The virgin .308 vs the CHAD 6.5
.308 vs 6.5
Cooper Martin
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
forgottenweapons.com
marinecorpstimes.com
modernfirearms.net
modernfirearms.net
forgottenweapons.com
twitter.com
James Adams
Isaac Peterson
Luke Roberts
Robert Wilson
...
Luke Jenkins
...
Logan Gomez
Christian Ramirez
Landon Powell
6,5 is a meme and 7,62x51mm is the best rifle round in the planet, period.
Prove me wrong. Protip:You can't
Andrew Cox
pay denbts
Leo Nelson
Here is something objectively better.
en.wikipedia.org
forgottenweapons.com
Grayson Garcia
Just look at a ballistic chart tbh smh
Evan Baker
7.62mm ballistic coefficient is .409 and the 6.5mm bc is .626. To complre it to others, a bc of 0.95 is a flechette, 0.05 is a sphere. The closer to 1 it gets, the more aerodynamic it is, the less energy it wastes.
6.5 is a more efficient cartridge because it loses less energy over distance traveled. In fact there must be a range at which even a grendel 6.5 (shorter) fired out of a gun has more energy than a 7.62, despite the second being bigger.
Xavier Bailey
the neutered .308
the virgin 6mm meme
the chad 300 win mag
Austin Mitchell
it depends on the bullet weight, dummy
lmao so true
Anthony Reed
...
Wyatt Walker
I usually like you Magyaranon, but that's fucking stupid.
Eli Campbell
6.5 is much more efficient but people talking about this tend to minimize or overlook that that OAL and aggressive shoulder is not going to feed in most assault style rifles.
Carson Collins
Is there some reason the AR-10 isn't considered an "assault style rifle"?
Brayden Phillips
never use that newspeak here again
Benjamin Fisher
Jose Ross
It's a battle rifle.
Mason Barnes
Leo Sanchez
Easton Ward
Joshua Thomas
Chase Fisher
CNN PLZ GO
Kevin Lopez
Yeah how about, no.
Robert Foster
Wew lad, just go buy a 30-06 and a .45 you fucking fudder.
Logan Martin
...
Charles Thomas
...
Eli Martin
How did you came to the conclusion that I was speaking of the machine gun, and not the cartridge?
Do you two know what the hell does fudd mean?
Julian Jones
Gabriel Ortiz
Charles Nelson
...
Henry Wood
It wasn't dismissed for being unwieldy or burning barrels.
Sure it would have reduced a PKM style MG to 5 000 rnds before barrel change but it's not like LMGs are never issued with multiple spares barrels. Also PKMs barrels were literally designed to be a WW2 style "consumable", fairly light and fairly cheap. Russia subsequently more than doubled the barrel life on the PKP by simply making it sturdier (and heavier. The PKP is heavier than the PKM mostly due to a much better barrel).
There is no reason to believe they couldn't have gone that way instead. And suddenly 10,000 rnds isn't so bad…
It was stopped because TsNIITochMash literally ran out of money and was barely scrapping by for years after the USSR collapse and then Russia just doesn't have the budget margins to change shit that still does the job when they have to change so many shit that doesn't…
An old PKM is still better than even the last iteration of the FN MAG, an SVD is still better than a tuning M14…
Kek.
Mate don't play that game, the Russian HMG are dual mounted 14.5mm… AKA the-round-that-is-around-since-before-WWII-and is-better-than-even-modern-20mm-yet-nobody-has-realized-it.
And they also have fucking semi-auto rifles firing it…
It's like if you take your stupidity but instead of putting a copper buttplug on a 20mm case like an idiot, you take a 30mm that you neck down to sit a properly made .50cal tungsten bullet that will cut through anything save a modern IFV composite armor.
Isaac Miller
Does make me wonder how bad of an idea making pipe bombs out of shot out barrels would be.
I'm curious frog user, how is the PKM better than an FN MAG?
Well aside from being lighter obviously.
Gabriel Flores
The bigger point of the 6.5mm concept isn't just that it might beat the 7.62mm in terms of long range performance, but that it finally MIGHT bring about the dream of one universal squad cartridge. Sub machine guns won't go away, pistols wont' go away, long range speciality sniper and marksmen rifles will never go away, but the 8-12 man squad in the field on average load out might finally have the same caliber rifle and light machine gun ammunition once and hopefully a long time.
This was something the 7.62mm NATO could do that the 5.56mm could not. You can bitch about less ammunition for the same weight in load out, that most rounds are suppression and very few hit their target, but when a squad was all battle rifles and light machine gun there was no need for one or two guys to be marksmen with a specialty rifle, the whole squad could shoot back long range.
The 5.56mm was simply far too ambitious, it was greedy. They wanted the smallest cartridge they could get away with, or at least they thought they could get away with. The old schoolers like myself who said "its lack of long range performance will mean others with longer range weapons will take advantage of their range and get a huge advantage in the field" and we were right. All that "nobody shoots beyond 200 meters" bullshit went away pretty quick. All the talk of finally turning all the light machine guns to 5.56mm and having a squad with all 5.56mm NATO died in the light of this reality. The 5.56mm assault rifle, far from being the perfect super performer, needs to have battle rifle accompaniant and is better off with the old fashioned 7.62mm light machine gun to compliment it. End of story.
A high quality 6.5mm cartridge offers not only potentially better long range performance against some 7.62mm ammunition, but more importantly replaces the 5.56mm NATO as general issue service. 6.5mm of a proper build can service a light machine gun, and all rifles and carbines in the section will now have long range competency, at least in the cartridge and rifle. Its still lighter and less recoil than 7.62, so better in all regards as general purpose? Its an interesting idea, and probably the future.
They don't want to bring back battle rifles as standard issue for everyone, the 7.62mm NATO is too wasteful they claim, to much recoil, too much material in total war scenario, 5.56mm has proven itself incompetent, so now 6.5mm is the ideal solution to everyone's problems. Good enough for long range, light enough to carry, lower recoil for close in fighting.
I think it could be inevitable.
Lucas Lewis
300 win mag is better because
1) 338 is not a true anti-material round
2) if you think .338 has a longer barrel life, you're a retard
3) 300 win mag shoots just as far, only difference is lower energy
4) 338 costs more
5) 338 requires a very large, unwieldy rifle so you don't get your shit fucked up from the recoil
but yeah, keep doing your greed and red text, that means you win amirite
the marines are reportedly enjoying their new rifle
marinecorpstimes.com
stay mad
Henry Smith
5.56 was never intended for long range, it was always an "intermediate" round.
the idea of "one round for everything" is F-35 tier Judaism incompetence.
Colton Bell
I would have thought you'd have killed yourself by now 30cal-kun. How does it feel knowing that .308 is consistently losing market share to 6.5 that it will never get back?
Leo Lewis
Huge logistics problems solved and lower costs if one cartridge is accepted, and that's exactly what the brass wants. The whole "universal cartridge" thing may not speak to you, but it speaks to the guys who check the marks and sign the papers.
5.55mm has had it share of issues, but it was the first cartridge to ever have a full fledged campaign, a full propaganda war to push it on soldiers who weren't demanding a replacement for 30-06 and 7.62mm NATO. Much of its defense is not from combat, but from the propaganda that started in the 60's and still rings strong today.
Also yes, glad you admit, its an intermediate and has weakenesses. The current push to get people to accept it can be a 1,000 yard cartridge and still keep its "universal" appeal runs against reality and its original design.
Again, its going to be either the current mixed squad going on from here on out, or a switch to one rifle under the 6.5mm of some design that might get finalized at some point which may be never.
James Lewis
I've yet to meet anyone besides redditspacing retards such as yourself claiming that 5.56 was meant to be a "1000 yard cartridge." It was never meant to be effective beyond 400 yards and the supporters of 5.56, and SCHV calibers in general, do not dispute this. Rather, the argument is that in those scenarios in which you are engaging the enemy beyond the effective range of your infantry service rifle, it's better to rely on full caliber MGs, DMRs, and similar weapons that are purpose-built towards long ranges. That's why you have specialized units, to deal with those fringe scenarios the generalist backbone of your military can't solve on their own. Especially when you consider that, even if the average infantryman were theoretically equipped to deal with threats at longer ranges, he generally isn't well-enough trained to exploit his equipment. To be classified an "expert" marksman in the Army you only need to average 4 MoA on the qualification course, giving the average grunt a longer range rifle won't mean shit if he can't make reliable hits past 400 yards anyways.
Bogging down your infantry with a heavy, difficult-to control rifle and equally heavy ammunition (meaning each man carries fewer rounds), the full capability of which won't even be exploited in 95% of cases, all so General Elmer Fudd's concerns about a few fringe cases are satisfied, is an equally retarded situation from a logistics point of view, which creates as many problems as it solves.
Cooper Bailey
There's a difference between "intermediate round" and a round having velocity-dependant terminal ballistics that cause the bullet to have zero terminal effect other than poking a .22-sized hole past 65 yards with a 14.5" barrel using M855.
Intermediate rounds don't have issues with range, 5.56 specifically does. 5.45 works at any range that you can hit the target.
Jordan Nguyen
My nigga. But while the Russians undoubtedly made improvements on the design, you'e giving 5.56 an unfair rap. M855 is a shit round for service rifles, sure. But there do exist workable loadings in 5.56, even if 5.45 is ballistically superior.
Jaxson Campbell
I like .270
Caleb Flores
Well yeah, stuff like the 68 and 77 gr black hills OTM improve the maximum effective range and lower the fragmentation threshold, but it really isn't a good design if you have to go through a bunch of hoops to get a round that actually does what it's supposed to at range. It's coming up with workarounds and solutions for a design that could have been avoided by simply going with a more traditional method of terminal ballistics.
Elijah Lewis
I'm a 300 win mag shill tbh
good to see you've been duped by a classic marketing spam campaign
James James
glad to see you've never shot an AR-15 before
first I agree that the 14.7 inch barrel meme is pure reddit cancer and should be gassed. You shouldn't use below a 20 inch barrel with 5.56, only go 18 if you absolutely must reduce weight.
what do you want to do with a bullet? To say "muh m855" is plainly stupid.
you are a stupid fuck saying that
7.62x39 has the trajectory of a thrown rock. 6.8 is slightly better because muh BC. 6.5 Grendel is better only because at that point you're getting into actual rifle power territory and no longer "intermediate."
again, you're a moron talking out your ass
You know all those things you complained about with 5.56? How it needs velocity because of how small the bullet is? Well idiot the 5.45 is both smaller than the 5.56 and it is slower. It's even worse.
Caleb Rogers
Hey, the .270's not bad. Go .270
Austin Diaz
what do you want to do with a bullet? To ask the question requires the ability to remove yourself from the idiot memery, and that requires you to be smart, which you are not.
you bitch about 5.56 being a tiny velocity dependent round
the 5.45 is
1) even smaller
2) but also slower
you are a moron
Tyler Turner
never said it was. In fact, it's a great round.
If you are one of those people spending all that money for a new 6.5 mememoor setup and the $1.25-1.50 per round for the same recoil as and inferior ballistics to a .270 just because you're buttmad at .30 on the internet, you're are a moron and should gas yourself.
Jonathan Perry
Okay, but how is the 7n6 spoontip not that same kind of workaround? I don't deny that 5.45x39 is a more ballistically efficient cartridge. Like I said before, it's without a dout a superior design to the original 5.56. But your claim that "5.45 works at any range that you can hit the target" has less to do with ballistics and more to do with projectile shape, specifically the spoontip which causes it to yaw in soft targets. If you shot a lead fragmentation-based projectile out of a 5.45 gun, or a spoontip projectile out of 5.56, the effective ranges would be much more similar.
5.45 is a longer, slimmer bullet that retains velocity better you mongoloid. It's superior in that it's more ballistically efficient.
Well that fucking depends now doesn't it? I specifically said that M855 was shit for service rifles. Out of an LMG it's not terrible due to its ability to chew through cover, but its terminal effect on soft targets is shit compared to other 5.56 loadings.
I can't believe such a retard got quads.
Lincoln Richardson
Oh, sorry, I'm not the guy you were talking to. I'm this guy
I just like the .270
Sorry for intruding
Joseph Young
Nathan Powell
...
Josiah Thompson
1) 5.56 is .224 inches in diameter
2) 5.45 is .220 inches in diameter
the 5.45 is roughly 400 fps slower
if you think that in such a scenario .004 inches is a massive, overwhelming difference, then that is proof that you are a stupid piece of shit and have never shot either of those rounds in real life before.
here you go being a stupid ass again
Lucas Allen
I'm not the one who said it could be used out to 800 yards, I've always argued it was a poor cartridge past 400, and I always knew and said it was only a 400 yard cartridge. I'm talking about people in the military I've even heard trying to talk up the 5.56mm and that with "good training" and improved ammunition maybe the higher ups might not have to backtrack on dancing on the grave of the battle rifle by magically making the M-4 suddenly effective at up to 800 yards.
I think we're on the same page but you keep misinterpreting me. I know how things work in the real world, so I'm stating it from the perspective of those in power who make the choices, that's all. The 6.5mm possibility is based on the kinds of decisions by the kinds of people who make those decisions, that's it.
Even then, I stated that the mixed squad is a possibility and might end up winning. But as far as real possibilities go, I also stated it could easily go the route of adopting a single cartridge. That's it. Glad you can take what people say and make other statements out of them.
MY actual CRITICAL response was AGAINST THE PENCIL NECKS and the brass in the first place. Am I arguing that we should return to an all battle rifle army, or did I simply say that the switch to 5.56mm and the Army's general constant push to make it a universal cartridge was wrong, it seems if you actually read my posts you would see I agree with you guys and you worked extra fucking hard to misread it.
Central planners were more concerned about obliterating the 7.62mm NATO into almost non existence, save for maybe a MMG round and sniper roles, but were overjoyed in their anticipation of replacing 7.62 light machine guns with 5.56mm, finally converting the whole squad to The One And Holy Round! They did this just in the nick of time to be proven wrong. Just as they were celebrating upon the grave of the battle rifle they were shown they still have a place on the field. Just as they were going to have ONE cartridge for the whole squad they were dragged back to the mixed squad.
The truth is over focus on single battlefields and the whole "future" thing has harmed the armed forces because it leads to too much proactive theoretical action. The whole idea that in the future infantry will ONLY fight 200 yards or less, and ALWAYS in cities has been proven false. The idea enemies will never exploit the shortcomings of a 400 yard cartridge is false. The idea that you know what the next war is before it happens is false.
Going forward, there are going to be two ways to go. The all 5.56mm ideal is shattered, the all 7.62mm is long buried, and know its going to be 6.5mm or the current mixed squad. That's it.
Isaiah Gutierrez
No, I get that you didn't make that claim. I'm just surprised that anyone would try to say that 5.56 was at all lethal past 400 yards, even the military guys I know don't suck its cock that much.
Fair enough. I still don't think it's a good idea, even from a logistics chain perspective, but I can see how some pencil pusher who didn't think things through would see that.
Jacob Johnson
The 7.62 "What armour?" Tokarev
Noah Edwards
The .357 "what autoloader?" SIG
Logan Peterson
Well for infantry MGs, it's not a small thing, especially when it's 3 full kilos lighter than the titanium made FN MAG (obviously making the PKM considerably cheaper)…
By being that much lighter you can actually put a 200/250 rounds box/belt and still move both things alone (in a defensive setting for example) while if you're using it with it's regular 100 round box it is still light enough to do properly controlled short burst from the shoulder (or simply shoot from a kneeling position).
Also the thing has the slav magic of the PPSh, meaning it's just the right amount of weight for the fire-rate making it really comfortable to shoot in full auto (which the FN MAG never was. On the most modern ones they had to put in an hydraulic buffer to achieve a similar feeling. Which obviously negates most of the weight loss brought by the titanium).
And of course since it's lighter and with an easily controllable recoil it's also more accurate in use because it's just far easier to handle (while the gun itself is less accurate than a MAG).
I mean you see buffed spetsnaz just use modded version of those (and not PKPs) as you would any AR, that's how good the handling on those are.
And then there is the fact that's basically an AK internally, same foolproof piss easy to maintain design. The FN MAG isn't bad for that but it's not as good you need to take out the stock to take out the moving parts, there are pins. It's still very simple, FN engineers know their shit, but not as simple as a PKM.
So yeah "it's better because it's lighter", which isn't much of an argument when you compare other rifles (mainly because the weight variation isn't that big), but in that particular case being lighter is just so much an advantage you can't just dismiss it.
Landon Mitchell
Interesting, thanks frog user.
I never really thought about it that way, it really is an end user thing hey.
Carson Harris
Honestly I'd say 5.56 is optimal only for 300 yards.
I'd be fine with a return to a full rifle powered battle rifle. Hell, we have the AR-10 ultra refined at this point and waiting.
I'd want full rifle power however, not even as much of a compromise as the grendel. Just go all the way with 6.5 mememoor, or 7mm-08, which imo is better, or something in the 6.5-7mm vicinity.
Or to cut costs, just re-adopt 7.62x51 and the m80 round.
Oliver Green
Because 7n6 doesn't have a spoontip, you're thinking of 4.6x36. 7n6 just has a hollow tip to create a back-heavy bullet which causes tumbling, which has been the standard since WW1.
Nolan Perry
Brandon Lopez
Howdy Zig Forums
Zig Forums - greetings
I shoot an AR10. It's flat out fucking badass. Never shot a 6.5 , but would like to
The .308 seems like a much better choice if poo were to hit the fan of course. I reload my own. My bud and I went and shot some tannerite (home brew formula) and my loads did the trick good like
180 grAMAX w/ 40.5 gr IMR3041
Book said 2350ish fps
Fucking Kek bless you motherfuckers
Julian Parker
...
Robert Rivera
Gee billy I love paying $.75 a round to shoot a less efficient 7.62x39 out of inferior rifles.
Kinda like .300Blk.
Gabriel Mitchell
Not wrong, but anyone using .300 memout as a replacement for 7.62x39 is retarded. It was a designed for good terminal performance when fired subsonic out of SBRs, and it fills that niche just fine. Trying to use it as a general-purpose intermediate cartridge is bizarre due to the availability and cost of 7.62x39. If you're a handloader of course the cost issue becomes less prevalent, and performance-wise .300 handloads have the potential to edge out 7.62, but not by a lot.
Robert Ward
7.62 only exists because the USA had a hardon for 30-06.
The US push for the T-65 cartridge (that became 7.62NATO) and adoption of the M14 fucked over the Belgians (and the yanks themselves) far more than it fucked over the Brits.
The US needed the Belgians to vote in favor of adopting the T-65, and so the US promised the Belgians that they would buy FALs from Belgium, if Belgium voted in favor of the T-65. The Belgians agreed and suddenly 7.62mm NATO was a thing. But the yanks had never planned to actually buy the Belgian rifles, they were dead set on an M1-based rifle since they were sure it would be much cheaper to produce. You see the Americans were convinced that M1 production lines could easily and cheaply be modified to build the M14. To make sure the M14 got adopted they rigged the rifle trials against the FAL by using an incredibly shitty copy built by H&R using blueprints incorrectly converted to US-measurements.
They made sure the M14 had well over a year and an entire team to work out any problems with the rifle. The H&R team had less than 3 weeks and two guys. The H&R team was not allowed to actually attend the trials and tinker with their rifle, the M14 guys were. And then just to make sure the FAL-clone failed, the Army fucked over the FAL even harder by downright cooking the books on the trials report. Some of their cheating was incredibly obvious, for example they wrote that the M14 was more or less impervious to mud.
Well then it turned out that the M14 was pretty shit, the T-65 cartridge was overpowered for use in full auto rifles, and they never saved money by converting old M1 factories to building M14s since it was deemed nigh impossible and all the tooling for making M1 rifles was obsolete, worn out, and needed to be replaced anyway.
Gavin Young
fixed
Camden White
How many NATO soldiers were killed with gunfire at 400+ yards range? How many goatfucking terrorists were killed with gunfire at 400+ yards range? By 5.56? Other small arms?
Charles Martinez
...
Dylan Carter
That's not really true and it make the story even the worse.
The FAL (and now the SCAR H) is the only rifle that does works well enough with 7.62 NATO in full auto.
Sure it's not great but it does work, it's not a G3 (that was redesigned in catastrophe to take 7.62 NATO) or Meme14.
That's why it was such a big commercial hit despite the US stuffing FN.
Had those been chambered in .280 they would still be used by everyone and it would have been the N°1 assault rifle instead of the AK…
Gavin Evans
Adorable.
Aiden Howard
Fun fact: during ACR trials it was found that even 5.56 has to much recoil. M16 modified with muzzle brake at full auto had no increase of hit probability vs semi-automatic fire of base M16.
Cameron Perez
If only.
Isaac Wright
30-30 win blasts 7.62 out of the shooting range, no competition
Angel Cox
the m16/14k are amazing.
John Bennett
...
Hunter Roberts
Not to mention that you should shoot from a prone position with a bipod whenever it's possible. Also, you could reduce the RoF to 300 rounds/minute, and thus reduce felt recoil during full auto.
Samuel Roberts
Elijah Richardson
Actual AR-10's are comfortable to shoot in F/A.
What gets me is its just a M60 gas system jerry rigged onto a M14.
Tyler King
you do realize that 30-30 is also 7.62mm (which isn't actually 7.62mm)?
30-30 uses the same .308 bullet as the .308, but with less powder. It is by definition weaker.
Evan Reed
in your haste to remember the history of the round, you forgot that it was very, very effective, which is why the USA fell in love with it.
Seriously, have you ever shot an animal with 30-06? If you did, you'd know why it is awesome. Now imagine shooting your despised enemy to pieces with it. Then, you'll love it.
Not hard to see. The confidence inspired in troops by giving them a cannon is probably more effective than all the "muh efficiency" tacticool ass flatulence in the world.
Nathaniel Richardson
The only reason why they kept on using it was because they had too much surplus ammo left over from ww1.
The m1 garand was going to be chambered in .276 Pedersen until the army cheapened out.
I would phase out 5.56 and 7.62 for 6-7mm cartridge such as 6.5 CM, phase out 9mm for something flatter shooting but not crazy recoil like 10mm & dangerous P++ overpressure such as 357 sig.
I don't see any point in replacing 50bmg, and if you need to shoot farmer then get a cannon caliber.
Caleb Taylor
Robert Ward
Asher Russell
I take it you don't into logistics. Yes you've got cost, but now you've got to get industry working to make something completely new as well as rework everything else in the arsenal to use the new cartridge.
wew
Jaxon Watson
I'll give you the 10mm recoil since
and
but .357 SIG is actually one of the few reasonably designed and well-performing rounds out there.
Brody Sullivan
It's what the FBI should have adopted.
no heavy recoil as 10mm
shoots flatter than 9mm, no risks like you would take with P++ 9mm ammo.
It's a nice step up from 9mm.
Christopher Fisher
.357 Sig is designed from the ground up to handle the pressure, as are guns like the p229.
.357 is objectively the best handgun round we have.
fuck 9mm.
Liam Anderson
And on top of all the ballistic advantages of .357 SIG, the bottlenecked cartridge means it's going to be far more reliable as well. FTF malfunctions are pretty much nonexistent, which also gives you much more flexibility with regards to bullet choice, whereas some 9mm guns won't feed certain hollowpoints correctly.
Lucas Robinson
Highly idiotic question but is it possible to construct something akin to the HEI Mineshells used in the 20x82mm of the MG151/20 for a sub-12mm caliber with CY+3 technology or would that be stupid.
Hudson Gomez
The down side of 357 sig is that it costs as much to shoot as 10mm, if the FBI had adopted 357 sig instead of 40 S&W…
Benjamin Ross
Could you load .357 SIG with bullets used for 9mm Parabellum? Because imagine making a +P+ version of the cartridge loaded with the 9mm Russian AP rounds.
Wyatt Peterson
This is good trollposting.
But seriously just in case you are not, 357 Sig is actually .355 so yes, it can load any 9mm Luger or even 380 ACP rounds. However, the Russian 9mm is different, .365 inches, on purpose so that there was no way for NATO forces to use it or its bullets if captured. Makarov bullets cannot be used.
Jordan Nelson
what type of bullet construction do they utilize?
Nicholas Adams
Read and learn:
modernfirearms.net
modernfirearms.net
I can't find that much info about that, but here is a pic and a few sentences.
forgottenweapons.com