[Guns] Smith & Wesson .500 Magnum Revolver

[Squeeky]

http://www.gunblast.com/images/SW500/MVC-001F.jpg



Jesus christ, i dont know much about firearms, but i know that this thing is insane. The fucking barrel has a muzzle break :rofl:

http://www.gunblast.com/images/SW500/MVC-006F.jpg

I wanna see some videos of this thing in action. But if you want an interesting read and some even cooler pics, check this out

http://www.gunblast.com/SW_500.htm

[Hezzy]

I can only just imagine the recoil on that :eek:

[Strygun]

I'm willing to bet that thing would fly out of your hand once you shot it.

[l3lizz4rd]

There was an older guy shooting one of those a couple of stalls down from me last Saturday. I was going to ask him if I could give it a try but then someone informed me that it costs like $3.50 a round. So I didn't, cause I didn't want to be a dick and waste his ammo.

[martyr]

the recoil is manageable, due to the porting in the brake. but yeah, it's still a beast.

[Mag]

I shoot those relatively frequently, while it is mangable, definately hold the gun double-handed. Never go John Woo with an S&W.

[Infernus]

I perfer my BFR .50 Beowulf

http://www.gunblast.com/images/BFR-50Beowulf/Thumbs/MVC-001F.jpg

My first gun... my dad just bought it for me a week or two ago... picture is from that same site squeeky listed above...

my grandfather also owns a Springfield .45 TRP he plans on giving me...

[Jennyboo]

pretty gun :D

[SDM]

http://img7.imageshack.us/img7/8339/watch1.jpg

Loose grouping, but repeatable.

[Jennyboo]

http://img7.imageshack.us/img7/8339/watch1.jpg

Loose grouping, but repeatable.
:lol: poor children ..why wont anyone think about the children :rofl:

[Sputty]

ph33r my gun
http://www.engr.mun.ca/~holden/rubberband/parts.jpg

[Ait'al]

I can see it now. Some stupid cop decides they need one of these on the force then goes on duty with it and thinks it wont kill someone to go for the abdomine shot. :lol::ugh:

"It was only an abdomine shot. Sally pulled out that squirt gun. Its not my fault she died from the shot. It was only to stop her!"

[DeadTeddy]

pistols are nice, but M16's are better :)
got to shoot the thing 4 times. 2 were prone, 1 in different positions and 1 at night with tracers.

chances are I will have one of those in 18 months when I get drafted, but who knows, I might get a galil instead.

[Everay]

pistols are nice, but M16's are better :)
got to shoot the thing 4 times. 2 were prone, 1 in different positions and 1 at night with tracers.

chances are I will have one of those in 18 months when I get drafted, but who knows, I might get a galil instead.


i think what you will use is a m1a4 i belive, unless you get heavy weapons, which in case youll use a M249 SAW, me im going for the ah-64. good times.

btw, that pistol, nice, but its not my style.

[jedi]

http://www.planetsideimages.com/uploads/FN%20F2000%202.jpg

[Mushnator]

http://www.praxagora.com/lunde/photos/thunder50bmg-3.jpg

Fires .50 rounds. :D

How about a .600?

http://www.pfeifer-waffen.at/cms/images/sonstige/zeliska_1.jpg

http://www.pfeifer-waffen.at/cms/images/sonstige/zeliska_2.jpg

That guy looks like he just shat his pants. :p

http://www.pfeifer-waffen.at/cms/sonstige/zeliska.htm

[Rbstr]

That first on looks liek it fires Machinegun type .50 rounds

[Mushnator]

It does, .50 BMD :)

[Everay]

holy cow, that .60 gun costs 14,000, for that price, i could get alot more guns, you know, a M1 Garand only costs 1000.

[Biohazzard56]

holy cow, that .60 gun costs 14,000, for that price, i could get alot more guns, you know, a M1 Garand only costs 1000.

1200 New, Springfield Armory.

[JetRaiden]

http://www.praxagora.com/lunde/photos/thunder50bmg-3.jpg

Fires .50 rounds. :D

How about a .600?

http://www.pfeifer-waffen.at/cms/images/sonstige/zeliska_1.jpg

http://www.pfeifer-waffen.at/cms/images/sonstige/zeliska_2.jpg

That guy looks like he just shat his pants. :p

http://www.pfeifer-waffen.at/cms/sonstige/zeliska.htm

:lol: that guy at the bottom looks like a brick just shot out of his ass.

