Gun Trouble [Archive] - Wilderness Survival Forums

kyratshooter

12-31-2014, 12:17 PM

Did you like it?

There is a philosophical point of discussion here Zack, especially for one who carried a tool into combat.

And this is a 100% opinionated statement expressing my views only.

A military rifle is a general purpose tool designed to aid the soldier in closing with and destroying the enemy. It is made to do that job while fitting and being used by several million men at any given point in time.

It does not matter if one "likes" the issue rifle, as long as it does the assigned job better than the rifle carried by the enemy.

The M14 was an "adequate" rifle for the time, but it was simply a revision of an already obsolete design (the M1).

FN had produced the FAL ten years before the M14 was adopted, Spain and Germany had the G3, the Soviets had already been using the AK for a decade. For Gods sake the Germans had MG44 rifles during WWII !

They were all better at aiding the soldier at closing with and destroying the enemy due to design features, shape, ammo, or durability.

If I had not know anything about what was available to the soldiers of other nations I might have thought the M14 was the bees knees. As it was, I felt that I was issued a rifle that was 25 years behind the development curve.

There was a valid reason why we dropped the M14 within 10 years. It was 10 years obsolete the day we adopted it in 1957.

Real problem was, what they gave us to replace it was worse than the M14.

Patton might have considered the M1-M14 platform the "greatest battle weapon ever designed" but that was in 1940.

and I have the distinct feeling he might have held a battlefield pickup MG44 in his hands and mumbled "God help us!"

crashdive123

12-31-2014, 12:50 PM

Yep - first rifle I qualified on. I loved it........but I didn't have to hump it around in the field.

I was teaching a Shipboard Anti Terrorist class and one of the students complained about the weight and size for use on Submarines and that we should all be issued 45's (issued sidearm at the time). I asked him what was the "mantra" regarding hostages? His reply was correct when he stated "The life of the hostage shall be considered, but it will not affect your course of action". (Remember... this is nuclear weapons security) I said OK.....if you have to take out the bad guy NOW and he is using a human shield, would you rather try and ricochet a shot with your 45 off a missile tube or shoot through the hostage with the M-14 and kill the bad guy?

He asked not to be put on OPFOR (opposing forces) for drills.

OldFlJarhead

12-31-2014, 12:52 PM

As another who qualified with the M-14 I agree completely. The M-16 was a bust at first, too. As for it's utility in Afganistan, many different rifles could have been bought off the civilian market to do the same mission...kill at a distance.

Rick

12-31-2014, 02:35 PM

@ Kyrat - That was a very well written and informative response. Thank you.

natertot

12-31-2014, 04:32 PM

I cannot disagree with anything that was said. I qualified and used both the m-14 and m-16 variants during my service with the Navy. I loved the capability if the M-14 better than the m-16. .308 or .223? Is that really even a question? I found it even more accurate than the m-16 as well as the fact it was more reliable. There are only a dozen parts to an m-14, they don't have to have tight tolerances, and none of them are plastic except the hand guard. The down side to the m-14 is it is HEAVY and the standard mag held 20 vs the m-16 which holds 30. Than again, one .308 does what 2-3 rounds of .223 does and the accuracy of the m-14 means fewer shots. The m-16 seems to be more of a "spray and pray" piece of equipment and the amount of maintenance for it as astronomical. So my choice between the two would be the m-14.

Like KyRat said though, there are many better options that our military doesn't look at. Mini-14 and Mini-30 are both a cut above the m-16 in the civilian world. Same thing as the m-14, but a little smaller and much lighter and in .223 and 7.62x39, respectively. Outdated design? Maybe. But how old is the wheel and it is still in use?!!!!! I always thought that if the military had converted .30 carbine to .223 they would have had a great option for little expense, but what do I know? I would definitely take an AK over the m-16 too. Of all the rounds, I like the .308 the best. I think an AK in .308 would be tough to beat for a military rifle. But then again, there is fantasy......

kyratshooter

12-31-2014, 05:14 PM

. I think an AK in .308 would be tough to beat for a military rifle. But then again, there is fantasy......

Ain't fantasy Nate, you held one in your hands last time we went shooting!

I had the little AK and the BIG AK. The BIG AK was an SVD knockoff in 7.62 NATO.

The Russians still issue one in 7.62x54r to one man in every squad as a designated marksman rifle. What that really means is that every tenth man in the Russian Army is issued a sniper rifle.

Do you suppose they learned something during WW2 that we let slip?

natertot

12-31-2014, 07:04 PM

Ain't fantasy Nate, you held one in your hands last time we went shooting!

I had the little AK and the BIG AK. The BIG AK was an SVD knockoff in 7.62 NATO.

The Russians still issue one in 7.62x54r to one man in every squad as a designated marksman rifle. What that really means is that every tenth man in the Russian Army is issued a sniper rifle.

Do you suppose they learned something during WW2 that we let slip?

I know the AK is made in 7.62 NATO, I am just saying that it is fantasy for it to be used by our military.

As far as designated marksmen in squads..... I don't think we let that slip too much. It seems to me that the military still issues an m-14 or two to units depending on the situation. One thing is that an m-14 is nearly impossible to use to clear buildings with due to its size so it isn't delegated too much for urban patrols. The M40A1 and the M24 are both heavily modified Remington 700's in 7.62 NATO and are what our snipers use and our snipers are utilized fairly often. So I don't think we let the lesson slip, I think we apply the lesson in a different way.

ElevenBravo

12-31-2014, 08:11 PM

I enjoyed the thread, creative discussion and some history too! I wanted to thank all that participated.

Im old school, but not as old school as some of you! HA HA! I qualified on an M16 A1 with triangle handguards, Ft. Benning. Anywho, all that root training carries over to this day... If I put optics on a weapon I just cant use it... Im off center so to say.... One reason I am looking at the Savage Hog Hunter, its a 308 bolt with iron sights, which is not in vogue anymore (due greatly to the tacticool takeover I reckon...). I taught my daughter to shoot rifle with iron sights, and NOT off a bench... (You guys might have already grown tired of the video, but I present it again)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=px1iuGKMkL8

On the topic of the AR/M series rifles... First, the GI system lends it's self to failure because of use... who came up with the idea to blow the gases into the upper and bolt face?!?!? The tolerances are too tight for reliability. What you get is a light bullet at high velocities with greater range and respectable accuracy but at the cost of dependability.

MK did not, in my mind, "invent" the AK... instead he created the weapon off the design of other already proven weapons, one being the SKS. Not to take from MK, the weapon he created is one of the finest ever designed even to this day... The design totally lends it's self to reliability and retain respectable accuracy to at least 200 yards, 250 if you memorize the trajectory and understand the ballistics.

No one will try to engage the enemy at 2,000 yards with a rifle... they will instead call for artillery or mortar. What I am getting at, is to deploy the weapon knowing its capacity and limitations.

You do not try to fight with an enemy at 350 yards with an AK, unless you like holding over by 6 feet. Its a limitation of the cartridge. (.54R style AK type weapons do not have such limitations, HA HA).

To compare the ballistics of an AK to an AR is udder nonsense and only a fool would try to make a direct comparison.

If my life depended on it, I pick the AK to protect me. Knowing the limitations dictates that enemy at 300 yards gets a free pass, which is fine by me because at that distance you wont know Im there anyway. At 200 yards, even better at 150 yards.. aggressor beware.

To live the XboX daydream that having an AR will automagically make you a killin' machine is just immature at best, idiotic at worst. Sure the AR platform has evolved and matured over the years, but it too has long lived past its design and should be abandoned for better. I still think the AK and FAL are by far more superior by design and function than the AR will ever be.

The number one thing a soldier wants on the battlefield is a weapon that will go bang every time. Seriously adverse conditions tend to muck up good luck with an AR. After reliability, the soldier wants combat accuracy. Any serious grunt will tel you, get me within 3 inches of center mass and they would be more than satisfied... Only a true and certified sniper, not a keyboard commando or warrior wannabe (mall ninja?) would be obsessed with MOA accuracy out of a semi automatic. Period.

I remember the entire time I was in the service, I heavily drank the Kool Aid and thought the M16 was the bestest weapon in the world, and I always regarded the AK as a P.O.S. stamped receiver rattaly worthless piece of junk. Fast forward to many years, and I sold my AR to get an AK, and couldnt be more thrilled and pleased! Its amazing how your impressions change, when you finally grow up.

This is my story, take it for what it's worth, I dont seek conflict or argument, only the opportunity to share my experience and ideas.

That is all, carry on...
EB

Phaedrus

01-01-2015, 06:15 AM

I will have to join in with TFB (http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2014/12/31/dissection-yet-another-m4-hit-piece/) in calling B.S. on it. Right off the bat, if the other sources I've read are correct the author is employed at a competing company trying to the Army to buy their gun. No conflict there.:tt2:

I'll say right off that I'm not a veteran. But I work with and know a multitude of recently discharged vets home from the sandbox. It's hard to find any of them with anything negative to say about the M4. Sure, some of them would have liked a bigger more powerful round. But it's not like the enemy AKs were mowing them down from outside of 5.56 range. According to the guys I've talked to the AKs in the hands of the Afghan's were in crappy shape, barely serviceable in a lot of cases. The consistent story I have heard is that the Taliban troops largely didn't know how to shoot, either.

The numbers don't really bear our the hit piece, either. How many troops were lost in ten years of combat? And how many of those were lost to enemy action? And of those, how many were IEDs, mines and mortars and how many were due to rifle fire? And of those how many were in stand-up firefights? I don't know the number but it's got to be pretty small. My guess is that the US troops gave a helluva lot better than they got. The author makes it sound like we were basically shooting spitwads at them as US soldiers were being mowed down. That strikes me as unmitigated BS.

Just as telling is the number of spec ops troops that have carried some variant of the M4. Sure, some of the SEALs have HKs (and I would personally rather have an HK but I'm a fanboy) but the bulk of them carry M4s or something akin to one. They presumably have some latitude in SOCOM to equip the troops.

What would be a better rifle then? I'm sure the author would humbly suggest whatever his company is making. But let's be objective. We have to look at the round and the gun as a package but even if we switched guns it's not clear that we'd move away from the 5.56 NATO round. It's the NATO round, after all. What gun would do a better job? An obvious contender is the FN SCAR but it is enough better to scrap 100s of thousands of rifles to change over?

The M16 was a disaster in the beginning for a lot of reasons. But the current M4 bears little resemblance to the old school 'Nam-era M16! It has served millions of troops very well and serves them well today.

randyt

01-01-2015, 11:30 AM

I own a fn-fal, m14, garand, ar15, m1 carbine, sks, ak-47, mas 56, cemte, and to be honest I prefer my SMLE or eddystone enfield LOL but if I had to choose a semi auto it would be the fn-fal.

natertot

01-01-2015, 02:29 PM

Faiaoga

01-01-2015, 02:59 PM

I did not know about The Firearms Blog article when I posted information about a piece from The Atlantic. It seems that there is a lot of disagreement. More information can probably help people make up their own minds.

The Atlantic article is from a whole issue devoted to national defense, an issue that is important to Americans. Because I am not a military veteran, I have no personal experience or knowledge of military small arms issues. From what I can tell, though the author of The Atlantic article has combat experience as an Army officer and served for many years in the military. If the author is employed by a company that is developing a rifle for sale to the US government, I am not aware of it.

Controversy about small arms is not new, and I have read about some of these issues before. Even today, some sources suggest that a larger diameter, heavier bullet than the 5.56 mm should be adopted. Because I lack practical experience, I cannot say much concerning the M16/M4 compared to other weapons. I hope those who do have experience can discuss the topic. I only posted the original thread because others might be interested in the "Gun Trouble" topic.

Zack

01-01-2015, 07:15 PM

There is a philosophical point of discussion here Zack, especially for one who carried a tool into combat.

And this is a 100% opinionated statement expressing my views only.

A military rifle is a general purpose tool designed to aid the soldier in closing with and destroying the enemy. It is made to do that job while fitting and being used by several million men at any given point in time.

It does not matter if one "likes" the issue rifle, as long as it does the assigned job better than the rifle carried by the enemy.

The M14 was an "adequate" rifle for the time, but it was simply a revision of an already obsolete design (the M1).

FN had produced the FAL ten years before the M14 was adopted, Spain and Germany had the G3, the Soviets had already been using the AK for a decade. For Gods sake the Germans had MG44 rifles during WWII !

They were all better at aiding the soldier at closing with and destroying the enemy due to design features, shape, ammo, or durability.

If I had not know anything about what was available to the soldiers of other nations I might have thought the M14 was the bees knees. As it was, I felt that I was issued a rifle that was 25 years behind the development curve.

There was a valid reason why we dropped the M14 within 10 years. It was 10 years obsolete the day we adopted it in 1957.

Real problem was, what they gave us to replace it was worse than the M14.

