Infographic: The Evolution of the Rifle

Infographics are fantastic, and if you don’t think so you haven’t seen enough (here’s a blog to fix that).With a single image the designer can convey a massive amount of information about a subject that is easily understood. It’s kinda like porn for statistics nerds. Cannon, the people who make safes, just released a nifty infographic about the evolution of the firearm. The point of an infographic is to be compact and convey a lot of information, but Cannon’s graphic really only has one or two interesting sections despite its slightly bloated size. Make the jump for my favorite section.

Now THAT is one sexy looking bar graph.


  1. avatar Aharon says:

    It was very enjoyable. Thanks.

  2. avatar Mike says:

    Very cool infographic… Although, I didn’t *think* the effective range of an M-16 was twice that of an M-14…

    1. avatar Raph84 says:

      + 1 it shows that even the M4 outranges it by 140 yards…which seems a smidge off

    2. avatar Nate says:

      The M16/M4 are far more accurate rifles than the M14. The M14, even in it’s updated forms, really isn’t that accurate. It’s why SOCOM dumped them for rifles like the Mk 11 (KAC SR-25) and now the Mk 17 (FN SCAR-H). People always bring up the EBR, but that’s really not anymore accurate than a traditional M14 and it’s a nightmare to maintain. However,I’d generally agree that the M14 would be more effective at engaging long range targets simply due to it’s much more potent chambering.

      I don’t understand why the M14 is presented as more advanced than the StG. 44 and AK-47. It clearly is not. It’s just an M1 with chambered for a more efficient, but still full powered, cartridge with a detachable box magazine. Other than that, it’s identical.

      The StG. 44 and AK-47 are far more modern designs. I’d also say the M16 is more modern than the AUG. I guess people equate bullpups with futuristic because of the way they look. In reality, they’re a big leap backwards from the standpoint of ergonomics. They simply do not work well with the human body.

  3. avatar tdiinva says:

    This graphic leaves off several revolutionary infantry rifles.

    Dreyse needle gun (Prussian model 1848). First breachloader in service
    French model 1851 Minie’ rifle. First rifled musket in widespread service
    Mauser 98. The ’03 Springfiield is just a copy with a few improvements

    There actually hasn’t been much evolution since the M-16.

  4. avatar Lance says:

    Can some one explain how the range of an M1 Garand is 2/3 the range of an M4?

    1. avatar tdiinva says:

      Because it’s wrong?

  5. avatar Matt says:

    Sorry but that graph is rediculous. No way the garland and ak have the same range. No way the ar-15 has almost doublet the range of the m-14 or garland. The rest are all off somewhat as well.

    1. avatar Derek says:

      Although I agree, I’m still trying to figure out how you got an L in Garand twice 🙂

      1. avatar HSR47 says:

        Likely spellcheck and/or brainfart.

  6. avatar Luc says:

    Cannon needs to give up on infographs stick to making safes.

    20″ AUG has a 300m range but a 16″ SCAR L has an 800m range?

    Magnets. How do they work?

    1. avatar HSR47 says:

      Tolerances, approved loads, twist rates.

  7. avatar Another Ken says:

    The ranges stated appear to be maximum effective range for a point targets using iron sights. The m14 has something over 800m effective range with optics and can shoot to the other side of the planet if you aren’t too concerned about point of impact (slight exaggeration).

  8. avatar zak b says:

    The listed ranges are totally ridiculous. Not to mention they use the cyclic, not practical rates of fire for everything past the garand.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email