why are there no new assault rifles in 7.62x39 - Page 3

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - why are there no new assault rifles in 7.62x39 (Page 3 of 4)

Posted: 10/25/2012 8:57:29 AM EDT

[#1]

because it is really hard to beat an ak when you want a cheap, simple, reliable, close to medium range rifle with a hard hitting round.

Posted: 10/25/2012 8:58:20 AM EDT

[#2]

Quoted:

Quoted:
I'd love a mp5 in 357sig

They have two versions, 9mm +p and 9mm +p+

http://www.turnerfab.com/Turner_Fabrications/WELCOME.html

Posted: 10/25/2012 9:00:39 AM EDT

[#3]

Quoted:
This is where I got my data: Ballistics Calculator

124 gr projectile at 2350. The data is zeroed at 100 yards. Drop at 500 is 103.63"

Where are you pulling 2350 from?

From the 16" 7.62x39 FMjs I've chronoed the average is 2300fps, I've seen as low as 2250fps, but I've never chroned any at 2350.

ETA: I just check the website Looks like the MV is comming from factory data? So they are either using 20" barrels or test barrels (with no gas bleed off for the action).

ETA2: the above 'calculation site' also lacks a height over bore settings - which is important when determining drop based on zero.

Posted: 10/25/2012 9:04:27 AM EDT

[#4]

Quoted:

Quoted:
This is where I got my data: Ballistics Calculator

124 gr projectile at 2350. The data is zeroed at 100 yards. Drop at 500 is 103.63"

Where are you pulling 2350 from?

From the 16" 7.62x39 FMjs I've chronoed the average is 2300fps, I've seen as low as 2250fps, but I've never chroned any at 2350.

Alot of 762x39 ballistics are based on longer barrels.

My 300blk ammo chronos over 2300fps and has a way better BC.

Posted: 10/25/2012 9:13:48 AM EDT

[#5]

Quoted:

Quoted:
This is where I got my data: Ballistics Calculator

124 gr projectile at 2350. The data is zeroed at 100 yards. Drop at 500 is 103.63"

Where are you pulling 2350 from?

From the 16" 7.62x39 FMjs I've chronoed the average is 2300fps, I've seen as low as 2250fps, but I've never chroned any at 2350.

ETA: I just check the website Looks like the MV is comming from factory data? So they are either using 20" barrels or test barrels (with no gas bleed off for the action).

I chrono'd three different lots of 7.62x39 Wolf Military (124gr FMJ) through my 16" Polish PMKMS and 16" Colt Sporter back in July. Average velocity of 50 rounds (Five 10-round samples of each lot through each rifle) at 15' from the muzzle was 2363fps from the PMKMS and 2316fps from the Colt.

I'd say it's possible that the mfg test data came from a 16" barrel.

Posted: 10/25/2012 10:05:56 AM EDT

[#6]

Because people who want to shoot lots of cheap 7.62x39 aren't the people who are going to drop $1500+ on a new rifle design. They buy WASR-10s, and rightly so. The cheap AK is a lot of fun when dumping cheap ammo.

Posted: 10/25/2012 11:59:22 AM EDT

[#7]

Quoted:
Is 7.62x39 even being produced on a large scale anymore? Thought I read somewhere that no major company or country has produced massive amounts of it in years. Its all surplus stockpiles being used now. And when it runs out....

eta: scratch that. Wolf still makes it, but certainly not on a scale like during the Cold War.

Tula, Ulyanovsk, and Barnaul factories are spitting 7.62x39 out every day. The problem is that they were supplying the Afghan army and had a massive contract to do so.

I highly doubt they're going to be running out of 7.62x39 anytime soon unless Zer0 gets re-elected and the UN is able to restrict international sales of ammo.

Posted: 10/25/2012 12:19:33 PM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:

Quoted:
You can buy a WASR for $400. Nobody wants to compete with that.

Not in CT...thats a 1000 dollar gun here.

Not even worth it at that point.

Commie crap's main selling point is being cheap not particularly quality

Works well at every class I've ever been to.

Personally I'm not going to rock up a class with Hornady TAP because ammo is damn expensive and I'm honestly not shooting off a bench or laying down, and it's almost never at distances over 200 yards. If I do that at a class, I've got match handloads to do it with. Not everyone gets to be David Fortier and get a free random truckload of the best ammunition three times a year.

I'll take the five times the trigger time over perfect potential accuracy out of a round I fired while moving. Just me. Your wallet might have more Benjamins and you're able to afford that.

Posted: 10/25/2012 12:19:52 PM EDT

[#9]

Government crap computer caused Double Tap.

Posted: 10/25/2012 1:07:02 PM EDT

[#10]

Quoted:
maybe not the 762x39 necessarily but maybe a round in between the 762 nato and 556

you mean like 7.62 x 45 Czech???

H

Posted: 10/25/2012 1:25:21 PM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:

Quoted:
You can buy a WASR for $400. Nobody wants to compete with that.

Not in CT...thats a 1000 dollar gun here.

Not even worth it at that point.

Commie crap's main selling point is being cheap not particularly quality

Works well at every class I've ever been to.

Personally I'm not going to rock up a class with Hornady TAP because ammo is damn expensive and I'm honestly not shooting off a bench or laying down, and it's almost never at distances over 200 yards. If I do that at a class, I've got match handloads to do it with. Not everyone gets to be David Fortier and get a free random truckload of the best ammunition three times a year.

I'll take the five times the trigger time over perfect potential accuracy out of a round I fired while moving. Just me. Your wallet might have more Benjamins and you're able to afford that.

A grand is a good chunk of change. Spending a grand on a WASR seems counter productive. A thousand bucks can buy or build a nice little AR that will be better than the wasr. The pretty big difference could be used for ammo which is relatively cheap and superior quality even without shooting TAP.

Posted: 10/25/2012 1:35:46 PM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:
Rock River Arms LAR-47.

I think the one of the newer ACR/SCAR type rifles will be offering one in 7.62x39MM

And think the XCR is also offers a 7.62x39MM

MGI Hydra

http://www.rockriverarms.com/images/products/lar47_1263vv.gif

http://cdn.ammoland.com/files/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/MGI-Hydra.jpg

Why hasn't anyone told me about these new lowers? I've been waiting for one to become available.

Must crawl out from under my rock and buy one.

ETA: Not yet in production. Guess I have more waiting to do.

Posted: 10/25/2012 1:52:44 PM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:

Quoted:

Not assault rifles. Assault rifles are what the OP asked about.

I get what you're saying but unfortunately the antis have won this particualr war of vernacular.

Only if gun owners start using their dumbass vernacular.

Are we going to let the media make the rules and tell us to use the wrong terms?

Just because the media is inaccurate and has an agenda doesn't mean that gun owners should buy into it.

Do we buy into 10 round mags just because the media says that anything over 10 round mags are bad?

I won't let up on this. My semiautos are not assault rifle, no semiautos are assault rifles, and the Dems, DU, the Brady Bunch, or anyone else calling them that does not make it so.

When some member here starts a thread about semiautos and calls them assault rifles, I am gonna call him/her on it.

Modern Sporting Rifles.

Even the Mossberg was quick enough to catch on to this with their new AR: The MMR (Mossberg Modern Rifle).

It'll take a while for that to catch on though.

Posted: 10/25/2012 3:57:14 PM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:
Uhh...

This particular Colt was my first hunting rifle.

Stlill the most accurate rifle I've ever owned. Mine's a postban 16-in bbl.

I love the Frankenmag in the pic. I know how to make them run.

I quit doing mag dumps ~15 years ago after learning they have .308 bores.

I guess it didn't hurt it.

The Remington 125 gr spire point ammo shoots best in mine. They used to load .308 bullets in them; I presume they're still loaded that way.

Posted: 10/25/2012 8:59:07 PM EDT

[#15]

Quoted:
Uhh...