Patton might have considered the M1-M14 platform the "greatest battle weapon ever designed" but that was in 1940.

and I have the distinct feeling he might have held a battlefield pickup MG44 in his hands and mumbled "God help us!"

I wasn't really referring to the rifle as it performed in battle, but more about its all around use. Besides using it as a fighting rifle, did you think it was an okay gun in the field? Was it accurate? Did it malfunction like the M16's? Was it a decent general purpose rifle? How did it compare to the M16's as a GP rifle? To clarify, was the M14 a better rifle that the M16 when it came to all purpose use? Thanks for the response, though.

Phaedrus

01-01-2015, 09:24 PM

Phaedrus, a lot of troops and newer veteran's will praise the m-16 and variants. Why? Because it is the only combat rifle they have ever used and they don't know any better. Also not abandoning the 5.56 just because it is "the NATO round after all" is faulty thinking because it is not the only NATO rifle round. That is why I would favor an AK in 7.62 NATO for a military rifle. Also implying the modern day M4 is better because it no longer looks like a nam era m-16 is foolish as well. You stated you are not a veteran, if you were you would realize the amount of cleaning, maintenance, and replacement of parts the M4 has to go through in order to serve those millions troops well. You stated that many of the AK's in Afghan were crappy and barely serviceable in many cases and I have no doubt that is true. But I guarantee you those AK's are older than the very first M-16 ever procured by the military and the only cleaning ever done was by blasting rounds through it. You couldn't get a week out of most M-16/M4 treated like that.

I dunno...some of them have had access to every battle rifle up to this point. And what did previous soldiers have experience with? Only their own battle rifles. The point I'm making is that the article's claims of poor reliability don't seem grounded in reality. The reports I've heard are that the M4 is reliable and accurate. And realistically are there contrary reports? Every weapon has fans and detractors. I recall one battle where troops were doing FA mag dump as fast as possible til they went "black" on ammo. What service rifle is made to do that? That is poor training for the most part.

What would we replace it with? I owned a good Chinese civilian AK and didn't strike me as a great rifle. It really is a myth that the AK will never stop running. The poorly maintained AKs confiscated in the sandbox often wouldn't run right either. What is the argument? We need something easier to clean? That's maybe true but according to recent vets the M4 doesn't need to be squeaky clean to run well. The more expert folks I know will echo this sentiment. M4 reliability problems seem to more myth than actual fact.

I'm not praising or condemning the 5.56. But looking at the reality adoption of that round forced the Soviets into a smaller caliber AK to "keep up". Last I read several thousand rounds are expended for ever hit on a combatant. That means you probably need a lot of ammo. We had a 7.62 rifle and ditched if for a reason. War changed. We didn't get into 1000 yard rifles battles anymore. My dad, a Viet Nam vet, actually felt the rifle was obsolete in warfare (a view I dont' agree with BTW).

As for the US adopting an AK that will never happen as you well know, for lots of reasons. First it's simply not that great a gun and doesn't fit modern Western military doctrine. More importantly it's famous as an enemy weapon, a tool of terrorism and communism. I can't imagine that politically we could ever adopt an AK! Obviously something like a Galil would be more politically correct but even the Israelis are moving away from it to the Tavor IIRC.

Phaedrus

01-01-2015, 09:36 PM

FN had produced the FAL ten years before the M14 was adopted, Spain and Germany had the G3, the Soviets had already been using the AK for a decade. For Gods sake the Germans had MG44 rifles during WWII !

They were all better at aiding the soldier at closing with and destroying the enemy due to design features, shape, ammo, or durability.

If I had not know anything about what was available to the soldiers of other nations I might have thought the M14 was the bees knees. As it was, I felt that I was issued a rifle that was 25 years behind the development curve.

There was a valid reason why we dropped the M14 within 10 years. It was 10 years obsolete the day we adopted it in 1957.

Very true! The FAL was superior to the M14 in every way except possibly accuracy potential. The G3 would also have been a superior weapon.

Patton might have considered the M1-M14 platform the "greatest battle weapon ever designed" but that was in 1940.

and I have the distinct feeling he might have held a battlefield pickup MG44 in his hands and mumbled "God help us!"

Another very good point! We always seem to adopt weapons perfected to fight the previous war. In the jungles of VN there wasn't a lot of call for a 7.62 rifle nor many big set-piece battles. Some of the lessons of WWII were definitely driven home! In WWII the "blitzkrieg" was very effective. German tactics incorporating rapid movement and heavy use of light, portable machine guns changed the face of warfare. I watched an old WWII training video that was created to address the fear US troops had of the MG44! It's funny now but sure wasn't then; the video tries to say that the "bark is worse than the bite" but that was not the case at all. The MG44 was highly lethal.

In service rifles it seems the Sturmgewehr was the game changer. While it didn't materially affect the war due to supply problems and the late introduction it had a profound influence on the Soviets and the West. The M16 was basically a reaction to the Sturmgewehr. The AK was a direct response to it. All modern military rifles are. What major army in the world still fields a "battle rifle" in the old sense? Everyone has switched over to 'assault rifles' influenced by the Sturmgewehr, guns in an intermediate caliber, high capacity and select fire capability. It's hard to overestimate the impact the MG44 and the STG44.

natertot

01-02-2015, 03:40 AM

Phaedrus, I doubt they had access to every battle rifle up to this point. Maybe US Rifles, but not every battle rifle in the world. Not even within NATO which includes the British SA80, Swedish AK5, Germany and Spains Hk G36, French FAMAS, Italian AR70/90, Mexican FX-05, Russian AK74, and Belgium and croatian FN F2000. All of which are 556.

I am not saying that the m-16 or variants are not accurate. They are. I am not even saying they aren't reliable. What I am saying is it takes a lot of effort and keeping several small parts on hand to keep them reliable. That is why after every firing and every patrol they are broken down, cleaned, and inspected. Lots of effort. Basically like saying you got 500k miles out of a car without it ever breaking down, never mind the fact you had to change all the fluids and filters ever 500 miles and replace half the gaskets every 3k miles to achieve it.

One cannot compare a Chinese civilian AK to a true military AK. The fact you even did that made me do a face palm and illistrates that you have no idea of what a true Russian military AK is. I also never stated that an AK will never stop running. What I am saying is that the Taliban can keep an AK running without any proper cleaning, no replacement parts, and no armorers for decades. What we need is something not so high maintenance which I touched on in the second paragraph. BTW, we never ditched the 7.62 either. If the 5.56 was all that and a bag of chips we would have.

I know the US won't adopt the AK for a military rifle. Not saying they should. I just said an AK in 7.62 NATO would be a great rifle for our military presently. For future rifles I believe they should look at something as reliable and low maintenance as an AK. As urban warfare continues and develops, I believe shorter and lighter rifles are key. Perhaps a bullpup style with a 12-14" barrel?

Zack

01-02-2015, 07:44 AM

natertot

01-02-2015, 09:56 AM

Does the group prefer piston driven M4/M16's over AK's or M14's?

I don't. That means you would have a rifle that might need periodic parts but now they are specialty and cost more. I am not sure that they are more reliable or better than the gas system. If they were, I would think the military would have converted theirs. Just my opinion.

I am also not a huge fan of the .223/5.56 round. To me, it is a .22 caliber bullet and could technically be called .22 Super Magnum in my book. I think it is a fantastic varmint round and would own a bolt gun or perhaps acquire a barrel for the single shot Rossi in the caliber. If I were to get a semi auto .223/5.56, and that is a big IF, I would actually purchase either a Mini14 or an AK74.

TXyakr

01-02-2015, 02:33 PM

My 2 cents are: This is a very old argument and Major General “Bob” Scales and many others have every right to be writing about a smaller more elite US military force with “better” munitions but the facts are that “a large ship takes a long time to change coarse” and it is mostly political. Meanwhile it is not wise to undermine our confidence in our troops or theirs in their assigned firearms. Maintaining all your gear in good conditions is part of good training. Gen Scales has written other articles, his views are similar to those of Sec of Defense Donald Rumsfeld in the first administration of G W Bush, that did not go so well for him.

Estimates are that the USA spends more treasure on its military (much of that on munitions) than the next 9-13 most powerful nations. I assume this is because our campaign finance laws are the most liberal in the “free world”, but perhaps we as a people just enjoy policing the world (despite the cost in wounded warriors etc.) or believe more strongly than other nations that space aliens are going to invade. (I hear hoof beats I think horses, not zebra, best to avoid politics and religion).

NATO and especially the US DOD procurement process takes a long time and is very expensive. Carbine firearms and ammunition is tested at labs, ranges and by Special Op Forces (in the field) before it can be approved to be ordered in large quantities from vendors. Then, if even when a small change is made in an alloy or propellant a long approval process must be followed. If it gets into the supply chain and a fault is discovered, the warehousing, its destruction and shortages on the battlefield can be very costly. The total cost of a new bullet or rifle are far more than just that one item’s manufacturing cost multiplied by the number actually deployed. Sorry to bore y’all with all that bureaucratic blah blah blah, most folks never read past the first line. But this is a small part of the reason why US troops have are issued the weapons they have.

BTW the 1000+ rebel groups in Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq that use AKs “successfully” use parts from one to “fix” another and are constantly working on them and they often jam and fail on them. Fine grit of the desert destroys everything. They are very good at improvising. Often their “supply chain” is weapons taken from dead fighters. Primary suppliers are oil rich “Persian Gulf States” sending surplus weapons from Russia, China and North Korea.

Phaedrus

01-03-2015, 05:17 AM

One cannot compare a Chinese civilian AK to a true military AK. The fact you even did that made me do a face palm and illistrates that you have no idea of what a true Russian military AK is. I also never stated that an AK will never stop running. What I am saying is that the Taliban can keep an AK running without any proper cleaning, no replacement parts, and no armorers for decades. What we need is something not so high maintenance which I touched on in the second paragraph. BTW, we never ditched the 7.62 either. If the 5.56 was all that and a bag of chips we would have.

Respectfully I think you're dead wrong. The Taliban is certainly not keeping those AKs running, at least not all of them. At least according to the guys I personally know that have fought them. I don't recall, are you a veteran of the recent wars? Are you speaking from your own experience? I'm not an expert at all in the field of AKs and I make no claim to be. But I think there's not much evidence that US soldiers are being "slaughtered" in firefights due to the M4 being inferior to the AK in the hands of the Taliban. In fact I think it's just the opposite. I can't even count the number of stories from US soldiers that state the Taliban were so badly massacred in nearly every straight-up fight with American troops that they soon learned to avoid head on confrontations, switching to ambush and IED attacks. It would appear that in point of fact the US soldier and the M4 are both greatly superior to the Taliban and their Russian/Chinese/wherever-they-found-them AKs.

I'm not really trying to argumentative. This is a good topic that bears some discussion. I'd be interested to hear some input from current or recently-discharged American soldiers regarding the M4.

I'll just end my involvement here with an interesting aside; I know at least three or four veterans that went out and bought or built their own M4geries after being discharged. I worked with one guy that had 8 different ARs (and to be fair, one ACR and one SCAR). He did six years in the sandbox and really loved his M4. He felt is was a great weapon. Again, just anecdotal, not "proof" really. But I hear that from so many ex-soldiers that I have to wonder if the whole issue isn't made up to try to sell the Army a new gun.

hunter63

01-03-2015, 12:44 PM

Government procurers + Military intelligence + pork barrel projects for elected officials= It's a wonder any kind of weapon made it past the drawing board.

I do propose that these discussions are held between people with experience , rather than speculation, and hearsay......

AK vs AR discussions are real close to "The best knife".

Carry on...........

natertot

01-04-2015, 02:39 AM

Respectfully I think you're dead wrong. That is fine that you think that. The Taliban is certainly not keeping those AKs running, at least not all of them. At least according to the guys I personally know that have fought them. I don't recall, are you a veteran of the recent wars? Yes, I am a veteran. Served onboard USS Elrod FFG-55 (Which is being decommissioned this month by the way) from 2003-2007. I assisted the GM's (Gunner's Mates) with small weapons maintenance and this is where I draw my experience from on the M-16/M4. Are you speaking from your own experience? I'm not an expert at all in the field of AKs and I make no claim to be. But I think there's not much evidence that US soldiers are being "slaughtered" in firefights due to the M4 being inferior to the AK in the hands of the Taliban. In fact I think it's just the opposite. I can't even count the number of stories from US soldiers that state the Taliban were so badly massacred in nearly every straight-up fight with American troops that they soon learned to avoid head on confrontations, switching to ambush and IED attacks. It would appear that in point of fact the US soldier and the M4 are both greatly superior to the Taliban and their Russian/Chinese/wherever-they-found-them AKs. There are many different reason's that we win or lose an area and yes, we have lost some areas in these recent wars. To base any of those wins and losses strictly on who has what rifle is putting on the proverbial blinders for the entire picture of the battles/wars that take place. AK's are not the only rifle the enemy uses and the M-16/M4 is not the only rifle we use. We also have tanks, helicopters, planes, missiles, bombs, and next to a never ending supply chain which the enemy lacks and they all have way more to do with our successes than what our primary rifle is. Also, during most battles, we outnumber the enemy by more than 2:1. For the times we have lost, it is usually because the terrain is so horrible that supplies chains are ineffective due to vehicles not being able to handle the terrain. This also prevents the use of HUMVEE's, tanks, and other armored vehicles. Look into the Valley of Korengal which is the best example of this and why we had to back out and give it up.

I'm not really trying to argumentative. This is a good topic that bears some discussion. I'd be interested to hear some input from current or recently-discharged American soldiers regarding the M4.

I'll just end my involvement here with an interesting aside; I know at least three or four veterans that went out and bought or built their own M4geries after being discharged. I worked with one guy that had 8 different ARs (and to be fair, one ACR and one SCAR). He did six years in the sandbox and really loved his M4. He felt is was a great weapon. Again, just anecdotal, not "proof" really. But I hear that from so many ex-soldiers that I have to wonder if the whole issue isn't made up to try to sell the Army a new gun.

Like I have said before, the M16/M4 is a good rifle. I just believe that the AK is more user friendly when it comes to maintenance and upkeep and would also save the US money on all those springs and seals that get burned up in an M16. I also believe that using 7.62 NATO as the standard round would be more effective than the 5.56 NATO round. Then again, I even said that the military should really look forward in warfare and consider something smaller and lighter for the rifle itself such as a bullpup even. Having rifles so long you can poke out your enemies eye from three countries away is no longer necessary, which is in part why the M4 was created out of the M-16. Warfare in urban environments and tight quarters are only becoming more frequent and more difficult with long arms. Not saying go with a pistol though.

As far as most of the recent vets preferring M-16/M4/AR15, I have no doubt that is true. But you have to realize that for their entire service they were INDOCTRINATED to love the rifle. Spend 4 to 20 years with a superior that can put you in a world of hurt if you disagree with them who is constantly telling you the rifle is the best thing in the world and you will start to believe it. It's like Stockholm Syndrome for guns!

Everything that I have said in this thread is just my opinion based upon my experience. I have never taken you as being argumentative and I apologize if I have come across argumentative myself.

Phaedrus

01-04-2015, 05:43 AM

natertot

01-04-2015, 06:39 AM

Good points! No I didn't take it that you were being argumentative. I think it's a good discussion topic. I'm a "gun guy" but not a soldier so I'm probably just talking out my arse here, but I think a good case can be made for a larger round. I love the 7.62 NATO (aka the .308), but I'm not sure it's the ideal military rifle. It has a lot of recoil (apparently not really an issue with the SCAR17, though) and the ammo is much heavier and bulkier than 7.62. The guns also have to be bigger and heavier. Certainly it packs more punch as has more range. But where will the next conflict occur? In the mountains and deserts long range engagements might be common, but what if the next battles are fought in the jungle? Or an urban setting? It seems that the 5.56 works pretty well and is pretty lethal inside 200 meters.

Realistically the rifle probably is a pretty small part of the war machine but a vital one.

I highlighted a section that you wrote. I do not understand why that has to be true. I have shot an AR10 and the recoil with it was pleasant, and the weight of the AR10 with a full 20rd mag weighed only half a pound more than an AR15 with a full 30rd mag. It also weighed in about 2.25lbs less than a loaded M14. Okay, you have 2/3's of the ammo capacity, but if you hit your target they won't need follow up shots. My thought is a miss is a miss, but if I hit something I don't want to have to hit it a second, third, or fourth time. But back to my point, a 7.62 doesn't have to be heavy, bulky and miserable to shoot.

For a 7.62 NATO Bullpup that weighs less than an M16, check out the Kel Tec RFB. I have no idea what the recoil is like on one, but it would be a heck of an option.

kyratshooter

01-04-2015, 12:06 PM

Could the real problem be that there are too many "civilians" who have never served making these budget decisions in congress?

And they believe everything a lobbyist tells them, or they happen to read on the internet.

Rifle weight is a moot point for the combat soldier. His load out is static and reduced rifle weight is replaced by added weight of other gear. The M4 loaded out with optics, lights and 30 round mag will top the scales at nearly 10 pounds.

Plus the fact that today's soldier wears body armor that is heavier than any rifle ever issued to a US soldier making a 2 pound difference in rifle weight irrelevant.

My two sons did return from Iraq from tours as combat Marines. And they did buy things. The first items they bought were body armor. The second things they bought were rifles, one bought an AK and the other an M4. Those were closely followed by 9mm pistols (neither bought Berettas). The son that bought the M4 did so before the price increase and sold his unit during the panic for 3x what he paid. He now has an AK.

The soldier of our present conflicts arrives on the scene of battle in a vehicle that is loaded down with thousands of rounds of ammo, making resupply also a moot point. It is also one of the reasons a hit on a Humvee is so devastating to the occupants.

Accuracy of fire is a result of training and individual capabilities more than the "quality" of the rifle, meaning that reliability is the primary concern of the soldier on the line. His primary concern is making the other guy stop shooting at him! Then he remembers he supposed to kill the other guy. Sometime the two goals are the same, sometimes not.

One will also find that most of our casualties in the present conflicts have been due to explosives devices rather than direct rifle fire, and the number or rounds expended by our troops/per casualty is higher than in any war that has gone before, making "accuracy" less important than firepower. It has been that way since the Henry Rifle and spencer rifles were placed in service during our Civil War.

NATO use and adoption is also a moot point since none of the allied countries spends more than one half of one percent of their budget on defense spending. WE ARE NATO, therefore NATO will do what we tell them to do. However, we will use the NATO approval system to our advantage for budgeting and procurement purposes when we wish.

History tells us that the established military will remain very conservative in adoption of new equipment of any kind as long as the old equipment continues to function up to the capabilities of the anticipated enemy. This is where the argument of procurement problems comes into play.

The only full scrapping and reequipping of the military establishment with new gear has always come after a major advance in technology, such as the British decision to convert all small arms to the flintlock system back in the 1670s, the nearly world wide conversion of all military weapons to cartridge firing in the 1860s, The bolt action rifle/machinegun/artillery arms race of the 1890s, the complete disarmament of Germany after WW1 and their fresh start in technology in the 1930s or the development of the AK in the 1940s.

In reality, we are not going to adopt an issue rifle that fires the 7.62x51 round. We are not going to abandon the M4 platform. We simply can not afford to do so. We have too much invested in the hundreds of thousands already in use.

Same for the 9mm M9 pistol. It does not matter how much you hear on the internet or in the gun magazines we are not switching to a "new .45". The "procurement people" just contracted for another 100,000 M9 pistols and Beretta has just built a new factory in Tennessee to build them.

As long as our perceived enemy does not make a huge advance in technology everyone that missed the "low bid" for providing supplies is going to be griping about the obsolete gear and the wicked, dishonest and wasteful procurement system.

ElevenBravo

01-04-2015, 12:18 PM

I know the AK is made in 7.62 NATO

Hmmm, no... its not.

kyratshooter

01-04-2015, 12:37 PM

http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/product_info.php/cPath/36_756/products_id/411553278/CENTURY+ZASTAVA+PAP+M77+308WIN+10RD+Thumbhole+Stoc k

Contrary to popular belief there is more than one kind of AK. Since there was no patent on the AK each nation that built the rifle was free to make modifications and alter the design to meet their needs. There is a distinct difference between Russian, Hungarian, Bulgarian, Serbian and Egyptian variations and some Warsaw pac nations did not use the AK at all (Chech VZ58)!

There are variations in receiver thickness and in trunion thickness and width, as well as attachment for the receiver cover and a major structural variation for the under-folder stock.

If you do not believe so then try to put a Bulgarian stock on a Serbian AK.

The platform has also been stretched to accommodate the 7.62x54 and the 7.62x51 cartridges and the AK underwent a major change to 5.45 caliber in the 1970s (reaction to our 5.56 round).

natertot

01-05-2015, 02:35 AM

^^^^^What he said^^^^^

Hmmm, no... its not.

Yep, it is. The AK can be had in the following rounds:

.22 LR
.22 Magnum
5.45x39
5.56x45 (5.56 NATO) Most are even made in Russia
6.5 Grendel
6.8 SPC
7.62x39
7.62x51 (7.62 NATO)
7.62x54
.410 Bore
20 Ga
12 Ga

I know it tends to irritate AR fans that AK's have more chambering options.

ElevenBravo

01-05-2015, 08:45 PM

natertot

01-05-2015, 11:20 PM

So just because the AK was originally 7.62x39, it cannot be made in any other caliber? I guess AR in calibers outside of 5.56 are not really an AR either. Just because someone says AK and you Assume 7.62x39, it is no one else's issue except yours for assuming. 7.62x39 is the most popular caliber for the AK, but not the only one. Also, if the gun "can be had" in such and such caliber, then it is made in that caliber, otherwise it couldn't be had. Good luck.

Winter

01-06-2015, 04:40 AM

Like KyRat said though, there are many better options that our military doesn't look at. Mini-14 and Mini-30 are both a cut above the m-16 in the civilian world. Same thing as the m-14, but a little smaller and much lighter and in .223 and 7.62x39, respectively. .

http://i3.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/001/582/picard-facepalm.jpg

Winter

01-06-2015, 04:45 AM

"The Mini-14 is NOT known to be “DURABLE” (When I was active we trained some Bahamanian Marines. They were all armed with pretty much brand new Mini-14's. We ran lots of patrols with them through swamps and over hill and dale - and did lots of dry and live fire exercises. Before two weeks were up - NOT ONE Mini-14 survived. They were ALL down - and I mean "down" as in would not work because of parts failure/breakage. They were all using "loaner" AR's for the rest of the time as their Mini's went down. Not surprisingly - they/we had no problems or issues with our AR's. Before this I had some 'range time' with a Mini-14 and it was a fun gun to shoot. I felt bad too – as I really liked the Mini-14 when shooting them on a range. Pat Rogers - an instructor at Gunsite - has stated that he has NEVER seen a "Mini" make it through the demanding 4-5 day carbine course. NEVER. They always go "down" and the person uses a loaner AR to finish the course with. (We had no problems with our M4’s doing all of the same stuff that we put the Mini's through. Granted – the abuse that our rifles saw was WAY beyond what any “civilian” rifle sees – but the scope of this post is way beyond what civilian rifles are designed for!)"

Winter

01-06-2015, 04:51 AM

The AR series of rifles are used by every western special forces unit on the planet, even countries that issue different firearms to their regular troops.

Do you think GROM and the SAS may know more than you, who once qualified, in the Navy, with some rifle?

Don't bother answering that.

Phaedrus

01-06-2015, 04:55 AM

Yeah, I had a Mini-14 back in the early 90's. I can't say much positive about it. Mine was lucky to shoot minute-of-paper plate groups, even with handloads. I think the later/recent models are better made with heavier barrels. But I didn't really like the gun much. The mag release sucked- basically like my AK. The safety wasn't ergonomic, either. I bought it because it was a fair bit cheaper than the Colt AR I really wanted, and I got what I paid for.

Winter

01-06-2015, 05:00 AM

Sell it, you can build an AR these days for $400.

This may help troubleshoot your mini 14.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v236/MolonLabe/Mini14target.png

Batch

01-06-2015, 07:24 AM

That statement was:

The AK *IS* ... where as it should have said the AK *CAN BE HAD*, which implied by default the AK/AKM default caliber is NATO, which... we all know, it is not.

An AK in NATO is not common, anyone you speak to when you say "AK" will rightfully assume X39. Seldom ever someone will ask "Oh, you have an AK... what caliber is it?"

The link is not even to an AK, its to an M77 or an AK VARIANT.
Only a variant can be had outside the X39 cartridge.

Examine the links carefully, check for cartridge.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK-47
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AKM

The analogy is that if you put a Chevy motor in a Ford, some how the while vehicle automagically becomes a Ford. It does not make it so.

I was just trying to put some accuracy in on the subject... But you dont have to take my word for it, all the information is freely available on Google..

In 1974 the soviets made a transition to a different caliber the AK-74 in 5.54X39. It first saw major conflict in 1979 in Afghanistan. That's 23 years the AK was an AK-47 and 40 years of an AK being a multiple caliber system. I have also always heard people discuss the Dragonuv as an AK system, which has been available in 7.62X54R since the early 1960's.

Please feel free to google my info as well. An AK-74 is an AK, right?

Rick

01-06-2015, 08:19 AM

...and that concludes our lesson today on semantics.

natertot

01-06-2015, 08:59 AM

In 1974 the soviets made a transition to a different caliber the AK-74 in 5.54X39. It first saw major conflict in 1979 in Afghanistan. That's 23 years the AK was an AK-47 and 40 years of an AK being a multiple caliber system. I have also always heard people discuss the Dragonuv as an AK system, which has been available in 7.62X54R since the early 1960's.

Please feel free to google my info as well. An AK-74 is an AK, right?

