Who owns an AR-15?

[sammer 0]

I think the difference is just the throat length. If you have measured the OAL length of your mil-spec ammo and it's within the SAAMI spec then you are probably good. You might also make sure the case length is within spec. I believe the issue is with the bullet being pushed into the rifling and causing overpressure. 5.56 ammo comes from so many different sources that you probably couldn't make a consice list of the "dangerous" ammo distributors. You are better off just measuring your ammo and making sure.

Or you could just buy a .50 beowulf upper and then not worry about it

[slug 1]

Quote

Quote

Kennedy's advice on The AR-10. NATO 762 (Winchester 30.06) with all the punch and accuracy that lies behind it - Mike.

Just a small thing, but the NATO 7.62 is the same as a Winchester .308, which is a shortened version of the venerable 30.06. Both can be very accurate rounds.

Hey Assbag

You timing sucks. You posted in the middle of dog fight

In SC

Say hi to Valinda & the kids for me. Assbag
we got to stop meeting like this,


R.I.P.

[JohnMitchell 16]

Quote

[Hey Assbag

You timing sucks. You posted in the middle of dog fight

Hey RIP, someone had to throw some water on those two.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Definitely a way cool gun, but at $2.50 a round I wouldn't be able to afford to shoot it as much as I'd like.

Yeah, but as hard as it kicks, you wouldn't want to shoot it as much as you'd like.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

you can only interchange if your barrel is stamped with "5.56 NATO", otherwise your weapon should ONLY be fired with .223 rounds. something about gas pressures of the 5.56 being MUCH higher to the point of causing the barrel to bulge and/or explode if it isnt stamped as such.

The cartridges are identical, and have the same reloading data in reloading manuals. There are not different powder charges based upon whether it is .223 versus 5.56, nor different lengths (COL = cartridge overall length). They're one and the same.

Sample reloading data for the .223/5.56:
http://www.hodgdon.com/data/rifle/223rem.php
I prefer Winchester 748 ball powder myself...

So the difference must have something to do with the rifle chamber, into which the cartridge is inserted. There are different companies which make reamers for boring out the chamber during manufacture, and the tolerances can vary somewhat. But I can't find any specific info on standardized chamber dimensions for .223 versus 5.56...

[cameramonkey 0]

Interesting... my info came directly off of the bushmaster website in my wanderings I remember coming across it. I have looked again, and cant find it.

Who knows what I was smoking at the time...

its also possible that I got that info when I was looking at other similar mfr websites that might have that restriction. *shrug*


I stand corrected

Two wrongs don't make a right, however three lefts DO!

[miked10270 0]

For the further elucidation of those in the .223" Vs Nato 5.56mm argument:

"Inspired by experimental work which showed the efficiency of small-calibre rifles, they went to the other extreme in adopting the M16 rifle and its tiny .223 (5.56x45) cartridge, developed from Remington commercial hunting rounds which had been designed for taking small game such as rabbits. This was actually only intended to be an interim purchase pending the perfecting of the SPIW flechette rifle (see below) but as this never happened, the 5.56x45 became the US Army's standard rifle cartridge by default. Much controversy arose about its effectiveness in stopping a determined enemy, but what was clear was that the long-range performance of the little bullet (designated M193) was poor. In the next competition for a new NATO rifle cartridge held in the late 1970s, the 5.56mm was duly adopted but in the new Belgian SS109 loading (M855 being the US version), which has a heavier bullet at a lower muzzle velocity and thereby achieves a better long-range performance."

Link here:

http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/Assault.htm


Oh yeah... The conclusions:

"Two conclusions about the present situation seem pretty clear. One is that there would be financial and logistical benefits in having only one military rifle/MG cartridge. The other is that it wouldn't hurt to have a rifle cartridge with more reliable hitting power than the 5.56mm. As it happens, both conclusions point in the same direction; towards a cartridge intermediate in power between the 5.56mm and 7.62mm NATO.

Such an "ideal" cartridge would need to combine a long-range effectiveness comparable with the 7.62mm, with a recoil light enough to permit controlled, full-auto fire. Is it possible to achieve this? The evidence suggests strongly that it is. The British aimed to do this with the 7x43 cartridge half a century ago, and by all accounts succeeded admirably."

EM2 Anyone?
Mike.

Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable.

Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

[christelsabine 1]

Quote

Quote

Kennedy's advice on The AR-10. NATO 762 (Winchester 30.06) with all the punch and accuracy that lies behind it - Mike.

Just a small thing, but the NATO 7.62 is the same as a Winchester .308, which is a shortened version of the venerable 30.06. Both can be very accurate rounds.

Except a very small difference:
.308 Winchester /NATO calibre is 7.62 x 51
30-06 Springfield is 7.62 x 63 (former American military calibre)

In fact it makes no big difference.

