You Vs. Terminator

[Straha]

The rifleman's assault weapon is basically the rifle grenade launcher from hell. It fits over and under the barrel of an M16. The attachment works by tapping off some of the gas released when a normal ball round is fired from the rifle and uses it to propel the grenade, which is on the launcher hung under the barrel.
The Grenade is about the size of a couple human fists and has a high explosive squash head warhead with a pound of plastic explosives in it. The Thing can kill a M48 tank frontally and is accurate to 300 meters.
Based off what Kyle's home made bombs did to the T1 terminator, this should blow the Terminator in half at the very minimal, likely it would blow it in half and knock off the head and limbs. A chest hit would likely annihilate the whole chest and send whats left flying for about 10 meters.
The best thing is, the grenade is almost all plastic, and so it can be safely used at near point blank range.

The T-800 took two bombs and was still able to chase Sarah. And one of them was amplified by an oil tanker explosion, and that did no structural damage, while the other one was lodged in his hip bone area and it only blew the thing into two still operating chunks. Unless you have enough time, ammo, and distence you would be doomed!
This is why I'd much rather go with a nuke, Phased Plasma Rifle, or an E-11 in that order.

[Sea Skimmer]

The rifleman's assault weapon is basically the rifle grenade launcher from hell. It fits over and under the barrel of an M16. The attachment works by tapping off some of the gas released when a normal ball round is fired from the rifle and uses it to propel the grenade, which is on the launcher hung under the barrel.
The Grenade is about the size of a couple human fists and has a high explosive squash head warhead with a pound of plastic explosives in it. The Thing can kill a M48 tank frontally and is accurate to 300 meters.
Based off what Kyle's home made bombs did to the T1 terminator, this should blow the Terminator in half at the very minimal, likely it would blow it in half and knock off the head and limbs. A chest hit would likely annihilate the whole chest and send whats left flying for about 10 meters.
The best thing is, the grenade is almost all plastic, and so it can be safely used at near point blank range.

The T-800 took two bombs and was still able to chase Sarah. And one of them was amplified by an oil tanker explosion, and that did no structural damage, while the other one was lodged in his hip bone area and it only blew the thing into two still operating chunks. Unless you have enough time, ammo, and distence you would be doomed!
This is why I'd much rather go with a nuke, Phased Plasma Rifle, or an E-11 in that order.

The fact that you think a homemade pipe bomb has anywhere near the power of a one-pound HESH round is conformation that you have no idea what you're talking about. The fact that you think the T-800 was undamaged after the truck explosion also puts in doubt the fact that you've seen the movie, did you not notice to close up of its non-functional left leg?

Amplified by an oil truck explosion? Those bombs were so weak they didn't even blow out the tires on the T-800s motorcycle, or those of the pickup even when one exploded directly along side them.

The ability of such a bomb to even set off a gasoline tanker is really doubtful. However it did explode, and the blast into the cabin would have been minimal, and reduced by passing through several layers of steel. Gasoline doesn’t have much explosive power, and generates only a small blast wave.

A bomb in that part of the T-800s frame would only direct a couple percent of its blast into it, and that was still enough to split it in two and blow the legs apart. A far more powerful bomb directing about 2/3s of its blast into the chest is going to blow the head off at the least along with reducing the chest to scrap metal.

In tests the RAW blasted clear though 65mm armor grade steel plate, and could knock off 12-inch wide scabs off steel of the backs of 200mm thick plates.

Why you would want to use a nuke when your 50 meters from the target with LOS and no cover is beyond me. Even the world's smallest 250-ton yield weapons would leave you quite vaporized.

[beyond hope]

Give me one of the railguns from Quake and I'll send you the Terminator's head.

[Shrykull]

this weapon http://www.kitsune.addr.com/Firearms/Sn ... tt_M82.htm

[Shrykull]

How exactly are/were muskets of the past few centuries. My history teacher once told me that American civil war weapons, were not even accurate enough to hit the world map we had in the back of the room, I think that is a major understatement, if they were that unreliable then I don't think people would have relied much on small handguns, since you probably couldn't hit that guy 6 feet away.

[weemadando]

The metal pipe. Tell me that it wouldn't be great to (literally) wrap it around the head of a Terminator.

