Does anyone else get annoyed when a company releases a new ammo

7.62x40 Wilson Tactical

>>29254135
>7.62x40 Wilson Tactical

Fucking why? For what?

>>29254020
Sometimes it's because the ammo is proprietary, like .50 Beowulf.

>>29254135
Yes, so why do we have that and 300 blackout?

>>29254020
Wait, what?!?

The rebated rims on those is something very much meant to *support* commonality!

Winchester making the .270 WSM a year after 7mm WSM.

>>29254156
It was a wildcat long before the 300 blackout came out and ruined everything. 7.62x40mm was like a 7.62x39mm on steroids, it was nearly as hot as a 308. Only issue was that you'd need magazines that didn't have the rib running down the sides.

>>29254159
I will never buy a gun with proprietary ammo.
New ammo designs should be driven by firearms manufacturers and have proprietary ownership.
They may think that's unreasonable and they can kiss my ass, not buying their product.

File: 1456270006834.jpg (68KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 640x480px

>>29254271
Not * have proprietary ownership.
I'm glint to bed now, g'night.

>>29254020
Depends on what.
.300BLK gives you 7.62x39mm performance in .223 guns without the drawbacks and difficulties (for instance, an AR in 7.62x39mm is typically going to be some kind of shitfest unless you want to spend way too much money)

>>29254171
Why would someone make a new proprietary cartridge that does .300BLK things, when we already have .300BLK?

>>29254213
>before the 300 blackout came out and ruined everything
They obviously do different things though.

>>29254020
yes
25-45 sharps aka 6x45

300 blackout aka 300 whisper

>>29254201
Maybe they were desparate to try to make it not fuck up the barrel or be absurdly loud? That seems to be the real issue with that anyway.

File: face2.jpg (52KB, 1024x1182px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 1024x1182px

I! NEED! AMMO! YOU! SHIT!

File: Gina.png (25KB, 84x140px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 84x140px

>>29259927
stahp it please