OTs-14 Groza Assault Rifle

[madanascar 0]

I originally posted this on Reddit, posting it here so everyone can see as well:

​

"I really like what the devs have done with the Slavic weapons in Standalone, and had an idea for a possible weapon to add. This is the OTs-14 Groza. Although the rifle isn't as commonly used as the AK and its counterparts, it fits perfectly with DayZ because of it's flexibility (similar to weapons such as the M4 or AK). It doesn't have to be a common weapon, it could take some time to find in Chernarus and I feel that the rifle would fit great with DayZ's setting. I think that this would be awesome to use in-game, maybe other people will feel the same. Just throwing the idea out there, although I'm hoping this doesn't get buried."

​

Other pics of the Groza: 1 2 3

 

​What would everyone think of this?

[rybec 339]

Since the VSS is confirmed it'd be nice to have at least one other firearm use the caliber so it's not another proprietary round.

[HomerJay27 69]

Bullpubs are allways appreciated and some more unknown guns too.

[star-lord252 83]

Hell yes I love this way it looks and how its a bullpup. Though we should get as val as well if this comes in.

[stielhandgranate 480]

 

 

Do it devs.

[Draco122 412]

I'd be up for this, if it was rare mind you. There are two versions that are used, "Groza-1" for 7,62x39mm and "Groza-4" chambered for 9x39mm.

[agouti 105]

Why should everything be rare?

___________________________

 

Ivan: Hey Peter! We need to get out of here, which guns do we take, the ones that take the common 5.45x39, or the super rare 9x39?

 

Peter: the 5.45x39, it'll be more useful too

 

 

End of story: It seems it'd be one of the guns most frequently left behind, ammo too.

 

On the other hand, a groza might be valued for it's grenade launcher alone.

[stielhandgranate 480]

Why should everything be rare?

___________________________

 

Ivan: Hey Peter! We need to get out of here, which guns do we take, the ones that take the common 5.45x39, or the super rare 9x39?

 

Peter: the 5.45x39, it'll be more useful too

 

 

End of story: It seems it'd be one of the guns most frequently left behind, ammo too.

 

On the other hand, a groza might be valued for it's grenade launcher alone.

 

Ivan would take a 9x39 for it's capabilities, however I would like to see both versions in.

[liquidcactus 719]

looks nice

[haven923 65]

Bullpubs are allways appreciated and some more unknown guns too.

^^This^^

The AUG was a nice touch.  I've been drooling over a Tavor 5.56 in real life for some time now.  Bullpups make so much sense from a military standpoint.  Heck, one of the main reasons why the US hasn't switched over to a bullpup-styled weapon yet is because of politics...

[Chaingunfighter 917]

^^This^^

The AUG was a nice touch.  I've been drooling over a Tavor 5.56 in real life for some time now.  Bullpups make so much sense from a military standpoint.  Heck, one of the main reasons why the US hasn't switched over to a bullpup-styled weapon yet is because of politics...

It's not really a simple black and white issue as to why we still use AR-15s over other platforms. Bullpups aren't universally better than rifles that load from in front of the trigger, and the design has to be favorable. Most of the replacement programs for the infantry rifles feature bullpup rifles but they aren't consistently popular enough over 'classic style' rifles.

 

The biggest reason they haven't switched is because every time they start a replacement program it gets too costly and it eventually just becomes more worthwhile to upgrade the current AR styled guns. Even when the US eventually replaces the M4/M4A1 and M16A4 (which will be gradual, I bet we'll still have M4s and M16s in some branches twenty years from now) it'll probably be something along the lines of an HK416 or another AR-styled rifle.

 

Though personally I think we'd do a whole lot better with a mix of TAR-21s and AR-15 rifles, like Israel does (without the Galils and old M16A1s and Colt Commandos they have)

[gibonez 3633]

End of story: It seems it'd be one of the guns most frequently left behind, ammo too.

 

On the other hand, a groza might be valued for it's grenade launcher alone.

 

It really wouldn't though. Groza is not common at all and reneging it to 9x39 is a great way to supplement the caliber.

 

Especially when you already have the vss , the only other options nearly look identical to the VSS.

Meanwhile this gun in 9x39 looks nothing like the VSS and would be great.

 

 

 

@ above in regards to bullpups.

 

Bullpups are not that great they universally have crappy triggers and the location of the magazine leads to problematic reloading in the most important military stance, prone.

[stielhandgranate 480]

^^This^^

 Bullpups make so much sense from a military standpoint.  Heck, one of the main reasons why the US hasn't switched over to a bullpup-styled weapon yet is because of politics...

 

Do you say this from your military experience? There are several bullpup rifles like the L85 that are plagued with serious issues like non-ambidexterity. If bullpup rifles are so superior, why does the British SAS use Diemaco C8 and C7 rifles, weapons based off M16 and M4 rifles?