[Smaug]

i think what you will use is a m1a4 i belive, unless you get heavy weapons, which in case youll use a M249 SAW, me im going for the ah-64. good times.

btw, that pistol, nice, but its not my style.

Actually IIRC DeadTeddy is Israeli. I know that america and israel share alot of the same weaponry, but I don't think they use those guns.

[Bighoss]

Yeah. Alright you primitive screwheads, listen up. See this?
This is my boomstick! It's a twelve gauge double barreled
Remington, S-Mart's top-of-the-line. You can find this in the
sporting goods department. That's right this sweet baby was made in
Grand Rapids Michigan. Retails for about $109.95. It's got a walnut
stock, cobalt blue steel and a hair trigger. That's right. Shop
Smart. Shop S-mart.

http://www.evildeadites.homestead.com/files/boomstick.jpg

[Everay]

:lol: well, on the website it said it retails for 14,000. ill check again.

[AztecWarrior]

Yeah. Alright you primitive screwheads, listen up. See this?
This is my boomstick! It's a twelve gauge double barreled
Remington, S-Mart's top-of-the-line. You can find this in the
sporting goods department. That's right this sweet baby was made in
Grand Rapids Michigan. Retails for about $109.95. It's got a walnut
stock, cobalt blue steel and a hair trigger. That's right. Shop
Smart. Shop S-mart.

http://www.evildeadites.homestead.com/files/boomstick.jpg

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

My personal toy is a SAR-1, a Romanian-made AK-47 in semi-auto. Fires 7.62x39, but I don't have a muzzle brake because of the fucking Brady Bill. Fuck you very much, Clinton.

http://www.ravnwood.com/images/blog-03/My_SAR-1.jpg

NOTE: I don't have a 40-round magazine like this guy does, but I DO have a 75-round drum! AND an Aimpoint sight mounted on a Belorussian low-profile mount.

[Bighoss]

you know thats from one of the best bad movies ever right? Army of Darkness

[AztecWarrior]

you know thats from one of the best bad movies ever right? Army of Darkness
Yes. I watched it.

"YOU WILL NEVER RETRIEVE THE NECRONOMICRON! YOU WILL DIE IN THE GRAVEYARD!"

"Hey, what's that on your face?"

"Huh?"

*SHOVEL!*

"Aaahh!"

[DeadTeddy]

I'm going for the F-16I but it's very hard. most soldiers get the m16. artillery and armor get the galil because you can throw run it over with a tank and it will still work, and they need to throw it in the tank before they jump in. an m16 will break after 2 throws. even pilots get the m16 usually. the m4 is mostly for special units cause we got the m16 for $1 a piece fromt he US, and the m4 costs allot more.

[oddfish]

FNP90.. it can kill your uncle steve.

[Everay]

I'm going for the F-16I but it's very hard. most soldiers get the m16. artillery and armor get the galil because you can throw run it over with a tank and it will still work, and they need to throw it in the tank before they jump in. an m16 will break after 2 throws. even pilots get the m16 usually. the m4 is mostly for special units cause we got the m16 for $1 a piece fromt he US, and the m4 costs allot more.


m16 for a dollar? ill buy one.

[Squeeky]

I just found out, they plan on selling this puppy with a 4" barrel (half the size of the original) so it will be more conceilable. I can only imagine the recoil then! :rofl:

[ControlledBurn]

I'm going for the F-16I but it's very hard. most soldiers get the m16. artillery and armor get the galil because you can throw run it over with a tank and it will still work, and they need to throw it in the tank before they jump in. an m16 will break after 2 throws. even pilots get the m16 usually. the m4 is mostly for special units cause we got the m16 for $1 a piece fromt he US, and the m4 costs allot more.

By F-16I, do you mean the Viper? That's the only F-16I I've ever heard of.

As for Pilots getting M16s, they are issued them, but they obviously don't carry it while in the cockpit. Regarding M4s, the US Army has plans to make the tranisition to every soldier carrying an M4 rather than the M16. That might be why you Israeli's are getting M16s for so cheap. Haven't heard of M16s breaking after a couple tosses but it's certainly possible I suppose, I've seen some of the shite they get put through and they're tough suckers imo.

[AztecWarrior]

I've read that the NATO 5.56 round, through the 14.5" barrel of the M4, will NOT take a man down with two hits to the chest.

