel Model 10? */ new section

== Travis' grip on the model 29 ==
The support hand thumb overlapping the strong hand like that used to be taught to police, and was very commonly taught to civilians pre-1980's. I know many older shooters who use this grip, including the one and only Les Baer. I've even seen him use this grip while firing a 1911.--[[User:James3|James3]] 15:02, 1 February 2012 (CST)

== Travis has got some cash on him ==

Okay so Travis spends $815.00 on the guns and holster. That's in 1975 dollars. Adjusted for 2011 dollars you're looking at $3,420.00. Evidently Travis does ''very well'' for himself driving a Taxi. I'm not saying I doubt it. I understand that those taxi drivers can make some pretty good bank in tips alone in NYC. Wish I could walk into my favorite gunstore and plop down over $3,400 in cash. If I was careful in my selection (I like second hand guns) and haggeled with the owner I could probably walk out with five or six handguns instead of the four that Travis buys. Of course I would be buying from a legitimate business instead of some black market street dealer. But it's interesting to look at the money involved. --[[User:Jcordell|Jcordell]] 18:22, 11 January 2012 (CST)
:He mentions that he takes down between $300-$350 a week sometimes more early in the film and he also says that he doesn't spend much money either. So it all really depends on how much his rent is how long it would take for him to be able to afford the guns. Plus there's no real indication of how long he's been driving the taxi before he buys the guns. --[[User:Cool-breeze|cool-breeze]] ([[User talk:Cool-breeze|talk]]) 05:29, 30 November 2012 (EST)

== Sterling Arms ???? ==

I belive it was not Sterling Arms, but italian Galesi M9.

See here:

http://www.pistoletik.net/galesi-m9.html

== Sport's nickel Model 10? ==

The close-up of Sport's "nickel M10" appears to show a gun with a five-shot cylinder, as the gun described for the robber; is it the same gun?

Talk:The Untouchables (1987)

2010-02-23T21:23:10Z

RickB: New page: Did treasury agents carry USGI pistols? That is, are the Colt auto pistols portrayed in the movie M1911A1s, or commercial Government Models? Is there a record of Ness or his men carrying...

Did treasury agents carry USGI pistols? That is, are the Colt auto pistols portrayed in the movie M1911A1s, or commercial Government Models? Is there a record of Ness or his men carrying Super .38s rather than .45s? If the former, then the guns in use would have to be GMs, as all M1911A1s were .45s.

Talk:McQ

2010-01-24T18:00:40Z

RickB:

As far as I know, and if I remember the movie correctly, in the movie McQ is suspended and his weapon is taken and he then "borrows" (not buys) the MAC-10 from a gunshop owner despite being told "it's not licensed" to which he replies "neither am I". --[[User:Charon68|Charon68]] 02:05, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

You are correct. McQ borrows the MAC10 immediately after buying the High Power. The gun store scene was shot at Warshall's sporting goods, which unfortunately closed 6-8 years ago.

Talk:No Country for Old Men

2010-01-18T22:51:36Z

RickB: /* Colt Delta Elite or a smaller frame 1911? */

Talk:M1911 pistol series

2009-10-12T23:44:54Z

RickB: /* The M in the page title */

==Primary M1911 description==
Who wrote this? The historical paragraph (on the background of the M1911) implies that the M1911 was replaced by the U.S. Military AFTER Operation Desert Storm (1991) which is not true. The Beretta M92 (M9) was already approved and adopted by 1985.

==Image Sizes==
The dimensions on a lot of the images are rather large. I'm tinkering with reducing them by 100 pixels each for the sake of conserving page length. Since a lot of people here are familiar with the wiki technology, they know they can click on the images to enlarge the images if they wish.

