Posted on 06/29/2021 2:20:50 PM PDT by PROCON
Unless you’re an avid shooter, there tends to be only a handful of ammunition types a person can list off the top of their heads, and even fewer if we’re talking specifically about rifles. Although there’s a long list of projectiles to be fired from long guns, the ones that tend to come to mind for most of us are almost always the same: 5.56 and 7.62, or to be more specific, 5.56×45 vs. 7.62×39.
National militaries all around the world rely on these two forms of ammunition thanks to their range, accuracy, reliability, and lethality, prompting many on the internet to get into long, heated debates about which is the superior round. Of course, as is the case with most things, the truth about which is the “better” round is really based on a number of complicated variables — not the least of which being which weapon system is doing the firing and under what circumstances is the weapon being fired.
This line of thinking is likely why the United States military employs different weapon systems that fire a number of different kinds of rounds. Of course, when most people think of Uncle Sam’s riflemen, they tend to think of the 5.56mm round that has become ubiquitous with the M4 series of rifles that are standard issue throughout the U.S. military. But, a number of sniper platforms, for instance, are actually chambered in 7.62×51 NATO.
The new M27 Infantry Automatic Rifle chambered in 5.56 during the Marine Corps’ Designated Marksman Course (Official Marine Corps photo by Lance Cpl. Levi Schultz)
So if both the 5.56×45 vs. 7.62×39 rounds are commonly employed by national militaries… determining which is the superior long-range round for the average shooter can be a difficult undertaking, and almost certainly will involve a degree of bias (in other words, in some conditions, it may simply come down to preference).
For the sake of brevity, let’s break the comparison down into three categories: power, accuracy, and recoil. Power, for the sake of debate, will address the round’s kinetic energy transfer on target, or how much force is exerted into the body of the bad guy it hits. Accuracy will be a measure of the round’s effective range, and recoil will address how easy it is to settle the weapon back down again once it’s fired.
The NATO 5.56 round was actually invented in the 1970s to address concerns about the previous NATO standard 7.62×51. In an effort to make a more capable battle-round, the 5.56 was developed using a .223 as the basis, resulting in a smaller round that could withstand higher pressures than the old 7.62 NATO rounds nations were using. The new 5.56 may have carried a smaller projectile, but its increased pressure gave it a flatter trajectory than its predecessors, making it easier to aim at greater distances. It was also much lighter, allowing troops to carry more rounds than ever before.
7.62×39 (Left) and 5.56×45 (Right) (WikiMedia Commons)
The smaller rounds also dramatically reduced felt recoil, making it easier to maintain or to quickly regain “sight picture” (or get your target back into your sights) than would have been possible with larger caliber rounds.
The 7.62x39mm round is quite possibly the most used cartridge on the planet, in part because the Soviet AK-47 is so common. These rounds are shorter and fatter than the NATO 5.56, firing off larger projectiles with a devastating degree of kinetic transfer. It’s because of this stopping power that many see the 7.62 as the round of choice when engaging an opponent in body armor. The 7.62x39mm truly was developed as a general-purpose round, limiting its prowess in a sniper fight, however. The larger 7.62 rounds employed in AK-47s come with far more recoil than you’ll find with a 5.56, making it tougher to land a second and third shot with as much accuracy, depending on your platform.
Hard to beat the ol’ 5.56 round. (Official Marine Corps photo by Cpl. Julio McGraw)
So, returning to the metrics of power, accuracy, and recoil, the 7.62 round wins the first category, but the 5.56 takes the second two, making it the apparent winner. However, there are certainly some variables that could make the 7.62 a better option for some shooters. The platform you use and your familiarity with it will always matter when it comes to accuracy within a weapon’s operable range.
When firing an AR chambered in 5.56, and an AK chambered in 7.62, it’s hard not to appreciate the different ideologies that informed their designs. While an AR often feels like a precision weapon, chirping through rounds with very little recoil, the AK feels brutal… like you’re throwing hammers at your enemies and don’t care if any wood, concrete, or even body armor gets in the way. There are good reasons to run each, but for most shooters, the 5.56 round is the better choice for faraway targets.
7.62×39 doesn’t tumble in flesh, you could through and through three maybe four antifa.
There’s that.
yer kiddin... right?
I’ve read that Navy Seal Chris Kyle, (American Sniper) used .300 Win Mag for most of his kills with a Mk-13 suppressed platform.
The AKs are generally less accurate than the .223s in use. So it’s kind of moot. AK’s just don’t have the accuracy and aren’t so designed in the first place. They are designed first to be reliable.
I suppose if you chambered a 7.62x39 in a bolt action rifle it could be pretty accurate, but there are far better rounds for long range accuracy. The muzzle velocity of the 7.62x39 is just too low.
Yeah, we’ve read his book. I fired my bro’s .300win mag once; just once. I was sore for a week. For long range stuff I like my Savage .22-250 with 4,000fps rounds. It’s sighted in at 500yds.
#1 It's a 22
#2 It's as loud as a cannon.
Most of the articles I’ve read lately indicate a trend towards larger rounds being preferable to the 5.56 but stopping short of 7.62. US Forces tend to zero in on a preferred round/rifle based upon whatever/wherever the current conflict happens to be. If I’m clearing structures give me an M-4/5.56. If I’m downrange probing Taliban elements an M-16/5.56 is appropriate. If I’m in an urban firefight or sniping I’d prefer the 7.62. Guess that’s why squads are structured with specialty weapons/ammo.But wherever that conflict is it’s difficult to find a more versatile platform than the M-4 chambered in 5.56.
If you want long-range performance, how about the 7.62 x 65 (.308 Norma Magnum)? I believe that is about the top-end of the 7.62 calibers.
PS: they don't care about the noise, they just wonder what happened to Carl who was standing right near them.
Wish I had that rifle,,,,
Less common rifles. Less common ammo. Less common means more $$$ and hard to find parts. No thanks.
6.5 Grendel.
It has a scope about two feet long on it, nice clear optics, and the Savage has a bull barrel on it. Cold shot dead on every time.
Yup - FN FAL with a good 21” barrel. Perfect balance while carrying at the ready for patrolling, ADJUSTABLE gas system to reduce recoil for different ammo, field strips in 30 seconds or less. Oh, and higher cyclic rate than an M4. Yeah, heavier and longer. Deadly at 1000 meters.
I was out of the Army way before the M-4 was issued and was issued the M-16. We also qualified with the M-14, great platform too!
Don't really have a yote rifle...just use my .308
The projectile’s velocity plays a big part in the quality of those holes. Spritzer bullets tumble upon impact at velocities exceeding about 2400 FPS. 7.62x39 exceeds that mark by very little, at the muzzle. Bullet construction accounts for some of the damage done, as well. I think I recall that one of the characteristics the Army was looking for when they adopted the 5.56 was that it be supersonic at 1000 yards.
The author’s question has already been answered by the world’s militaries: 30 caliber for intermediate range. 7.62x51 or 7.62x54. We use AR-10 based rifles (and Remington 700’s in the past), Russians use the SVD Dragunov.
6.5 Creedmoor is a good long distance round. Kicks about the same as a .243, but is still a 1000 yard cartridge.
I realize it’s not used by the military, but just sayin’.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.