I can agree about obsolete rifles. There's no reason a modern 20 or 30 round clip-fed rifle couldn't be developed, except it would be such a huge strategic advantage over mag-fed rifles the powers-that-be wouldn't want it.
Hmm. I think customers wouldn't want it, which is why it hasn't been developed.
That's a purely B.S. argument. It's like saying CNN runs fake news stories because that's what the public demands.
A "mini Garand" in .223 would sell like hotcakes, and you'd want one too.
I don't think so. The AR-15 will remain the king of civilian rifles for a long time. People don't want a new primary fighting rifle with new parts when they have a ton of AR accessories already.
I have hundreds of rounds of .303 British loaded into Enfield clips, in bandoleers. I once put on as many bandoleers as I could and it was absurdly heavy. The volume of rounds you are talking about is only relevant in a static defense scenario, and the only situation in which there would be an advantage to clips would be if you were firing nonstop for hours and any break in firing (to reload mags, for example) would result in your position being overrun. It's a one-in-a-trillion scenario. Clips don't have any advantage in any scenario that is likely to happen.
(post is archived)