G41 Accuracy Reduction

[Panzer Jager]

In reality, a well-maintained G41 (w) has poorer accuracy than a G43, let alone an SVT40. Yet in RO, the G41 (w) has nearly perfect accuracy :S this is a mild error, ask any gun collector and they'll tell you which one can hit a target farther.

Additionally: (dont know if you guys trust Wikipedia; usually the information is decent though)


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gewehr_41

Thats the G41. Compare 400 m effective range to 500 m G43:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gewehr_43

 

[LukeFF]

You need more proof than Wikipedia and hearsay to support your argument.

 

[Panzer Jager]

If the G41 had greater accuracy than the G43, then why would they reduce the accuracy when they "mixed" the G41 with the SVT-40? And if they couldn't/didn't do it, why would the SVT40's rechambering system cause less accuracy?

If the G41 still had greater accuracy, then it would be more preferred as a sniper's weapon than the G43. However this is not the case, G41 sniper variants were extremely rare and very few were produced, let alone that they were very infrequently used, hardly even by snipers. A 1.5 zoom scope doesn't get you too far.

 

[Dumba [cro]]

On engagement ranges we have in game, it does not matter, for the most part.

 

[D3terioNation]

If the g41 ever had its accuracy nerfed (highly doubtful ) it would be a useless weapon!

The gun would be a complete pain in the arse to use, if it wasnt as lethal (and fun to use) as it is right now!

<3 the g41!!

 

[LogisticEarth]

Someone recently posted the actual code-numbers for the G41, G43, and SVT, and the G43 actually IS coded to be more accurate than the G41, if my memory servers me right.

 

[Gewehr 43]

ask any gun collector and they'll tell you which one can hit a target farther

The G41.

 

[Reddog]

It's generally accepted that G43's were produced late in the war and were of less quality (fit and finish wise) than the G41 and were hence less accurate.

 

[Rak]

Someone recently posted the actual code-numbers for the G41, G43, and SVT, and the G43 actually IS coded to be more accurate than the G41, if my memory servers me right.

But it sways much more, which makes it kinda pain to use for longer range.

 

[Diamond]

Not that it really matters at the ranges in 99% of engagements in the game, as somebody already pointed out.

 

[Rak]

Well, that argument is valid for Insurgency but not for RO It matters on most maps. It's not that you always use semi's at 20 meters.

 

[Gewehr 43]

But it sways much more

It should. It is an extremely off-balance and muzzle heavy rifle and fatigues the arms quickly.

 

[LemoN]

effective range of the G41 = 400m? highly doubt that

ive shot targets at 400 meters and that rly isnt a big problem even with an assault rifle (STG58)

 

[Grobut]

effective range of the G41 = 400m? highly doubt that

ive shot targets at 400 meters and that rly isnt a big problem even with an assault rifle (STG58)

Its not that simple, effective range has no bearing on accuracy, or the range at which you can still hit a target, its the range at which the projectile has lost so much power it is nolonger deemed fully effective in tests, for instance it may nolonger be able to penetrate basic armour like a helmet or flak jacket past this range, which it would normally do at ranges less than this.

Many weapons can easilly hit targets past their effective range, just take the M16, its effective range is 500 meters, but a decent shooter can hit targets as far away as 800 or even 900 meters, but the projectile will not perform as intended past the 500.

 

[Reddog]

Its not that simple, effective range has no bearing on accuracy, or the range at which you can still hit a target, its the range at which the projectile has lost so much power it is nolonger deemed fully effective in tests, for instance it may nolonger be able to penetrate basic armour like a helmet or flak jacket past this range, which it would normally do at ranges less than this.

Many weapons can easilly hit targets past their effective range, just take the M16, its effective range is 500 meters, but a decent shooter can hit targets as far away as 800 or even 900 meters, but the projectile will not perform as intended past the 500.

