Close Range: 6.8mm vs. 5.45x39

Status
Not open for further replies.
[quote="Facebutt Sterling]And if the 5.45x39 doesn't tumble unless you're using specialized "air tip" bullets and not just standard FMJ[/quote] The 'standard FMJ' coming from Wolf and Vymple do have the air pockets. The "standard" for the round includes the air pocket.

One of the posters has pix up showing a bisected round with the lead core and air space at the top.
 
The 5.45 is a long bullet, yeah? I thought that was a major contributor yaw, regardless of air pockets?

I cut the tip of some wolf and it had a pocket. The "wasp" surplus does as well.

I've not done micrometer accuracy testing, but it feels pretty accurate "out there" to me. Much more so than the 7.62x39 variants.
 
Let's borrow some images from Brassfetcher, showing the terminal performance of representative 5.45x39 and 6.8SPC rounds in bare ballistic gel. You can find the actual pics and accompanying text at http://www.brassfetcher.com/AK-74 .html . Per the Brassfetcher FAQ, we can link these pics here and embed them in the discussion:

All information and images on this website is free for public distribution, provided that credit is given to the source of the information. This offer extends to all legitimate uses of the information, for non-political, medical, pro-second amendment, governmental or recreational usage.

I am not an expert in terminal performance analysis, and the comments to the pictures are solely my observations.

First up, let's look at the performance of standard com-bloc steel insert 5.45x39 53gr milsurp:

545x39mmBlk1.JPG


The shot direction is left-to-right. Note that the bullet yawed, but exhibited zero deformation or fragmentation. The only wounding being done here is by the intact projectile itself as it yaws. Unlike 5.56 NATO M193 or M855, there is no fragmentation that would increase the wounding potential of the bullet. Bullet yaw appears to start at 2.5" of penetration and the bullet appears to assume base-first travel at 9.5" or so.

Next up is Wolf 60gr HP, with the shot direction right-to-left:

545x39mmWolfHPBlk1.JPG


Notice the REALLY, really long neck in the wound track before it starts to yaw. Again, fragmentation was minimal until the end of the wound track. Surprisingly, the bullet did not begin to yaw until it had penetrated ten inches of gel and the wound cavity didn't get interesting (presumably due to moderate fragmentation) until thirteen inches in. This round may be useful for barrier penetration, but it's not particularly suited for social work. This is not advertised as high-penetration ammo, and as best I know does not actually have a penetrator insert. I paid for Brassfetcher to conduct this test because I wanted to determine if the Wolf commercial offerings were suitable replacements even for the milsurp ammo, should the milsurp become unavailable. My conclusion was that I would never use Wolf 60gr HP for serious social work.

Finally - this is a 6.8SPC controlled-expansion load made by Silver State Armory, using a 110gr Barnes TSX bullet:

6.8mm%20SPC%20Barnes%20Triple%20Shock%20block.JPG


The wound cavity initiates almost immediately, and the cavity characteristics are quite dramatic. Penetration is moderately deeper than the tested 5.45x39 rounds, and yet the wound cavity is much larger.

All cost aside - which would you choose for HD purposes?
 
Auburn1992 said:
I would choose 6.8mm but becuase of ammo prices (nearly $1/bullet) I would choose 5.45mm

... which trumps, for most of us, rbernie's most elegant and thoughtful post.

Yes, 6.8 is a wonder-round, but it's twice as expensive as 5.56, and eight times as expensive as 5.45 surplus. If we were using tax money, yes, we'd be tempted to foot the extra expense of the chambering and its expensive accessories, but 99% of us neither have the luxury of using tax money nor the ultimate role in making decisions concerning new weapons systems.

So, yes, all cost aside, it's great. But at 22¢, so is a double-tap of 5.45. I'm just sayin' ...
 
But at 22¢, so is a double-tap of 5.45. I'm just sayin' ...
Understood.

But I have 4000 rounds of 6.8SPC handloads on tap; my cost to make this (not including any cost for my labor) was about $160/1000. That's not much more more than the delivered cost of a spam can of milsurp 5.45x39...

Just sayin... :)
 
But I have 4000 rounds of 6.8SPC handloads on tap; my cost to make this (not including any cost for my labor) was about $160/1000. That's not much more more than the delivered cost of a spam can of milsurp 5.45x39...

Just sayin...

And as of yet I haven't waded into the relatively expensive quagmire of reloading equipment and supplies in order to secure a healthy supply of 5.45x39, which goes for $120 a tin without any shipping charges whatsoever if you purchase $500 worth or more from the right vendor ...

Just sayin' ... :D

PS: UPS nicely does most of my labor for me!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top