Pennsylvania Firearm Owners Association
HB80 Signed by Governor Corbett!

Thanks to everyone's support of this bill, it has been signed into law by Governor Corbett. Municipalities can now be held liable for firearms laws on the books which are in direct violation of the state's preemption laws. To link to continuing discussion on the new law, CLICK HERE


Go Back   Pennsylvania Firearm Owners Association Discussion Forum > Discussion > Firearms > Ammunition & Reloading

Notices

PAFOA Sponsors Businesses that provide financial and technical support to PAFOA. PAFOA Shopping Partners A percentage of all sales made through these partner links goes to PAFOA.
Arms Dealer Logo

Arms Dealer — Free Firearm Classifieds, Gun Shop & Shooting Range Reviews

Arms Dealer is your one-stop shop for free firearm classifieds, gun shop & shooting range reviews.

Join today to start buying, selling and reviewing!


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51 (permalink)  
Old September 1st, 2012, 02:30 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location:
lebanon, Pennsylvania
(Lebanon County)
Posts: 328
Rep Power: 5686
herplover has a reputation beyond reputeherplover has a reputation beyond reputeherplover has a reputation beyond reputeherplover has a reputation beyond reputeherplover has a reputation beyond reputeherplover has a reputation beyond reputeherplover has a reputation beyond reputeherplover has a reputation beyond reputeherplover has a reputation beyond reputeherplover has a reputation beyond reputeherplover has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: 5.56 vs. 7.62x39

Quote:
Originally Posted by Valorius View Post
If the 7.62x39mm was all that great the Russkies themselves would not have switched away from it, what, almost 40 years ago? 5.45x39mm is a much better all around caliber than 7.62x39mm IMO.
By the same token USA is trying to replace the 5.56 due to its question of stopping power with a lot of units preferring the 7.62NATO even though ammunition is heavier to carry.
The soviets switching from the 7.62x39 was probably more politically motivated than it was the 7.62 not being able to do the job. USA/NATO had a 22 center fire as their main ammunition so the soviets made one of their own.
Reply With Quote

Thanks for visiting our forum! If you ever plan to return you should consider quickly registering for a forum account, especially if you're in Pennsylvania. It's simple to do and best of all free. Once registered you'll be able to participate in our discussions and keep up to date on issues important to Pennsylvania firearm owners!

  #52 (permalink)  
Old September 1st, 2012, 02:46 PM
animalmother85's Avatar
Grand Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location:
Kepler-22b
Posts: 2,911
Rep Power: 429203
animalmother85 has a reputation beyond reputeanimalmother85 has a reputation beyond reputeanimalmother85 has a reputation beyond reputeanimalmother85 has a reputation beyond reputeanimalmother85 has a reputation beyond reputeanimalmother85 has a reputation beyond reputeanimalmother85 has a reputation beyond reputeanimalmother85 has a reputation beyond reputeanimalmother85 has a reputation beyond reputeanimalmother85 has a reputation beyond reputeanimalmother85 has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to animalmother85
Default Re: 5.56 vs. 7.62x39

Quote:
Originally Posted by herplover View Post
By the same token USA is trying to replace the 5.56 due to its question of stopping power with a lot of units preferring the 7.62NATO even though ammunition is heavier to carry.
The soviets switching from the 7.62x39 was probably more politically motivated than it was the 7.62 not being able to do the job. USA/NATO had a 22 center fire as their main ammunition so the soviets made one of their own.
We are?

5.45mm = .214"

The modern 5.56's questionable stopping power mainly stems from internet commandos.
__________________
Hit it with your purse.
Reply With Quote
  #53 (permalink)  
Old September 1st, 2012, 03:19 PM
RXM's Avatar
RXM RXM is offline
Grand Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location:
Hueco Mundo, Pennsylvania
(Montgomery County)
Posts: 1,758
Rep Power: 258616
RXM has a reputation beyond reputeRXM has a reputation beyond reputeRXM has a reputation beyond reputeRXM has a reputation beyond reputeRXM has a reputation beyond reputeRXM has a reputation beyond reputeRXM has a reputation beyond reputeRXM has a reputation beyond reputeRXM has a reputation beyond reputeRXM has a reputation beyond reputeRXM has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: 5.56 vs. 7.62x39

Quote:
Originally Posted by animalmother85 View Post
The modern 5.56's questionable stopping power mainly stems from internet commandos.
Completely untrue! I heard from a friend that has a friend that's a Navy SEAL that the 5.56 is not an effective round. Everyone wants the 6.8 SPC.







[/sarcasm]
Reply With Quote
  #54 (permalink)  
Old September 1st, 2012, 04:22 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location:
South of Heaven
Posts: 4,548
Rep Power: 0
Valorius has a reputation beyond reputeValorius has a reputation beyond reputeValorius has a reputation beyond reputeValorius has a reputation beyond reputeValorius has a reputation beyond reputeValorius has a reputation beyond reputeValorius has a reputation beyond reputeValorius has a reputation beyond reputeValorius has a reputation beyond reputeValorius has a reputation beyond reputeValorius has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: 5.56 vs. 7.62x39

Quote:
Originally Posted by animalmother85 View Post
Just curious; who here has actually seen the damage that any of the bullets stated in this thread have done to human tissue? There's allot of hypotheticals being thrown around about barrel length, velocity, and bullet design. The biggest factor is bullet design.
In one engagement in the Western Iraqi desert, a 3 man SOCOM sniper team using SPR's loaded with Mk262 ammo took out an entire company of Iraqi infantry without loss at ranges as long as 600 meters.

I believe they scored 180 kills using their Mk12's and Mk262. It's been a while since i read about it, but the round is absolutely battlefield proven.

You can look at the wound profile chart i posted in my first post in this thread, and see that Mk262 is one seriously devastating round.

Quote:
Originally Posted by herplover View Post
By the same token USA is trying to replace the 5.56 due to its question of stopping power with a lot of units preferring the 7.62NATO even though ammunition is heavier to carry.
The soviets switching from the 7.62x39 was probably more politically motivated than it was the 7.62 not being able to do the job. USA/NATO had a 22 center fire as their main ammunition so the soviets made one of their own.
The US military has zero short term or mid range plans to replace 5.56mm as the primary infantry caliber of it's forces.

In fact both the USMC and USA just invested a whole lot of money coming out with modernized (and highly effective) 5.56mm ammo. Mk318SOST for the USMC, and M855A1 for the USA.

Some folks need to understand, in military trim both M193 and Mk262 do MUCH more damage than M80 or M118 7.62mm ball ammuniton. It's really not even close.

Personally, I think that 5.7x28mm is an even better short range/CQB round than 5.56 or 5.45mm for the same reason that 5.56/5.45mm is better than 7.62mm. Less recoil (a whole lot less) and much lighter and more compact ammo. You can carry about 30% more 5.7mm ammo than 5.56mm, and it recoils about 30% less too. With top performing 5.7x28mm rounds you get a tumbling and jacket fragmentation effect that is comparable to 5.56mm type fragmenting ammo.

If 5.7mm is good enough to protect the White House and the Queen of England, it's good enough to protect me too.

@Evorich: 5.56mm is vastly superior at armor penetration when compared to 7.62x39mm. In fact some 5.56mm is superior to even 7.62x51mm NATO at armor penetration. As was already pointed out by another poster, US 5.56mm M855 will out penetrate US M80 7.62mm ball out to 500 or 600 meters. Either will significantly out penetrate low velocity 7.62x39mm ammo. M855 has even shown the ability to defeat some level IV trauma plates designed to stop .30-06 M2 AP rounds.

Last edited by Valorius; September 1st, 2012 at 05:24 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #55 (permalink)  
Old September 1st, 2012, 05:02 PM
7998's Avatar
Grand Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location:
My Castle/ Bucks County, Pennsylvania
Age: 39
Posts: 1,591
Rep Power: 747460
7998 has a reputation beyond repute7998 has a reputation beyond repute7998 has a reputation beyond repute7998 has a reputation beyond repute7998 has a reputation beyond repute7998 has a reputation beyond repute7998 has a reputation beyond repute7998 has a reputation beyond repute7998 has a reputation beyond repute7998 has a reputation beyond repute7998 has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: 5.56 vs. 7.62x39

Quote:
Originally Posted by Valorius View Post
In one engagement during the first Gulf War, in the Western Iraqi desert, a 3 man SOCOM sniper team using Mk12 SPR's loaded with Mk262 ammo took out an entire company of Iraqi infantry without loss at ranges as long as 600 meters.

I believe they scored 180 kills using their Mk12's and Mk262. It's been a while since i read about it, but the round is absolutely battlefield proven.

You can look at the wound profile chart i posted in my first post in this thread, and see that Mk262 is one seriously devastating round.


The US military has zero short term or mid range plans to replace 5.56mm as the primary infantry caliber of it's forces.

In fact both the USMC and USA just invested a whole lot of money coming out with modernized (and highly effective) 5.56mm ammo. Mk318SOST for the USMC, and M855A1 for the USA.

Some folks need to understand, in military trim both M193 and Mk262 do MUCH more damage than M80 or M118 7.62mm ball ammuniton. It's really not even close.

Personally, I think that 5.7x28mm is an even better short range/CQB round than 5.56 or 5.45mm for the same reason that 5.56/5.45mm is better than 7.62mm. Less recoil (a whole lot less) and much lighter and more compact ammo. You can carry about 30% more 5.7mm ammo than 5.56mm, and it recoils about 30% less too. With top performing 5.7x28mm rounds you get a tumbling and jacket fragmentation effect that is comparable to 5.56mm type fragmenting ammo.

If 5.7mm is good enough to protect the White House and the Queen of England, it's good enough to protect me too.

@Evorich: 5.56mm is vastly superior at armor penetration when compared to 7.62x39mm. In fact some 5.56mm is superior to even 7.62x51mm NATO at armor penetration. As was already pointed out by another poster, US 5.56mm M855 will out penetrate US M80 7.62mm ball out to 500 or 600 meters. Either will significantly out penetrate low velocity 7.62x39mm ammo. M855 has even shown the ability to defeat some level IV trauma plates designed to stop .30-06 M2 AP rounds.
Do you have a link to that? I looked and didn't find it, not doubting you just would be interested in reading it.

BTW just got back from the range guess what? You'll never believe this but some guy with his high dollar Delta or Daniels AR all topped with a $1500 acog jammed. Not only did it jam but it jammed twice. Brass cased Lake City, in fact when asked if he had fired some steel lately he quickly responded with "Never!". Imagine that
__________________
We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately.-Benjamin Franklin
Reply With Quote
  #56 (permalink)  
Old September 1st, 2012, 05:24 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location:
South of Heaven
Posts: 4,548
Rep Power: 0
Valorius has a reputation beyond reputeValorius has a reputation beyond reputeValorius has a reputation beyond reputeValorius has a reputation beyond reputeValorius has a reputation beyond reputeValorius has a reputation beyond reputeValorius has a reputation beyond reputeValorius has a reputation beyond reputeValorius has a reputation beyond reputeValorius has a reputation beyond reputeValorius has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: 5.56 vs. 7.62x39

From Guns & Ammo:


Black Hills' Mk 262 Mod 1


"He arose, and smote the Philistines until his hand was weary, and his hand clave unto the sword and the Lord wrought a great victory that day..."--II Samuel, 23:10

When a five-man Special Forces team looking for Scuds in Iraq ran into a reinforced Iraqi infantry company, the future looked grim for the Americans. Facing overwhelming odds, it was quickly decided that three men armed with sniper rifles would cover a hasty retreat back to the LZ. With these odds death--or worse--seemed certain.

Yet the ensuing firefight did not go as the Iraqis had planned. Rather than being overwhelmed, the three Americans instead put down a hail of highly accurate rifle fire. Advancing against this murderous wall, entire sections of Iraqi infantry were simply cut down. Screaming and rattling away with their Kalashnikovs on full auto, they were knocked from their feet by carefully aimed shots. When staggering losses finally broke their spirit, the surviving Iraqis either threw down their weapons or simply ran away. Scattered about lay the bodies of 167 of their comrades. The Iraqi dead lay in mute testimony to the Americans' tenacity and marksmanship skill.

With the criticism of poor terminal performance leveled by many on the 5.56x45, you would think those 167 Iraqis were cut down by 7.62mm M14s. Such was not the case. They fell to 5.56 Mk 12 sniper rifles firing 77-grain Mk 262 Open Tip Match ammunition. Developed to offer increased accuracy, range and improved terminal performance over the standard 62-grain M855 load, the Mk 262 has performed quite well in actual combat. This impressive combat record has stimulated a great deal of interest among civilian shooters, so we thought we'd take a look at this load and its Russian and Chinese counterparts.

(story continues at link)

http://archives.gunsandammo.com/cont...s-mk-262-mod-1

FROM AR15 AMMO ORACLE:

US M855 5.56mm vs US M80 7.62mm armor penetration:

Q. Isn't 7.62 NATO much better for long range penetration than 5.56 anyhow? Why would I want to use 5.56 when I could send 7.62 downrange instead?

Well, yes and no. For some penetration mediums like mild steel, M855 is actually superior. Consider a recent research report:

They certainly behave in a similar way when they encounter tissue at the right velocities, but they aren't exactly the same.

The SS-109 can penetrate the 3.45mm standard NATO steel plate to 640 meters, while the 7.62mm ball can only penetrate it to 620 meters. The U. S. steel helmet penetration results are even more impressive as the SS-109 can penetrate it up to 1,300 meters, while the 7.62mm ball cannot penetrate it beyond 800 meters.

The current production 7.6251mm NATO ball cartridge has remained unchanged since its adoption by NATO in 1953. As typified by the U. S. M80 ball and the Belgian M77 ball, this cartridge propels a 147-grain cupronickel-jacketed lead bullet at a muzzle velocity of 2,800 fps (848 mps). Total cartridge length and weight are 2.80 inches and 386 grains, respectively. Utilizing a standard 22-inch barrel with a rifling twist of one turn in twelve inches (M14 rifle), the maximum effective range of the 7.6251mm ball cartridge is listed as 620 meters (682 yards). The U. S. M80 and the Belgian M77 ball projectiles can penetrate the standard NATO 3.45 mm (.14 inch) thick steel plate up to a range of 620 meters and can penetrate one side of the U. S. steel helmet up to a range of 800 meters (880 yards). In barrier and fortification penetration tests, the 147 grain ball projectile can consistently penetrate two test building blocks.

The new SS-109 cartridge propels a heavier 62-grain semi-armor piercing projectile at an initial velocity of 3,050 fps (924 mps). The improved projectile contains a 10-grain .182 caliber hardened steel penetrator that ensures penetration at longer ranges.

The new projectile can penetrate the standard NATO 3.45mm steel plate up to a range of 640 meters (704 yards) and one side of the U. S. steel helmet up to a range of 1,300 meters (1430 yards). In tests of barrier and fortification penetration however, the steel penetrator of the SS-109 could not pierce any of the test building blocks.

The primary advantages of the intermediate power 5.5645mm NATO cartridge are summarized as follows: (1) the penetration and power of the SS-109 version are superior to the 7.62mm NATO and more than adequate for the 300-meter average combat range documented in actual battle (ORO studies): (2) the lower recoil generated by the 5.56mm cartridge allows more control during full automatic fire and therefore provides greater firepower to the individual soldier; (3) the lesser weight of the 5.56mm ammunition allows the individual soldier to carry more ammunition and other equipment; (4) the smaller size of the 5.56mm ammunition allows the use of smaller, lighter and more compact rifles and squad automatic weapons and; (5) the lethality of the 5.56mm projectile is greater than the 7.62mm projectile at normal combat ranges, due to the tendency of the lighter projectile to tumble or shatter on impact. In summary, the 5.56mm NATO provides greater firepower and effectiveness than the larger and heavier 7.62mm NATO. 5.56-mm NATO ammunition weight only 47% as much as 7.62 mm NATO ammunition.

However:

These comparisons however, do not consider the fact that the SS-109 uses a semi-armor piercing, steel-cored projectile, while the 7.62mm ball uses a relatively soft antipersonnel, lead-cored projectile. A semi-armor piercing 7.62mm caliber projectile, using second generation technology as the SS-109, would easily outperform the smaller SS-109 projectile in penetration tests at all ranges. With respect to barrier and fortification penetration tests, the 7.62mm ball projectile can consistently penetrate two test building blocks, while the SS-109 semi-armor piercing projectile cannot penetrate a single block.

http://ammo.ar15.com/ammo/project/term_762.html

Last edited by Valorius; September 1st, 2012 at 05:48 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #57 (permalink)  
Old September 1st, 2012, 06:02 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location:
South of Heaven
Posts: 4,548
Rep Power: 0
Valorius has a reputation beyond reputeValorius has a reputation beyond reputeValorius has a reputation beyond reputeValorius has a reputation beyond reputeValorius has a reputation beyond reputeValorius has a reputation beyond reputeValorius has a reputation beyond reputeValorius has a reputation beyond reputeValorius has a reputation beyond reputeValorius has a reputation beyond reputeValorius has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: 5.56 vs. 7.62x39

Full Mk262 Mod1 terminal ballistics summary from B&T ammunition laboratories.

http://ammo.ar15.com/project/Ballist...est6/Test6.htm

"In summary, the NATO 77 grain OTM round fills an important gap and we believe will substantially increase the terminal performance of 14.5" and 16" civilian weapons systems for practical self defense.

Other notes and observations:

Fragmentation was extensive enough to cause Dr. Brouhaha (hee!) to utter occasional profanities during the extraction process. This is generally a good indicator of high levels of terminal performance."
Reply With Quote
  #58 (permalink)  
Old September 1st, 2012, 06:10 PM
EvoRich's Avatar
Grand Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location:
Enola, Pennsylvania
(Cumberland County)
Posts: 1,028
Rep Power: 76770
EvoRich has a reputation beyond reputeEvoRich has a reputation beyond reputeEvoRich has a reputation beyond reputeEvoRich has a reputation beyond reputeEvoRich has a reputation beyond reputeEvoRich has a reputation beyond reputeEvoRich has a reputation beyond reputeEvoRich has a reputation beyond reputeEvoRich has a reputation beyond reputeEvoRich has a reputation beyond reputeEvoRich has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: 5.56 vs. 7.62x39

Quote:
Originally Posted by Valorius View Post
@Evorich: 5.56mm is vastly superior at armor penetration when compared to 7.62x39mm. In fact some 5.56mm is superior to even 7.62x51mm NATO at armor penetration. As was already pointed out by another poster, US 5.56mm M855 will out penetrate US M80 7.62mm ball out to 500 or 600 meters. Either will significantly out penetrate low velocity 7.62x39mm ammo. M855 has even shown the ability to defeat some level IV trauma plates designed to stop .30-06 M2 AP rounds.
You're right. But I was speaking more so of barriers rather than armor. The greater mass of the x39 will be much more effective through glass, walls, doors, car doors, etc. Though soft armor, 5.56 will be superior due to being smaller, and basically...pointier.

The 5.56 is just so light and small that once it hits, it wants to explode and loses a lot of energy.

The Mk318 5.56 is a great barrier blind load that does very well against glass but has the ability to fragment when no barrier is involved, unlike the M855. Other than the MK262, it's probably the best OTM non-special purpose military 5.56 you can get.

