Quantcast

Just asking....

Discussion in 'Rifle Country' started by Oldhandloader, Apr 19, 2018.

  1. Oldhandloader

    Oldhandloader Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2011
    Messages:
    67
    Location:
    Louisiana
    I read an article on the internet not long ago about the lethality of the venerable old M1 Garand (30-36) compared to the M-14 (7.62 x 51). The gist of the article was that the M-14 produced more lethal and destructive wounds at the same ranges due to the rate of twist of the rifling.
    I.E. the M-14 bullet although a tad bit slower in velocity was rotating much, faster and was quicker to yaw and zig zag creating more catastrophic wounds.
    I lost the article but was wondering if any of you guys have ever heard this. Let me know.

    Thanks
    Old Handloader.
     
  2. JeffG

    JeffG Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2017
    Messages:
    1,437
    Location:
    NE Wisconsin
    That is almost verbatim the argument the used to persuade us Marine recruits about the M16 vs the M14, in 1973. They demonstrated the effect on ammo cans filled with water to show the difference in splash.o_O Military personnel need to be confident in their issue weapons, so no doubt that type of argument has been used. I know that being shot in the chest with a 30-06, 308 or .556 will not make one bit of difference as you lay dying.
    Dr. DiMaio's book may help.
    http://www.e-reading.club/bookreade...arms,_ballistics,_and_forensic_techniques.pdf
     
    Bushpilot and NIGHTLORD40K like this.
  3. Oldhandloader

    Oldhandloader Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2011
    Messages:
    67
    Location:
    Louisiana
    Thanks Jeff....like I said, just asking because I'm getting old and can't remember where I read that article. But it sounded good---who knows?
     
    JeffG likes this.
  4. MistWolf

    MistWolf Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2005
    Messages:
    3,004
    Poppycock
     
  5. RecoilRob

    RecoilRob Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2003
    Messages:
    2,009
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    The difference in velocity between M2 ball and M80 is insignificant as well as the twist rates used in the M1 vs M14 which are the same 1-10 or at worst difference 1-12. What IS different is the bullet construction where the M80 tends to yaw quickly then fragment at the cannelure which could offer more wounding effect than the flat base 150 grain M2 bullet in the '06. But even with that caveat at the power level of 30 caliber full power rifle cartridges it's kind of like arguing which hits harder...a Kenworth or a Peterbuilt if you jump in front of it? Restricted to the Military bullets I'd kind of hedge toward the 7.62 Nato as possibly being more effective...but can't back it up with any meaningful data. The option of 'It doesn't matter' is probably closer to the correct answer.
     
    ontarget and JeffG like this.
  6. jmr40

    jmr40 Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2007
    Messages:
    12,054
    Location:
    Georgia
    I've not heard the argument made comparing the 308 vs 30-06. But at the time the 308 was introduced it gave exactly the same muzzle velocity as military 30-06 loads so at worst it should have been able to match 30-06 in lethality. Modern 30-06 hunting loads are 100-150 fps faster than the best you can get from 308. But not military loads designed to work in the Garand.

    On the other hand some gun writers, and others whom I respect have made claims that barrels with faster twist rates do result in more explosive expansion when bullets impact game. This is coming from a hunting rifle perspective with soft point ammo. Not sure if it would apply to FMJ military loads.

    I've not seen any data to confirm this, just observations. But the people I know who are making the claims are people who's opinions I trust and respect. Until I see something that disproves it, I'm going to say there is some truth to the claim.
     
    Demi-human and JeffG like this.
  7. eastbank

    eastbank Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2009
    Messages:
    3,902
    center hit, the point is moot.
     
    JeffG and .308 Norma like this.
  8. Goneshoot'n

    Goneshoot'n Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2017
    Messages:
    49
    Location:
    Iowa
    I was watching an old documentary of a WWII vet talking about the M1 Garand, he said when him or his guys hit someone anywhere center mass,there was never any doubt that they were a gonner, and there was no need to check. I think that says a lot about the confidence the soldiers had in the M1.
     
    JeffG likes this.
  9. .308 Norma

    .308 Norma Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2016
    Messages:
    1,773
    Location:
    SE Idaho
    The WWII soldiers would have said the same thing about the M-14 had it been invented yet.
     
    Demi-human, JeffG and Infidel like this.
  10. eastbank

    eastbank Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2009
    Messages:
    3,902
    yes, I liked the m-14 over the m-16, but you paid a price carrying the m-14 in the conditions in Vietnam if you humped, better if you rode.
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice