*Concern grows*

I've been saying this every time I hear about it. Everyone keeps using 7.62 NATO when the rifle is clearly marked and advertised as .308 Winchester. The difference is subtle enough that within certain tolerances, and with a weak recoil and gas system, you can cycle both equally fine in many rifles. Some have a preference, though, and in some rifles .308 is specifically unsafe due to the higher pressure and tighter headspacing. Yet I've never seen anyone actually shoot .308 in the gun.

This is a luxury, match-grade precision rifle in carbine form factor, specifically designed to use the higher pressure and more accurate civilian cartridge. Why do people expect it to handle Wolf M80? I think most of the problems with this lie in the controlled ejection flute plate anyway, given the case thickness and shoulder angle. I've seen people pop that plate off and run the gun just fine, although it still required overgassing… due to using weak ammo. One thing that needs to be said, though, is that if Desert Tech plans to market this to militaries they're going to have to loosen tolerances. The Army doesn't want a sub-MOA combat rifle. The one they currently use is a 3 MOA carbine with a barrel that's too short for an overpressured 5 MOA cartridge, let's be real. Modern NATO forces are a joke, and anyone thinking the current version of the MDR is going to suit them is casting pearls before swine.

Why is NATO even fucking shit up and not just using standard round specs? Is this some kind of desperate gun control measure to introduce additional incompatibility between the ammo?

Not for standard issue but I could see a 7.62 DMR being popular with militaries as they have learnt 5.56 isn't enough in many cases.

Attached: f7b1712bb90e151f78c8f084307b0b98314e75d96cab792aa9ec96ee1e9e1b72.png (640x360, 347.59K)

The thing is wolf is .308 spec not NATO. The only actual 7.62 NATO he used was the Austrian surplus. Wolf itself is notorious for having an inconsistent loading which probably explains the torn rim. I'm baffled at the Magtech stuff doing the same as the steel shit.

The story with .308 and 7.62 NATO is when Winchester got a good look at the former, they figured if they changed a few things they'd get a good cartridge for the civilian market. tl;dr Winchester made changes to 7.62 for the civilian market.

JUST why!? 7.62x51mm is really just a shortened .30-06, and that cartridge was already popular in the civilian market. Not to mention how much surplus there must have been after ww2. And in that time the only widely available self-loading rifle was the Garand if I'm not mistaken, and that was already set up for .30-06 to begin with. In a bolt-action rifle it really doesn't matter if you shorter the cartridge some 15mm. And the market was also flooded with two world war's worth of .30-06 bolt action rifles. What were they thinking?

Attached: 8e975b58ee1e0720b13d691b3a1f16d0.png (900x900, 636.28K)

Because .308 is based on .300 Savage, and it has a superior case shape and better pressure. It's a better performing round. Why would you stick with the same thing when you can innovate?

Wait. Nigger what?

Attached: 41776c77bfd68780786c5ee7283cf7eccd193b3f67b2cd6a9e474180dbd72b28-1-1.png (700x796, 542.35K)

I explicitly said the 7.62 version, get help.

Why can't they make it handle both rounds? Fucking Russians can make an American rifle better.

You somehow failed reading comprehension on only two words. I was responding to you saying 5.56 isn't enough. I was agreeing with you.

The best accuracy and precision requires a chamber that is as tight as a loli nun's asshole after she just watched a cartel gore video.

Well shit, guess I'll commit sodoku by cassowary.

Attached: maxresdefault.jpg (1920x1080, 222.1K)

Winchester and later Remington cranked out self loading guns in .308. Picture related, the bolt of a Remington 740.

Oversized chambers. Doesn't lead to exceptional accuracy.

Attached: 740.jpg (2016x1134, 1.11M)

What does that have to do with anything?

Same giant 300 million people country should be able to both make an accurate rifle that only works with special snowflake cartridges, AND a rifle that actually functions for the person who purchases it regardless of accuracy.

My question is why this country is incapable of making the latter, not whether it can make the first.

Never mind, I thought you might be confused for a second there, but you're just a retard.

Why talk like this when the subject is firearms?

I wish I could try one of these bullpups too. I just wanted an excuse to post this webm

Attached: Shorty_Grip_Repeating_Rifle_S&O-GOrVd1gwRvc.webm (450x360, 13.29M)

This.

I don't get why people thinks that NATO standards are better than civilians ones when they've VERY loose tolerance when you actually compare them.
Fudd myth?

It's like when people tell you 9mm NATO is 9mm +P, while in fact the NATO norm tolerance for pressure variation is so big it goes to basically a 90gr 9mm to a 125gr 9mm…
9mm NATO can be +P… but it can also be a wadcutter load…

What sort of retard juice did you drink? If I decided to build a SVD with tight chambers it probably would have the same sort of cycling problems the MDR has but it'd be a hell of a lot more accurate for the course. Hell my m14 won't reliably cycle 7.62 NATO due to the .308 match barrel I threw on it, it mangled .308 brass with the 7.62 barrel that was on it.

I just love how they got a guy in random milsurp just blasting random woodland from the hip after saying superior accuracy.

I don't think anyone is saying NATO standards are better. Its more people thinking 7.62 and .308 are perfectly interchangeable when in reality they're not in most cases. Besides NATO standards regarding tolerance resembles what the British in the day considered good enough due to them unable to have anything properly standardized, i.e loose chambers in Enfields due to how shit and varied ammo was out of its colonies.
Pardon that I haven't slept in two days, besides I can't edit my post.

Huh, never would have guessed that would be an issue.
Also, RELEASE A FUCKING NORMAL EJECTION PORT FOR IT, REEEEEEEEEEEEEE

*growing concern*

Attached: zxcxzc.PNG (193x219 103.58 KB, 88.38K)

This makes me happy.

Why would you throw away all of your existing development, infrastructure, and inventory for a marginal improvement in case length and carrying capacity that amounts to fuck all in the grand scheme of things?
Hell, why wouldn't you just copy the case improvements while keeping the same external dimensions for backwards compatibility?

That didn't happen, though. What are you talking about?

It's almost like the needs and desires of a civilian shooter are different than those of an industrialised military, and therefore, a civilian's equipment is likely to not only be different but also demand a higher standard of quality than a military's mass-produced equipment which is expected to be treated like trash. Is this really a difficult concept for you? Are you going to sperg about how .50 BMG Improved is 'exactly the same no benefit lol' now too, even though the .50 Imp. boasts superior pressure curves and long-range precision for use in rifles as opposed to belt-fed machine guns?

That's literally not possible. You can't fit a larger case capacity and higher pressures in the same size case, you idiot. Why would you think that would work?

SAAMI external dimensions for .308 and 7.62x51 are the same. .308 has larger interior dimensions though due to thinner brass particularly in the web. The problems arise because the tolerances are different with 7.62x51 trending toward the larger end and an accuracy focused .308 rifle trending toward the lower end.

Attached: .308.jpg (602x799 148.44 KB, 131.51K)

Well ok, impress me, show me a US made semi auto rifle that can feed from .308 or 7.62 NATO and offers similar ease of use and performance. I'm pretty sure if you found it, we could all agree that would be a very good rifle.

It's a technical term. Special snowflake = pointless modification of an existing cartridge, overpriced, and requiring special treatment/specially made guns to work.

That looks like it would be MASSIVELY popular in Britbongland.

No they aren't. Try again.

DPMS AR-10s, and the Stoner or Knight's Armament Company SR-25s all seem to work just fine. .308 also performs well in DSA SA58s in my experience, and should really cycle in any FAL with a decent barrel since those are pretty hardy rifles to begin with. Would you care to elaborate on what qualifies you to make sweeping statements about the entire US civilian firearms industry despite not even being American?

Attached: MSSS_762_nato_1_1.jpg (1500x1286, 103.49K)

While I dont understand the point of this gun, it's certainly an interesting idea. I hope they can make it work so all the mall ninjas can buy a rifle that sounds great to anyone who's never had to carry their own ammo over any distance, doesnt understand the need for rapid follow up shots, and loves spongy triggers.

AR-10 has plenty of feeding problems between .308 and 7.62 NATO, don't joke about that. SR-25 is a $5000 rifle that has a spotless record because 20 people in America own it and none of them shoot it. FAL isn't american.

Come on.

We're talking about the switch from 30-06 to 7.62x51, not the differences between 7.62 NATO and .308 WIN.

Its the fact you can't understand how chamber tolerance work let alone the fact 7.62 and .308 are different cartridges that baffles me. You sound like the person who'd put 9mm luger into a gun chambered in 9mm glisenti and be surprised when it eventually grenades or hell people who have used 9x23 Winchester in a 9mm largo gun.

Attached: use 308 you fuck.png (1999x719 48.96 KB, 905.45K)

I just realised you reported the post where I pointed out how retarded and internally inconsistent your logic was, instead of even trying to respond to it in any mature manner. Wow, being nogunz but pretending to be an expert is bad enough, but you're an emotional faggot. Damage controlling that hard on an imageboard is kind of sad. It's okay, though, I have time travel powers.

Canada, everyone.

This. He sucks on camera, but at least he is personally putting his mouth where his money is.

Remove the fancy holes for the bullets, just have it open.

Also, get the rights to produce Korobov's most bullpup of bullpup design, in 6.5 Grendel, and sell that.

Because wow. A bullpup battle rifle sounds neat, but come one. It can't be that fucking hard to make one that fucking cycles.

The fact that you place such weight on the minute changes between them kind of proves my point bro.

Can you not lie about me you fucking faggot, I didn't report a single post in this thread.

Kinda called it. If its ambi and side ejects, it doesnt need a forward guide. If it ejects forward, it needs no guide. It comes with an extra bit for funz.

I have my doubts, but I'll take your word for it this time. Could easily have been some other Canadian or just a random oversensitive guy. We're not living in 2014 anymore, dumb things happen.

Also, .308 was not a copy of 7.62x51 NATO. .308 Winchester is a wildcat based on .300 Savage, and 7.62 NATO was the weaker, downloaded copy of .308. 7.62 NATO is simply inferior in performance, but that's because the military preferred looser tolerances for belt feeding over having the best ballistics.

The pressure difference between the two is what, 2,000 PSI? You can get a bigger difference from switching brands of primer, or shooting on a hot day. I doubt there's a significant difference in ballistic performance between the two. The real difference between the two is that 7.62 has thicker brass and the chamber's headspace is a little more forgiving.

He honestly looks like he's seen some shit more than actual concern.

Attached: WW2_Marine_after_Eniwetok_assault.jpg (1155x1328, 181.17K)

It's a difference of about 2425-2450 ft-lbs of energy from 7.62 NATO M80 Ball to closer to 2600 ft-lbs with 150gr .308 loads. 7.62 NATO M118 175gr BT gets around 2600 ft-lbs, but I get over 2700 with Federal Power-Shok 180gr JSP out of my Sako 85. Quality tolerances for the military loads are also less consistent than with civilian ammo, from my own testing as well as other people's groupings.

What the fuck are you talking about, which post? Do you mean this one:>>642279

I can't find any other greentext link in the thread. Get you paranoid ass out of here, you probably wrote a post and forgot to submit. Disease ass faggot.

fucking lol

Fudd logic.

So if I buy a rifle in .308, can I use 7.62x51 or not?
I know with 5.56 rifle, I can use .223.

It's up in the air. Most licensing bodies like SAAMI say they're interchangeable, but the people making the guns make annoying mistakes like in which can result in misfeeds, ruptured cases or worse. Hence my contempt for modern gunsmiths.

What a whiny, bitchy, insufferable post to read. That was absolutely miserable. Stop being a little girl.

Attached: downloadd86f072b__2fstorage_2femulated_2f0_2fDownload_2fIdw_norm.png (720x720, 222.62K)

Here's my official opinion.

I own three battle rifles, PTR-91, SA 58 FAL and an M1a, all the bare bones off the rack combat grade regular rifles. I fire anything out of all three, cheap steel case, NATO ball, civilian 308, whatever. My G3 clone is stamped 308, my FAL is stamped 7.62x51mm. I don't care and throw whatever I want into all three, they cycle and hit just fine. PPU 150 grain soft points have the same POI as South Korean M80 ball at the bench. I read through my manuals on the rifles and the biggest thing that ever came up was suggesting that steel case not be shot through the FAL, and that Match rifles of M1a are tricky and ammunition can be important not only in cycling but also slam fire in tight chambers.

The M1a manual leads us the big clue we need to understand in this issue, which has been brought up in this thread, that my infantry grade M1a will eat anything without a problem and the match versions cannot, why? Because a regular combat rifle is MADE with loose tolerances for 1. greater reliability, 2. the fact that even NATO manufacturers have been known to MAKE AMMUNITION OUT OF SPEC WITH EACH OTHER SOMETIMES WITHIN THE SAME COUNTRY. Loose tolerances make for a rifle that will keep fighting for hours and hundreds of rounds through it in a tight long lasting battle. It also means that if you get different shipments during hectic wartime from various sources your gun will use them. The FAL's gas system was centered around this, the Howa was designed so that reduced load 7.62 NATO could be used as an intermediate cartridge. Never be surprised if you sit down with the calipers on regular ball ammo from all over the world and find that its different in dimeinsons, don't be shocked by this. An old combat bolt action rifle has looser tolerances than a new sporter? Why, is it just poor manufacturing, or was it in some ways actually a feature and not a flaw?

Fact is my auto loaders are MADE for happy horseshit manufacturing process garbage. So is every other assault and battle rifle made for main line infantry service, just in case the next batch of war time rush ammunition is a 0.001 too long or short in the neck than spec or more. That's why battle rifle shooters in general don't think twice about it, why so many AR 15 shooters don't worry about 223/5.56 because a non speciality off the rack rifle is made for out of spec ammo to certain tolerances.

YES this is why GI spec guns are more inaccurate, YES they fuck up brass for reloading far worse. YES they will eat almost anything and YES they will stay in the fight when things get hot and fouling starts to build up. In my case, and maybe your case, I would fire either/or, treat it more like a truck instead of a luxury car.

If you own a tight tolerance rifle, build a tight tolerance rifle, then I would suggest not. If you are going to spend the money for high quality, why not put only the best rounds through it, if you are going for accuracy then you will want the best rounds anyhow. This is also where you are going to run into problems with function and, in certain guns, perhaps slam fire. If you put steel case or shit grade ammo into a $2-5k match or custom rifle then what the fuck, seriously. Thus the problem irons itself out in the end, loose guns made for high round count blasting will run anything, the high end guns that will choke on it will never be fed it anyway.

Cheap guns can work with cheap ammo, expensive guns should run expensive super spec ammo. Its a rough general rule of thumb, but it'll probably solve this tl;dr nightmare of a question.

What's a decent .308/7.62x51 autoloader that won't cost too much, is pretty reliable, and is fun to shoot?

*clearance, nigger
Tolerances are the accepted deviation of each product from the same production line.

He talked about that already. You want something that will eat even steel cases.

I know that already. Just want specific rifles.
Been eyeing the PTR-91, but getting close to $1k is a bit much. There's century versions, but

The SA58 has been mentioned twice now. Ones in the early serial range which were built on Steyr parts kits are even nicer.

SA58s are pretty baste and are the holy grail of FAL tbqh

Any particular barrel length to go for?
Looks nice, but the price tag hurts to look at.

Why do I have a feeling you are not ready for full power battle rifles yet?
But since you want to larp, just get a 21 incher (standard length) FAL. And then save up some cummies to buy some wood furniture for it.

If you want to get the most out of .308, 21" with 1:12 rifling is ideal, and longer doesn't hurt. 18" isn't a bad length either, but gives up some velocity. Any shorter than that just leaves you with a lot of unburnt power and bad recoil, so it makes the gun a lot less useable. The right ammo can still perform well on target with carbine length barrels, but the idea that anyone needs a 24" OAL on a gun in order to use it indoors is a shitpost and will just give you a less effective gun and blown out eardrums.

Can someone nuke the jewnited states already?

Attached: wtf mutts.png (1330x472, 81.08K)

Oh good, Spergkike is here to ruin yet another thread.

The Jew cries out as he spams at you.

Back to the FAL though.
Great site I just found, prices seem reasonable.
libertytreecollectors.com/productcart/pc/viewCategories.asp?idCategory=29

jandcsales.com/FNFALmag.html
15 shekels metric mags.

Attached: chart.jpg (4792x5952, 5.19M)

So how much do these rifles cost? I want to give them money based solely on this.

Attached: wewlad.png (1074x190, 69.12K)

What a shit, unfunny image

What's the one in the bottom right corner?

shotgun ak

Nice. Sorry to be that guy, but is the company that makes them good? Do you happen to have a website link?

Attached: pf308000_08928.jpg (650x433 28.54 KB, 23.83K)

Saiga
Made in Russia. Apparently there can be some issues until they're broken in but then they're fine.

That's one of the hardest questions to answer. The hardest part of owning three battle rifles and enjoying them all greatly is that you can't find the money to shoot all of them as much as you want, and its hard to recommend one particular rifle over the other. I've caught enough hell for defending the M1a, and with the hate for M14's being all the rage, and Springfield's horseshit on gun control, I'll just skip that one. So between the SA58 and the PTR-91 I can't hardly make that choice too easily.

