Results 21 to 30 of 119
Thread: 5.56 vs. 7.62x39
-
August 31st, 2012, 03:05 PM #21
-
August 31st, 2012, 03:07 PM #22Banned
- Join Date
- May 2011
- Location
-
South of Heaven
- Posts
- 4,549
- Rep Power
- 0
Re: 5.56 vs. 7.62x39
5.56mm penetrates most things better than 7.62mm, including clothes. Less frontal area and more velocity.
Mk262 Mod1 does just as much damage as any of the rounds listed here, and has other advantages that no .30 cal is going to match, Most specifically how much you can carry, and recoil level.
The only people that still think 7.62x39mm is superior to good fragmenting 5.56mm in an all around comparison dwell on gun forums.
By the way, this statement:
Originally Posted by Asmodeous
85% of all battlefield casualties are caused by fragments. Historically, less than 5% of battlefield casualties are caused by small arms OF ALL TYPES COMBINED. The overwhelming majority of casualties are caused by artillery fire, hence it's nickname, "King of the battlefield."Last edited by Valorius; August 31st, 2012 at 03:13 PM.
-
August 31st, 2012, 03:08 PM #23
-
August 31st, 2012, 03:11 PM #24Banned
- Join Date
- May 2011
- Location
-
South of Heaven
- Posts
- 4,549
- Rep Power
- 0
Re: 5.56 vs. 7.62x39
Notice that NO military force is replacing 5.56mm with .30 cal anything in their primary infantry rifles.
As in: No one on the entire planet. Including US SOCOM. What .30 blackout is awesome for is suppressed mission requirements. That is definitely not a strength of the small bore calibers because the velocity limit of about 1100fps gives a huge advantage to projectiles with more mass.Last edited by Valorius; August 31st, 2012 at 03:15 PM.
-
August 31st, 2012, 03:15 PM #25
-
August 31st, 2012, 03:18 PM #26Banned
- Join Date
- May 2011
- Location
-
South of Heaven
- Posts
- 4,549
- Rep Power
- 0
Re: 5.56 vs. 7.62x39
.458 SOCOM or .50 Beowulf is great if you want a 10rd rifle, you only want to be able to carry about 71rds, and you don't want the ability to penetrate any sort of modern infantry armor.
Given the choice between a P90 or a M4, i'd pick a P90...and that bullet is even smaller than 5.56mm. (5.7x28mm vs 5.56x45mm).Last edited by Valorius; August 31st, 2012 at 03:23 PM.
-
August 31st, 2012, 03:27 PM #27
Re: 5.56 vs. 7.62x39
Come on guys....
Before the mods bust out the infraction/ban hammer, can we please get this thread back on track without the pi$$ing contest?
Please?Soap Box - Worn out : Ballot Box - Broken : Jury Box - Pending : Ammunition Box - Unknown
-
August 31st, 2012, 03:27 PM #28
-
August 31st, 2012, 03:28 PM #29
Re: 5.56 vs. 7.62x39
Look out I'm quoting Wikipedia now. I'm still looking into the 600meter .308 vs 5.56 thing.
There has been much criticism of the poor performance of the bullet on target, especially the first-shot kill rate when the muzzle velocity of the firearms used and the downrange bullet deceleration do not achieve the minimally required terminal velocity at the target to cause fragmentation.[19] This wounding problem has been cited in incidents beginning in the first Gulf war, Somalia, and in the current conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. In recent lab testing of M855, it has been shown that the bullets do not fragment reliably or consistently from round-to-round, displaying widely variable performance. In several cases, yawing did not begin until 7–10 in of penetration. This was with all rounds coming from the same manufacturer.[19] This lack of wounding capacity typically becomes an increasingly significant issue as range increases (e.g., ranges over 50 m when using an M4 or 200 m when using an M16) or when penetrating heavy clothing, but this problem is compounded in shorter-barreled weapons. The 14.5 inches (37 cm) barrel of the U.S. military's M4 carbine generates considerably less initial velocity than the longer 20" barrel found on the M16, and terminal performance can be a particular problem with the M4.
Combat operations the past few months have again highlighted terminal performance deficiencies with 5.56×45mm 62 gr. M855 FMJ. These problems have primarily been manifested as inadequate incapacitation of enemy forces despite them being hit multiple times by M855 bullets. These failures appear to be associated with the bullets exiting the body of the enemy soldier without yawing or fragmenting.
This failure to yaw and fragment can be caused by reduced impact velocities as when fired from short barrel weapons or when the range increases. It can also occur when the bullets pass through only minimal tissue, such as a limb or the torso of a thin, small statured individual, as the bullet may exit the body before it has a chance to yaw and fragment. In addition, bullets of the SS109/M855 type are manufactured by many countries in numerous production plants.
Although all SS109/M855 types must be 62 gr. FMJ bullets constructed with a steel penetrator in the nose, the composition, thickness, and relative weights of the jackets, penetrators, and cores are quite variable, as are the types and position of the cannelures. Because of the significant differences in construction between bullets within the SS109/M855 category, terminal performance is quite variable—with differences noted in yaw, fragmentation, and penetration depths. Luke Haag's papers in the AFTE Journal (33(1):11–28, Winter 2001) also describes this problem.
—[19]
Despite complaints that the 5.56 round lacks stopping power, others contend that animal studies of the wounding effects of the 5.56×45mm round versus the 7.62×39mm have found that the 5.56 mm round is more damaging, due to the post-impact behavior of the 5.56 mm projectile resulting in greater cavitation of soft tissues.[20] The US Army contended in 2003 that the lack of close range lethality of the 5.56×45mm was more a matter of perception than fact. With controlled pairs and good shot placement to the head and chest, the target was usually defeated without issue. The majority of failures were the result of hitting the target in non-vital areas such as extremities. However, a minority of failures occurred in spite of multiple hits to the chest.[2We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately.-Benjamin Franklin
-
August 31st, 2012, 03:29 PM #30
Similar Threads
-
7.62x39 for .380 ACP
By zachomega in forum GeneralReplies: 0Last Post: March 26th, 2009, 08:39 PM -
Well, i did it 7.62x39
By Guns4Fun in forum GeneralReplies: 9Last Post: February 20th, 2009, 10:20 PM
Bookmarks