Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Is the 458 Socom very popular?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Mobius
    replied
    Originally posted by Smitty of the North View Post
    It's true that I don't embrace all new technology. Possibly, it's a lack of understanding, because of a lack of interest.

    WOW! How can you say that? I think they are a "radial departure", in pretty much everything that comes to usage. They don't look the same way, carry the same way, OR handle the same way.

    Compare it with the Mini 14. Don't you see a difference? If the Mini 14 had the benefit of the same development, would it not be a better choice for a Military Service Rifle?

    Not to suggest that LOOKs are everything, but the Mini 14, For Example, looks like a rifle, not like a platform. Tripods are "platforms".

    To function like a rifle, a rifle conceivably LOOK like a rifle, rather than a Ray-Gun.

    Since, you're so good with the lingo, and rationalizations, you might research how the AR15 was chosen in the first place in spite of all the problems, and the credit to American Ingenuity, that made it as functional as it is today.

    I'm not offended, and hope I'm not being offensive.

    Smitty of the North
    Certainly nothing wrong with not embracing new tech. It's not for every one. I've always been exposed to the cutting edge from the time I was very young. My dad used to be a programmer for IBM and we had one of the first home computers in our house back in the late 70's. I think that's kind of driven me to embrace new tech more than others my age even.

    I think we aren't too far off, but maybe thinking from different angles on the "departure". I think more along the lines of the action itself rather then the outward view. To me a semi-auto is a semi-auto. They all have different mechanical action but the result is the same. So I don't really differentiate base on how it looks. That said, the mini-14 was (and still does) have a reputation of accuracy issues. I'm not saying it can't be accurate, but it inherently has issues that need to be resolved. They actually competed for dominance (mini-14 was produced after the AR-15) but the flexibility of the AR eventually won out. Initially the M-16 had issues. BAD issues. Through trial by fire, that was worked out. I think (and this is really only my opinion) that the simplicity and flexibility of the AR design was what won out. It's very easy to maintain an AR and parts are pretty easy to swap if needed. You can pretty much tear the thing down to a pile of parts with not much more than a punch and your fingers. That and if a barrel was damaged you could literally do an upper swap in the middle of a battle without any tools at all. And while aesthetics means something, they don't really matter to the military. What caused the general public to embrace it? Why to girls like barbie dolls. It's not the doll, it's all the accesories. So yeah, the AR is the barbie doll of the gun world. You can put whatever dress and shoes on it you fancy. I really think that is what has made it so popular. The fact that it's relatively cheap and cheap to add jewelry to. That and it's about the most flexible foundation for a firearm I can think of. I mean look at the list you posted. Many of those calibers are not much more than a simple barrel change. The rest are little more than an upper receiver. You could pretty much have one lower that allows you to have everything from a .22LR plinker/rodent control up to a pretty decent medium game hunter. And the total cost would probably be cheaper in the long run, plus as far as Uncle Sam is concerned, you only have 1 gun. The lower is the gun. Uppers ship regular mail with no FFL involved.

    I may come across as an "AR fanboy", but in reality I'm a gun fanboy. I like em all! I just can't afford to OWN them all...

    Leave a comment:


  • Smitty of the North
    replied
    Originally posted by Mobius View Post
    LOL, please don't take this with offense, it's honestly meant to be with a lot of respect. It seems to me that the points you make kind of boil down to "I don't understand why people need MP3 players when we've had perfectly good vinyl records all this time."

    I don't see MSRs as a "radical departure" from other semi-auto's. The only different is the look. So unless I'm mistaken you just don't like the look of MSRs, which by the way is perfectly fine. Sort of like saying I don't like the look of the Chevy truck so I'll stick to my Ford. (Or vice versa if that's an issue). There is a semi-auto .30-06. The only reason the .308 was made was because the .30-06 has such a long cartridge that semi-auto mechanisms of the time had trouble being consistent. So a shorter case was made and welcome .308 (aka 7.62X51mm). It's just the natural evolution of anything really. At some point in their past even the guns you use were adapted from military service.
    It's true that I don't embrace all new technology. Possibly, it's a lack of understanding, because of a lack of interest.

    WOW! How can you say that? I think they are a "radial departure", in pretty much everything that comes to usage. They don't look the same way, carry the same way, OR handle the same way.

