reconsidering 5.56mm
- Thread starter justin22885
- Start date
- Status
justin22885
member
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2009
- Messages
- 2,102
i wouldnt mind seeing what some ammo does at 300, the big problem with ballistics gel tests is they are all done at point blank range, bullets will perform differently, yaw more suddenly, expand less or whatever as distance increases so its always a poor comparison for rifle ammunition thats going to be shot at targets up to and maybe beyond 400 yards
i think i would keep my tests to the low cost ammo, maybe not 25 a round, but at least test what is offered by brands like wolf, tula, golden tiger, bear, etc
my ammo at 30 cents a round included the price of bulk once fired brass, reloads on that brass would only be 23 cents a round, as cheap as the 7.62x39, i should consider a progressive press to reduce some of the labor in reloading because there are other calibers i reload for too that it would aid
meanmrmustard
Member
I'll aid in this as soon as I can.
I too would like to see a comparison test at distances beyond point blank range in test media. As soon as I can squirrel the necessary items, ill PM you.
As an aside, I have the ability to go to at maximum 500 yards give or take, so 0-500 is an option.
I too would like to see a comparison test at distances beyond point blank range in test media. As soon as I can squirrel the necessary items, ill PM you.
As an aside, I have the ability to go to at maximum 500 yards give or take, so 0-500 is an option.
justin22885
member
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2009
- Messages
- 2,102
i think i need to get a few more guns first before i do more testing, i lost a lot having to pay for medical bills, my only 308 now has a .311" bore which isnt suitable and the AR15 i used was borrowed from a relative
While the 5.56 NATO and .223 Rem have been used in high power rifle matches since 1971, they've not shot the scores on bullseye targets consistently better than the 7.62 NATO or .308 Win rounds in Garands or M14/M1A platforms. It's not a surprise to me that the US Army Marksmanship Unit got the NRA to allow AR10's to be used in long range matches at 1000 yards. Chambered for the .308 Win., they shot more accurate than the best M14NM rifles they had and finally was able to set records with it.
meanmrmustard
Member
justin22885
member
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2009
- Messages
- 2,102
well, my situation is unfixable, but stable and wont be getting any worse, but i had to sell of rifles like an M1A, PTR-91, AUG clone, i have on my list an AR15, AR-10, and more AKs
i think my next two rifles would have to be an AR-15 of my own, and build up my last AK-74 kit as a 5.45 rifle so i can compare the two.. 5.45 has the range, accuracy, recoil and lightweight properties of 5.45, but better barrier penetration (maybe due to the steel/copper bimetal jacket) and a much larger wound cavity as that very long bullet tumbles almost instantly
i think my next two rifles would have to be an AR-15 of my own, and build up my last AK-74 kit as a 5.45 rifle so i can compare the two.. 5.45 has the range, accuracy, recoil and lightweight properties of 5.45, but better barrier penetration (maybe due to the steel/copper bimetal jacket) and a much larger wound cavity as that very long bullet tumbles almost instantly
Last edited:
Swampman
Old Fart
I agree that the 7.62x39 is significantly more effective on 200+ pound pigs than 5.56.
They are fairly close in performance when taking "textbook" side shots to the chest, but when you've got a sounder of 40 or 50 pigs all headed directly away from you (so that your only target is pig butt), the 7.62x39 is much more effective.
An M1A loaded with 150 grain Partitions is even better.
meanmrmustard
Member
I have heard that about 545, but I've no experience of it myself.
As for the AR, are you going 556?
justin22885
member
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2009
- Messages
- 2,102
yeah, the AR would be 5.56, unfortunately there are too many compromises with 6.8 and 6.5 on the AR15, a lot of them are due to pressure limitations, 300 blackout doesnt interest me all that much since it doesnt offer much over the much cheaper 7.62x39 and certain pistol calibers perform at least as well when suppressed..
