Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
1/25/2018 7:38:29 AM
Posted: 7/28/2002 10:53:20 AM EST
From Ocnus.net

Defence & Arms
In Praise Of The 7.62
By Maj. Anthony F. Milavic USMC (Ret.), Defese Watch 26/6/02
Jun 27, 2002, 8:54am

In the name of transformation for the 21st century, the Department of Defense (DoD) is all ears for programs such as the Crusader howitzer, MV-22 Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft and Joint Strike Fighter, while it continues to lend a deaf ear to its warriors on the most fundamental issue in need of change - the 5.56-mm. rifle bullet used by its infantrymen.

For over 36 years, Americans on the field of battle have reported hitting enemy soldiers with multiple rounds of 5.56-mm. ammunition and watching them continue to advance while firing their weapons. In spite of these field observations, the DoD is developing its future infantry weapon - the Objective Individual Combat Weapon (OICW) - to fire this same impotent cartridge.

This deficiency was reported as early as Dec. 9, 1965, in the official after-action report of the Ia Drang Valley battle popularized by the movie and book, We Were Soldiers Once … and Young, by Joseph L. Galloway and Lt. Gen. Hal Moore USA (Ret.).

Moore, the commanding officer of the battalion engaged there, writes of assaulting enemy soldiers being hit by 5.56-mm. rounds: "Even after being hit several times in the chest, many continued firing and moving for several more steps before dropping dead." Later in that war, a similar experience is voiced by Col. John Hayworth, USA (Ret.): "In one fire-fight, I saw my RTO place three rounds [of 5.56-mm.] in the chest of a charging NVA regular at 50 yards. He kept firing his AK and never slowed down. At 30 yards, I hit him with a blast of double-ought buck. It picked him up off his feet and he didn't get up again."

In the aftermath of the Vietnam War, the DoD increased the weight of the 55-grain bullet (M193) to 62 grains and increased its length to accommodate a steel "penetrator." These changes resulted in a new 5.56-mm. bullet with the designation M855.

The Pentagon then sent its warriors to the Gulf War in 1991. Maj. Howard Feldmeier, USMC (Ret.) was there: " … several Marines commented that they had to shoot Iraqi soldiers 2-3 or more times with the 62-grain 5.56-mm. green tip ammo before they stopped firing back at them …. "



Link Posted: 7/28/2002 10:56:03 AM EST
That report is exemplified by one of an Iraqi officer who was thrown from his vehicle and set afire by an explosion: "Somehow he managed to hold on to his AK-47. He also got up, still on fire, faced the firing line of Marines and charged forward, firing his weapon from the hip. He didn't hit anyone but two Marines each nailed him with a three-round burst from their M-16A2s. One burst hit him immediately above his heart, the other in his belly button. [He] … kept right on charging and firing until his magazine was empty."

"When he got up to the Marines, two of them tackled him and rolled him in the sand to put out the fire …. He was quickly carried back to the battalion aid station …. The surgeons told me he certainly died of burns, but not necessarily from the six 5.56-mm. wounds …. "

In spite of the above "lesson learned," the DoD dispatched its warriors to combat in Somalia in 1993 with the same flawed 5.56-mm. "green tip" cartridge. As testified in Mark Bowden's book, Black Hawk Down: "His weapon was the most sophisticated infantry rifle in the world, a customized CAR-15, and he was shooting the Army's new 5.56-mm. green tip round. The green tip had a tungsten carbide penetrator at the tip, and would punch holes in metal, but that very penetrating power meant that his rounds were passing right through his targets …. The bullet made a small, clean hole, and unless it happened to hit the heart or spine, it wasn't enough to stop a man in his tracks. Howe felt he had to hit a guy five or six times just to get his attention."

The Pentagon remained unmoved by that experience of its warriors and continues to send them to war under-powered. On Apr. 4, 2002, I received an e-mail from a trooper in Afghanistan who appeals, in part: "The current-issue 62-gr 5.56-mm. (.223) round, especially when fired from the short-barreled M-4 carbine, is proving itself (once again) to be woefully inadequate as [a] man-stopper. Engagements at all ranges are requiring multiple, solid hits to permanently bring down enemy soldiers. Penetration is also sadly deficient. Even light barriers are not perforated by this rifle/cartridge combination."

These reports are consistent with my own experience during three tours of duty in Vietnam from 1964 to 1969; experience that repeatedly reminded me that this 5.56-mm. cartridge was nothing more than the full metal jacket military version of the commercial .223 Remington cartridge. The .223 Remington was and is today commercially advertised and sold as a "varmint" cartridge for hunting groundhogs, prairie dogs and woodchucks. The cartridge is offered with soft point, hollow point, fragmentation, or projectiles incorporating two or more of these attributes to enhance its lethality and assure a "clean kill" on varmints: one-round knockdown power.