    Compare it with the Mini 14. Don't you see a difference? If the Mini 14 had the benefit of the same development, would it not be a better choice for a Military Service Rifle?

    Not to suggest that LOOKs are everything, but the Mini 14, For Example, looks like a rifle, not like a platform. Tripods are "platforms".

    To function like a rifle, a rifle conceivably LOOK like a rifle, rather than a Ray-Gun.

    Since, you're so good with the lingo, and rationalizations, you might research how the AR15 was chosen in the first place in spite of all the problems, and the credit to American Ingenuity, that made it as functional as it is today.

    I'm not offended, and hope I'm not being offensive.

    Smitty of the North

    Leave a comment:


  • Smitty of the North
    replied
    Originally posted by ADfields View Post
    Well I don't know about that . . . USDA Wildlife Service in Palmer has a very nice 458 SOCOM chambered bolt action. 223 has long been a popular bolt action round. We have 6 orders for the mini model 70 223 size actions chambered for 6.8 and I bet not long before someone wants a 458 built on one. I'm seeing more and more cross over of these AR rounds.

    Yea AR seems rock-n-roll to us old farts (remember "rock-n-roll has got to go"?) but face it . . . AR is just this generations'' 30-30 and every bit as useful all be it ugly to the older guys eye.
    OK, here's a Partial "List". I don't know which ones were designed with the AR in mind.

    SOTN


    AR-15, (without bolt modification )

    .17 Remington
    .17/223
    .20 Tactical
    .20 Practical
    .20 Vartag
    .204 Ruger
    .221 Fireball
    .222 Remington
    .222 Remington Magnum
    .223 Remington (5.56x45mm)
    .223 Remington Ackley Improved
    6x45mm
    6mm TCU
    6x47mm
    6mm Whisper
    .25x45mm
    6.5mm Whisper
    7mm Whisper
    7mm TCU
    .300 Whisper (.300/221, .300 Fireball)
    .338 Whisper

    AR-15, (with bolt modification)

    223 WSSM
    5.45x39mm (.21 Genghis)
    243 WSSM
    6mm PPC
    6mm WOA
    6mm BR Remington
    6mm Hagar
    6.5mm PPC
    6.5 WSSM
    6.5 WOA
    6.5mm Grendel
    25 WSSM
    6.8x43mm SPC
    .30 Herrett Rimless Tactical (6.8x43mm case trimmed to 41mm and necked up to .308; the 6.8mm version of the .300 Whisper)
    7.62x25
    7.62x39mm
    .30 RAR
    300 OSSM
    .357 Auto
    .35 Gremlin (necked up 6.5 Grendel to 358)
    .358 WSSM (various names, but all are some form of a WSSM necked up to 35 caliber, some are shortened to make them big game legal in Indiana)
    .458 SOCOM
    .50 Action Express
    .50 Beowulf

    AR-15 (using a simple blowback operation)

    .17 HMR
    .22 LR
    .22 WMR
    9x19mm
    9x21
    9x23
    30 Carbine
    357 Sig
    40S&W
    400 Cor-Bon
    41 Action Express
    10mm Auto
    45 GAP
    45ACP
    45 Super
    45 Win Mag

    (This list is in no way complete.)

    This list does not include complete different uppers like the FN 5.7 or the one that shoots .410 shotgun, crossbow bolts or bolt action uppers like the 50BMG

    AND, another one.


    AR-15 Calibers

    Posted on September 6, 2012


    Hereís a partial listing. This list is in no way complete as many new cartridges are made. If someone can figure out how to shove the round through the magwell or slap the upper on, it is made for AR-15ís! This list also does not account for complete uppers like the FN 5.7◊28, .410 shotgun, crossbow bolts, golf ball launchers or bolt action uppers like the .338 Lapua, 50BMG, etc.

