Don't know what they be talkin 'bout. My scope is clear as day, however mine was serviced in 1965 so could have had its lenses replaced.
Printable View
Don't know what they be talkin 'bout. My scope is clear as day, however mine was serviced in 1965 so could have had its lenses replaced.
The only thing I dont like about the PU is the style of reticle it has, which isn't the scopes fault. I'd rather have a Mil-Dot.Quote:
Originally Posted by PenGuin1362
Am I the only person here who loves me a good FN P90? That would be my first purchase if I was able to pick and chose.
Have you ever held one? It's rather cramped and there's no way to adjust it. The magazines are a comparative pain next to your traditional box magazine. For the civilian versions, you have to deal with those long barrels which make it look ugly, and then ammo is not the easiest thing to come by. If you were to ask me, the MP7 wins vs. the P90 on all counts as a PDW.
Oh, and before anybody says it: if it's firing 5.56 NATO, it's not a PDW.
I have held the civilian version, but it fits my hands pretty well considering I have a slighter frame than most. Even with the lengthened barrel, its still very compact. Im not sure what issues you are talking about as far as the magazine is concerned. I also don't understand how firing a high velocity round completely negates the obviously compact design when you say it isn't a PDW.
MP7 is better, hands down. I love FN and the P90 is a neat little piece of engineering, but it is not practical and the MP7 utterly outclasses it in its intended role.
I'd rather have a PPSh than both, though, because you guys know how I am with these things :-3
Mine must've been too as the lenses are coated (the Soviets didn't coat lenses in WWII) and the exterior finish is excellent, but any cared-for PU would be just fine without a refurb. Considering mine is 68 years old, and if it was refurbed it would've been in the 60s, that's still a damn good piece of simple, solid optical engineering to hold out so well for so long. New-production they would've been even better - completely shutting down pretty much any argument of them being noticeably inferior to their German counterparts.Quote:
Originally Posted by PenGuin1362
At any rate, the only true counterpart the Germans had to the PU was the ZF4, which ranged from excellent to absolutely awful depending on factory and planetary alignment. The other scopes find themselves facing off against the Zeiss-derived PE and PEM... and have even less to brag about.
P90 uses a 5.7 Its different... Very different.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobblehob
I know that, it still doesn't keep it from being a PDW...Quote:
Originally Posted by TVTyrant
It is a PDW that was my point. Warsaw said guns using 5.56 weren't... PDWs all use high velocity cartridges compared to SMGs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobblehob
Ohp, my bad xPQuote:
Originally Posted by TVTyrant