Yes, but it wasn't chambered in 5.54x39. I have never even heard of that round. The AK 74 is primarily chambered in 5.45x39.

natertot

01-06-2015, 09:20 AM

Winter, I do not doubt your experiences but mine have been a little different in regards to the Mini's and M-16's. While I was in, every time we had quals we ended up with 1-3 out of a few dozen M-16's that would go down. After quals, there were always several springs and seals that would get replaced. Then again, I was in the Navy which, while I was in, tended to get lots of rejected stuff from the Army and USMC since we were not in a "Naval war". Perhaps our m-16/m-4 were other branch rejects? I don't know. I have never come across a Mini having reliability issues. I have heard many people say the early ones had accuracy issues and magazine issues, but personally never experienced any. The minis were also not built to be a military rifle. If they were built "tougher" for military purposes and to military specs I believe that it would out perform the m-16.

Either way, it is a moot discussion because the whole thought of our military changing rifles is a complete fantasy. Our military will continue to "patch" the m-16 by changing this, modifying that, and adding more gizmos to get it through the situation at hand.

natertot

01-06-2015, 11:49 AM

Here is a decent read in light of the thread. Thought ya'll might like it.

http://www.chuckhawks.com/compared_AR-15_Mini-14.htm

hunter63

01-06-2015, 12:27 PM

kyratshooter

01-06-2015, 01:01 PM

The reason the AR platform is so widely used in the western world is because we give them away to any allied nation that wants them!

So far we have managed to give away 8 million AR platforms while the Soviets have inspired 100 million units of the AK platform.

The Mini14 was not developed until after the M16 had been adopted as standard issue and was never submitted for testing.

It is basically an M1carbine re-chambered to .223/7.62x39. Both accuracy and durability of the mark have always been chancy. They are as much a love/hate item as the AR platform.

I think the Australian Army used them as a second standard behind the FN for a time but have replaced them with the Styer, AUG.

Just like the M16, the mini14 has gone through constant revisions trying to make it work, but its biggest problem, in my view, is the proprietary magazines Ruger designs for every one of their creations. AR mags are $5, mini14 mags are $30!

At least one of the smart things the British, French, Germans, Austrians, Israelis and about every other nation with an independent arms production did was engineer the use of the American M16 magazine into their designs.

TXyakr

01-06-2015, 01:11 PM

At risk of grossly over simplifying a complex issue from a simple hunter's perspective one reason for various calibers is simply the terrain. This is why a very small selection of ammunition and rifles/handguns (platform variations) is not possible, regardless of how much the members of United States House Committee on Appropriations may insist on it. Check out how few ever served. $ super PACs spend on their campaigns is a fuzzy number at best by design.

When "hunting" in open terrain and shooting long distances a smaller projectile with more propellant is generally preferred for flat trajectory. But if the "hunter" is in a heavily "forested" or urban terrain where bush, branches and obstacles can deflect a projectile (bullet) a larger caliber that with more "knock down" power is generally preferred. Since this is a more intimate space a more immediate and certain kill is desired while at distance a wounded soldier who would require assistance was once thought to be a disadvantage to his comrades. The modern enemy who may be a ISIL rebel on hallucinogenic drugs strapped with an IED wishing for martyrdom has changed that IMO. This calculus effects who I choose to vote for, and thus I watch my congressional rep's and senator's voting records. I really don't care what party they claim to caucus with.

Edit: I "assume" the 3000+ American military "advisors" in western Iraq today are actually wearing tennis shoes and armed just with blades and words of advice while surrounded by ISIL hordes. But I could be wrong, history does seem to repeat itself. US Congress repeat themselves on a regular cycle, the "will of the voters"? which voters? those 10-20% that actually vote on issues? OH I'll just shut up and rant some other more appropriate place. Waste of time.

Winter

01-06-2015, 04:16 PM

The reason the AR platform is so widely used in the western world is because we give them away to any allied nation that wants them!

That's nonsense. The Canadians make their own. SAS can choose from any weapon system they want but use an AR. Australian SASR use M4 type rifles instead of the AUG.

Winter

01-06-2015, 04:29 PM

natertot

01-06-2015, 05:21 PM

That's nonsense. The Canadians make their own. SAS can choose from any weapon system they want but use an AR. Australian SASR use M4 type rifles instead of the AUG.

It really isn't nonsense. There are only three countries that produce the M16/M4/AR15 platform. They are USA, Canada, and China. The US produces the majority of them, the ones made in Canada are made by Colt which is an American company, and the ones made in China are Unlicensed knock-offs made strictly for export. All three countries have made a little more than 8 million of them, but yet 15 NATO Counties use them and a little more than 80 countries worldwide use them. Where did they get them? Either a Chinese knock-off, from the US, or a US company producing them in Canada. So when KyRat said that the reason it is widely used in the western world is because we gave them away, he was spot on.

We basically make a version, use it for a few years, modify it because it sucks and then send the previous versions to poorer NATO countries that struggle to get their arms to NATO compliance. Wash, rinse, repeat......

natertot

01-06-2015, 05:41 PM

Nater, what springs and seals are you talking about?

There are 6 springs. Only one of which a sailor will ever touch. The other 5 only the armorer would deal with. 2 of those are in the trigger group and the other 3 are sealed into tubes.

There's one set of "seals". They are the 3 gas rings and the rifle will work with only 2. They are steel.

I jumped in to the conversation only because I abhor disinformation. From our wilderness survival standpoint, the rifle doesn't make much of a difference as long as you have one and know its capabilities.

It's not the arrow, it's the Indian.

I am not sure which springs or seals they were constantly replacing as I was not permitted to do that. Only the GM's could do that level of work. I was not a GM, but did complete some GM training. We called them PQS in the Navy. I was only qualified to sign out weapons to watch standers and do basic cleaning but was often times permitted to repair magazines, although I wasn't really qualified to do so. Not like the 4-5 parts are that complicated.... After range days, I would hang out in the armory assisting GM's by doing cleaning, inventories, and other small tasks that came about. While I was doing that stuff is when GM's would be doing this, that, and the other to guns that failed and they were always talking about replacing seals and springs on the M-16/M4.

I do not know what you mean by a "sailor will ever touch" but "only the armorer would". GM's are sailors and they are our armorers.

I'll leave the rest alone.

Winter

01-06-2015, 05:49 PM

Selling them is not giving them away.

China, the Philippines, Canada, USA, and Germany make AR variants.

The AR never sucked. It was initially issued without the proper ammo and without cleaning kits, but I can see you are drinking the kool-aid, so, bottoms up.

Winter

01-06-2015, 05:54 PM

Soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines are not authorized to dismantle the firearm past field stripping unless they are armorers.

natertot

01-06-2015, 06:45 PM

Selling them is not giving them away. At the price for they were sold for vs. the price we paid to get them, yeah, we gave them away.

China, the PhilippinesOnly Philippines reference I could find was the failed Armorlite deal that started in 1983 and failed in 1987, Canadaonce again, Canada does not make M16/M4. Colt, an American company makes them..... on Canadian soil, USA, and GermanyOA does make AR's in Germany, but only civilian versions. Probably why Germany uses the HK G36. make AR variants.

The AR never sucked. It was initially issued without the proper ammo and without cleaning kits, but I can see you are drinking the kool-aid, so, bottoms up.

Not drinking any kool-aid. I just have my set of experiences which draw me to my conclusions leading to my own choices. Border line calling me a liar and having low tolerance of my personal opinion with the topic is no one's issue except yours. Certainly not my issue, nor am I going to make it mine.

As I said Gunner's Mates are the Navy's armorers. I do not know what more you want out of that, or what you don't understand about that. I suppose it is another one of your angles to try and make my experiences and opinions seem fool hardy to boost your personal opinions. If you want a million AR/M16/M4 rifles and have marital relations with them every night, that is your business. I don't have the same love for them as you do. Just get over it.

Rick

01-06-2015, 06:51 PM

And here we can agree to disagree. Move on folks. Nothing to see.

Winter

01-06-2015, 07:19 PM

There are facts and there's opinion.

Canada made the AR under the Canadian company Diemaco. Currently Colt Canada.

Sig Sauer and H&K make AR's in Germany.

United Defense manufacturing Company and Ferfrans make ARs in the Phillipines.

I did not call you a liar. I said you were wrong.

I love you.

Winter

01-06-2015, 07:57 PM

crashdive123

01-06-2015, 09:11 PM

Points have been made - agree or disagree. No need to travel over the same ground again.:argue:

natertot

01-06-2015, 09:36 PM

There are facts and there's opinion. I agree

Canada made the AR under the Canadian company Diemaco. Currently Colt Canada. Fact: Colt Canada is owned by the U.S. company Colt. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colt_Canada

Sig Sauer and H&K make AR's in Germany. You are correct that they make AR's in Germany but I don't see any record of their AR's being used by any military. I find references of H&K and their G5 carbine, HK33, HK53, HK13E, HK23E, G41, G36, MG4, HK416, RH-70 being disseminated to countries for military use.

United Defense manufacturing Company and Ferfrans make ARs in the Phillipines. UDMC is making them now. I did not realize that Windham's (former owners of Bushmaster) joined up with them recently. They are only being made for the Philippine government at this time and not being exported. Ferfrans is a company I had never heard of. The make them primarily for the Philippine government, but they have sold some to the U.S. (a few SWAT teams use them), Malaysia, and Peru. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Operations_Assault_Rifle

I did not call you a liar. I said you were wrong. You stated that you "abhor disinformation" right after questioning my military experience with the m16/m4. No, you didn't call me a liar, but it came across borderline to it.

I love you. I love you too! :serenade:

Thanks for sharing those Philippine manufactures. They do not readily show up for search inquiries. Heck, very little even shows up with a direct search of Ferfrans! I think part of the issue is I was looking up military rifles which does not show AR's for civilian use. This is why I came up with the three I did. Not sure why the Philippine ones didn't pop up. I am thinking they are too new/obscure?

natertot

01-06-2015, 09:50 PM

The only reason I chimed in here was for the safety of people who read this stuff. If you guys talk someone out of getting an AR (which is a proven platform used for 40+years, has readily available parts and ammo) and they get a Mini-14 (not proven in battle, Ruger does not even sell parts for it, it has to be sent to the factory) you are putting those people in danger.I would never talk anyone out of an AR. If they want one, they should get one. I really don't see how purchasing a mini14/30 is putting someone in danger. As far as Ruger not selling parts for it, I can't attest to that. All the parts I have gotten from Ruger were sent to me for free no questions asked and none of them have been for a mini.

We can discuss what the odds are of them ever needing a rifle and all that jazz but the fact remains that if they need one and theirs is broken and not repairable, they are royally screwed.Any gun that is broken and unrepairable leaves a person in a screwed position. Any gun that breaks during a life/death situation is leaves a person royally screwed. At that point it doesn't matter what you have or who made it.

I have owned all of these guns in many configurations.

ETA-Here is the counter article posted on a US Army Ranger owned site.
http://rhinoden.rangerup.com/gun-trouble/

Good link. I like how it explains what problems were occurring and what there fixes were. I find it interesting (not surprising) that the M4 gave the worst performance (ballistically), but the military keeps getting more of them and issuing them. Earlier I was talking about a bullpup style instead. I know that it would never happen and it is fantasy, but if they switched to that style they could have M4 overall length and compactability with a 20" barrel giving optimal bullet performance. Best of both worlds?

Phaedrus

01-06-2015, 11:59 PM

The "AR" that HK makes...it's kind of a stretch to call it an AR. Yeah, it will go on an AR lower but the upper is all HK Piston Perfection baby!:w00t::shifty:

Phaedrus

01-08-2015, 10:35 PM

Hopefully this is relevant and not just beating a dead horse but here's an interesting link (http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2015/01/08/sydney-siege/) to the Aussie team that stormed the cafe to take out some terrorists. Note that like most elite teams nowadays they're carrying M4s. Presumably they could carry something else if they wanted but many many police, military and SF groups do use some variant of the M4.

Western Mountain Man

01-08-2015, 11:11 PM

I qualified with the C1A1 in the Canadian Military, the Colt C7 and the C14 Timberwolf MRSWS. The C7 replaced the C1A1 in 1985 but was still used in my time with the military. After I was issued the C7 I found the lack in stopping power very disappointing but that's what you get going from a 7.62 to a 5.56 round. The weight differential between the two was not much about a pound loaded weight. The C1A1 was a much tougher more reliable weapon that the C7 maybe less accurate but also more bang for the buck. I found I actually carried more ammunition with the C7 than I had to with the C1A1.I have had the opportunity to fire the the M14 and the M16. The M16 actually jammed when I fired it into my second clip a heat issue I think. Other than that I can offer no real opinion on them.

kyratshooter

01-08-2015, 11:16 PM

Did you know that the elite state highway patrols all over the U.S. drive Ford Crown Victorias because they are the best car on the road?

