Juju Posted March 19, 2002 Share Posted March 19, 2002 Feast your eyes... And, uhm, when it's done. Shouldn't be too long... And, er, should someone come along and point out that some of these guns aren't entirely historically correct: my answer will most probably be: "yeah? So?" or "shuh? Really?" (You have been warned. ) Oh, and, ahm, no requests either, okay? Edited: twice, to update pics. [ March 22, 2002, 12:08 PM: Message edited by: Juju ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
offtaskagain Posted March 19, 2002 Share Posted March 19, 2002 :eek: Damn those look good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
109 Gustav Posted March 19, 2002 Share Posted March 19, 2002 [confusion] Are those mods or pics in a museum? [/confusion] Either way I can't wait to see more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juju Posted March 19, 2002 Author Share Posted March 19, 2002 Originally posted by 109 Gustav: [confusion] Are those mods or pics in a museum? [/confusion] Either way I can't wait to see more.That, my dear Gustav, is a preview of my latest small arms mod. As you can see I've learned a thing or two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow 1st Hussars Posted March 19, 2002 Share Posted March 19, 2002 Yet another Keyboard shorted out by me drooling on it.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffsmith Posted March 19, 2002 Share Posted March 19, 2002 A. OK for us non-Grogs, how are they NOT historically accurate* B. You may expect a visit from the National Firearms Authority to make sure you are not actually caching them * OK they look a bit "out of the box" new for weapons that have been used in combat but I have seen a Lee-Enfield Jungle Carbine that has the same level of wood detail and quality [ March 18, 2002, 06:36 PM: Message edited by: jeffsmith ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rleete Posted March 19, 2002 Share Posted March 19, 2002 Accurate or not, that is some fine work. Looks like a picture out of a firearms book. Nice work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commissar Posted March 19, 2002 Share Posted March 19, 2002 If you were a woman, I'd give you a slobbery kiss. Another hi-res small arms mod was LONG over due. Makes me wish I had some artistic skill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhammer Posted March 19, 2002 Share Posted March 19, 2002 Wow. Excellent. Hurry up will ya? These are too good to be left undone. Great job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juju Posted March 19, 2002 Author Share Posted March 19, 2002 Originally posted by jeffsmith: A. OK for us non-Grogs, how are they NOT historically accurate* Oh, I don't know. Someone is bound to come along and say, for instance, 'say, that's an Enfield Mark so-and-so which wasn't issued to units in Europe,' or 'doesn't that look like a part of an AA mount on that M1919? Infantry don't carry AA mounts, matey.' Originally posted by jeffsmith: * OK they look a bit "out of the box" new for weapons that have been used in combat Ah, yes. So you noticed. Next step is to see if weathering will do any actual good at all. Originally posted by Commissar: If you were a woman, I'd give you a slobbery kiss.I'm, er, well... I don't know if I should be touched, or just glad I'm not a woman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanks a Lot Posted March 19, 2002 Share Posted March 19, 2002 I'm one of the lucky guys who got to test out some of these beauties. Wait till you see them in the game. Great work again Juju. :cool: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juju Posted March 19, 2002 Author Share Posted March 19, 2002 Thanks Tanks. Note the clever trick of not showing any other mod in the preview to prevent the 'ere,-wots-dat-grass-your-using' syndrome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom TCMHQ Posted March 19, 2002 Share Posted March 19, 2002 :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: Damned fine work Juju !!!! Now YOU will feel the pleasure to be bumped to death Cheers Tom ( TCMHQ ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Splinty Posted March 19, 2002 Share Posted March 19, 2002 Excellent! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeauCoupDinkyDau Posted March 19, 2002 Share Posted March 19, 2002 People, I had the honor of playtesting these arms along with Tanks' for Juju; and they F****** ROCK!! :eek: Prepare to sit and stare at your squads for hours after you install this set of super-de-duper-ultra-high-res small arms! :cool: . . .and Juju: Who's grass are you using in those pics with your mods? [ March 18, 2002, 08:20 PM: Message edited by: Vader's Jester ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fieldmarshall Posted March 19, 2002 Share Posted March 19, 2002 The 'Mg-42' the third one (bottom) is an MG-3 from what I can see, it is kinda pixilated, but it still looks like an MG-3 which is a modern, and improved version of the MG-42, popular with African rebels that.. Wonderful KR-98s, I shall have to get that set! --Niles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lcm1947 Posted March 19, 2002 Share Posted March 19, 2002 Truely beauiful work. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruno Weiss Posted March 19, 2002 Share Posted March 19, 2002 Beautiful Juju. Very detailed work. Can't wait to see what you do wit them Ruskie guns. [ March 18, 2002, 08:44 PM: Message edited by: Bruno Weiss ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juju Posted March 19, 2002 Author Share Posted March 19, 2002 Originally posted by Fieldmarshall: The 'Mg-42' the third one (bottom) is an MG-3 from what I can see, --NilesThanks for the nice comments. As far as I know the gun you're referring to is an MG42. Actually it's the same gun I've (any many other mod sluts out there) been using for years, since the same gun is in BFamily's small arms pack as well. Incidentally, that particular MG ( the bottom one)is intended as a replacement (finally) for the HT Mounted German MG. The second one is an optional MG34 for the infantry units. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Posted March 19, 2002 Share Posted March 19, 2002 Very pretty. Why two SMLEs? As to weathering, be very careful. No soldier worth his salt lets his weapon remain dirty for long! If do you, do weathering, limit it I'd suggest to removal of blueing from cocking handles and other areas where the weapon would be handled. Now, a question, doesn't the .50 cal feed from the left, not the right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunnergoz Posted March 19, 2002 Share Posted March 19, 2002 As our Prez' likes to say "Fabulous Job, JuJu!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juju Posted March 19, 2002 Author Share Posted March 19, 2002 Originally posted by Brian: Now, a question, doesn't the .50 cal feed from the left, not the right?If you look at it from the left in the game... It'll feed from the left! Works both ways. can't be helped, sorry. BTW, good suggestions on the weathering. Valid points there. I'll keep that in mind. Um, What's an SMLE? [ March 18, 2002, 10:36 PM: Message edited by: Juju ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted March 19, 2002 Share Posted March 19, 2002 Originally posted by Juju: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Brian: Now, a question, doesn't the .50 cal feed from the left, not the right?If you look at it from the left in the game... It'll feed from the left! Works both ways. can't be helped, sorry. BTW, good suggestions on the weathering. Valid points there. I'll keep that in mind. Um, What's an SMLE?</font> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted March 19, 2002 Share Posted March 19, 2002 Originally posted by Brian: Very pretty. Why two SMLEs? Bad, Brian! BAD! Those are No. 4s, which were not known as SMLE in civilized countries. You know, the ones the Aussies didn't bother to switch to... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BloodyBucket Posted March 19, 2002 Share Posted March 19, 2002 Good looking work. The Garand doesn't have the correct WWII style locking bar on the rear sight, and if you look real close, you can see that the serial number indicates it was built by Winchester in 1943, so it is obvious that it is a reworked piece. Also, the chamber brush in the cleaning kit is not the early style that was part of the combination tool. Other than that, it's great! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts