| Error creating thumbnail: File missing Join our Discord! |
| If you have been locked out of your account you can request a password reset here. |
Talk:CZ 805 G1: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mNo edit summary |
Spartan198 (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
It's too bad this wasn't developed sooner, because in all honesty it's what I feel ''should'' have become the M320 instead of the HK monstrosity. I mean, there's nothing wrong with the AG36 and its variants from a mechanical standpoint, but they're ''too freaking big'' as opposed to the 805 G1 which combines all the advantages of the M320 and then some with the slimmer size of the M203. Too bad. :( [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] ([[User talk:Spartan198|talk]]) 02:27, 29 June 2016 (EDT) | It's too bad this wasn't developed sooner, because in all honesty it's what I feel ''should'' have become the M320 instead of the HK monstrosity. I mean, there's nothing wrong with the AG36 and its variants from a mechanical standpoint, but they're ''too freaking big'' as opposed to the 805 G1 which combines all the advantages of the M320 and then some with the slimmer size of the M203. Too bad. :( [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] ([[User talk:Spartan198|talk]]) 02:27, 29 June 2016 (EDT) | ||
:Doesn't seem to do anything the IWI GL40 doesn't also do, why this one in particular? Also, IIRC a lot of US soldiers carry their 320 as a standalone because modern medium-power grenades are shits to fire from a UBGL and you don't really want a computerised GL sight on your rifle at all times. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] ([[User talk:Evil Tim|talk]]) 03:00, 29 June 2016 (EDT) | :Doesn't seem to do anything the IWI GL40 doesn't also do, why this one in particular? Also, IIRC a lot of US soldiers carry their 320 as a standalone because modern medium-power grenades are shits to fire from a UBGL and you don't really want a computerised GL sight on your rifle at all times. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] ([[User talk:Evil Tim|talk]]) 03:00, 29 June 2016 (EDT) | ||
::It doesn't have a pistol grip or the M320's forward grip to get caught on stuff, for one. The breech swings in either direction instead of just one, unlike the M320. And it's no more bulky than an M203. The reason most soldiers carry it standalone is because it's a hindrance to mobility when attached to a rifle. If it was a matter of needing a launcher that could be used standalone, why not follow USMC suit and get M32s? That's what SOCOM did instead of bothering with the M320. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] ([[User talk:Spartan198|talk]]) 06:11, 29 June 2016 (EDT) | |||
Latest revision as of 10:11, 29 June 2016
For want of a nail
It's too bad this wasn't developed sooner, because in all honesty it's what I feel should have become the M320 instead of the HK monstrosity. I mean, there's nothing wrong with the AG36 and its variants from a mechanical standpoint, but they're too freaking big as opposed to the 805 G1 which combines all the advantages of the M320 and then some with the slimmer size of the M203. Too bad. :( Spartan198 (talk) 02:27, 29 June 2016 (EDT)
- Doesn't seem to do anything the IWI GL40 doesn't also do, why this one in particular? Also, IIRC a lot of US soldiers carry their 320 as a standalone because modern medium-power grenades are shits to fire from a UBGL and you don't really want a computerised GL sight on your rifle at all times. Evil Tim (talk) 03:00, 29 June 2016 (EDT)
- It doesn't have a pistol grip or the M320's forward grip to get caught on stuff, for one. The breech swings in either direction instead of just one, unlike the M320. And it's no more bulky than an M203. The reason most soldiers carry it standalone is because it's a hindrance to mobility when attached to a rifle. If it was a matter of needing a launcher that could be used standalone, why not follow USMC suit and get M32s? That's what SOCOM did instead of bothering with the M320. Spartan198 (talk) 06:11, 29 June 2016 (EDT)