The one I prefer is the Winchester. But, as I am a simple hunter and just use what I think is appropriate, I do not care too much on those small differences.

dudeist skydiver # 3105

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

but what was clear was that the long-range performance of the little bullet (designated M193) was poor. In the next competition for a new NATO rifle cartridge held in the late 1970s, the 5.56mm was duly adopted but in the new Belgian SS109 loading (M855 being the US version), which has a heavier bullet at a lower muzzle velocity and thereby achieves a better long-range performance."

There are many different types of military 5.56 ammo, all of which can be in use for different applications at the same time:

M193: 56 gr. bullet
M855/SS109: 62 gr. steel tip armor penetrating
M195: rifle grenades
M196: 54 gr. bullet, tracer
M856: 64 gr. bullet, tracer
And various dummy, blank and inert versions

And target shooters use different heavier bullet weights and designs ranging from 69 grains up to 80 or 90 grains, which perform better than the standard military bullets. Military shooters using M-16's at the National Matches do not use standard military ammo - they use custom reloads and different bullets.

Quote

EM2 Anyone?

What's "EM2"?

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

30-06 Springfield is 7.62 x 63 (former American military calibre)

There is nothing "former" about .30-06. It is still to this day one of the most popular hunting cartridges in America.

[christelsabine 1]

Quote

Quote

30-06 Springfield is 7.62 x 63 (former American military calibre)

There is nothing "former" about .30-06. It is still to this day one of the most popular hunting cartridges in America.

OK. In America.
It's a little bit different here. Usual hunting calibres are (depending on animal=`) 7 x 57 (R), 7 x 64 (R) or SE,
8 x ... and so on.
.308 Wichester is 7.62 x 51
.30.06 Springfield is 7.62 x 63
(and that is called a "former military calibre" here)
.375 H & H = 9,.55 x 72,4
.458 Winchester Magnum = 11.64 x 63.5

Oh wait, I forgot Rimless 10.75 x 73

European/German hunters prefer local calibres. There is something special about the NATO calibres, which f.e. in many "forms" of calibres (you know, silver tip, soft tip, hard tip) are completely forbidden. I learned all of that s*** while appliying for hunters' license and after, I forgot so much.

Anyhow, I have to confess it's fun using my hunting weapons.

dudeist skydiver # 3105

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Usual hunting calibres are (depending on animal=`) 7 x 57 (R), 7 x 64 (R) or SE,
8 x ... and so on.
.30.06 Springfield is 7.62 x 63
(and that is called a "former military calibre" here)

Well, that's weird. The .30-06 was introduced in 1906, and is still in widespread use. The 8mm, invented by the Mauser brothers for their Mauser-action rifles, was created in 1888, used in millions of military firearms, and is also still fairly popular. Likewise for the 7x57, introduced in 1892. So if .30-06 is a "former military caliber", then 8mm and 7x57 should be also.

Maybe it has something to do with the .30-06 being used in all those M1 Garands by American soldiers to defeat Hitler that makes present- day Germans a bit prejudiced against it.

[jdhill 0]

So, how 'bout the 6.8 Rem SPC round? Barrett is making an upper group... it is supposed to offer much better performance than 5.56mm...

http://www.barrettrifles.com/rifles/rifles_m468.htm

J

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. - Edmund Burke

[sammer 0]

Here is just one more link (from Armalite) that might let you rest a little easier:

http://www.armalite.com/library/techNotes/tnote45.htm

I have always suspected that people made too much of the 5.56 vs .223 issue. I have probably put nearly every brand of NATO ammo through my .223 chambers with no problems.


Sam

[rickjump1 0]

Quote

The .30-06 was introduced in 1906, and is still in widespread use. The 8mm, invented by the Mauser brothers....

I have read that the Springfield 03 was developed using a Mauser action. The American troops discovered that the Mauser rifle was superior to the 30-40 Kraig they (Americans) were using during the Battle of San Juan Hill/Spanish-American War.

Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts.

• Quote

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

I have read that the Springfield 03 was developed using a Mauser action. The American troops discovered that the Mauser rifle was superior to the 30-40 Kraig they (Americans) were using during the Battle of San Juan Hill/Spanish-American War.

Correct! The Krag held only five rounds, and was clumsy to reload. The Mausers used by the Spanish held 8 rounds, and could be reloaded in a jiff with stripper clips. Captured mausers were brought back home, copied, and voila! The Model 1903 Springfield was born.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Here is just one more link (from Armalite) that might let you rest a little easier:
http://www.armalite.com/library/techNotes/tnote45.htm

Bingo! There's the technical definition I was looking for. Thanks for that link.

The bullet has to "jump" across some free space when fired from the cartridge, before engaging the rifling. Generally, the smaller that free space is, the more accurate the rifle will be. However, if there is no jump at all, with the bullet wedged into the rifling upon chambering, then gas pressure builds up behind the bullet, and can cause excessive pressure. So that dimension is critical to both accuracy and safety. The military plays it a little safer by increasing that "jump" space, but at the expense of match-grade accuracy.