| 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:Tiger Cage: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
Commando552 (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
''(Moved from elsewhere)'' I still think the shotgun is mainly a S&W 3000 - In the one closeup of the receiver the eject port seems a bit large and seems to have a wee bit more of an upward cut reaching the top of the receiver which matches more the Smith, rather the Remington - It's slight but it's there. That plus the pump grip doesn't look like that of a typical 870, and the gun has the S&W-style factory folding stock. I will admit the barrel clamps are plainly there in that one shot but don't seem to be in others so I'm wondering if they just swapped with an 870 for that one shot or something. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan|talk]]) 17:22, 9 February 2016 (EST) | ''(Moved from elsewhere)'' I still think the shotgun is mainly a S&W 3000 - In the one closeup of the receiver the eject port seems a bit large and seems to have a wee bit more of an upward cut reaching the top of the receiver which matches more the Smith, rather the Remington - It's slight but it's there. That plus the pump grip doesn't look like that of a typical 870, and the gun has the S&W-style factory folding stock. I will admit the barrel clamps are plainly there in that one shot but don't seem to be in others so I'm wondering if they just swapped with an 870 for that one shot or something. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan|talk]]) 17:22, 9 February 2016 (EST) | ||
:Can you get magazine extensions for the S&W 3000? --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] ([[User talk:Funkychinaman|talk]]) 17:51, 9 February 2016 (EST) | :Can you get magazine extensions for the S&W 3000? --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] ([[User talk:Funkychinaman|talk]]) 17:51, 9 February 2016 (EST) | ||
::[http://oi45.tinypic.com/2iaebmt.jpg Here] is a comparison shot of the Remington to the Smith. The Remington ejection port is fully rounded at the ends as opposed to the S&W which just has rounded off corners. Also, not sure but I think from this image the ejection port actually reaches the same point on both guns and is the same size, any apparent difference is probably just the angle in a particular shot. The design of the bolt carriers themselves is also different, with the film gun matching the Remington. There is also a difference in the action bar, with the 870 one being thicker with a step just ahead of the receiver, just like the film gun. As for the stock, I believe that these were made by another company and just used on the S&W so would have been available, but even if they were made special as the S&W is pretty much dimensionally a clone of the 870 the stocks interchange anyway. You can get extension tubes for the S&W but I have never seen them with that 870 style clamp, but TBH this would probably also interchange. The ejection port and bolt is the real telling difference. I think it is always an 870 as the ejection port looks the same, but are there 2 different shotguns here? In the first two images it appears to have a synthetic pump and a clamp on the barrel, but in the second two it has a wood pump and no clamp. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] ([[User talk:Commando552|talk]]) 21:12, 9 February 2016 (EST) | |||
Revision as of 02:12, 10 February 2016
Is there any evidence to indicate the Type 54 is a Model 213? --Funkychinaman (talk) 10:46, 9 February 2016 (EST)
- Two bottom images show sloped slide serration, like on Model 213.Greg-Z (talk) 11:15, 9 February 2016 (EST)
Why a Smith & Wesson Model 25? Do you ever see it loading with moon clips? --Funkychinaman (talk) 16:53, 9 February 2016 (EST)
(Moved from elsewhere) I still think the shotgun is mainly a S&W 3000 - In the one closeup of the receiver the eject port seems a bit large and seems to have a wee bit more of an upward cut reaching the top of the receiver which matches more the Smith, rather the Remington - It's slight but it's there. That plus the pump grip doesn't look like that of a typical 870, and the gun has the S&W-style factory folding stock. I will admit the barrel clamps are plainly there in that one shot but don't seem to be in others so I'm wondering if they just swapped with an 870 for that one shot or something. StanTheMan (talk) 17:22, 9 February 2016 (EST)
- Can you get magazine extensions for the S&W 3000? --Funkychinaman (talk) 17:51, 9 February 2016 (EST)
- Here is a comparison shot of the Remington to the Smith. The Remington ejection port is fully rounded at the ends as opposed to the S&W which just has rounded off corners. Also, not sure but I think from this image the ejection port actually reaches the same point on both guns and is the same size, any apparent difference is probably just the angle in a particular shot. The design of the bolt carriers themselves is also different, with the film gun matching the Remington. There is also a difference in the action bar, with the 870 one being thicker with a step just ahead of the receiver, just like the film gun. As for the stock, I believe that these were made by another company and just used on the S&W so would have been available, but even if they were made special as the S&W is pretty much dimensionally a clone of the 870 the stocks interchange anyway. You can get extension tubes for the S&W but I have never seen them with that 870 style clamp, but TBH this would probably also interchange. The ejection port and bolt is the real telling difference. I think it is always an 870 as the ejection port looks the same, but are there 2 different shotguns here? In the first two images it appears to have a synthetic pump and a clamp on the barrel, but in the second two it has a wood pump and no clamp. --commando552 (talk) 21:12, 9 February 2016 (EST)
