Revision as of 15:38, 15 June 2017

Moved from Main Page

Kalashnikov AKS-74U

While the weapon that the "AK-74u" is standing in for does not appear in-game, it is in the "Weapons of Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare Gamer Picture Pack." It is quite strange that it appears here, but not in the game.

Glock 17

The Glock 17's silhouette appears in the "Last Stand" and "Overkill" perk symbols.

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

A Generation 3 Glock 17 - 9x19mm.

The "Last Stand" and "Overkill" Perk Symbols.

Main Knife

This is main melee knife used in Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare. The knife attack always kills an enemy in one slash or stab. In Old School multiplayer matches, however, two knife attacks are required to kill an enemy player at full health. This two-hit-kill knifing also applies when double health is applied on Private Matches. It is used by all the factions and moves very fast.

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

The main Knife In-Game

Discussion

Ah, goddamnit. I wanted to do this. Well, maybe i can make it up to IMFDB standards sometime, just DON'T do Half-Life 2. - Flying Dane

MP5

This is not an MP5A3/SD as previously suggested, as it has a flat sided receiver with pictogram markings instead of the S-E-F markings on the A3.

Wrong, It's an MP5N/SDN, it doesn't have the 4th selector option.

Please, keep the commentary on the discussion page. At any rate, I added a capture with a clearer view of the selector and its lack of a fourth position. Spartan198 20:42, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Screenshots

I have a lot of shots for the page and will upload them tommorow. -GM

I've got a crapload of good real pictures for a lot of the guns, but I don't have any clue as to how to upload them, so, for anyone that can, email me at r1c0ch37@gmail.com

You know what would have been better?

I kinda wished the creators of this game made more guns for us to use. There are so many modern firearms at least they could put in the multiplayer. Like the G36 carrying handle instead of the rail, H&K machineguns, H&K grenade launchers, a full auto M16 in the multiplayer, the option to put every accessory on your primary, like sights, suppressor, and grenade launcher all in one instead of just pick only one. I know they did that for balance, but screw balance. Let's see, what else? The UMP, Mac-10, Glocks (specificly the Glock 18), Drum magazines, AUG, Tavor, SA80/L85A1, L96A1, MP7A1. I know I'm starting to sound like I'm turning the gun choices of COD4 into Rainbow Six, but that's why I like that game a lot because it has SO MANY GUNS to pick from and the option of putting whatever you want. I want the ability to change firing modes, to add and take off suppressors. Excalibur01 20:34, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Not to mention having the actual front sight posts still present on optic-equipped M16s and M4s would have been nice. I realize they probably removed it to give better visibility, but still. Spartan198 22:40, 24 February 2009 (UTC) Spartan198

Firing selectors would have been nice. Full auto or nothing is kind of lame. - Gunmaster45

According to gamers, the military doesn't use semi-automatic (sarcasm). Spartan198 09:31, 7 March 2009 (UTC) Spartan198

Yet it's all modeled on semi. Or safe.-protoAuthor 01:45, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Well screw hardcore gamers. I have most of the Tom Clancy games and those you can select weapons to semi and auto and even some have bursts modeExcalibur01 01:06,

3 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree completely with you. In most situations in-game, I seemingly always find myself tapping the trigger for single shots instead of firing bursts. Spartan198 07:02, 20 May 2009 (UTC) Spartan198

i would have liked to have seen the L96A1 and or the AW50F, as these would have been awesome in cod, also the glock 18, SR-25, and i would have liked to do my own customising of weapons, like on the M16 on the modified version you lose the front sights which just look wrong.

Is ok to put pics on this from other websites. User:Drjuki

I want a goddamm regular FN FAL and a IMI Galil AR with the wood hand guards. They would be perfect in the hands of terrorists in the game. They already have the G3 why not a FN FAL?Oliveira 18:56, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

i would have liked to customised the weapons myself

In my opinion the worst choice of the Infinity Ward was the selection of the MP-44 as "final unlock": is older than the AK-47 and cannot be modified, excepted the selection of the camouiflage painting. Why call the game "Modern Warfare" if the (teorically) ultimate gun is also the oldest??? Lone Soldier 03-12-2009

I believe the mp44 aka sturm was put in there as an Easter Egg of sorts since this was the first Call of Duty to date that wasnt about WW2.

Desert Eagle

what finishes do the Desert Eagles have in the game? IMI lists several variants http://www.magnumresearch.com/CustomFinishes.asp

Just stainless steel, I think. But don't quote me. I never use it. Spartan198 07:07, 20 May 2009 (UTC) Spartan198 the game has chrome and titanium gold.

Stainless steel, as well as gold once you reach level 55.

The Desert Eagles don't come in stainless steel. It would be too goddamn shiny. It uses a chrome-plating finish. --Blemo ^TALK • _{CONTRIBUTIONS} • _EMAIL • _MESSAGE 06:29, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

P90 comments.

whoever keeps deleting my edits bugger off, this gun is awesome it is easy to aim and has awesome stopping power, and to say it is weak and inaccurate is just plain rubbish, u would have to be a fool to fail to kill an oppo with this gun

Have at it, but remember - this is the last time I play nice. --Clutch 19:05, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

this weapon is the fantastic it is very easy to aim it has good stopping power and at close range it is downright lethal

Can't we all play nice?!?! User:Drjuki

I stopped playing COD4 because of peoples bickering "Thats a noob gun" "you're camping" "that perk sucks"

There is a crowd who all believe what perks everyoe should have and what weapons, Id love to see a game by their rules, it would be boring. So waiting a few minuites behid a corner is camping, and i'm kicked for it, but they can sit in a building with a siper level the whole match? Tehn there is the p90 debate. Let people who like it use it, do't start telling them there a noob and being unfair.

Come on clutch! Don't be so evil on the kid.Oliveira 18:56, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Any weapon or perk combination you use to kill an opposing player is deemed "noobish". Anymore I just laugh their rants off and go on with the game. Spartan198 20:46, 20 May 2009 (UTC) Spartan198

I think it's sad people (including myself) stop playing the very good multiplayer because of the other players who just ruin it with loud, abusive talking, silly arguments about trivial matters, and generally making it uncomfortable. User:Mcguinness

the noobish comment is spot on as if u use something that the other gamers dont like noobish sod that i kill the lot of em, and the silly arguements comment is also right it gets down right annoying

No Browning M2?

Why is there no Browning on the page? It was clearly seen in-game.

umm i dont think glitching outside of the map counts unles your counting the one on the M1 ambrams -scarecrow

As long as it's in the game, it counts to be in the article. --Blemo ^TALK • _{CONTRIBUTIONS} • _EMAIL • _MESSAGE 06:31, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Red Dot Sight

The red dot sight on the M4 SOPMOD is a Sure Shot Reflex Sight, not a C-More. [[1]] Spartan198 07:14, 20 May 2009 (UTC) Spartan198

The 1911 Griggs used looks more like a Kimber TLE stainless

About the Springfield 1911 in the game I also think it is a Springfield opposed to a Kimber Warrior because I have one and the grip is a lighter color plus it has a different magazine.

umm its a stainless (silver colour) 1911 isnt it? where does it say on the page its a kimber? -scarecrow

Excerpt from Remington 700P

"Oddly, the M40A3 also seen in game is very much the same weapon, although in the game they have slightly different attributes."

I have to agree and disagree with this statement, as they can't be classified "as the same weapon", since the M40A3 has its own model number, designation, and role in the Marine Corps; and was modified from the R700P, one change being the finely rifled heavy barrel. However, both rifles, as mentioned before, are made from the Remington 700 model. I think this should be clarified a bit more clearly. Any thoughts? --Blemo ^TALK • _{CONTRIBUTIONS} • _EMAIL • _MESSAGE 12:57, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Just quick, is the 700p the ltr model or not? Can you tell? User:Mcguinness

Bluey?

I noticed that some M4's and M16's have "Bluey" on the side. Is there a reason for this? Or just something the designers put in?

I think it's "Blue 4," possibly to identify who the rifle belongs to in the squad. Vangelis 11:34, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

yea it says blue 4 on both a M4 and M16 -scarecrow

M4/M16

I added a little more information about how the gas block removal on an M4/M16 would effect the firearm. It is true that is the gas block is removed that the next round will not chamber automatically. the bolt would have to be racked to load a new round. I just thought I'd add that information to the page. It can be removed if desired. ShaDow XPS

INCORRECT ^

Though you cannot see it, most likely the standard front sight gas block has been replaced whit anyone of the readily available low-profile gas blocks and most likely covered by the rail system or fore-grip.

Thank you...some one realized that it was still there. please remove the text stating it is not there from the main page -supertoaster

The KAC RIS isn't long enough to cover a low profile gas block because the gas tube has to be long enough to reach the front sight post, which rests in front of the RIS on the barrel. If the RIS covered the entire gas tube, then the standard RIS/front sight post set up wouldn't work because the gas tube wouldn't be long enough to reach the front sight post and therefor no gases would be directed back to cycle the bolt. And if this explanation is lost on you, try taking a look at Rabbit's CQBR from Medal of Honor (2010), which actually is equipped with a low profile gas block.

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

Notice how the gas block, while partially obscured by the tac light, can quite clearly be seen on the barrel. It has to be placed here because of the length of the gas tube, which extends beyond the length of the RIS. Compare this with the AR-15 carbine in CoD4.

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

Notice how it doesn't even have a gas tube! This gas block debate is getting old, especially with how I've just shown that any gas block would be visible on the barrel. There is no gas block. Get over it. Spartan198 01:35, 13 April 2012 (CDT)

There's obviously no gas block, I personally never argued there was, but in first person you wouldn't be able to see it if there was one, so there "could" be one in first person, when you're holding it. I don't think anyone was saying there was a gas block on the actual model or in third person.

You say you never argued there was a gas block, but then you say there could be one. Quite a contradiction there. The fact is that the low profile gas block defense is baseless and essentially made up, even for the hero guns used by the player, because there's nothing in the game to actually support it. The third person model is all there is to go by and it refutes any and all claims of a low profile gas block being present. Spartan198 21:24, 13 April 2012 (CDT)

I mean I know there obviously isn't a gas block, they didn't put one on the player or world models, but on the hero gun, your first person gun, you can't tell. What I'm saying is if I'm playing I can assume there's a gas block there, just like I assume there's a stock on the gun, even though I can't see it either. Basically, there is no gas block, but in first person you can't tell if there is or isn't. Alex T Snow 02:43, 14 April 2012 (CDT)

M4 Barrel

If anyone's still looking at this page, does it look to you like the M4 has a 16" barrel? It does to me. A perfectly straight 16" barrel (no M203 cuts) and the old style M4 stock. I believe that makes it exactly the same as the C8, which was mentioned as being what the SAS really use, so maybe the M4 in this game is really a C8. If anyone can counter this feel free.

You're right about the barrel, I think, but the C8 has a 14.5", not a 16". Furthermore, if you look at the rifle without any optics, it has an A2 style rear sight, while the C8's is A1 style.

The barrel looks longer because the front sight/gas block is removed when equipped with optics. If you take into account the length of the front sight, the barrel evens out at around 14.5 inches. The "standard" C8 has a 14.5 inch A1 profile barrel, but the C8FTHB (the version used by SAS under the designation L119A1) has a 16.1 inch barrel that bulges out where the M203 step is on an M4 barrel. Spartan198 18:27, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

The L119A1's the SFW, not the FTHB. Although in practice there's probably not much difference. The Wierd It 20:53, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Oh right, I forgot about the front sight being removed. Since you never have a carry handle in the SAS missions I wasn't counting that, and I was thinking SFW when I said C8.

