Pennsylvania Firearm Owners Association
Page 10 of 12 FirstFirst ... 6789101112 LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 119
  1. #91
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Montgomery County, Pennsylvania
    (Montgomery County)
    Posts
    397
    Rep Power
    372195

    Default Re: 5.56 vs. 7.62x39

    Quote Originally Posted by arjohnson View Post
    Compared to the 2 listed by the op there is no advantage, consider cost of mags, ammo, guns
    Cost is not a primary consideration for everyone.

    I have a PS90 and a whole bunch of ammo for it. It's a handy little thing. I like the fact that each mag holds 50 rounds. It's totally reliable; never so much as a hiccup. But if the SHTF, I'll probably hand it to my daughter, while I grab an AR..

  2. #92
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    lebanon, Pennsylvania
    (Lebanon County)
    Posts
    379
    Rep Power
    410544

    Default Re: 5.56 vs. 7.62x39

    Quote Originally Posted by animalmother85 View Post
    We are?

    5.45mm = .214"

    The modern 5.56's questionable stopping power mainly stems from internet commandos.
    According to several TV shows and magazines yes the US military is looking into replacing the 5.56. The 300 whisper and blackout are 2 of the possible choices.Special forces are now carrying 7.62NATO light machine guns instead of 5.56NATO light machine guns due to the lack of stopping power the 5.56 has. The 5.56 is very close to a 223 and a 223 is mainly used by hunters for groundhogs and other small to medium game.Look at ballistic gel test and the 5.56 comes no where close to a 30 caliber.It does have better range than a 7.62x39 but how many fire fights are even at long ranges?

  3. #93
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Nowhere Land, Pennsylvania
    (Westmoreland County)
    Posts
    4,954
    Rep Power
    5723755

    Default Re: 5.56 vs. 7.62x39

    Quote Originally Posted by herplover View Post
    According to several TV shows and magazines yes the US military is looking into replacing the 5.56. The 300 whisper and blackout are 2 of the possible choices.Special forces are now carrying 7.62NATO light machine guns instead of 5.56NATO light machine guns due to the lack of stopping power the 5.56 has. The 5.56 is very close to a 223 and a 223 is mainly used by hunters for groundhogs and other small to medium game.Look at ballistic gel test and the 5.56 comes no where close to a 30 caliber.It does have better range than a 7.62x39 but how many fire fights are even at long ranges?
    A few years ago the front runner to replace the 5.56 was the 6.8 SPC.

    Now it's the "whisper" and "blackout".

    Next year it will be something else.

  4. #94
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Kepler-22b
    Posts
    3,760
    Rep Power
    2946389

    Default Re: 5.56 vs. 7.62x39

    Quote Originally Posted by herplover View Post
    According to several TV shows and magazines yes the US military is looking into replacing the 5.56. The 300 whisper and blackout are 2 of the possible choices.Special forces are now carrying 7.62NATO light machine guns instead of 5.56NATO light machine guns due to the lack of stopping power the 5.56 has. The 5.56 is very close to a 223 and a 223 is mainly used by hunters for groundhogs and other small to medium game.Look at ballistic gel test and the 5.56 comes no where close to a 30 caliber.It does have better range than a 7.62x39 but how many fire fights are even at long ranges?
    Listen boss, I'm not trying to sound like I'm king shit or that I know everything about what's going on within the military, but I do know what SF units are using from first hand experience. The primary weapon is still the M4A1 in SOPMOD II clothing. I know what you're thinking about the Mk17, but not every swinging dick has one, not even half. There was some chatter about implementing a new rifle which in turn became hype, but that's it.
    Most of our engagements in South West Asian were beyond the 300 meter mark.
    Quote Originally Posted by dkf View Post
    Official Gun Bully and corn flakes pisser inner since March 2007.

