[Tropical Z]

I searched unsuccessfully as im sure ive seen this before.If one were using the same rifle such as a SAR or Saiga in both of these calibers which would be inherently more accurate and at what ranges.Id like to get info out to 500 yards if possible.Im also talking about using "regular" commercial ammo and NOT using some dudes "custom" handloads.Normal weights as far as im concerned are 122 and 55 grains.;)

[cratz2]

I've never really bought much into the idea of inherent accuracy. Having said that, I'd be willing to bet that you could find a more accurate load using a CZ527 in 223 than you could using CZ's carbine in 7.62x39.

If we compare an AR to an AK, the same would be true except it would be even more true.

[Snowdog]

Well, the 122gr 7.62 would be less prone to wind drift I'd imagine, but the 55gr 5.56 would have a flatter trajectory. Besides that, I believe it boils down to the rifle and the shooter.

[Art Eatman]

Seems to me that to compare the inherent accuracy of the cartridges, you need to start with a rifle of good quality.

For instance, I get 1/2 MOA from my Ruger 77 Mk II in .223 when using Remington 55-grain soft-points. No idea what a good bolt-action rifle would do with 7.62x39. For my bolt-action uses, the 7.62x39 cartridge is neither fish nor fowl, so I won't be finding out about its accuracy.

Art

[444]

How much drop would you get at 500 yards with the 7.62x39 cartridge ?

[geekay]

about 22" @ 300 yards.

[Art Eatman]

AK round drop at 500 yards: If zeroed at 200, it would run about seven feet, mas o menos. (Had to interpolate from the Sierra tables.) This compares to about a four-foot drop for a typical .223 loaded with a 55-grain spitzer.

Art

[444]

I knew it would be a lot. I remember looking at a ballistics chart years ago and realized that the 7.62x39 drops faster at 100 yards than a .22 LR.

[Correia]

I would have to go with .223 on this one. Not for group size at 100 yards or anything like that, but as was pointed out before the 7.62x39 just has way to much of a loopy trajectory.

And this is coming from a 3 gun addict, who sticks with an AK or FAL vs. the ARs sitting in the safe just out of spite. When you start shooting at steel plates at extended range the 7.62x39 just plain sucks.

Just wait until I get my .223 AK though. He he he. :)

[SodaPop]

I know you were talking about the 55gr being shot out of an AK, but if you shot the M855 round out of an SAR III I bet it would out perform any 7.62x39 round. When i first got into rifle shooting I started out with all sorts of Russian rifles. I know it sounds like crazy, but my Mini 14 out did two of my scoped SKS rifles and my Russian Saiga. It took me about 200rds before I could figure out where my 7.62x39 bullets were hitting at 400yds and I was still missing a lot. This was all from a bench.

My Mini 14 shooting American Eagle 55gr is far more accurate and practical than any 7.62x39 rifle from 200-500yds. I've also shot the SAR I and SAR II side by side and never missed the 400yd post with the SAR II.


I have tremendous respect for AK variants but if they are chambered in the 7.62x39 round they extremely impractical for any purpose other than cover-fire past 300yds.

[SodaPop]

I'm not sure how long you were around TFL, but this is an old thread on what I learned one day.

The 7.62x39 round:

http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=80177&highlight=I+proved+myself+wrong+about+the

Here's another thread on some American Eagle 55gr results. This one was under far more stress though.:what:

This is 100yds further and almost the same results. It was under far more stress.:uhoh:

http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=100314&highlight=400yds

[BevrFevr]

that just kicks ***

at 500 yards

7.62x39mm
223 Remington
Index No. Cartridge Type Wt. (grs) Bullet Style Primer No. Ballistic Coefficient
R762391 Remington Express 125 Pointed Soft Point 7 1/2 0.267
R223R1 Remington Express 55 Pointed Soft Point 7 1/2 0.197

VELOCITY (ft/sec)
Cartridge Type Bullet Muzzle 100 200 300 400 500
Remington Express 125 PSP 2365 2062 1783 1533 1320 1154
Remington Express 55 PSP 3240 2747 2304 1905 1554 1270

