Why was 7.62 a standard caliber during WWII?

[Jim Watson]

The 1906-1925 issue round with 150 grain flatbase spitzer was known as the "1906" cartridge for some reason. The "M1" round adopted in 1925 or thereabouts had a 173 grain boattail bullet. When they went back to a 150 grain flatbase in time for WW II, that was the "M2". There was also an "M2 AP" round that was used a lot, too.

 

[cheygriz]

Uhhh..... They were smart enough to figure out that velocity was more important than diameter or bullet weight, but they didn't have the technology to go much above 2750 FPS.

So they junked the .45 "pumpkin roller" rifles. As technology moved forward, they were able to get significant incrteases in velocitry and they junked the .30 in favor of the .22.

In another 20-30 years, powder technology will improve enough that they will be able to junk the .22 in favor of a 5-10 grain, .12-.14 caliber at 6000-6500 FPS.

The .22 will still probably be retained as a machine gun round, just like the 7.62 "pumpkin rollers" today

 

[Jim Watson]

I think you could have a lot of fun with the military rifles that never were; the last generation of black powder rifles that were almost immediately obsoleted by smokeless.

I can think of the 9.5mm Turkish Mauser on the 71/84 action. As one site says: "Its cartridge, the most impressive of the blackpowder military rounds, used a 60mm rimmed, bottlenecked case containing 70 grains of blackpowder that propelled its 285-grain paper-patched, flat-nosed lead bullet to approximately 1758 fps."

There was the .402 Enfield Martini; 65,000 rifles made or in advanced stages of manufacture when the Brits got smart and adopted the .303 Lee Metford. They were converted to .577-450 for the old standard load to be issued to colonial troops as the Mk IV, perhaps some to .303 Mk V.

 

[Va Shooter]

Look at what the troops are asking for in Afghanistan, M-14, taking care of long distance Tangos.

 

[LHshot]

Seems pretty clear to me that the 7.62x51 is just about the perfect round for maximum lethality, accuracy and manageability. It's capable of major hydrostatic shock as well as damage to hard targets, engine blocks and the like.

 

[R.W.Dale]

Seems pretty clear to me that the 7.62x51 is just about the perfect round for maximum lethality, accuracy and manageability. It's capable of major hydrostatic shock as well as damage to hard targets, engine blocks and the like.

I'll prolly get flamed for this but I disagree. IMO for the criteria you mention the 6.5x50mm Japanese was one of the best balanced military cartridges ever devised and to a lesser extent the Carcano and Swedish 6.5's

I find it most intersitng that the latest whiz bang 6.5Grendel pretty much duplicates 6.5x50 ballistics in an ar15

 

[Bwana John]

eems pretty clear to me that the 7.62x51 is just about the perfect round for maximum lethality, accuracy and manageability. It's capable of major hydrostatic shock as well as damage to hard targets, engine blocks and the like.

MO for the criteria you mention the 6.5x50mm Japanese was one of the best balanced military cartridges ever devised and to a lesser extent the Carcano and Swedish 6.5's

Mauser got it right the first time with the 7mm x 57mm.

 

[Quiet]

[quote="FIVETWOSEVEN[/quote]
Many of the countries involved in WWII excluding germany and france I believe, used weapons that were 7.62 caliber. Russia had their Rifles, submachine guns, and their handguns in .30. England had their rifles and the bren machine gun in .30, America had the M1 garand, the browning M1919 and the M1 carbine in .30 cal.

How come it was a standard caliber during that time period? (Please don't bite my head off if the .303 isn't 7.62.) [/quote]

WW2 rifles
France = Manufacture d'armes de Saint-Étienne MAS36 = 7.5x54mm (.31)
Germany = Mauser K98K = 7.92x57mm (.323)
Italy = Carcano M91/41 = 6.5x52mm (.266)
Japan = Arisaka Type 99 = 7.7x58mm (.31)
UK = Enfield No4 Mk1 = .303British (.311)
USA = M1 Garand = .30-06 (.308)
USSR = Mosin-Nagant 91/30 = 7.62x54mm (.312)

 

[R.W.Dale]

Many of the countries involved in WWII excluding germany and france I believe, used weapons that were 7.62 caliber. Russia had their Rifles, submachine guns, and their handguns in .30. England had their rifles and the bren machine gun in .30, America had the M1 garand, the browning M1919 and the M1 carbine in .30 cal.