  5. #95
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Enola, Pennsylvania
    (Cumberland County)
    Posts
    1,069
    Rep Power
    516738

    Default Re: 5.56 vs. 7.62x39

    I do think the biggest advantage to the 5.7 is the ability to have interchangeable ammo and mags between your rifle and handgun. However, as a whole, I'm really not a fan of the caliber. I don't know much about it. I have very little interest in it. Admittedly, I've never shot a gun chambered in 5.7, but other than what I just stated and what Valorius has stated many times about interchangeability, I personally see no other advantages other than you will have a handgun that can defeat body armor with an FN FiveseveN.

    I don't have any personal experience with 5.7, I just go by those that do... the 5.7 is said to be a rather poor performer. I'm not for or against the 5.7mm. I do know that I don't want to get shot by it. I've never really looked into it because it's never peaked my interest. I don't have a clue how it's supposed to act terminally, whether is frags or what... Would I feel well armed with a gun chambered in 5.7mm? Probably. I'd feel adequately armed, depending on my situation with a .22LR. In war ( ), I'd rather have a REAL rifle caliber, 5.56 being the minimum.

    Here is a link I got from the same knowledgeable and experienced source I got the 5.56 and 7.62x39 info from.
    http://m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=19913

    More on the 5.56 from the experienced...
    http://m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=96260
    I have no strong opinions or empirical data that lean one way or another. I will tell you however, and you will have to read between the lines on this one, I do not have an issue with the current 5.56.

    On numerous occasions I have generated positive results with the current load and was personally never put in a position that forced me to question my rifle or caliber (using good ammo BTW)nor were any of my team mates with whom I've deployed.
    Last edited by EvoRich; September 2nd, 2012 at 12:31 AM.

  6. #96
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Augusta, Georgia
    Age
    38
    Posts
    129
    Rep Power
    10300

    Default Re: 5.56 vs. 7.62x39

    Evo, not to jump on the bandwagon with Valorius but the 5.7 is an awesome round. What you hear from a lot of people is that they expect or believe the performance to be bad because it is a small round and us, being American, believe bigger is better. This is usually the case with pistol ammo, but you can't look at the 5.7x28mm as a pistol round. It is much more of the performance characteristics of a rifle round. This means when it hits a target, it doesn't kill through sheer force like a pistol round does. Instead, it creates a massive hydroshock cavity which will tear apart any "hard" organs nearby like the heart or the liver. I've heard it compared to a small bomb going off in your chest if that gives you a better idea.

    Long story short: 5.7x28mm has been proven in a scientific study to have similar killing potential to a .45 JHP. However it maintains its energy over a longer distance and since the bullet has a rifle design, is much more accurate over distance.

    Didn't mean to stand up on the soap box but the "poor performer" comment got under my skin. Lots of people out there bash the round without actually knowing its true capabilities.


    As for having a rifle round. I agree with you that having a rifle with a rifle cartridge is better for most situations. As for the 5.56 or 7.62, I refer you to my prior comment on the matter. Unlike a lot of people on this board (not bashing anybody), I have seen the effects of a 5.56 in a combat environment. The times I have seen somebody hit with the round, they tend to stop in their tracks and are either dead or are incapable of continuing to fight. Talk about stopping power or size of the round or anything else that you want. You cannot convince me that a 7.62 is better than a 5.56. They both do what they are intended to do and they both do it equally well.

  7. #97
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    New Castle, Pennsylvania
    (Lawrence County)
    Posts
    8,392
    Rep Power
    4021338

    Default Re: 5.56 vs. 7.62x39

    I've shot about 45+ big game animals. Critical tissue disruption is what kills. The first factor is shot placement. You need to hit the important tissue. After that you need to frag the most tissue you can to incapacitate. I typically shoot 140gr bullets at 3400fps and 160's at 3200 fps. These anchor deer and elk DRT. I can count maybe 6-7 that moved after the shot.

    The hunting crowd tends to favor bullets that penetrate through and bleed out the animal with minimal meat loss. These are your "premium" bullets. Bog game tend to run a ways after being shot. A human would be able to shoot back.