    Standard Mil-Spec Bolt
    .17 Remington
    .17/223
    .20 Tactical
    .20 Practical
    .20 Vartag
    .204 Ruger
    .221 Fireball
    .222 Remington
    .222 Remington Magnum
    .223 Remington
    .223 Remington Ackley Improved
    6x45mm
    6mm TCU
    6x47mm
    6mm Whisper
    .25x45mm
    6.5mm Whisper
    7mm Whisper
    7mm TCU
    .300 Whisper (.300/221, .300 Fireball)
    .300 AAC Blackout
    .338 Whisper
    5.56x45mm NATO

    With Bolt Modification
    20 LBC
    22 LBC
    243 LBC
    264 LBC
    223 WSSM
    5.45x39mm (.21 Genghis)
    243 WSSM
    6mm PPC
    6mm WOA
    6mm BR Remington
    6mm Hagar
    6MM Turbo
    6 BR
    6 BRX
    6X6.8
    6.5mm PPC
    6.5 WSSM
    6.5 WOA
    6.5mm Grendel
    25 WSSM
    6.8x43mm SPC
    6.8 SPCII
    .30 Herrett Rimless Tactical
    7.62◊25
    7.62x39mm
    .30 RAR
    300 OSSM
    .357 Auto
    .35 Gremlin
    .358 WSSM
    .458 SOCOM
    .50 Action Express
    .50 Beowulf

    Blowback Operation
    .17 HMR
    .17 HM2
    .22 LR
    .22 WMR
    9x19mm
    9◊21
    9◊23
    30 Carbine
    357 Sig
    40S&W
    400 Cor-Bon
    41 Action Express
    10mm Auto
    45 ACP
    45 GAP
    45 Super
    45 Win Mag

    Leave a comment:


  • Mobius
    replied
    Originally posted by Smitty of the North View Post
    With an Auto rifle and most pistols you gotta train yourself. After you pull that trigger and fire, it is not SAFE. Pulling it again, will fire again. There is no Cocking or chambering necessary FIRST. It's ready to GO.

    This makes me uncomfortable, but I have some Semi Automatic firearms.

    The ARs are a RADICAL DEPARTURE from even normal semi-autos, and comparisons with other designs just doesn't seem to work.

    I'm at a LOSS to explain the explosion in their popularity, and the continuation of it.

    Granted, they are an adaptation of the Military Svc Rifle, but it hasta be MORE than that. I rather think it's the Zoomie Look, lack of recoil, and the desire for protection.

    I read an account of someone who used his, actually didn't have to FIRE it, right after the hurricane in New Orleans. Just carrying it made ALL the difference in his situation.

    I think the AR, of any persuasion has a greater psychological effect than any other type of firearm, including a Tactical Lookin Shootgun.

    Any member of ones family could handle an AR. Not So, with a Shootgun.

    This is what I mean when I say "comparisons with other designs just doesn't seem to work."

    Smitty of the North
    LOL, please don't take this with offense, it's honestly meant to be with a lot of respect. It seems to me that the points you make kind of boil down to "I don't understand why people need MP3 players when we've had perfectly good vinyl records all this time."

    I don't see MSRs as a "radical departure" from other semi-auto's. The only different is the look. So unless I'm mistaken you just don't like the look of MSRs, which by the way is perfectly fine. Sort of like saying I don't like the look of the Chevy truck so I'll stick to my Ford. (Or vice versa if that's an issue). There is a semi-auto .30-06. The only reason the .308 was made was because the .30-06 has such a long cartridge that semi-auto mechanisms of the time had trouble being consistent. So a shorter case was made and welcome .308 (aka 7.62X51mm). It's just the natural evolution of anything really. At some point in their past even the guns you use were adapted from military service.

    Leave a comment:


  • Smitty of the North
    replied
    Originally posted by Akheloce View Post
    8477

    A very similar argument was made by Brigadier General James Ripley, chief of ordnance during the Civil War against the repeating rifle, although he tended to focus more on the wasted ammunition from people not aiming.

    8477

    You mean kinda like all those rimless cartridges chambered for that new fangled "Mauser PLATFORM?"
    With an Auto rifle and most pistols you gotta train yourself. After you pull that trigger and fire, it is not SAFE. Pulling it again, will fire again. There is no Cocking or chambering necessary FIRST. It's ready to GO.

    This makes me uncomfortable, but I have some Semi Automatic firearms.

    The ARs are a RADICAL DEPARTURE from even normal semi-autos, and comparisons with other designs just doesn't seem to work.

    I'm at a LOSS to explain the explosion in their popularity, and the continuation of it.

    Granted, they are an adaptation of the Military Svc Rifle, but it hasta be MORE than that. I rather think it's the Zoomie Look, lack of recoil, and the desire for protection.

