7.62x51 coming back?
- Thread starter Gunfighter14e2
- Start date
7.62x51 never really went anywhere. Would be interesting to see the battle rifle concept become a thing again though.
I don't foresee 7.62x51 rifles being issued beyond a few extra DMR's though. The weight difference between a 160rd load out of 5.56 and and 160rds of 308 is substantial.
I don't foresee 7.62x51 rifles being issued beyond a few extra DMR's though. The weight difference between a 160rd load out of 5.56 and and 160rds of 308 is substantial.
My load for a M14e2 was 300rds + all the other shit that had to go with me as well. The Mattel guys, carried about 400 total + their other shit. I had no issue getting threw most barriers with ball, they did not fare as well. The 5.56 has it's place, an that would be in someones hand other than mine.
Is 210 not the "big army's" standard load out and individual groups create their own standards to exceed that?
I know 10yrs ago the Marine Corps only issued 6 mags to each infantry marine. All the guys had to go out and buy their own after that. Most just bought 10 packs of PMags and stored there GI mags away until they had to return them. So far as the higher brass was concerned, you only had 6 mags...
Back in my time, basic combat load (TO&E) for a none scoped M14 was 100rds, an the mouse gun was 200. Those who went beyond the wire took all they could carry, an most M14 guys took 200-300. The E-2 guys always had 300-360+ at all times on them. The mouse gun shooters had 350-400 all the time. More than that was mission, an A/O based, as some A/O's there was no re-supply or Dust Off, because you were never there in the first place. When you were not there the AK/SKS & 91/30 load out was lighter but not by much, because when humping those you had to carry extra B/S as well.
The biggest problem I see is that everyone wants to either shoe horn something in the AR15 action size or the AR10 action size. Why the fuck can't they think outside the box and come up with an intermediate sized action.
Use the .30 remington case as the parent, as it is an excellent, in between bolt head size, case that is around 45-48 mm, firing a 130 grain 7mm bullet. Lighter weight than the 7.2x51, significantly more punch than anything worth carrying in the AR15 action size.
Use the .30 remington case as the parent, as it is an excellent, in between bolt head size, case that is around 45-48 mm, firing a 130 grain 7mm bullet. Lighter weight than the 7.2x51, significantly more punch than anything worth carrying in the AR15 action size.
You're thinking critically. That's a "no no" when talking about things connected to the government.
Seriously though, I suspect that the primary reason for not wanting to make rounds with different cartridge lengths than already "standard" action lengths would be because companies would have to re-tool up more so to start production of the new products. It's a money thing. I agree with you though. I'm for ingenuity and end game efficiency.
The thing is, they are using CNC machines to shit out uppers, lowers and BCG's, it is nothing more than changing a few dimensions.
I understand not wanting to replace a couple of million magazines, but it is going to have to be done at some point.
I understand not wanting to replace a couple of million magazines, but it is going to have to be done at some point.
I think the AR is a great platform, hell its been proven in every environment now, performed graet after the initia roll out hiccup in VN. I dont think there is a better platform out there, Caliber can be upgraded quite a bit though.
[/QUOTE]Use the .30 remington case as the parent, as it is an excellent, in between bolt head size, case that is around 45-48 mm, firing a 130 grain 7mm bullet. Lighter weight than the 7.2x51, significantly more punch than anything worth carrying in the AR15 action size.[/QUOTE]
Look up all the work the Brits where doing with 7mm's before Uncle Sam (Nato's boss) stepped in and said everyone had to run 30 cals. The intermediate sized 7mm's they had developed would have been the kitties titties but they where too far ahead of their time.
Look up all the work the Brits where doing with 7mm's before Uncle Sam (Nato's boss) stepped in and said everyone had to run 30 cals. The intermediate sized 7mm's they had developed would have been the kitties titties but they where too far ahead of their time.
Feeds like shit in full auto, doesn't work well linked, no taper whatsoever on the case makes for extraction issues in a dirty environment, case head diameter leaves practically nothing on the bolt face (though, again, this could be modified by changing dimensions) .
In the AR15 platform, the 6.8 is probably the best, overall compromise, but it is a compromise. In order to gain a substantial improvement, pressures have to be at the upper end of the safety margin for the bolt face.
Once again, modification of the dimensions is the key, if you are going to do that, then stretch the case to 46-48 mm and increase the bolt diameter, you'll get the increased performance while maintaining a reasonable weight.
The 130 grain 7mm bullet kills shit really well,
Back in 1895, the Navy had a good answer, the 6mm Lee Navy, powders of the era weren't up to the task though.
If it weren't for Dougy McArthur, we would probably STILL be using the .276 Pedersen, because it WAS the right answer.
Similar threads