This is why I prefer the new 6.Xmm cartridges coming out, but it looks like 6.8 SPR is winning.

[ControlledBurn]

I've read that the NATO 5.56 round, through the 14.5" barrel of the M4, will NOT take a man down with two hits to the chest.

This is why I prefer the new 6.Xmm cartridges coming out, but it looks like 6.8 SPR is winning.


Barrel length should have no effect on the lethality of a round. I'd like to see some data/sources to back that idea up.

[AztecWarrior]

Barrel length should have no effect on the lethality of a round. I'd like to see some data/sources to back that idea up.
I read it in Guns and Weapons for Law Enforcement (http://www.guns-weapons.com/), the Marines said so.

[martyr]

lethality of any round depends exclusively upon placement of point of impact.

[AztecWarrior]

lethality of any round depends exclusively upon placement of point of impact.
Explain this to a Marine dodging AK-47 fire in the streets of Fallujah. It's one thing to shoot 2 MOA at a paper target, it's another to do it in the field.

[JetRaiden]

my cousin is fighting the war in Fallujah right now as a matter of fact...

[ControlledBurn]

Explain this to a Marine dodging AK-47 fire in the streets of Fallujah. It's one thing to shoot 2 MOA at a paper target, it's another to do it in the field.

I'll be sure tell my brother that when I talk to him tonight or tomorrow.

[l3lizz4rd]

I've read that the NATO 5.56 round, through the 14.5" barrel of the M4, will NOT take a man down with two hits to the chest.

This is why I prefer the new 6.Xmm cartridges coming out, but it looks like 6.8 SPR is winning.
You need to read that article again.


The lethality has nothing to do with the round, it has to do with the speed at which it is fired from the weapon, and how quickly it loses its kinetic energy. That is why G&W:LE specified that with the M16A2 the enhanced wound effect threshold occurs at 200m, and that with the M4 it is decreased to 100m. The reason they're looking for a different round is because they feel that they need enhanced lethality +100m if they're going to switch over to the M4 for your basic rifleman. So if you read between the lines the only problem with the 5.56(.223) is that it lacks lethality at range. So in short, it damn well will take a man down. It's just not as certain past a specific distance.
How can you prefer the new 6.Xmm cartridge? You've never shot it. Neither have I. What kind of paper are you shooting that requires "Increased lethality at range"?
It's the 6.8x43mm SPC.
Formulate your own opinion. Don't just hop on the bandwagon because a shiny magazine says so. Speaking of magazines, the M468's magazine only carries 25 rounds as opposed to the normal 30 with the 5.56. Wonder what that'll do for lethality while Joe Generic Marine "running through the streets dodgin AK fire"?


If I'm coming off hostile, it's cause I am. It just urks me when people post things that they've read but don't really understand.

[Heavygain]

Well, i know virtually nothing about bullets, but i know damn well how to hit a squrrel with a rifle.

[JetRaiden]

:lol:

[Dharkbayne]

I'm not a gun expert or anything , but I think that barrel length only alters noise/flash and accuracy in some way?

[AztecWarrior]

You need to read that article again.


The lethality has nothing to do with the round, it has to do with the speed at which it is fired from the weapon, and how quickly it loses its kinetic energy. That is why G&W:LE specified that with the M16A2 the enhanced wound effect threshold occurs at 200m, and that with the M4 it is decreased to 100m. The reason they're looking for a different round is because they feel that they need enhanced lethality +100m if they're going to switch over to the M4 for your basic rifleman. So if you read between the lines the only problem with the 5.56(.223) is that it lacks lethality at range. So in short, it damn well will take a man down. It's just not as certain past a specific distance.
How can you prefer the new 6.Xmm cartridge? You've never shot it. Neither have I. What kind of paper are you shooting that requires "Increased lethality at range"?
It's the 6.8x43mm SPC.
Formulate your own opinion. Don't just hop on the bandwagon because a shiny magazine says so. Speaking of magazines, the M468's magazine only carries 25 rounds as opposed to the normal 30 with the 5.56. Wonder what that'll do for lethality while Joe Generic Marine "running through the streets dodgin AK fire"?


If I'm coming off hostile, it's cause I am. It just urks me when people post things that they've read but don't really understand.

