This is the perfect all around cartridge. unless you're

>>35140529
a thread died for this.

>>35140547
F

File: 20170510_180153.jpg (3MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4032x3024px

>>35140529
*a new challenger appears!

>>35140585
nope. can't compare or compete. lower BC and range.

File: 20170223_131555.jpg (3MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4032x3024px

fuddy-ought-six is still king

>>35140637

too long and not enough rifles chambered for it. less accurate cartridge overall, more expensive, fewer loadings available.

>>35140713
wrong on all counts

>>35140731

#'s or GTFO

>>35140713
"not enough rifles chambered for it"?
on which planet would that be?

>>35140772
30-06 is way more versatile in reloading options and you know it

>>35140790
the one where there are more rifles chambered for .308/7.62x51 - IE this one.

>>35140806

nope; same bullets, but fewer options for brass.

>>35140806
also you could load either cartridge to sufficient pressures to destroy the firearm; Only one has more options as far as firearm manufacturer and case manufacturer, and that one has firearms capable of handling greater pressures as a result of BBL's and novice handloaders. Guess which one. I'll give you a hint; it's not the .30-06.

>>35140529
Honestly I have to agree, even though I'm a big fan of .300WM to the point of autism.

>>35140637
>>35140731
>>35140790
>>35140806
.30-06 in military rifles is deliberately underpowered because the Garand would beat itself to pieces with full civilian loads. Sure would have been nice to have .276 but as usual MacArthur fucked everything up by being retarded. Reloading is irrelevant, loads just as effective can be achieved with .308 no problem, we're not talking about getting every single mouse fart's worth of performance.

I don't like what the 7.62x51mm represents as far as it's use in the military, (there were way, way better options) but it's a great round that did everything previous rounds did better on all accounts. It's widely available, it's universally usable, (the same cannot be said for .223 as plenty of older rifles will explode if loaded incorrectly) and it does pretty much whatever you need a rifle to do almost all the time.

I still want to live in the timeline where Pedersen got his way, though.

>>35140950
>the same cannot be said for .223 as plenty of older rifles will explode if loaded incorrectly
???

>>35140950

I like you. I do have to disagree that the .276p would've been better though; for automatic fire, sure. but it doesn't quite have the oomph of a more massive .308d bullet at range

I'm not saying that .260rem, .270win and .30-06 are BAD cartridges, or that .276p wouldn't have been effective, for hunting or otherwise; I'm just saying .308 is better.

>>35140950
also I'm using "mouse farts" in my everyday vernacular now. +1 internet to you.

>>35140547

and as such an unworthy caliber died for .308. survival of the most adaptable, newfriend.

>>35140529
what about 7.62x39?

in b4 bears

most people will never encounter a bear and if they do it will be a docile black bear that doesnt need to be shot. the sound of a shot will scare it if needed.

7.62x39 is arguably cheaper and more plentiful

>>35141250
plus, the more you think about it, one or a few rounds of 7.62x39 would easily take out a bear

>>35141250

yeah, because aiming and range are for faggot nigger capitalists. Also, the 7.62x39 totally hasn't been eclipsed in every regard by all the other intermediate calibers, which don't even come close to being comparable to 7.62x51.

gee, I'd sure love to get me a tapered case loser cartridge that is outdated and notably inaccurate, despite its availability. that sounds great. I'll just send more bullets towards the faggot nigger capitalists, that have lighter, more accurate cartridges that penetrate better. sounds great.

>>35141296
7.62x39 would barely slow down Winnie the Pooh

File: 30-Remington-AR-ammo-accutip-682x379.1421388956.jpg (41KB, 682x379px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 682x379px

>>35140529
Wrong. Wider cartridges have more efficient powder burns. When you carry 308 you are carrying extra powder and brass that you dont need to.

Pic related has the same goddamn ballistics and weighs less and fits into ar-15s.

File: 17-357rg-diagram.png (22KB, 900x350px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 900x350px

This is now the pdw/intermediate/pistol cartridge of the future.

>>35141296
sure would.

thought experiment.

you have a single shot rifle in the caliber of your choosing, and one bullet. you are hunting brown bear.

.223: accurate, but anything other than a CNS shot won't put it down. it's gonna eat you. better be close up, because brownies are big and tough.

7.62x39: might as well have a 30-30. similar (possibly better) ballistics, same bullet, similar range. problem: 7.62x39 is inherently inaccurate as a cartridge. sure, individual guns matter, but there's an 800lb (at LEAST) bear in front of you, so there's that.

.260p you'll hit your mark if the rifle is constructed properly, but the rifle options in this caliber are so lacking it'll be hit or miss without much customer feedback. good luck, pardner.

.30-06: yup. it kills, and it works. problem; the store was fresh out of soft points! they had hollow points, but they were light and didn't have the penetration you needed for this particular species of megafauna. better luck next time... oh wait it survived and killed you. there won't be a next time.

.308/7.62x51: the store had exactly the 180gr bullet you needed for the task. as an inherently accurate round, loaded to ideal commercial specifications as paid for and used by generations of hunters and outdoorsmen prior, it hits the mark and kills the prey. you survive and it doesn't. you have dinner for several months and your wife and children eat. case closed.

>>35141388
nope. waste of space. I love .308, but caseless telescoped is the future.

File: 758198879.jpg (11KB, 220x293px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 220x293px

While everyone's here, what do we think about .243 Winchester?

>pic is .223, .243, .308 from left to right

>>35141350
they take up more space and weigh more as a result of solid mass void occupancy. v=m when it comes to killing.

>>35141450
i live on the east coast

and the part about 7.62 being inaccurate when a bear is in front of you

cmon now

>>35141482

good for smaller game, and even people, but less useful and available as compared to .308. less malleable, less adaptable, less recyclable, less reloadable, lower range, lowere efficiency and lowe usefulness.

It's not bad, but not as good as it could be; IE .308.

>>35141450
If all I have is a single shot rifle I'd go as big as comfortably possible. .300 Win M.

If the rifle selection was semi auto and mag fed, then .308 could present a more complete argument to being the best choice since it is better at that kind of thing. Bears are big so shooting it a lot in a survival situation won't exactly ruin it.

>>35141545

you're hunting the bear with one round in the thought experiment. where you live is irrelevant; it's a brown bear, not a black bear. you have a single shot rifle and one bullet.

you choose x39? fine. your loss. it's not gonna stop because you missed its brain and hit its lung; it's gonna maul you to death.

x39 is notably less powerful than x51. HS shock being a myth and all, you're more likely to get a kill with a more powerful round, period. Also, I don't recall a single department or agency relying on x39 for its accuracy or power, which are both negligible compared to x51.

>>35141563

better ballistics? yes. bigger case, heavier bullet potential.

malleability? no. .300 WM is plenty accurate, but you'd be hard pressed to find exactly the cartridge you wanted for the price.

sure, longer range. but overall, it's less adaptable and less likely to be available, plus not every pussy ass woman soldier can handle it.

>is the bear dead? maybe, if you didn't flinch from knowing your little girl shoulder couldn't handle the very expensive and hardly available cartridge you're using

kinda hard to compare .300 WM to .308. might as well be comparing 7mm Rem mag to it. completely different applications.

>>35140603
Made up for in capacity and weight efficiency, as well as cost. I win't lie though, I like both rounds.

>>35141576
i'm saying that the closest brown bear is thousands of miles away you fucking moron

your fantasy of fighting off brown bears is irrelevant to my needs and desires for a rifle

>>35141633

doesn't do then same job.

go ahead; you try to make an 800 meter shot w/ a 5.56: ain't gonna happen.


incomparable. .308 is just better when it comes to terminal ballistics. sure, you can't carry as many rounds, but each round will be more effective at range.

again, this is the multitasker's bullet; 5.56 only fills a niche of human sized targets around 300yds.

.308 eclipses that by 3/4 mile, in spite of cartridge weight/shot.

308 is the new age 'i'm right because of this small list of irrelevant opinions' fudd round

when are you all going to realize that there is no right answer and tastes change and some rounds are better for different things? the sooner you embrace this the sooner you can enjoy more things

>>35141250
7.62x39 is the poor man's .308

You can hunt with it (yes it'll even kill a bear, obviously not a choice round for that though). It's great for SHTF due to lighter weight and great barrier penetration (people shoot at you may actually be hiding behind things). But it lacks the ability to really reach out and touch someone. Within 300m you're golden, within 500 you can make it if you're good (unlike .223 rounds it actually kills outside of 400m) within 700 you gotta be a goddamn spetsnaz. 308 won't give you as much trouble hitting things at such range.

>>35141662

Ok, New york. A wild Gigga Nigga appears, he's on bath salts and meth. He's running at you full sprint/erection.

you have one bullet. take your pick.

>>35141706
is he near me or at about 800 yards? do you see how silly that sounds?

>>35141692

.308 is better for more things than any other round.

except elephants and squirrels. I hunt cottontails with it all the time. bit pricey, but more assured kills.

>>35141717

~500 yds.

store's out of .30-06 because all the fudds love it, and nobody buys .270 or .3,000,000 win mag.

>>35141737
*so they don't stock it

>>35141697
i can't even find a place to shoot at 400 yards legally let alone 800+

to me 7.62x39, out of a good and accurate gun, fits a perfect sweet spot. mainly because of weight, bulk availability and cheapness. it kills things dead. i'm not worried about 900 yard shots. ever. i will never need to take one. i don't live in kansas or utah or montana, and i don't pretend to be a sniper.

