I don't get why people still use this round, i mean lets

File: calibers.jpg (104KB, 586x750px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 586x750px

And here are the wound channels.

>>33263040
Because the average person is using it to poke holes in paper or kill deer from <300 yards.

For those applications, 7.62x39 performs just fine.

>buckle up OP

File: 1419853574654.png (55KB, 700x700px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 700x700px

>>33263040
14 .308 real fucking NATO mags weigh 10kg

Better go with the proven performer.

it made sense back when aks and 7.62 were both cheap, but now ARs and 5.56 are both less expensive.

also random thought, why don't they make 30-30 ARs?

>>33263121
No demand.

>modern cartridge is better than outdated and already phased out cartdridge
Tell me more stories, anon

>what is 5.45x39?

>>33263121
It's rimmed and has weird dimensions; not really suitable for a semi-auto

>>33263121
It's rimmed and blunt tipped.

>>33263101
>2/3 the actual ammo

>>33263121
7.62x39 is marginally cheaper and 30-30 has a rim

File: bait.gif (3MB, 500x207px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 500x207px

>>33263040
> The Russians don't primarily field 5.45x39, and 7.62x39 in specific situations where it outperforms 5.45
>Has the same effective range as 5.56x45 and 5.56x39, and outperforms both in vegetation
>Chews through cover much more effectively than 5.56x45 or 5.45x39
>Possibly the most mass-produced cartridge in history, feeding the most mass-produced rifle in history
It's almost like caliber selection is a situational thing and both have their advantages.

PROTIP: If you were right then .300BLK wouldn't exist.

what is the "long and short 'NL'" given for the 5.56 in that wound channel chart?

>>33263040
You're trying to compare fmj to non fmj wound channels LOL

Good luck in life OP

Also you don't have the volumetric capacity to carry 33 magazines in any meaningful way anyway

And 13x30 is 390 rounds, which is more than enough ammo for virtually all encounters

>muh flatter trajectory
It's funny because 5.56 has less recoil because, surprise, it's less powerful. I would rather take a .30 cal bullet over a .22 cal bullet any day

>>33263137
There's like 10 years between 5.56 and 7.62x39

>>33263040

7,62x39 performs really well in SBRs.

You can buy ten thousand rounds of 7.62x39 for the same price as three thousand 5.56

>>33263151
.300BLK is a niche meme round, it's not surprise no military has adopted it.

>>33263046
>The wound channel of the M67, which most modern commercial 7.62x39 emulates to various effect, produces pretty similar wound channels to the 5.56 and 5.45 examples inside 30cm
Really gets the noggin joggin.

>>33263040

It's cheap and depending on the loading better for hunting.

>>33263040
>more case taper makes it more reliable
>trajectory is irrelevant for intended range
>30cal penetrates brush better than 22cal
>8m3 creates awesome wound channels
>it's generally cheaper and more common

>>33263185
Considering OP seems to be talking about civilian use in the USE, I think the point holds.
There is demand for 7.62x39 ballistics and performance in the civilian AR market, or .300blk wouldn't exist

>>33263046
>>33263160
>You're trying to compare fmj to non fmj wound channels LOL
Mk262 and M855 are both fmj as well as M43 and M67

>Also you don't have the volumetric capacity to carry 33 magazines in any meaningful way anyway

>And 13x30 is 390 rounds, which is more than enough ammo for virtually all encounters
Those points are irrelevant, what is relevant is that 5.56 is lighter per round

>It's funny because 5.56 has less recoil because, surprise, it's less powerful. I would rather take a .30 cal bullet over a .22 cal bullet any day
Slightly less joules yes but look at those wound channels man.

Did i just get baited or what?

>>33263040
>33 magazines versus 13
What you're leaving out is using polymer or aluminum mags for 5.56 and sandbagging 7.62 with outdated steel mags.

>>33263230
I don't see why op would be talking about civilian use in the USE.

>>33263040
Only poor people still use it, and that goes for both civilians and military. Even Russia switched to 5.45mm. If you are a civilian, you may as well use 30-30, 243, or 6.5 Creedmoor.

>all these plebs unable to take down their target using 5.56
>muh 7.62
>fuck 22. boolet
It's like you guys need to be babied into using a bigger round and are too retarded to improve your shooting skills.

>>33263040
>I don't get why people still use this round, i mean lets compare it to its most common rival, the 5.56x45mm.
>wrong, that would be 5.45

>For every 10kg of weight you can carry 33 magazines of 5.56x45mm or mere 13 magazines of 7.62x39mm.
make two trips to the car when lapping at the range, and what is 5.45

>5.56x45mm has a lot flatter trajectory than 7.62x39mm
it was literally designed that way. Using carbines at 500 meters is a joke

>5.56x45mm has 3.84p of recoil while the 7.62x39mm has 5.904p of recoil therefore followup shots are a lot faster with with the 5.56x45mm
faggot

>5.56x45mm shrapnels inside the body creating huge wound channels compared to the 7.62x39mm that only tumbles creating very small found channels.
what is 8m3

>>33263040
>I don't get why people still use this round
1: It works
2: It's everywhere
3: It's cheap
4: It has low recoil
5: The most popular firearm in the history of the world is chambered for it.

>>33263179
So does .300 blk

File: ImRetarded.gif (2MB, 240x180px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 240x180px

>>33263267
"USE" should read "US."
>mfw
lolmobileposting
I think the point is valid, retarded typo or not

>>33263040
Intermediate rounds a shit.

>>33263040

If some guy is shooting at me from cover, Id rather have an AK.

>>33263303
You seem to be arguing that it's harder to hit a target with a flatter trajectory, higher-velocity projectile, and lighter recoil.
That's a dumb, wrong argument, anon.

>>33263322
Again, the invention of a round for ARs specifically designed to emulate 7.62x39 ballistics is not a good argument that 7.62x39 is an irrelevant round.

The caliber is no more obsolete than a man shooting a rifle is. The Afghani and Viet kong used it against a superpower with resounding effect. The next war won't be fought by humans manually aiming rifles at each other. Robot aiming that basically cannot miss will be fielded.

>>33263322
And that's because they're basically the same round.

7.62x39 is also 1/5 the price of 300 memeout.

>>33263040
i mean, people still shoot muzzleloader/black powder in 2017. just because a cartridge isn't better performing on paper to another caliber doesn't mean it's completely useless

>>33263179
ding ding, cheap 7.62x39 is optimal at ~320mm, and can be loaded loaded subsonic and still cycle
cheap 223 and 545 is optimal around 400mm

223 taper is shit tier, requiring brass
545 bore is too small to safely take advantage of .224 projectiles
7.62x39 taper is god tier, can use cheap western .308/.309 projectiles, and has a lot going for it.

Don't get me wrong: 5.45 is the better choice to equip an army, but you are not an army.

>>33263170
>There's like 10 years between 5.56 and 7.62x39
33 years

>>33263383
>Don't get me wrong: 5.45 is the better choice to equip an army, but you are not an army.
I'm a one man army, motherfucker. 7N6 for life.

>>33263040
>5.56x45mm has 3.84p of recoil while the 7.62x39mm has 5.904p of recoil
That's some amazing scientific units of recoil you have there anon.

>>33263424
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Momentum

>>33263151
>Russians don't primarily field 5x45x39
lmao no

>>33263410
>7n6 for life
>ITT it's 2013

50 cal will be the only effective round when shooting at Chinese terminator bots. The larger the caliber the more explosives can be packed into the bullet. Can't fit much into a tiny .22

File: 67-mustang-obsidian-2.jpg (65KB, 960x640px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 960x640px

>>33263040
Couldn't agree more OP.

Also, why the fuck do people like classic cars? Don't they know a Toyota Prius is better in every way!

>>33263445
I think you maybe misread what I was trying to say there, playboy.

File: cackling crone.jpg (37KB, 640x481px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 640x481px

>>33263450
>he didn't stockpile

>>33263402
.222 Rem was introduced in 1950

7 years

File: vietnam3.jpg (77KB, 720x443px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 720x443px

>>33263402
No wonder the M16's didn't work in Vietnam, their ammo wasn't even invented yet!

>>33263493
5.56x45 was in 1977

File: 1403201376877.jpg (123KB, 1067x653px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 1067x653px

>>33263477
I hope you bought enough, anon, because that shit's NEVER EVER coming back.
NEVER
EVER

How does it feel to have the NRA throw you under the bus because your gun rights don't matter unless you shoot American guns?

>>33263493
also .223 was designed in 1962

File: 1480120542969.jpg (89KB, 700x525px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 700x525px

>>33263513
really?

>>33263463
One of the shittiest analogies i've ever heard.

>>33263040
I measured the weghts of my mags
.
.
.
.
.
----45rd--30rd---10rd
545-------1.1----.4
556-1.5---1.1----.4
762-------1.5----.7
308---------------1
54r---------------1

>>33263520
I honestly didn't but I am training my anal plasticity and learning Russian. I can almost fit two spam cans now.
I choose to believe it will return soon.

I also never gave them a dime. Fuck the NRA.

>>33263468
Probably, with that horrendous grammar of yours.

>>33263527
It's almost as if it was some kind of...joke or something.

7.62x54r is over 100 years old still a very good design and still used by modern military. Germany had better tanks but mass production was a more important factor than superior performance. Quantity has a quality all its own in battle.

Also nobody actually carries ammo anymore

>>33263402
5.56x45mm is the metric designation for 223 you fucking idiot.

>>33263040
Here's the newfag question

Why is it called 7.62 yet only 5.?? long?

>>33263537
>I choose to believe it will return soon.
NEVER
EVER
VER
ER
R

It hurts.

File: tumblr_inline_n8zd5lBhj61snt10a.jpg (76KB, 500x328px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 500x328px

>>33263550
yeah man I just will whatever I need into existence whenever I need it

>>33263244
>What you're leaving out is using polymer or aluminum mags for 5.56
The DOD across all US Military branches has forbid the use of polymer mags. The Entire US military across the board only allows the use of issued standard steel mags.

>>33263554
No it isn't, .223 Remington was developed by Remington in the USA, 5.56x45mm NATO was developed by FN Herstal in Belgium.

>>33263322

ill try 300 memeout when it isn't like 60 cents a round.

File: 1486721078461.jpg (9KB, 250x219px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 250x219px

>>33263561
I choose to believe and believing is magic. It will return. P-Please...

>>33263569
>steel mags
what is aluminum?

>>33263560
Standard nomenclature means that the first number in x.xx X xx is the diameter of the bullet and the second number is the length of the cartridge case. The Russians are a little fucky because they actually measure the smallest diameter between the lands of the rifling in the barrel instead. 7.62x39mm is actually 7.92mm wide.

>>33263569
That's because the Canadians informed them plastic magazines don't last in the Arctic at -45. We tried to use the cool looking sandbox magazine back home and the Russia war coming up will be cold as shit.

>>33263151
>Possibly the most mass-produced cartridge in history,
my bet would be either 8mm Mauser or .303 Brit

>>33263586
>There's like 10 years between 5.56 and 7.62x39
I don't see the 5.56x45mm NATO mentioned anywhere.

File: c6S8p.gif (934KB, 250x167px) Image search: [Google]

934KB, 250x167px

>>33263586
source?

>>33263629
Oh I'm sorry you were clearly talking about 5.56x39, carry on.

>>33263639
If you don't believe Remington made .223 Remington go fuck yourself. Otherwise here, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/5.56%C3%9745mm_NATO - reference 4 because Wikishit won't let me hotlink a .pdf.

>>33263620
>That's because the Canadians informed them plastic magazines don't last in the Arctic at -45.
Negative! (Although not irrelevant) It's because the feeders have tendency to gum up against the polymer construction of the magazine body and affects reliable feeding.

>>33263569
Magpul's Gen3 PMAGs would like a word with you

>>33263730
USGI aluminum mags with non-tilt followers are still better.

>>33263730
Stainless steel chains shatter like glass in the Arctic. Plastic specially formulated to suit Canadian temperature was used without success so we just went with aluminum hand guards and mags. We used to issue ammunition already loaded into disposable plastic magazines but changed to aluminum in 1995

>>33263160

>I don't understand ratios because I'm a dumpster fire of retardation even among my fellow retards

>>33263185
>In July 2015, the Netherlands' Defense Material Organization issued a tender for 195 carbines chambered in 300 BLK on behalf of the Dutch Maritime Special Operations Force (NL-MARSOF). Plans are to purchase ball, subsonic and lead-free frangible cartridges representing the first formal military adoption of the 300 BLK.[9]

>>33263569
when the fuck did the standard m4 mag become steel?

>>33263463
This, actually

A prius is master race when it comes to road trips. It's roomy (they're not small cars, no matter what anyone tells you), and the mpg is fucking phenomenal (something like 62 mpg on road trips).

My dad (ex POG, current civil servix guy with a masters in something) has one, he regularly makes a 45 min commute to the state capital with multiple big ass drums (~25"x20" each), and he does it in his prius. His old isuzu trooper would never have that kinda mileage

>>33263593
see u at the top, boi

>>33264060
FBI is using it too

>>33263402
>>33263493
>>33263513
>>33263554
>>33263513
>>33263524
.222 Remington Special, later renamed to .223 Remington, was started in 1950 and typified in 1955.
No, not 1960 or 1962 no matter what shittypedia says, and certainly not 1977.

>>33264117
CIA has been using 300 Whisper for a decade.

>>33264297
>>33265024
What, bunch of know-nothings get learn'd and now y'all have nothing to say? Try not saying in the first place next time.

>>33264088
for the technology and price, it should get twice that

i had a 1980 vw rabbit diesel that got 50mpg.

>>33266132
Emissions are a mother fucker, anon.

Also, the Prius is damn near unbreakable. Can't say the same for anything VW.

File: 5.56 gotta go fast.jpg (92KB, 500x496px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 500x496px

>>33263040
>5.56x45mm shrapnels inside the body creating huge wound channels compared to the 7.62x39mm that only tumbles creating very small found channels.

Better not use an M4 then
>Shooting people with FMJ

>>33263185
you got BTFO pretty hard bud.

Time to buy your own meme out

>>33263622
>Implying it's not 762x54r
Longest used military cartridge. In fact still used, and by a lot of people.

>>33263554
Not exactly. There are small differences in case dimensions.

>>33263622
7.62x54R beats both of those cartridges.

>>33264088
So when did you find out your dad was a raging faggot when he was fucking u in the ass or when he first bought the Prius.

>>33263321
>5: The most popular firearm in the history of the world is chambered for it.

t. Slavaboo

>>33263513
>literally retarded

Guess all those M16's adopted in 1963 were just fucking empty all the time.

>>33266812
That's objectively true though, you retard.
The Soviet Union made more AKMs than anybody else has made any other gun in history.
And they gave them away like candy on Halloween.

>>33266240
Well yeah 5.56 was designed for 20 inch barrels, not my fault that us armed forces are filled with a bunch of idiots.

>>33267111
Trips of truth.
Pretty much everyone who passed through the USSR got a free AKM with a tiny microphone and transmitter in it.

File: 1485032052711.gif (1002KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

1002KB, 500x281px

>>33263121
>30-30 ARs
Fund it.

>>33263071

beat me to it, I personally use it because it's dirt cheap

I use 7,62x39 because that's the caliber we use in our military. I got used to it when I served there. Also thats the caliber that would be the easiest to get in SHTF scenario. And I also love my Saigafu.

>>33270269
And it penetrates trough forest much better than 5,56 so there is another reason. Where I live is a lot of thick forest. 5,56 hits a few branches and loses it's power when 7,62 just goes trough it.

>>33270282
Glorious 5.45 penetrates branches and small trunks.

Probably not readily available 4u though.

>>33264060
>frangible cartridges
Okay, now I'm interested

>>33266812
>What is the Cold War
Protip: Alot of those issued arms also have been displaced and gone missing only for it to be found by villagers and blackmarket salesmen. Used by both civvies and organized crime thugs alike

>>33266190
>what is regular maintenance

>>33270295
They sell it here, but it's expensive as fuck and not widely available.

>>33270354
He's also wrong, 7.62 BTFOs 5.45 in thick vegetation.

>>33263121
>also random thought, why don't they make 30-30 ARs?

Machine your own. All you need is a mill and a lathe.

>>33263040
Guaranteed replies

>>33263374
>The next war won't be fought by humans manually aiming rifles at each other.

Which next war? Are you retarded?

>>33266132
Rabbit diesels were pathetically slow though quite durable if you changed the timing belts. If you didn't, kiss dat engine goodbye.

Rabbits were the epitome of cheap deathtrap construction. Much love for my former 1981 Scirocco, but comparing that crap to a modern car that meets superior safety standards, is far more comfortable and has more features is fucking stupid.

Muh fuel mileage isn't the only vehicle design factor. Mechanic here, stop trolling badly or I'll destroy your nonsense again.

>>33263040
Because I'm not some special ops operator at the end of the day.
7.62x39 is fun as fuck, and I can't get that level of joy from shooting my 5.45 or 5.56

>>33263121
Why don't they make .243 ARs?

>>33271272
>>33263121
Why don't they make 30 Carbine ARs?

>>33270300
Frangible for shooting steel targets during training

>>33271272
They do

>>33271328
why don't they make .276 ARs

>>33271328
because .30 Carbine was a failure of a round.

File: 1480463691869.png (95KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 800x600px

>AR fags always talk about the wounding capabilities of MK 262 but all they can afford to shoot is Tula Steel

>>33263040
Because I don't want to be sodomized by the ghost of Kalashnikov should I chamber an AK in 5.56mm.

>>33271475
5.45*

FTFY

>>33271401
I don't mean a snowflake by some off the wall manufacturer.

.243 is a solid round and should be in more ARs

>>33270337
This is also funny since anything new from toyota requires (((scheduled maintenance))) that isn't your standard oil change. They gradually replace parts and charge you for it. Isn't it a wonder why these cars are so INDESTRUCTABLE!

>>33263372

It's a good arguement when you consider that when you buy the .300BLK for x39 performance you're doing it because you dont want to have to buy all new mags/ect parts for that AR.

300BLK is a compromise attempting to be 7.62x39. Imitation is the highest form of flattery, I'd say it makes a great case.

>>33271790
The only real advantage to .300BLK is shooting suppressed.

I'm not saying that doesn't have its place but for a backyard plinker it's not really necessary

>>33263040
>10kg of weight
>22lb
>Loaded 30-rnd STANAG mag is 1.1lb
>Loaded 30-rnd bakelite 7.62x39 mag is 1.65lb
>22lb is 20 STANAG mags
>22lb is 13 bakelite mags

Yes, a fair bit of difference, but not as extreme as it's made out to be. Also, 7.62x39 retains energy and velocity better at longer distances.

>55gr .223 cal M193 5.56 from 20" barrel at 600yd (550m)
Abt. 1200 ft/s
>123gr .312 cal M43 7.62x39 from 16.3" barrel at 600yd (550m)
Abt 950 ft/s

Equal barrel lengths would have the velocities almost equal at 550m, however a larger and heavier bullet will retain more energy and beyond 600m the 7.62x39 might actually have more velocity remaining.

>>33263101
Keep in mind that 7.62 Nato mags only hold 20 rounds, and while 7.62x39 can be controlled in full auto with practice, 7.62 Nato in full auto... basically can't. Maybe under IDEAL conditions, and at VERY short range, but anything actually realistic and a full auto M14 or FN FAL is going to be spray and pray.

>14 20-rnd mags
280 rounds
>13 30-rnd mags
390 rounds

Also, 7.62x39 is much better for hunting medium-sized game, or even up to moose or bear, than 5.56.

Either way, I'd consider 5.45 better than 5.56, and considering its horrific tendency to tumble reliably on impact as well as penetrate better than 5.56 however (though to be fair, not quite better than 7.62x39), I might put consideration into considering 5.45 better than 7.62x39 as well, but not for hunting.

>>33263321
He's not wrong.

>>33266812
I say again, he was not wrong. The AKM is the most common assault rifle on the planet, and might just be the most common firearm in general in the world. Was more M91/30s produced than the AKM? Were more M1895 Nagant revolvers produced from 1895-1945 than the AKM? Not being douchey; legit questions.

>>33268749
>Rimmed cartridge means less capacity for the same size mag
>Larger ejection port/receiver needed means heavier firearm compared to one with shorter ejection port/receiver
>.30-30 isn't as cheap

File: 1475961660069.gif (903KB, 300x200px) Image search: [Google]

903KB, 300x200px

>>33263639
>56 chicken nuggets
>american standard
mfw

>>33272395
>Was more M91/30s produced than the AKM?

Yes, actually

>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AKM
>No. built More than 10,278,300

>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosin%E2%80%93Nagant
>No. built ~37,000,000 (Russia/Soviet Union)

>>33272472
That 10,278,300 figure isn't only Russian AKMs? China's been producing them for something like 50+ years haven't they, and the Soviet Union produced AKMs for almost 20 years.

>>33263040
Why do I use it? Because I own 3 rifles chambered in it, a multitude of magazines and over 10k rounds of ammo for it. I'm not going to invest in your meme caliber because you don't like it.

>>33272472
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_56_assault_rifle
No. built 10-15 million

So that's about 20-25 million between just Russia and China. Who else produced a lot of AKMs? Yugoslavia, the Galil counts as an AK variant as I recall, and that INSAS thing, if I'm not mistaken.

>>33272526
If I go by what is available on the surplus market in Europe, Poland, Romania, Serbia produced their own AKs even after leaving the USSR.

>>33263520
>>33263537
>Why won't the NRA save us from the 7N6 ban?!?
Because 7N6 is banned from import by the ATF and the ATF doesn't answer to the NRA or it's constituents. The only reason m855 survived is because Congressional pressure.

>>33272229

Except that's not true senpai.

Compare the length on an 8.5" with a can shooting supers to a 14.5" or even a 10.5" with a can. Back yard plinking is great but not within the scope of this discussion

>>33272526
>Yugoslavia

Pretty sure M70s aren't AKMs, they don't use standard AKM furniture

>>33271790
That's pretty much it: 300 BLK is an attempt to clone 7.62x39 with 223. As much as I like 300 BLK it's just too expensive to keep a large cache of. I have no regrets with my 7.62x39 AR, though I am glad I chose a barrel with a .308 groove diameter.

300 BLK subs are only good for quiet plinking. You can get 220gr HP but that's just dumb. 7.62x39 has 1.5x the case capacity. I keep 10k Wolf Military Classic 124gr HP, which kill durr plenty so I'd assume they kill the two legged variety just as well.

6.5 Grendel + 7.62x39 is basically a better 223 Rem + 300 BLK. Interchangability with 223 parts is nice, but I'd rather have interoperability with the superior 5.45 parts.

>>33272472
>>33272526
>Comparing all Mosins to all AK's
>Article on Mosins include all variants, article on AKM/Type 56 includes only specific variants.
>Going to the AK-47 article estimates 75 million AK-47's built as of 2004
>Countries still adopting/producing it.

Vietnam, Argentina, and Columbia have formally adopted new variants of the AK-47 (Galil IIRC). It is still being produced in Russia for export, it is the standard issue rifle for dozens of countries, and blah blah blah. If you count the RPK as a 47 variant that's millions more. While a stupid number of Mosins were built not that many have been since WWII, and IIRC none have been built since the 60's. The only other rifle that could possibly come close to the AK's success is the Mauser, and that's only if you count unofficial adaptations like the M1917 along with all civilian copies, like the Ruger 77 or Cz 550, and that's in dozens of different calibers.

File: battle-rifle-m1-garand-3.jpg (12KB, 648x270px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 648x270px

>>33263139
>not really suitable for a semi auto

File: 1488411053086.jpg (22KB, 529x529px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 529x529px

>>33263040
Because it's fun.

>>33263148
>Marginally cheaper
Nigger what? x39 is like .25-.30 per round. I have yet to see .30-30 for anything remotely close to that price.

>>33263240
MK262 is not FMJ

>>33273334
I don't know what to make of that. So does the AK-47 thing collect all AK variants? AK-47, AKM, AK-74, AKs-74u, etc.?

>>33273509
What's your point?
The Garand isn't chambered for .30-30, and .30-06 isn't rimmed.

>>33273749
Just because it's rimmed doesnt mean its not suitable for semi-auto.
See SVT-40 or Dragunov

>>33270360
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=547BKysByqM

>>33274377
I wouldn't use the SVT-40 as an example of a good... anything really. It's pretty shit.
Not disagreeing with your premise, just saying.

>>33274643
SVT-40 is a good design, and in some ways even better than the M1 however there's quite a few aspects of pros and cons for both. I can tell you from experience however that the SVT is a reliable design.

>>33274377
Really is a meme that rimmed cartridges aren't good in magazines.

>Millions of Lee Enfields
>P14
>Millions of Ruger 10/22s
>Something like 2,000,000 SVT-40s if nor more
>Did the Browning M1895 lever action in 7.62x54r have an interrupter?
I doubt it, either way the M1895 and Mosins have rimmed 7.62x54r in mags
>Chauchat LMG used 8mm Lebel rimmed ammo as I recall in its mag, and it wasn't anywhere NEAR as unreliable a firearm as people make it out to be.
An open mag in a muddy trench wouldn't go well for pretty much any design

At this point, after literally over a century of rimmed ammo being used in magazines with them still being used today, worrying about it causing reliability issues is like worrying that smokeless powder might be TOO potent to be used in small-arms so we must worry that at any moment firing a smokeless powder cartridge might cause a kerboom. QUICK! Sell all your smokeless powder funs! Go get a black powder musket before it's too late! YOUR FACE ISN'T WORTH THE INCREASED PERFORMANCE! SAVE YOURSELF!

File: 529358025.png (208KB, 591x599px) Image search: [Google]

208KB, 591x599px

>>33263046

>>33276116
That's one rare peepee.

>>33263040
In Canada, it is incredibly cheap. You can get thousands of rounds of surplus, non-corrosive (not that corrosive 60s Warsaw Pact crap) in large batches -- pallets even -- for less than a third of the cost of large batches of 5.56.

And the rifles are cheaper, more plentiful, and less restricted.

Which reminds me, do SVTs still cost $wtf in the US?

>>33271787
I run into so many dumb motherfuckers like yourself who believe that all a car needs is an oil change.

>>33276236
nobody else noticed my rare peepee

>>33273567
i pay 20-25 cents a round shipped for both cartridges in steel

>>33272395
Good luck hitting anything past 200 meters with that fast dropping bullet.

>>33273592
Yes it is.

>>33277375
Sad.

>>33278725
ikr, it's not like people have hit targets out at 450-500m with 7.62x39 before. Oh wait...

>>33276422
An air filter? okay
Wiper blades? sure
Tranny fluid check/possible replacement at 100K? yep
New hoses and fuel pump at 50K? get fucked

File: 1485026212723.jpg (52KB, 403x462px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 403x462px

>>33263040
>I don't get why people still use this round, i mean lets compare it to its most common rival, the 5.56x45mm.
ok

>>33263040
>For every 10kg of weight you can carry 33 magazines of 5.56x45mm or mere 13 magazines of 7.62x39mm.
Good point.

>>33263040
>5.56x45mm has a lot flatter trajectory than 7.62x39mm.

Yes, but remember why we converted to 5.56 from 7.62 (.308) ourselves? Every study that's been done shows that no matter what the ballistics of their weapons the mass of infantry can't hit anything past 100 yards, period. Snipers get different gear.

>>33263040
>5.56x45mm has 3.84p of recoil while the 7.62x39mm has 5.904p of recoil therefore followup shots are a lot faster with with the 5.56x45mm.
Err sort of. Your physics is right but you're overlooking a variable - the 7.62 is usually fired from a heavier weapon which roughly compensates for that.

>>33263040
>5.56x45mm shrapnels inside the body creating huge wound channels compared to the 7.62x39mm that only tumbles creating very small found channels.

Depends on the loads and bullets, at best that's true part of the time.

OK so that's your negatives, what's the positive? Better penetration against things like walls and barricades.

>>33263151
>> The Russians don't primarily field 5.45x39, and 7.62x39 in specific situations where it outperforms 5.45
>>Has the same effective range as 5.56x45 and 5.56x39, and outperforms both in vegetation


Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do ... decided as to even go that far in wanting to do to look more like?

Maybe you're dehydrated? Or having a blood sugar issue?

>>33281029
>12 years before second amendment was ratified
Nigga wut
The Bill of rights was ratified in 1781

File: EDC.webm (2MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1280x720px

>>33272395
>x51 cant be controlled on FA
your a silky boy aint you?

>>33263383
>223 taper is shit tier, requiring brass
If your ar won't cycle steel case, throw it away because you mcfucked up.

File: 1467340215016.jpg (100KB, 645x287px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 645x287px

>>33281204
really?

>>33263040
russia still uses 7.62x39 ak's in extreme cold weather conditions because it extracts more reliably.

for people in the us, idk maybe because its fun?