User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 8:01:19 PM EDT
For me, this is just preaching to the choir. But I know we're all gun enthusiasts and many have a thirst for knowledge on this subject.
These dudes are squared away, subject matter experts. Not like some random dude on the internet throwing out his fake ass opinion. It's hours long but worth listening through. Shit, listen to it on your commutes to work if you want. You can download the Podcasts.  P&S ModCast 103 - Gun Nerds 6: 5.56 Vs .308 (and Other Silly Interim Ideas) |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 8:07:44 PM EDT
[#1]
Cliff-notes? Kind of a long video, haha. Do they basically think 5.56mm is better in general? Or what's their rifle caliber of choice?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 8:08:51 PM EDT
[#2]
6.5x55 Ackley Improved
End thread. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 8:09:07 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Cliff-notes? Kind of a long video, haha. Do they basically think 5.56mm is better in general? Or what's their rifle caliber of choice? 5.56 > 7.62 is the bottom line |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 8:10:10 PM EDT
[#4]
6.5 Grendel is the right answer.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 8:15:34 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
6.5 Grendel is the right answer. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 8:18:39 PM EDT
[#6]
In before joglee.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 8:19:32 PM EDT
[#7]
Jogl... hey wait a second...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 8:19:56 PM EDT
[#8]
7.62x51 is okay, better than nothing I guess mark me down for 30.06 every time Let's face it, you want something that will your enemy down NOW! While their horse-assing around with 5.56, or 7.62x39 you were smart, and brought enough gun. You want something that will truly reach out and "touch" someone!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 8:20:26 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
6.5 Grendel is the right answer. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 8:20:34 PM EDT
[#10]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 8:21:39 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
7.62x51 is okay, better than nothing I guess mark me down for 30.06 every time Let's face it, you want something that will your enemy down NOW! While their horse-assing around with 5.56, or 7.62x39 you were smart, and brought enough gun. You want something that will truly reach out and "touch" someone! |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 8:21:42 PM EDT
[#12]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 8:23:10 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote History |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 8:23:21 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Anything that decreases combat load, and thus decreases hit probability is fucking dumb. We ain't speaking gerpanese. Just playin. 556 for me. Only reason I have other ars is for dumb state hunting laws. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 8:27:40 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What exactly does 30.06 do that 308 can't? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
7.62x51 is okay, better than nothing I guess mark me down for 30.06 every time Let's face it, you want something that will your enemy down NOW! While their horse-assing around with 5.56, or 7.62x39 you were smart, and brought enough gun. You want something that will truly reach out and "touch" someone! 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 8:29:11 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
208-220 grain bullets with a higher BC and range than the .308 |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 8:30:17 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Explain the mother flipping Garand then! We ain't speaking gerpanese. Just playin. 556 for me. Only reason I have other ars is for dumb state hunting laws. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 8:39:10 PM EDT
[#18]
I've noticed that most of the people advocating for a larger caliber are the ones who don't hump that shit around all day. 7lbs per 100 adds up quick.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 8:43:47 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You can load the those in 308 also. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
208-220 grain bullets with a higher BC and range than the .308 |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 8:43:49 PM EDT
[#20]
I doubt there's many infantrymen who want to hump more weight.
3 years of it was enough for me. My knee is like a loose hinge. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 8:44:04 PM EDT
[#21]
Pfft. 60mm
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 8:47:20 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I doubt there's many infantrymen who want to hump more weight. 3 years of it was enough for me. My knee is like a loose hinge. They'll just have much much less ammo. And it will virtually add no barrier penetration benefit. Which is better suited for LAWs, AT-4s, Mortars, Arty, or CAS anyway. Fuck, do these idiots think Infantry fight in a vacuum with only rifles? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 8:48:12 PM EDT
[#23]
When I saw the thread title, I was gonna reference this. I'm currently listening to the podcast, incredibly insightful and entertaining, if highly NSFW. I love Ian's intro of "I've been nowhere and done nothing, but I've read a lot of books."
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 8:56:53 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Thats why I said to get the podcast and listen to it on long drives. LOL 5.56 > 7.62 is the bottom line 5.56 works. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 8:58:28 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
.30-06 Will absolutely out-do the .308 every time. With those bullets in an '06 it is easily a true 1500 yard shooter. Simple reason for it....case capacity Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
208-220 grain bullets with a higher BC and range than the .308 I will have to study up on the 1500 yard 30.06. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 8:59:39 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
6.5 Grendel is the right answer. Hell, some SOF are using 300 Norma Magnum for ELR right now. Those are more expensive than 338s FFS. Don't expect that to overtake the 300 Win Mag in standard use any time soon either. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 9:01:44 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This round may be adopted someday, but it will take time. Time enough for it to get cheaper. Hell, some SOF are using 300 Norma Magnum for ELR right now. Those are more expensive than 338s FFS. Don't expect that to overtake the 300 Win Mag in standard use any time soon either. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 9:11:19 PM EDT
[#28]
OP, I actually agree with the concept of "Fire Superiority is King." The more bullets, fragments, explosions, missiles, etc etc you get down there, the more damage you can inflict upon enemy soldiers. The main issue with this is that this adoption of a full powered cartridge is that it's developed from the mindset created by fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq. We've been fighting in that shithole for well over a decade, so the entire mindset of needing a longer ranged cartridge that can deliver more "oomph" at those distances has festered. It's a festering mindset.
You want to destroy Abu McShitstain and his butt buddy Ashar Goatfucker at distances beyond 500m, you call in fire support and let MGs take the bastard out while maneuvering riflemen to flank. If you start adopting a 7.62x51mm rifle as the standard service rifle, you will wind up in the same fucking situation as Vietnam if we start fighting China on an island-hopping and mega-city campaign. Same thing with Russia if we find ourselves in the fucking woods of Germany, Poland, or Finland trying to take out Ivan. You find yourself having issues with body armor still with M855A1? Get some tungsten core for those bullets. You really wanna fuck their life up and have far more penetration for cheaper, get some DU cores. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 9:13:03 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Weird, I am around long range shooters on a daily basis. I am the only in the group that owns or shoots 30.06 and that's only because I own Garands. I will have to study up on the 1500 yard 30.06. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 9:13:21 PM EDT
[#30]
Muh Capacity
Muh Knockdown Power |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 9:16:20 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Uh, hopefully we will NEVER EVER see .338 on ANY dismounted weapon system. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 9:28:12 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Its an awesome machine gun round. The ammo is expensive as fuck, so your training time will be very limited on it. A 100 round belt will cost around a 1,000 dollars. Maybe with economy of scale it could be brought down to 8 dollars a pill. We don't need a MG with extra range. We have combined arms. We use things that are far better at producing casualties at those extended ranges than with MGs. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 9:31:30 PM EDT
[#33]
The Brits had it right back in the 50's with the .280 British.
Check out the Forgotten Weapons video posted today, Ian is shooting the EM-2 in .280...well, trying to, it's worn the hell out. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 9:34:52 PM EDT
[#34]
2" mortar, for when you don't want to set up that bipod and baseplate.
Range of HE, illumination, smoke, and signal rounds available. Weapon only weighed around 10-11lb, depending on model. Range wasn't great (often cited 500-600yd), but that could probably be improved these days. Rounds weigh around 1.5-2.5lb each depending on type and variant. I'm betting the HE version has a lot more bang than any grenade, whether thrown, launched, projected, or fired, ever--though a lot less than a 60mm, obviously, at 5/6 the diameter and 2/3 the weight. India still makes a version (see here) that they claim has almost 1km range--still a lot less than a properly emplaced 60mm from what I'm told, but the whole shebang still weighs under 5kg and setup is nearly instant. Might it actually be handy for smaller-unit (i.e. platoon on down) use, or is it just not worth the effort compared to the 60mm? Seriously curious for answers from folks who have some experience. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 9:37:24 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
For what? To bring an extra heavy machine gun, with extra heavy ammo? Only to engage targets out no further than a few hundred meters? The ammo is expensive as fuck, so your training time will be very limited on it. A 100 round belt will cost around a 1,000 dollars. Maybe with economy of scale it could be brought down to 8 dollars a pill. We don't need a MG with extra range. We have combined arms. We use things that are far better at producing casualties at those extended ranges than with MGs. So...guess they want to write a big check. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 9:41:27 PM EDT
[#36]
Every other man in a platoon is issued a MAAWS.
Problem solved. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 9:51:17 PM EDT
[#37]
Didn't watch. Caliber, in this context, is not really that important. Might as well just stick to what we got, but a new intermediate caliber would be cool to see.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 10:26:06 PM EDT
[#38]
I never understood why western troops always humped all that crap around for miles on foot when we're supposed to be all mechanized and mobile and techno savvy. They end up getting chased around by a bunch of 3rd world goat herders with Dushka's welded to the beds of 20 year old toyotas and nissans, and they never huck around a bunch of gear, just AK's and RPG's and any ammo they can hold.
Seems like we don't do guerrilla fighting anymore, we tend to just dress up as big slow targets. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 10:30:38 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Anything that decreases combat load, and thus decreases hit probability is fucking dumb. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
6.5 Grendel is the right answer. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 11:15:20 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The Brits had it right back in the 50's with the .280 British. 
Actually, the Russkis are the folks who came closest to getting it right, with the 5.45x39, which combines the SCHV concept of 5.56x45 with a long, streamlined bullet that provides maximum ballistic efficiency. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 11:25:30 PM EDT
[#41]
300BLK for those 1000m shots.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 11:36:46 PM EDT
[#42]
7.62x45mm
or 5.56x51mm? compromise |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/13/2017 11:51:17 PM EDT
[#43]
Because people shot with a 5.56 thank you and plan a nice evening after?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2017 12:02:07 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Anything that decreases combat load, and thus decreases hit probability is fucking dumb. I personally feel that it's close, but not quite perfect in terms of weight/size to power ratio. Though, I'm not quite sure what is better. I'm willing to appreciate the overall efficiency of things like the 6.5 calibers, but the concept of what is needed should be decided first. Is long range accuracy/terminal ballistics the priority or is having more ammo more important? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2017 12:14:47 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If combat load is the primary concern, do you believe that 5.56 is the best there is to offer? Honest question. I personally feel that it's close, but not quite perfect in terms of weight/size to power ratio. Though, I'm not quite sure what is better. I'm willing to appreciate the overall efficiency of things like the 6.5 calibers, but the concept of what is needed should be decided first. Is long range accuracy/terminal ballistics the priority or is having more ammo more important? We have a hard time getting troops to hit shit out at 200 meters. And that's with a super controllable 5.56 rifle with hardly any recoil. Ok, so going with heavier ammo, troops will substantially have less chances to make hits. Because instead of carrying 210 rounds, they got 120, or whatever. Also, it's been said that because of higher velocity, 5.56 is more deadly. That is why pistols make poor weapons to kill. They are way heavier than 5.56 ammo, but have an 80% survival chance. It's because they move way slower than rifle bullets. And 5.56 is screaming at like 3100 fps with the m855a1. And 7.62 NATO is 2,700 fps with a long as 26" barrel. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2017 12:24:12 AM EDT
[#46]
I feel like I'm on a hampster wheel
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2017 12:25:29 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What exactly does 30.06 do that 308 can't? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2017 12:42:26 AM EDT
[#48]
Ironic that at a time when the Army is being proactive in small arms procurement Arfom GD doesn't like it.
Arfcom GD, wrong on guns just about every time
The ideal weapon per Arfcom GD guides would be a 400$ AR with a 22LR conversion; all the same features as that fancy HK, super light ammo that you can carry a lot of, and it's really affordable! 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2017 12:43:38 AM EDT
[#49]
I'm just here because I thought it was a joglee thread.
Small caliber, high velocity military rifle cartridges aren't going anywhere. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2017 12:58:09 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Nope. The .280 British is just as fat as 7.62 NATO, and nearly as long, so mag size and capacity would be the same as for 7.62 NATO. Plus, .280 rifles would be just as long, and almost as heavy, as 7.62 rifles. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/df/.30-06_Springfield%2C_7.1x43mm%2C_7.62x51_mm_NATO.jpg/220px-.30-06_Springfield%2C_7.1x43mm%2C_7.62x51_mm_NATO.jpg Actually, the Russkis are the folks who came closest to getting it right, with the 5.45x39, which combines the SCHV concept of 5.56x45 with a long, streamlined bullet that provides maximum ballistic efficiency. https://www.ammoland.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/5.56x45-vs-5.45x39.5.jpg Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The Brits had it right back in the 50's with the .280 British. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/df/.30-06_Springfield%2C_7.1x43mm%2C_7.62x51_mm_NATO.jpg/220px-.30-06_Springfield%2C_7.1x43mm%2C_7.62x51_mm_NATO.jpg Actually, the Russkis are the folks who came closest to getting it right, with the 5.45x39, which combines the SCHV concept of 5.56x45 with a long, streamlined bullet that provides maximum ballistic efficiency. https://www.ammoland.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/5.56x45-vs-5.45x39.5.jpg The earlier versions were a bit narrower. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
