Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Which Calibers SHOULD our Military be using?

Discussion in 'Rifle Country' started by Mark IV Series 80, Dec 29, 2002.

?

Which Rifle Calibers SHOULD our Military be using?

  1. .22 LR

    17 vote(s)
    9.4%
  2. .223

    58 vote(s)
    32.2%
  3. .243

    27 vote(s)
    15.0%
  4. .25-06

    1 vote(s)
    0.6%
  5. 6.5 x 55

    21 vote(s)
    11.7%
  6. .270

    10 vote(s)
    5.6%
  7. 7.62 x 39

    12 vote(s)
    6.7%
  8. .30-30

    2 vote(s)
    1.1%
  9. .30 Carbine

    5 vote(s)
    2.8%
  10. .308

    98 vote(s)
    54.4%
  11. .30-06

    17 vote(s)
    9.4%
  12. .45-70 Gov't

    10 vote(s)
    5.6%
Multiple votes are allowed.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Mark IV Series 80

    Mark IV Series 80 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2002
    Messages:
    207
    Which Rifle calibers should our Armed Forces be using?
     
  2. Schuey2002

    Schuey2002 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    3,388
    Location:
    The Oregon Coast..
    Hmmmmmm,

    Which calibers?

    22
    30

    ;)
     
  3. DMK

    DMK Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    8,766
    Location:
    Over the hills and far, far away
    .308

    Ulterior motive

    I just wanna see the price of .308 ARs drop! :D
     
    Last edited: Dec 29, 2002
  4. voilsb

    voilsb Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2002
    Messages:
    633
    Location:
    Ft. Lewis, WA
    Re: .308

    it's a good motive. I put down .223 (assuming he meant 5.56 NATO), .270, and .308. They're all very good, especially if used/deployed properly.
     
  5. HSMITH

    HSMITH Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    4,933
    7mm Kurtz, or 7 mm-08. Should be a 7 mm with a muzzle velocity of 2850-2900 with a 140 grain bullet. Would be well flatter than the 223 past 300 yards, and hit like a train on people at any distance.
     
  6. wingnutx

    wingnutx Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Messages:
    1,047
    Location:
    Phoenix, AZ
    7.62 and 5.56 are fine by me. I just wish they'd give me a SAW instead of the full-auto M-16 that I carry now.

    For pistol caliber I'd stick with the .45 ACP.
     
  7. cratz2

    cratz2 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    4,233
    Location:
    Central IN
    Complicated question... Many believe the 7.62 in the sniper role should be replaced. 257 Weatherby would ideal or even the 270 Weatherby. The 6-284 has certainly proven itself in long range competition.

    For the grunt, I don't know... something a little bigger than the 223. Maybe something like the 6x45 which is a 6mm in a 223 case. Still could carry just as much ammo but leaving a bit bigger hole. Would function in all roles where the 223 does with different barrels and a bit of tweaking.

    For handguns, I'd certainly prefer a 45 ACP for most purposes. And supressed 22 pistols are still very handy. ;)
     
  8. Coffee357

    Coffee357 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2002
    Messages:
    135
    Location:
    Texas
    I had trouble choosing. I think the biggest problem our troops
    have with our current cartridge selection is that we take one
    round and try to make it work in all senerios. I think the .223
    works great at short to intermediate ranges. Flat shooting,
    low recoil, carry lots of ammo. Just the thing for close in fights.
    .308 or 25-06 would make more sense in the desert or mountain
    areas. The interchangable upper idea makes a great deal of
    sense here. If not, similar weapon systems like the ar-15 / ar10
    idea may work better. We have the logistics in place for .223 and
    .308 already and heaven knows they take enough of my tax
    money to buy a few extra rifles. You wouldn't take a mini-van
    on the race track and an indi-500 car just won't get the
    family to disneyland - why make one rifle do everything?

    Coffee
     
  9. Cosmoline

    Cosmoline Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    23,648
    Location:
    Los Anchorage
    The ideal assault rifle cartridge would have the superior ballistics of the 7mm or 6.5 mm bullet, with a short OAL.

    In other words, the 7mm-08! Far superior to the .223 in all respects, and it even has the edge on the .308.
     
  10. Andrew Wyatt

    Andrew Wyatt Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    4,468
    Location:
    Bakersfield, California
    I think the Army should have two types of units, light and heavy.

    Light infantry get red dotted .223 squirtguns(and M249 saws) (noncombatants also get .223s)
    heavy infantry get Ar-10s with ACOGS. (and .308 caliber SAWs)

    then, you'd have guys who can go and clear houses and whatnot, and guys who can run around and shoot afganis at 500 yards and whatnot.

    I voted for .223 and .308.
     
  11. Bostonterrier97

    Bostonterrier97 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    211
    I am both amazed and yet..the cynicist within me is not surprised at the current polling results.

    It reflects a decided bias towards the .223 and .308 based upon familiarity and less upon ballistic performance.

    In terms of ballistics a 6.5mm round is suitable as both a sniping round and as an infantry round.

    The sectional density of the 6.5mm round allows for the superior penetration and performance at the same time it is lighter and has less recoil than the .308

    The 6.5mm round if made with identical bullet construction as the M855 round will have greater penetration and wounding ballistics than the .223 round.
     
  12. Zorro

    Zorro Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    208
    Location:
    California
    6MM PPC

    Not Listed!

    6MM PPC.

    7.62X39MM case necked down to 6MM.

    90% of .243 Winchester Power out of a round a bit lighter than 7.62X39MM.
     
  13. Bostonterrier97

    Bostonterrier97 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    211
    6mm PPC. Yes..it is a necked down 7.62x39mm round but it has been blown out so there is no taper. A round used for semi-automatic rifles needs some taper to the case to insure reliable extraction.

    Ballistically the 6mm PPC is outstanding.

    Other good alternatives would be a 257 Roberts which is nothing more than a 7x57 round necked down to take a 25 caliber bullet
     
  14. Frohickey

    Frohickey Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    2,018
    Location:
    People's Republic of **********
    Hehehe... 2 guys said 45/70Govt. :D

    Covering fire with a 45/70Govt is heavy cover.
     
  15. dev_null

    dev_null Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Messages:
    1,338
    Location:
    Austin TX
    I never claimed to be a ballistician, but for a service round I'll take a popular, hard-hitting, and easy to obtain round like .308/7.62 over a wildcat necked-down anything anyday.

    YMMV...
     
  16. Gewehr98

    Gewehr98 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    5,988
    USe that beautiful 6.5mm bullet...

    In either a .308 case (6.5-08, aka .260 Remington)

    Or to keep it light and in an AR or AK platform, put the 6.5mm bullets in a 7.62x39 case, such as the popular IHMSA 6.5x39.
     
  17. seeker_two

    seeker_two Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    3,616
    Location:
    Deep in the Heart of the Lone Star State (TX)
    .223 (submachine gun)
    .308 (general battle rifle)
    .22lr (training aid & silenced applications)
    .50BMG (long-range sniping)
     
  18. WilderBill

    WilderBill Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    544
    Location:
    Texas
    There should be a choice of "other" to make it interesting.
    If you have to go for a one size fits all round it could be something in the vein of the new short magnums. Lots of power for the size, so you could carry plenty. Maybe a 6.5 with a little more case capacity the the 7.63 x 39, but less than the .308.

    If you want seperate long and short range how about 7-08 for long and .50AE for 100 yards or less. Should be pretty effective with a 14-16 inch barrel.
     
  19. Gordon

    Gordon Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    8,113
    Location:
    central Kali.
    Ballistically speaking computor model says 6.8 mm 120 grains at 2700fps does it and can be fired in existing platforms with existing case head size(.223). I say convert uppers to .50 Tromix (or whatcha call it) and blow the bad guy in two. I think the third worlders would have more respect.:neener:
     
  20. Dogsoldier

    Dogsoldier Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    73
    Location:
    Tucson, AZ
    I'm in the 308 or 243 camp. The virtues of the 308 have been talked about enough, so I'll let it rest.

    Don't over look the humble 243. Plenty fast enough to punch body armor, the 6mm bullet is not a slotch power/penetration wise and the round is darn flat shooting. If the bullet mass is around 80 grains, it will do the job well past 300 meters.
     
  21. Art Eatman

    Art Eatman Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2002
    Messages:
    42,985
    Location:
    Terlingua, TX; Thomasville,GA
    Seems to me that a lot of this is putting the cart before the horse: "Gee, we've got this slick rifle package! Now, what will be our philosophy about its use?"

    I keep reading that there would be less of the WW II massed armies vying over a large area. More "brushfires" and small-unit actions.

    What sort of weaponry would be most useful in air-mobile small-unit actions, in open country? To a great extent, I see this as what's going on in Afghanistan, albeit not all that well thought out. And, when one reflects upon Somalia and Afghanistan, it looks like something more potent than a .223 is needed.

    Seems like 6mm to 8mm bullets are most useful. The issue is then dealing with recoil, and the weight of a probable need of a "combat pack" of ammo.

    From a military standpoint, absent the sniper-rifle category, a semi-auto in something near the 6.5mm or 7mm in a .308Win-sized case would work. It would be quite controllable in firing, and would be quite human-effective to at least 500 yards.

    Seems to me that in a jungle-type environment, ranges would generally be more like the Nam. However, in an ideal military structure, fire suppression during a radio call to ground or airborne artillery would be the primary tactic. In other words, M16s and better commo/support.

    $0.02, Art
     
  22. JShirley

    JShirley Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Messages:
    20,843
    Location:
    Atlanta
    None of the above (calibers).

    Ideal caliber will be about 6mm, and fire aprox 100 grn round in the 2900-3000 fps region, from an AR-sized platform. This round will be considerably smaller than current "main battle rifle"/sniper/GPMG rounds.

    This round will perform without undue recoil for the typical grunt, and match ammo and platforms will enable accurate long-range use.

    (Incidentally, the Chinese have come to a similar conclusion.
    http://www.sinodefence.com/army/crewserved/mg_58.asp
    http://www.sinodefence.com/army/individual/rifle_87.asp
    http://www.sinodefence.com/army/individual/rifle_88.asp )
     
  23. chaim

    chaim Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    3,312
    Location:
    Baltimore, MD
    While the .223/5.56 isn't a bad round I do think it needs to be replaced. As far as the stories of Somalis not going down, keep in mind that we killed quite a few over there and no caliber will kill or even knock someone down anywhere near 100% of the time (even the powerful cartridges of WWI and WWII wounded far more than they killed). It does have the advantage over the .308 when it comes to full-auto in a light rifle and carriabilty. However, at longer ranges (as in Afganistan) it is far from ideal and the perception of being underpowered is a disadvantage (psychologically it is important that the troops have confidence in their equipment). For that reason I vote for a new cartridge that splits the difference between a .223 and .308 maybe tending closer to the .223 (I actually voted 7.62x39 since there was no such animal in the poll and the Commie round is somewhat more powerful than the 5.56 with slightly better range yet is well suited to full-auto and is very carriable).

    I agree that multiple calibers to specialize in different needs would be best but that isn't really the way the military does things. True, currently the 5.56 and .308 are officially stocked and in some cases troops can be outfitted with M14s but it is rare. For all practical purposes the military likes the one size fits all approach with the 5.56/M4.

    For sniping I said .270 just because I like it's flat trajectory, it is more powerful than the .308 used for that now and it has a longer range. I'm sure there are other good choices, some maybe better, but I choose this since I know more about it than some other choices.

    I also listed the .22lr. I understand from my reading that in Vietnam snipers and some others sometimes used .22 rifles (especially suppressed .22s) for some close in sniper missions. Currently, the Israeli Defense Forces uses Ruger 10/22s for some jobs. It is quiet, even in non-suppressed set-ups, and using sub-sonic rounds and suppressing it would make it almost impossible to figure where the shot came from. A .22 can certainly kill so I think this would be a useful addition.
     
    Last edited: Jan 2, 2003
  24. King

    King Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    218
    Location:
    Austin Texas........
    I vote .223 but also note that mil-spec ammo should be used (M913 in 5.56MM). Lighter ammo, carry more ammo, effective out to 200 meters or so (combat efficient), ballistic coefficient equal to .243 calibur. Yaw and framentation very good.

    Proven..........
     
  25. J Miller

    J Miller Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    874
    Location:
    Central IL
    OK, Disclaimer time. I have never been in the military. So my opinions are based on what I have seen, done, read, and the conversations I have had with combat vets.

    I voted for the 308 (7.62 NATO).
    I voted this way because it is a proven battle rifle round. It will do the job when it is used by riflemen that can shoot. It is easily acquired anywhere in the world, everyone makes it.

    My second comment is this. I believe that with the exception of the squad machine gunner, all rifles should be semi-auto ONLY!
    And I believe that our military troups should be taught marksmanship. The spray and pray technique with the M-16's is wastefull and useless. As for the M-14 or other rifle being a big heavy weapon, yes it is. But if a soldier is so small they can't be made fit enough to cary it, then they shouldn't be in combat.

    I grew up with footage of the military action in VietNam on the TV news every night. The one scene of the US soldier behind a wall putting a fresh magazine in his M-16 then holding it up over his head and emptying the magazine still is imprinted in my minds eye. As an early teenager I though it was wrong then, I still think it was wrong.

    OBTW, I think we should ditch the Berreta M whater and go back to the 1911A1 too.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page