.223 vs 7.62 in the Age of Obama


PDA






nachosgrande
November 6, 2008, 05:05 PM
Not talking ballistics here. Nor is it even possible to find a semi auto rifle in these calibers anymore, but if I could, politically speaking, would it be better to get one or the other? Right now 7.62 is dirt cheap, but could legislation be passed that seriously taxes foreign ammo, or even bans it altogether?

If you enjoyed reading about ".223 vs 7.62 in the Age of Obama" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
gotime242
November 6, 2008, 05:08 PM
I think its all relative. And if things start to happen it wont matter.

The only thing i can think of is you can get more 5.56 for your money, so just go that route.

tribbles
November 6, 2008, 05:25 PM
I think .223/5.56's gonna be the safer bet in the long run, since most 7.62x39 is of foreign origin and thus vulnerable to federal import restrictions.

That, plus like what gotime242 said, it's cheaper, both to buy and to reload for.

HorseSoldier
November 6, 2008, 05:38 PM
These definitely seems to be some buying hysteria at the moment -- looking at Bud's Gunshop online, it looks like they're sold out of pretty much anything that even looks like an Evil Black Rifle except for the real high end price stuff.

But, it remains to be seen if Barry O is really going to make the sky fall, or if this election is just an early Christmas present for gun store owners (off topic but I think he'd like to, but don't know if he wants to pay the political price for doing so).

politically speaking, would it be better to get one or the other? Right now 7.62 is dirt cheap, but could legislation be passed that seriously taxes foreign ammo, or even bans it altogether?

If I'm not mistaken, foreign ammo imports could be blocked by an Executive Order or a BATFE re-interpretation of the law.

There is domestic production of 7.62x39 (I'm thinking that's the 7.62 you're talking about), though what there is presently can't compete with Wolf in terms of price (and there's no domestic 5.45x39 production at present). I suspect, though, that American manufacturers don't even try, since they can't match the lower bottom line in Russia, Bulgaria, etc.

If foreign ammo was banned, and that was the only thing that changed on the landscape (i.e. no ammo tax, no laws to screw US ammo manufacturers, etc.) I think we'd see US manufacturers moving more volume of 7.62x39 and their prices coming down some in the process. They wouldn't ever reach Wolf prices, but they'd be better than they are now.

Likewise, there are enough AK-74s out there that if 5.45 imports went away, someone would step up here in the US and start feeding the market. Again, we'd never get prices down where they are now for a Bulgarian or Russian sardine can, but there would be ammo available.

Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
November 6, 2008, 06:27 PM
There's little rhyme or reason to the gun-banner's nonsensical "logic" when it comes to what they think should be banned in their fantasy world legislation they draw up.... BUT,

Trying to think like a gun-banner, think simplistic. A 7.62 is "more powerful", and therefore more likely to be labeled a "sniper round" - combine that with a platform of an EBR, and you've got a slight *possibility* that legislation could be passed which bans the manuf. of EBRs ".30 cal or larger" or "over .224 caliber" or some such nonsense. So go for the bigger one first, then get a smaller one, too after that.

hags
November 6, 2008, 07:01 PM
PremiumSauces, I think you give way too much credit to these clowns in office. I would bet they wouldn't know the difference between 7.62 and .223, let alone which is more powerfull.

My guess is they look at an AR and want to ban it and the ammo it uses.

KBintheSLC
November 6, 2008, 07:21 PM
I'm betting that both platforms will see dark times ahead. As previously mentioned, imported ammo will likely be the first to get hit. I'm betting that we will start seeing WWB bulk packs of 7.62x39 before long. However, the days of buying $200 cases of Wolf are likely going bye-bye... at least for a while.
The thing to consider is that even of the price of 7.62 doubles, it will only cost the same as the .223 costs today. So, then what will the .223 cost when it goes up?
My personal strategy was that I went with 7.62, and bought 3 cases of ammo for it (3k) that are stored in sealed ammo boxes with desiccant. I won't be shooting my scary rifle much for the next 4-8 years so I think it will get me through.

indoorsoccerfrea
November 6, 2008, 07:38 PM
i would go .223. of course, i have one myself and therefore have a little bias, but the so called "AK round" will likely be the first to get taxed. that is pure speculation, but I'm sure you can see what i mean.

The Deer Hunter
November 6, 2008, 08:56 PM
Not talking ballistics here. Nor is it even possible to find a semi auto rifle in these calibers anymore, but if I could, politically speaking, would it be better to get one or the other? Right now 7.62 is dirt cheap, but could legislation be passed that seriously taxes foreign ammo, or even bans it altogether?

Well look at it this way;

Obama wants to get out of Iraq. When the military isn't buying up all the ammunition it may significantly drop for us.

R127
November 6, 2008, 09:12 PM
Have you been watching the Dow? How about the over 100 trillion in debt, pensions, medicare and other unfunded liabilities? I think they'll be busy with a lot of other things long before they get around to banning guns and ammo.

BHP FAN
November 6, 2008, 09:24 PM
Chuck Schumer and Joe ''I WROTE the assault weapons ban'' Biden are not going to forget about us.

anymanusa
November 6, 2008, 10:37 PM
Have you been watching the Dow? How about the over 100 trillion in debt, pensions, medicare and other unfunded liabilities? I think they'll be busy with a lot of other things long before they get around to banning guns and ammo.

That kind of thinking is ignorant. I bet they address guns and ammo before they fix social security. How long has that issue been a problem?