    A thinner diameter bullet made of full copper like the Barnes or a good bonded bullet has better sectional density than many larger diameter bullets. A Barnes .223 will outpenetrate a 150gr .300 win mag up close. I once pushed a 160gr Nosler Partition at 3200 and shot a deer at 40 yards.

    This is the entrance hole and and not very pretty. No exit. You've been warned. He never moved.

    http://members.bellatlantic.net/~jefwolfe/partition.JPG

    However....a 140 Barnes X can go through a moose end to end.......

    The military is generally limited to full metal jacket rounds. These don't typically displace a lot of tissue unless you push them fast enough to fragment. There is a LOT of opinion stated as fact simply based on .mil options.

    Luckily, you have more options. As a civilian, you have soft point or match ammo that fragments easily at relatively low velocity. In other words, you can frag bullets far beyond what the military can. There are many who are ignorant to this fact. The military is at a significant disadvantage when it comes to ammo in light weapons.

    So..both can easily do the job with available offerings. Perhaps it does come down to cost, recoil or ballistics. With that, you're on your own.

    Lycansomuchadothrope

    I taught Chuck Norris to bump-fire.

  8. #98
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Monroeville, Pennsylvania
    (Allegheny County)
    Posts
    6,650
    Rep Power
    21474859

    Default Re: 5.56 vs. 7.62x39

    Quote Originally Posted by Ewussor View Post
    Cost is not a primary consideration for everyone.

    I have a PS90 and a whole bunch of ammo for it. It's a handy little thing. I like the fact that each mag holds 50 rounds. It's totally reliable; never so much as a hiccup. But if the SHTF, I'll probably hand it to my daughter, while I grab an AR..
    Cost vs availability is more of what I'm thinking so that will favor 5.56 or 7.62x39 over the 5.7.

    I wouldn't mind having a 5.7 and may eventually get one, but the reason for getting it wouldn't be to replace an AR as a primary weapon.

  9. #99
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    South of Heaven
    Posts
    4,549
    Rep Power
    0

    Default Re: 5.56 vs. 7.62x39

    Quote Originally Posted by arjohnson View Post
    Cost vs availability is more of what I'm thinking so that will favor 5.56 or 7.62x39 over the 5.7.
    I agree that cost and availability are the two big drawbacks to 5.7mm. They will be for some time.

    I wouldn't mind having a 5.7 and may eventually get one, but the reason for getting it wouldn't be to replace an AR as a primary weapon.
    Since a lot of you lads are saying you don't know much about 5.7mm, please read the huge thread on it that's here on PAFOA. The thread has ballistics tests, ballistics reports from brassfetcher, gel tests, armor tests vs IIIA vests, tons of pictures and some actual gunfight results.

    http://forum.pafoa.org/gun-pictures-...en-pistol.html

    I started out as a 5.7mm skeptic, but the more i read, the more i was convinced. This caliber (and the HK 4.6mm) is used by dozens of elite forces around the world, and has been extensively combat tested in both the Mexican drug wars (where a Five Seven pistol fetches $5000 on the black market, and has been dubbed the "Matas Policia" by the mexican press) and the Global War on Terror.

    In both carbine or pistol form, it has a huge reduction in recoil compared to it's competitors. 30% less recoil than a 5.56mm carbine of equal mass, and 30% less recoil than a 9mm pistol of equal mass. This to me is the round's greatest edge.....you can fire it FAST and stay dead on target. Even a rank novice can score bullseye after bullseye at combat ranges with a P90 or other 5.7mm carbine. And the FN Five Seven pistol is equally easy to shoot when compared to a 9mm pistol. It's like shooting a .22LR target pistol....at 2000+ fps! Just dead nuts accurate and super easy to shoot fast.

    I actually did sell my AR to buy my Five Seven, after a whole lot of research.