Looks like the FTHB to me. L119A1 - [2] C8FTHB - [3] Spartan198 00:51, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

The only difference is that the SFW has a stronger front sight to use the HK AG-C/L17A1 grenade launcher.The Wierd It 09:29, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Why would a stronger front sight be needed when the AG-C is RIS-mounted? Spartan198 18:44, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

The 1911 in-game

The article is full of incorrect information. The MEU (SOC) pistol does have novak sights and a match grade trigger nowadays, and a Springfield Loaded model has front cocking serrations which the 1911 ingame does not. I don't see how it's anymore a Springfield Loaded than the other models the article lists it as not being. It seems obvious it's not any specific model of a 1911 but I'd say it's closer to the MEU (SOC) pistol than anything else. The MEU (SOC) pistol even uses desert tan gunner grips now that look just like the ones in the game.

Not that I disagree that the Springfield Armory Professional 1911 is the 1911 model in-game, but I think that there is a possibility that it might be a Nighthawk Custom Enforcer Series or GRP 1911. Why? Because the armed forces would likely use higher-ended companies like Nighthawk. Anyway, just a possibility. Any thoughts?

LINKS:

http://www.nighthawktactical.com/The_Enforcer.html

http://www.nighthawktactical.com/GRP.html

--User:Blemo 22:45, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

That's a negative. The Nighthawk Enforcer is basically a Kimber Warrior without the rail, and the rail wasn't the only thing that made the Kimber Warrior a misidentification. The Novak sights are different, and it has a flat top strap across the slide. As far as the military using "higher end companies" They usually buy what's most cost effective and not necessarily best quality, and since Nighthawk Custom makes.... custom firearms, I doubt they'd have a contract that would be cheap, or at least cheaper than competitors. It's still a Professional. --Yournamehere 02:51, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

I see. --Blemo ^TALK • _{CONTRIBUTIONS} • _EMAIL • _MESSAGE 06:39, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

It definitly has those grips though, that was the first thing I noticed. It might not be an Enforcer, but it has the same grips. Here (in tan):

link: http://www.nighthawkcustom.com/detail.aspx?ID=133#

Oh and thanks Blemo for bringing this up anyway because I've been trying to put together an airsoft replica of this 1911 for a while, and now I've finally got those damn grips, couldn't find 'em anywhere. I also put together the M4 SOPMOD the S.A.S. use in game as my primary, which makes me Captain Price :D

EDIT: You guys think it could be this one, a Springfield Armory Loaded? Just add the grips I linked above, I'm pretty sure it's exactly the same otherwise.

http://www.bullshooterssupply.com/store/images/springfield_armory_1911_a1_px9109lp.jpg

EDIT 2: I used my not so amazing MS Paint skills to put this together for you guys (and me)

Alex T Snow 06:32, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

It could be a customized Colt since the front sight does not seem to dovetailed into the slide--Jan 22:36, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the MS Paint image, Alex. =] Sadly, I'd hate to burst your bubble and say that the ejection port should not be as "shiny" as seen in this image. Plus, the coloration of the slide and frame should be darker. (although it may just be the lighting). --Blemo ^TALK • _{CONTRIBUTIONS} • _EMAIL • _MESSAGE 06:39, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

I know, but the barrel, bushing, and trigger are some kind of "silver", whether it be stainless, chrome, nickel-plated, though I'd say stainless the point is those parts are "silver" Alex T Snow 22:12, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

although more likely for Special Ops to be using Nighthawk's i dont think the designers at infinity ward no what they are. and on the topic of it possibly being an Enforcer model. All Nighthawks have Novak Sights besides the Dominator. and the Grips are easily replacable. so it could be any model from the GRP to the Enforcer to the Talon. Dirtdiver6421 23:14, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Desert Eagles hammer down?

Isn't the Desert Eagles hammer incorrectly down?

Yes but so is the 1911's, and the rest once they've been fired. In the Modern Warfare universe all guns are double action only I guess. Alex T Snow 06:09, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

M4 In-Game For Airsofters (Or Real Steel Guys Too I Guess)

As with I'm sure a number of other people on this site, I airsoft. =D I've been working on a Captain Price kit for a little while, who, as you know, uses an M4 SOPMOD/Grenadier. The reason he uses both is because they're the same gun with and without the suppressor, for the sneaky and not sneaky parts. (And different optics, but his gun is probably supposed to have the same optics the whole time, I'd bet IW didn't want to make a different gun just for him, as most people wouldn't notice.) Because finding EVERYTHING to put together his M4 was a big pain, I'm going to put a list of parts here for anyone wanting to make the M4 and its versions in-game. This would also work for a real one too I would think, at least mostly. This is assuming the base gun is a normal, generic M4A1.

M4A1 "multiplayer":

16" HBAR (no grooves) barrel
Old style stock
RAS
Vertical foregrip

(Please note this one can't be made using an electric airsoft M4, well, it can, but there'll be nowhere to put a battery. You will need a gas airsoft one or a real steel one.)

M4A1 "normal":

16" HBAR (no grooves) barrel
Old style stock
RAS
Vertical foregrip
PEQ-2 (on the front left)
Tasco red dot scope
The smallest gas block you can find

M4A1 Suppressed:

Same as the M4A1 "normal" except with a suppressor (go figure)

M4A1 Grenadier:

16" HBAR (no grooves) barrel
Old style stock
RAS
M203 (9" rail mounted version)
M203 leaf sight (on the front top)
PEQ-2 (on the front left)
EOTech 552 holosight
The smallest gas block you can find

M4A1 SOPMOD:

Same as the M4 Grenadier except with a suppressor, and a Tasco QP22 reflex sight replacing the EOTech 552

For Captain Price's M4 I'm combining the Grenadier and SOPMOD by having a suppressor and an EOTech 552, seems like the easiest way to solve the problem.

I hope this list helps whoever needs it. :) Alex T Snow 08:54, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

The barrel on the M4 is 14.5". The missing FSP just makes it look longer. Spartan198 05:21, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

As much as everyone seems to think that, try putting a piece of paper up to your screen with the edge down the centre of the barrel of a 14.5" M4, a real one would be good. Mark off the back of the front sight/front of the RAS/Handguard, and, without moving it, mark where the flash hider starts. This distance will be the same as the length of the RAS/Handguard. Do the same thing to the COD4 M4 Info Picture and you'll find the barrel's longer. :) Alex T Snow 12:42, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

AKS-74

Misinformation - as it is not portrayed in game. Removing

How? It's pointed out that it is not in game and only on the poster. We have the Glock 17 on the Overkill and Last Stand perks, and the PPSh-41 that the statues hold, this isn't any different. Alex T Snow 22:37, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

G3A4

Someone commented that this was an HK91 due to the lack of a paddle release on the magazine. Here's a picture of a player reloading it:

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

I don't see much here so what do you guys think? - Kenny99 16:02, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Don't see one, look at the create a class picture, no paddle release there either. --FIVETWOSEVEN 00:50, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Well the reload animation acts like it DOES have a paddle release, so it supposed to be a G3A4 but the animation forgot about it, just like the trigger and guard for the M203 Excalibur01 03:36, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Seems like a HK91 to me.--FIVETWOSEVEN 15:03, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

--Milkovich 20:19, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

I saw that it is a HK91 even without looking at Milkovich's proof image. Missing paddle release can be seen on the image with tha reload on the page. - bozitojugg3rn4ut 02:01, 27 July 2011 (CDT)

The Javelin sight

I posted this on the CoD wiki initially, but only on a talk page since they don't feature RL weapon info. When you're looking through the Javelin's sight, the display behaves...oddly. The light on at the bottom is supposed to be red and indicates "missile BIT failure," according to the field manual. The red CLU BIT failure light comes on when it's locking on, and the amber "missile not ready" flashes just before you fire. I'm not sure if this is just normal behaviour or the FM on GlobalSecurity is wrong (I'd defer to anyone who's actually used one of these things for that) or if they just had lights come on at random for visual appeal. Vangelis 20:24, 5 March 2011 (MSK) Also seems that Remaster is now more unrealistic.--Dannyguns (talk) 10:03, 11 November 2016 (EST)

The M4A1

From Hitman: Contracts Talk page: "HOW the hell can the M4 in COD4:MW be an M4 if it has a 16" non-stepped barrel? I say that is an AR-15A3 with a full auto lower, if something like that can exist" (Stated by bozitojugg3rn4ut)

Does anyone else agree? I do. - Mr. Wolf 17:34, 24 September 2011 (CDT)

I'm thinking the AR-15A3 is the most likely, but at any rate, here are the differences between the COD4 M4A1 a real M4A1. 16" heavy barrel (non-stepped), M16A1 flash hider, original M4 stock, M16A1 pistol grip (in 3rd person, can't see it in 1st), and a KAC RIS. Also, being a civilian gun could explain why the selector is set to semi. Alex T Snow 20:10, 24 September 2011 (CDT)

But the M4A1 in MW2 and MW3 have their selector switches set to semi too. :\ - Mr. Wolf 22:02, 24 September 2011 (CDT)

Yeah... but there were so many other things in those games I just call that lazy. AUG with no rear sight... Alex T Snow 23:41, 24 September 2011 (CDT)

Which game? - Mr. Wolf 18:12, 25 September 2011 (CDT)

MW2's AUG has no rear sight, an aftermarket rail-mounted front sight, and a 30 round magazine that holds 42 rounds. Alex T Snow 20:02, 25 September 2011 (CDT)

Aw, okay. Never played MW2 so I wouldn't know. - Mr. Wolf 20:42, 25 September 2011 (CDT)

Don't, it will make you depressed :/ Alex T Snow 21:14, 25 September 2011 (CDT)

Never planed too. :) - Mr. Wolf 22:29, 25 September 2011 (CDT)

This site's MW2 page has pics, they're enough Alex T Snow 00:13, 26 September 2011 (CDT)

Looks like this thread died... Bye Bye Thread. (P.S.: I still say that let's change it to AR-15A3. Will do it tomorrow if no one comes up with a good reason not to.) - bozitojugg3rn4ut 15:20, 3 October 2011 (CDT)

although not a solid reason i would just keep it. its not a big deal but for any onlookers there not going to understand it Dirtdiver6421 20:11, 3 October 2011 (CDT)

Or, they could learn what an AR-15A3 is :) Alex T Snow 20:38, 3 October 2011 (CDT)

So am I the only one willing to write the barrel off as a modelling error and the rest as being due to the low-polygon third person model? The Wierd It 09:46, 5 October 2011 (CDT)

If a modelling error makes one gun into another, then we cover it as the one the error made it into. Evil Tim 10:21, 5 October 2011 (CDT)

Well, I've always insisted that the M4 in-game IS an M4 rather any other M16-based weapon, but I guess I was wrong and looking on the small details, it's a civilian AR-15A3. BTW, if talking about accuracies, have you noticed that the M203 mounted on the, eventually AR-15A3 :P, is actually the A2 version used for the M16A4, rather the A1? (noticed by the rail). I guess it ought be changed too :) --RaNgeR 10:49, 5 October 2011 (CDT)

Although if it was a 14-inch barrel I could almost argue it's a C8A1 fitted with an M4 carry handle. The Wierd It 11:39, 5 October 2011 (CDT)

Correction; C8A2 with M4A1 carry handle and M16A1 pistol grip; the A1 doesn't have the heavy barrel. The Wierd It 12:58, 5 October 2011 (CDT)

If you measure the length of the rail system, and then the length of the barrel in front of the front sight of this "M4", you can tell for sure it has a 16 inch barrel. I'm still thinking it's supposed to be the C8SFW, the barrel's straight instead of stepped, but still 16 inches, one of the few with a standard 16 inch barrel. And 90% of the time you see a picture of the SFW, it has a KAC RIS. Oh, and it IS what the SAS use in real life as well, makes it more likely. Wow, this has got the be one of the hardest guns to identify... Alex T Snow 18:43, 5 October 2011 (CDT)

I really think you are giving the devs too much credit here with the appropriateness of the C8SFW for the SAS, especially as they call it an M4. There are quite a few Colt variants that have a 16" barrel as standard, the carbine sporter and LE variants. These would also be much more prevalent in the US for the developers to get a look at to base their weapon off of. The only distinguishing features of the C8SFW is the profile of the barrel and rupper pad on the butt, both of which are absent from this weapon. --commando552 19:21, 5 October 2011 (CDT)