    I read an account of someone who used his, actually didn't have to FIRE it, right after the hurricane in New Orleans. Just carrying it made ALL the difference in his situation.

    I think the AR, of any persuasion has a greater psychological effect than any other type of firearm, including a Tactical Lookin Shootgun.

    Any member of ones family could handle an AR. Not So, with a Shootgun.

    This is what I mean when I say "comparisons with other designs just doesn't seem to work."

    Smitty of the North

    Leave a comment:


  • limon32
    replied
    Something else o fun funny about the AR perceptions is that they are almost entirely made in America, at least the most popular stuff, which I would think would appeal to the old guys since most modern bolt guns are not. Perhaps they are just not aware of that?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    Leave a comment:


  • ADfields
    replied
    Originally posted by Smitty of the North View Post
    I imagine there is quite a list of cartridges chambered for the ARs or AR type action. Most of them are unique to that "PLATFORM".

    Smitty of the North
    Well I don't know about that . . . USDA Wildlife Service in Palmer has a very nice 458 SOCOM chambered bolt action. 223 has long been a popular bolt action round. We have 6 orders for the mini model 70 223 size actions chambered for 6.8 and I bet not long before someone wants a 458 built on one. I'm seeing more and more cross over of these AR rounds.

    Yea AR seems rock-n-roll to us old farts (remember "rock-n-roll has got to go"?) but face it . . . AR is just this generations'' 30-30 and every bit as useful all be it ugly to the older guys eye.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mobius
    replied
    Originally posted by Smitty of the North View Post
    Perhaps, there is a perception that an Automatic (Semi) Rifle with a high capacity magazine will result in more wounded game and more dead or injured hunters. ?????
    Point of clarification, and maybe you already know this, AR doesn't stand for Automatic Rifle. It's ARmalite or Armalite Rifle. It's just the two letter designation for the Armalite company that first patented the rifle. Originally it was made as an AR-10 (in .308) and then modified to be the AR-15 (in 5.56). In it's first design it was a semi-auto. When the military added it as the M-16 the company converted it to automatic. And maybe you know that, but it's an important distinction.

    Originally posted by Smitty of the North View Post
    As to "ergonomics", I see no comparison with a Traditional Rifles, at all. Not even with a Thumbhole stocked rifle. The notable thing about the "ergonomics" of an AR is the LACK of it.

    Now, imagine an AR (223, the Light one) used by a Feescherman for Bar protection, (They'll keel anything ya know.) and he's got the "platform" hanging in front of his mighty chest, while he's Fishing. The blame thing is in the way.

    Smitty of the North
    I won't argue ergonomics because that's really a preference thing only. The .223 for bear protection is the realm of caliber appropriateness. I doubt I'd be the first to grab a .223 in hopes of protection against a bear, but a .458Socom? Sure. Personally, I'd just grab the 12 Ga, but that's me.

    Originally posted by Smitty of the North View Post
    Having HISTORICALLY been on the receiving end of many of IO's characterizations, I would note that just saying that something is "inappropriate" is so MILD that only an extremely sensitive platform owner should take offense. I've been callin them "Platforms" for awhile and that's probably worse. Should I be watchin my back?.

    As to appropriateness, I think by and large, he is correct. The tiny cartridge is inappropriate for expected normal uses here in the greatland. Of course, you can jump through a buncha hoops and redesign it or larger cartridges, or design larger cartridges to fit. Both options have already been done and are available.

    And/or you can FIND an appropriate use, for them.

    "Human nature being what it is" (quote for his post), If someone has an AR and likes to shoot it, he will always attempt to find something to shoot at and game of some sort is Fair Game. Or unfair game.

    Smitty of the North
    I do want to be clear, my point wasn't to say that IO was "out of line" or anything that serious. I personally wasn't offended at all. I was simply pointing out the small little things that get under people's skin. Sort of like the Mother in Law saying to her daughter "I love you so much even though you can't make meatloaf." It's the little things that slip out that are not intended, but still dig in.

