WW2 Rifle Cartridges

>>33458019
Modern .30-06

>ballistics
what do you mean?

>>33458019
For what?

And why is that 8mm Mauser roundnosr and not spitzer?

>>33458019
I personally prefer 6.5 jap, flat and soft shooting

>>33458055
pre WW1 example? Or a modern hunting load

>>33458078
Ugh.
Nasty.

>>33458048
Velocity, trajectory, ballistic coefficients.

>>33458086
That would also take into account each rounds respective rifles no? I doubt 54R out of an Arisaka will perform the same as 7.7 Jap.

OP here, I mean that at the time of WW2, what cartridge had the best velocity/trajectory/ballistic coefficient. Sorry for being a fag and not clarifying.

>>33458099
That is also true. Alright, I just want to know how each cartridge compared to each other with their respective bolt action rifle.

>>33458113
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.92%C3%9757mm_Mauser
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.30-06_Springfield
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.303_British
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.62%C3%9754mmR

>>33458113
>>33458138
Also this
http://www.ballisticstudies.com/

>>33458138
So it appears that 8mm Mauser has both the highest velocity and energy for similarly weighed bullets. If it's the best, then why is not more prevalent on the market today than 30-06?

>>33458200
Poor ballistic coefficient and low sectional density. 30 caliber rounds fly straighter, and dump their energy more efficiently. It's a minor difference, but it's there.

There's also a quirk to all 8mm Mauser JS ammo produced commerically in the USA that makes it weak, so only handloaded rounds reach the full potential of the caliber.

>>33458200
They lost.
>Say Mr. red blooded American, do you want a Nazi bullet or do you want .30-06 of pure boner inducing American muscle?
Marketing. 8mm milsurp was around for ages after the war, but why focus on mass producing another countrys shit when you have your own shit to peddle? Also, ballistics and whatnot weren't the hotness they are today. As long as it killed bambi dead people didn't give a fuck.

>>33458200
8mm had the best ballistics of WWII, but that is because Germany had more R&D on the subject than other comparable powers. They could've made it better if they wanted to. In the case of WWII era .30-06, the Garand is sensitive to pressure curves, so if you shoot modern .30-06 out of it you'll bend the op-rod or even get a ka-boom. Bad as that is on the range, it's a thousand times worse on the battlefield.

As for modern day ammunition, .30-06 is better than its contemporaries, all other things being equal. There are better .308 bullets than .323 bullets, the .30-06 has more case capacity, and the .30-06 has been experimented with more. The .30-06 became a worldwide hunting/target cartridge that the 8mm never could for political reasons, though that isn't to say 8mm is unheard of for hunting, much less unsuitable. The ballistic difference between the two is even less than, say, .30-06 vs .308. It's just the way the cards fell, as it were.

>tfw 8mm-06 never became a factory offering

>>33458019
6.5 Mannlicher-Schoenauer.

>>33458253
Honestly, I wish that wasn't true.
I wish 8mm Mauser was more common.

So, 8mm Mauser never reached the level of prominence that the 30-06 has because the Germans lost the war. But what happened to .303 Brit after the war? The British were on the winning side so what made them phase it out?

>>33458382
Unified supply chains, adoption of more modern cartridges. 303 was around for quite awhile post WWII though.

>>33458351
you and me both pal

>>33458019

For rifles: 6.5 x 55 SE
For machine guns: 7.92 x 57 IS

>>33458382
NATO.
They kept it a long fucking time though, and really seem to only have taken up 7.62 RFN in the late 60's.
They had it mostly for their Vicker H/MMGs.

>>33458400
>>33458440
Ah, so NATO is responsible for the disappearance of .303. Thanks for the replies, I never really heard of what happened to it. To me, it seemed like it just disappeared.

>>33458572
It wasn't really suitable post WWII. Everyone was looking into modern semis, that lead to BRs. After BRs though they started developing more intermediate and focused on the modern concept of assault rifles which we use today. 303 just didn't age well into that time period, not surprising considering how many years it managed to survive.

>>33458086
What about my stopping powah?
Does it make a prettier pink mist on a head shot at 300,600, or 1000 yards?

>>33458224
There is a Serbian 8mm x 57 JS manufacturer out there. PPU

Can we take a moment to appreciate how horrifying an entire battlefield of full strength rifles is?
100s of 3,000+ fps, 150+gr bullets flying everywhere.
Fuck man.

>>33458323
6.5 swede has about 200 fps more velocity

>>33458064
6.5 Arisaka needs a barrel 10 inches longer to attain 6.5 Grendel ballistics.

>>33458019
>WW1cartridges.jpeg

>>33458019
which one of these killed the most people?

>>33458034
>op asks about ww2
>>Modern

kill yourself

>>33458055
>>33458078
For some reason the OP added an image of a Remington CoreLok

>>33458019
>>33458113
Germans had the most powerful loading with their s.S. Patrone 8x57.

File: IMG_7581l.jpg (605KB, 2304x3072px) Image search: [Google]

605KB, 2304x3072px

>>33461029
The Norwegian 7.92x61mm and Swedish 8x63mm Bofors were more powerful than the 7.92x57mm s.S. and .30 M2 Ball..

>>33461623
What do you know about the limited distance training rounds?
Picked up a bunch of .297 morris and a handful of .303 Mk1 Gaudet cartridges.

7x57mmasterrace

>>33458019

.30-06 M1 Ball Or
7.92 Mauser or 7.62x54R with the HE filler.

But let's be real, .50 BMG and 12.7x108mm are the winners.

>>33458019
by WWII, ballistic differences between service rifle rounds were so small as to be mostly irrelevant.

>>33460814
Well, 7.62x54R has been in military service since 1891...

>>33458019
8mm mauser is the most fun for me to shoot, followed by 7.62x54R

Its a shame 8mm isnt common but oh well, thats why I reload.

>>33458019

6.5mm swede

>>33461802
yeah but in WWII alone, 8mm could have caused 10+ million deaths. It was used by both sides in Europe, Russia and Africa

File: 7mmDWM_zps2f9d684d.jpg (279KB, 640x425px) Image search: [Google]

279KB, 640x425px

>>33458019

7x57mm Mauser

File: 2i0br0j.jpg (84KB, 351x480px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 351x480px

>>33461688
The .297/230 Morris Short and Long cartridges were for 'aiming tubes' which were a conversion kit inserted in the .303 rifle's bore. The 'adapter' cartridges such as the .303 Kynoch Adapter and the .303 Eley Simplex were a bit more popular as they were less expensive. These were mainly used by rifle clubs rather than the military.

I have some examples of these as well as .303 Gallery Practice - Ball cartridges, which were full sized .303 cases with a light unjacketed lead bullet and much smaller powder charge for short range and indoor target practice.

The Germans took the time to make an excellent load for their 8mm with the sS 1933 round. .30-06 could have easily equalled it. 54R was alright, same with 7.7 Jap although they really loaded it quite light. Even though I love Lee Enfields I have to say .303 was the worst, although the bullet produced reliable and consistent terminal performance it was fucked in the ass by two thing; a rim and cordite. Cordite is retarded as fuck and Mk.7 .303 ammo should have been done away with as soon as WW1 was over, Mk.8 should have been standard ammo across the board although the whole round should have been dropped for something more modern.

6.5x55 got used a little by the Finns as I recall, I would take that over anything but .30-06 and 8mm, and if Swedish m/41 ammo only had the same bullet design but the added lightened nose section of .303 I would have taken it above everything else.

>>33458572
It was around for Korea, Malaya and every other little fight the British and Commonwealth got in up to the mid 50s.

>>33458440
>>33458572
The canadian were still using it in small quantities for their "rangers" up untill very recently.
>inb4 that one picture, you know, that one
>inb4 you cant inb4 your own post

>>33461956
7x57 is one of my favorite rounds, don't know why.

>>33464306
Are you hispanic or latino?

>>33458200
Because the biggest market for firearms is the USA.

8mm Mauser is sort of popular in countries where it was historically used. Germans, Czechs, ex-Yugos, Slovaks etc. tend to have quite a lot of those and it's really their .30-06, with the same economy behind it.
They're more expensive than .308 while doing more or less the same, but if you have your father's rifle which you use for occasional hunting and nothing else then what's the problem? You can buy 400 rounds and it'll last you a lifetime if you use it like that and it'll probably still be cheaper than entirely new rifle and same amount of .308's or whatever other calibre you want.

This is one of those quirks like Dragunovs being quite common in Europe(in the countries where you can own firearms, not whole Europe is the UK) and super-rare in the USA, while M1 Garands being exactly the opposite.

>>33458382
.303 wasn't very good and they wanted to replace it by 1913. Then the war happened, after the war austerity and realisation that it's good enough for their uses anyway as they weren't even bothering with self-loading rifles.

Then NATO standardisation gave them new round to jump to(although they would rather have .280 British but we all know how it went) they happily did so, although slowly because again, austerity.

File: 6.5_x_55mm.jpg (13KB, 449x411px)

13KB, 449x411px

>dat long af point blank range

>>33461012
>.30-06 was not used in WWII