You're forgetting the original style M4 stock, that's pretty important. Alex T Snow 20:49, 5 October 2011 (CDT)

That is literally a 2 second job to change, and as I said before the SFW has a chunky rubber pad on the butt, which the game gun doesn't. Unlike the gun we have pictured for the site, AR15A3s can also have the fiberlite stock [4]. All of this is assuming it is a Colt rifle at all, for example it is a match for a Fulton Armory Classic M4, but that really is opening up a can of worms for something that probably only has a 16" barrel due to poor scaling of the 3rd person model. --commando552 05:13, 6 October 2011 (CDT)

I see your point, but a rubber stock pad is as much a part of the gun as rail mounted optics, it's really not. Let's just go with the AR-15A3. The 16" straight barrel and old style stock are the most notable features, and it has both. Alex T Snow 05:36, 6 October 2011 (CDT)

Images

I'm gonna bump the image sizes up to 600px, is that okay? - Mr. Wolf 22:03, 7 November 2011 (CST)

Sounds fine to me :) Alex T Snow 23:05, 7 November 2011 (CST)

Inaccurate Recoil Info

In the HK91 (G3) section the one photo says something along the lines that: Although firing a larger cartridge than the AK-47, the G3 is inaccurately depicted as having less recoil than the AK. The game is actually relatively correct that the G3 has less recoil than the AK, because the AK is a 6-7lb rifle firing full auto, and the G3 is a 10-12lb semi-automatic battle rifle firing a caliber (7.62x51 NATO) that really isn't that much more severe than the AK (7.62x39 Russian). --Ranger12 11:18, 8 November 2011 (CST)

Sounds right to me Alex T Snow 16:22, 8 November 2011 (CST)

Actually AKs usually weigh 8 lbs (stamped steel) or 10 lbs (milled steel), G3s weigh 9 lbs (G3A3) or 10 lbs (G3A4), plus real G3s are semi & full-auto (the one in-game is a HK91) and most people say it has a good kick like any other 7.62 NATO rifle. - Mr. Wolf 17:05, 8 November 2011 (CST)

A G3 still has more recoil than an AK-47. Although the G3A4 is heavier (only by one or two hundred grams when both are fully loaded thanks to the "sturdy" AK magazine), the NATO round has quite a bit more energy than the 7.62x39. Did a (very) quick calculation and came out a loaded G3 having approximately double the recoil kinetic energy of a loaded AK-47. --commando552 17:17, 8 November 2011 (CST)

Mmmmm sorry it really doesn't. I have a Saiga .308, which in the way I have it configured, weighs 10lbs loaded. The Saiga 7.62x39, which weighs 7lbs loaded, recoils as much as or more than the .308. Also, there are other factors being left out here. For one, the G3 is roller delayed recoil operated, which soaks up about 80% of the recoil alone. The AK is gas piston operated which soaks up only about 60% of the recoil. Another factor is the bullet itself. .308 tends to just "shove" your shoulder, whereas a 7.62x39 delivers a quick punch. (If you have shot these calibers you know exactly what I'm talking about). Lastly, a G3 has an 18" barrel, which offers more velocity to the .308 cartridge than the 16" barrel does to the 7.62x39, therefore calculations on velocity/energy vs recoil won't be accurate because it isn't a direct comparison. (you would need to compare 16" to 16" barrels, and as a rule of thumb, every inch different from the published velocity of a certain ammo adds or subtracts 50 fps for every inch added or removed). --Ranger12 18:28, 8 November 2011 (CST)

The only factors I took into account were the muzzle velocity of the particular firearms, the weight of the bullet, the weight of the gun, and Newton's third law. In order for the world not the fall apart, the G3 definitely recoils with more energy than an AK-47. The exact manner in which it transfers this energy is a different matter. I can't say definitely as haven't shot them back to back, but I would agree that a G3 is more comfortable than an AK-47, but if you were to lay them both on a frictionless table and pull the trigger, the G3 would slide backwards faster than an AK-47. I have also shot a G3 full auto, and it is pretty damn hard to stay on target. --commando552 19:13, 8 November 2011 (CST)

Theoretically, you would be right. However the roller delayed blowback system significantly slows down the cycling of the gun and requires much of the recoil to operate the bolt, thereby reducing felt recoil. Technically, yes the G3 does have more recoil, but because of the operating system, you don't feel it nearly as much as on an AK. Don't get me wrong, it's one heck of a gun to control, however because of the type of action, the type of caliber, rounds per minute, and so on, the recoil on a full auto AK will be much worse than a semi-auto G3. Are we all cleared up? Thanks --Ranger12 19:46, 8 November 2011 (CST)

Maybe recoil is the wrong word here, the MP5 (in-game at least) has tons, but that's not what we mean. What we're talking about is muzzle climb, or vertical recoil, not factoring recoil back into your shoulder, because you don't really see that in a game. Alex T Snow 19:48, 8 November 2011 (CST)

I still think the statement should be deleted because it obviously isn't true. Alex, I'm pretty sure it's safe to call muzzle climb "recoil" because in the game, that's what recoil is depicted as. If we want to switch out everything we talked about to muzzle climb, well it still would be wrong. In game, it's the same thing. --Ranger12 19:58, 8 November 2011 (CST)

To be honest I haven't played the original Modern warfare, so have just looked up some videos of the G3 firing and it has ridiculously low recoil, its like a .22LR. Even if you click the mouse so fast it replicates full auto, there is zero muzzle climb. In real life, even if we are just talking about muzzle climb, in my experiencing a G3 firing on full auto has a lot more climb than an AK-47 firing on full auto. As for the operating systems absorbing recoil, I don't know where you are getting numbers like 80% from (so you think a G3 has 20% the recoil of a bolt action 7.62?) but no operating system can get rid of recoil energy (with the exception of turning negligible amounts of it into sound and heat) it will just change the way it is distributed over time. The bolt on an AK-47 is heavier due to the piston being attached, which meant that it might have a harder "kick" within the recoil when the bolt hits the rear, but the G3 has a possibly softer but much more sustained push, which will typically cause more muzzle climb. An analogy would be that you can push someone and punch someone with the same amount of energy, and they will be knocked over by the push but the punch will hurt more. I don't see anything untrue about the statement as it stands, but if it bothers you, get rid of the reference to the AK as it is unnecessary, and just change it to saying that the G3 has much lower recoil than it should creating zero muzzle climb even with rapid fire. --commando552 06:31, 9 November 2011 (CST)

I totally get what your saying. Those numbers I got are approximations from strictly my observations only. I own AK's and have shot CETME's along with dozens of other firearms, sometimes back to back. In full auto, yes. I 100% agree with your statement (although it would probably be considerably less of you were shooting prone or from a bipod). As for shooting it out of a bolt action, yes, shooting .308 out of a bolt action is at least 2x as hard on your shoulder than if you shot it out of a semi-auto. It may not be 80%, but you have to remember the other factors than just the operating system.

I also agree that the depicted recoil may be less than it should be, however, given weight, operating system, caliber, caliber gunpowder burn type (pretty technical but it plays in), gun weight distribution, etc. its pretty safe to say that the semi auto G3 will have less recoil than the full auto AK. Maybe not as less recoil as depicted, but less recoil nonetheless. --Ranger12 07:42, 9 November 2011 (CST)

I think the difference is that I'm comparing a full auto G3 to a full auto AK-47, whereas you are talking about a semi auto G3. I don't think this is a fair comparison though (which is suppose is a reason to get rid of or change the phrase in question, not because it is false but because it isn't a fair comparison), as any full auto rifle would have more perceived recoil and muzzle climb than a semi auto. A better comparison would be for a single shot from either gun, and in my opinion is that you would definitely feel more recoil from a single shot from a G3 as opposed to an AK-47. --commando552 09:51, 9 November 2011 (CST)

In short, I'll agree with that. There are other things to be factored in and bla bla bla, but in short, you've got it. Glad we could fix this. --Ranger12 10:50, 9 November 2011 (CST)

Revising the page

Can I be the one to get the screen shots, I want one less page afflicted with your (Evil Tim) obsession with the number 400. It may take me a while (need to get a new copy of the game (didn't own an actual copy) and I will be addicted to Skyrim and BF3 on top of that), hope you can wait Tim and ignore this page like how I ignore your pages (jk! >:P). I'm a merican, I do not like your 400px weapon images of "order" and you will never understand my "disorder", because you're not an operator, you wouldn't understand.
- Mr. Wolf 01:02, 26 November 2011 (CST)

Well, look at this page now and you can see a demonstration of different image sizes making things look messy. Evil Tim 03:05, 26 November 2011 (CST)

I'm not talking about the caps, screen caps should be 600/500px, I'm talking weapon images. - Mr. Wolf 21:46, 26 November 2011 (CST)

No, I mean the page is an excellent large-scale demonstration of how messy it looks when there's no standard image size. Incidentally, the way I took my caps for MW3 was to get it on Steam (which has a built in screencapping function by pressing F12) and then use Setpoint to stick F12 on one of my spare mouse buttons. I currently have a Steam copy of MW since I "pre-ordered" MW3 (by thirty minutes, and 6 hours after it was released in stores here) so I might have a head start :D Evil Tim 02:41, 27 November 2011 (CST)

Well, the only thing that needs to be replaced are the weapons screenshots. - Kenny99 11:43, 27 November 2011 (CST)

Yeah, the only thing that needs to be changed is basically the entire page. I can't believe we still have Gamespot and IGN watermarks and a picture of someone's TV screen for the Desert Eagle. Also, Kenny, the images you're uploading are nice, but gameplay images are better than model viewer images. Let's try and build this page out of images of what the game looks like while someone's actually playing it. EDIT: There, that's a few uploaded just as a demonstration. Evil Tim 11:53, 27 November 2011 (CST)

Just a note, you're going to have to be quick with this, this page is so incredibly horrible I'm fighting the urge to overhaul it immediately. Evil Tim 12:45, 27 November 2011 (CST)

I won't mess with it while you guys are changing it, but seriously, it's MacTavish. Mac. Not Mc. He is Scottish after all. Alex T Snow 17:33, 27 November 2011 (CST)

Must admit I hadn't checked the spelling. Nevermind, the series makes it clear the entire population of the British Isles are actually Scottish so maybe Soap is one of the English kind of Scottish. Evil Tim 21:07, 27 November 2011 (CST)

Mac as opposed the Mc has nothing to do with whether he is Scottish or not. The voice actor is Scottish and his name is McKidd. Mc is just an abbreviation of Mac (used to be written as M'c) and is a personal preference thing. The thing about Mac being Scottish and Mc being Irish is a myth, you find both forms in both places. --commando552 03:46, 28 November 2011 (CST)

Good to know, I didn't mean to generalize. :/ Well, there's Soap and MacMillan who are Scottish, but Price, Gaz/Ghost/Wallcroft, and most of the other SAS members in this and MW3 are English if I remember correctly. Alex T Snow 13:46, 28 November 2011 (CST)

I've been told that in real life there are proportionally more Scots in the SAS than there should be. If you live in a country where the thistles are waist high and nobody's invented trousers, you're going to toughen up a bit I suppose. --commando552 15:54, 28 November 2011 (CST)

Hahahahaha very true :) Alex T Snow 18:20, 28 November 2011 (CST)

I would know, I have Scottish ancestry. :D - Mr. Wolf 19:12, 28 November 2011 (CST)

Cool :) Alex T Snow 01:07, 29 November 2011 (CST)

Not an AK-47

The game gun is not based on an AK-47 as it has a stamped upper and lower receiver. However it lacks the AKM dimple, so my guess would be that it is actually based on a WASR-10. The rivets are in slightly the wrong place though, and it has a random plate stuck on the side behind the handguard so might be something else, but at the very least I think it should be labelled as an AKM variant. --commando552 13:00, 29 November 2011 (CST)

You know these guys, it's probably based on some Airsoft hybrid like the "AK-74U" was. Evil Tim 13:02, 29 November 2011 (CST)