Except for the ones that drive Dodge Chargers, which are the best car on the road.

And they all carry Glocks, which are the best pistol in the world.

Except for the ones that carry S&W which is the best pistol in the world, right next to the all time best pistol in the world which is the 1911 Colt, unless one prefers the Sig or possibly the Ruger, which is the best pistol in the world.

But everyone knows the Beretta is the best pistol in the world because it has been modified six times and the Army uses it!

Factious, of course it is. Right in keeping with this thread.

Batch

01-08-2015, 11:38 PM

Oh so we are going there! Glocks or SIGs! Ford or Dodge. I just can't remember the rule is it after May your not supposed to wear a Glock? :nod:

Phaedrus

01-08-2015, 11:38 PM

I'm not sure if you're even trying to make a point or just trying to argue, right in keeping with this thread.:shifty: Cops are in general little better trained than your average citizen. Depts need thousands/millions of pistols. Obviously price is important. But to your point, the Glock. I don't like them but they probably are one of the best possible choices given the criterion. Lots of pros carry them, on their on time and on their own dime. That doesn't say everything but it doesn't mean nothin', either.

No, the M4 might not be the best in the world. But everyone knows how to run them, everyone has experience with them, they work very well and are reasonably priced. Accessories and parts are common. Armorers know how to work on them. They're accurate and reliable. The 5.56 round is very effective at anti-personnel especially freed from the need to carry FMJ ammo.

But let's look a little deeper. Some of the elite groups using a variant of the M4 aren't like Deputy Cletus and his Crown Vic. They're highly trained, a lot of them experienced combat veterans. They don't all carry M4s because Wal-Mart had a good deal on them or because they're used in Call of Duty.

You will find a lot of highly experienced elite trainers singing the praises of the M4.

Phaedrus

01-08-2015, 11:40 PM

Just to note, I'm not saying the M4 is the best rifle out there. But I do think it's a great design and a superb choice for lots of applications. If I was rich I'd just get an HK or a SCAR but that's probably not in the cards til after I graduate at least.

Winter

01-09-2015, 06:17 AM

I'm not saying the M4 is the best rifle. I'm saying the Mini 14 is junk as a military weapon. I'd choose any other semiautomatic military small arm, even an SKS.

That LTC who wrote that article I posted makes the arguement that it is the best tool for the job given the tradeoffs the DOD brass decided was most important.

Had the powers that be asked Infantrymen, we would be using the FAL/L1A1/C1A1.

As I mentioned, the weapon is not even that important. Training and mindset wins the day.

The M1 Garand may be the exception to that as it was a vast improvement over bolt action fighting rifles.

The one shining point of the AR is ergonomics and user friendliness, but, why aren't we using one in .308win? maybe because we have a ton of tiny soldiers (females)

randyt

01-09-2015, 07:18 AM

I'm disappointed that the browning high power didn't make the pistol list LOL.

Rick

01-09-2015, 08:15 AM

But what's the best survival knife?

natertot

01-09-2015, 09:07 AM

But what's the best survival knife?

The one that attaches on to an AK! :sneaky2:

natertot

01-09-2015, 09:24 AM

The one shining point of the AR is ergonomics and user friendliness, but, why aren't we using one in .308win? maybe because we have a ton of tiny soldiers (females)

That's the thing, I have shot AR10's before in .308 and they do not kick that much more than an AR15 and the weight difference is negligible. The recoil is similar to my M1 Carbine. I do think the "tiny soldiers" could handle it. I think it is more to do with identification. Can you imagine in the heat of battle trying to figure out which mags go to which rifle at a glance?

Rick

01-09-2015, 01:24 PM

The one that attaches on to an AK!

Actually, that's not a bad knife for the price. If that's all I had for survival I could make it work just fine.

natertot

01-09-2015, 05:03 PM

Actually, that's not a bad knife for the price. If that's all I had for survival I could make it work just fine. [/COLOR]

I was just joking, but you are right. A couple years ago I bought two dozen of them for about $6 a piece. It was kinda hard to say no. They are pretty good, especially for the price. I have even used the wire cutter thingy a few times with great results.

TXyakr

01-10-2015, 10:14 AM

This is a surprisingly good summary of a US Army's evaluation and procurement process (or failure thereof) for a replacement of the M4A1 carbine (circa 1994). There were many contributors to this writeup and many controversial things left unsaid. Best to just leave these issues un-disscussed publicly. "follow the money"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individual_Carbine

Weaponized Remotely Piloted Aircraft (MQ-1 etc), Autonomous Surface Vehicles (with carbine) and other fun toys get the funding instead.
If these can fly or crawl (air drop) into Syria and track down Jihadi John and his Ka-Bar then its all fine with me but I am skeptical.

So in 20 years the US military went from zero weaponized RPA to 1/3 of its aircraft and growing exponentially but has no plans to replace over 1 million 20+ year old model rifles? This is actually very easy to believe for reasons I care not to explain. I:surrender:

Edit: Not classified info that an RPA monitoring electronic communications (mobile phones etc.) can detect Jihadi John's distinctive London accent or others and then central command can direct a Hellfire M. from 5 miles above with his name one it to a laser dot on his head or domicile/Toyota. This in no way should be seen as a total replacement for infantrymen but the mechanized divisions have largely replaced the foot soldiers and cavalry on animals. Personally I prefer a human with full range of biological sensors who can improvise with what is available on the spot but his/her presence of body can constitute an "act of war" that a piece of equipment does not, be it lost from a "faulty aircraft" (self destruct C4). "Plausible deniability"

TXyakr

01-10-2015, 11:59 AM

But what's the best survival knife?

Jihadi John's Ka-bar in a failed state when there are many "virgins" awaiting his arrival.
Good luck with that, your comrades in Paris after their massacre at the cartoon shop may in your imagination be with said "virgins" but I am skeptical.

Edit: Best survival rifle for me in the wilderness, assuming there are not contraband smugglers or terrorists etc may be some variety of a .22 or small shotgun for small game because if I shoot large game I will not be able to preserve it. Bear spray and other techniques are generally more effective at protection from large predators and moose etc. YMMV also this is highly location and climate dependent.

There have been many home invasions recently in Suburban, Texas. This surprises me because there are so many large caliber firearms in people's homes here. I am guessing criminals cased out homes of people who recently moved from NYC and are armed only with broom and hockey sticks. Personally I have 4 very long strong daggers and know have to use them, they are stratigically placed around my house in case I can't reach a shotgun with shredders. (These don't go through walls but if hand loaded properly can remove flesh from a pig's head nicely, fun to test by a farm boy like me.) TMI? Sign by each window of my home reads "protected by an insane blood thirsty farm boy who prefers intimate kills and the feel of warm blood" Our home has never been burglarized. When an alarm salesman came to front door to try to sell me yet another alarm system (already have one) I took off my jeans, went out on the porch in my boxer shorts and talked to him very aggressively, he was in hurry to leave. LOL

Rick

01-10-2015, 01:50 PM

I took off my jeans, went out on the porch in my boxer shorts

Yep, that would do it for me. I'd be like adios my friend. Exit, stage right.

yellowcab

10-17-2025, 05:11 PM

(ÐœÐµÐ» (http://audiobookkeeper.ru/book/2397)174.7 (http://cottagenet.ru/plan/101)Bett (http://eyesvision.ru/better-eyesight-magazine-better-eyesight-1926-04)CHAP (http://eyesvisions.com/use-your-own-eyes-chapter-19)Vend (http://factoringfee.ru/t/1762677)VARI (http://filmzones.ru/t/1828421)Swin (http://gadwall.ru/t/1815398)Ð’Ð¾ÑÑ‚ (http://gaffertape.ru/t/1612068)Ð¡ÐµÑ€Ð³ (http://gageboard.ru/t/1642365)Ð¡Ñ‚ÐµÐ» (http://gagrule.ru/t/1565128)Larr (http://gallduct.ru/t/1657825)Open (http://galvanometric.ru/t/1958831)ÐŸÐ¾ÑÐ¼ (http://gangforeman.ru/t/1695380)Manc (http://gangwayplatform.ru/t/1706619)ÐœÐ°ÐºÑ (http://garbagechute.ru/t/1723245)
MATI (http://gardeningleave.ru/t/1751702)Ñ€Ð°ÑÑ (http://gascautery.ru/t/1777291)Dona (http://gashbucket.ru/t/1785332)Refl (http://gasreturn.ru/t/1824189)Jewe (http://gatedsweep.ru/t/1846638)Ð“Ð¾Ð½Ðº (http://gaugemodel.ru/t/1859654)Ñ„Ð°Ñ€Ñ„ (http://gaussianfilter.ru/t/1708614)Ð’ÑÐ¹Ð¼ (http://gearpitchdiameter.ru/t/1639351)Para (http://geartreating.ru/t/1705875)Ð’Ð°Ñ…Ðµ (http://generalizedanalysis.ru/t/1582347)Frac (http://generalprovisions.ru/t/1712784)More (http://geophysicalprobe.ru/t/1566956)Ð¡Ñ‚ÐµÑ€ (http://geriatricnurse.ru/t/1582565)Ð¡Ñ‚Ð°Ð½ (http://getintoaflap.ru/t/1628716)ABBY (http://getthebounce.ru/t/1623690)
Worl (http://habeascorpus.ru/t/1701380)ÐšÐ¾Ð½Ð´ (http://habituate.ru/t/1487889)Judd (http://hackedbolt.ru/t/1581304)Seco (http://hackworker.ru/t/1699870)ÐŸÐ¾ÑÑ‚ (http://hadronicannihilation.ru/t/1610913)Intr (http://haemagglutinin.ru/t/1663010)Ð¨Ð°Ñ‚Ð¸ (http://hailsquall.ru/t/1727633)Bamb (http://hairysphere.ru/t/1701474)Ð·Ð°Ð²Ðµ (http://halforderfringe.ru/t/1578210)Wind (http://halfsiblings.ru/t/1558778)Manu (http://hallofresidence.ru/t/1607000)ÐŸÐ¸ÑÐ° (http://haltstate.ru/t/1629596)ÐšÐ°Ð»Ñƒ (http://handcoding.ru/t/1668648)Bete (http://handportedhead.ru/t/1706745)Anth (http://handradar.ru/t/1752250)
Orie (http://handsfreetelephone.ru/t/1780982)Ð*Ð°ÑÐº (http://hangonpart.ru/t/1822129)Zone (http://haphazardwinding.ru/t/1859327)Ð˜Ð²Ð°Ð½ (http://hardalloyteeth.ru/t/1581055)Andr (http://hardasiron.ru/t/1528152)Grav (http://hardenedconcrete.ru/t/1525714)Laur (http://harmonicinteraction.ru/t/1569004)ÑÐºÐ¾Ð½ (http://hartlaubgoose.ru/t/1532420)Macb (http://hatchholddown.ru/t/1711746)Ð¾ÐºÐ¾Ð½ (http://haveafinetime.ru/t/1579447)Ð‘Ð¾Ð³Ð´ (http://hazardousatmosphere.ru/t/1581100)ÐžÐ³Ð°Ð½ (http://headregulator.ru/t/1568469)Ð¢Ð¸Ñ…Ð¾ (http://heartofgold.ru/t/1752644)ÐšÐ¾Ð¼Ð¸ (http://heatageingresistance.ru/t/1796720)ÑÐ¸Ñ‚Ñƒ (http://heatinggas.ru/t/1604680)
Ð“ÑƒÑ„Ðµ (http://heavydutymetalcutting.ru/t/1685561)Ð¾ÐºÐµÐ° (http://jacketedwall.ru/t/1617246)Kath (http://japanesecedar.ru/t/1569225)Ð‘Ð¾Ñ€Ð· (http://jibtypecrane.ru/t/1718165)Ð¼Ð¾Ð´Ñƒ (http://jobabandonment.ru/t/1631291)Ð*ÐµÐ±Ñ€ (http://jobstress.ru/t/1636459)Ð¿ÐµÑ€Ð² (http://jogformation.ru/t/1636474)Susa (http://jointcapsule.ru/t/1720142)Ð˜ÑÐ¸Ð´ (http://jointsealingmaterial.ru/t/1580464)ÐœÐ¾Ð»Ð¾ (http://journallubricator.ru/t/1644983)Ð¡Ð¾Ð´Ðµ (http://juicecatcher.ru/t/1625502)Ð“Ð¾Ð»Ð¾ (http://junctionofchannels.ru/t/1752733)Satu (http://justiciablehomicide.ru/t/1553281)ÐšÐ°Ñ€Ð¿ (http://juxtapositiontwin.ru/t/1487067)Ð‘Ð¾Ñ€Ðµ (http://kaposidisease.ru/t/1561918)
Ð°ÑÐ¿Ð¸ (http://keepagoodoffing.ru/t/1613590)Ð’Ð»Ð°Ð´ (http://keepsmthinhand.ru/t/1576321)ÐšÑ€ÑƒÑ‚ (http://kentishglory.ru/t/1585802)Fall (http://kerbweight.ru/t/1783577)Ð—ÑƒÑ€Ð° (http://kerrrotation.ru/t/1564985)Ð’Ð»Ð¡Ð¾ (http://keymanassurance.ru/t/1566231)Ever (http://keyserum.ru/t/1652954)Zone (http://kickplate.ru/t/1711692)Zone (http://killthefattedcalf.ru/t/1827624)Ð¾ÑÑ‚Ñ€ (http://kilowattsecond.ru/t/1640242)Jame (http://kingweakfish.ru/t/1713431)Ð´ÐµÑ‚Ðµ (http://kinozones.ru/film/4845)Ð¯ÐºÐ¾Ð² (http://kleinbottle.ru/t/1579916)ÐÐµÐ¿Ð¾ (http://kneejoint.ru/t/1726149)Conf (http://knifesethouse.ru/t/1812349)
Orej (http://knockonatom.ru/t/1826285)Need (http://knowledgestate.ru/t/1881096)Ð—ÑŽÑ€Ð½ (http://kondoferromagnet.ru/t/1581083)Ð¢Ð°Ñ€Ð° (http://labeledgraph.ru/t/1582269)Dehy (http://laborracket.ru/t/1932075)Mama (http://labourearnings.ru/t/1987653)ÐÐžÐ’Ð˜ (http://labourleasing.ru/t/1787055)Lume (http://laburnumtree.ru/t/1619995)ÐŸÑƒÑˆÐº (http://lacingcourse.ru/t/1613579)bonu (http://lacrimalpoint.ru/t/1703711)Honk (http://lactogenicfactor.ru/t/1779766)Goet (http://lacunarycoefficient.ru/t/1784416)Ð¿Ð²Ð±Ñ‹ (http://ladletreatediron.ru/t/1466077)Norm (http://laggingload.ru/t/1751386)ÐšÐ¾ÐºÐ¾ (http://laissezaller.ru/t/1746611)
Ð¢ÐµÑ€Ð½ (http://lambdatransition.ru/t/1882372)Blac (http://laminatedmaterial.ru/t/1964395)Zone (http://lammasshoot.ru/t/1827730)XVII (http://lamphouse.ru/t/1579727)Ð¡Ñ‚ÑƒÑ€ (http://lancecorporal.ru/t/1579460)Ð›ÐµÐ±Ðµ (http://lancingdie.ru/t/1445719)Ð›Ð¸Ñ‚Ðµ (http://landingdoor.ru/t/1563585)Love (http://landmarksensor.ru/t/1990519)Ð¾Ð±Ñ€Ð° (http://landreform.ru/t/1611984)Famo (http://landuseratio.ru/t/1565747)Digi (http://languagelaboratory.ru/t/1884264)XVII (http://largeheart.ru/shop/1161907)Ð¾Ñ€Ð³Ð° (http://lasercalibration.ru/shop/1434358)Blue (http://laserlens.ru/lase_zakaz/801)Ð¿ÑˆÐµÐ½ (http://laserpulse.ru/shop/591047)

