Chinese DBP-10 5.8 x 42 mm cartridge -- (MERGED)

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

meanmrmustard

Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2011
Messages
4,225
Location
Missouri
Are there any commercial rifles that fire this round? Have any of you ever used it, and if so, how did it perform? I'm interested in this, as I like contenders to the 5.45 and 5.56. Thanks.
 
Is that stuff even available in the US? I can't say I've ever seen a gun for sale that was chambered for it, let alone ever seen a box of ammo on sale. And I've done a lot of internet browsing. Maybe I'll go do some more specific searches...
 
TurtlePhish said:
Is that stuff even available in the US? I can't say I've ever seen a gun for sale that was chambered for it, let alone ever seen a box of ammo on sale. And I've done a lot of internet browsing. Maybe I'll go do some more specific searches...
Click to expand...
That's why I was curious. I was reading about it and thought it looked promising. But, I'm not seeing a whole lot that shoots it other than Type 95. Guess it was wishful thinking.
 
Been hearing about it for years, but I've never even seen a report where someone got some to play with. Part of the issue is, of course, that no guns exist that will shoot it that are lawfully importable. I'm sure the US Military has plenty of rifles and ammo they've snagged one way or another for evaluation, but they aren't sharing the info, and certainly didn't care enough about what they saw to incorporate any features of the weapons or ammo.

Truth is, we know what it is, what it's made of, how fast it goes, and so forth. Nothing magical there. Any manufacturer that felt it was worth the effort could duplicate the dimensions and make barrels and ammo in 5.8x42mm. If we want to try out something like it, we have choices that bracket it closely on either side. So I doubt there's a whole lot of perceived interest to make it worth their while.
 
It's an interesting round but then again the Russians claimed that the 5.45x39 was a superior round to the 5.56x45 and you don't see a lot of guns here in the US chambered in this "superior" Russian round nor a lot of manufacturers producing it in any sort of volume. Most AR's that come to the market are still chambered in 5.56x45. Whenever another country comes out with a new round they always like to claim that it's superior to what the US uses but opinions are like...well you know the rest.....

Plenty of videos on youtube of people shooting the Type-95 rifle which fires this round.

Here's a few...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uMkD-SvLHuI&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M56yDEFMZZY&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PjUIVCHLz4
 
I don't know what they did to determine if it's better. They came into the game of small caliber cartridges after the Russians so they could have based it off of both 5.56 and 5.45 data and made something better. For all we know, it's just propaganda and their round sucks. Since I don't know about 5.8 x 42, to me 5.45 is more powerful out of all 3.
 
Good lord, that's one butt-ugly gun.

I wonder why they didn't go with the FS2000 style mag release. That lever-operated crap has to be hard to hit fast. Gimme a button to push any day over the AK style releases.

Cheek weld looks abysmal.

Charging "club" looks ackward as hell. I prefer the SCAR's ambidextrous release over that.

Worst of all though is the non-ambidextrous ejection port RIGHT at the back of the gun. What's up with that? Must not be many lefties over there in China.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5.8x42mm_DBP87

3100fps @64 grains.
2900fps @77 grains.

Quite a bit hotter than our 5.56.
 
So a little hotter than the 5.56... The gun really is butt ugly . I prefer the looks of the Tavor. What i have in bullpup is a Walther G 22, it looks butt ugly as well.
 
I think my FS2000 is a good looking gun, for a bullpup. Most bullpups are just ODD looking... Probably because we all grew up looking at conventional rifles on the wall/in the cabinet. I bet kids from the new generation will think our "old" guns all look goofy. :)

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, I guess.
 
Meh, I've seen the terminal ballistic studies done on the chinese ammunition. It isn't a "great leap forward" by any stretch of the imagination. Don't get me wrong, it does the job, but it isn't a game changer of any sort.

The other part of those ballistics is the long barrel of the bullpup helps, so comparing apples to apples would help folks get a better sense of reality. A 77gr SMK can reach 2900 fps from a long barrel with a milspec loading.

Bottom line? It is a fully capable cartridge from a fully capable weapons platform, but nothing special.

Jimro
 
"Was that intended to be a subtle historical joke, or am i the only one chuckling here?"

-Yes, of course it was.
-No, you're not.
And it was very clever, by the way.
 
For light and fast in the US, there is no reason not to go 5.56. Otherwise, I'll take a 6.8 spc.
 
It's been around for a while. This article is about relatively minor improvements like the selector switch position and going with tritium instead of paint on the sights.
 
I've actually fired the QBZ-95 in 5.8mm. HATED the ergonomics of the rifle, and I mean really really hated. That experience alone made me realize how fortunate our armed forces are that they can benefit from the ergonomics that come with a nation of civilian shooters.

But the round itself? Honestly, I couldn't tell it from a 5.56. Maybe if I'd fired the QBZ-97 (the 5.56 export version) alongside the 95, I could tell a difference, but I didn't get the chance to do that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

C
  • Locked
Chinese 5.8x42mm: unique ballistics or a political decision?
Replies
20
Views
13K
itsa pain
I
L
  • Locked
AK-74 for general purposes?
Replies
15
Views
1K
CornCod
C
B
  • Locked
Good info on the 7.62x39
Replies
11
Views
6K
trinydex
T
L
  • Locked
RE: Fragmenting 5.45?
Replies
9
Views
2K
Spencer
S
K
  • Locked
AR-5.45x39
Replies
7
Views
830
Djcubinlinx
D
Back
Top