Link Posted: 7/28/2002 10:57:14 AM EST
States such as the Commonwealth of Virginia do not permit it to be used for hunting deer because its lethality - with or without those enhancements - does not assure a "clean kill" on deer. Yet, its full metal jacket military counterpart continues to be issued to American warriors for the purpose of knocking down an enemy soldier and causing him to stop shooting. As heard from the above testimony, this varmint cartridge fails to do that even with multiple hits.

In desperation, some troopers in Afghanistan are using the commercial .223 Remington 77-grain Sierra MatchKing hollow point bullet loaded by Black Hills Ammunition. Ironically, even this extreme effort has not fixed the problem: "Its performance on enemy soldiers is not much better, but it does penetrate barriers. We're fighting fanatics here, and they don't find wimpy ammunition particularly impressive!" cries a voice from Afghanistan.

From 55-grain (M193) to 62-grain (M855) to 77-grain (Sierra MatchKing), these changes in the weight and composition of the 5.56-mm./.223 Remington bullet have failed to increase lethality to that needed in combat: one-round knockdown power on an enemy soldier. Curiously, the DoD has ignored just such a cartridge for over 36 years; listen again to its lethality as recounted by the American warriors in Black Hawk Down:

"They used to kid Randy Shughart because he shunned the modern rifle and ammunition and carried a Vietnam era M-14, which shot a 7.62-mm. round without the penetrating qualities of the new green tip. It occurred to Howe as he saw those Sammies keep on running that Randy was the smartest soldier in the unit. His rifle may have been heavier and comparatively awkward and delivered a mean recoil, but it damn sure knocked a man down with one bullet, and in combat, one shot was all you got. You shoot a guy, you want to see him go down; you don't want to be guessing for the next five hours whether you hit him, or whether he's still waiting for you in the weeds."
© Source: 2002 by Ocnus.net


Link Posted: 7/28/2002 11:03:15 AM EST
I believe this to be true.I know i will get flamed here but o well.
I own a Bushmaster and a M1A and i dont think you can put the 5.56 even in the realm of the 7.62 as far as effectiveness.
Link Posted: 7/28/2002 11:13:16 AM EST
Thanks for sharing.

don't have a link I suppose?, I'm sure someone will be askin'

I love My MBR's even more now
Link Posted: 7/28/2002 11:21:07 AM EST
my new scope for my M1A should be here tomorrow or tuesday
Link Posted: 7/28/2002 11:32:10 AM EST
[Last Edit: 7/28/2002 11:33:52 AM EST by usmc0311]
http://www.ocnus.net/artman/publish/printer_916.shtml


This is the link i hope it comes up.
Link Posted: 7/28/2002 12:31:53 PM EST
I have an AR10, does that count?
Link Posted: 7/28/2002 12:54:58 PM EST
I just have a 308 bolt action "sniper" rifle... does that count?
Link Posted: 7/28/2002 1:08:46 PM EST
Link Posted: 7/28/2002 1:18:07 PM EST
I dont think it matters as long as its 7.62mm.
FAL,AR10,M14 it does not matter as long as your comfortable with that weapon.
I think they all are great platforms to launch 7.62x51mm ammunition i just like the M14/M1A.
I plan on getting a Scout to be buddies with my Standard.
But if your of a Worldly sort or poor and just plain unamerican you can buy a FAL.
"The Free Worlds Right Arm",my ass the free worlds right arm has been and always will be the 1903 Springfield,M1 Garand,M14 and the M16 by God.Those four weapons have held the free world up,and i dont consider Europe any part of the free world.

Link Posted: 7/28/2002 1:20:12 PM EST
Excellent read! M1a here, doesn't get much better...
Link Posted: 7/28/2002 1:26:37 PM EST
I've got 2 Garands, 2 03A3s, 3 .308 bolt guns and a single shot long range gun in .308 or I can change the barrel to a 6.5 - .284.
Am I covered?
Gerry
Link Posted: 7/28/2002 1:39:40 PM EST
Ger42 you would be covered,But you must be a heathen and turn one of your garands into 7.62x51mm.just kidden.your more than covered.
Link Posted: 7/28/2002 2:05:51 PM EST

Originally Posted By LgAnimalVet:
Excellent read! M1a here, doesn't get much better...hr


The FAL is better!
Link Posted: 7/28/2002 2:26:38 PM EST

... I hit him with a blast of double-ought buck. It picked him up off his feet and he didn't get up again."



He forgot about the part where Newton's laws were suspended! Ya' know the one that runs for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Dude might have tripped and fell but people only fly backwards from the blast of a 12 gauge in Hollywood.

There are also reports of people taking several rounds of a .50 BMG and one of an M-1 120mm penetrator core and not dropping dead fast enough.

Sorry Major, the .223 is still the best round - there are no magic bullets - even 7.62 x 54 mm
Link Posted: 7/28/2002 2:35:04 PM EST
M1A,Fal,AR10,Cetme here.My AR's are fun but if my life depended on it I'm grabbing a 308.You can talk all the scientific mumbo jumbo you want but bigger bullet=bigger hole.I know ,you can't carry as much 308 ammo but then again you only have to hit somebody once or twice with a 308.

Let the flames begin.
Link Posted: 7/28/2002 2:44:53 PM EST
1-I am "worldly". I've been all over it.
2-I am USMC retired
3-I am a (multiple) FAL owner.
4-I am NOT poor.
5-I am NOT un-American.
6-Just who the FUCK are YOU to make these judgements?

just curious


Jim


Originally Posted By usmc0311:
I dont think it matters as long as its 7.62mm.
FAL,AR10,M14 it does not matter as long as your comfortable with that weapon.
I think they all are great platforms to launch 7.62x51mm ammunition i just like the M14/M1A.
I plan on getting a Scout to be buddies with my Standard.
But if your of a Worldly sort or poor and just plain unamerican you can buy a FAL.
"The Free Worlds Right Arm",my ass the free worlds right arm has been and always will be the 1903 Springfield,M1 Garand,M14 and the M16 by God.Those four weapons have held the free world up,and i dont consider Europe any part of the free world.


Link Posted: 7/28/2002 2:50:10 PM EST
Of all my toys...it just feels right!
Link Posted: 7/28/2002 2:50:24 PM EST
[Last Edit: 7/28/2002 3:19:53 PM EST by GreyGhost]
Don't get me wrong,I love my AR's but fans of the 5.56 answear this....

1.When we had the 30.06 M1 or the .308 M14 did we EVER have a controversy about the stopping power of the weapon?

2.If many states won't let you use a .223 on a 150-200# deer why should we think it would give you a clean kill on a 150-200# man?
Link Posted: 7/28/2002 2:51:28 PM EST
Anybody ever read Stephen AMbrose's stuff like Citizen Soldiers, D-Day, Band of Brothers? He has accounts of veterans who survived a lot of wounds. One guy got hit in the adam's apple with a 8mm round from a German machine gun, lived and continued to serve in the US Army during WWII at the front. A British soldier had a mortar round land right in front of him while he was cooking tea, came thru unscathed. Another man had a grenade go off between his legs, the buttstock of the rifle absorbed all of the blast, he was uninjured. Point is, people can survive getting hit with bullets, regardless of the caliber or power of the weapon. Doesn't have to be big. Another guy shot himself in the leg accidentally with a 9mm Luger pistol he picked up, died right there.

I bet if they had the internet during WWII, these posts would still be the same. "Garands suck, give me a 1903 Springfield". The Germans would be complaining about their "puny 9mm pistols and sub guns" or maybe even the "limited punch of the 8mm round"
Link Posted: 7/28/2002 2:51:50 PM EST

Originally Posted By Paul:

... I hit him with a blast of double-ought buck. It picked him up off his feet and he didn't get up again."



He forgot about the part where Newton's laws were suspended! Ya' know the one that runs for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Dude might have tripped and fell but people only fly backwards from the blast of a 12 gauge in Hollywood.

There are also reports of people taking several rounds of a .50 BMG and one of an M-1 120mm penetrator core and not dropping dead fast enough.

Sorry Major, the .223 is still the best round - there are no magic bullets - even 7.62 x 54 mm



Speak the truth brother!

People love to cite certian instances, while ignoring others.

My favorite is when people quote Black Hawk Down to some how prove that the 5.56 is ineffective. They seem to love to gloss over the parts where people where NOT put down immediately with larger caliber weapons. Maybe they didn't read the whole book, I don't know.

I still like my AR15's chambered in 5.56 thank you. And I'd bank my life on them.
Link Posted: 7/28/2002 2:55:43 PM EST
Link Posted: 7/28/2002 3:03:15 PM EST
[Last Edit: 7/28/2002 3:05:16 PM EST by QuietShootr]
You all forgot the best MBR of them all:


Link Posted: 7/28/2002 3:03:34 PM EST

Originally Posted By GreyGhost:
Don't get me wrong,I love my AR's but fans of the 5.56 answear this....

1.When we had the 30.06 M1A or the .308 M14 did we EVER have a controversy about the stopping power of the weapon?

