Those are military weapons NOT available to the civilian population. In point of fact they are not even sold to movie armourers. They should be moved to the military variants section. --Charon68 01:45, 25 March 2012 (CDT)
Beretta ARX 160
From what I know, "Beretta ARX 160" is not a separate copy of the M16 design. When creating this weapon designers have focused on the model of "Beretta AR70/90". The M16 does not have anything in common structurally. The appearance of grip may be similar to the M16, nothing else.
Beretta ARX 160 is a completely new production, there is nothing to do with the M16.
--Mateogala 06:39, 25 March 2012 (CDT)
Daewoo K7
"Daewoo K7" was built on components "Daewoo K1" and "Daewoo K2". All these structures have nothing in common with the M16. A similar trick is only modeled on the M16 so that you can easily get used to the weapon. South Korea before the introduction of the M16 rifles had so similar. --Mateogala 06:44, 25 March 2012 (CDT)
The Daewoo K7 is specifically based on the Daewoo K1 (which has a completely different operating system compared to the K2) - the point still stands that it has nothing to do with the M16 at all besides a common use of the .223 round. --Markit 09:29, 27 March 2012 (CDT)
Too wide?
Anyone else think the galleries are too wide? Im using a 1600x1200 monitor right now (not exactly the biggest, but probably wider than most of the screens this site is viewed on) and part of the right hand column is going off the side of the screen. I think 400px would be a better size for the gallery cells, as also a lot of the pictures are much narrower than the cell they are in which looks a bit odd IMHO. --commando552 07:23, 25 March 2012 (CDT)
At my maximum resolution (1280x1024), I have to scroll the entire screen. Gallery should be made under this resolution because it is the most standard.--Mateogala 07:27, 25 March 2012 (CDT)
Count me in as another poor sap who often has to deal with a 4:3 monitor that has a 1280x1024 resolution limit. The widescreen revolution didn't give everyone a 16:9 monitor, after all (I do have one of that size ratio but I don't often get to use it). If the width of the pictures can be narrowed so the page looks good on a 4:3 monitor/resolution, then I think almost everyone will be satisfied. --Mazryonh 13:05, 25 March 2012 (CDT)
The issue is that there is both and height AND width restriction which is why images such as the "PWS MK1 rifle series" look so weird. I'm in the process of cropping all these to make them fill the box. I'm talking about the line between maximizing the images and not making the gallery too wide. We can either a) make the images narrower, or B) make it 2 per row instead of 3. I'm happy either way. :-) --Zackmann08 12:58, 25 March 2012 (CDT)
I'm on a 15" screen and this gallery still runs off the right side of it. I would say go with the two images per row. Spartan198 23:27, 27 March 2012 (CDT)
M231
Why is the M231 under the pistol section? It isn't even capable of semi-automatic, it's basically a... carbine-sized mag feed-only support weapon. Spartan198 02:08, 29 March 2012 (CDT)
It could be that it was put there due to the fact that it is sized like an AR-15 pistol. Other than that, I can't say I agree with the designation. But if it's there so viewers can easily recognize it, so much the better. --Mazryonh 02:11, 29 March 2012 (CDT)
It is a hard one to categorise, as it is full auto only firing from an open bolt like an MG, has a carbine length 15.6" barrel, and no butt. Earlier versions had a retractable wire stock like the one on the M3 Grease Gun along with folding sights which would put it in the carbine category, but the production variant doesn't have these (although I have seen pics of the final model M231 fitted with the wire stock shown below, don't know how common these were though). In terms of role I would categorise it as a machine gun, but it would be classified as a pistol if it was semi auto so I don't know. This is pretty much academic though as one has never actually appeared in anything, the only two pages where it is listed it is not actually seen, it is just presumed to be the weapon used. --commando552 08:54, 29 March 2012 (CDT)
How come the Civilian M16A2 is still under the Military section? I thought Orca did move it to the civilian section. --bozitojugg3rn4ut 12:30, 3 April 2012 (CDT)
There's no such thing as a civilian M16A2. Spartan198 16:42, 3 April 2012 (CDT)
I've moved it and added a few other civilian versions. And there is a civillian version of the M16A2, it is called "AR-15A2 Government" (along with the "AR-15A2 HBAR" which is externally identical to the Government but with a heavier barrel, but only on the portion under the handguard so there would be no way of knowing). It is exactly the same as an M16A2 but with a semi only FCG (making it pre-ban civilian legal). There are a few other rifles that are essentially more neutered civilian versions of the M16A2 such as the Sporter Match HBAR which deletes the bayonet lug, and the later Match Target which also does away with the flash hider. I would call all of these "civilian" versions of the M16A2, but it is the AR-15A2 Government/HBAR which is the closest, being indistinguishable unless you can see the selector markings. --commando552 16:58, 3 April 2012 (CDT)
The M16A2 has a 3-round burst setting, hence all of those ARs you listed off, including the AR-15A2 HBAR, aren't M16A2s. ;) Spartan198 10:05, 17 August 2012 (CDT)