Effective range is one of those truly poorly defined terms, it all depends on who you talk to. Some people and organisations use it as a measure of the maximum range a weapon can consistently engage man sized targets others use it to define the maximum range a weapon still carries terminal effectiveness (ie. what you said). Depending on who you talk to you'll hear either one or the other is supposedly the correct way.

I am wondering where the figure 400m as effective range for a G41 came from? Looking at it though I'd also have to say that in this case 'effective range' is being used to describe it's accuracy limits, because 7.92x57 will certainly be carrying plenty of clout a lot further out than 400m (try 800m).

Personally I've always charcterized it as maximum range of terminal effectiveness like yourself Grobut and use the term 'maximum accurate range' when talking accuracy. Not everyone does it this way though.

 

[LemoN]

Its not that simple, effective range has no bearing on accuracy, or the range at which you can still hit a target, its the range at which the projectile has lost so much power it is nolonger deemed fully effective in tests, for instance it may nolonger be able to penetrate basic armour like a helmet or flak jacket past this range, which it would normally do at ranges less than this.

Many weapons can easilly hit targets past their effective range, just take the M16, its effective range is 500 meters, but a decent shooter can hit targets as far away as 800 or even 900 meters, but the projectile will not perform as intended past the 500.

so if the effective range of a .223 rem is 500 meters then the effective rangeof a 7.92x57IS is def way further

as allways i dont trust wiki in numbers about firearms/tanks/guns ect
i personally cant understand why its 400 meters?
u can easily shoot man sized targets over 400 meters with any 8x57IS rifle
ive shot a garand @ 300 meters and didnt even have to chang the ironsights for 300 meters (i just aimed at the head )

every shot hit its target exept I was offset with my aim

btw i think the range a 8x57IS round is still leathal is around 1500-2000 meters and the range it still is dangerous is around 4000 meters afaik

 

[Murphy]

so if the effective range of a .223 rem is 500 meters then the effective rangeof a 7.92x57IS is def way further

The size of the ammo doesn't say a whole lot about the accuracy of the weapon. Accuracy is also a factor in the so-called effective range.

 

[LogisticEarth]

The size of the ammo doesn't say a whole lot about the accuracy of the weapon. Accuracy is also a factor in the so-called effective range.

True, however in general: Heavier bullet = More stability & Inertia = Greater accuracy & effective range.

This is why they use .50 BMG for super-long range shots. Also consider that the WWII cartriges were not shortened assault-rifle rounds. They were full-on long range rifle rounds. And they're LOUD.

Actually that's one of the things that's unrealistic about the rifles in RO. They're far too quiet, ha. If you've got a few people banging away with a Mosin or a K98, you're going to be deaf for a few minutes untill your hearing recovers.

 

[Murphy]

Haha, I don't we want that in the game, right?
Turn up your volume until your steps sound as loud as your real steps would sound. The weapons are loud enough to be anoying then.

I also think they use the huge caliber rounds because of their higher power so their terminal range, as some called it before, is higher too and the penetration capabilites are better suited for the job.

Of course you are right about what you said though.

 

[LemoN]

1st: the 8x57IS is a pretty accurate round... nearly the same balistics as a .30-06

2nd: it all depends on the cartridgelayout, caseleingth, bullet(how many grains, what type of bullet, ect) how many grains of powder, what powder (i normally use N140 for riflecartridges but ive also used N130 and N150 before), how deep the bullet is sitting in the case ect

if uve got it all right but the bullet is a sh** one accuaricy is gone
so plz dont take the 1950's yugo 8x57 and compare them to a 2007 .223 REM

with a heavy loaded .303 i can easily outshoot a normal (hunting) 8mm Mauser (if ive got a VERRY [in terms of machining]neat enfield... if uve got a normal id strongly recoment to stay at around 40 grains N140 with a COL of 77,7mm)

3rd: a normal 8x57IS will allways outpower, outclass and outrange a .223 rem in a fight for accuaricy & range