Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: mbynack
762 isn't going to “knock” someone over. That's a myth too. 762 (as far as potential) is better at extended ranges and it has more punch on a building, bunker, forested areas, even penetrating thin armor of vehicles like a BTR70 (with standard M80 ball). The problem is that a weapon chambered in 308 will weigh and recoil more, with target effect on a human not being any greater (in net often less).

You can carry 210 rounds 223 in the weight and volume of 120 rounds of 308. The weapon weighs less (by design you can make them lighter); you basically don’t need to compensate for range from 0-300 meters because the deviation from line of sight is 2 inches up and down. Ammo is cheap; training new people is easy on a weapon that isn’t that intimidating. Recoil is low and recovery times fast, and depending on design of the weapon easy to manage on auto. All this is packed into a weapon that essentially does more damage on a human than a much more stable and slower 762x51 round.

**** “In that case I want the biggest, badest bullet traveling at the highest velocity to create a huge wound cavity and immediate incapacitation.”

223 isn’t some magical caliber, nor is it perfect for everything, but it’s a caliber that in most situations offers good all around performance. The M4 “CAN” be operated from a vehicle. 15 minutes later you “CAN” be clearing rooms, and tomorrow you might be on a roof top where you “CAN” take a 200 yard shot. It’s a weapon you “CAN” carry for long times in hill country or jungles. How good would an MP5 work at 200 meters? How good does the M107 work at CQB? How nice and light is an M14 carrying it? 223 is simply a good standard caliber that works well in most scenarios, and you can’t pick and choose what you have that second like in a computer game switching between the nine different weapons one carries there. Those stating the obvious that caliber “X” can carry further or punch through more or whatever else, are playing the game of narrowing in the scope to a small band of variables they deem important that second to make their claim. The problem is that we’re talking about an “all purpose” caliber with mutually exclusive variables at work.

32 posted on 05/21/2008 2:53:24 PM PDT by Red6 (Come and take it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]


To: Red6
“762 isn't going to “knock” someone over. That's a myth too.”

True. IF you're using Ball Ammo. We're dinking around with stuff that's truly “lethal”. To the effect that if you hit the guy in the supper arm, no more arm and part of the shoulder to boot.

That's all I'll say, except that it has undergone JAG review and survived.

34 posted on 05/21/2008 3:54:27 PM PDT by roaddog727 (BS does not get bridges built - the funk you see is the funk you do)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies ]

To: Red6
I'm not basing my analysis on rumors on the Internet. I'm basing it on 22 years on active duty and two combat tours. I have to disagree with your assessment of "smaller and lighter is better". If that were true the Marines and special forces wouldn't be pulling surplus M-14s back into service and the Army wouldn't be looking at the 6.8.
44 posted on 05/22/2008 4:48:37 AM PDT by mbynack (Retired USAF SMSgt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies ]

To: Red6

The .223 and 556x45 (556) are fine flat shooting and affordable rounds for the US Mil and our allies. That is one of the primary reasons the 556 was chosen as the premier ammunition for the M-16A1/A2 Etc. There have been many other calibers tested for this rifle config and the 556 still comes out on top for what it is, what it does and how many rounds you guys can pack in/out. You can put a 556 and a 762 side by side in most any marksman’s hands in the A/R style weapon and he will be just as effective at this weapons capable range.
There is a higher chance of hydrostatic shock on mass targetted recipients with the 762 for sure! As for damage? Of course the 762 makes a bigger mess, but as Red6 pointed out, if your carrying ammo into a fight, do you want a 3Lb 30 rd mag, or a 3 20 rd mag? Look at the weight of your ammo cans in comparisson? The bad guys are more than likely carryin some variation of the 762, many NATO countries shortened the 762 cartridge in an attempt to make the .308 Win a more compact cartridge. Have the succeeded?
On an off subject matter, my mother, yes my mom, has killed more Cal Black Bears with her .243 Win with head shots, that I have ever even seen alive. What’s this got to do with the 556/762 debate? Practice with what you have guys. Practice on accurizing targets, not washing machines, printer/scanners got bad, refridgerators etc. Bring back the “Tack Drivers” that we used to brag about, those of you that are old enough to remember that term.
Lets just pretend we went to the 762 as a primary weapon, everyone in all services would be required to re-qual on this rifle prior to entering the AOR. Not to mention, the cost envolved in building/purchasing all new weapons, and the gun Co’s would NAIL the US Gove on the price, even though she goes with the lowest bidder. You also need to seriously take into account the rasied recoil effect you will have! Remember our opposite sex is out there, somewhere, but they’re out there.
Next, what would our Gov do with all the old M-16’s and 556 ammo that’s been laying in storage since VN? Give or sell it all by the boat load to the next enemy, or the next.
Lets hope they don’t catch on to what we now have, more for less and a but load of it!


56 posted on 12/13/2009 6:39:28 AM PST by 22Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson