.280 british

>>31367232
It was a step in the right direction maybe.

File: 1950s_Enfield_EM2_was_the_grandfather_of_the_L85.jpg (182KB, 600x709px) Image search: [Google]

182KB, 600x709px

Not made here?

>>31367232

The .280 was actually more accurate than the larger .30 rounds, so it could have worked as a universal cartridge so that assault rifles and machine guns could both using the same ammunition.

>>31367232
Size has nothing to do with classification as an intermediate. It's all about the muzzle energy.

File: f 14s flying over burning oil field.jpg (454KB, 1920x1200px) Image search: [Google]

454KB, 1920x1200px

>>31367379
But why is it so often regarded as the first western intermediate round?

>>31367232
.280 British was brilliant

Fucking Americans

>muh .30cal

File: M1 Abrams Looking down Barrel in Dust Storm.jpg (509KB, 2260x1280px) Image search: [Google]

509KB, 2260x1280px

>>31367420
Its muzzle energy was comparable to that of full sized rifle rounds, and it's penetration at a distance was better. My question is why the hell is it considered an intermediate round when it has all the same characteristics of a full sized rifle round?

>>31367232
Nathaniel F. from TFB said the cartridge was overhyped.

>>31367487
Not really. Full powered cartrdiges are typically 2,500+ ft lbs while intermediate are 1,000-2,500.
The 280 was right around 2,000.

>>31367422
>>31367487

Because it was smaller than the .30 caliber rounds that were already in use.

A nice 7 mm (.276 in) cartridge would have been ideal.

It was a shorter, slightly downloaded 7mm-08. That's it.

>>31367420
> It's all about the muzzle energy.
If only that we're true, but that's not a hard rule. Some people say it's bore diameter too, but it's more of a combination of things.

Magnum pistol cartridges in carbines blur the lines a bit and 30-30 loads can cover 7.62x39 to low/mid .308 in some cases.

>>31367425
RIP 280 FAL

File: girls-005-07062015.jpg (70KB, 615x923px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 615x923px

>>31367549
6.5 would have been more ideal
But thats what the Army Marksmanship Unit is developing.

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2016/08/31/modern-intermediate-calibers-021-us-army-marksmanship-units-264-usa/

>>31367232
276 Pederson
280 British
6.5x55 Swede

Any of these should have become the standard instead of .308

File: image.gif (789KB, 444x272px) Image search: [Google]

789KB, 444x272px

>>31368727
>6.5x55 Swede

>>31367574
There were a bunch of different experimental loads for the .280, some of the last being 7mm-08 equivalents. Original loads before the US started regulating were significantly weaker. Going off of wikipedia...

>Recoil of the .280 British cartridge was calculated to be a little under half of the .303. Long range performance actually surpassed that of the .303, and shooters reported that it was much more comfortable to fire with the reduced recoil and reduced blast. It seemed that the British designers had accomplished their goals, and proceeded to introduce the cartridge to their NATO allies.

There is no set definition for what is "intermediate", but I'd say somewhere between 1000 to 2000 foot-pounds of muzzle energy, with the .280 being on the high side of that and the 5.45x39 being on the low side. Regardless, both cartridges are easily more controllable than full power rounds that everybody and their mamas were using since WWI.

>>31367341
>50s
??