1. Not all combat is restricted to sub-100 meter ranges. What worked in Vietnam's junges may also work in Iraq's urban warfare, but neither of those may work in Central Europe. Not every conflict will be won in dry urban areasI wonder why we're going for a general issue of the M4, given the reports of it. Besides, the AR-15 series is getting old, H&K's XM8 looks nice.

Yes, I understand that in theory, the cartridge compensates for less mass via increased velocity, as physics taught us when force equals mass times speed. However, if it doesn't take a man down in two shots with an M4, and we're going for a general issue of the M4, we'd better use a 6.X.

2. I really want to shoot one, does that count? I can just hope our trials work out. But does this mean nobody has the right to talk about it? I don't get the second part of your point here.

3. There are dozens of 6.X cartridges and I'm tired, cut me some slack. It's just a letter.

4. Other countries worked fine with the FN-FAL which carried 20 cartridges. 5 bullets is not a massive issue, and if it is found to be, extending it won't be a big problem. Hell, we maintained a 20-round size when changing from the M14 to M16.

Just because I agree with a publication does not mean that I'm a mindless drone of GWLE.

[UncleDynamite]

Those are some pretty kickass pistols, but I'm a fan of the Wildey pistol:

http://world.guns.ru/handguns/wildey-1.jpg

Comes in .44 Automag, .45 Wildey, .45 Winchester, and .475 Wildey Special. My grandpappy used to own one for hunting.

[ControlledBurn]

1. Not all combat is restricted to sub-100 meter ranges. What worked in Vietnam's junges may also work in Iraq's urban warfare, but neither of those may work in Central Europe. Not every conflict will be won in dry urban areasI wonder why we're going for a general issue of the M4, given the reports of it. Besides, the AR-15 series is getting old, H&K's XM8 looks nice.

Yes, I understand that in theory, the cartridge compensates for less mass via increased velocity, as physics taught us when force equals mass times speed. However, if it doesn't take a man down in two shots with an M4, and we're going for a general issue of the M4, we'd better use a 6.X.

2. I really want to shoot one, does that count? I can just hope our trials work out. But does this mean nobody has the right to talk about it? I don't get the second part of your point here.

3. There are dozens of 6.X cartridges and I'm tired, cut me some slack. It's just a letter.

4. Other countries worked fine with the FN-FAL which carried 20 cartridges. 5 bullets is not a massive issue, and if it is found to be, extending it won't be a big problem. Hell, we maintained a 20-round size when changing from the M14 to M16.

Just because I agree with a publication does not mean that I'm a mindless drone of GWLE.


1. The Corps has no plans to deviate from the M16A3/A4 currently. That is what is being issued to Marines deploying. Those who shoot Expert get the A4, all else get the A3. Yes the XM8 looks nice, but it's a ways off for deployment into today's battlefields. And in today's modern battlefield, it's mostly UrbanOps warefare anyways, with firefights at 50-100m (I'll get a more precise idea of how close fighting in Fallujah is the next time I speak to my brother who's deployed there) As for physics, did you take the same physics I did? Cause Force = Mass x Acceleration not Force = Mass times Velocity last I checked. And as for it not taking someone with two to the chest, again, it's likely at an inreased range with the M4, in which case it's not likely that the M4 would be employed at such a range. At least not by the Marines, since as I pointed out before, we're sticking with the M16.

2. It means you, me, Bliz, and anyone else without firsthand knowledge of the round's specifics has no right to tout it as a good replacement. Sure the mag has an opinion, but they're once source and opinion so far. Personally I'll trust whatever the Corps decide upon if they do decide to change up the round. For now I'll stick with 5.56.

3. I think the point Bliz is driving at here is that if you're going to spout off, be accurate in what you're writing about.

4. Bliz was pointing out that just because the round is smaller and less lethal at longer ranges, doesn't make that huge a difference to Joe Any Marine, just like a smaller magazine. Also, if you're going to point out that while moving on the battlefield that you're going to be less accurate with the weapon, wouldn't you want more ammo in that magazine? At least according to your "opinions" you would think so.

[ControlledBurn]

Average ambush is 50-100m in Fallujah. Well within the M4's lethality range for even 1 shot to the chest.

As far as 500m for opening up on unarmored convoys, but the 240G and M2 have a much higher effective lethality range obviously, and that's what would be used in such a circumstance.

[OneManArmy]

woo for guns! (http://www.hkpro.com/g36c.htm)