Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > GURPS

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-31-2010, 06:40 PM   #11
Phoenix_Dragon
 
Phoenix_Dragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Default Re: Relative Bulk for Battle Rifles

Quote:
Originally Posted by Icelander View Post
It's hardly irrelevant.
It's mostly irrelevant. Overall length and bulk are relevant, and shortening a barrel is a common way of shortening a weapon to make it more compact, but the barrel length of two completely different weapons, without any other data on them, is not going to give any useful information. You could compare two weapons and say that the one with the 14" barrel is shorter than the one with the 20" barrel, but if it ends up that you're comparing a M4A1 and an AUG, you'd be wrong.

While this case isn't quite so extreme, it [i]can[i] give slightly misleading results. The MK 14 was shortened by more than just 4 inches off the barrel. I'm not saying it's enough to make a difference, but presenting only a single measurement of part of the weapon is misleading.
Phoenix_Dragon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2010, 07:46 PM   #12
Langy
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: CA
Default Re: Relative Bulk for Battle Rifles

The MK14 Mod 0 EBR is 35 inches long (I'm guessing with the stock extended). The G3AK4 is also 35 inches long. If everything else was equal, the MK14M0 and the G3AK4 should be the same Bulk, I'd think. Maybe the forward grip or some other design feature of the EBR is supposed to make it have a lower Bulk or something, or maybe it's just errata. A battle rifle with the bulk of an MP5K does seem a little off, even if the stock is retracted.
Langy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2010, 08:21 PM   #13
Icelander
 
Icelander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Iceland*
Default Re: Relative Bulk for Battle Rifles

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phoenix_Dragon View Post
It's mostly irrelevant. Overall length and bulk are relevant, and shortening a barrel is a common way of shortening a weapon to make it more compact, but the barrel length of two completely different weapons, without any other data on them, is not going to give any useful information. You could compare two weapons and say that the one with the 14" barrel is shorter than the one with the 20" barrel, but if it ends up that you're comparing a M4A1 and an AUG, you'd be wrong.
That's because of bullpup configuration, which is relevant for none of the weapons mentioned above.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phoenix_Dragon View Post
While this case isn't quite so extreme, it [i]can[i] give slightly misleading results. The MK 14 was shortened by more than just 4 inches off the barrel. I'm not saying it's enough to make a difference, but presenting only a single measurement of part of the weapon is misleading.
But I didn't present just a single measurement. I quoted both barrel length and total length.

Total length of the G3KA4 is 21" with the stock folded, around 35" otherwise. The total length of the MK 14 MOD 0 EBR is around 35" at maximum retraction and around 40" at maximum extention.

No matter how you slice things, the G3KA4 is shorter and lighter. Why does it get a higher Bulk stat?
__________________
Za uspiekh nashevo beznadiozhnovo diela!
Icelander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2010, 08:46 PM   #14
Icelander
 
Icelander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Iceland*
Default Re: Relative Bulk for Battle Rifles

Quote:
Originally Posted by Langy View Post
The MK14 Mod 0 EBR is 35 inches long (I'm guessing with the stock extended).
No, that's with the stock at maximum retraction. Figure on adding around 5" if you extend the stock.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Langy View Post
The G3AK4 is also 35 inches long.
If we're comparing like to like, it's 21" with the stock folded.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Langy View Post
If everything else was equal, the MK14M0 and the G3AK4 should be the same Bulk, I'd think. Maybe the forward grip or some other design feature of the EBR is supposed to make it have a lower Bulk or something, or maybe it's just errata. A battle rifle with the bulk of an MP5K does seem a little off, even if the stock is retracted.
Other weapons in the size range of the MK 14 MOD 0 EBR get Bulk -5* and if I were assigning stats, that's what I would have given it. Remember, this is a weapon with a total length that's about equal to the M16A2 when the stock is extended and it is heavier than that gun to boot.

Meanwhile, all weapons* near the size of the G3KA4 get Bulk -4.

*Well, except the G36K, which despite being 34" with stock extended and just over 24" with it folded gets Bulk -5*. Meanwhile, the M4A1, at 33" inches extended and 30" retracted, is Bulk -4. Looks like short versions of H&K weapons get short (heh) shrift.
__________________
Za uspiekh nashevo beznadiozhnovo diela!
Icelander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2010, 12:45 AM   #15
Ubiquitous
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Default Re: Relative Bulk for Battle Rifles

It sounds more like errata (I never thought I'd get to call anything this) the more it's described; I thought something was up when I heard Bulk 4*, because that would mean that you'd be holding the average SMG (GURPS Bulk-wise), which sounds wrong for a battlerifle with the stock folded.

Looking at it it sounds like somewhere along the line 4 was hit instead of 5; if the size dimensions are as similar as you say (I could easily check but it's sooo laaate) than even my hair-brained Bulk-dimension suggestion at the beginning sounds like it wouldn't explain it.

EDIT: Actually to be particular, a person with a MOD 14 and a person with an MP7A1 will both be handling weapons with Bulk 4*, which kinda compounds the notion that it just ain't right.

Last edited by Ubiquitous; 02-01-2010 at 12:50 AM.
Ubiquitous is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2010, 05:27 AM   #16
Icelander
 
Icelander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Iceland*
Default Re: Relative Bulk for Battle Rifles

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ubiquitous View Post
It sounds more like errata (I never thought I'd get to call anything this) the more it's described; I thought something was up when I heard Bulk 4*, because that would mean that you'd be holding the average SMG (GURPS Bulk-wise), which sounds wrong for a battlerifle with the stock folded.
The smallest carbines are Bulk -4*, so it's hardly unheard of, but I would not classify the MK 14 MOD 0 EBR as being among the smallest rifles.
__________________
Za uspiekh nashevo beznadiozhnovo diela!
Icelander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2010, 06:45 AM   #17
Willis P. Dunlevey
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Default Re: Relative Bulk for Battle Rifles

The G3 is/was made with a stamped sheet metal receiver and polymer stock and handguards. it is lighter than the same class of rifle with a heavy wood stock and a milled receiver would be.
Willis P. Dunlevey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2010, 08:52 AM   #18
Ubiquitous
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Default Re: Relative Bulk for Battle Rifles

Quote:
Originally Posted by Icelander View Post
The smallest carbines are Bulk -4*, so it's hardly unheard of, but I would not classify the MK 14 MOD 0 EBR as being among the smallest rifles.
My statement was made after seeing the MK 14; I don't see that being among the 'smallest carbines'. I know there's a few exceptions to every rule but the two guns you were comparing primarily, the MK 14 and G3, definitely didn't seem like they'd go that small.

And are Battle Rifles made into carbines? My understanding of such rifles is tht they use full-on rifle cartridges; not the 5.56 but the big 7.62 (or whatever the FAL is chambered for); doesn't seem like this'd benefit from a smaller packaging recoil-considering, but I know precious little about this kinda thing.
Ubiquitous is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2010, 09:59 AM   #19
Icelander
 
Icelander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Iceland*
Default Re: Relative Bulk for Battle Rifles

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ubiquitous View Post
My statement was made after seeing the MK 14; I don't see that being among the 'smallest carbines'. I know there's a few exceptions to every rule but the two guns you were comparing primarily, the MK 14 and G3, definitely didn't seem like they'd go that small.

And are Battle Rifles made into carbines? My understanding of such rifles is tht they use full-on rifle cartridges; not the 5.56 but the big 7.62 (or whatever the FAL is chambered for); doesn't seem like this'd benefit from a smaller packaging recoil-considering, but I know precious little about this kinda thing.
The G3KA4 is a very short carbine.
__________________
Za uspiekh nashevo beznadiozhnovo diela!
Icelander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2010, 10:28 AM   #20
Ubiquitous
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Default Re: Relative Bulk for Battle Rifles

Quote:
Originally Posted by Icelander View Post
The G3KA4 is a very short carbine.
Oh the A4, right...I keep just looking up the G3 flat-out when I look up stuff for this thread.

My apologies, carry on.
Ubiquitous is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
guns, high-tech

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:18 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.