2.If many states won't let you use a .223 on a 150-200# deer why should we think it would give you a clean kill on a 150-200# man?



There has always been a controversy with the weapons we choose, not necessary the caliber either. When the military picked the Kraig-Jorgensen, it was a slower firing rifle then the Mauser, and we paid for that when we fought the Spainards in Cuba. The Marines dissed the Garand, because "A true rifleman doesn't need to fire that fast." I have yet to see a controversy concerning the 5.56 mm, except for emails from SF guys in Afghanistan and internet stories.
Link Posted: 7/28/2002 3:10:25 PM EST

Originally Posted By usmc0311:
I dont think it matters as long as its 7.62mm.
FAL,AR10,M14 it does not matter as long as your comfortable with that weapon.
I think they all are great platforms to launch 7.62x51mm ammunition i just like the M14/M1A.
I plan on getting a Scout to be buddies with my Standard.
But if your of a Worldly sort or poor and just plain unamerican you can buy a FAL.
"The Free Worlds Right Arm",my ass the free worlds right arm has been and always will be the 1903 Springfield,M1 Garand,M14 and the M16 by God.Those four weapons have held the free world up,and i dont consider Europe any part of the free world.




I was with you until I read this.

What qualifies you to judge others on their firearms purchases and preferences? This is some of the most ridiculous, elitist and un-American (capital A for American smart guy) crap I've ever read.

Time for that big cup of Shut The Fuck UP!

Kids these days! Give me a break!
Link Posted: 7/28/2002 3:37:13 PM EST
I have very extensive hunting experience of all types of game from small to large and have seen the effectiveness of practically every common caliber. I have hunted with both the .223 and .308 a very lot.

I also was in combat 2 times, both times using and witnessing the effectiveness of the 5.56 and the 7.62.

7.62 definitely for me.
Link Posted: 7/28/2002 3:57:08 PM EST

Originally Posted By usmc0311:
I dont think it matters as long as its 7.62mm.
FAL,AR10,M14 it does not matter as long as your comfortable with that weapon.
I think they all are great platforms to launch 7.62x51mm ammunition i just like the M14/M1A.
I plan on getting a Scout to be buddies with my Standard.
But if your of a Worldly sort or poor and just plain unamerican you can buy a FAL.
"The Free Worlds Right Arm",my ass the free worlds right arm has been and always will be the 1903 Springfield,M1 Garand,M14 and the M16 by God.Those four weapons have held the free world up,and i dont consider Europe any part of the free world.



I agree with you on using 7.62mm as the MBR standard and using it in whatever platform your comfortable with.

I disagree with your view of FAL owners. As far as being worldly, yes I am, as far as being poor, no I'm not, as far as being unAmerican, wrong again....20 years and still serving. I own 1 FAL with 2 others being professionally built.

I again disagree with your very limited view on FN FALs. FALs are considered the Free World's Right Arm because they were adopted by over 90 countries, and probably would have been adopted here in the USA over the M-14 if political leveraging had not take place. Granted our battle rifles are great guns, but why did most other armies of "Free World" (i.e non-communist despite your definition) countries adopt G3s and FALs developed and sold by European countries?

I like M-1s, M-14s, FALs, Dragonov's and AR-15s. I dislike AK-47s and SKS', but I won't make disparaging remarks about the firearm or anyone who owns one or who would like to own one because of my weaopon preference. And yes it is ironic that I like Dragonov's and not AK-47s, but hey, that's my choice.


Link Posted: 7/28/2002 5:28:49 PM EST
It was a joke,OK,im sorry.

I meant it in jest.

However the part about the "free worlds right arm" i hold to be true.
Because if it were not for the 1903,M1,M14 and the M16 there wouldnt be any FALs.Because we have bailed Europe out in two world wars and a cold war.

But i guess i should have explained myself a little better.Sorry.
Link Posted: 7/28/2002 6:09:23 PM EST
In 7.62, I am most partial to the lightweight KAC SR25. Scoped and with good ammo it shoots better than I can.

Also am very fond of the AMERICAN FAL - the DSarms 58. Heavier and not as accurate, but a better "battle rifle" - whatever that is.
Link Posted: 7/28/2002 7:23:15 PM EST
I am rather partial to .303 British...the MVII 174 grain FMJ ammo tumbles like a buzz saw.

Link Posted: 7/28/2002 10:49:55 PM EST
While any bullet has the potential to kill, or not kill, I think that the larger caliber has the potential to so more consistently and effectively. While the .223 may not be so wimpy as is often stated, there is no way that it can be equal to or better than a .308! Good grief, a 55 gr bullet at 3200 fps or a 150 gr bullet at 2820 fps? I think the answer is obvious as to which is better.
Link Posted: 7/28/2002 11:05:42 PM EST
Seems like the 5.56 is best suited to CQC-type chores, & 7.62 is better for medium to long-range engagements.