This particular Colt was my first hunting rifle.

http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/168903_1823953202747_3567320_n.jpg

Colt discontinued it because 7.62x39 sucks.

ETA: By sucks I actually mean it has the trajectory of a mortar shell. For those of us who like to shoot from point blank to 600 yards, it sucks. And most of the ammo is inaccurate since it comes from Russia. So it stands to reason that an inaccurate short range only caliber would be popular in in an inaccurate rifle such as an AK.

The ammo/ round is accurate. It's the platforms that suck.

Posted: 10/25/2012 9:05:10 PM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:

Quoted:
This is where I got my data: Ballistics Calculator

124 gr projectile at 2350. The data is zeroed at 100 yards. Drop at 500 is 103.63"

Where are you pulling 2350 from?

From the 16" 7.62x39 FMjs I've chronoed the average is 2300fps, I've seen as low as 2250fps, but I've never chroned any at 2350.

Alot of 762x39 ballistics are based on longer barrels.

My 300blk ammo chronos over 2300fps and has a way better BC.

It's not really all that magical.

To really enjoy that "way better BC", you need a .308 charge.

Posted: 10/25/2012 9:15:42 PM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:

Quoted:
maybe not the 762x39 necessarily but maybe a round in between the 762 nato and 556

You mean like .300 blackout?

So...7.62x39 that costs $1/round instead of $0.15/round?

Why develop 300BLK when you already have 30 Carbine?

Posted: 10/25/2012 9:17:35 PM EDT

[#18]

Quoted:

Quoted:
maybe not the 762x39 necessarily but maybe a round in between the 762 nato and 556

You mean like .300 blackout?

So...7.62x39 that costs $1/round instead of $0.15/round?

Why develop 300BLK when you already have 30 Carbine?

When was the last rifle to be manufactured in 30 carbine

Posted: 10/25/2012 9:34:08 PM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:

Quoted:
maybe not the 762x39 necessarily but maybe a round in between the 762 nato and 556

You mean like .300 blackout?

So...7.62x39 that costs $1/round instead of $0.15/round?

Why develop 300BLK when you already have 30 Carbine?

When was the last rifle to be manufactured in 30 carbine

Well, a long time ago. But I think we're both just being silly.

Posted: 10/25/2012 9:35:30 PM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:

Quoted:
maybe not the 762x39 necessarily but maybe a round in between the 762 nato and 556

You mean like .300 blackout?

So...7.62x39 that costs $1/round instead of $0.15/round?

Why develop 300BLK when you already have 30 Carbine?

When was the last rifle to be manufactured in 30 carbine

Well, a long time ago. But I think we're both just being silly.

I'd sexually molest a 1940's 30 carbine rifle

Posted: 10/25/2012 9:54:10 PM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Is 7.62x39 even being produced on a large scale anymore? Thought I read somewhere that no major company or country has produced massive amounts of it in years. Its all surplus stockpiles being used now. And when it runs out....

eta: scratch that. Wolf still makes it, but certainly not on a scale like during the Cold War.

More 7.62x39 was employed in Iraq and Afghanistan than 5.45, and much of that was new Russian production, often in the commercial wrappings we see it in.

Wolf is just a brand name, though it's usually Tula manufacture from what I've seen. That's just one factory though. Ulyanovsk, Barnaul, and Vympel are also set up to produce that cartridge, and have at various times.

If there's not a war on, those factories will crank out whatever the US shooting public desires.

I've read Klimovsk was up and running again, or is that just Vympel by another name?

Posted: 10/25/2012 10:15:56 PM EDT

[#22]

Quoted:

Quoted:
never been a fan of 556, and 7.62 nato is heavy and expensive to shoot.

how come no companies make rifles to chamber this round or an intermediate round like it? is it a nato thing or is the idea of a round like that dying off?

Not sure if serious....
https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS2knp9Sau2GYepeNNJXvkt-gabG2PHWKSiJ1pTAu2Jd5BUJtzSfQ
300 Blkout
6.8 SPC
6.5 Grendel...
Companies do make rifles to chamber these rounds, NATO just has never adopted one as a standard for light-arms.

ok well since .50 cents a round for 762 nato was to much i dont think im gunna be buying rounds for close to a dollar

the main reason i pointed out the 762x39 is its intermediate and somewhat cheap

I get it, but 7.62x39 is only cheap because there is tons of Russian surplus and cheap, relatively crummy Russian steel-case still being manufactured. If they made a new rifle to shoot 7.62x39, they would have to make decent ammo for it to shoot. Crappy ammo out of a nice, new-fangled weapon, is still just crappy ammo going down-range.

There is good quality domestic FMJ ammo being manufactured, not to mention decent hunting loads.

Yes, there is. And it is not cheap. The OP likes x39 because it is "somewhat cheap", your domestic FMJ and hunting rounds, aren't cheap, thereby eliminating the only argument I have seen here supporting it over 300blk and some other domestic intermediates. I'm confident that there are Russians over there wondering why they never made a dedicated 5.56 rifle for their market.
We have a few variants of our rifles that will shoot x39, and they have the Arsenal AKs in 5.56 and the Saiga 5.56. We have domestic manufacturers making brass x39 rounds, and they have the Bear brands and various Wolf brands putting out steel-case .223.

The answer to the original question, is that rifles are made to serve a purpose, and shooting cheap steel-case Ruskie ammo, is not a valid reason to develop a new firearm. We already have one that does that, it's called the AK. It might be a perk, but that's it. There are currently other intermediate cartridges available in the US that serve the same role as the x39, but do so better. They may not have the cheap ammo available (until Tulammo is offered in 300blkout), but that is not a key concern when someone develops a firearm.

Posted: 10/26/2012 6:51:49 AM EDT

[#23]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Is 7.62x39 even being produced on a large scale anymore? Thought I read somewhere that no major company or country has produced massive amounts of it in years. Its all surplus stockpiles being used now. And when it runs out....

eta: scratch that. Wolf still makes it, but certainly not on a scale like during the Cold War.

More 7.62x39 was employed in Iraq and Afghanistan than 5.45, and much of that was new Russian production, often in the commercial wrappings we see it in.

Wolf is just a brand name, though it's usually Tula manufacture from what I've seen. That's just one factory though. Ulyanovsk, Barnaul, and Vympel are also set up to produce that cartridge, and have at various times.

If there's not a war on, those factories will crank out whatever the US shooting public desires.

I've read Klimovsk was up and running again, or is that just Vympel by another name?

Forgot about them. I'm pretty sure it's a separate factory. They've got their own website, and there's a pretty significant difference in the ammo.

In my rifles, Vympel (Golden Tiger) runs like a champ. My favorite is Barnaul, but Uly and Vympel are almost as good, if not just as good. Tula was always my least favorite because I didn't get much accuracy out of it, and all I ever shot was anemic comparatively. The 1k of Klimovsk I shot was at or below Tula in accuracy, and word was that it was corrosive as well, so I always treated it as such. It seemed acceptably powerful but I never bought more.

Posted: 10/28/2012 5:57:38 AM EDT

[#24]

Sure there are new rifles in 7,62x39 -e.g. CZ 805

Posted: 10/28/2012 7:14:13 AM EDT

[#25]

Quoted:

Quoted:
never been a fan of 556, and 7.62 nato is heavy and expensive to shoot.

how come no companies make rifles to chamber this round or an intermediate round like it? is it a nato thing or is the idea of a round like that dying off?

Not sure if serious....
https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS2knp9Sau2GYepeNNJXvkt-gabG2PHWKSiJ1pTAu2Jd5BUJtzSfQ
300 Blkout
6.8 SPC
6.5 Grendel...
Companies do make rifles to chamber these rounds, NATO just has never adopted one as a standard for light-arms.

ok well since .50 cents a round for 762 nato was to much i dont think im gunna be buying rounds for close to a dollar

the main reason i pointed out the 762x39 is its intermediate and somewhat cheap

I get it, but 7.62x39 is only cheap because there is tons of Russian surplus and cheap, relatively crummy Russian steel-case still being manufactured. If they made a new rifle to shoot 7.62x39, they would have to make decent ammo for it to shoot. Crappy ammo out of a nice, new-fangled weapon, is still just crappy ammo going down-range.

