If you were a soldier in Iraq and had a choice of combat rounds, 7.62x39 or 5.56?

[XD-40 Shooter]

Lets assume that all of the combat will be urban and under 200 yards, which cartridge would you prefer? I'd rather debate the merits of each cartridge, rather than the platform.

 

[DMK]

In Iraq, I'd want 5.56, preferably 77gr mk262 or M193.

If I needed longer range or more penetration, I'd want 7.62x51.

I've never been impressed by the ballistics or terminal performance of 7.62x39 FMJ. Of course, I'm sitting nice and safe in Hometown, USA. Those who've seen for felt the terminal affects of 7.62x39 may very well disagree and in that case I defer to them.

 

[GunTech]

Given that 5.56x45 was demonstrated to be 11% more lethal than 7.52x51 at this range, that's a no brainer. 7.62x39 is great if you want to shoot holes straight through.

 

[Acheron]

Since all of the combat will be under 200m, I would pick the 7.62x39. As long as it is loaded with a fragmenting rounds, the wounding potential is much higher than 5.56. I know most military 7.62x39 ammo is loaded with steel cored non-fragmenting bullets, but if you could load it with a 125-140gr fragmenting round, the 7.62x39 would be unstoppable at the shorter ranges described in this scenario. I would rather have the heavier bullet and greater stopping power of either a 7.62x39 or 7.62x51 than the flat trajectory and better (at least than the 7.62x39) long range accuracy, since combat ranges here are 200m or less.

 

[Art Eatman]

If you have to shoot through doors or partitions to hit an enemy, I'd tend to favor the AK round. Otherwise, no le hace--I don't see it making much difference, either one.

Art

 

[Kimber1911_06238]

I agree with art, for penetration...the X39. All other situations, the 5.56

 

[mljdeckard]

A couple of things,

I know the criteria ruled out the platform, and wanted to discuss only the round, but it's really still important to remember that you are working with weapons that are select-fire capable, and that the A2 has a burst. The advantage if the platform is that three shots fired from an A@ are certainly very effective at the given range. Three shots from 7.62x39 are also effective, but most soldiers can fire more effectively from an A2 than they can an AK.

I also have small-framed female soldiers in my squad. even if it were an option, to let them use AR-style weapons chambered in the AK round, I would want them to have the cartridge with less recoil.

One afternoon, several of my friends went out to shoot rabbits with weapons in both platforms, chambered for both cartridges. We all found that the rifles chambered in 5.56 are easier to fire accurately, and that the ARs are more comfortable to use overall. Yes, we all CAN use the other rifle, but I want the one that's easiest/most comfortable/most accurate for my soldiers.

 

[Geronimo45]

Given that 5.56x45 was demonstrated to be 11% more lethal than 7.52x51 at this range

Really? Where are those results? Not arguing the point, just curious to see 'em, and to see where the x51 regains an advantage.

 

[redneckrepairs]

I dont care about the cartage Ill take the armalite ar platform. Its more ergonomic , i am familiar with it , and i have faith in it since ill clean/lube my own rifle . If i am forced to pick a cal ill pick .50 bmg and set back a mile or so from the unpleasant activitys of the day .

 

[inherentical]

I'd be curious as to opinions of people who have actual combat experience in Iraq. Otherwise this is just another "which one is better" argument with no real world application.

 

[The Annoyed Man]

I don't have much knowledge about either cartridge, but I would refer people to Michael Yon's website about Iraq. In his dispatch titled "Gates of Fire in which he recounts in great detail a close quarters firefight in which he was an involved observer, and speaking of the effect of the 5.56 round fired from an M4, he writes:

[CSM] Prosser shot the man at least four times with his M4 rifle. But the American M4 rifles are weak - after Prosser landed three nearly point blank shots in the man’s abdomen, splattering a testicle with a fourth, the man just staggered back, regrouped and tried to shoot Prosser.

The bad guy gets hit FOUR times, three in the abdomen and the fourth destroying one of his testicles, and he's still in the fight. I don't know about you all, but if that guy is still in the fight, then perhaps the 5.56 round is perhaps not the best choice. Now, Michael Yon is former Special Forces (where he was an A Team small arms specialist), and he's been there and seen the elephant. In this particular case at least, he doesn't seem that impressed with the M4 and the 5.56 round. Please note (if you've read the article) that Lt. Col. Kurilla is hit 3 times in this same firefight by 7.62 rounds (fired by the same guy Prosser hit 4 times with the 5.56), also from close range, one of which snapped his femur in two, and the hits put Kurilla down. I'm not convinced that a 5.56 round would snap a femur. The bad guy who was hit 4 times by a 5.56 was not put down.

I'm not trying to minimize the 5.56 cartridge (I certainly don't want to volunteer to be shot by one), but the OP question was, "which would you want to carry?" If the bigger and heavier bullet of the 7.62 round has more knock down power than the 5.56, then that's the one I want to be using in an urban environment, particularly in close quarters. Of course, as I said above, I am not an expert on these matters, and I've never (thankfully) HAD to shoot someone who was shooting at me.