[[Special:Contributions/68.167.206.53|68.167.206.53]] 04:27, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

: Please don't change the page format. Everything works together now and it took me a long time to fix. - [[User:Gunmaster45|Gunmaster45]] 02:20, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
::Uh sorry, but it's FUBARed again. I am going to try a weird little formatting trick, please bear with me [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 04:30, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
:::Hold on, I'm gonna see if I can make this work out better... -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 00:49, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

:::OK, I have fixed it. From now on, it won't matter if anyone hits "Edit" to one pistol (instead of the whole page); the edit won't remove all the other paragraph spaces automatically (which is what was causing the problem). -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 01:32, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

==Para-Ordance==
Shouldnt these guns get their own page? Sure they are a 1911 varients, but their made by a totally different company.[[User:The Winchester|The Winchester]] 00:38, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
:Yeah, but their 1911 variants. This is the M1911 pistol series page, and they are 1911s. That's why they are on here. - [[User:Gunmaster45|Gunmaster45]]
::I would prefer the Para Ordnance series of pistols have their own page due PRIMARILY to the fact that the Paras have a whole slew of different calibers that other M1911 makes and models don't have [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 06:40, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

== The M in the page title ==

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the M in the page title incorrect? These are Colt 1911s (or 1911a1s, etc.), not Colt M1911s, unless referred to by US military nomenclature, just the same way that a Beretta 92f is an M9 only to the US Army and a SIG Sauer P228 is an M11 only in USAF terms. Just because it's the model of 1911 doesn't make it an M1911, any more than a '67 Shelby GT500 is an M67 Shelby GT500.[[User:YourMessageHere|YourMessageHere]] 08:09, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
::No. The Colt pistol was formally adopted by the Army on March 29, 1911, thus gaining its designation, M1911 (Model of 1911). Only examples or prototypes prior to the year 1911 would NOT have the M designation (which is extremely rare). Between the years of 1907 and 1910 the Colt pistol was constantly being modified and re-designed to win the Army's trials for adoption of a new handgun. The gun was only mass produced AFTER winning the Army's pistol trials. The Beretta 92FS was already famous world wide and was commercially available as the 92F/FS for YEARS before the Army adopted it. Every 1911 design came AFTER the M1911 (aka Model of 1911) so it is the correct nomenclature. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 07:20, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Using "1911" to refer to any and all pistols based on the M1911 design has only been popular for about fifteen years. Prior to that, the vast majority of such pistols were Colts, and were usually called "Colt .45s", even if they were pistols made by wartime contractors like Remington Rand. Those commercial guns that weren't made by Colt, as made by Vega, Randall, Federal Ordnance, Essex, etc., were called "clones", as they were generally close copies of the Colt. When makers started adding previously "custom" features to production-line guns, and branching into areas that Colt hadn't, a new name was needed, and "1911" became popular. The problem that I have with the various names on the site is the mixing of military and commercial designations; a gun cannot be a "M1911A1 Government Model", as M1911A1 is a military designation, and Government Model is what Colt has always called the civilian version of the "M" military pistols. Colt has made M1911s (1912-circa 1924), M1911A1s (circa 1926-1945), and Government Models (1912-date), but you can't mix or combine those names without confusing the issue.

==WHO KEEPS ON F#$%KING WITH THE FORMAT?==
I noticed yet AGAIN, the pictures are not aligning with their sections. We need to tell these anonymous members not to mess with a page's format if they don't know what they are doing!!!!!!! [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 07:13, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

==Caliber question==
I thought I would ask permission before making this change considering how important this article is: in the specifications category the caliber is listed solely as .45 ACP. I was wondering whether or not that should be changed to include .380 ACP, .38 Super, 9mm, and .40 S&W?
:-[[User:Anonymous|Anonymous]]

==M1991 Series==
I was wondering: what exactly is the difference between the 1911 series and the 1991 series? -[[User:Gunman69|Gunman69]] 17:18, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Colt introduced (announced) the M1991A1 in 1991 as a sort of economy version of the Government Model, resembling the military M1911A1, and with the serial numbers picking up where the military gun left off after WWII. The gun was made in that form until about 2003, at which time the finish was changed to polished blue rather than matte blue, and the black rubber grips replaced with checkered wood.