But when put up against tough barrier, a bigger heavier bullet will likely always be better.
Reply With Quote
  #59 (permalink)  
Old September 1st, 2012, 06:24 PM
EvoRich's Avatar
Grand Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location:
Enola, Pennsylvania
(Cumberland County)
Posts: 1,028
Rep Power: 76770
EvoRich has a reputation beyond reputeEvoRich has a reputation beyond reputeEvoRich has a reputation beyond reputeEvoRich has a reputation beyond reputeEvoRich has a reputation beyond reputeEvoRich has a reputation beyond reputeEvoRich has a reputation beyond reputeEvoRich has a reputation beyond reputeEvoRich has a reputation beyond reputeEvoRich has a reputation beyond reputeEvoRich has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: 5.56 vs. 7.62x39

Quote:
Originally Posted by animalmother85 View Post
The modern 5.56's questionable stopping power mainly stems from internet commandos.
I agree with this. Many people can't help but to think the 5.56 is "just a .22". When you hear reports from people actually using the ammo to actually fight bad people with, many have good things to say. Especially special forces guys using MK262. This round was originally developed for long range use out of mk12's, but when realized the effectiveness of it, guys started using it in their M4's and mk18's.

I know somebody personally who has seen what 5.56 and 7.62 does to people. I don't ask him detailed questions out of respect, but he's confident in his M4 and 5.56.

5.56 works. Is 7.62x51 better? For long range, most defiantly. For close quarters, for instance.... home defense, the only thing you'll notice is the difference in muzzle blast and recoil. I'd feel better using the 7.62x51 for 150-200 yards and further. But if I'm kicking down doors, I want 5.56. Thankfully, I'm not kicking down doors, nor am I sniping people. But I still prefer 5.56 to either x39 or x51 for real life defensive purposes. Not dream world, zombie SHTF crap where people think they'll be "legally" taking people at 100 yards and more

The great thing is, in the civilian market, we're able to use even better ammo than the military. Mk262 is a great round, but there is better. We're legally allowed to use expanding ammunition. An expanding 5.56 some experts believe are better than fragmenting 5.56 loads. The link I posted on page 5 lists many options that are highly regarded as the best choice available in 5.56. The downside, they're all VERY expensive.

Last edited by EvoRich; September 1st, 2012 at 06:27 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #60 (permalink)  
Old September 1st, 2012, 06:28 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location:
South of Heaven
Posts: 4,548
Rep Power: 0
Valorius has a reputation beyond reputeValorius has a reputation beyond reputeValorius has a reputation beyond reputeValorius has a reputation beyond reputeValorius has a reputation beyond reputeValorius has a reputation beyond reputeValorius has a reputation beyond reputeValorius has a reputation beyond reputeValorius has a reputation beyond reputeValorius has a reputation beyond reputeValorius has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: 5.56 vs. 7.62x39

Quote:
Originally Posted by EvoRich View Post
You're right. But I was speaking more so of barriers rather than armor. The greater mass of the x39 will be much more effective through glass, walls, doors, car doors, etc. Though soft armor, 5.56 will be superior due to being smaller, and basically...pointier.

The 5.56 is just so light and small that once it hits, it wants to explode and loses a lot of energy.

The Mk318 5.56 is a great barrier blind load that does very well against glass but has the ability to fragment when no barrier is involved, unlike the M855. Other than the MK262, it's probably the best OTM non-special purpose military 5.56 you can get.

But when put up against tough barrier, a bigger heavier bullet will likely always be better.
I agree with every word in your post.

I would advise everyone asking themselves this question to also ask, "Does a 5.7mm do everything i need done even better?"

In my estimation, it does.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
[Want To Buy] 7.62x39 wheeling365 Classifieds Archive 4 January 28th, 2012 08:08 PM
[CLOSED] 7.62x39 Saiga Power Classifieds Archive 0 October 6th, 2011 10:12 PM
[Want To Buy] 7.62x39 2303oa Classifieds Archive 0 December 28th, 2010 10:06 AM
7.62x39 for .380 ACP zachomega General 0 March 26th, 2009 07:39 PM
Well, i did it 7.62x39 Guns4Fun General 9 February 20th, 2009 09:20 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:30 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.2.0 ©2008, Crawlability, Inc.
Marketing Services provided by MergeMedia.
Local gun shops | Local shooting ranges | Philadelphia Shooting Ranges | Philadelphia Gun Shops | Pittsburgh Shooting Ranges | Pittsburgh Gun Shops