How come it was a standard caliber during that time period? (Please don't bite my head off if the .303 isn't 7.62.)

WW2 rifles
France = Manufacture d'armes de Saint-Étienne MAS36 = 7.5x54mm (.3075 to .308)
Germany = Mauser K98K = 7.92x57mm (.323)
Italy = Carcano M91/41 = 6.5x52mm (.266)
Japan = Arisaka Type 99 = 7.7x58mm (.31)
UK = Enfield No4 Mk1 = .303British (.311)
USA = M1 Garand = .30-06 (.308)
USSR = Mosin-Nagant 91/30 = 7.62x54mm (.312)[/QUOTE]

 

[Deanimator]

I'll prolly get flamed for this but I disagree. IMO for the criteria you mention the 6.5x50mm Japanese was one of the best balanced military cartridges ever devised and to a lesser extent the Carcano and Swedish 6.5's

The ancestor of the modern assault rifle, the Russian Federov, was chambered for 6.5x50mm Japanese.

 

[Deanimator]

The 1906-1925 issue round with 150 grain flatbase spitzer was known as the "1906" cartridge for some reason.

The original Springfields were not adopted in 1906, but instead in 1903. They were chambered for a similar but different round, longer and with a heavier round nosed bullet, called the "30-03". After Germany adopted the spitzer "S" bullet and enlarged the bore diameter from .318 to .323, the .30-03 was redesigned (along with the rifle, which lost its rod bayonet). It was shortened to 63mm and acquired a spitzer bullet.

 

[FIVETWOSEVEN]

I have never seen that rifle before, was it full auto?

 

[Rhodesian]

Rhodesian

Bwana John, upi lo gam kawena hena puma? Where does your name come from?

 

[TCOV]

I had not thought of the 7X57 but I agree that it could do about anything being done with small arms nowdays, military or hunting. I have an old carbine Serb Mauser and like it.

 

[Jim K]

Yes, the Federov Model 1916 was selective fire. The reason for choosing the 6.5x50 Japanese round was because it had less pressure and therefore was easier on the gun than the 7.62x54R, plus it was easier for feeding having a smaller rim. In addition, it weighed less and had less recoil, making the gun more controllable. (The Russians had plenty of 6.5x50 ammunition because they had bought surplus Type 30 rifles from the Japanese, and were making the ammo.)

The 6.5x50 round may have been "the best balanced" round, but the Japanese did not think so after they got into serious fighting; they went to a 7.7mm (.303) caliber as soon as they could do so.

All sound familiar? The ONLY reason the US went to 5.56 was that it was somewhat controllable in full auto fire, where the 7.62x51 was not. (Yes, I know some folks claim to be able to fire an M14 or an FAL full auto off hand and keep all the shots in a dime at 500 yards. The key word is "claim.")

Jim

 

[geim druth]

Wasn't the Garand originally designed for another cartridge?

 

[Deanimator]

Wasn't the Garand originally designed for another cartridge?

.276 Pedersen. The Pedersen rifle had a toggle action like a Parabellum pistol. It lacked primary extraction, so the cases had to be waxed during production to prevent the rims being torn or the heads being ripped off. This feature was no longer necessary when focus switched to the gas operated, rotating bolt Garand.

It was just another failed 7mm cartridge, like the .276 Enfield for the British Pattern 13, the various 7mm rounds for pre-WWII German semi-autos, and the British .280 of the late '40s and early '50s.

 

[nyrifleman]

A big part of it is the fact pre- (and to some degree) post-WWI, many countries were actually using the same weapons designers. Before the arrival of "total war" in WWI and WWII, it wasn't "unpatriotic" for an inventor or designer to be selling his designs to another, potentially hostile country. Just think about the fact that both Nagant (of Mosin-Nagant fame) and Browning had been working in the same Belgian city of Liege (albeit at slightly different times). In many ways, the world pre-WWI had been a much more open place, as far as international relations go, than the world we live in today.