There is good quality domestic FMJ ammo being manufactured, not to mention decent hunting loads.

Yes, there is. And it is not cheap. The OP likes x39 because it is "somewhat cheap", your domestic FMJ and hunting rounds, aren't cheap, thereby eliminating the only argument I have seen here supporting it over 300blk and some other domestic intermediates. I'm confident that there are Russians over there wondering why they never made a dedicated 5.56 rifle for their market.
We have a few variants of our rifles that will shoot x39, and they have the Arsenal AKs in 5.56 and the Saiga 5.56. We have domestic manufacturers making brass x39 rounds, and they have the Bear brands and various Wolf brands putting out steel-case .223.

The answer to the original question, is that rifles are made to serve a purpose, and shooting cheap steel-case Ruskie ammo, is not a valid reason to develop a new firearm. We already have one that does that, it's called the AK. It might be a perk, but that's it. There are currently other intermediate cartridges available in the US that serve the same role as the x39, but do so better. They may not have the cheap ammo available (until Tulammo is offered in 300blkout), but that is not a key concern when someone develops a firearm.

Maybe 10% of my shooting requires concern for terminal ballistics. I like the cheap stuff for the other 90%. Paper and soda cans don't care.

Posted: 10/28/2012 7:48:36 AM EDT

[#26]

Quoted:
Sig 556R bam, google it.

its a POS. BAM google it.

Posted: 10/28/2012 7:49:53 AM EDT

[#27]

Quoted:
It's dying as a round. Everybody other than turd world armies and terrorists has moved to 5.56 or 5.45 now.

Posted: 10/28/2012 7:52:41 AM EDT

[#28]

Quoted:

Quoted:
I don't understand why U.S. gun makers dosn'tuse some of the surplus calibers.

I'd love to see some new pistols in 7.62x25mm for example.

That's just one of many.

It's a terrible caliber for anything other than plinking.

http://www.ar15.com/archive/topic.html?b=3&f=16&t=493280

Buddy (a police officer) was using his Colt M4 with 55 gr. FMJ (don't ask me why) and he had to put his 250 lb. hog down with 5 rounds and it kept running for a while. We didn't see any of the fragmentation that .223 should have had from a 16" barrel (using 55 gr. fmj) @ 125 yds. Although he wasn't using the right ammo, I was really surprised that 7.62x39 worked so much more effectively than .223 and while a 300 lb pig is not representative of a human being (not yet) pigs do have similar anatomy and it made me question the effectiveness of .223 for defense. I really expected to see fragmentation, but there was none, all rounds just went through and through with no extreme damage.

Posted: 10/28/2012 7:53:05 AM EDT

[#29]

double tap

Posted: 10/28/2012 7:55:00 AM EDT

[#30]

Quoted:
It's a crappy round.

which kills 250k people a year.

Posted: 10/28/2012 7:56:06 AM EDT

[#31]

I love to hear all this talk about the "superior ballistics" of .300 stupid expensive fuck over 7.62x39 when in reality- both will kill you dead and both are very effective rounds.

Posted: 10/28/2012 7:58:27 AM EDT

[#32]

Quoted:

Quoted:
It's dying as a round. Everybody other than turd world armies and terrorists has moved to 5.56 or 5.45 now.

Finland, Czech Republic, and Slovakia still primarily use 7.62x39.

For now. In ten years they will all be using 5.56 I guarantee. The Czechs are already replacing their VZ-58's with the new 5.56 CZ 805.

yup. its called politics.

Posted: 10/28/2012 8:01:31 AM EDT

[#33]

Quoted:

Quoted:
It's a crappy round.

which kills 250k people a year.