Just a hunch.
Link Posted: 7/28/2002 11:21:08 PM EST
Yeah let's switch back to 7.62, no better yet let get rid of rifles all together. Every soldier should be given 10 LAW rockets instead of those weak kneed rifles.

Of course the caliber analysis crew always makes it seem like a solider is "an army of 1" fighting alone. BS BS BS.

US soldiers have M-4's, M-203's, M-249, M-240, Carl Gustav(M134?), and SMAW's as platoon level weapons. Or that a lot of US Army infantry is "mechanized", meaning a Bradley is driving them about. Gee, you think they can point out targets for the 25mm gun? Not to mention a radio that can unleash the "big stuff".

Of course thes proponnents of larger calibers also leave out that the MBR's are just about useless on full auto, which does have some utility.

A determined person can stay up even after suffering a fatal wound. It just takes them a little bit to run out of blood, oxygen, or their will toi continue.

I think some people need to spend less time watching "Dirty Harry", because it distorts their perceptions about what a gun shot will do to the recipient.
Link Posted: 7/28/2002 11:58:18 PM EST
[Last Edit: 7/29/2002 12:00:08 AM EST by ARndog]

Moore, the commanding officer of the battalion engaged there, writes of assaulting enemy soldiers being hit by 5.56-mm. rounds: "Even after being hit several times in the chest, many continued firing and moving for several more steps before dropping dead." Later in that war, a similar experience is voiced by Col. John Hayworth, USA (Ret.): "In one fire-fight, I saw my RTO place three rounds [of 5.56-mm.] in the chest of a charging NVA regular at 50 yards. He kept firing his AK and never slowed down. At 30 yards, I hit him with a blast of double-ought buck. It picked him up off his feet and he didn't get up again."


I'd have to agree with OLY-M4gery.

Hollywood has distorted peoples thoughts of what should happen when someone is shot.

"It picked him up off his feet and he didn't get up again" -- classic hollywood...in the majority of movies 00 buck shot is the equivilant of being hit by an SUV at 100 mph.

Humans are not deer, they may weigh near the same(remember the weight of the deer is after it has been gutted)...but since you make the comarison...

If you shoot a deer with a .308 round does it immediately drop, or does it run 100 yards? Some times it will drop in it's tracks, and some times it will run 1/4 mile.(assuming a solid chest shot) It all depends upon the shot placement.
Link Posted: 7/29/2002 1:02:03 AM EST
I still like the AK-47 and 7.62x39 since it doesnt kick a whole lot so it should be controllable in full auto, it penetrates better than 223 (223 just breaks up after going through a table) which is useful for hitting enemies behind cover. Its cheap and reliable and mags are cheap as hell.... I kinda wonder why no one makes semi (or full) auto guns in 6.5x55 mauser because it kicks little (even less than 308), yet its still more powerful than 7.63x39...
Link Posted: 7/29/2002 1:48:39 AM EST
Whatever this former Colonel saw when he fired the 12 gauge 00 Buck at the bad guy (whether he went airborne or just dropped) I will bet money there was no more resistance from him! Nothing like 9 .32 caliber pellets striking home at once. And for most of the situations civilians will encounter (home defense) that's all you will need anyway! So buy yourself a good ol 12 gauge 870 with a short barrel and load it up with 00 Buck. For any problems you may ever encounter, this should get you through it. Afterall, what business will anyone here ever have taking shots at people over 100 yards away? If you want more range, get some slugs and make sure your gun has rifled or ghost ring sights on it. There, you are covered from 0-100 yards or more, with a weapon that will do as much damage as anything you can legally own. There, now stop worrying about rifles! LOL.

If you are military, hope that they develop a super-duper weapon soon that fires .50 BMG rounds that are made of super lightweight titanium that also has a detonating tip that explodes on impact. Then have a very effective muzzlebrake installed to keep the recoil down. And oh yeah, it should have a microwave on it too for heating up MRE's! LOL, come to think of it, didn't that French dude create a similar gun in Beverly Hills Cop 3? Not trying to be a jerk here, just trying to lighten up an intense, un-resolvable argument about .223 vs .308.
Link Posted: 7/29/2002 7:25:35 AM EST
Weeeeeeee

Another 7.62 vs. 5.56 Thread!

I'm not going to get into the details of why I say this, there's probably over 100 threads on this same exact topic, all with great explanations.

When you add up ALL the variables to combat, not just stopping power, the end result is the 5.56 being the round the "fits most of the bills".

