The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Hide > NFA Guns and Gear

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old September 29, 2005, 04:03 AM   #51
AK103K
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 1, 2001
Posts: 9,788
Let me look around, I'm sure I've got it here somewhere.
AK103K is offline  
Old September 29, 2005, 09:51 AM   #52
shaggy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 9, 2004
Posts: 1,519
There is currently no MG34 upper conversion for the MAC type guns. BRP makes an MG34 upper conversion unit for the M16; the XMG-99 - it runs about $4k.

From what I've heard, either Len Savage or Ernie from SOCOM (and quite possibly both working together since Ernie seems to still be having some legal troubles) are re-starting the RPD upper project for the MAC. Again, as I understand it, the price should be around $4k, but I've also heard prices could be as high as $7k.
shaggy is offline  
Old September 29, 2005, 01:06 PM   #53
AK103K
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 1, 2001
Posts: 9,788
Quote:
There is currently no MG34 upper conversion for the MAC type guns.
This does now seem to be the case. The link I had is now dead, as are the couple I found while doing a search. I do remember seeing one with a M11/9mm lower replacing the trigger group of a MG34. They even had video if I remember correctly.
AK103K is offline  
Old September 29, 2005, 02:59 PM   #54
Zsnark
Junior Member
 
Join Date: July 16, 2005
Location: SoCal
Posts: 11
MAC 10 revised!

Hi there SMG buffs,

I have both items mentioned earlier. Here I present my opinion, I won't share the other at present.

Seems to me that if you did all the things the MAC needs to make it better you'd have an entirely different piece. Also, it would cost many bucks.

Going back to my original admittedely cursory experience with MAC 10 (in 9mm), Uzi (full size, folder, 9mm), and the MP5. I repeat that the H&K MP5 is a thoroghbred, the Uzi is a workman's tool, and the MAC 10 is a cheapie along the lines of the WW2 Sten gun. It works. I ain't any where near perfect.

You really can't compare the MAC because it was designed for cheap, mass production and I am sure if Ingram, the designer, sat back and conjured up a perfect SMG it would have been better in every way than the one which was produced.

Thought I'd throw my two centys in to keep the conversation going.

http://thefiringline.com/forums/newr...e=1&p=1704085#
Big Grin
AAW
Zsnark is offline  
Old September 29, 2005, 03:21 PM   #55
shaggy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 9, 2004
Posts: 1,519
The MAC type guns can indeed be made competitive with far more expensive guns, and at quite a reasonable cost overall. The results of the national subgun matches at KCR are testament to that - M11 shooters often beat MP5's in the open class. The TASK slow-fire conversion only costs a few hundred bucks, or can be done at home if you've handy with tools. Richard Lage is in the process of developing a slow-fire upper which brings the RoF down to about 600rpm. The crude sights of the M11 can be replaced with an HK type sights. Personally, I've used an almost bone-stock M11 in competition and done better than guys with far more expensive guns (all that was done to mine was a k-grip was added, and the wobbly wire stock was welded to the open position). Practice makes perfect, and while an out of the box M11 is no match for an MP5, some modifications can make it competitive for a shooter who takes the time to practice. All in all, for significantly less than the price of a $14,000 MP5 or a $6500 Uzi, an M11 can be modified to be quite competitive with those weapons.
shaggy is offline  
Old September 30, 2005, 03:22 PM   #56
Sleuth
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 27, 2002
Location: Arizona
Posts: 445
I have had the chance to shoot around 200 different machinguns over the last 20 years (I have some very nice friends with big collections), including most variations of the MAC. In it's original format, straight from the factory, the MAC is (compared to almost all others) bulky, awkward, blocky, crude, and hard to hit with. It is totally lacking any ergonomics, grace or style.

It is inexpensive, reliable (if well maintained), and, as noted, can be modified into something it is not, a controllable, usefull, subgun.

It's a mostly free country, if you like it, by all means buy and enjoy one.
__________________
Sleuth
Sleuth is offline  
Old October 3, 2005, 04:20 AM   #57
czc3513
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 4, 2005
Location: Oregon.
Posts: 709
Have you seen this before?
http://world.guns.ru/smg/smg37-e.htm

__________________
"HEDP: High Explosive Donkey Punch"
czc3513 is offline  
Old October 3, 2005, 08:21 AM   #58
CQBArms
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 6, 2004
Posts: 192
Problem with that is it's a post sample and not a transferable.
CQBArms is offline  
Old October 3, 2005, 12:01 PM   #59
Sleuth
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 27, 2002
Location: Arizona
Posts: 445
I got to shoot one of those as well - the only problem I had with it was because of the design of the stock, it pulled at my beard with ever shot. It made it less than pleasurable.

Is Ruger still making them??
__________________
Sleuth
Sleuth is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:59 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2018 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.05592 seconds with 10 queries