If terrorists, third world genocidal dictators, and the red Chinese get a cheaper price on something else the numbers will change

Posted: 10/28/2012 8:03:28 AM EDT

[#34]

Sig 556R
AR Uppers

Posted: 10/28/2012 8:04:50 AM EDT

[#35]

Quoted:

Quoted:
You can buy a WASR for $400. Nobody wants to compete with that.

Not in CT...thats a 1000 dollar gun here.

Not even worth it at that point.

Commie crap's main selling point is being cheap not particularly quality

Works well at every class I've ever been to.

Personally I'm not going to rock up a class with Hornady TAP because ammo is damn expensive and I'm honestly not shooting off a bench or laying down, and it's almost never at distances over 200 yards. If I do that at a class, I've got match handloads to do it with. Not everyone gets to be David Fortier and get a free random truckload of the best ammunition three times a year.

I'll take the five times the trigger time over perfect potential accuracy out of a round I fired while moving. Just me. Your wallet might have more Benjamins and you're able to afford that.

A grand is a good chunk of change. Spending a grand on a WASR seems counter productive. A thousand bucks can buy or build a nice little AR that will be better than the wasr. The pretty big difference could be used for ammo which is relatively cheap and superior quality even without shooting TAP.

I have less than a grand in my Arsenal with every thing on it. and about $550 into my WASR cause I got a good deal.

Posted: 10/28/2012 8:05:57 AM EDT

[#36]

Quoted:

Quoted:
It's a crappy round.

which kills 250k people a year.

If terrorists, third world genocidal dictators, and the red Chinese get a cheaper price on something else the numbers will change

This thread just went full retard.

Posted: 10/28/2012 8:06:28 AM EDT

[#37]

Quoted:
http://www.all4shooters.com/en/NEWS/Pro-Zone/2012/ARTICLES/Beretta_ARX160_76,2x39/BerettaArx160-762_aperturamagazine.jpg?&resize=900x599

I will be in my rack

So when is the Beretta hitting the market?

Posted: 10/28/2012 8:06:31 AM EDT

[#38]

Quoted:
I love to hear all this talk about the "superior ballistics" of .300 stupid expensive fuck over 7.62x39 when in reality- both will kill you dead and both are very effective rounds.

prepare your anus

even though I agree with you

Posted: 10/28/2012 8:11:51 AM EDT

[#39]

Quoted:

Quoted:
It's a crappy round.

which kills 250k people a year.

If terrorists, third world genocidal dictators, and the red Chinese get a cheaper price on something else the numbers will change

This thread just went full retard.

How so?

The reason combloc shit is everywhere is because it's cheap. Non government groups need to arm for cheap and the Russians have no problem selling to shit heads. Dictators go the same route.

Quantity is a quality of it's own.

When money is not an issue you don't see a lot of combloc shit.

Posted: 10/28/2012 8:21:21 AM EDT

[#40]

They still make civilian rifles for the 7.62x39. Some new military rifles are also being made for it like AK-12,CZ 805, and Beretta's new rifle. The reason it isn't as popular as it use to be with armies is probably because Russia moved away from it to the 5.45x39. And a lot of countries that use to use 7.62x39 have joined NATO. The 7.62x39 is not a bad round, and Russia still uses it in certain niche roles where the 5.45x39 doesn't work as well. I'm not the biggest fan of the 5.56x45 and 5.45x39, but I would say they are better rounds overall than the 7.62x39.

Posted: 10/28/2012 8:56:44 AM EDT

[#41]

Quoted:

Quoted:
It's dying as a round. Everybody other than turd world armies and terrorists has moved to 5.56 or 5.45 now.

http://francisedevoe.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/5541.jpg

Whatever dude. How many first rate armies are still using it then?

Posted: 10/28/2012 8:58:16 AM EDT

[#42]

Quoted:

Quoted:
I don't understand why U.S. gun makers dosn'tuse some of the surplus calibers.

I'd love to see some new pistols in 7.62x25mm for example.

That's just one of many.