 

[jay43]

The bad guy gets hit FOUR times, three in the abdomen and the fourth destroying one of his testicles, and he's still in the fight. I don't know about you all, but if that guy is still in the fight, then perhaps the 5.56 round is perhaps not the best choice.

these are just poorly placed shots. three in the cheast would of easily stoped the man. i voted 5.56 its more accurate and easier to get well placed shots. a

 

[Twud]

Since access to ammo dosen't seem to be a problem, I'd want the new .27 cal round. Can't remember the metric desgnation. I keep remembering footage of a car bomber heading for group of marines. They couldn't stop it with their 223s. Give me somehing with a little more penetration. Something with a little block cracking cababilitiy.

 

[everallm]

@ Geronimo

The 11% figure came during the Vietnam conflict with 1:14 or longer twist barrels.

The point was at 20 - 100 mtrs the round was already starting keyholing and was dynamically unstable. This lead to increased wound channel size as well as fragmentation.

The problem was that it meant that accuracy past 200m - 300m started to deteriorate noticeably.

Up close in jungle not a real issue but this has lead to the gradual change to tighter barrel twists in the current issue weapon.

@ Acheron

You CANNOT have fragmenting rounds, It's against the Hague Convention and really really illegal.....

As a general point on the 5.56 and urban warfare. One of the advantages and disadvantages of this round as opposed to the 7.62x39 is overpenetration.

BG behind a cinderblock wall and the 5.56 has a much hard time penetrating and impacting than the 7.62

It also means when doing room clearance that you have LESS concern over overpenetration and collateral damage.

You pay your money, you take your choice....

@Twud

Sounds like the 6.8SPC.....careful, can start a realllllllllllll long calibre argument

 

[GunTech]

If 4 rounds of 5.56x45 didn't do the job, I doubt 7.62x39 would have done any better. It is worth repeating over and over - these folks are shooting FMJ. Remove any thoughts about how your 30-30 deer rifle is so effective - more so than a 223 (30-30 is generally equated with 7.62x39).

Just to reiterrate, repeat again: Full Metal Jacket. It doesn't expend, it goes right on through. The best you can hope for is that the bullet tumbles and fragments in the target. The 5.56x45 will do this, but the 7.62x39 won't.

The Russians thought so highly of the lethality of the 5.56x45mm versus the 7.62x39mm that they developed the 5.45x39mm. They had plenty of clients on the receiving end of the 5.56 to know.

 

[GunTech]

everallm

The 1:14 twist does not keyhole with M193. That's a myth that I have personally disproven many times. The reason that the 1:14 was replaced by 1:12 is that 1:14 did not give adequate accuracy in arctic conditions.

Aside from early M16 that were tested by Vietnamese troops and advisors, all issue M16s had 1:12 twist. The 11% superiority resulted because almost all fire was within the fragmentation zone for M193. The M16 riflkes in use in SE Asia were all 20 inch barrels (accepting a few XM177s). The fragmentation range for the M193 fired from a 20 inch barrel is just over 200 yards.

By contrst, the M4, firing the M855 has a has a muzzle velocity of about 2770 fps (compared to 3300 fps for the M193 from an M16). Fragmentation velocity is about 2500 fps. The M4's velocity has dropped below 2500fps before reaching 100 yards.

 

[jaholder1971]

Men have been gutshot with rounds as large as .45/70 and still lived to fight, sometimes even for days.

I'll take whatever they'd give me.

 

[MechAg94]

The bad guy gets hit FOUR times, three in the abdomen and the fourth destroying one of his testicles, and he's still in the fight.

You answered your own post. Obviously not the best hits to take someone down quick.

 

[GunTech]

Personally, I think a shot to the testicles would take me out right quick.

 

[MechAg94]

It was only a flesh wound!!

 

[yesit'sloaded]

Since the military action in Iraq is not a declared war between two nations, can you use fragmenting bullets. That would change the whole ballgame as far as which cartridge.

 

[DMK]

Personally, I think a shot to the testicles would take me out right quick.

Some of these guys have such a bloodlust to kill westerners and Zionists that pain is pretty much irrelevant to them. Death is pretty much irrelevant to them. It's all about how many they can take with them. It's a foreign concept to most of us. To stop them, you really need to make it physically impossible for them to continue.

 

[Cosmoline]

Heck with those! If I can't have SP rounds I'll take me some 54R!

Since the military action in Iraq is not a declared war between two nations, can you use fragmenting bullets. That would change the whole ballgame as far as which cartridge.

I agree. But the top brass will never let it happen. Nor will the politicos. The lives of our soldiers simply aren't important enough to risk upsetting the European press. And there is a hidebound reluctance on the part of many in the military to accept *any* change in the tools of warfare. So we're stuck with bullet designs that haven't been state of the art since the first world war.

We know enough to realize that a headline screaming "YANKS TO USE KILLER BULLETS!" is hilariously stupid. But to the rest of the world, it would be a very serious matter.

 

[RockyMtnTactical]

5.56 has plenty of stopping power and more range than 7.62x39. I would be fine carrying a weapon in 5.56 in to combat.

 

[LeibstandarteAdH]

7.62x39, No doubble taps required.
Also plenty of ammo if the D.A. EOD's dont destroy what is already there while the DOD is paying for more from Vympel at the same time.