reyn0lds
Sergeant Major
dont shoot, let them burn.
Posts: 66
|
Post by reyn0lds on Aug 8, 2006 13:06:06 GMT -5
nah, I would just get the mp5, I like the look of it better then the mp5k.
|
|
|
Post by kman118 on Aug 8, 2006 21:16:45 GMT -5
I don't like the look of the mp5k, its to compact it seems...in a bad way.
|
|
|
Post by hudabon on Aug 8, 2006 22:07:14 GMT -5
However, if you can look past the looks, you will realize all you are losing is the buttstock, which does nothing for performance, so it is just as accurate and powerful as any other TM MP5.
|
|
feliks
Corporal
Pontifex Maximus
Posts: 33
|
Post by feliks on Aug 10, 2006 20:06:46 GMT -5
Ah, I got my Ruger today and it's looking quite nice. I'm waiting awhile to write a review so I can really know how the gun works.
|
|
|
Post by hudabon on Aug 10, 2006 23:03:36 GMT -5
Cool. Make sure to have some pictures as well, thats always nice in a review.
|
|
roketpropldcorn
Sergeant
All of my questions are answers to my sins. All of my endings are waiting to begin. -Corey Taylor
Posts: 44
|
Post by roketpropldcorn on Aug 21, 2006 10:14:17 GMT -5
i like the way the mp5k looks. its cool for extremly CQB fights and maybe a sniper backup because of its size
|
|
|
Post by hudabon on Aug 22, 2006 12:02:23 GMT -5
Yeah, I also like the look. But I dont get why its less powerful than any other mp5, because all it loses is the stock, and it comes with a foregrip.
|
|
roketpropldcorn
Sergeant
All of my questions are answers to my sins. All of my endings are waiting to begin. -Corey Taylor
Posts: 44
|
Post by roketpropldcorn on Aug 22, 2006 17:13:15 GMT -5
its because they expect people to use it somewhere where its too small for an MP5 (and most people :\ ) so they tone down the range and fps. also i think the barrel is shorter.
|
|