    In a lot of ways, the Five seven is the "new glock", in that when it was first introduced, almost everyone was a skeptic. Now, 30 years later, look how popular the glock is. The Five Seven pistol was only introduced to the public in 2004. I would say that after 8 years, it has won a lot of converts, especially given it's price. IMO, in 20 to 30 years, all cops will carry a sidearm chambered in a PDW caliber, and odds are, will have a carbine to match in the trunk.

    Both HK's 4.6mm and FN's 5.7mm are very popular with police and elite forces all over the world, and they're getting more popular every day.

    Quote Originally Posted by herplover View Post
    According to several TV shows and magazines yes the US military is looking into replacing the 5.56. The 300 whisper and blackout are 2 of the possible choices.Special forces are now carrying 7.62NATO light machine guns instead of 5.56NATO light machine guns due to the lack of stopping power the 5.56 has. The 5.56 is very close to a 223 and a 223 is mainly used by hunters for groundhogs and other small to medium game.Look at ballistic gel test and the 5.56 comes no where close to a 30 caliber.It does have better range than a 7.62x39 but how many fire fights are even at long ranges?
    Actually if you do look at both ballistics tests and actual combat, the 5.56mm Mk262 is an extremely devastating round.

    I would rather get hit with a 7.62mm M80 ball, or even a US M1 .30-06 than a 5.56mm Mk262. The damage the Mk262 does is far, far more extensive (and irreparable) than that caused by US .30 caliber military ammo.

    Mk262 causes massive tissue detachment which is not readily surgically repairable. IOW, you get hit, and you're fucked.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ewussor View Post
    Cost is not a primary consideration for everyone.

    I have a PS90 and a whole bunch of ammo for it. It's a handy little thing. I like the fact that each mag holds 50 rounds. It's totally reliable; never so much as a hiccup. But if the SHTF, I'll probably hand it to my daughter, while I grab an AR..
    And that would be a good move, because the super light weight and recoil of the P90 combined with it's small size makes it PERFECT for smaller people, whereas she would not perform as well with the AR as she does with the P90.
    Last edited by Valorius; September 2nd, 2012 at 09:46 AM.

  10. #100
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    South of Heaven
    Posts
    4,549
    Rep Power
    0

    Default Re: 5.56 vs. 7.62x39

    Quote Originally Posted by TXDMERC73 View Post
    Your forgetting reliability and durablility, AK trumps 57 and 5.56 in reliability which counts as something.
    Based on what?

    The 5.7mm weapons are straight blow back designs, very simple, and are extremely reliable.

    AR vs AK, i'll give the reliability nod to the AK...but AK's jam too, even in combat.

    ACTUAL EXAMPLE:

    One of the North Hollywood bank robbers was forced to blow his own brains out with his sidearm when his AK jammed on him.

    Had he had a 5.7mm carbine/pistol combo, even if his carbine did jam, he'd have a pistol with 100 meter range, 30rd capacity, almost no recoil, that can easily defeat the IIIA vests that the cops he was facing were wearing, and that fired the same ammo from the same mags as his carbine did.

    Huge real world difference, right?

    Quote Originally Posted by TonyF View Post
    No offense to the OP but I find this topic even more tiresome than the accu-wedge thread.

    It's all about "software", not "hardware".

    Whichever caliber or platform you choose, becoming proficient with it is the key.
    That does not mean that technology has not advanced to give the shooter more advantages.

    Would you take a Kentucky Long Rifle into battle? Or a Henry Rifle? How about an '03 springfield?

    Sure, skill is good, but the hardware is very, very important too.
    Last edited by Valorius; September 2nd, 2012 at 10:14 AM.

Page 10 of 12 FirstFirst ... 6789101112 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. 7.62x39 for .380 ACP
    By zachomega in forum General
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: March 26th, 2009, 08:39 PM
  2. Well, i did it 7.62x39
    By Guns4Fun in forum General
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: February 20th, 2009, 10:20 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •