This Ping List is for all things pertaining to infringes upon or victories for the 2nd Amendment.
FReepmail me if you want to be added to or deleted from the list.
More 2nd Amendment related articles on FR's Bang List.
This Ping List is for all things pertaining to infringes upon or victories for the 2nd Amendment.
FReepmail me if you want to be added to or deleted from the list.
More 2nd Amendment related articles on FR's Bang List.
Is this for antifa?
Minuteman III
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.
But then there is the issue about the ammo itself. Steel cased East Block ammo is cheap, and runs hot. Wolf isn’t so bad, but it will wear the bore out of your AR variant very quickly (around 5,000 rounds), giving the projectile a keyhole type entrance wound and crappy accuracy.
We always thought that the captured AKs we trained with were just sloppily manufactured with all of the stamped parts - no - it was the worn out chambers from their ammo.
There was a long article posted about the steel cased ammo in here a few months ago - I stopped using it in my AR shortly after that. Keep it on hand for emergency use only.
Short of .338, 7.62x51 is still the best all around cartridge for me. Yeah, heavy. Lots of penetration through cover objects (like both doors of a car) and still quite lethal. I’m done humping SAWs or heavier MGs, and prefer stand off capability using quality glass - too old to clear buildings. Shooting thru them is easier…
Start with the external ballistics of the two rounds. (I've added a third round that most people would consider a good long distance round for comparison in the bottom row of the chart.)
| Cartridge | Bullet | B.C. | muzzle velocity | energy at muzzle | 500 yds velocity | energy at 500 yds | Drop at 500 yds |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7.62x39mm | 123 gr | .275 | 2350 fps | 1507 ft.lbs. | 1066 fps | 310 ft.lbs | 123" |
| 5.56x45mm | 62 gr | .174 | 3077 fps | 1298 ft.lbs. | 1079 fps | 160 ft.lbs. | 88" |
| .300 Win Mag | 190 gr | .533 | 2900 fps | 3548 ft.lbs. | 2089 fps | 1841 ft.lbs. | 40" |
What we can see from this is that neither is a very good long range round. Yes, the 5.56mm does shoot a little flatter and is faster, although by 500 yds. that advantage is pretty much used up.
Considering that 1000 ft.lbs. is frequently sighted by hunters as the minimum energy for hunting deer with modern hunting bullets (where the hunters expect expansion), you can see that both of these fall far short of that.
And of course if you are talking military ammo you are talking Full Metal Jacket - less stopping power in soft tissue.
If I were going to be shot at 500 yards with either of these I would pick the 5.56. It's a smaller diameter bullet, it's about 1/2 the weight, but going the same speed.
For long distance efficiency you want a bullet that has a high ballestic coefficient (B.C.) so that it carries speed well over a long distance. Both these rounds have very low B.C.'s (short/light for caliber rounds). They just aren't designed for long range. (And 500 yards isn't THAT long.)
Which is why both military snipers and hunters who expect to have shots on game at longer ranges don't use either of these rounds.
The smallest cartridge you might see a military sniper use is .308 Winchester. The .300 Win Mag is a big step up, and has been used by the US Military since Vietnam as a go-to round.
The long American war in Afghanistan, where really long shots were possible, resulted in even more effective long range rounds including the .338 Lapua, .338 Normal Mag, and .300 Norma Mag. A lot of what the designers of these rounds have done is optimize them for very heavy-for-caliber (and therefore longer, with a higher BC) bullets.
For practical purposes this culminates with the two military .338 calibers, the Lapua and the Norma Mag. Federal makes a 300 grain bullet for these that has a ballistic coefficient of .768, which is very high and will lose speed slowly, thus being a top choice for over 1,000 yard shots.
The .50 BMG was pressed into a the sniper-rifle roll early on in Afghanistan, but it was designed as an anti-material round. The guns that chamber it are by necessity very heavy, and until Barrett built theirs, were always considered "crew served". IE: a few people were needed to hump that thing and run it. The military's Barrett Model M107A1 weighs 29lbs. Their newer MRAD (in .300 and .338) weighs 14.5lbs. Not light, but plausible.
Also, I would hardly describe shooting an AK-47 round as particularly brutal. The .300 Win Mag in a 7.5lb hunting rifle is much worse. But then, it's much more effective at long range, as the chart demonstrates.
The venerable .30-06. Obviously. :)