F
ForeverPvt
Guest
I‘m curious to see if anyone else shares my view of replacing the C7/8 with a larger caliber assault rifle
C
Cycophant
Guest
I‘ll offer this interesting link to read, about the debate of rifle calibers.
7.62 mm Versus 5.56 mm - Does NATO
Really Need Two Standard Rifle Calibers?
It‘s long-winded, but has some interesting parts. Summarized, the paper states that the 5.56mm round is, for the most part, superior. If someone worked about improving and upgrading the 7.62mm round from its current state, it would surpass the 5.56 round. However, that‘s yet to be done - and I have my doubts the CF could afford more expensive rounds anyway.
7.62 mm Versus 5.56 mm - Does NATO
Really Need Two Standard Rifle Calibers?
It‘s long-winded, but has some interesting parts. Summarized, the paper states that the 5.56mm round is, for the most part, superior. If someone worked about improving and upgrading the 7.62mm round from its current state, it would surpass the 5.56 round. However, that‘s yet to be done - and I have my doubts the CF could afford more expensive rounds anyway.
- Reaction score
- 2
- Points
- 410
I do believe we went through this a while ago.
But anyway,me the old F.N. C1 any day.
The C7 get‘s just a little muck in it,it jam‘s.
For cleaning the C7 is a pain in the arse with the little cotter pin‘s etc.
The old C1 just crank up the gas and a way you go but again but was 12lb‘s with a full mag and was unwieldly but was easy to clean and no fiddley little part‘s to worry about,but you had stopping power!
The best weapon I have ever fired was the Hk assault rifle (7.62m.m.)forget the model,no recoil,light weight,user friendly and was accurat.
Fired it in Germany back in the late 70‘s,damb good piece of kit.
But anyway,me the old F.N. C1 any day.
The C7 get‘s just a little muck in it,it jam‘s.
For cleaning the C7 is a pain in the arse with the little cotter pin‘s etc.
The old C1 just crank up the gas and a way you go but again but was 12lb‘s with a full mag and was unwieldly but was easy to clean and no fiddley little part‘s to worry about,but you had stopping power!
The best weapon I have ever fired was the Hk assault rifle (7.62m.m.)forget the model,no recoil,light weight,user friendly and was accurat.
Fired it in Germany back in the late 70‘s,damb good piece of kit.
Michael Dorosh
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
Those little .223s bounce around the human body and tear up all kinds of stuff. .308 Winchester just goes in one side and out the other.
If it ain‘t broke, don‘t fix it. I shoot much better with the C7 than I did with the C1.
If it ain‘t broke, don‘t fix it. I shoot much better with the C7 than I did with the C1.
- Reaction score
- 2
- Points
- 410
Micheal,yup the old C1 was a bugger i.e. F.N cheek if you didn‘t know how to hold it,even black eye‘s,but it was a good weapon and I had no prob‘s with it and was a good shot with it even having going down jungle trail training with it and geting bruised rib‘s from the mag!OUCH!
I‘ll still take the C1 over the light weight pop gun we have now.
I‘ll still take the C1 over the light weight pop gun we have now.
C
Cycophant
Guest
That is one thing I‘ve heard a lot about, in terms of merits for the 5.56mm round. It has a lovely habit of spining as it cuts through human tissue, causing signifigant damage to unarmored targets. The 7.52mm can penetrate body armor a little better, but generally will go straight through a body leaving a hole, but minimal tissue damage (comparitively).
There have been cases where a 5.56mm round was shot into a target and exited the body the same side it entered. Apparently it hit the hip bone, richocheted through the torso to the shoulderblade, and back out the front chest. I‘m going to take a guess that the poor man didn‘t survive. But a 7.62 round in the same situation would just penetrate the body and leave out the other side. Unless you hit something pretty valuable in that small diameter, you‘re not doing much.
Sounds to me that‘s more of a problem with the specific rifle, than the actual caliber of the round. The AK-series of rifles are chambered for a 5.56 round (usually), and are some of the most all-weather reliable guns.
K
klumanth
Guest
Quote
Sounds to me that‘s more of a problem with the specific rifle, than the actual caliber of the round. The AK-series of rifles are chambered for a 5.56 round (usually), and are some of the most all-weather reliable guns.
You may want to recheck your info before posting. The AK-47 and it‘s variants are 7.62mm and the newer AK-74 and it‘s variants are 5.45mm. They can be modified to take a 5.56mm round but it‘s not common
Sounds to me that‘s more of a problem with the specific rifle, than the actual caliber of the round. The AK-series of rifles are chambered for a 5.56 round (usually), and are some of the most all-weather reliable guns.
You may want to recheck your info before posting. The AK-47 and it‘s variants are 7.62mm and the newer AK-74 and it‘s variants are 5.45mm. They can be modified to take a 5.56mm round but it‘s not common
Devlin
Full Member
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Have to agree with you here the weapons made by HK certainly are nice. Probably a G36 model that you fired over there. It‘s one of the more popular HK models out there.
Around the C7 or C7A1 if your using the Elcan sight. What‘s your preference optical or iron sights. Does situation dictate, myself I prefer the iron sights. Any thoughts?
C
Cycophant
Guest
My bad, you‘re right. I was thinking of the 5.45mm round, and had forgotten that it wasn‘t really all that popular.
Strike that part from my arguement then
- Reaction score
- 6
- Points
- 410
Maven,
The AK series are not 5.56mm. The original AK-47 and the later Akm were chambered for 7.62mm short (7.62x39mm as opposed to the NATO 7.62x54mm)
The later AK-74 had a "new" 5.54mm(?) round.
The only "versions" of the AK in 5.56mm would be the Israeli Gailil(sp), the South African R4 (basically the same weapon) and some Finnish versions. Also I beleive the Dutch were looking at a version of the R4 too.
The AK series are not 5.56mm. The original AK-47 and the later Akm were chambered for 7.62mm short (7.62x39mm as opposed to the NATO 7.62x54mm)
The later AK-74 had a "new" 5.54mm(?) round.
The only "versions" of the AK in 5.56mm would be the Israeli Gailil(sp), the South African R4 (basically the same weapon) and some Finnish versions. Also I beleive the Dutch were looking at a version of the R4 too.
K
klumanth
Guest
quote
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maven,
The AK series are not 5.56mm. The original AK-47 and the later Akm were chambered for 7.62mm short (7.62x39mm as opposed to the NATO 7.62x54mm)
The later AK-74 had a "new" 5.54mm(?) round.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you read my original post you will see I was quoting from another post. I don‘t have that nice little quote button (HTML is not enabled) but I will try and make my quotes stand out a bit more.
AK-74 and variants - once again it is a 5.45 round
and not that it really matters but I think the 7.62mm NATO round is 7.62x51mm)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maven,
The AK series are not 5.56mm. The original AK-47 and the later Akm were chambered for 7.62mm short (7.62x39mm as opposed to the NATO 7.62x54mm)
The later AK-74 had a "new" 5.54mm(?) round.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you read my original post you will see I was quoting from another post. I don‘t have that nice little quote button (HTML is not enabled) but I will try and make my quotes stand out a bit more.
AK-74 and variants - once again it is a 5.45 round
and not that it really matters but I think the 7.62mm NATO round is 7.62x51mm)
M
MG34
Guest
The 5.56mm round‘s ability to wound has been jacked up quite a lot most of the stories of it entering one say the chest and exiting the elbow are pure BS.The 5.56mm round uses it‘s velocity to fragment upon hitting the target,this fragmentation is the source of most of the wound effect as mulitple wound channels are greated.The round will tumble when the velocity is not high enough to cause fragmentation.
The thing to note in the below pics is the size of the PERMANENT CAVITY which is caused by the actual destruction of organs and tissue.The TEMP CAVITY has no relative effect on the wounding potential of any round.
Typical wound from the 62gr SS-109 Round
Typical wound from 7.62x51mm
The thing to note in the below pics is the size of the PERMANENT CAVITY which is caused by the actual destruction of organs and tissue.The TEMP CAVITY has no relative effect on the wounding potential of any round.
Typical wound from the 62gr SS-109 Round
Typical wound from 7.62x51mm
M
MG34
Guest
And for comparison the 5.45X39 round fired from an AK 74
And the 7.62x39mm round fired by the AK74and SKS series
And the 7.62x39mm round fired by the AK74and SKS series
P
PTE Gruending
Guest
From what I have heard; the 5.56MM round is designed to maim, rather than kill. You can kill one man, taking one man out of the battle, or you can maim him - taking three men out of the battle, ie: the wounded man, and two men to carry him. Not to mention the resources it takes to feed and repair said wounded soldier.
M
MG34
Guest
Nope it is designed to kill,there is no sense in wounding the enemy only to have him come back at a later date.We aim for center of mass which is a killing shot into the vital organs of the enemy the intent is and always has been to kill the enemy.
P
PTE Gruending
Guest
MG, then why don‘t we use hollow pointed rounds? They would create much more trauma than an FMJ round.
M
MG34
Guest
No it is not absurd,the current bullet design works just fine for the job at hand.War like anything else has to be governed by laws if there were no such laws then there would be horrific acts committed upon the innocent,and soldiers alike.
Michael Dorosh
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
So what is it that soldiers are guilty of, if they are not innocent???
I wouldn‘t classify being shot by FMJ any less or more horrific than being shot by dum dum bullets.
There is no validity to the belief that wars are governed by laws. There are, however, accepted conventions, that may or may not be respected by one side or another in any given conflict.
There is no precedent for individual weapons being classified "illegal" simply because no international court exists to try violators.
There have been many conventions agreed to over the years by us, our allies, and our enemies. Specifically I don‘t recall off hand any good examples; poison gas was not used in WW II, but not so much by convention as by general and coincidental agreement. I dimly recall saw-toothed bayonets being not used in WW I due to international convention but stand to be corrected on that.
Today, Canada has agreed not to use landmines in future wars. If we decided at some point that we wanted to, though, there would be nothing anyone could do about it. I find it particularly interesting that we have agreed not to employ flame weapons (if this is actually true) given that WASP, CROCODILE and LIFEBUOY (as well as OKE and BADGER in limited numbers) were the most effective and feared close quarters weapons we employed in WW II.
The only people who fight wars by rules are generally the losers. Reference the British in 1776 or the Americans in 1972.
Lest we forget we and our allies spend the latter half of World War Two roasting civilians alive with incendiary bombs and deliberately created firestorms, and ultimately with nuclear weapons. I can only imagine our enemies had wished there were a law against them.
I don‘t doubt that most "civilized" nations have agreed not to use hollow-point bullets. The Geneva and Hague Conventions also allow for such things as humane treatment of prisoners, though our enemies have as often as not been willing to follow these conventions (the Japanese in WW II and the Chinese in Korea felt little compunction to treat prisoners according to the conventions).
But if we find out the Taliban are using dum dum bullets in Afghanistan, there would really be nothing we could do about it, and they would be powerless to stop us from doing likewise. The only court that would matter would be the court of public opinion; and since we like to maintain the moral high ground, I am sure we would honour any agreements we have made in the past.
M
MG34
Guest
Perhaps law was too strong of a term,but there are definatly "guidelines" on how civilized countries engage in combat,One only has to read our own literature on the subject such as the Code of Conduct,it is spelled out in black and white.Just because some uncivilized savage wants to conduct war by hacking up his neighbours with a machete does not negate the fact that western armies all have a code that their soldiers are expected to follow.
