FNG / Fresh Meat
- Jun 14, 2006
I really did not get the Tomcat_ha
They do, but it comes with certain drawbacks, like bigger and heavier magazines, needing longer barrels to perform as intended, more recoil.. BR's are heavier, longer, and they aren't all that great at full-auto fire due to their recoil, hence they where replaced by the AR in the first place.battle rifle rounds can go through more wood which would be handy in ye woods.
That's exactly what i was talking about, a caliber somewhere between 6-7mm which can offer better stopping power and performance at range while still being light and handy to use.They do, but it comes with certain drawbacks, like bigger and heavier magazines, needing longer barrels to perform as intended, more recoil.. BR's are heavier, longer, and they aren't all that great at full-auto fire due to their recoil, hence they where replaced by the AR in the first place.
The real problem is that current AR's are too wimpy (5.56x45 or 5.45x39), they get good accuracy at range, but they have no real force left in them at ranges past 300~500 meters, so it's not really usefull.
What's really needed is a mix between the 7.62x39 and the 5.56x45, something with the more penetrating power of the 7mm and the better accuracy of the 5mm, so probably something in 6mm point something or other..
I've screwed around with an SL-8 before. I thought it felt flimsy and with a poor fit and finish. Left a bad taste in my mouth; I like a gun that can be used confidently.As a former user of the G36 i will just say it has its share of problems. Given a little familiarization I could see myself taking an HK416 over it and I am pretty confident the majority of active G36 users, of whom i know quite a few, would agree. Sig i have no idea. I bet you have years of experience with all of them right?
Concerning the Fedorov: the prototype cartridge was even stronger at over 3000 joules (compared to 2500 of the Arisaka), or in other words 7.62 NATO level. So there.
Tell me about it. I've lost 10 IQ points reading this thread alone.If i had a dollar for every AK vs M16 agrument i stumbled on id be able to afford both of them and provide myself with a first hand evaluation...
Wait, so you ignore every aspect of performance except one in your evaluation? You can bash people to people with tons of guns. Ones with proper sights, a bolt hold-open device, the ability to be fired from a low prone position, light ammunition, good accuracy...AK wins for me. accuracy, weight, reliability, noise and cost aside, it wins for me because i like the idea of having a gun you can bash someone thats trying to kill you to death with it. Hardly a nice image. But it could happen one day... Bashing ability is important.
That's what we have DMs for; most firefights are well within 300-500 meters, so it wouldn't make a whole lot of sense to use a larger round that is a bit wasted.The real problem is that current AR's are too wimpy (5.56x45 or 5.45x39), they get good accuracy at range, but they have no real force left in them at ranges past 300~500 meters, so it's not really usefull.
It's not the caliber that's accurate, it's the cartridge. 7.62x39 is just poorly-designed all around, with an only slightly-angled shoulder and a bullet that is only useful if traveling at about 50% higher velocity than it would out of an AK. It's about as twice as heavy as it needs to be; it manages to cut the performance of a full-sized 7.62mm rifle cartridge in half while weighing only a little less.What's really needed is a mix between the 7.62x39 and the 5.56x45, something with the more penetrating power of the 7mm and the better accuracy of the 5mm, so probably something in 6mm point something or other..
It's more-or-less one or the other, thanks to those dastardly laws of physics. You can't push a bullet faster without accelerated barrel wear and more recoil, and you can't just upscale it without increasing weight (and, again, recoil).That's exactly what i was talking about, a caliber somewhere between 6-7mm which can offer better stopping power and performance at range while still being light and handy to use.
I remember seeing a clip from Future Weapons with that moron Mack talking about how awful squad support weapons were. He went around like an idiot with a loose belt slung over his shoulder like Rambo then complained afterward that SAWs suck because the belt can get caught and break (that's why you keep it in the poly box you fool). He then completely invalidated all of his opinions when he said that SAWs can't use STANAG magazines, meaning you can't "bum mags off your buddies".Having a medium machine gun or two in your squad is all good, but it's putting all your eggs in one basket one they are exhausted of ammunition or taken out of action.
Yup, that's pretty much it, the 5.56x45 tries to be a jack of all trades, but as is common with such things, that just means there's nothing it really excels at.The 6.5 grendel is really the answer to this problem. At long range performs just as well as a full sized rifle catridge and even had better penetration against a wind shield then a 7.62x51 did. The British had right idea over 60 years ago they came up with the .280 british which had similar performance a full sized catridge just like the 6.5 grendel did, the American stupidly rejected it claiming it was too weak and yet went to the 5.56 which has unsatisfactory perfomance at long distances and poor penetration compared to the enemy's 7.62x39 weapons. Yes the 5.56 fragments but really there are so many factors that can effect it like the barrel length etc and when it dosen't fragment it leaves a .22 caliber hole in the enemy. A round that has consistent performance is better.