277 wolverine has me interested a bit though, it has about 100fps more muzzle velocity than 7.62x39 using 110 grain bullets that have a significantly higher ballistic coefficient so its much flatter shooting than 7.62x39 but with all the advantages in barrer penetration, energy, and not including the brass i could load up .277 wolvering for $0.26/rd using the remington 115 grain bullets
this also has me interested in coming up with my own .277" wildcat based on the 7.62x39 case but unlike 6.5 grendel, i would keep the taper of the cartridge (so unlike the grendel there will be lots of quality magazines available for it) and also unlike the grendel, pressures would be increased to 62kpsi.. if the AR-15 cant handle that, thats its problem because the AK can
Sapper771
Member
Justin,
Is this a platform concern or a caliber concern? I saw that you used a borrowed AR of unknown quality and an AK in 5.56. Just wondering which platform YOU prefer.
As far as calibers go, what caliber are you confident with? Which caliber can you use more effectively? Are you the only one thats going to be using this rifle?
Example: I love my AK in 7.62x39.....but I am clearly better with my AR in 5.56. So the AR in 5.56 is my primary rifle based on MY performance with it.
Is this a platform concern or a caliber concern? I saw that you used a borrowed AR of unknown quality and an AK in 5.56. Just wondering which platform YOU prefer.
As far as calibers go, what caliber are you confident with? Which caliber can you use more effectively? Are you the only one thats going to be using this rifle?
Example: I love my AK in 7.62x39.....but I am clearly better with my AR in 5.56. So the AR in 5.56 is my primary rifle based on MY performance with it.
justin22885
member
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2009
- Messages
- 2,102
to be completely fair, there are things i hate about all of it, things i hate about 5.56, things i hate about 7.62x39, things i hate about the AK, things i hate about the AR-15.. everything has to be this massive compromise between one major flaw over another that it fuels this constant bickering from fanboys on both sides that cant take a step back and realize, neither one is perfect and if one was, there wouldnt be an arguement
sure i wish the 5.56 has more energy, better penetration, and performed better from shorter barrels, and i wish 7.62x39 was lighter and flatter shooting... i wish the AK didnt have to be some compromise or another just to get a functioning optic on it and that i didnt need a frickin garage equipped with shop tools just to change out a part here and there.. i also wish the AR-15 didnt have a buffer tube, could have a proper folding stock or even put into a bullpup configuration (which i found i REALLY liked with the AUG clone i used to have)
it could be the fact im a raging perfectionist to the point of it almost being obsessive, or having just enough technical knowledge and engineering knowledge to see flaws most people see, or maybe im over annoyed with rampant fanboyism on both sides, but if there was a low cost, non proprietary, viable option 3 for any of it, i might just go for that
but of the two im actually beginning to learn more AR15 because even though theres all these stupid little parts everywhere that can and will fail and break (murphys law) the parts are so common and easily replaced and easier to repair
About the only thing the 5.56 has going for it is velocity. Go to a heavy bullet, with a relatively high BC, and it's an okay paper puncher at 600 yds, but you've negated it's strong suit.. Go heavier (and so long that they must be loaded singly in an AR) and they'll reach the legendary 1000yds. Work the pits at a CMP match and you will hear them supersonic at 600yds, which is sort of impressive.
The 7.62x3commie is meh². I'd rather have a .30-30.
The 7.62x3commie is meh². I'd rather have a .30-30.
justin22885
member
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2009
- Messages
- 2,102
30-30 is 7.62x39 just with a horribly low ballistic coefficient from flat or rubber tipped bullets and a rim.. the illusion that 30-30 has even remotely more energy than 7.62x39 comes from the fact the numbers on the 30-30 ammo box is done with a 20-24 inch barrel while 7.62x39 is done with a 16
justin22885
member
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2009
- Messages
- 2,102
so i was reading an article about luckygunner that was testing out all sorts of low cost 5.56 ammo and it brought up one dimensions to the cost and labor aspect in barrel life and how its reduced rather significantly by the use of bimetal jacketed ammunition of which most the steel case ammo happens to be.