Libs go by their agenda, not by the severity of the problems facing the country.

When was the last time you ever heard of ccw permit related crime? Well Hussein O says this about ccw: “Well I, I, I, I continue to, I continue to, uh, uh, support a ban on concealed carry laws.” -- Barack Obama


You can watch the interview if you'd like, it's on Utube.

We are in for quite a fight these next 8 years, I'm afraid to say... and yes, you read that right, 8 years.

I guess I should stop now, given that this is the 'rifle' section. Sorry.:o -oh and p.s., I think that's 10 trillion, not 100.

kcmarine
November 6, 2008, 10:55 PM
I don't know. I don't think Obama has the balls to go for it like they did in 1994. Biden, maybe, but Barack seems like he'd be more concerned about getting re-elected. Which will not happen if he touches guns or ammo.

ByAnyMeans
November 6, 2008, 11:03 PM
I only have a 7.62 so that's my vote but personally I'm looking to get into reloading so an import ban won't affect me. If he bans 7.62 all together than i'm sure 5.56 would go as well.

Roadwild17
November 6, 2008, 11:03 PM
Get what you can aford to stock up on NOW. Then get what you can aford to stock up on in a month.

Quickill
November 6, 2008, 11:09 PM
I think you give way too much credit to these clowns in office. I would bet they wouldn't know the difference between 7.62 and .223, let alone which is more powerfull.

Your partialy right. Obama voted on legislation that would ban most of the commonly avalible hunting ammo by calling it "armor piercing". They based this on the velocity at which the bullet traveled and not the matierals used in it's construction.

They know enough to be dangerous.

kcmarine
November 6, 2008, 11:25 PM
I don't think they'd go after ammunition if they're as cunning as we credit them as being. The thing that made the 1994 ban plausible and passable is that at the time, AR-15 rifles and the like were not big in the hunting community. The common guy who just used the bolt action in his safe to hunt didn't care if the black rifles were banned. He thought those rifles were unsporting, and thought they made no sense for anything other than killing. Now, the AR is widely used for hunting and target shooting, and its legions of users is growing every day. Interest is also growing in the Soviet rifles, like the SKS and the AK. You can't pull off that kind of ban again. You'd be stepping on too many people to do it, and if you're a Democratic senator from a place like Virginia or Missouri, you're going to piss off a lot of hunters that now use those rifles.

With these facts in mind, the antis now consider going after ammunition a viable route. It'd be worse for them than trying to repeat the 1994 ban at a time like this. They wouldn't just be making life hard for the tactical shooter and black rifle lover, they'd also make life difficult for Uncle Jim and his .308 hunting rifle or other type of weapon. Collecting an excise tax on that ammunition would mean pissing off the one group that the antis pretend to care about, which is the American hunter. Plenty of hunters use surplus ammunition for practice, and target shooters love the stuff for their military patterned rifles. If you make it hard for the hunters, your support evaporates faster than a tray of scotch glasses in front of Ted Kennedy.

Seafarer12
November 6, 2008, 11:28 PM
Let the panic begin

BHP FAN
November 6, 2008, 11:37 PM
7.62X39,which coincidently is one of the VERY few calibers I don't currently load for.Those of you who think they're not after your guns and your ammo,good luck,and I hope to God you're right.I've never wanted to be wrong more....but I'm not.

SimpleIsGood229
November 7, 2008, 12:52 AM
Hey guys, I don't mean to be a stick-in-the-mud, but this probably belongs at Armed Polite Society. THR doesn't have a politics section.

chris in va
November 7, 2008, 12:57 AM
I have to admit, pretty nervous about feeding my AK. I'd feel better owning an AR at this point, ammo-wise.

esmith
November 7, 2008, 12:59 AM
I don't know. I don't think Obama has the balls to go for it like they did in 1994. Biden, maybe, but Barack seems like he'd be more concerned about getting re-elected. Which will not happen if he touches guns or ammo.

Im not putting it past him, nor Biden especially. The obama website said obama would support a permanant AWB. Not to mention the fact that obama is infatuated with the U.N. which has a vicious anti-gun policy that it tries to enact upon countries.

Don't think that they won't try to slip one past us just because the economy is in the tank. They have an agenda that they are more interested in following.

TonyDedo
November 7, 2008, 01:37 AM
I can't help but think that the panic is unjustified. I'm not buying anything more or less than I normally would. Then again, I buy ludicrous quantities of guns and ammo, regardless of who's in office.

That being said, I think .223 is the better round in the long run. Personally, I like the rifles that fire .223 better (I enjoy shootings ARs much better than AKs). I'm pretty sure .223 ballistics are better, especially at longer ranges. .223 is more commonly reloaded than 7.62 (does anyone reload 7.62x39? I've heard of it being done, but never seen it). And of course, it's a domestic caliber.

But ultimately, I think it really comes down to what rifles you like shooting better. If you're an AK fan, than f*** it, go with 7.62. We're not going to experience a sudden ammo shortage any time soon.

fireflyfather
November 7, 2008, 03:28 AM
Ed Harris reloaded that cartridge. In fact, the Lee tumble lube molds in .312 diameter are for just that purpose. Of course, I'm lucky that they're almost perfect for 7.62x54R also.

Art Eatman
November 7, 2008, 11:42 AM
Unfortunately, far more political than about rifles as rifles.

APS is the proper place.

If you enjoyed reading about ".223 vs 7.62 in the Age of Obama" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!