    The caliber thing, to me, has nothing to do with the rifle. Using an appropriate caliber for the game is important. And if that means you can't use an MSR? So be it. But there's nothing wrong with using an MSR if you choose to and can get a caliber that is appropriate. Sure, many of the caliber are more prevelant in the MSR category, I'll agree. But many of those calibers were developed to provide the same or similar characteristics to non-MSR based calibers. Is it adapting something to a different purpose? Sure, but let's be honest, so was the original bolt guns, no? Oh and by the way, full disclosure, I don't hunt with an MSR. I prefer a BA .308 my self. I just don't see the point to telling someone else they can't. I'd love to try going after caribou with a .300 BLK AR, but that's not likely to happen.

    Leave a comment:


  • Akheloce
    replied
    8477
    Originally posted by Smitty of the North

    Perhaps, there is a perception that an Automatic (Semi) Rifle with a high capacity magazine will result in more wounded game and more dead or injured hunters. ?????


    Smitty of the North
    A very similar argument was made by Brigadier General James Ripley, chief of ordnance during the Civil War against the repeating rifle, although he tended to focus more on the wasted ammunition from people not aiming.

    8477
    Originally posted by Smitty of the North

    I imagine there is quite a list of cartridges chambered for the ARs or AR type action. Most of them are unique to that "PLATFORM".

    Smitty of the North
    You mean kinda like all those rimless cartridges chambered for that new fangled "Mauser PLATFORM?"

    Leave a comment:


  • Smitty of the North
    replied
    Originally posted by Akheloce View Post
    Smitty I think you might misunderstand the different AR's with respect to weight. The 458 Socom is for the lighter AR-15 platform. The 308 sized one is indeed heavy.

    think of it as short action 308 length vs shorterer action .223 length. The 458 Socom is negligibly heavier than the 223 as the barrel is the only thing different.
    I'm sure you're right. I know only those things that I hear from guys at the range, and I don't often ask questions about them.

    I imagine there is quite a list of cartridges chambered for the ARs or AR type action. Most of them are unique to that "PLATFORM".

    There is even a Muzzle Loader AR. http://www.gunsholstersandgear.com/2...-muzzleloader/

    You guys have created MONSTERS. Where will it end??

    Smitty of the North

    Leave a comment:


  • Akheloce
    replied
    Smitty I think you might misunderstand the different AR's with respect to weight. The 458 Socom is for the lighter AR-15 platform. The 308 sized one is indeed heavy.

    think of it as short action 308 length vs shorterer action .223 length. The 458 Socom is negligibly heavier than the 223 as the barrel is the only thing different.

    Leave a comment:


  • Smitty of the North
    replied
    Originally posted by Mobius View Post
    I'm no expert, but I wonder if the reason some AR fans feel "victimized" is evidenced in the bold below.



    Define inappropriate. See to me, appropriateness for a task is strictly the realm of a caliber and has little to do with the action. In the sense that it would be inappropriate to hunt large game such as bull moose with a .22 short. The action of a firearm and the shape and style of it have nothing to do with it being appropriate for a task. Modern sporting rifles are simply the next step along the path of hunting firearms. Some people choose to use msr's to hunt, some people choose to not use them. There is no appropriateness involved. Choosing the appropriate caliber/round to humanely take game is the realm of "appropriate." Don't get me wrong, I understand the point of the post. It's the little side dig that I think raises the red flag of "victim" to some. For me, it doesn't matter. I don't honestly care one rat's patootie what some one else thinks of my choices to hunt with. If the round I choose will do the job and people don't like the shape of the rifle, tough cookies.

    As to the .458 SOCOM, well it's purely my opinion that rounds like that are used when someone wants a new challenge. Some people are happy spending their entire lives shooting the same round out of the same gun using the same formula. That's awesome. Some people get tired of the same thing over and over and want something different. So enter the "boutique" rounds. Ones that aren't mainstream but offer something different. I know a guy who built a .300 blackout for hunting caribou. He's "done it all" and wanted something different for a change. He's also building a .458 SOCOM to hunt Moose for the same reason. It's less about the gun itself or even the caliber. It's about the challenge of tinkering and making something you out together work.

    Well, that's my opinions anyway. Which I know are about as valuable as a used newspaper.
    Having HISTORICALLY been on the receiving end of many of IO's characterizations, I would note that just saying that something is "inappropriate" is so MILD that only an extremely sensitive platform owner should take offense. I've been callin them "Platforms" for awhile and that's probably worse. Should I be watchin my back?.

    As to appropriateness, I think by and large, he is correct. The tiny cartridge is inappropriate for expected normal uses here in the greatland. Of course, you can jump through a buncha hoops and redesign it or larger cartridges, or design larger cartridges to fit. Both options have already been done and are available.

    And/or you can FIND an appropriate use, for them.

    "Human nature being what it is" (quote for his post), If someone has an AR and likes to shoot it, he will always attempt to find something to shoot at and game of some sort is Fair Game. Or unfair game.

    Smitty of the North

    Leave a comment:


  • Smitty of the North
    replied
    Originally posted by Mobius View Post
    Many of the comments about the AR for hunting seem to be about the capacity. IE, like rbuck351 saying "One of my biggest complaints is the many of folks that use them seem to think that volume of fire will make up for poor shooting ability." I'm not attacking anyone, so I hope this doesn't come across that way.

    The assumption here is that people can only hunt with 30 round magazines or whatever. This is the assumption that anti-gun dingleberries use to attack standard capacity magazines for all guns. It's gets under my skin more than anything. Why make that assumption to begin with? It's just as easy to go hunting with a 5 round magazine in an AR style rifle. Having an AR doesn't necessitate that it's because the shooter needs more rounds. The flexibility is that you can use a 5 round or a 30 round depending on the job at hand. Helicopter hunting for hogs I'd be willing to bet you want as many rounds as you can jam into a magazine. Silent stalking big game through rough terrain you may only need 1 or 2 shots. But the nice thing is, you have the choice. Hunters who use capacity to replace accuracy exist whether they have an AR or a 10/22 or even a BA rifle. The idea that people only choose MSR's because they "need a lot of bullets" is false. Why do we keep propagating it?

    Weight is also a misconception. It's funny, I read the "how heavy is too heavy" thread and see the weights bandied about in there and think, well an AR isn't much different. It's not like they weigh 25 lbs. and up. The lightest AR I've ever seen weighs in at 4.9 lbs only missing the scope. I guess the old fashioned iron block AR is still stuck in the mindset. Sure some weigh more, some weigh less. To me it's all about ergonomics. A lot of people rightfully don't like the ergonomics of the AR style rifles. No beef there. But, a lot of people put thumb hole stocks and cheek risers on BA rifles and end up with the same ergonomics in the end...
    Clearly, you AR peoples are terribly misunderstood.

    It is the ARs that are designed for the 308 and other cartridges more powerful than the 223, that might be considered too heavy.

    Perhaps, there is a perception that an Automatic (Semi) Rifle with a high capacity magazine will result in more wounded game and more dead or injured hunters. ?????

    As to "ergonomics", I see no comparison with a Traditional Rifles, at all. Not even with a Thumbhole stocked rifle. The notable thing about the "ergonomics" of an AR is the LACK of it.

    Shucky Gee, so many of them have rails and grooves on 4 sides so all kinds of accessories can be hung on'em, every whichaway. (Scary Mon.) I've never seen so many angles and dangles, on any other rifle, that wasn't designed strictly for Battle.

    I'm not wild about Thumbhole stocks, but I could at least put a sling on one and hang it over my shoulder.

    Now, imagine an AR (223, the Light one) used by a Feescherman for Bar protection, (They'll keel anything ya know.) and he's got the "platform" hanging in front of his mighty chest, while he's Fishing. The blame thing is in the way.

    Of course, he could stuff it down into he front of his chest waders, but than might be uncomfortable. Or, take the stock off and carry it in a holster on his strong side Hip, but if that is a good idea, why come we don't see holsters made for such, including scopes which are mounted maybe 4 inches above the barrel.

    Ya gotta ANALYZE this stuff.

    Smitty of the North

    Leave a comment:


  • mike h
    replied
    Sounds very "Texas"

    Leave a comment:


  • Mobius
    replied
    Originally posted by mike h View Post
    Helicopter hunting for hogs!

    Don't know what to say about that.
    In southern areas, like Texas, it's a near necessity. The feral hog population causes billions in crop damage every year. So they legalized pretty much any means necessary to cut the population down. Night vision, no limits, baiting, helicopters, anything to stop the damage.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sx66ys4JG5o

    Looks fun too.

    Leave a comment:

Footer Adsense

Collapse
Working...
X