Recoil is only a big problem if you do nothing about it, which sadly, is the norm in western firearm design, look at any AR designed in allmost any western nation since their inception, and what do you see on the muzzle? a flash hider, nothing else.. even on firearms like the X-47 and the newer MASADA and SCAR rifles, which chamber the beefier 7.62x39 and even the 7.62x51 in some configurations, there is only a flash hider.some interesting new weapons like that kriss .45 cal smg deal heavily with recoil reduction, now if the old .280 round the british thought up 60 years ago were to be utilised with good recoil reduction, one would have a very interesting base for a rifle..
Excuse me, what? It's designed as an intermediate round, between subgun caliber and rifle cartridges. Exactly like every other assault rifle round out there (many of which, by the way, intended to copy the ballistics of 5.56; 5.45x39 and 5.8x42 come to mind, but I guess you know better than Russian and Chinese military R&D guys)Yup, that's pretty much it, the 5.56x45 tries to be a jack of all trades, but as is common with such things, that just means there's nothing it really excels at.
Which, if anything but CAS, artillery, or the designated marksman is engaging, they're doing it wrong.It is accurate at range, yes, but it has no real power to speak of at range, depending on barrel leangth, the projectile will stop performing as intended after 300~500 meters,
"Never mind the fact that at 500 yards 5.56 will still have nearly three times the kinetic energy of .22LR at muzzle and will still yaw and penetrate, I watched a History Channel documentary and now I'm an expert."and at this point it's basically just a glorified .22lr, the wounds it will produce at range are not impressive,
Yes, it's true that 5.56 isn't at it's best penetration at extreme close range, but with regular-issue M855, it's still very good.And yes it fragments, this can cause very serious wounds, but as stated above, this performance is not stable, it doesen't work past it's optimum velocity, it's very depandant on barrel leangth, and at clouse range, it comes at a cost aswell, namely very poor penetration.
Where the hell did everyone get this "omg 5.56 can't penetrate and 7.62 can" idea? I see you haven't met Mr. M855 Armour Piercing, which is not only an excellent penetrator, but leaves some nasty wounds behind.So what you get is a round that can hit a target at distance, but performs quite badly when doing so, and within it's optimum range, it's still only good on soft targets as it wont penetrate much.
If you're optimistic.If we look at the 7.62x39 by contrast (and mind you, this is a round designed in 1943, so i'm not by any means claiming it is the best that modern technology could produce), it may only be accurate to 300 meters,
I'm guessing by "stopping power" you mean "wounding capability", in which case, no, no it does not. Rounds that actually expand, fragment, or at least yaw violently are far better at producing big wound channels than 7.62, which tends to stay together and make a nice, neat 7.62mm hole through the target.but atleast it performs well and consistant within its ideal range, it has both stopping power and penetration,
They did that. It's called 5.45x39.Personally, i think the 7.62x39 comes clouser to what an AR needs than the 5.56x45, it's not perfect and could use a makeover with the knowledge and technology we have today,
7.62x39 is just a terrible cartridge all around. The bullet is something more suited to ~2800 FPS, but cut down to 1900, it fails utterly to fragment and therefore the wound profiles are completely unimpressive. SS109 5.56, on the other hand, will fragment very well up to and including 250 m out of a full-length barrel, even longer if you use the mk.262 open-tipped that's so popular among the US's SOFs.but it does what it's supposed to at the ranges an AR is intended for, and with a facelift it could become very good indeed!,
So wait, 5.56 sucks because it can't work at range, but even though 7.62x39 can't either, it's okay, because DMs and automatic rifleman can take care of it?and for long range, DMR's, LMG's and Sniper's work much better anyway, you just plain need size and weight to make an accurate and deadly long range round (and that wont work on full auto, so you cannot have both in one round).
5.56 SS109 rounds can penetrate perfectly well, that's what the steel core is for. It can penetrate the standard NATO 3.45 steel armour plate up to 640 m, way beyond any assault rifleman's effective range.The 5.56x45 seems to have been born out of the outdated view of the "rifleman", sacrificing some of the brute force it could have had within it's ideal range, for a little more accuracy at distance that it cannot put to much use anyway, you still need a DMR for the long range stuff, but coupled with 5.56 AR's, you lack clouse range automatic fire that can penetrate cover, leaving your cheese hanging a bit in the wind..
[nitpick]If you're optimistic.
7.62x39's external ballistics are like a 30-30's: crap ballistic coefficient means it drops quickly (and no, this isn't one of those things that can be improved with that magical modern technology), which means any zero you can manage to eek out of the AK's primitive sights is more or less worthless at either extreme close range or long range (which, for an assault rifle, is 300-400m). You tend to overshoot or undershoot your target, respectively, unless you're an excellent marksman and can "eyeball" it.