Just noticed as well that it has the AK-47 type front sight, so it is either based on something obscure, a custom, airsoft, or imagination. --commando552 13:05, 29 November 2011 (CST)

I think "most likely based on an Airsoft gun" is probably the best bet for the article. We know they do that, and it's vastly more likely than that they picked an obscure AK variant. Evil Tim 13:12, 29 November 2011 (CST)

I agree. Saying most likely based on an airsoft gun is best, if only to avoid confusing everybody :/ Alex T Snow 16:07, 29 November 2011 (CST)

Is it possible that "AK-74U" in Battlefield 2 was based on Airsoft hybrid too? Its image --Masterius 08:02, 12 April 2012 (CDT)

Yep, that's the same as the COD4 one except for the 74U stock and 5.45mm magazine. Alex T Snow 12:43, 12 April 2012 (CDT)

It is slightly different as it has the correct stamped receiver as opposed to the milled one on the COD4 gun along with the above differences. --commando552 13:10, 12 April 2012 (CDT)

Good catch :) Alex T Snow 14:38, 12 April 2012 (CDT)

Price is Price's grandson

While I agree it was most likely a joke at first, as MW Price became such an important character and so well liked they must've felt they had to clear this up and someone from IW (from the model department no less) said that he is his grandson. Alex T Snow 01:56, 15 December 2011 (CST)

It's never officially stated in the games themselves if they're even related, just an informal interview. Doesn't really dignify including it. Evil Tim 02:46, 15 December 2011 (CST)

Okay :/ Alex T Snow 09:38, 15 December 2011 (CST)

Plus we know from Price surviving being shot in the head, Macmillan surviving a helicopter falling on him, Zakhaev being fine after having his arm blown off in the middle of nowhere, Petrenko surviving due to being handed a Russian flag and Ghost TOTALLY NOT BEING GAZ that death in the CoD universe works on the honour system. Evil Tim 17:16, 15 December 2011 (CST)

When'd he get shot in the head? The Wierd It 17:28, 15 December 2011 (CST)

Fairly sure that was where Zakaev shot him at the end of 4. Evil Tim 19:13, 15 December 2011 (CST)

Nope, he shoots another similarly dressed guy in the head, Price is the one that slides the pistol over after this point. Price's fate is initially ambiguous, as you see a Russian soldier attempting CPR. --commando552 19:20, 15 December 2011 (CST)

Yeah, that was Gaz that Zhakaev shot in the head, not Price. Also, not trying to ignite an argument about it, but having the same voice actor doesn't make Gaz and Ghost the same person. Going by that logic, Naomi Hunter and Emma Emmerich from the MGS franchise must be the same person because both were voiced by Jennifer Hale, and Resident Evil's Leon S. Kennedy and Specter the SEAL from the SOCOM games must be the same person because both were voiced by Paul Mercier. Spartan198 19:24, 15 December 2011 (CST)

Well sure, but neither of those died only to be replaced by a character called ghost wearing a skull mask he never takes off. It's pretty obviously supposed to be a joke rather than him actually being undead Gaz, but still. Evil Tim 19:50, 15 December 2011 (CST)

Undead Gaz sounds like something Treyarch would try. Anyway, I read the Ghost comic book series, and he has his own backstory. It's just weird they'd bring in Craig Fairbrass to do the role again, he has such a distinctive voice. --Funkychinaman 22:21, 15 December 2011 (CST)

He's also in MW3, voicing Wallcroft, who was in this :) Alex T Snow 01:56, 16 December 2011 (CST)

C8 Link Help :(

I don't know how to link things to places part way down pages, so could someone fix the red C8 link in the AR-15A3 section? Alex T Snow 02:57, 9 February 2012 (CST)

The correct markup is PAGENAME#SECTIONNAME Evil Tim 06:28, 9 February 2012 (CST)

Thanks :) Alex T Snow 18:41, 9 February 2012 (CST)

M21 Scope

Can anyone ID the M21's scope? I'm not very good with rifle scopes. Here, here, here, and here. Alex T Snow 20:54, 13 June 2012 (CDT)

I believe it is a Leupold scope of some sort, maybe a Mark 4 as seen fitted on many other sniper rifles. --RaNgeR 06:06, 14 June 2012 (CDT)

Thanks! That narrowed it down enough, and I think I figure out exactly what it is, the Leupold Mark 4 6.5-20x50mm ER/T M5. Yes, that is as short as Leupold names come. The rear end seems to be enlarged in game, most likely something to do with the scoping-in animations working properly, and the whole thing is also mirrored. Alex T Snow 10:36, 14 June 2012 (CDT)

Well, then, glad to be at your service, M8 :) --RaNgeR 11:49, 14 June 2012 (CDT)

Thing On Price's Vest

Not really firearm related, but does anyone know what the small round object is on the chest part of Price's vest? It's beside the flag patch. Alex T Snow 16:38, 2 July 2012 (CDT)

I can't find any good images of it right now so can only see that it is round, but would guess that it is a PTT radio switch of some sort. The quintessential one that has been seen used by the British SAS is the Selex CT401 Audio Harness. --commando552 17:57, 2 July 2012 (CDT)

A PTT, that makes sense. And the one you linked is probably the same one :) Alex T Snow 02:35, 6 July 2012 (CDT)

Removal of guns from Main Page

In my case (I wasn't the original remover) I re-removed the Glock entry and put it here on the talk page because I didn't think it a legitimate entry - The entry stated the gun only appears in those icons, which in my view doesn't constitute a real 'appearance' in-game, unlike the statues and posters in the game with the other weapons (and even those are debatable to some). One reference I make is the page for the original Half-Life - the shotgun icon shows an Ithaca "Stakeout" shotgun but no such weapon appears elsewhere in the game. As such, there is no entry for that weapon. There is a mention of it on the page, but no individual listing because again, outside of that one icon, the weapon is not in the game at all. Same thing here. I also removed the last Kalashnikov entry for the same reason - it references a weapon in picture files but not even in the game itself. It is notable enough to make a mention, hence why I moved it to the Talk Page, rather than just do away with it completely. But again I don't think it warrants its own section. If an admin would weigh in, I'll certainly defer to them. StanTheMan (talk) 22:19, 20 February 2014 (EST)

I usually don't handle games, but if the AK doesn't actually appear anywhere, then it's hard to justify its inclusion here. As for the Glock, statues and the poster, I believe there is precedent for those. --Funkychinaman (talk) 22:23, 20 February 2014 (EST)

If they're equated the same, then fine by me. Sorry for the extraneous edits. StanTheMan (talk) 22:25, 20 February 2014 (EST)

I'm okay with the 74u being moved to the talk page, I suppose it doesn't really count. Alex T Snow (talk) 22:29, 20 February 2014 (EST)

M2H in "Charlie don't surf"

The MG outside the level is a MG42 not a M2 i think. Nintendow131 21:47 21 April 2014 (EST)

It has the MG42 icon but is definitely the M2HB from the technical seen earlier as shown by the blocky reciever.AgentGumby (talk) 23:41, 22 April 2014 (EDT)

Inaccurate use of the RPD

Please someone of the admins add that the use of the RPD by Russian Forces is inaccurate, since it was replaced by the PKM (or the PKP Pecheneg). --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 14:13, 1 May 2014 (EDT)

As is the AK-47, along with the USP and M21 for the SAS, and AR-15A3 and 92SB for the US, etc. There's lot of this in this game, I'm not sure it's worth pointing out for everything. Alex T Snow (talk) 15:52, 1 May 2014 (EDT)

Yeah, right, the HK417 would make more sense than the M21. (EDIT: It can't be in the levels set in 1996, since the HK417 was made in 2005; the Acc. Int. AW could be put instead.) --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 05:40, 5 May 2014 (EDT)

They would be more likely to be using an accurised G3 variant (particularly when this game was made). The SAS did get some HK417s to supplement the old G3s, and they were also adopted by the SFSG when they needed a DMR. However, with the adoption of the L129A1 I believe the HK417 has been phased out with the SFSG and replaced, and wouldn't be surprised if the same has happened with the SAS/SBS. --commando552 (talk) 11:42, 5 May 2014 (EDT)

These weapons (G3/L129A1) should be added to this page, then. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 17:50, 12 April 2015 (EDT)

The G3 is already on it and the L129 hasn't appeared in any media yet to warrant its inclusion. Spartan198 (talk) 09:56, 13 April 2015 (EDT)

The G3KA4 carbine version is on it, but I think C552 was talking about a longer-range variant (that might have to be included in the sniper/DMR section), wasn't he? And regarding the L129A1, a variant of it does appear in media, so we can add info about it (we're ok with spare images on talk pages). --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 10:19, 13 April 2015 (EDT)

I don't think there being a variation of its base system seen in one movie is enough to warrant its inclusion. The Beretta M9A3] isn't on the Beretta 92 pistol series page for that same reason. There are 20+ more variants of the M1 Garand, but they aren't included just because they're variations of the original M1. Just have some patience, the L129 will end up in a CoD or Battlefield title sooner or later. Spartan198 (talk) 17:57, 13 April 2015 (EDT)

Heck, the RPD makes some sense given the Second Russian Civil War, ostensibly both sides would make use of whatever old ComBloc arms they could find.AgentGumby (talk) 16:42, 1 May 2014 (EDT)

Yeah, but it is a bit weird having it show up but not the PKM and RPK in greater quantities, since it's not like either of those is particularly new or hard to get hold of. Evil Tim (talk) 18:28, 13 April 2015 (EDT)

USP

The USP used in the Modern Warfare titles is the USP Tactical (as seen here and here), as evidenced by the longer barrel, not the standard USP. Please can someone unlock the page (as well as the MW3 page)? I don't think it is really needed to keep them protected. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 05:20, 4 August 2014 (EDT)

The menu icon there what looks like both a longer barrel, and oddly a longer guide rod; it appears to just be an error with that picture, since IIRC there's no extended barrel in either the first person or third person models. MW2's USP, the second picture, is a different in-game model and I think it's the Tactical. Alex T Snow (talk) 13:25, 4 August 2014 (EDT)

The page states that it actually has an extended barrel in CoD4, and I just tested it in MW2 and MW3, where it also has one. For some reason, the MW pages state that it is a standard USP with an incorrect extended barrel. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 17:50, 4 August 2014 (EDT)

The gun model lacks the "Tactical" markings on the slide and it has the standard USP rear sight rather than the adjustable one used on the Tactical which suggest that this pistol is actually a standard model with an extended barrel. --commando552 (talk) 20:05, 4 August 2014 (EDT)

That makes sense, but usually the CoD developers write anything they want on the gun markings. And the iron sights part isn't a big deal, since in MW3 (which page state the presence of both the standard and tactical variants) the tactical variant is shown with the iron sights of the standard USP. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 05:13, 5 August 2014 (EDT)

Swapping in a threaded barrel is about on par with giving on original M16 a birdcage flash hider, it doesn't make it an A1. Markings > iron sights > threaded barrel Alex T Snow (talk) 15:00, 5 August 2014 (EDT)

I'm fairly sure what's going on with the old USP is it was originally modelled as a Mark 23 (as evidenced by the LAM unit) and they didn't take the extended barrel off when they reworked it as a USP. The extension is shorter than the one on the actual USP Tactical in MW3, and it doesn't have the other features one would expect of a USP Tactical. Evil Tim (talk) 19:01, 28 September 2014 (EDT)

I posted a comparison of the three on the MW3 talk page, in fact, here:

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

Standard USP in CoD4. Barely visible barrel, slide says "(HK logo or something like it) USP .45 Auto." This is a USP 45.

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

Standard USP from MW2 in MW3. Slide wording "(front cocking serration) USP .45 Auto." Has very slightly visible projecting barrel. This is a USP 45.

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

USP Tactical model. Slide says "USP Tactical .45 Auto," has highly visible (and therefore longer) projecting barrel. This is a USP Tactical.

This is also visible if you compare the third-person models: the USP Tactical in MW3 has a longer barrel. To compare the real guns:

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

Heckler & Koch USP Tactical - .45 ACP

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

H&K Mark 23 - .45 ACP

The smaller projecting barrel is pretty consistent with the Mark 23; that means it's an incorrect addition to the USP. Maybe if we didn't also have the Mark 23 LAM on the USP in the first game we could argue it was always supposed to be a USP Tactical, but with it we have a totally consistent reason for the differing barrel length in MW3 versus the other other two. Evil Tim (talk) 19:18, 28 September 2014 (EDT)

So it's a standard USP45 with the barrel (end) and LAM of a Mk 23, makes sense. Also, the MW2 USP45 features the Mk 23's rear sight, which is rather odd since otherwise it's a copy-paste, aside from the light which I believe is the proper USP45 light (forget the name). And yes, the CoD4 one has the HK logo. Alex T Snow (talk) 13:42, 29 September 2014 (EDT)

kurzer 8cm Granatwerfer 42

Can somebody please add the link to this page? http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/Granatwerfer_42_Mortar ?? I cannot edit this sight, looks like it has been locked? -Hchris

I just went to do that, but it's locked for me too. Who can help? Alex T Snow (talk) 15:25, 28 September 2014 (EDT)

Done. Evil Tim (talk) 19:30, 28 September 2014 (EDT)

P90 in Ukraine is Anachronistic

Very heavily so. In the near-future timeline set forth in Mw3, both missions in Pripyat take place in 1996; the FN P90 TR didn't even exist until 1999, and finding them in the hands of random dirt eating terrorists at the ass-end of nowhere seems a bit far-fetched (not to say its appearances elsewhere aren't possible, if highly implausible). However, on top of that, the game itself never gives any indication as to when these missions take place; assuming, as most of us probably did, it takes place in the year it came out (2007), that means the mission in question took place in 1992, just a year after the factory standard P90 even entered production. Worth noting?--That's the Way It's Done (talk) 23:23, 11 August 2015 (EDT)

That and the G36C was not around in 1996 either, although the setting of a fictional Russian civil war post Soviet collapse might mean a lot of small arms developed at a faster rate?AgentGumby (talk) 10:34, 12 August 2015 (EDT)

Yeah, the P90 TR's anachronism is worth mentioning. Regarding the date, the MW3 flashback to Pripyat reveals it to be 1996. The date was even somehow implied in CoD4 when Price said in a cutscene "a decade" after the Chernobyl disaster, which occurred in 1986. ~~Btw AgentGumby don't forget to sign your posts.~~ --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 05:13, 12 August 2015 (EDT)

Yeah, the Pripyat missions are 1996 and the story proper is 2011. Alex T Snow (talk) 19:02, 12 August 2015 (EDT)

I don't think you could use the civil war as the reason, since it wasn't happening yet in '96 in Call of Duty's timeline, it was just an arms deal. Price's voiceover implies the conflict has only just started in 2011. Evil Tim (talk) 06:19, 13 August 2015 (EDT)

The Ultranationalists are shown disposing a lot of Loyalists corpses in the vehicle graveyard, so I figured the conflict was going on prior to 2011.AgentGumby (talk) 14:58, 13 August 2015 (EDT)

I don't think they were Loyalists in the Civil War sense; MacMillan notes they had eliminated the men they couldn't buy out, so it seems to just be good old fashioned arms dealing and such. Alex T Snow (talk) 16:11, 13 August 2015 (EDT)

Can someone unlock the page so it can be done, or make the edit? It's currently locked. Also, we might want to mention the "remaster" IW is doing in the page's description. --That's the Way It's Done (talk) 12:17, 9 May 2016 (EDT)

M16A4

The image with KAC M5 railed handguard should be added in addition to the one with A2 handguard, since that's the actual first-person model when not using the M203. I was also thinking at first if we add the one for the M16A1 with A2 handguard regarding the third-person model, but the problem is that the model probably still has the A2 fixed stock (used on the real M16A4), so here I don't know. By the way does the page still need to be indefinitely sysop-protected? It was only done due to an edit warring that happened almost two years ago. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 08:45, 14 December 2015 (EST)

That doesn't look like a KAC M5. There's no cutout at the front for the M203 mount.--BlackHawk510 (talk) 16:48, 7 May 2016 (EDT)

CoD4 Remastered

Is it me, or they changed the AK-47 model to that of an AKM in the remastered version? (as seen in the recent Crew Expendable gameplay video) --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 13:45, 17 July 2016 (EDT)

I honestly can't tell those sorts of AK features at a glance, but I can tell you the M4 now has an LE stock instead of the older C7-style stock, an M203 cut in the barrel (though it still looks like a 16" to me), and very notably a front sight. Also, the USP's hammer is now cocked, and the M4 Grenadier's EOTech 552 is one of those newer, smaller EOTechs. Alex T Snow (talk) 16:29, 17 July 2016 (EDT)

Neither can I confirm if it is really an AKM, but one sure thing is that the weapon now has a stamped receiver. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 18:11, 17 July 2016 (EDT)

Here's some interesting stuff. In addition to the AKM, the game now features an actual AKS-74U (with still an underfolding stock though) instead of the 7.62x39mm shortened abomination from before, as well as a genuine M4A1 (with the selector correctly set to full-auto) instead of AR-15A3. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 06:38, 4 September 2016 (EDT)

That RPD is sexy, I just wish there was a more contemporary RPK variant and a Makarov.--AgentGumby (talk) 12:04, 4 September 2016 (EDT)

I'd have also wished things like that (as well as an AK-74M), but nah, as of now they chose to keep same weapons with still the same incorrect names like AK-74u and M4 Carbine. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 13:11, 4 September 2016 (EDT)

I like how the hammer on the Deagle isn't properly cocked. At this point i wonder if game devs have some agenda against cocked hammers and fire-selectors being in the correct position.--AnActualAK47 (talk) 12:55, 4 September 2016 (EDT)

The weird thing is the new USP model has its hammer cocked. I where the M1911's hammer will end up, as it was half-cocked in the original. Alex T Snow (talk) 18:49, 4 September 2016 (EDT)

Drift0r has another video where he uses the M1911 at the end, it has a properly cocked hammer now. It looks it might be different from the Springfield PX9109 model.--AgentGumby (talk) 22:36, 4 September 2016 (EDT)

Honestly i was expecting the Desert Eagle to have its current production picatinny rails, same for the MP5N and not its wide tropical handguard, kinda dissapointed in that aspect but everything else looks great, imma just get this one since IW seems to follow Black Ops 3 mechanics and i prefer MW trilogy over BO so call me weird if you want.--Death Shadow20 (talk) 10:34, 5 September 2016 (EDT)

I found the other weapon modeling change: almost all weapon, the actual modeled bullets in the magazines. M9, now correctly modeled with cocked hammer and finger support trigger guard. Mini Uzi, the mysterious fingerprint are now removed. P90 and G36C, the bullets in the magazines are actually disappear. --Seganamcofan (talk) 13:08, 6 September 2016 (EDT).

That I really like, bullets actually disappearing in clear mags Excalibur01 (talk) 14:24, 6 September 2016 (EDT)

I also found the LMG's reload animation change. Like in BF4's PKP, Remastered reload animation has the charging handle pulled last rather than at the start of a reload in original.--Seganamcofan (talk) 16:17, 6 September 2016 (EDT)

I think they also replaced most of the sounds of the guns to a different game. From the video, they guy claims some of the gun sounds like the Desert Eagle is from MW3, which is more beefier. Which I don't have a problem with. And interesting to see the AKS74U with an under folder stock instead of the correct side folder. Excalibur01 (talk) 09:57, 6 September 2016 (EDT)

Damn, even I'm impressed with this remaster. Weapon world models actually look like skilled modeler made them, as opposed to the original game's models looking like they were drawn by an untalented 5 year old. Shame that the M203 still isn't scaled right, though. Spartan198 (talk) 16:35, 6 September 2016 (EDT) I'm not too impressed so far, some of the animations are sorta crap, the gas block on the M16 still dissappears when you mount an optic on it. That uncocked hammer on the Deagle is seriously annoying, the hammer on the RPG is also uncocked, the AK is still not an actual AK47 (wububb) or maybe it is idk.--AnActualAK47 (talk) 18:24, 6 September 2016 (EDT)

Really? Well, that sucks. My level of impressed just went down drastically. But then again, I've only looked at screenshots rather than gameplay videos. It's not as if I was going to buy it, though. The arcadey gameplay was what turned me off to CoD and I highly doubt it will ever change. Spartan198 (talk) 20:16, 6 September 2016 (EDT)

This video shows off a low profile gas block on the M16 (at least on the world model), praise be to Eugene Stoner. AK looks like an AKM given the slant muzzle brake, but that makes more sense anyway.--AgentGumby (talk) 22:35, 6 September 2016 (EDT)

That low-profile gas block is real nice.--AnActualAK47 (talk) 08:36, 7 September 2016 (EDT)

It still baffles me as to why they do that in shooters. In one of the betas for Battlefield 3, they actually had you using a standard M4 with a fixed front sight post with an EOtech over it I think but then they changed it. Something to do with perspective changes for objects in a game. I just think gamers have problem with seeing the front sight post int front of their optics. Excalibur01 (talk) 17:54, 7 September 2016 (EDT)

No, they didn't. Front sight post is still present with the EOTech in BF3, at least in single player. It wasn't present with an ACOG, though, which is kind of half right because in reality the magnification blurs it out to the point where it's almost invisible. Spartan198 (talk) 11:51, 8 September 2016 (EDT)

As stated above, the LMG's charging handle is pulled after changing belt box instead of before like it used to. However, it is still pulled even if the belt box wasn't empty. Isn't this incorrect/impractical? Or it should be done this way due to the functionality of belt-fed open-bolt machine guns? --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 08:58, 7 September 2016 (EDT)

Sauce on this? I've only seen the M60, which is the same as it was in 2007.--AgentGumby (talk) 11:23, 7 September 2016 (EDT)

at 5:00 https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QEpiEF5wX38--Death Shadow20 (talk) 12:16, 7 September 2016 (EDT)

"Sauce" lelelelelel--AnActualAK47 (talk) 12:41, 7 September 2016 (EDT)

Lol didn't know that they made an exception for the M60. Anyway, the full reloading animation of the RPD is here at 4:54. And per my question above, does anybody know what's the correct way to cock the weapon? --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 14:48, 7 September 2016 (EDT)

There isn't really any correct way on most open bolt weapons. For belt fed machine guns, it can be both ways as far as I've seen. For a mid-magazine reload, you shouldn't need to rack the bolt and forth.--AgentGumby (talk) 18:00, 7 September 2016 (EDT)

On most machine guns there is a correct way, but it is totally dependent on the weapon. An FN MAG can be done both ways, an M60 has to be cocked before you load a belt, and an RPD has to be cocked after the belt is in. As for whether the bolt needs to cycle after a partial reload, you wouldn't have to for an M60 but I think you might for the RPD to lock the first round on the belt into the right place (so in this case you would have to remove the current belt, dry fire the gun, load a new belt and cock the bolt). As for non belt fed open bolts it generally doesn't matter, it is how the particular belt feed works on a weapon that makes it a complicated issue. --commando552 (talk) 10:27, 10 September 2016 (EDT)

Thanks man; then in this case the M60's reload remaining the same as in 2007 is correct. Btw it means that there's a lot of belt-fed LMGs (in the CoD and BF series) to check on whether their reload/cocking operations are correct or not, lol. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 11:59, 10 September 2016 (EDT)

Emm... apparently that guy cocked the RPD before the belt is in. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 17:10, 13 December 2016 (EST)

Due to how that is edited, we do not know for sure when he cocked the gun. The cocking isn't shown on camera in a continuous shot with it being fired so it could have been before of after. From most stuff I have seen the action is cocked after a belt is inserted, as cocking the bolt back is what moves the belt into the correct position to strip the first round off of the belt. If you look here, here, here, here, or here, all of these guys seem to cock it after loading the belt, and in most cases (where the angle allows) you will see that the belt or starter tab moves through the action as the bolt is pulled back. If the bolt wasn't pulled back after the belt was loaded, there would be no round in line with the chamber. It may be that the guy in the video you posted is effectively skipping a step by putting the second round on the feed pawls so that there is a round in line with the chamber, but I am fairly sure this isn't how you are meant to load it and I imagine it would have a higher likelihood of something going wrong. I have actually fired an RPD years ago and I believe I charged the bolt after it was loaded with a belt. However, if I remember correctly I didn't open up the feed tray and just pulled the belt through the action by the starter tab so this may be different to what you can do with the feed tray open. --commando552 (talk) 18:41, 13 December 2016 (EST)

Yeah I should have mentioned in the first place that it isn't a continuous shot. So if it's not about putting the second round on the feed pawls, the other possibility is that he did actually pull the bolt between takes at 8:11 :P, though there's no reason why he would skip such a step and not show it in the final editing, who knows. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 04:14, 14 December 2016 (EST)

I don't know if anyone noticed it but the screen gets stained in blood if you kill someone with the knife, similar to some of the MGS games, could also get bloodier if you shoot from close range, since it's basically the same results just saying.. but nice little detail if you ask me.--Death Shadow20 (talk) 13:47, 7 September 2016 (EDT) I'm also wondering when you look down the EOtech, will it take up the whole screen like in the original or less like in the later editions Excalibur01 (talk) 17:07, 9 September 2016 (EDT)

This will happen--AnActualAK47 (talk) 17:16, 9 September 2016 (EDT)

The Beretta has the correct model now, that's all I care about. :) Also, MP5 selector switch still pointing at a wrong angle :( bozitojugg3rn4ut (talk) 14:34, 10 September 2016 (EDT)

I'm expecting the EOTech to work like it does in later games. Remember, the reason it took up the whole screen back in the day was because it was the singleplayer equivalent of the ACOG, same (incorrect) zoom with none of the idle sway. Kadorhal (talk) 15:31, 22 September 2016 (EDT)

After watching some of the footage that are out now, I really wished they put new gun models instead of just retexturing the older looking guns. Some are ok, but after getting into guns, the M4 with the weird red dot and no front sight or back up irons is just...weird. They could have added guns from the later COD games for the hell of it. In Ghost, they finally gave us a SIG handgun. Could of went back and give all the SAS guys SIGs. They could have just pulled the M4 model from MW2 or MW3 for shits. I really hope when I look down the sights of an EOtech for this game, it doesn't take up the entire screen. That was one thing I was glad they fixed in MW2 and beyond. Excalibur01 (talk) 18:04, 3 October 2016 (EDT)

Gonna disappoint ya bubba but the EOtech still takes up the whole screen.--AnActualAK47 (talk) 18:54, 3 October 2016 (EDT)

I know. I've been playing it. Excalibur01 (talk)

Always red dots in modern warfare

A particular trend I noticed starting with MW is pretty much all shooters need to give the play some kind of optic, either a red dot or something. Even in time periods where there shouldn't be a proliferation of red dots, we see red dots. Like COD Black Ops. It's like game developers and even fans of today's shooters can't live without red dots on their weapons. Going back to this game, the time it came out even the SAS still used plain MP5s with no sights on them and tons of Marines and soldiers deployed did not have optics of any sort on their rifles, yet in this game for the majority of playthrough, your starting weapon most likely has some sort of optic aside from the SAS missions with the MP5. It's always kinda bothered me how that trend translated into gaming and even with the release of Battlefield 1...we see very primitive optics like scopes on rifles that didn't have them back in WWI. As if the developers are so used to optics, they can't imagine a time when they didn't exist or not common. COD Black Ops is so guilty of this that they had to created shit for the M16 type rifles like completely removing the carrying handles to model mounts almost as if they were half assing models from previous games but because the size difference isn't right, they couldn't just mount shit on top of the carrying handles. It was only on a promotional poster for Black Ops where I see the shorty M16 with the old Colt scope on the carrying handle and also...incorrect magazine counts. Would it kill these developers to have accurate ammo count. MW2 had a SCAR-H with 30 rounds and Black Ops had the 20 round M16 mags with full 30 rounds...like the developers are afraid to limit the players with period accurate weapons. Excalibur01 (talk) 11:26, 5 October 2016 (EDT)

That's something that irks me about BF1, that you have stuff such as those wonky sights, but also super rare and low production firearms being widely used. It's cool to see some of those guns (such as the Mondragon rifle) for the first time in a game (or media for that matter) but the fact that guns such as the Nagant and the french service rifle (whatever it was called) are locked behind DLC is just dumb. Why are super rare weapons more common in the game than the damn Nagant?!--AnActualAK47 (talk) 11:41, 5 October 2016 (EDT)

I think developers don't like old timey guns that are slow bolt action. They want fast firing guns. Why you think the cover character has an SMG with a high cap mag and a pistol that fired more rounds than most guns in a standard sized mag? For an action game, apparently slower working rifles and revolvers must not be appealing to testers or something. Excalibur01 (talk) 14:36, 5 October 2016 (EDT)

To be fair to this game, if you google "US soldier 2007" about 99% of them have optics on their rifles, either Aimpoints or ACOGs for the most part. Also, SAS MP5s would probably also have optics in 2007, or at the very least they would have those front sight mounted lasers which have been standard on SAS MP5s and MP5Ks since the early 90s. The reason that the SAS held off with optics on their MP5s is because they were not used in a role where they believed optics would be that useful. The majority of the time they used point shooting (with the held of a flashlight) due to the fact that they expected to be in the same room as the target and it is hard to get a good cheek weld wearing older style respirators so any sights were seen as unnecessary. Thats why they used the MP5KA1/5 variants with the useless tiny irons, as they weren't intending on using the sights anyway so they were just in the way. Hell, sometimes they didn't even bother with a stock on their MP5s just using the sling loop end cap so that gives you an idea as to the ranges they used the MP5s at. Thinking has changed somewhat since the 80/early 90s though. --commando552 (talk) 17:17, 5 October 2016 (EDT)

Don't forget the game is set in 2011, too. Whereas BF3 had Marines running around with M16A3s, carry handle and all, set in 2014....On a somewhat related note, has the SAS ever been seen in the "black kit" from the Iranian embassy siege in more recent times?--AgentGumby (talk) 18:08, 5 October 2016 (EDT)

I have seen them in the flesh during a training exercise in the black kit in (I think) 2010. Standard issue was MP5s with Aimpoints, lasers and flashlights, some guys had MP5KA1s with the same, and marksmen had custom G3KA4 based rifles and Accuracy Internationals. Most of them has SIG pistols of some sort, but strangely one of them had a USP. Apparently the USP was the standard pistol in the SAS for a period, and this guy liked it so carried one even though it had been phased out (long before this guy would have joined up, so I assume they are all sitting in an armoury still and you just help yourself). The clothing and equipment itself is totally different to the "classic" kit, its all modular armour vests, helmets with integrated comms, NVGs, all the cool toys. I am not sure if they actually still wear the black kit now though, last time they were seen in the UK this is how they were equipped, with multicam and L119A2 carbines. EDIT: Looks like they do still wear the black overalls ([5], [6], [7], [8]), unfortunately it looks like their gear colour coordination has gone to shit. --commando552 (talk) 19:06, 5 October 2016 (EDT)

I'm only nitpicking because the Marines I'm friends with had joined back in 2005 when I was about to graduate high school and they showed me photos of them with the vast majority without optics of any kind of their rifles. Maybe it just bothers me with the no front sight post or any iron sights when you have a red dot attachment on your rifles in this game Excalibur01 (talk) 13:59, 6 October 2016 (EDT)

M203

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

The M203 still lacks the trigger guard in the Remastered version (fuck), but aside from that, is it also an airsoft version akin to the original CoD4? I uploaded this screencap two months ago to show if it is, but now there are other screencaps on the main page either way. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 11:28, 6 November 2016 (EST)

Hard to tell in that pic, but the M16 definitely is. It shouldn't have an M203 groove in the barrel like that. Spartan198 (talk) 18:36, 6 November 2016 (EST)

I think he was talking about the M203, which I think we could just chalk up to a goof with the modeling and scaling as I'm not sure that there are any airsoft M203s that have the traditional barrel mount. As for the M16A4, I don't believe that it was an airsoft gun that was used for modeling as a) I've been looking at airsoft M16A4s for the past few months, and none have the M203 groove, and b) I believe that the modelers likely made the M4 model first, and then made an M5 RAS, and stuck the M4 barrel model on the end, which is something that I have seen before on M16 models. Also, I'm going to edit that bit about the M4/M16 gas block on the main page, gameplay footage shows that a lowpro Gas Block is used when mounting optics.--BlackHawk510 (talk) 12:43, 11 November 2016 (EST)

You get Airsoft M203s that have the standard barrel mount, but when they have this they are pretty much indistinguishable from a real launcher. Although I would agree that in this case it is just that they stuck the M4 barrel on the front of an M16 length handguard, there are actually Airsoft replicas that have the M203 step on the barrel. This one is an A1 rather than A4 receiver, but have also seen it on ones with flat top receivers. You tend to only find it on REALLY cheap crappy spring replicas, and the reason they do it is that there in only a thin inner barrel that runs the full length and the part of the barrel that is ahead of the handguard is just a cosmetic sheath, and they use the same one as they use on M4 type guns. --commando552 (talk) 16:01, 11 November 2016 (EST)

Consequently, I think we'll keep it ID'ed as an airsoft M203, because when equipped on the M4A1 it has a RIS mount with noticeable knobs (look here), though it's not visible on the M16A4. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 16:34, 11 November 2016 (EST)

Here we go with the low profile gas block BS again...

There's nothing in any of the given M4 screencaps to prove there's a low-profile gas block. Face it, they just simply removed the front sight post again and the attempts to explain and defend its absence are pitiful. Spartan198 (talk) 18:29, 11 November 2016 (EST)

But the third-person model shows the rifle with one, doesn't it?--AnActualAK47 (talk) 18:59, 11 November 2016 (EST)

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

Au contraire, it looks like they made the M4/M16 great again.--AgentGumby (talk) 19:59, 11 November 2016 (EST)

For as lazy as new-IW kept proving themselves to be for Ghosts, they're certainly doing a lot to impress me just with a remaster of an existing game now. I was honestly expecting them to just take the original models and slap on textures that look about the same but nevertheless require a much larger system footprint for no reason (I'm still not sure how they've managed that in every game since Ghosts). We're definitely going to need to grab our own shot of it, though - the only shot we have that would show off the low-profile gas block has it obscured by a laser aiming module. Kadorhal (talk) 21:08, 11 November 2016 (EST)

Raven Software did the remaster, not Infinity Ward.--AgentGumby (talk) 21:12, 11 November 2016 (EST)

Well that'd explain a thing or two then :V Kadorhal (talk) 02:01, 12 November 2016 (EST)

Okay, a shot that actually proves there's a low profile gas block this time around, even if it does look like a basic FSP with the actual sight post sawed off. Appreciate that, Gumby. Still, though, the front sight post doesn't obstruct optics as much as some people make it out to. And through an ACOG, it's barely a blur. So I don't quite understand why they didn't just put it on and leave it on. On a side note, it looks in the screenshot above like they put a Sampson rail handguard on it instead of the KAC one. Spartan198 (talk) 04:56, 12 November 2016 (EST)

yeah, I'm the one who put the gas block thing in, as I'd seen that shot in a gameplay video. Anyway, I get what you're saying about the handguard, looks like the vents don't go far enough back, but Samson rail handguards don't usually have delta rings or circular holes, or am I wrong?--BlackHawk510 (talk) 11:08, 12 November 2016 (EST)