ENERGY (ft-lbs)
Cartridge Type Bullet Muzzle 100 200 300 400 500
Remington Express 125 PSP 1552 1180 882 652 483 370
Remington Express 55 PSP 1282 921 648 443 295 197

SHORT-RANGE¹ TRAJECTORY*
Cartridge Type Bullet 50 100 150 200 250 300
Remington Express 125 PSP 0.1 zero -2.2 -6.7 -14 -24.5
Remington Express 55 PSP 0 0.6 zero -2 -5.6 -11.2

LONG-RANGE² TRAJECTORY*
Cartridge Type Bullet 100 150 200 250 300 400 500
Remington Express 125 PSP 1.5 zero -3.8 -10.4 -20.1 -51.3 -102.5
Remington Express 55 PSP 1.6 1.5 zero -3.1 -8.2 -26.2 -58.6

[No4Mk1*]

"7.62x39 drops faster at 100 yards than a .22 LR."

All objects accelerate toward the center of the Earth at the same rate: 9.8meters/second^2
Since they begin with a vertical velocity of 0, they are largely unaffected by air resistance. The only variable remaining is time. A 7.62*39 starting at 2400ft/sec and slowing to 2050ft/sec by the time it gets to 100 yards will always take less time to get to 100 yards than a .22LR which starts at about 1300 and may slow to around 1000ft/sec by the time it gets to 100 yards. Ballistic tables must be read with consideration for the distance which the rifle has been zeroed.

[SodaPop]

All objects accelerate toward the center of the Earth at the same rate: 9.8meters/second^2


Bullets rise too:evil: Right Art????:evil:



Disclaimer:

I'm asking for a beating.

[444]

No4Mk1*
Take it easy, relax. This was a slight exageration used to illustrate the point that the 7.62x39 cartridge isn't a real hot performer at long range. The gentleman that asked the question was talking about shooting out to 500 yards. IMO the 7.62x39 wouldn't be a good choice for long range shooting. Of course in my opinion, it isn't the best choice for anything, but that is just me.

[SodaPop]

IMO the 7.62x39 wouldn't be a good choice for long range shooting.

With standard Milsurp ammo i don't even think its possible.

[Snowdog]

IMO the 7.62x39 wouldn't be a good choice for long range shooting. Of course in my opinion, it isn't the best choice for anything, but that is just me.

It's the best choice for my SKS, I'll tell you that much. I find I get horrible accuracy when I put .223 through it. Just seems to like the 7.62x39 best. Must be one of them finicky types.

[Longbow]

:D :D

[BevrFevr]

Well at 500 yds the 7.62 will drop 100 inches but it still retains almost twice the energy of a .223. And velocity at that point is about equal.

My bet is the .223 has the inherent accuracy edge but with less than 200 ftlbs of energy who cares.



-bevr

[RON in PA]

Long range accuracy with either of these cartridges is moot, both were designed to create casualties at short distances using assault rifles and shooting them past 300 yards is foolish IMHO.

[No4Mk1*]

Sorry, I just like physics (simple physics that is). I do like a good challege, but at 500 yards I don't think I would have much luck with 7.62*39mm. At least it is cheap enough to keep shooting until you hit the target. And .311" holes are easier to see than .223' holes. (unless they miss the paper)

[BevrFevr]

I'm pretty sure that .223's have been beating the .308 crowd at the 800 meter matches occasionally. Am I mistaken?

-bevr

[Correia]

"Long range accuracy with either of these cartridges is moot, both were designed to create casualties at short distances using assault rifles and shooting them past 300 yards is foolish IMHO."

I wouldn't go that far. I can still manage to hit a phone booth size rock 95% of the time, standing, snap shooting, slinged up with my Vepr K at 475 yards. I'm no fan of the 7.62x39 for anything other than the really cheap ammo, but I would hardly call using it past 300 yards "foolish".