Tue Jun 10, 2003 12:43 am
I have read that it was other problems such as overheating of the barrell in the G11. (Nothing to eject, extremely high rate of fire.) This is probably why caseless guns in general haven't been pursued (what a great concept however).
Also, many that are avid hunters and shooters (I have shot M16 and AKs, along with many others) agree that the 5.56mm is an excellant military round. So the debate goes on....
Even if the 5.56mm does less damage in many situations, it still has its times when it is better than any 7.62mm.
I can acknowledge and respect the opinion of someone that is in favor of the 7.62mm. As long as they know that there are many different 7.62mm rounds, that the answers are in shades of grey (not black and white), and as long as they reduce the argument to a "better of two evils" contest.
But anyone acting as if they have the absolute truth, even in light of the arguments amongst experts, and anyone that reduces the high velocity 5.56mm to a "wimpy little .22 caliber" .. well.... why argue. That person fits in with those that think that dinosaurs are only a couple of thousand years old, or that we never went to the moon. If I took you guys wrong and we jumped off to a bad start then I apologoze.
If not, nothing left to say.
Also, many that are avid hunters and shooters (I have shot M16 and AKs, along with many others) agree that the 5.56mm is an excellant military round. So the debate goes on....
Even if the 5.56mm does less damage in many situations, it still has its times when it is better than any 7.62mm.
I can acknowledge and respect the opinion of someone that is in favor of the 7.62mm. As long as they know that there are many different 7.62mm rounds, that the answers are in shades of grey (not black and white), and as long as they reduce the argument to a "better of two evils" contest.
But anyone acting as if they have the absolute truth, even in light of the arguments amongst experts, and anyone that reduces the high velocity 5.56mm to a "wimpy little .22 caliber" .. well.... why argue. That person fits in with those that think that dinosaurs are only a couple of thousand years old, or that we never went to the moon. If I took you guys wrong and we jumped off to a bad start then I apologoze.
If not, nothing left to say.
Tue Jun 10, 2003 4:34 am
Sannop, hunters saying the .223 is an excellent MILITARY round says more then you realize 
What is the purpose of a soldier in combat? To hunt the enemy and remove him as a threat. What is the best way to remove a threat? To incapacitate it. Best way to do THAT is to kill it, baring that, wound it enough to make it unable to react. 7.62mm rounds tend to be very effective at that, ask anyone that's ever been hit by one. .223 rounds on the other hand, are NOT real effective at that, again, ask anyone that's been hit by one. I've talked with plenty of people who've caught either/or and some who've actually caught both types of rounds. All of them agree, they'd rather be hit by a 5.56 then a 7.62 if they had to do it again. It's smaller, faster, and tends to actually do less damage in the real world then a 7.62 does. Hell, my own father caught a 5.56mm in the chest when he was in the 101st Airborn in '63, it went in, took a slight turn, then went out his shoulder blade. Pissed him off, and he almost beat the idiot who shot him to death before they pulled him off of the guy. He was hit while in the air during a parachute jump using live ammo, and was so incapacitated that he was able to land, remove his pack, then beat the guy senseless. This is opposed to the guys who dropped in Nam and weren't able to do anything after catching a single 7.62x39mm standard AK47 round while in the air(yes, they actually parachuted into the jungles at first) except hit the ground and lay there, either screaming or passed out.
Baring certain 'kill zone' shots, the larger the slug, the more effective it is, period. Smaller diameter slugs, no matter what their velocities, tend to have less energy transfer to the human body. That's a fact, proven time and again in actual usage, unless they are specially made to fragment upon impact. And, for the record, FMJ(full metal jacket) ammunition is NOT designed to do that, and the 5.56mm round used by the US military is FMJ. They use it because it's less prone to cause jams(tips don't deform in the clip/feed) and it has a better chance of penetrating light armor(in theory..5.56 rounds tend to be too light for that at 100m).
Personally, when I hunted with my Hakim 8mm mauser, I used home made loads using soft lead tips instead of a fmj. Jamming wasn't a concern, since I only fired 1 round at a target and only fired at 1 target usually. And I've yet to see a deer wearing kevlar or riding in an APC I did test the ammo against armor though, and at 100m, my soft lead hunting rounds penetrated 1" armor plate steel with ease, while 5.56mm and even M1 Garand and M14 rounds did not. Just in case I ever ran across some mutated deer driving APCs...and because I loved seeing the faces of people when my Hakim tore up those armor plates at the range
What is the purpose of a soldier in combat? To hunt the enemy and remove him as a threat. What is the best way to remove a threat? To incapacitate it. Best way to do THAT is to kill it, baring that, wound it enough to make it unable to react. 7.62mm rounds tend to be very effective at that, ask anyone that's ever been hit by one. .223 rounds on the other hand, are NOT real effective at that, again, ask anyone that's been hit by one. I've talked with plenty of people who've caught either/or and some who've actually caught both types of rounds. All of them agree, they'd rather be hit by a 5.56 then a 7.62 if they had to do it again. It's smaller, faster, and tends to actually do less damage in the real world then a 7.62 does. Hell, my own father caught a 5.56mm in the chest when he was in the 101st Airborn in '63, it went in, took a slight turn, then went out his shoulder blade. Pissed him off, and he almost beat the idiot who shot him to death before they pulled him off of the guy. He was hit while in the air during a parachute jump using live ammo, and was so incapacitated that he was able to land, remove his pack, then beat the guy senseless. This is opposed to the guys who dropped in Nam and weren't able to do anything after catching a single 7.62x39mm standard AK47 round while in the air(yes, they actually parachuted into the jungles at first) except hit the ground and lay there, either screaming or passed out.
Baring certain 'kill zone' shots, the larger the slug, the more effective it is, period. Smaller diameter slugs, no matter what their velocities, tend to have less energy transfer to the human body. That's a fact, proven time and again in actual usage, unless they are specially made to fragment upon impact. And, for the record, FMJ(full metal jacket) ammunition is NOT designed to do that, and the 5.56mm round used by the US military is FMJ. They use it because it's less prone to cause jams(tips don't deform in the clip/feed) and it has a better chance of penetrating light armor(in theory..5.56 rounds tend to be too light for that at 100m).
Personally, when I hunted with my Hakim 8mm mauser, I used home made loads using soft lead tips instead of a fmj. Jamming wasn't a concern, since I only fired 1 round at a target and only fired at 1 target usually. And I've yet to see a deer wearing kevlar or riding in an APC
I did test the ammo against armor though, and at 100m, my soft lead hunting rounds penetrated 1" armor plate steel with ease, while 5.56mm and even M1 Garand and M14 rounds did not. Just in case I ever ran across some mutated deer driving APCs...and because I loved seeing the faces of people when my Hakim tore up those armor plates at the range
Tue Jun 10, 2003 11:50 pm
"Shit", thought Kristov, "they've read the..."
Wed Jun 11, 2003 1:07 am
Originally posted by Chacal
"Shit", thought Kristov, "they've read the..."
Luckily, Kristov had his handy BAR with the .30 (7.62 mm) round, 853.4 mps (2800 fps) muzzle velocity, 550m (600 yds) effective range, .......
Wed Jun 11, 2003 3:09 am
Chacal.. you are one sick puppy... keep it up.
rotflmao:
rotflmao:
Wed Jun 11, 2003 8:17 am
i think the greater question in the military's mind on the .223 vs any other round is the weight of a typical load...say weapon and 200 rounds of ammo.
much less strain on the soldier...keep em fresh fellas!!
strange how we forget fatigue and weight in this game Battlefield huh???
much less strain on the soldier...keep em fresh fellas!!
strange how we forget fatigue and weight in this game Battlefield huh???
Wed Jun 11, 2003 8:22 am
Originally posted by Colonel Ingus
Hey Sannop I was one of the ones calling the 5.56 a "crappy" .223 round. I don't think I ever said it sucked I believe I just said it was a wimpy 22 round.
The major reason the US Army went to the A-15/M-16 5.56 weapon system was for one reason and one reason only. A standard loadout with a M-14 (7.62) was 100 rounds of ammo. AR-15/M-16 loadout (because of the .223 calibre ammo) was 300 rounds.
missed this first time around
i said it again nonetheless...
Wed Jun 11, 2003 8:43 am
Interesting talk, glad I spent the time to read the thread. After the talks I have had with several Vietnam vets, plenty of the History Channel, and Quite a few reads through many books, I will interject my NON-scientific info.
The lighter rounds in the jungle SUCKED, clip a leaf (basically anything) as you are firing at your target and you are virtually assured a miss. The same is not quite as true of the larger caliber bullets. Again this is my personal understanding (mostly) from the people I talked with that were in this kind of situation.
Now I remember why I stopped taking physics...
The lighter rounds in the jungle SUCKED, clip a leaf (basically anything) as you are firing at your target and you are virtually assured a miss. The same is not quite as true of the larger caliber bullets. Again this is my personal understanding (mostly) from the people I talked with that were in this kind of situation.
Now I remember why I stopped taking physics...