@Dan: I'm curious where you came up with the 600 FPS figure as a starting point. I understand that you're interested in extending the range of a particular platform to make things more interesting, but "I dunno, just make it 600 FPS" doesn't seem well thought-out. Perhaps if you had a particular effective range in mind, or a desired range advantage over your general 400 FPS rifle, you could arrive at a number that's got some reason for being there.
@Morgan:
As seen (measured with a .30g bb) in the graphs, he's only gaining about 70-80 feet of range by increasing the velocity. This also speaks nothing for his accuracy. I doubt this is a serious threat to the bolt-users, as you still have more accurate fire and range. It might even be a challenge to pick off a target from a moving vehicle.
@Pharaoh6:
I understand where you're coming from, but the conversation on this topic has been done to death so much that a lot of AP is sick of hearing it, even when it's spelled out in a (mostly) meaningful and mature way. The reaction you're seeing is a knee-jerk response to the general topic, not a thought-out response to the post. There is also a bit of politics involved with a few of the involved parties, and that's not helping. Add in pickles and KA-BAR, and you have a recipe for a nasty thread. I can appreciate your non-biased rationale in being here, and I wish others would emulate it.
Also, I think Catch22 was kidding about the M240B. I think that's what the smiley face implies.
@pickles:
Dan doesn't need you to make his points for him. Dan is a smart enough guy to handle this kind of discussion without you getting everyone riled up because you have some need to argue about everything. Despite your intentions, you're not helping.
@Bad Karma:
I'm pregnant. It's yours.