 

[R.W.Dale]

The 6.5x50 round may have been "the best balanced" round, but the Japanese did not think so after they got into serious fighting; they went to a 7.7mm (.303) caliber as soon as they could do so.

my research leads me to believe the imperial command made the decision to switch to 7.7 for many other reasons aside from pure terminal performance. One of which was logistics (airborne guns were already 7.7 some even in 303brit) and improved performance of tracer rounds. As tough as our marines were it's not like they were shrugging off hits made with the 6.5

 

[Harve Curry]

It should be noted that in the original design/plan of the M1 Garand it was a 10 round en-bloc clip for .276" caliber. I think it was Gen.MacArthur that squashed that idea because of the abundance of 30-06 ammunition left over from WWI and cost savings during the 1930's depression.

 

[Neo-Luddite]

Near .30 cal @ apx 150-165 grain works. Mostly all of the best calibers of the last 115 years (all-around military rifle use, that is) have fit near that size and shape.

It will come down to other factors of tactics, too---but if one looks it's the physics of the thing that just hits the 'sweet spot' given the air pressure, gravity and other forces we live with on our planet--.30 is it. Perhaps this is why, too---when you scale up .308 you end up at the far end with the 16" guns on the Iowa-Class Battleships.

If you try to harness the exponetial performance of a bullet by sacrificing mass in favor of more velocity (which yields wonderful results on paper)--you end up with very tiny moving very fast. The problem then becomes (among other things) the projectile moves SO fast that you can't make them from a material that will hold together or not vaporize the barrel it was fired from after a few rounds. After you reach things like the accelerator (sabot .22 fired from .06) you get into the realm of projectiles that will perform wonders in very limited scenarios---like 650 MPH race cars that can run only on the salt flats in perfect weather.

Hey, pretty soon it will be thought-activated death rays anyway--right?

Am Besten--Mike B.

 

[MachIVshooter]

WW2 rifles
France = Manufacture d'armes de Saint-Étienne MAS36 = 7.5x54mm (.3075 to .308)
Germany = Mauser K98K = 7.92x57mm (.323)
Italy = Carcano M91/41 = 6.5x52mm (.266)
Japan = Arisaka Type 99 = 7.7x58mm (.31)
UK = Enfield No4 Mk1 = .303British (.311)
USA = M1 Garand = .30-06 (.308)
USSR = Mosin-Nagant 91/30 = 7.62x54mm (.312)

Pretty much the bulk of it. Of course, our Marines were still running around with 03A3's, and don't forget that the Jap's pushed alot of 6.5mm rifles back into service toward the end due to short supply. Lots of other obsolete weapons and cartridges were used on all fronts by all armies as well. I'm sure there we're muzzle loading and trapdoor or falling block rifles taking lives in African countries and other lesser known fronts.

On the other side of the spectrum, the Italians made the move to ~.30 caliber (7.35x51), but a day late and a dollar short. If they had thought it through more, they'd have gone with their MMG cartridge, the 8x59 Breda, and a Mauser-type rifle instead. That round actually outclassed all the other small bores used during WWII.

 

[Deanimator]

If they had thought it through more, they'd have gone with their MMG cartridge, the 8x59 Breda, instead. That round actually outclassed all the other small bores used during WWII.

Not the 8x63mm Swedish, used in their Browning machine guns and Mauser 98s issued to machine gun crews.

 

[MachIVshooter]

Not the 8x63mm Swedish, used in their Browning machine guns and Mauser 98s issued to machine gun crews.

I was not including the arsenals of officially "Neutral" countries, like Sweden and Switzerland. I know they had a couple of skirmishes and other minor involvement for which they received criticism, but nonetheless, they we're not considered participants.

Or did some involved nation actually use their weapons that I'm unaware of?

 

[Deanimator]

Or did some involved nation actually use their weapons that I'm unaware of?

Sweden sent equipment and volunteers to help the Finns.