Talk:M1911 pistol series

2009-10-12T23:33:08Z

RickB: /* M1991 Series */

==Primary M1911 description==
Who wrote this? The historical paragraph (on the background of the M1911) implies that the M1911 was replaced by the U.S. Military AFTER Operation Desert Storm (1991) which is not true. The Beretta M92 (M9) was already approved and adopted by 1985.

==Image Sizes==
The dimensions on a lot of the images are rather large. I'm tinkering with reducing them by 100 pixels each for the sake of conserving page length. Since a lot of people here are familiar with the wiki technology, they know they can click on the images to enlarge the images if they wish.

[[Special:Contributions/68.167.206.53|68.167.206.53]] 04:27, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

: Please don't change the page format. Everything works together now and it took me a long time to fix. - [[User:Gunmaster45|Gunmaster45]] 02:20, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
::Uh sorry, but it's FUBARed again. I am going to try a weird little formatting trick, please bear with me [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 04:30, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
:::Hold on, I'm gonna see if I can make this work out better... -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 00:49, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

:::OK, I have fixed it. From now on, it won't matter if anyone hits "Edit" to one pistol (instead of the whole page); the edit won't remove all the other paragraph spaces automatically (which is what was causing the problem). -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 01:32, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

==Para-Ordance==
Shouldnt these guns get their own page? Sure they are a 1911 varients, but their made by a totally different company.[[User:The Winchester|The Winchester]] 00:38, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
:Yeah, but their 1911 variants. This is the M1911 pistol series page, and they are 1911s. That's why they are on here. - [[User:Gunmaster45|Gunmaster45]]
::I would prefer the Para Ordnance series of pistols have their own page due PRIMARILY to the fact that the Paras have a whole slew of different calibers that other M1911 makes and models don't have [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 06:40, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

== The M in the page title ==

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the M in the page title incorrect? These are Colt 1911s (or 1911a1s, etc.), not Colt M1911s, unless referred to by US military nomenclature, just the same way that a Beretta 92f is an M9 only to the US Army and a SIG Sauer P228 is an M11 only in USAF terms. Just because it's the model of 1911 doesn't make it an M1911, any more than a '67 Shelby GT500 is an M67 Shelby GT500.[[User:YourMessageHere|YourMessageHere]] 08:09, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
::No. The Colt pistol was formally adopted by the Army on March 29, 1911, thus gaining its designation, M1911 (Model of 1911). Only examples or prototypes prior to the year 1911 would NOT have the M designation (which is extremely rare). Between the years of 1907 and 1910 the Colt pistol was constantly being modified and re-designed to win the Army's trials for adoption of a new handgun. The gun was only mass produced AFTER winning the Army's pistol trials. The Beretta 92FS was already famous world wide and was commercially available as the 92F/FS for YEARS before the Army adopted it. Every 1911 design came AFTER the M1911 (aka Model of 1911) so it is the correct nomenclature. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 07:20, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

==WHO KEEPS ON F#$%KING WITH THE FORMAT?==
I noticed yet AGAIN, the pictures are not aligning with their sections. We need to tell these anonymous members not to mess with a page's format if they don't know what they are doing!!!!!!! [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 07:13, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

==Caliber question==
I thought I would ask permission before making this change considering how important this article is: in the specifications category the caliber is listed solely as .45 ACP. I was wondering whether or not that should be changed to include .380 ACP, .38 Super, 9mm, and .40 S&W?
:-[[User:Anonymous|Anonymous]]

==M1991 Series==
I was wondering: what exactly is the difference between the 1911 series and the 1991 series? -[[User:Gunman69|Gunman69]] 17:18, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Colt introduced (announced) the M1991A1 in 1991 as a sort of economy version of the Government Model, resembling the military M1911A1, and with the serial numbers picking up where the military gun left off after WWII. The gun was made in that form until about 2003, at which time the finish was changed to polished blue rather than matte blue, and the black rubber grips replaced with checkered wood.