You are all speaking 1 Dimension here.

Combat is a 3 Dimension environment with a 4th Dimension not many talk about, LUCK!!

Luck, the reason why someone can get hit with 5 bullets of your beloved 7.62 and still live.

Luck, the reason why others get hit with even bigger calibers and even large parts of shrapnel and still got to come home to their families.

Link Posted: 7/29/2002 7:49:31 AM EST

Originally Posted By Gunner1X:

Originally Posted By usmc0311:
I dont think it matters as long as its 7.62mm.
FAL,AR10,M14 it does not matter as long as your comfortable with that weapon.
I think they all are great platforms to launch 7.62x51mm ammunition i just like the M14/M1A.
I plan on getting a Scout to be buddies with my Standard.
But if your of a Worldly sort or poor and just plain unamerican you can buy a FAL.
"The Free Worlds Right Arm",my ass the free worlds right arm has been and always will be the 1903 Springfield,M1 Garand,M14 and the M16 by God.Those four weapons have held the free world up,and i dont consider Europe any part of the free world.




I was with you until I read this.

What qualifies you to judge others on their firearms purchases and preferences? This is some of the most ridiculous, elitist and un-American (capital A for American smart guy) crap I've ever read.

Time for that big cup of Shut The Fuck UP!

Kids these days! Give me a break!




Originally Posted By usmc0311:
It was a joke,OK,im sorry.

I meant it in jest.

However the part about the "free worlds right arm" i hold to be true.
Because if it were not for the 1903,M1,M14 and the M16 there wouldnt be any FALs.Because we have bailed Europe out in two world wars and a cold war.

But i guess i should have explained myself a little better.Sorry.



Don't worry, I got your back buddy. It was obviously "tongue-in-cheek" and did not warrant the outragious reaction from so many insecure FAL owners.

If it's such a great rifle then why are they so sensitive. If you have the best then you can sit in quiet confidence, or chuckle at other's ignorance. By over-reacting, you validated his joke as plausible.
Link Posted: 7/29/2002 9:04:17 AM EST

Originally Posted By Charging_Handle:
If you are military, hope that they develop a super-duper weapon soon that fires .50 BMG rounds that are made of super lightweight titanium that also has a detonating tip that explodes on impact. Then have a very effective muzzlebrake installed to keep the recoil down.




www.birdman.org/products/M82entryl.htm

Why charge through the door with a wimpy M-16 or an even more girly and vastly over-rated, "bullets stuck in the door" type HK MP-5? Why not use a weapon that not only gets the ones hiding behind the front door but ALSO gets the two running out the back?


hehehehehe
Link Posted: 7/29/2002 11:50:42 AM EST
No the FAL is a good rifle,before the ban here in cali a bunch of my Marine buddies went and bought FAL's because they are cheap.
5 to stay alive you know.

However i know this to be a fact that the M14 types are just as good.I bought my M1A and alot of those same guys said "man i wish i would have bought a M1A",and alot of them did go out and buy M1A's.

Now my take on the 5.56mm M16A2 is:
1.5.56 is easier to teach a bunch of recruits that have never shot a weapon before.
2.M16's are easier to manufacture,they cost alot less to buy i think the military price is like $624.00 a copy.
3.They are lighter M16A2 weighs 8.7 pounds Vs 9.2 pounds of the M14 with a synthetic stock.The orignal M16 and M16A1's were lighter yet.
4.Ammo is lighter,smaller and more compact.

Now my take on the 7.62mm M14.
1.7.62mm is much more effective than 5.56 no matter how you wanna look at it.
2.The M14 was very robust built like a tank and had a action that won two wars against Japan and Germany and it fought in Korea.However it is very labor intensive to build.But todays casting technology makes this null and void.
3.9.2 pounds Vs 8.7 is not that much of a weight diffrence.
4.It does not matter how much the ammo weighs cause your gonna carry it.Thats the military way.Ask a 240 Gunner and he will say you just do it.And Machine gunners have to carry M240 that bag with all the gear and extra barrel and the T&E tripod,along with their own personal gear,and at least two of those guys have M16's for security purposes.The weight issue is nill,it does not exist in the military.

The reason i brought up the 0331 M240 guys is cause more often than not they are attached to line platoons and Sqauds,they do the same thing the average foot 0311 rifleman does.
Link Posted: 7/29/2002 12:24:05 PM EST
[Last Edit: 7/29/2002 12:26:11 PM EST by OLY-M4gery]

Originally Posted By usmc0311:

Now my take on the 5.56mm M16A2 is:
1.5.56 is easier to teach a bunch of recruits that have never shot a weapon before.



It's also easier to use full auto, be it for house clearing or final protective line.