the more frequent need to change barrels and the PITA it can be to do this on an AK without a shop press, headspacing gauges, and a drill handy will raise costs and labor of the steel cased ammo and you certainly arent going to get brass cased match ammo as cheap as i can hand load it for
i think im going to stick with loading up my own ammunition which also means i would be sticking with 5.56 or one of its derivatives.. i want to test out 277 wolverine even more now because with a 100fps boost over 7.62x39, a much higher BC bullet that still weighs about the same it gives all the advantages of 7.62x39, with a much flatter trajectory and would only cost me about $0.03/rd more than my 75 grain 5.56 ammo
so i will focus more on the AR-15 and getting a progressive press
the more frequent need to change barrels and the PITA it can be to do this on an AK without a shop press, headspacing gauges, and a drill handy will raise costs and labor of the steel cased ammo and you certainly arent going to get brass cased match ammo as cheap as i can hand load it for
i think im going to stick with loading up my own ammunition which also means i would be sticking with 5.56 or one of its derivatives.. i want to test out 277 wolverine even more now because with a 100fps boost over 7.62x39, a much higher BC bullet that still weighs about the same it gives all the advantages of 7.62x39, with a much flatter trajectory and would only cost me about $0.03/rd more than my 75 grain 5.56 ammo
so i will focus more on the AR-15 and getting a progressive press
OilyPablo
Member
I don't think it's an illusion. Have even you shot both?
adcoch1
Member
The 7.62x39 can and does do the job that 30-30 has been doing for over a hundred years if you load it right. But load a 30-30 with the same modern bullets and use it in a bolt gun, the difference between the two cartridges becomes glaringly obvious. I love 7.62x39, but to try and compare its efficiency to a cartridge developed in the black powder era, and that has taken WAY more game over the last century is bordering on silly. The rifle and cartridge system is worthwhile to compare in my opinion though. Sorry about the rant.
justin22885
member
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2009
- Messages
- 2,102
yes, i have, and the perception in there being a difference comes from the longer barrels on the 30-30, the numbers on the back of your ammo box with 30-30 is done with a 20-24 inch barrel as well, cut a barrel down to 16" and compare and you wont notice a difference
ive had factor 7.62x39 ammo up higher than 2,500fps from an SKS barrel and have gotten 150 grain hand loads over 2400fps while remining within the pressure limits.. news flash, thats all a 30-30 can do either... why does this surprise anyone? 30-30 is very low pressure
Last edited:
Lloyd Smale
Member
that the 5.56 doesn't compare to the 762x39 in power.
justin22885
member
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2009
- Messages
- 2,102
it does after about 200 yards, the heavier bullets do anyway, 55 grain definitely not
meanmrmustard
Member
You're pushing a bullet that's roughly 45+ grains heavier than the standard 762 Soviet round at nearly 300 fps faster.
Not really apples to apples.
Take your same chosen load, barrel length, and even your magic 30-30 round doesn't compare to 308 win, and has a laughable BC. No one loads a modern 30-30 in a modern bolt gun, because why would anyone care? 308 win does the job already, and 30-30 does what its supposed to do. But it is no 762 Soviet, which is not even remotely better, but easily even.
Let us look at it this way: 30-30 is like the backup date to prom; she's plain, unobtrusive, and nothing to get excited about. But, she still dances.
Last edited:
Ignition Override
Member
Is a primary objective at 100-200 yards (+) for hunting, or possibly target shooting?
If mostly for Self-defense, I've never read/heard about rifles being needed at any similar distances Inside the US, other than in the Am. Revolution or Civil War. Nor just after Hurricane Katrina in LA, MS... for self-defense.
For protection at less than 200 yards, maybe the most reliable type of carbine should be the priority over elaborate evaluations between .223, 5.45/7.62x39? Even an original, Non-modifed Saiga with a wooden buttstock might work, and is shorter than a standard SKS.
If mostly for Self-defense, I've never read/heard about rifles being needed at any similar distances Inside the US, other than in the Am. Revolution or Civil War. Nor just after Hurricane Katrina in LA, MS... for self-defense.
For protection at less than 200 yards, maybe the most reliable type of carbine should be the priority over elaborate evaluations between .223, 5.45/7.62x39? Even an original, Non-modifed Saiga with a wooden buttstock might work, and is shorter than a standard SKS.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
