Talk:M231 Firing Port Weapon

message: The article claims that some versions fire at 200rpm, which is much slower than any other small caliber fully automatic weapon than I'm aware of. A typical full auto AR-15 will cycle at 700+rpm. I don't see anything in the sources (which are limited at best) about it, where is that information from?
After thinking about it, it's possible that the cyclic rate was lowered by 200rpm, from the 1050 quoted earlier to 850. 
Totensiebush (talk) 00:35, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  200rpm claim 

message: the m4 has a collapsable and removable sights and stock, i was wondering, if they were attached to this, wouldn't it become a m4? user:Btzkillerv (User talk:btzkillerv) 17:51, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No, there are still other features it would lack, and the internal functions are a bit different from those of the M4.--LWF (talk) 17:57, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: but with some blacksmithing, surely it can be converted into an m4? Btzkillerv (talk) 20:12, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

text: Blacksmithing? No blacksmithing is involved with firearms. In addition, the internal mechanisms are different in more than one way, the gas system is obviously designed differently as the gas port is obviously located closer to the bolt, and the furniture is different, as the M231 lacks a stock, and the forward handguard is completely different, the barrel is of different length, and the profile of the barrel is different as the M231 lacks the barrel cutout for the M203, and appears to be thinner all around. Take a close look at the article and you'll see the M231 has only a 65% parts commonality and that is likely including internal and external parts. So in conclusion, no, the M231 could not be converted to be an M4, they are similar because they are based on the M16, but there are too many differences to allow for a conversion.--LWF (talk) 22:35, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: awww Btzkillerv (talk) 20:35, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  anyone noticed thai it can be converted to a m4? 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 25 July 2011 
;What should I do?
	A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 08:35, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Ar-10.jpg Nominated for Deletion

message: In the History section, the bit about "a WW2-era Firing Port Weapon created by Heckler & Koch based on the HK33" makes no sense, as the HK33 was first designed several decades after World War II. Did some text get dropped in the middle? - CarlRJ (talk) 23:18, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: It's this edit here. User:Hisredrighthand messed up. Originally it read something along the lines of "[the choices included] the M3, (plus) a FPW created by Heckler & Koch, and [further choices]". The user mangled this into the current formulation; bearing in mind the edit summary he didn't know anything about the topic. The words of Kurt von Hammerstein-Equord are apt; "one must beware of anyone who is stupid and diligent - he must not be entrusted with any responsibility because he will always cause only mischief". -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 19:10, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Competing weapons