Quoted:
Quoted:
Thanks, and one more question. I am not really up on the esoterica of the gelatin tests, but this places both of these in the "not bad at all" range, right?
View Quote
Actually, it places them in the "nearly as good as *good* 5.56mm in most situations, and considerably better than any 5.56mm through auto glass."
View Quote
Actually, I'd consider the Winchester load an excellent performer, better than M193. Close to, if not on par with 75/77gr 5.56mm loadings.
The entrance wound is about .310". After about 1.5" it expands very quickly and drops about 33 grains in fragments. Penetration ends at about 14.5", where the diameter of the expanded 90gr round remenance is about .56".
For comparison:
M193: Entrance wound is .223", after about 3-4" it yaws and fragments, dropping about 20-30 grains in fragments. Penetration ends just shy of 14", where the diameter of the round is only slightly higher than when it entered. Usually around .30".
Hornady 75gr: Entrance wound is .223", after about 1.5" it yaws and fragments, dropping about 40-50 grains. Penetration ends just shy of 14", where the diameter of the round is variable between .30"-.45".
Through auto glass, there is no comparison, the Winchester 7.62x39mm is clearly superior. To have decent combat effectiveness against autoglass in 5.56mm, you have to give up significant damage in "normal" conflicts. Intermediate barrier penetration is about the only thing the 7.62x39mm does positively better than 5.56mm.
The 6.8mm should bridge this gap. Keeping recoil, round counts (how much you can load/carry), weight, accuracy, flat trajectories, wind resistance, etc. all on par or better than 5.56mm and 7.62x39mm, while gaining precious combat effectiveness against intermediate barriers and longer distance targets.