@tsarstepan,
tsarstepan wrote:I never said it would be a practical gun but it sure would be slick to look at!
As Seed indicated, it coud very well be a practical gun,
if mounted to protect the gunner from recoil.
Obviously, the diameter of the slug will not hurt the gunner;
its the amount of powder that is inserted behind it in its shell.
Historically, larger caliber slugs have had more powder put behind them.
The rest is up to Isaac Newton and his 3rd Law of Motion.
So far as I 'm aware no sniper 's rifle has exceeded .50 caliber.
Some of these rifles (for shoulder use) are of very advanced design,
with a great deal of very careful, precise and creative engineering built into them
after experimentation and with good results at long distances; around 1.5 miles,
but thay r not necessrily slick in appearance.
Some of them look like boxy, cumbersome machines that get the job done effectively.
Some of their mfgrs. call them "weapons systems" rather than a rifle.
Thay have multiple accessories, including bi-pod or tri-pod braces and hand-held computers.
My prize for best slick appearance of any gun (not for sniping)
woud go to Georg Luger for his P-'08. I have one from 1940 in my collection,
most of which consists of revolvers.
David