2.M16's are easier to manufacture,they cost alot less to buy i think the military price is like $624.00 a copy.


I think if the military decided to go back to 7.62 it would be in the form of an AR-10, same ease to make, cost etc.


3.They are lighter M16A2 weighs 8.7 pounds Vs 9.2 pounds of the M14 with a synthetic stock.The orignal M16 and M16A1's were lighter yet.


They are also shorter, and "handier", light and short are important in CQB, and that's what the military thinks it will be doing in the future.


4.Ammo is lighter,smaller and more compact.


As you are about to point out for the end user that is a big "so what". Although 30 round mags versus 20 rounders do have an advantage in CQB, and auto fire situations.


Now my take on the 7.62mm M14.
1.7.62mm is much more effective than 5.56 no matter how you wanna look at it.



Ummm, there have been very few complaints about SAW's effectiness....... .300 mag is more effective than 7.62, .338 Lapua is effective than .300 mag............ I could go on. 5.56 will kill you dead, you end up no deader if hit by 7.62.

Most infantry type combat takes place at appx 100 yds. 5.56 is lethal in that range, esp when you consider that a trained soldier can fire more rounds accurately for a longer time with a 5.56 rifle than a 7.62 rifle. That 7.62 is producing more heat and recoil with every shot.


2.The M14 was very robust built like a tank and had a action that won two wars against Japan and Germany and it fought in Korea.However it is very labor intensive to build.But todays casting technology makes this null and void.


No matter what the military wouldn't go back to an M-14 rifle for general issue for a variety of reasons, any more than the would go back to M-48 tanks.


3.9.2 pounds Vs 8.7 is not that much of a weight diffrence.
4.It does not matter how much the ammo weighs cause your gonna carry it.Thats the military way.Ask a 240 Gunner and he will say you just do it.And Machine gunners have to carry M240 that bag with all the gear and extra barrel and the T&E tripod,along with their own personal gear,and at least two of those guys have M16's for security purposes.The weight issue is nill,it does not exist in the military.



Well you are right, but only in the fact that the grunt using the rifle will be told basically "march or die". The weights, space issue is more with those logisitics types that are concerned how many rounds can fit on trucks, aircraft, or ships.

The more space each rifle round takes up the less space available for grenades, AT, or heavier weapon ammo. The more space needed the more support needed for logistics, more troops transporting ammo means fewer troops using it.

Logistis is becoming a larger issue, every new weapon system is heavier, less fuel effeicient, and comprised of more "modules" that may break down.

Link Posted: 7/29/2002 12:25:18 PM EST
[Last Edit: 7/29/2002 12:39:57 PM EST by OLY-M4gery]

The reason i brought up the 0331 M240 guys is cause more often than not they are attached to line platoons and Sqauds,they do the same thing the average foot 0311 rifleman does.


7.62 probably isn't coming back, and I'm not sure that that many people care. The wave of the future seems to be electronics. Which are great for collecting and transmitting data, but I wonder how useful all that stuff is at obtaining rifle fire hits, or if it would work in aynthing other than a "low intensity" conflict.

I think that an intermediate caliber 6.5-7.0 mm/.260-.280 in a shorter case may be more practical.

This deficiency was reported as early as Dec. 9, 1965, in the official after-action report of the Ia Drang Valley battle popularized by the movie and book, We Were Soldiers Once … and Young, by Joseph L. Galloway and Lt. Gen. Hal Moore USA (Ret.).

Moore, the commanding officer of the battalion engaged there, writes of assaulting enemy soldiers being hit by 5.56-mm. rounds: "Even after being hit several times in the chest, many continued firing and moving for several more steps before dropping dead." Later in that war, a similar experience is voiced by Col. John Hayworth, USA (Ret.): "In one fire-fight, I saw my RTO place three rounds [of 5.56-mm.] in the chest of a charging NVA regular at 50 yards. He kept firing his AK and never slowed down. At 30 yards, I hit him with a blast of double-ought buck. It picked him up off his feet and he didn't get up again."


I hate to nit pick anything that Gen. Moore says, he seems like an old-fashioned dependable American Hero, in the best sense of the term.

But, "...they took several more steps before dropping dead." Well the rounds killed them, sometimes people are dead and it just takes them a few seconds to get the message. That happens with any rifle round unless you hit them THROUGH the spine or in the head.

As far as 30 yards with a shotgun, If that was an 18" barrel type shotgun the pattern would be something like 4-6 feet around, I doubt he hit the guy with more than 3 00 pellets. Not soemthing that would take anyone off their feet.

Lots of Americans have been shot by rifles in the wars the US has been in. A fair number of those guys survived. Probably a fair number continued to fight after being shot.

