5.56 Nato verses 7.62x39

M

murphy

Guest
Would be interested to hear some views on the respective killing power between these two calibers. Had a bad experience when I shot some foxes with FMJ ammo and a 223, none were clean kills and I was lucky to recover their carcases. My argument is that if they won't kill a fox, how are they surposed to kill a human who may be doped, crazy or full of religious zeal or all three. Seems to me that he would still be able to pull the pin on a grenade or get off a burst from an automatic weapon. The 7.62x39 has a bullet of bigger diameter and twice as heavy so why are not more black rifles made in this caliber? The biggest drawback has always been that lousy Easten Block ammo but in a good rifle with good ammo I think it would be a winner.:eek:
 
Both rounds were made to wound a Human. Not to Kill a Human.
Kill a Human. One guy is down. And done.
Wound a US Human. You just took 4 to 6 Humans off the Battle Field.
The US Military is the only fighting force, in History, that picks up dead and wounded. Even the ENEMY(Explains Terrorists At GITMO).
 
As long as the AR/M16 rifle is the basis for our military's primary weapon, I don't think the x39 is the answer as the case body has too much taper to feed reliably with the straight mag well, and consequently, straight portion of the magazine found in these guns. A case with less body taper that is similar in size may be an option. My 30 Major, which is a 6.5 Grendel necked up to 30 cal. is currently being tested by the US Army Marksmanship Unit in competition in AR15 rifles, which was my original concept for it all along. But, along the way, I found it to be a superbly accurate round and currently focus on VFS BR with it in rifles with a PPC bolt face. I believe that in the battlefield that we're now fighting, that our men in uniform are more concerned with what a gun can do across a room when they kick doors in than what it can do 600 meters away. The 30 has a significant advantage in terms of stopping power and is IMO why our military may be looking in that direction. I shoot it much "hotter" in a bolt action BR rifle than what it can be loaded to for AR/M16 rifles, but it is a reliable round in them that still can have quite a bit more umph than the x39 offers and far better than the 5.56.--Mike Ezell
 
Last edited:
Murphy. The main reason for the lighter rounds. So a soldier could carry more ammo.
And the Fed-Ex guy got an extra day off.
 
The .224 cal. bullet in a 5.56 chamber is really a good combo. 1:9 or 1:7 twist. A very accurate round.
Switch your bullets to Hunting Bullets. And those foxes won't be running.
 
To Tim and Mike, It's a strange thing foxes have got rights but humans don't have the luxury of a quick death. I do shoot foxes with soft point bullets and yes they are effective, I just tried the FMJs to avoid pelt damage but never again. I think if I were faced with a determined foe I would want something that would incapacitate him straight away, thats why the 30 sounds like a better idea to me.
 
zippy06 said:
Hey Mike,
How about a .30 Gorilla........??????
Click to expand...

It should work. The shoulder angle is 30 degrees on the 30 Major, vs. 35 degrees on the gorilla, which may or may not hurt it's ability to feed reliably in an AR style gun. Other than that, the two cartridges are the same or very close.--Mike
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0011.jpg
    IMG_0011.jpg
    20.2 KB · Views: 303
Last edited:
murphy said:
Would be interested to hear some views on the respective killing power between these two calibers. Had a bad experience when I shot some foxes with FMJ ammo and a 223, none were clean kills and I was lucky to recover their carcases. My argument is that if they won't kill a fox, how are they surposed to kill a human who may be doped, crazy or full of religious zeal or all three. Seems to me that he would still be able to pull the pin on a grenade or get off a burst from an automatic weapon. The 7.62x39 has a bullet of bigger diameter and twice as heavy so why are not more black rifles made in this caliber? The biggest drawback has always been that lousy Easten Block ammo but in a good rifle with good ammo I think it would be a winner.:eek:
Click to expand...


That is why SOF use the 77 SMK bullet and the USMC just switched to a newer bullet with more knockdown than the old M118. Military bullets are designed to fragment for additional knockdown and no that is not against the rule of law. (ie Hague Conventions)
 
murphy said:
To Tim and Mike, It's a strange thing foxes have got rights but humans don't have the luxury of a quick death. I do shoot foxes with soft point bullets and yes they are effective, I just tried the FMJs to avoid pelt damage but never again. I think if I were faced with a determined foe I would want something that would incapacitate him straight away, thats why the 30 sounds like a better idea to me.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure there is a rd short of the 50 cal that would have instant incapacitation. The only shot that would do that is the 6 inch area that would allow you to sever the spinal column. Once again we are back to shot placement. Even attacking bull prairie dogs could still pull the pin on a grenade with most of the shots to the body. I think others here have stated it properly on using varmint ammo for varmints and target ammo for targets. I understand about the pelts, but shot placement should take care of that. Good luck.
 
To Marvinvwinkle, I hit a fox fair through the chest with a FMJ at about 60yds and it took off like I had missed. Went away and had a think about it and realised that it was not a miss, so went back and started looking around. Found the dead fox about 70yds away and the skin was ruined where the FMJ had blown a big piece of rib bone through it so I had lousy preformance all round. I do think that something like a 30/06 would stop a person in their tracks at about 10 feet but I have never been a soldier and could not say for certain.
 
The answer gentlemen is spelled 7.62x51 NATO. Unfortunately expanding bullets are considered to be naughty in military use, but a 150 gr FMJ or two at close range will end someone's career. At longer ranges where more careful aim can be taken one will work, and at long range a 175 gr SMK has ended a few careers.

I've never shot a fox, but the prairie dogs I've shot with 40 to 50 gr plastic tipped bullets from the .222 or .223 if hit well only go, down, sideways, or up. Never had one that was in much condition to do much fighting back unless it was missed. A solid body shot is an instantly dead prairie dog, with only a twitch or two. Take off the head and they flop and jump around like a chicken with its head cut off.
 
BH,

Don't you mean that the current lawyers that interpret the Conventions for our benefit, have
concluded that Hp and Fragmentary bullets are legal in their opinion. The fact is the conventions have not changed.

During the cold war all the Military Bulls were making a name for them selves by claiming the Soviets were developing funny bullets that were not legal,
And must be forbid to be used against personal.

Our military is openly claiming that they are in fact using Hollow Points, as our lawyers have decided they are legal. These are the same bunch that told us we
could treat parishioners the way we did. I've seen a statement that these legal advisor's stated "Match Hollow Points" were not really hp's,,,, that he hole was just the jacket closure.
 
The Open Point bullet slides by the prohibition as stated in the Hague Convention, theres no lead exposed.
The Open Point is not designed to increase expansion, that it does is a side effect of its design purpose.

German Manufacture 7.62 NATO ball with the thin steel jacket fragmented as easily as any varmint bullet. Other European 7.62 NATO bullets have also been shown to fragment very easily in flesh. In at least one instance a public relations uproar over the horrific wounding effect of these rounds when used by police sharpshooters led to the ammunition being withdrawn from service.

The 7.62X39 has a few advantages over the 5.56 as a military cartridge, mainly in its ability to penetrate light cover far better than the 5.56.

When fired from the full length M16 barrel the 5.56 fragments readily.
When fired from the shorter M4 Carbine barrel the standard 5.56 ball does not achieve enough velocity to fragment or deliver any significant percentage of its energy beyond its tumbling effect, which is greatly reduced by the loss in velocity.

The 7.62X39 is far better suited to use in short barreled Carbines.


PS
Both cartridges are in fact designed to kill.
The wound rather than kill mantra came from a pre WW1 medical journal tract on humane warfare. A not a very realistic approach composed by academics.

Incapacitation is far more important than ultimate but delayed death. Stopping power is more important than killing power.
A .22 rimfire through the liver can kill but its a less effective wound than a .45 ACP in the hip joint that isn't likely to result in death.
One kills very slowly through internal bleeding, during which time you can set off a Claymore or empty a mag into the guy who shot you, or make it back inside to finish off your hostages, the other puts you down for the count, unable to stand or do much else but cry for momma.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top