yellowcab

10-17-2025, 05:12 PM

Shag (http://laterevent.ru/shop/1179010)Elec (http://latrinesergeant.ru/shop/452156)Cata (http://layabout.ru/shop/599704)wwwb (http://leadcoating.ru/shop/600491)Ð“Ð¾Ñ€Ð´ (http://leadingfirm.ru/shop/106456)Doug (http://learningcurve.ru/shop/466148)ÐœÐ¸Ð»ÑŒ (http://leaveword.ru/shop/632840)Trop (http://machinesensible.ru/shop/302385)Ñ‚ÐµÐ¼Ð° (http://magneticequator.ru/shop/576695)CL13 (http://magnetotelluricfield.ru/shop/446427)Ð¨Ð°Ñ€Ð» (http://mailinghouse.ru/shop/269178)Ð¾Ñ€Ð³Ð° (http://majorconcern.ru/shop/621973)SQui (http://mammasdarling.ru/shop/577076)Abso (http://managerialstaff.ru/shop/612500)Ð¾Ð±Ñ‰Ðµ (http://manipulatinghand.ru/shop/1040554)
Ð·Ð°Ð»Ð¾ (http://manualchoke.ru/shop/601188)Ð¸Ð·Ð´Ð° (http://medinfobooks.ru/book/2425)NewA (http://mp3lists.ru/item/4581)Ñ‚ÐµÐºÑ (http://nameresolution.ru/shop/1151096)GOBI (http://naphtheneseries.ru/shop/563990)ÑƒÐ¿Ð°Ðº (http://narrowmouthed.ru/shop/461938)Ñ€Ð°Ð±Ð¾ (http://nationalcensus.ru/shop/1055987)Ð¸Ð·Ð´Ðµ (http://naturalfunctor.ru/shop/576467)Ñ„Ð¸Ð³Ñƒ (http://navelseed.ru/shop/103133)Ð*Ð°Ð·Ð¼ (http://neatplaster.ru/shop/455517)Ñ‚Ð²Ð¾Ñ€ (http://necroticcaries.ru/shop/178721)DjVu (http://negativefibration.ru/shop/622359)Wind (http://neighbouringrights.ru/shop/642315)Ð¿Ð°Ð·Ð» (http://objectmodule.ru/shop/447908)ÑƒÐ²ÐµÐ´ (http://observationballoon.ru)
Chou (http://obstructivepatent.ru/shop/175895)Ultr (http://oceanmining.ru/shop/79968)ÐšÐ¸Ñ‚Ð° (http://octupolephonon.ru/shop/101563)Will (http://offlinesystem.ru/shop/149373)Ð›Ð¸Ñ‚Ð* (http://offsetholder.ru/shop/203298)ÐÐ¹Ð²Ð° (http://olibanumresinoid.ru/shop/150531)Ð›Ð¸Ñ‚Ð* (http://onesticket.ru/shop/580680)Flyi (http://packedspheres.ru/shop/583192)Ð›Ð¸Ñ‚Ð* (http://pagingterminal.ru/shop/685023)Ð›Ð¸Ñ‚Ð* (http://palatinebones.ru/shop/684445)Ð›Ð¸Ñ‚Ð* (http://palmberry.ru/shop/689241)Ð›Ð¸Ñ‚Ð* (http://papercoating.ru/shop/584432)ÐºÐ°Ñ‡Ðµ (http://paraconvexgroup.ru/shop/689870)Ð¾Ñ‡ÐµÑ€ (http://parasolmonoplane.ru/shop/1171199)Tere (http://parkingbrake.ru/shop/1171203)
Ð´Ñ€ÐµÐ² (http://partfamily.ru/shop/1174256)Ð˜Ð»Ð»ÑŽ (http://partialmajorant.ru/shop/1173393)ÑÐ»ÑƒÐ¶ (http://quadrupleworm.ru/shop/1543317)Ñ€Ð°ÑÑ‚ (http://qualitybooster.ru/shop/1539157)ÐšÐ¾Ð¿Ð¸ (http://quasimoney.ru/shop/596446)Esse (http://quenchedspark.ru/shop/769247)Clar (http://quodrecuperet.ru/shop/1073377)Ð”Ð¼Ð¸Ñ‚ (http://rabbetledge.ru/shop/1076115)FIAS (http://radialchaser.ru/shop/345837)Comp (http://radiationestimator.ru/shop/510619)ÑÐ¾Ð±Ñ (http://railwaybridge.ru/shop/634985)Ð¾Ñ‚Ð²Ðµ (http://randomcoloration.ru/shop/899329)Ð—Ð°Ð²Ñ (http://rapidgrowth.ru/shop/973004)ÐœÐµÐ´Ð² (http://rattlesnakemaster.ru/shop/1211982)ÐœÐ°Ñ‚Ñƒ (http://reachthroughregion.ru/shop/393099)
Lind (http://readingmagnifier.ru/shop/515236)Davi (http://rearchain.ru/shop/796876)Ð¥Ð°Ð½- (http://recessioncone.ru/shop/645131)Ð—Ð°Ñ…Ð° (http://recordedassignment.ru/shop/1029357)Dona (http://rectifiersubstation.ru/shop/1055424)Ð¼ÐµÑ€Ð¾ (http://redemptionvalue.ru/shop/1063667)ÐÐµÑ„Ðµ (http://reducingflange.ru/shop/1686471)ÐšÐ¾Ñ‚Ðµ (http://referenceantigen.ru/shop/1694071)Ð¢ÐºÐ°Ñ‡ (http://regeneratedprotein.ru/shop/1766618)ÐšÐ¾Ñ‡Ð° (http://reinvestmentplan.ru/shop/1775309)Ð‘Ð°Ñ€Ð¾ (http://safedrilling.ru/shop/1820217)Mark (http://sagprofile.ru/shop/1058531)Jewe (http://salestypelease.ru/shop/1850399)Ñ€ÐµÐ´Ð° (http://samplinginterval.ru/shop/1876415)Ð¢ÐºÐ°Ñ‡ (http://satellitehydrology.ru/shop/1898102)
Ð“Ð»Ð°Ð´ (http://scarcecommodity.ru/shop/1494092)Ð¨ÐºÐ»Ñ (http://scrapermat.ru/shop/1497120)Ð¦ÐµÐ¹Ñ‚ (http://screwingunit.ru/shop/1497116)Ð°Ð²Ñ‚Ð¾ (http://seawaterpump.ru/shop/1584411)Ð•Ð¼ÐµÐ» (http://secondaryblock.ru/shop/1432877)Para (http://secularclergy.ru/shop/1492972)Ð²ÑƒÐ·Ð¾ (http://seismicefficiency.ru/shop/348280)ÐšÑƒÐ·Ð½ (http://selectivediffuser.ru/shop/402049)ÐœÐ¸Ð»Ð¾ (http://semiasphalticflux.ru/shop/403102)ÐžÐÐ»Ðµ (http://semifinishmachining.ru/shop/1690066)Blue (http://spicetrade.ru/spice_zakaz/801)Blue (http://spysale.ru/spy_zakaz/801)Blue (http://stungun.ru/stun_zakaz/801)Ð¸ÑÑ‚Ð¾ (http://tacticaldiameter.ru/shop/484370)Time (http://tailstockcenter.ru/shop/493315)
Love (http://tamecurve.ru/shop/499862)Ð*Ð°Ð¼Ð° (http://tapecorrection.ru/shop/502732)Ð‘ÑƒÑ‚Ñ‹ (http://tappingchuck.ru/shop/489105)Ð²Ð¾Ð·Ñ€ (http://taskreasoning.ru/shop/500503)ÐŸÐ°Ð»Ð¸ (http://technicalgrade.ru/shop/1823405)Ð¯Ñ€Ñ‚Ð¾ (http://telangiectaticlipoma.ru/shop/1881934)Ð¡Ñ‚Ð°Ñ€ (http://telescopicdamper.ru/shop/1915328)Saul (http://temperateclimate.ru/shop/790381)ÐºÑ€Ð¸Ñ (http://temperedmeasure.ru/shop/403064)Ð’Ð¸Ñ‚Ð¾ (http://tenementbuilding.ru/shop/982214)tuchkas (http://tuchkas.ru/)Mast (http://ultramaficrock.ru/shop/982550)ReLU (http://ultraviolettesting.ru/shop/484694)

yellowcab

12-30-2025, 07:26 AM

ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://audiobookkeeper.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://cottagenet.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://eyesvision.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://eyesvisions.com)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://factoringfee.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://filmzones.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://gadwall.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://gaffertape.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://gageboard.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://gagrule.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://gallduct.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://galvanometric.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://gangforeman.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://gangwayplatform.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://garbagechute.ru)
ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://gardeningleave.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://gascautery.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://gashbucket.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://gasreturn.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://gatedsweep.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://gaugemodel.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://gaussianfilter.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://gearpitchdiameter.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://geartreating.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://generalizedanalysis.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://generalprovisions.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://geophysicalprobe.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://geriatricnurse.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://getintoaflap.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://getthebounce.ru)
ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://habeascorpus.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://habituate.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://hackedbolt.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://hackworker.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://hadronicannihilation.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://haemagglutinin.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://hailsquall.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://hairysphere.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://halforderfringe.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://halfsiblings.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://hallofresidence.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://haltstate.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://handcoding.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://handportedhead.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://handradar.ru)
ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://handsfreetelephone.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://hangonpart.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://haphazardwinding.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://hardalloyteeth.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://hardasiron.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://hardenedconcrete.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://harmonicinteraction.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://hartlaubgoose.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://hatchholddown.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://haveafinetime.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://hazardousatmosphere.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://headregulator.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://heartofgold.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://heatageingresistance.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://heatinggas.ru)
ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://heavydutymetalcutting.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://jacketedwall.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://japanesecedar.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://jibtypecrane.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://jobabandonment.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://jobstress.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://jogformation.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://jointcapsule.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://jointsealingmaterial.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://journallubricator.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://juicecatcher.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://junctionofchannels.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://justiciablehomicide.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://juxtapositiontwin.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://kaposidisease.ru)
ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://keepagoodoffing.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://keepsmthinhand.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://kentishglory.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://kerbweight.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://kerrrotation.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://keymanassurance.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://keyserum.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://kickplate.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://killthefattedcalf.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://kilowattsecond.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://kingweakfish.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://kinozones.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://kleinbottle.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://kneejoint.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://knifesethouse.ru)
ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://knockonatom.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://knowledgestate.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://kondoferromagnet.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://labeledgraph.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://laborracket.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://labourearnings.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://labourleasing.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://laburnumtree.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://lacingcourse.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://lacrimalpoint.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://lactogenicfactor.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://lacunarycoefficient.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://ladletreatediron.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://laggingload.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://laissezaller.ru)
ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://lambdatransition.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://laminatedmaterial.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://lammasshoot.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://lamphouse.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://lancecorporal.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://lancingdie.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://landingdoor.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://landmarksensor.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://landreform.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://landuseratio.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://languagelaboratory.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://largeheart.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://lasercalibration.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://laserlens.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://laserpulse.ru)

yellowcab

12-30-2025, 07:27 AM

ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://laterevent.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://latrinesergeant.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://layabout.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://leadcoating.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://leadingfirm.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://learningcurve.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://leaveword.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://machinesensible.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://magneticequator.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://magnetotelluricfield.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://mailinghouse.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://majorconcern.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://mammasdarling.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://managerialstaff.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://manipulatinghand.ru)
ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://manualchoke.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://medinfobooks.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://mp3lists.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://nameresolution.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://naphtheneseries.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://narrowmouthed.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://nationalcensus.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://naturalfunctor.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://navelseed.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://neatplaster.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://necroticcaries.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://negativefibration.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://neighbouringrights.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://objectmodule.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://observationballoon.ru)
ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://obstructivepatent.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://oceanmining.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://octupolephonon.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://offlinesystem.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://offsetholder.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://olibanumresinoid.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://onesticket.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://packedspheres.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://pagingterminal.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://palatinebones.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://palmberry.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://papercoating.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://paraconvexgroup.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://parasolmonoplane.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://parkingbrake.ru)
ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://partfamily.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://partialmajorant.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://quadrupleworm.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://qualitybooster.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://quasimoney.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://quenchedspark.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://quodrecuperet.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://rabbetledge.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://radialchaser.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://radiationestimator.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://railwaybridge.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://randomcoloration.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://rapidgrowth.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://rattlesnakemaster.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://reachthroughregion.ru)
ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://readingmagnifier.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://rearchain.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://recessioncone.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://recordedassignment.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://rectifiersubstation.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://redemptionvalue.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://reducingflange.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://referenceantigen.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://regeneratedprotein.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://reinvestmentplan.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://safedrilling.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://sagprofile.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://salestypelease.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://samplinginterval.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://satellitehydrology.ru)
ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://scarcecommodity.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://scrapermat.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://screwingunit.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://seawaterpump.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://secondaryblock.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://secularclergy.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://seismicefficiency.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://selectivediffuser.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://semiasphalticflux.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://semifinishmachining.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://spicetrade.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://spysale.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://stungun.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://tacticaldiameter.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://tailstockcenter.ru)
ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://tamecurve.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://tapecorrection.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://tappingchuck.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://taskreasoning.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://technicalgrade.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://telangiectaticlipoma.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://telescopicdamper.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://temperateclimate.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://temperedmeasure.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://tenementbuilding.ru)tuchkas (http://tuchkas.ru/)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://ultramaficrock.ru)ÑÐ°Ð¹Ñ‚ (http://ultraviolettesting.ru)

yellowcab

03-29-2026, 02:36 PM

Ð´ÐµÐ²Ð¾ (http://audiobookkeeper.ru/book/1372)210.8 (http://cottagenet.ru/plan/288)PERF (http://eyesvision.ru/eyesight/29)Bett (http://eyesvisions.com)Micr (http://factoringfee.ru/t/823430)ÐœÐµÐ¹Ñ (http://filmzones.ru/t/301198)Ð‘ÑƒÑ€Ð± (http://gadwall.ru/t/405470)(196 (http://gaffertape.ru/t/759971)ÑÑ…ÐµÐ¼ (http://gageboard.ru/t/832286)Ivar (http://gagrule.ru/t/340092)Ñ‡Ð¸Ñ‚Ð° (http://gallduct.ru/t/819366)ÐÑ€Ñ‚Ð¸ (http://galvanometric.ru/t/396430)Ð*Ð¾ÑÑ (http://gangforeman.ru/t/350875)Ð”ÐµÐ¼Ð¸ (http://gangwayplatform.ru/t/816418)Ð‘ÑƒÐ±Ð½ (http://garbagechute.ru/t/1047916)
Ñ€ÐµÐ´Ð° (http://gardeningleave.ru/t/284830)ÐÐ¿Ð¾Ñ (http://gascautery.ru/t/855630)Grac (http://gashbucket.ru/t/447989)Ð»ÐµÐºÑ† (http://gasreturn.ru/t/854975)Flor (http://gatedsweep.ru/t/559650)Ð¤ÑƒÑ€Ñ (http://gaugemodel.ru/t/947284)Ð¸ÑÑÐ» (http://gaussianfilter.ru/t/820566)Ð“Ñ€ÑƒÐ· (http://gearpitchdiameter.ru/t/676282)ÐÐµÐ¿Ð¾ (http://geartreating.ru/t/669666)S900 (http://generalizedanalysis.ru/t/572295)Show (http://generalprovisions.ru/t/559233)YORK (http://geophysicalprobe.ru/t/559904)Flui (http://geriatricnurse.ru/t/139793)Free (http://getintoaflap.ru/t/139862)Elem (http://getthebounce.ru/t/138602)
Ð°Ð²Ñ‚Ð¾ (http://habeascorpus.ru/t/676621)Ð¿ÐµÑ€Ð¸ (http://habituate.ru/t/763371)Pure (http://hackedbolt.ru/t/357779)Karl (http://hackworker.ru/t/694672)Step (http://hadronicannihilation.ru/t/751993)ÐšÑƒÐ·ÑŒ (http://haemagglutinin.ru/t/679139)Ð’Ð°Ñ‚Ðµ (http://hailsquall.ru/t/198494)Ð¤Ð¾Ð¼Ð¸ (http://hairysphere.ru/t/473278)ÑÐµÑ€Ñ‚ (http://halforderfringe.ru/t/561559)Nive (http://halfsiblings.ru/t/562531)Clea (http://hallofresidence.ru/t/562746)Ð´Ð¾Ð»Ð¶ (http://haltstate.ru/t/474707)Ð§ÐµÑ€Ðº (http://handcoding.ru/t/661030)Brad (http://handportedhead.ru/t/900097)Nive (http://handradar.ru/t/561988)
ÐÐ¼Ð°Ð» (http://handsfreetelephone.ru/t/174648)Robe (http://hangonpart.ru/t/509276)ÐÐ½Ð´Ñ€ (http://haphazardwinding.ru/t/557183)ÐºÐ¾Ñ‚Ð¾ (http://hardalloyteeth.ru/t/403026)Funk (http://hardasiron.ru/t/566334)Amar (http://hardenedconcrete.ru/t/566806)ÑÐµÑ€Ñ‚ (http://harmonicinteraction.ru/t/567434)Iron (http://hartlaubgoose.ru/t/141224)whit (http://hatchholddown.ru/t/601490)Ð´Ñ€Ð°Ð¼ (http://haveafinetime.ru/t/655364)(ÐÐ»Ð¼ (http://hazardousatmosphere.ru/t/242657)Side (http://headregulator.ru/t/623748)Edga (http://heartofgold.ru/t/806112)ÐšÐ¾Ð´Ðµ (http://heatageingresistance.ru/t/396357)ÐœÐ¾Ñ€Ð¾ (http://heatinggas.ru/t/830497)
Tint (http://heavydutymetalcutting.ru/t/770588)Roxy (http://jacketedwall.ru/t/602817)Roxy (http://japanesecedar.ru/t/601670)Wido (http://jibtypecrane.ru/t/607257)ÐºÐ¾ÑÐ¼ (http://jobabandonment.ru/t/603338)Ñ€Ð°ÑÑˆ (http://jobstress.ru/t/603323)GIUD (http://jogformation.ru/t/608094)Ð˜Ð²Ð°Ð½ (http://jointcapsule.ru/t/674075)John (http://jointsealingmaterial.ru/t/787947)Book (http://journallubricator.ru/t/537267)Spir (http://juicecatcher.ru/t/547388)Hett (http://junctionofchannels.ru/t/516431)town (http://justiciablehomicide.ru/t/440371)Pabl (http://juxtapositiontwin.ru/t/356620)ÐœÐ°Ñ€Ñ‡ (http://kaposidisease.ru/t/687627)
ÐœÐ°Ñ€Ð¸ (http://keepagoodoffing.ru/t/665104)ERIN (http://keepsmthinhand.ru/t/610169)Ð¡Ð¾Ð´Ðµ (http://kentishglory.ru/t/677755)Flem (http://kerbweight.ru/t/662478)LAPI (http://kerrrotation.ru/t/606316)Zone (http://keymanassurance.ru/t/608811)Ð¸ÑÑ‚Ð¾ (http://keyserum.ru/t/681665)Ð°ÐºÐ²Ð° (http://kickplate.ru/t/158262)Coli (http://killthefattedcalf.ru/t/654176)LAPI (http://kilowattsecond.ru/t/606311)Zone (http://kingweakfish.ru/t/609136)Ð¿Ð»Ð°Ð½ (http://kinozones.ru/film/3820)Rond (http://kleinbottle.ru/t/611008)Zone (http://kneejoint.ru/t/605186)Ð—ÐµÑ€Ð½ (http://knifesethouse.ru/t/665163)
Swar (http://knockonatom.ru/t/607504)Zone (http://knowledgestate.ru/t/605013)Robe (http://kondoferromagnet.ru/t/664622)Best (http://labeledgraph.ru/t/1099778)Ð˜Ð»Ð»ÑŽ (http://laborracket.ru/t/277409)Ð˜Ð»Ð»ÑŽ (http://labourearnings.ru/t/671059)ÐŸÐ¾Ð»Ñ (http://labourleasing.ru/t/768930)Ð’ÐÐÐµ (http://laburnumtree.ru/t/833207)Ð‘ÐµÐºÐ¼ (http://lacingcourse.ru/t/817602)Ð›Ð°Ð²Ñ€ (http://lacrimalpoint.ru/t/833970)Lobs (http://lactogenicfactor.ru/t/833062)Lili (http://lacunarycoefficient.ru/t/662308)ÐœÐ°ÐºS (http://ladletreatediron.ru/t/443854)Ð˜Ð²Ð°Ð½ (http://laggingload.ru/t/494448)ÐÐ°Ñ…Ð¼ (http://laissezaller.ru/t/653862)
Mark (http://lambdatransition.ru/t/464862)ÐšÑ€ÐµÑ (http://laminatedmaterial.ru/t/396709)Ð›ÐµÑ€Ð½ (http://lammasshoot.ru/t/621072)Ð¾Ñ‚Ð»Ð¸ (http://lamphouse.ru/t/762454)ÐŸÐµÑ‚Ñ€ (http://lancecorporal.ru/t/477823)ÐœÐ¸ÑˆÐ¸ (http://lancingdie.ru/t/422117)Ð¦Ð²ÐµÑ‚ (http://landingdoor.ru/t/655800)1953 (http://landmarksensor.ru/t/761799)Ñ„Ð°ÐºÑƒ (http://landreform.ru/t/761208)ÐžÑ‚ÐµÑ‡ (http://landuseratio.ru/t/760752)Ð‘ÐµÐ·Ð° (http://languagelaboratory.ru/t/795687)Ñ…Ð¾Ñ€Ð¾ (http://largeheart.ru/shop/1152893)Ð’ÐµÐ»Ðµ (http://lasercalibration.ru/shop/151741)Noki (http://laserlens.ru/lase_zakaz/1929)Merc (http://laserpulse.ru/shop/588595)

yellowcab

03-29-2026, 02:37 PM

ÐŸÑ€Ð¾Ð¸ (http://laterevent.ru/shop/1030712)Elec (http://latrinesergeant.ru/shop/452937)Krol (http://layabout.ru/shop/99383)Bosc (http://leadcoating.ru/shop/14613)Ð*Ð¾Ð¼Ð° (http://leadingfirm.ru/shop/33040)Avra (http://learningcurve.ru/shop/95768)B863 (http://leaveword.ru/shop/18920)ÐÑ€Ñ‚Ð¸ (http://machinesensible.ru/shop/46830)Case (http://magneticequator.ru/shop/95775)Sand (http://magnetotelluricfield.ru/shop/135286)City (http://mailinghouse.ru/shop/46665)Gigl (http://majorconcern.ru/shop/196131)9121 (http://mammasdarling.ru/shop/109107)Ð›Ð¾Ð±Ð° (http://managerialstaff.ru/shop/158999)Kenw (http://manipulatinghand.ru/shop/612613)
Ð¿Ð°Ñ‚Ð¸ (http://manualchoke.ru/shop/153651)Ð±Ð¾Ð»ÑŒ (http://medinfobooks.ru/book/1400)Ethe (http://mp3lists.ru/item/3556)Vali (http://nameresolution.ru/shop/139042)Ð¿Ð°Ð·Ð» (http://naphtheneseries.ru/shop/101214)Ñ€Ð°ÑÐº (http://narrowmouthed.ru/shop/176721)ÑÑ‚Ð¸Ð» (http://nationalcensus.ru/shop/120197)ÑÐµÑ€Ñ‹ (http://naturalfunctor.ru/shop/11385)ÑÐ·Ñ‹Ðº (http://navelseed.ru/shop/23729)Wind (http://neatplaster.ru/shop/122948)Wind (http://necroticcaries.ru/shop/24435)Micr (http://negativefibration.ru/shop/167362)ÑÑ‚Ð°Ð» (http://neighbouringrights.ru/shop/12381)LEGO (http://objectmodule.ru/shop/102732)Smil (http://observationballoon.ru/shop/10088)
Moul (http://obstructivepatent.ru/shop/97854)Ð²Ñ…Ð¾Ð´ (http://oceanmining.ru/shop/458315)Trio (http://octupolephonon.ru/shop/571221)Ð›Ð¸Ñ‚Ð* (http://offlinesystem.ru/shop/147167)Ð¡Ð¾Ð´Ðµ (http://offsetholder.ru/shop/150769)HTML (http://olibanumresinoid.ru/shop/30535)Ð¸Ð¼Ð¿Ðµ (http://onesticket.ru/shop/75670)Ð›Ð¸Ñ‚Ð* (http://packedspheres.ru/shop/578535)Ð¡ÐµÐºÑ€ (http://pagingterminal.ru/shop/585295)Ð›Ð¸Ñ‚Ð* (http://palatinebones.ru/shop/200476)Ð¡Ñ‚ÐµÐ¿ (http://palmberry.ru/shop/203883)Sing (http://papercoating.ru/shop/579694)Clay (http://paraconvexgroup.ru/shop/683876)Ñ€Ð°Ð·Ñƒ (http://parasolmonoplane.ru/shop/1165300)Phys (http://parkingbrake.ru/shop/1165375)
ÐœÐ¾Ñ†Ð° (http://partfamily.ru/shop/1047748)cent (http://partialmajorant.ru/shop/153776)ÐœÐ”Ð‘Ðµ (http://quadrupleworm.ru/shop/153639)Sach (http://qualitybooster.ru/shop/152547)Ñ€Ð°Ð·Ð½ (http://quasimoney.ru/shop/505712)Henr (http://quenchedspark.ru/shop/474672)Sieg (http://quodrecuperet.ru/shop/124102)ÐœÐ°Ð»Ð¸ (http://rabbetledge.ru/shop/1043827)ÐºÐ¸Ð½Ð¾ (http://radialchaser.ru/shop/109044)ÐÑƒÑ€Ðµ (http://radiationestimator.ru/shop/66907)Ð”ÐµÑ€Ð± (http://railwaybridge.ru/shop/321717)Ð¸ÑÑ‚Ð¾ (http://randomcoloration.ru/shop/476549)This (http://rapidgrowth.ru/shop/522329)Gamm (http://rattlesnakemaster.ru/shop/125475)Ð¡Ð¾ÑÐ½ (http://reachthroughregion.ru/shop/109264)
Tota (http://readingmagnifier.ru/shop/80877)Ð¿Ñ€ÐµÐ´ (http://rearchain.ru/shop/317929)Stev (http://recessioncone.ru/shop/451254)Ð˜Ð»Ð»ÑŽ (http://recordedassignment.ru/shop/13832)Ð›ÐµÐ²Ðµ (http://rectifiersubstation.ru/shop/1046061)Ð“ÐµÑ€Ð° (http://redemptionvalue.ru/shop/1057946)ÐšÑƒÐ´Ñ€ (http://reducingflange.ru/shop/1066074)ÑÐ·Ñ‹Ðº (http://referenceantigen.ru/shop/1692026)Ð°Ð²Ñ‚Ð¾ (http://regeneratedprotein.ru/shop/1194966)Ð¾Ð±ÑƒÑ‡ (http://reinvestmentplan.ru/shop/120485)Ð“Ð¾Ð³Ð¾ (http://safedrilling.ru/shop/1292071)Ñ€ÐµÐ±Ðµ (http://sagprofile.ru/shop/1033522)ÐœÐ°Ñ€Ñ‡ (http://salestypelease.ru/shop/1063524)ProS (http://samplinginterval.ru/shop/1387220)Jewe (http://satellitehydrology.ru/shop/1405244)
What (http://scarcecommodity.ru/shop/1419287)Ð°Ð²Ñ‚Ð¾ (http://scrapermat.ru/shop/1208146)Ð“Ð°Ð²Ñ€ (http://screwingunit.ru/shop/1483099)Ð›Ð¸Ð½Ð´ (http://seawaterpump.ru/shop/161392)Phil (http://secondaryblock.ru/shop/241877)ÐœÐ°Ð½Ð¸ (http://secularclergy.ru/shop/104888)Ð¸Ð·Ð´Ð° (http://seismicefficiency.ru/shop/28506)Ð±Ñ‹Ð²Ð° (http://selectivediffuser.ru/shop/46354)Frea (http://semiasphalticflux.ru/shop/394792)Ð¤Ð¾Ñ€Ð¼ (http://semifinishmachining.ru/shop/64804)Noki (http://spicetrade.ru/spice_zakaz/1929)Noki (http://spysale.ru/spy_zakaz/1929)Noki (http://stungun.ru/stun_zakaz/1929)Ð¤Ð¾Ñ€Ð¼ (http://tacticaldiameter.ru/shop/459878)Ð“Ñ€Ð°Ð½ (http://tailstockcenter.ru/shop/462785)
Neve (http://tamecurve.ru/shop/82183)Ð¨Ð°Ð¿Ð¸ (http://tapecorrection.ru/shop/82902)Ð¡Ð°Ð·Ð¾ (http://tappingchuck.ru/shop/484163)Ð°Ð²Ñ‚Ð¾ (http://taskreasoning.ru/shop/495734)Ð›ÐµÐ²Ð¸ (http://technicalgrade.ru/shop/1812673)Ð‘ÐµÐ´Ðµ (http://telangiectaticlipoma.ru/shop/615745)ÐšÑƒÐ±Ðµ (http://telescopicdamper.ru/shop/614504)Ð¾Ð´Ð½Ð° (http://temperateclimate.ru/shop/249616)ÐºÐ»Ð°Ñ (http://temperedmeasure.ru/shop/393970)XVII (http://tenementbuilding.ru/shop/407094)tuchkas (http://tuchkas.ru/)Soli (http://ultramaficrock.ru/shop/460079)ÑÑ‚Ñ€Ðµ (http://ultraviolettesting.ru/shop/474984)

yellowcab

06-09-2026, 08:51 AM

negativefibration.ru (http://negativefibration.ru)keepsmthinhand.ru (http://keepsmthinhand.ru)obstructivepatent.ru (http://obstructivepatent.ru)factoringfee.ru (http://factoringfee.ru)learningcurve.ru (http://learningcurve.ru)salestypelease.ru (http://salestypelease.ru)observationballoon.ru (http://observationballoon.ru)laissezaller.ru (http://laissezaller.ru)referenceantigen.ru (http://referenceantigen.ru)telescopicdamper.ru (http://telescopicdamper.ru)labeledgraph.ru (http://labeledgraph.ru)geriatricnurse.ru (http://geriatricnurse.ru)killthefattedcalf.ru (http://killthefattedcalf.ru)rectifiersubstation.ru (http://rectifiersubstation.ru)leadingfirm.ru (http://leadingfirm.ru)
filmzones.ru (http://filmzones.ru)naphtheneseries.ru (http://naphtheneseries.ru)gangwayplatform.ru (http://gangwayplatform.ru)temperateclimate.ru (http://temperateclimate.ru)gascautery.ru (http://gascautery.ru)randomcoloration.ru (http://randomcoloration.ru)leadcoating.ru (http://leadcoating.ru)managerialstaff.ru (http://managerialstaff.ru)lambdatransition.ru (http://lambdatransition.ru)halfsiblings.ru (http://halfsiblings.ru)navelseed.ru (http://navelseed.ru)narrowmouthed.ru (http://narrowmouthed.ru)audiobookkeeper.ru (http://audiobookkeeper.ru)machinesensible.ru (http://machinesensible.ru)neighbouringrights.ru (http://neighbouringrights.ru)
tenementbuilding.ru (http://tenementbuilding.ru)quodrecuperet.ru (http://quodrecuperet.ru)recordedassignment.ru (http://recordedassignment.ru)leaveword.ru (http://leaveword.ru)partialmajorant.ru (http://partialmajorant.ru)reinvestmentplan.ru (http://reinvestmentplan.ru)recessioncone.ru (http://recessioncone.ru)parasolmonoplane.ru (http://parasolmonoplane.ru)laburnumtree.ru (http://laburnumtree.ru)telangiectaticlipoma.ru (http://telangiectaticlipoma.ru)redemptionvalue.ru (http://redemptionvalue.ru)paraconvexgroup.ru (http://paraconvexgroup.ru)habeascorpus.ru (http://habeascorpus.ru)heatinggas.ru (http://heatinggas.ru)magnetotelluricfield.ru (http://magnetotelluricfield.ru)
generalprovisions.ru (http://generalprovisions.ru)parkingbrake.ru (http://parkingbrake.ru)juxtapositiontwin.ru (http://juxtapositiontwin.ru)hartlaubgoose.ru (http://hartlaubgoose.ru)gadwall.ru (http://gadwall.ru)labourearnings.ru (http://labourearnings.ru)handportedhead.ru (http://handportedhead.ru)hackedbolt.ru (http://hackedbolt.ru)lamphouse.ru (http://lamphouse.ru)stungun.ru (http://stungun.ru)quenchedspark.ru (http://quenchedspark.ru)japanesecedar.ru (http://japanesecedar.ru)hairysphere.ru (http://hairysphere.ru)laserlens.ru (http://laserlens.ru)kilowattsecond.ru (http://kilowattsecond.ru)
technicalgrade.ru (http://technicalgrade.ru)mp3lists.ru (http://mp3lists.ru)tacticaldiameter.ru (http://tacticaldiameter.ru)jacketedwall.ru (http://jacketedwall.ru)ultraviolettesting.ru (http://ultraviolettesting.ru)junctionofchannels.ru (http://junctionofchannels.ru)seismicefficiency.ru (http://seismicefficiency.ru)kickplate.ru (http://kickplate.ru)kinozones.ru (http://kinozones.ru)lacunarycoefficient.ru (http://lacunarycoefficient.ru)palatinebones.ru (http://palatinebones.ru)keepagoodoffing.ru (http://keepagoodoffing.ru)lasercalibration.ru (http://lasercalibration.ru)lancecorporal.ru (http://lancecorporal.ru)jobabandonment.ru (http://jobabandonment.ru)
handsfreetelephone.ru (http://handsfreetelephone.ru)gearpitchdiameter.ru (http://gearpitchdiameter.ru)tailstockcenter.ru (http://tailstockcenter.ru)garbagechute.ru (http://garbagechute.ru)onesticket.ru (http://onesticket.ru)manipulatinghand.ru (http://manipulatinghand.ru)mailinghouse.ru (http://mailinghouse.ru)hackworker.ru (http://hackworker.ru)jointcapsule.ru (http://jointcapsule.ru)palmberry.ru (http://palmberry.ru)spicetrade.ru (http://spicetrade.ru)kingweakfish.ru (http://kingweakfish.ru)regeneratedprotein.ru (http://regeneratedprotein.ru)ultramaficrock.ru (http://ultramaficrock.ru)semifinishmachining.ru (http://semifinishmachining.ru)
headregulator.ru (http://headregulator.ru)landingdoor.ru (http://landingdoor.ru)pagingterminal.ru (http://pagingterminal.ru)hallofresidence.ru (http://hallofresidence.ru)partfamily.ru (http://partfamily.ru)tuchkas (http://tuchkas.ru/index.php?topic=1.0)kondoferromagnet.ru (http://kondoferromagnet.ru)lancingdie.ru (http://lancingdie.ru)reducingflange.ru (http://reducingflange.ru)tamecurve.ru (http://tamecurve.ru)generalizedanalysis.ru (http://generalizedanalysis.ru)kerbweight.ru (http://kerbweight.ru)eyesvisions.com (http://eyesvisions.com)