As I've posted on this forum before, the SA58 has the FAL's great points, adjustable gas setting, bolt hold open on empty, that nice long smooth gas system's recoil feel, just a damn great rifle. The PTR-91 is perhaps the most reliable you can find, perhaps more reliable than the venerable AK series, is at home with a 16-18 inch barrel (consumer reviews seem to tend towards M1a's and FAL's having more problems on average with shorter than full barrels for whatever reasons with their gas systems and civilian manufacture), and its hard and sharp recoil is liked by some, including me, because of the quick rhythm you can rapid fire controlled with it. FAL's suffer from different manufactured parts, inch and metric mostly, meaning man parts aren't interchangable; H&K's hardcore commitment to forcing license holders to manufacture shit to spec means G3/HK91/PTR91 can use almost everything from everywhere, it can even use some CETME parts.

In theoretical WW3 or apocalypse or whatever, militia or survival, drafted into service during a crisis, whatever, The PTR enjoys near universal parts interchange, the FAL not so much. M1a's can at least claim parts and magazines because there are still military stocks of arms in the US, many police agencies have tons of them, many serious civilian shooters have them. This is a far off theoretical reason to sink the AR-10, which doesn't have interchangeable parts with itself.

With another tl;dr, I would suggest PTR or SA58, or equivalent Between those two it just pains me to recommend one over the other, they are just too damn good. You won't make a mistake on either. If you are a more beginner shooter, go with the FAL because it is gentler and kinder to the tenderhanded newbie. CETME's from Century seem to be good enough for urban nightmare scenarios, but the quality and accuracy seems to be below what serious shooters and rifleman deem proper (still so cheap you might buy one anyway).

Barrel length is up to you, all my rifles, including my one AR15, is full length GI rifle. Some builds have problem with gas system settings for some reason with shorter barrels, some will mention velocity loss which is real, but I hate muzzle blast in lower light conditions as well. 18 inch barrel PTR will almost blind you for a second in my ACOG shooting low light training, the 22 and 21 inch barrels on the other two rifles are much better. But if you are training for urban shit the shorter barrel for manuever has its points; if you are just a rifleman on the range always go full length barrel.

tl;dr

n3t.host/

nope.

Attached: chart.jpg (4792x5952, 5.1M)

PSA

They need to bring in somebody like Styer for QC. In exchange for that they could sell conversions for the platform. Desert Tech could then focus on producing the main rifle.

I wish Steyr would make a 308 aug.

Jesus christ learn how to greentext you fucking imbecile.
back 4chan with you and your ilk

DT is owned by the Kingston Clan:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latter_Day_Church_of_Christ

so?

I'd get a PTR 91 tbh.

Are you ill?

So a lot of people don't want to fund rich polygamous, polytheistic utah barrons who thinks native americans are jews.

I prefer the modularity of the DPMS pattern AR10 platform, and I built by Aero when they where cheaper upon initial release. dem Lancer mags too

Attached: lancer-l7awm25-smk-25rd-magazine_2.jpg (600x600, 33.18K)

Are they brown?
Do they work to undermine the bill of rights or constitution?
Do they prey on children?
Do they work with glowniggers?
Do they idolize kikes?
Do they promote racemixing?

Yes to any of the above means they're faggots destined for the ovens.

I know that among the burger posters there are at least two kikes, one mexican, two partial injuns and two mulattoes. Which group do you fit in to?

But every group you listed are by definition mutts though. Please use the correct terminology :^)

the only things they do that are ok are guns trafficking and proper patriarchal polygamy

Attached: Ash 12 and Rsh 12.jpg (600x401, 55.29K)

It's obvious that you're a shill but you could at least pretend to put in some effort at fitting in.

Attached: stay bootyblasted.png (1366x664, 178.5K)

LMAO LAND OF THE "FREE" LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
Why haven't you gone outside to kill some amerimutts?
Go outside and kill. Do it now! Kill kill kill!
If you don't do it now, you're a turbocuck. Kill a mutt right now!

Yes, they are.

Attached: 06bbb95e77840f147937205aa1f20e07a64f0b806e9be71cf1546ec3214d8db9.png (650x440 97.77 KB, 514.98K)

Why would you say that in such a video? Not that I disagree, still.

Attached: wew_lad.mp4 (640x360, 810.95K)

Big toys for the big boys

Here's some advice.

The M1A is the dumbest rifle ever conceived and the PTR is truly nigger tier. Sell them both and build an AR10 that eats 308 and 7.62 both with no issues and can still shoot sub 3MOA at 800 yds.

How hard are they to get in the US?

CAN'T GET THEM ANYMORE
LAND OF THE """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""FREE"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""