[haven923 65]

Do you say this from your military experience? There are several bullpup rifles like the L85 that are plagued with serious issues like non-ambidexterity. If bullpup rifles are so superior, why does the British SAS use Diemaco C8 and C7 rifles, weapons based off M16 and M4 rifles?

I do.  I have no qualms with the M4 by any means, but I am a huge fan of the practicality of the bullpup design. You have a shorter gun with the same--if not greater--accuracy.  The mechanics make sense to me.  Besides, the M4 isn't ambidextrous.  I shoot lefty, meaning my standard issue M4 doesn't accommodate my preferred shooting orientation.  However, with a little adaption, the right-handed functions of an M4 are easily perormed from the opposite side.  In the case of the magazine release, it is actually more effective from the left-handed position than the right ;)

[stielhandgranate 480]

I do.  I have no qualms with the M4 by any means, but I am a huge fan of the practicality of the bullpup design. You have a shorter gun with the same--if not greater--accuracy.  The mechanics make sense to me.  Besides, the M4 isn't ambidextrous.  I shoot lefty, meaning my standard issue M4 doesn't accommodate my preferred shooting orientation.  However, with a little adaption, the right-handed functions of an M4 are easily perormed from the opposite side.  In the case of the magazine release, it is actually more effective from the left-handed position than the right ;)

 

Bullpup rifles have several flaws. Simply designing a rifle in a bullpup configuration does not make it more accurate. You run into issues like having the fire control group and the trigger group needing to be separated.The M4 and M16A2/M16A4 are ambidextrous, not as much as they could be, but far more with practice. The safety can be be selected with your left thumb, there is a brass deflector that prevents your face from eating hot brass. Have trouble with the charging handle? Rotate your weapon clockwise one quarter turn and grab it the charging handle lever with your right hand. Bolt release? Tap it with your left index finger. I'm a lefty too. The M4 is far more lefty friendly than the L85, which is totally non ambidextrous or the French FAMAS and Austrian AUG, which can be converted to left hand configuration but now means a right handed person cannot use it until an armorer converts it back.

 

Sometimes the grass is always greener. One of the reasons the M4/M16 and M9 get a bad rep from it's users because in the military, we are given these items without choice. People tend to dislike things we are forced to use without options. Look for new production FN M4s and M4A1s. The safety selectors are fully ambidextrous. My unit has 60 of them to the pleasure of lefties that have had the good grace to have one issued rather than a Colt M4.

[agouti 105]

It really wouldn't though. Groza is not common at all and reneging it to 9x39 is a great way to supplement the caliber.

 

Especially when you already have the vss , the only other options nearly look identical to the VSS.

Meanwhile this gun in 9x39 looks nothing like the VSS and would be great.

 

 

 

@ above in regards to bullpups.

 

Bullpups are not that great they universally have crappy triggers and the location of the magazine leads to problematic reloading in the most important military stance, prone.

 

Do you say this from your military experience? There are several bullpup rifles like the L85 that are plagued with serious issues like non-ambidexterity. If bullpup rifles are so superior, why does the British SAS use Diemaco C8 and C7 rifles, weapons based off M16 and M4 rifles?

 

Bullpup rifles are known for having poor triggers because the trigger is connected via a trigger bar. I have heard rumors of some bullpups having decent triggers, and having never disassembled this latest generation of bullpups, I can only imagine they either figured out a better connection, or somehow totally figured out a new way to do it.

 

 

Furthermore, if you can reach your arm back into your armpit and yank out a hair, I'd imagine you could reload a bullpup in the prone position.

[haven923 65]

-Snip-

Accuracy is affected by three main attributes (outside of the input of the operator, that is...): Number of moving parts, bullet (and everything from the primer to the powder to the casing that goes along with that bullet), and the barrel.  Long barrels tend to increase accuracy for a giver round since increased length means more powder gets burnt, which means the bullet has more velocity, which means it get to its target faster and with more energy.  More moving parts means there is more room for "tolerance" to interfere.  This is why bolt-action rifles are so popular still in an age of automatic weapons.  Bullet is pretty self-explanatory.  Every round has a different ballistic quotient, a different effective range, and a different effect at that range.

Now, what I was getting at:  Assuming you are using the same lot of rounds, that means that there are really only two big differences:  the number of moving parts and the barrel.  Bullpups, from what I've seen in cutaways and articles, tend to have more moving parts.  Like was mentioned above, the trigger is away from the action and the action is clumped inside of the aft of the weapon.  The solution?  The compact design means that the weight of the weapon is in the rear of the weapon, making it feel lighter and easier to maneuver with.  Since everything is shifted back, you can maintain the same barrel length (or even a longer barrel!) in a shorter weapon than a rifle in a standard configuration.  Of these two factors, the barrel is the most impactful on performance.

 

Bullpups make sense.  I have heard that a lot of Bullpups have a heavier trigger squeeze or that the pull isn't as smooth, but there are all sorts of companies stepping up to make precision trigger groups that put these weapons well above the quality of the tried-and-true M4.  Like I said, I've been drooling over a Tavor 5.56 for some time now...