[Sea Skimmer]

How exactly are/were muskets of the past few centuries. My history teacher once told me that American civil war weapons, were not even accurate enough to hit the world map we had in the back of the room, I think that is a major understatement, if they were that unreliable then I don't think people would have relied much on small handguns, since you probably couldn't hit that guy 6 feet away.

Civil War weapons were rifled and percussion caps to fire mini balls, they were accurate out to several hundred feet against man sized targets, and much further then that against massed troops in ranks.

However if you go back 100 years, hitting a man at 50 feet is near impossible with smooth bore weapons firing lead balls with flintlocks.

[beyond hope]

The metal pipe. Tell me that it wouldn't be great to (literally) wrap it around the head of a
Terminator.

The amusement value of that would not be worth the subsequent agonizing pain as the Terminator takes it away and beats me to death with it.

I'll stick with the railgun, thanks

[Knife]

The barrett would be nice but you may not have time to sight in on the target. I voted for the blaster, but would have perfered the 10mm pulse rifle with ap explosive rounds. Not to mention the upper and lowwer 20mm gernade launcher.
By the way earlier were you all talking about the M203 on the M16 or something else.

[Golem169]

I would use a lightsaber, 'cause then I could watch his metal head twitch as the electronic synapses fired after being disconected from their main power source, then sputer and die out. I only wish that the terminator were organic.

[Sea Skimmer]

The barrett would be nice but you may not have time to sight in on the target. I voted for the blaster, but would have perfered the 10mm pulse rifle with ap explosive rounds. Not to mention the upper and lowwer 20mm gernade launcher.
By the way earlier were you all talking about the M203 on the M16 or something else.

No, what I mentioned was not the M203 and is in no way related, it uses a totally different mechanism, it's basically a giant anti tank rifle grenade rather then a dedicated clip on launcher like the M203.

[His Divine Shadow]

I want a Clone-rifle!
KABOOM!

[Cpt_Frank]

.

However if you go back 100 years, hitting a man at 50 feet is near impossible with smooth bore weapons firing lead balls with flintlocks.

You mean 200 years I guess? cause flintlock era only lasted until about 1830.
The flintlocks came into military action at about 1700 and before that you had matchlock muskets which were even more inaccurate and unreliable than the flintlocks and in the time between ca 1450 and 1500 you had the arquebus, the matchlock musket's direct precursor without mechanical spring lock and accurate at only about 15-20 meters and before that hand-cannons which were completely impossilbe to aim.

My choice would be the Texas's 14 inch canons.
However since they're not available, I'd take the E-11.

[Mr Bean]

I prefer the large version of this
The Anti-Material one that is fires its own .501 Rounds desgined for anti-material work


Like shoting base-ball sided holes in APCS

[Cpt_Frank]

You know Bean you're trapped in an arena ie very limited space, so using a bolt-action rifle wouldn't be ideal for the slow rate of fire.
Until you fired sufficient shots to kill the thing he's already blown you to hell.

[Sea Skimmer]

.

However if you go back 100 years, hitting a man at 50 feet is near impossible with smooth bore weapons firing lead balls with flintlocks.

You mean 200 years I guess? cause flintlock era only lasted until about 1830.
The flintlocks came into military action at about 1700 and before that you had matchlock muskets which were even more inaccurate and unreliable than the flintlocks and in the time between ca 1450 and 1500 you had the arquebus, the matchlock musket's direct precursor without mechanical spring lock and accurate at only about 15-20 meters and before that hand-cannons which were completely impossilbe to aim.

My choice would be the Texas's 14 inch canons.
However since they're not available, I'd take the E-11.

1860-65 minus 100 years =1760-65, the heart of the flintlock era.

I'd rather use a weapon for which ammunition exists, and which does not need a couple years of work to be made ready to fire. I'd also like it to be able to fit in the arena, and depress enough to hit the target...

[Damaramu]

this weapon http://www.kitsune.addr.com/Firearms/Sn ... tt_M82.htm

"I LIKE IT!"

[Corran Horn]

Which Model of Terminator?

[Mr Bean]

Read page one Horn, T-800

[Cpt_Frank]

1860-65 minus 100 years =1760-65, the heart of the flintlock era.

I'd rather use a weapon for which ammunition exists, and which does not need a couple years of work to be made ready to fire. I'd also like it to be able to fit in the arena, and depress enough to hit the target...

D'oh!
me = stoopid