It's a terrible caliber for anything other than plinking.

http://www.ar15.com/archive/topic.html?b=3&f=16&t=493280

Buddy (a police officer) was using his Colt M4 with 55 gr. FMJ (don't ask me why) and he had to put his 250 lb. hog down with 5 rounds and it kept running for a while. We didn't see any of the fragmentation that .223 should have had from a 16" barrel (using 55 gr. fmj) @ 125 yds. Although he wasn't using the right ammo, I was really surprised that 7.62x39 worked so much more effectively than .223 and while a 300 lb pig is not representative of a human being (not yet) pigs do have similar anatomy and it made me question the effectiveness of .223 for defense. I really expected to see fragmentation, but there was none, all rounds just went through and through with no extreme damage.

Nice except I was talking about 7.62x25 in the quote you posted. If you're going to attempt to discredit me t least get a clue as to what you are trying to discredit.

Posted: 10/28/2012 8:59:37 AM EDT

[#43]

Quoted:

Quoted:
It's a crappy round.

which kills 250k people a year.

Not hard to do when many of them are on their knees and you're holding the rifle within and inch of the back of their head or just slaughtering unarmed African villagers.

Posted: 10/28/2012 9:00:34 AM EDT

[#44]

Quoted:

Quoted:
It's a crappy round.

which kills 250k people a year.

If terrorists, third world genocidal dictators, and the red Chinese get a cheaper price on something else the numbers will change

This thread just went full retard.

No he's quite right actually. Except for the Chinese. They have already moved away from 7.62x39 as their main caliber.

Posted: 10/28/2012 9:04:49 AM EDT

[#45]

Quoted:

Quoted:
I don't understand why U.S. gun makers dosn'tuse some of the surplus calibers.

I'd love to see some new pistols in 7.62x25mm for example.

That's just one of many.

You can reach 7.62 toks ballistics from the 357sig and not need the long action which, aside from the being corrosive, makes it less popular

are there rifles in 357 sig?

I think there has been at least one 40S&W Sub2000 which has been converted.

Posted: 10/28/2012 9:10:38 AM EDT

[#46]

Quoted:

Quoted:
It's a crappy round.

which kills 250k people a year.

If terrorists, third world genocidal dictators, and the red Chinese get a cheaper price on something else the numbers will change

This thread just went full retard.

No he's quite right actually. Except for the Chinese. They have already moved away from 7.62x39 as their main caliber.

Did they finally adopt the wonky 5.45 adaptation?

Posted: 10/28/2012 1:01:59 PM EDT

[#47]

Quoted:

Quoted:
It's a crappy round.

which kills 250k people a year.

If terrorists, third world genocidal dictators, and the red Chinese get a cheaper price on something else the numbers will change

This thread just went full retard.

No he's quite right actually. Except for the Chinese. They have already moved away from 7.62x39 as their main caliber.

Did they finally adopt the wonky 5.45 adaptation?

5.8mm in their QBZ-95

Posted: 10/28/2012 2:29:39 PM EDT

[#48]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Rock River Arms LAR-47.

I think the one of the newer ACR/SCAR type rifles will be offering one in 7.62x39MM

And think the XCR is also offers a 7.62x39MM

MGI Hydra

http://www.rockriverarms.com/images/products/lar47_1263vv.gif

http://cdn.ammoland.com/files/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/MGI-Hydra.jpg

Not assault rifles. Assault rifles are what the OP asked about.

Most all of those are offered in FA to authorized individuals and organizations.

Posted: 10/28/2012 2:40:03 PM EDT

[#49]

Glad you guys want to get in close to use 7.62x39 at 150-200 yards, I'll happily stay back 500 yards with my 5.56

Posted: 10/28/2012 2:48:58 PM EDT

[#50]

Quoted:
Glad you guys want to get in close to use 7.62x39 at 150-200 yards, I'll happily stay back 500 yards with my 5.56

I'll be at 1000 with a 6.5x55.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - why are there no new assault rifles in 7.62x39 (Page 3 of 4)

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us