Some Sampson rails, like the STAR DI, do make use of the delta ring, but you're right about the vent holes. The overall shape of it is more Sampson-ish than KAC to me, though. Personally, considering how the game is set in 2016 and it's 2016 now, I think they should have just Block IIed things up. RIS IIs, Elcans instead of ACOGs, the whole shebang. If you look up pics of MARSOC, that's mostly what they're using now. Spartan198 (talk) 22:33, 15 November 2016 (EST)

at the risk of coming off really nitpicky, COD4 is set in 2011; MW2 is set in 2016. Although I wish more was done in this remaster instead of just rehashing the Halo Anniversary method. Marines riding in Blackhawks from LHDs is triggering.--AgentGumby (talk) 23:23, 15 November 2016 (EST)

MWR cut weapons

Apparently there are quite a few weapons left in the files of the Remaster, including some sort of Saiga-12, MW2's PP2000, Striker, M240, FAL, Anaconda, and the Black Ops Galil: http://imgur.com/a/sNi1b#6klDbvS

There are rumors that some of these might be added to the game as DLC. And what about signing your post? :P --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 05:54, 16 November 2016 (EST)

I'm hoping they leave MWR as it is (bar extra maps) and instead add these (and more) into IW instead --Forrest1985 (talk) 07:27, 16 November 2016 (EST)

Why the fuck the FAL is dubbed with a XM-LAR?--Dannyguns (talk) 14:47, 11 January 2017 (EST)

Mhmh maybe they are planning a Remastered of MW2? The Saiga would be good instead of the Stryker.--Dannyguns (talk) 11:50, 5 February 2017 (EST)

New Guns

The Original G3, The Original M14, The Broken Original AK47, and more Guns is in MWR.--Treliazz (talk) 19:07, 13 December 2016 (EST)

To expand on this, a recent update added "Weapon Kits," which are basically skins for guns that cosmetically change the various parts of the weapon. For example, the Battleworn weapon kit for assault rifles gives each weapon a weathered appearance, most notably removing the receiver cover of the AKM, giving the G3 a full wooden stock and furniture, and doing the same for the M14. Each weapon kit has a different theme going on for each. The sniper rifle weapon kit gives each rifle "tactical" body kits, the shotgun weapon kit gives each shotgun the appearance a of competition shotgun, etc. I'll try to see if I can get any good pictures. --PyramidHead (talk) 18:35, 14 December 2016 (EST)

Thanks for explain--Treliazz (talk) 21:29, 14 December 2016 (EST)-

Well not all users/visitor of site got PS4/XB1/PC and game so uploading pics isnt a bad idea.--Dannyguns (talk) 14:42, 11 January 2017 (EST)

M14

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

Both lack a fire-control lever in third person

The Remastered version shows an actual M14 (having a SOCOM 16-style length tho). However, in the original CoD4, is the lack of a bayonet lug a powerful version enough to identify it as an M1A? Even if it uses a modified version of the M21's model, I think the presence of a selector switch in first-person outweighs the absence of a bayonet lug, and thus it might be better to identify it as an M14 (or maybe an M14/M1A hybrid), shouldn't it? (With that in mind, are some real M14s seen without bayonet lugs?)

That said, the M14 and M21 both lack a selector switch in third person (easily seen in Old School FFA), so the M1A would still be mentioned in the page (for both cases; the in-game "M21" has a bayonet lug, which is possible on an M1A). For instance, I think the M1A image on the CoD4 page should be replaced by one showing this variant.

Any ideas? --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 08:17, 20 November 2016 (EST)

I'd go for it, just say that the original M14/M21 don't model the fire selector in third person giving some coincidental resemblance to the M1A.--AgentGumby (talk) 15:13, 7 February 2017 (EST)

The fire selector is the more important feature over whether or not something is an M14 rather than the bayonet lug, so as these seem to have the selector I would go for calling it an M14 or M21 rather than a Springfield. As for the selector being missing in the 3rd person models, its absence is one of the smaller problems with those models so I would assume that this is more of a modelling expediency rather than it genuinely being modelled off of a different gun. --commando552 (talk) 15:38, 7 February 2017 (EST)

Alright. And by the way, the M14 has a SOCOM 16-style barrel in both CoD4 and MWR. Can it be the case on a real M14 (swapping barrels or something), or this only goes for civilian and airsoft versions? --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 15:51, 7 February 2017 (EST)

Oh and on another note, that newly released FAL frankengun has a lot in common with this stuff, not to mention its FN LAR-style rear sight. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 10:48, 8 February 2017 (EST)

The new guns look like they've taken COD Online design cues for sure. I guess they are only available through ̶s̶u̶p̶p̶l̶y̶ ̶d̶r̶o̶p̶s microtransactions?--AgentGumby (talk) 14:39, 8 February 2017 (EST)

What's the deal with the Anaconda?

Do they call it an Anaconda in game? Because it's clearly not an Anaconda in the rendering that was just posted. --Funkychinaman (talk) 10:47, 16 February 2017 (EST)

So I should use the in-game name for pic of game and not the real?--Dannyguns (talk) 10:50, 16 February 2017 (EST)

Go with that is actually is, maybe a Taurus Model 44(?), and then mention that it's referred to as a Colt Anaconda. --Funkychinaman (talk) 11:09, 16 February 2017 (EST)

Someone that created the section said that is based on an Anaconda maybe supposing is model from MW2, in-game is referred as ".44 Magnum", and 44 Magnum is that I wrote--Dannyguns (talk) 11:24, 16 February 2017 (EST)

I looked on the CoD wiki, and the gun the rendering doesn't appear to the same gun in the screenshot. BTW, please don't poach images from the CoD wiki. We don't like it when other wikis poach from us, so let's show some professional courtesy. --Funkychinaman (talk) 11:52, 16 February 2017 (EST)

It's always a Taurus. The FPS image currently on the CoD wiki shows the pre-release model found in the game files that kinda reused the MW2 model. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 17:13, 16 February 2017 (EST)

Well I dont own the remastered game so yes I admit i copied from CoD wiki.--Dannyguns (talk) 07:45, 17 February 2017 (EST)

Look at Grand Theft Auto V page they use renders from gta wikia.--Dannyguns (talk) 15:02, 17 February 2017 (EST)

This doesn't really hold water, just because something was done wrong before doesn't give you the permission to do the same elsewhere. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 17:12, 17 February 2017 (EST)

Erm, I'm not really following how that matters. Congrats for having useful pictures? I doesn't really make sense to do everything all over again on every single site, as opposed to sharing resources, especially when both are just wikis. Alex T Snow (talk) 12:17, 18 February 2017 (EST)

Thing it it's not the only reason. The other one (which I believe is more important) is that such images tend to be too much cropped and/or have transparency added. This isn't usually suitable on IMFDB, where we always favor full-res screencaps showing the weapons in question rather than cropped to only show the weapon. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 14:51, 18 February 2017 (EST)

Ah, that makes sense then. I just thought it was a little silly to fight over the use of them when we're all really trying to do the same thing, but I do agree full screencaps are much better for here. :) Alex T Snow (talk) 17:20, 18 February 2017 (EST)

If we can negotiate something between the CoD wiki admins and Bunni, then fine, but AFAIK, no agreement exists. I know how mad I was when I saw the caps I uploaded here elsewhere without being credited, I suspect others will feel the same. --Funkychinaman (talk) 19:00, 18 February 2017 (EST)

I've seen some of my Call of Duty 3 screenshots on the Cod wiki, which I don't really mind other than some credit or a shoutout would be nice. What AnActualAK47 did on the M249 entry on the Payday 2 page seems fair to me.--AgentGumby (talk) 14:28, 19 February 2017 (EST)

They added PKM

Finally, but they could had add it to story mode.--Dannyguns (talk) 14:18, 15 March 2017 (EDT)

New "D-25S" in MW Remastered

Here. Any idea on what it is? Could be something like an F&D Defense FD338 or a Remington RSASS. Also, is it fine how the "XM-LAR" is currently described as an FN LAR with SA58 OSW handguard/charging handle and custom stock, or is it more complex than this? --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 13:24, 15 March 2017 (EDT)

Kinda looks like some version of the HK417 but with a left side charging handle.--AnActualAK47 (talk) 13:37, 15 March 2017 (EDT)

I did think of the HK417A2 previously, but nah, aside from some components like the rounded trigger guard I doubt it is. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 13:40, 15 March 2017 (EDT)

On a side note, I think IMBEL just came out with a new IA2 carbine that's (coincidentally?) pretty close to the "XM-LAR." http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2017/04/13/imbels-new-7-62x51mm-ia2-carbine-rifle/ --AgentGumby (talk) 16:27, 13 April 2017 (EDT)

I get H&K G28 vibes from it, personally.--H3nry8adger1982 (talk) 09:44, 16 March 2017 (EDT)H3nry8adger1982

I'm seeing an HK417 combined with an RSASS or something of that sort.--BlackHawk510 (talk) 10:36, 16 March 2017 (EDT)

Raven Software gotta love making frankenguns. Anyway while some parts are reminiscent of the HK417, I think the final verdict could actually be an F&D Defense FD338 with a Geissele Super Modular Rail HK handguard and a an AK-74/AR hybrid style muzzle brake (somebody else pointed out the latter details to me). Among the weapons we've mentioned in this section until now, the D-25S's operation (left-side bolt locking back, etc.) and the stock & upper receiver seem to match the FD338 the most. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 07:17, 18 March 2017 (EDT)

It's a RSASS.--Treliazz (talk) 10:48, 18 March 2017 (EDT)

I dunno, I'm thinking this is an amalgam gun. The rail and overall coloration makes me think G28, the stock is straight off of the RSASS, but the RSASS comparisons end there. The grip is too rounded, plus the RSASS doesn't have such a round trigger guard. The barrel is really weird, it has a Mk 12 Mod 0 style break, then has a A2 flashhider screwed on. I'm thinking it's another amalgam gun like the FAL, taking parts from many other standard DMR AR rifles to make...that thing. -- PaperCake 13:59, 18 March 2017 (EST)

Well, we are all 100% that is a AR-15 style... why we dont put a damn pic and say "Unidentified AR-15? PS for me look like a HK417 style rifle.--Dannyguns (talk) 02:23, 19 March 2017 (EDT)

Funny how the name could be inspired by the Remington R25. Coincidence? To make it similar to the D-25S we could have a Remington R25 Gen II with a Magpul PRS stock, but nah nevermind, the R25 GII's receiver is kinda different with buit-in trigger guard, and it has a rear-mounted charging handle. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 11:32, 20 March 2017 (EDT)

I think the most accurate description is a frankenrifle made from the FD308 upper receiver matched with HK417/G28 parts (handguard, lower receiver and 10-round 417 style magazine, and G28 style paint finish) and a stock resembling the Magpul PRS.--AgentGumby (talk) 00:01, 28 March 2017 (EDT)

Lol didn't know there was a .308 version of the F&D rifle. Anyway I agree with this, in addition to the custom handguard & muzzle brake as I mentioned above. Also funny how the charging handle resembles that fictional design. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 11:18, 28 March 2017 (EDT)

This fictional design remind me of the son of WA2000 and a P90.--Dannyguns (talk) 11:53, 28 March 2017 (EDT)

Looks partly based of the FAL. With the charging handle of the British L1A1 SLR variant. -SeptemberJack (talk) 19:29, 6 April 2017 (EDT)

I just found out what the D-25S supposed to be. It is suppose to be the SR-25. It was going to called the DMR-25. I look up the gun, and I found the SR-25--Treliazz (talk) 22:20, 10 April 2017 (EDT)

Someone might have noticed this...

I thought i must have shared this and looking at the wooden targets you shoot in F.N.G, it seems they are holding UMP .45s.--Death Shadow20 (talk) 16:10, 6 April 2017 (EDT)

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

That looks right. As long as it doesn't turn out to be some kind of MP5/10 or MP5/40 (knowing what Raven Software usually does regarding weapons lol), then yeah we can add a UMP section to the page. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 14:55, 8 April 2017 (EDT)

Why exactly do you think that this is a UMP as opposed to it being an MP5, as seen in the foreground of this same image? You can barely make out any details of the weapon, but one of the few that you can is the fact that it has a round cocking tube located above the barrel like on the MP5 rather than the UMP where it is a more seamless part of the receiver with a blockier shape. The front sight also looks more like an MP5 one, and the rear sights look like they are an MP5 dioptre rather than the simpler UMP flip rear sight. As for the magazine, it is pretty hard to tell from the angle but to me this looks curved rather than straight. --commando552 (talk) 15:19, 8 April 2017 (EDT)

What 'e said, MP5. Alex T Snow (talk) 16:39, 8 April 2017 (EDT)

So my doubts were true after all lol; I was gonna mention the front sight, which is a good giveaway. We could benefit from a good quality screencap about this though, to confirm the curvature of the magazine, etc. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 17:57, 8 April 2017 (EDT)

That's one big ass MP5 then, unless its the weaponlight one.--Death Shadow20 (talk) 16:52, 8 April 2017 (EDT)

Bos14 (New Gun Coming to MWR)

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

MWR are adding the new Bos14, and new attachments. What is this gun? Is that the TAR-21?--Treliazz (talk) 21:53, 10 April 2017 (EDT)

no. it's this.--AgentGumby (talk) 22:13, 10 April 2017 (EDT)

Thanks--Treliazz (talk) 22:18, 10 April 2017 (EDT)

Yeah, the Bos14 model looks pretty much like that bullpup SCAR; one of the main differences is the position of the charging handle. Some discussions on Reddit mentioned the resemblance to the "AKBP" (AKU-94) model from Raven Software's previous game CoD Online; while this Bos14 isn't the same weapon, it does have a similarly designed carrying handle/rail system. Also, not sure why they had to put "MK31 MOD1" (a torpedo's name) on the side of the weapon.

On another note, regarding the D-25S, the magazine well indicates that it's chambered in .308, as I've added to the main page. From what I've read, 7.62mm ammo fits into .308 Winchester chambers (while for the opposite isn't the case), so I guess it can be considered correct for it to share ammunition with the 7.62x51mm rifles in-game, eh?

--Ultimate94ninja (talk) 16:40, 13 April 2017 (EDT)

From what I've heard, they're dimensionally interchangeable, but the headspacing can be a bit iffy when putting .308 into 7.62mm chambers, so it's generally not advised; the other way around doesn't really pose many issues. Pyr0m4n14c (talk) 18:50, 27 April 2017 (EDT)

If I remember correctly, the cartridges are actually the same length, but the 7.62x51mm chamber is looser than the .308. The brass is also thinner on the .308, which when combined with this looser headspace can led to case ruptures. It is also possible that the .308 cartridge is greater pressure (there is potentially more room due to the thinner brass) but I vaguely remember hearing that this isn't necessarily the case as the two pressures are measured at different points with a different method so they are not actually comparable. Either way, 7.62x51mm in a .308 is definitely fine, and to be honest I imagine that most .308 in a 7.62x51mm gun would be as well, as the headspace difference isn't that much and probably falls within the machining tolerances for a lot of firearms. --commando552 (talk) 19:15, 27 April 2017 (EDT)

I was going to mention the pressure difference, but that bit about different measurement methods is new to me. In any case, a quick double-check to make sure I remembered right shows me that SAAMI does consider the two interchangeable, even if it's probably meant primarily in the context of loading the military round into a civilian gun. Kadorhal (talk) 19:25, 27 April 2017 (EDT)

Yeah it considers them interchangeable, though this states that it's not really recommended to use .308 rounds in a 7.62x51mm chamber. On a similar topic though, SAAMI states that firing 5.56x45mm from a .223 Remington chamber is unsafe. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 13:19, 28 April 2017 (EDT)

Yeah, .223 versus 5.56mm is the opposite issue from .308 versus 7.62mm, the military round is loaded to higher pressures than the civilian one. I've heard most manufacturers "idiot-proof" their .223 rifles by making them strong enough to handle the military round just in case, but still. Kadorhal (talk) 20:08, 28 April 2017 (EDT)

Well, that BOS14 got released two days ago (should we mention it directly as a bullpup SCAR? in 5.56x45mm tho). We also have the Prokolot, which is pretty much an Arsenal Strike One but with diagonal serrations (akin to the HK VP9 and the like). Finally, the Fang 45: while the first thing that came into my mind was a FAMAE SAF (with a different trigger guard and a modified handguard akin to the SAF-200 variant), it actually seems to resemble the POF PSG 9mm; it also has a UMP45/UMP40 style magazine. Thoughts? --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 12:59, 4 May 2017 (EDT)

There's also a worn MP5 weapon kit based on this that looks absolutely awesome.--AgentGumby (talk) 20:51, 9 May 2017 (EDT)

I haven't seen the in-game appearance, but the image that you linked? This is my reaction. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 17:13, 10 May 2017 (EDT)

Prokolot seemsto mean Pierce in РУССИАН which imply that is based on a AP Russian pistol for sure the Stryke One is semi-russian so I think is right.--Dannyguns (talk) 14:09, 4 May 2017 (EDT)

Also, I've seen a claim that the LRC-2 long range conversion kit for the real Strike One allows it to fire in bursts, but it's apparently not the case (not 3-round burst or something; it seems it was intended to mean practical burst firing or something), I think it's only available in semi-auto/full-auto. But even without having this specific kit mounted, there's an available adapter that allows the base Strike One to fire in full-auto, am I correct? --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 07:30, 11 May 2017 (EDT)

I don't know anything about an "adapter" that allows the Strike One to fire in auto, but there is a select fire full auto variant of it called the AF1-R. This is totally independent of the LRC-2 conversion, and can be used in the kit or as a standalone pistol, and the standard semi-only pistol will fit in the LRC-2. Here is a promo video from Arsenal showing it being used both standalone and in the LRC-2. I don't know if this variant was ever really produced though or if it was essentially just a prototype. --commando552 (talk) 10:15, 11 May 2017 (EDT)

Ah, nice info, I was trying to look up regarding what specific variant of the Strike One is full-auto. I checked this video, but apparently the adapter info was only about the long range kit itself. The variant shown in the kit in this video was the AF1-R, I guess? --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 10:55, 11 May 2017 (EDT)

Oh and regarding the Fang 45, there's another candidate, which is the LWRC SMG-45, and I think it's the closest match (aside from some components like the muzzle brake), with some kind of handguard reminiscent of that of the Angstadt UDP-9. For now I'll wait for you guys to conclude what we can list it as. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 15:40, 12 May 2017 (EDT)

Checking the game files? --Dannyguns (talk) 12:26, 20 May 2017 (EDT)

As far as i've seen, the game files for the new DLC weapons aren't helpful, they simply refer to them as their in-game name or things like "april smg" and the like. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 06:38, 22 May 2017 (EDT)

EDIT: regarding the Prokolot, it actually seems to match more the Arsenal Firearms USA Stryk-B compact variant; should we list it as such? (look at another angle of the Prokolot, not the one that I linked previously) --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 09:08, 10 June 2017 (EDT)

Formatting added weapons

I think it would make more sense to have the new entries come in a subcategory after the original COD4 weapons rather than putting them within the normal list. It seems kinda weird that the Arsenal Strike One is the first entry on the page and not a pistol from the base game.--AgentGumby (talk) 09:44, 20 May 2017 (EDT)

Why not, this could work, either we keep them in their sections but after the original CoD4 weapons (which mean the alphabetical order will be disregarded), or else we can create a new section heading for all the MWR-exclusive weapons without necessarily mentioning the weapon classes. On an unrelated note, I wonder what the fuck is flying here besides the standard spent brass. Was that caused by a recent bug or something? --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 10:51, 24 May 2017 (EDT)

Regarding the 1st topic: Sounds like a good idea. Regarding the second topic: My best guess would be spent links, but rendered by someone who doesn't quite understand what disintegrating links look like once, well, disintegrated. Pyr0m4n14c (talk) 16:58, 24 May 2017 (EDT)

I think it would be best to put a section at the bottom for the remastered exclusive guns as this seems the best way to differentiate them. As for the links coming out of the RPD, those look exactly like what the links from an RPD belt look like. The only problem is that the belt from an RPD is non-disentegrating, with the links attached to each other by a coiled wire (a bit like on a notepad) through those holes along the side edge. I understand why they just made up it being disintegrating though, it would be pretty tricky to correctly model and animate an intact belt coming out of the right side of the gun until you had fired 50 rounds, having this drop off, and then starting a new spent belt for the next 50 (the 100 round in the drum were separated into two 50 round belts joined in the middle that would separate after the joining cartridge were removed). Watch this to see what an RPD should look like with the empty belts feeding out. --commando552 (talk) 17:17, 24 May 2017 (EDT)

Alright, thanks. And I've created a bottom section for the weapon that are exclusive to MWR. I will add the "Fang 45" and the "BOS14", but first I would like some clarification on their ID, more exactly if I can list them directly as LWRC SMG-45 and bullpup SCAR respectively (if not other weapons), or else we list them as fictional weapons by putting their in quotes and mentioning their basis. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 04:50, 25 May 2017 (EDT)

I'd just list them under their names in quotation marks and then mention the base weapon.--AgentGumby (talk) 10:50, 25 May 2017 (EDT)

Done (also, yeah, it's isn't directly an SMG-45; i forgot that the Fang has a rear AR-type charging handle). --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 10:05, 26 May 2017 (EDT)

@@ Line 702: / Line 702: @@
 Checking the game files? --[[User:Dannyguns|Dannyguns]] ([[User talk:Dannyguns|talk]]) 12:26, 20 May 2017 (EDT)
 :As far as i've seen, the game files for the new DLC weapons aren't helpful, they simply refer to them as their in-game name or things like "april smg" and the like. --[[User:Ultimate94ninja|Ultimate94ninja]] ([[User talk:Ultimate94ninja|talk]]) 06:38, 22 May 2017 (EDT)
-EDIT: regarding the Prokolot, it actually seems to match more the Arsenal Firearms USA Stryk-B compact variant; the length of the pistol in-game seems be between the Stryk-B and the original Strike One. But anyway, I think it would be the best to list it as a Stryk-B, eh? --[[User:Ultimate94ninja|Ultimate94ninja]] ([[User talk:Ultimate94ninja|talk]]) 09:08, 10 June 2017 (EDT)
+EDIT: regarding the Prokolot, it actually seems to match more the Arsenal Firearms USA Stryk-B compact variant; should we list it as such? (look at another angle of the Prokolot, not the one that I linked previously) --[[User:Ultimate94ninja|Ultimate94ninja]] ([[User talk:Ultimate94ninja|talk]]) 09:08, 10 June 2017 (EDT)
 == Formatting added weapons ==

Talk:Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 15:38, 15 June 2017

Moved from Main Page

Kalashnikov AKS-74U

Glock 17

Main Knife

Discussion

MP5

Screenshots

You know what would have been better?

Desert Eagle

P90 comments.

No Browning M2?

Red Dot Sight

The 1911 Griggs used looks more like a Kimber TLE stainless

Excerpt from Remington 700P

Bluey?

M4/M16

M4 Barrel

The 1911 in-game

Desert Eagles hammer down?

M4 In-Game For Airsofters (Or Real Steel Guys Too I Guess)

AKS-74

G3A4

The Javelin sight

The M4A1

Images

Inaccurate Recoil Info

Revising the page

Not an AK-47

Price is Price's grandson

C8 Link Help :(

M21 Scope

Thing On Price's Vest

Removal of guns from Main Page

M2H in "Charlie don't surf"

Inaccurate use of the RPD

USP

kurzer 8cm Granatwerfer 42

P90 in Ukraine is Anachronistic

M16A4

CoD4 Remastered

Always red dots in modern warfare

M203

Here we go with the low profile gas block BS again...

MWR cut weapons

New Guns

M14

What's the deal with the Anaconda?

They added PKM

New "D-25S" in MW Remastered

Someone might have noticed this...

Bos14 (New Gun Coming to MWR)

Formatting added weapons

Navigation menu

Search