A motivated person won't let a gun shot stop them. .223 and .308 are both awfully small ice picks.
Link Posted: 7/29/2002 12:41:54 PM EST

Originally Posted By Scary:

Originally Posted By Gunner1X:

Originally Posted By usmc0311:
I dont think it matters as long as its 7.62mm.
FAL,AR10,M14 it does not matter as long as your comfortable with that weapon.
I think they all are great platforms to launch 7.62x51mm ammunition i just like the M14/M1A.
I plan on getting a Scout to be buddies with my Standard.
But if your of a Worldly sort or poor and just plain unamerican you can buy a FAL.
"The Free Worlds Right Arm",my ass the free worlds right arm has been and always will be the 1903 Springfield,M1 Garand,M14 and the M16 by God.Those four weapons have held the free world up,and i dont consider Europe any part of the free world.




I was with you until I read this.

What qualifies you to judge others on their firearms purchases and preferences? This is some of the most ridiculous, elitist and un-American (capital A for American smart guy) crap I've ever read.

Time for that big cup of Shut The Fuck UP!

Kids these days! Give me a break!




Originally Posted By usmc0311:
It was a joke,OK,im sorry.

I meant it in jest.

However the part about the "free worlds right arm" i hold to be true.
Because if it were not for the 1903,M1,M14 and the M16 there wouldnt be any FALs.Because we have bailed Europe out in two world wars and a cold war.

But i guess i should have explained myself a little better.Sorry.



Don't worry, I got your back buddy. It was obviously "tongue-in-cheek" and did not warrant the outragious reaction from so many insecure FAL owners.

If it's such a great rifle then why are they so sensitive. If you have the best then you can sit in quiet confidence, or chuckle at other's ignorance. By over-reacting, you validated his joke as plausible.



action<reaction, reaction>action

get it?
Link Posted: 7/29/2002 12:44:50 PM EST
.223 vs .308....

.45ACP vs 9mm Luger

Anyone ever notice how ammo arguments never die???
Link Posted: 7/29/2002 1:09:31 PM EST
Alright everyone up against the wall, time for a 5.56 v 7.62 shoot off
Link Posted: 7/29/2002 1:24:27 PM EST
Weren't there over 1000 Somalians killed during the BHD mission? Were any of these with 5.56?
Link Posted: 7/29/2002 1:28:58 PM EST

Originally Posted By Scary:

Originally Posted By Gunner1X:

Originally Posted By usmc0311:
I dont think it matters as long as its 7.62mm.
FAL,AR10,M14 it does not matter as long as your comfortable with that weapon.
I think they all are great platforms to launch 7.62x51mm ammunition i just like the M14/M1A.
I plan on getting a Scout to be buddies with my Standard.
But if your of a Worldly sort or poor and just plain unamerican you can buy a FAL.
"The Free Worlds Right Arm",my ass the free worlds right arm has been and always will be the 1903 Springfield,M1 Garand,M14 and the M16 by God.Those four weapons have held the free world up,and i dont consider Europe any part of the free world.




I was with you until I read this.

What qualifies you to judge others on their firearms purchases and preferences? This is some of the most ridiculous, elitist and un-American (capital A for American smart guy) crap I've ever read.

Time for that big cup of Shut The Fuck UP!

Kids these days! Give me a break!




Originally Posted By usmc0311:
It was a joke,OK,im sorry.

I meant it in jest.

However the part about the "free worlds right arm" i hold to be true.
Because if it were not for the 1903,M1,M14 and the M16 there wouldnt be any FALs.Because we have bailed Europe out in two world wars and a cold war.

But i guess i should have explained myself a little better.Sorry.



Don't worry, I got your back buddy. It was obviously "tongue-in-cheek" and did not warrant the outragious reaction from so many insecure FAL owners.

If it's such a great rifle then why are they so sensitive. If you have the best then you can sit in quiet confidence, or chuckle at other's ignorance. By over-reacting, you validated his joke as plausible.



Point taken SCARY. Some of this old rehash garb
just makes me insane at times. Every weapon I
own is either a .223 or .308. I see the value in
both.

I carried the M14 when I was in the service,
most of my buddies carried the M16. APPLICATION!

Preaching one over the other as a fix all round
is shear ignorance.
Link Posted: 7/29/2002 2:09:45 PM EST

Originally Posted By shadows:
Weren't there over 1000 Somalians killed during the BHD mission? Were any of these with 5.56?



No, they died of Instant Solalian Death Sydrome or "ISDS".

Everything was OK for the Sam's when the M-16 and Saw's were in use. But when the 7.62 machine gun touched down, they all just fell over, it was weird.
Top Top