>>35141763
>x39
>accurate gun

you won't stop the charging quarry, hit a CNS, or stop the charging bear. x51>x39 for this application.

>>35141763
>one shot
>chooses 7.62mmx39

bich u gon die

>>35141885
>He thinks a bear is a magical creature that can withstand a full 30 of x39

My nigga how bad a shot are you?

>>35141763
Stop ruining their autistic fantasies with reason.

>>35141900

>ONE
>ROUND

>>35141763
no such thing. .308>x39, bitch.

>>35141900
>>35141947

>see thouht experiment, asshat

>>35140603
And that matters to the majority how?since we are talking about all around

>>35141962

ok... go moose hunting with a 5.56mm. see how good you do.

File: battle-rifles-chart-3.jpg (943KB, 1200x1170px) Image search: [Google]

943KB, 1200x1170px

>>35140529
QUICK QUESTION
For all around apocalypse 7.62/.308 rifle, all ranges:

Should I choose an M14, G3, SCAR, AR-10, or something else entirely? A one-line summary would be nice. I'm leaning AR-10 but could be convinced otherwise.

Here's a nice photo for helping.

>>35141973

For some perspective;

plenty o' dudes have taken moose with .30-30; but it took a while and the animal suffered.

for price per round and availability, .308 is the best option, being more effective, more humane, more available and more accurate. this is verifiable fact as per all measured information available to the public; in terms of PPR there is no greater round/cost.

>>35141672
>make an 800 meter shot with 5.56
>impossible
Like in these videos?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PAnDYUGWBsk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s99mTfokffc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGHfAv4KIpM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=igXUZVWylsM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ukciUja7dw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSJWibX65kk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gK8W-sxO3vI

>>35141991

great question,

m14 will be very expensive, be easy to ghetto fix but have fe warts available.

g3/scar will have almost no parts available but as rifles will be more common than m14 based on demos.

AR10's will be the most likely to have parts available, will be more common and more modular, second to SCARs. AR10's are subject to the same direct impingement as AR15's; your gonna have a mess in the frame. pay the extra for a piston actuated mech; the price for the piston will pay for itself in terms of cleaning. who the fuck wants to have exhaust fed directly into the machine? nobody, that's who.

>>35142026
not impossible, but extraordianrily unlikely.

>800 meter shots with 7.62x51
>1000ds of vids

up your game, ho.

File: pdw_cartridge.jpg (28KB, 638x906px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 638x906px

Guys check out my design for a pdw/intermediate round.

WIth a 15 grain bullet it should be able to go over 4k feet per second out of a 8in barrel, so basically hypersonic.

My idea is for the bullet to have a sort of tail that protrudes into the cartridge so there is a kind of shaped charge like effect that squeeze it out of the chamber like squeezing a tube of toothpaste. Would that even work?

>>35140713
>not enough rifles chambered for it

Wut

Also, I'm already sub MOA with my model 70, I guess that's... inaccurate? Again, what?

>>35141523
Gunpowder doesnt expand linearly so the thinner a cartridge is the less efficient the powder burn is.

>>35142076
yaaasss 100% efficient 0% wasted space

u rok, bra

>>35142084

as compared to .308? yeah. not enough options.

cost per round your losing. I'm not saying your caliber won't do the job... I'm saying your caliber won't get the job done for the money.

File: hpJ2CkX.png (151KB, 507x291px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 507x291px

>>35141473
How does telescopic ammunition go into the barrel from the chamber? I know it sounds like a dumb question but on a traditional firearm part of the bullet sticks into the barrel when a round is chambers so wouldnt telescoped bullets kind of bounce around inside the chamber before being shoved down the pipe?

>>35142085

and as such .308>.30-06. there are more cases available for the .308 because of higher demand.

it is more adaptable, despite its upper limitations (see >>35140950)

>>35141697
spot the fuddlore

>>35142026
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s99mTfokffc
Its looks like the bullets are falling out of theyre arching so much.

File: doge_pixel.jpg (9KB, 251x212px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 251x212px

>>35142131
Yeah but 30ar>.308

Its just wayy wider so it doesnt have to be as big a cartridge or have as much powder so it weighs less.

>>35142114

I don't like Telescoped ammo but it works, so I'll oblige you.

Telescoped ammunition is operated the same as ordinary ammo in that the projectile being fired provides the energy required to chmber the next round.

in telescoped ammo the big picture is cartridge length; the mechanics rely on cartridge dimensions.

I am ashamed that I share a space in which I have to explain this to you; I would have hoped that /k/ could have figured it out on their own.

using polymer cased non-rimmed ammo, the force of the action will chamber another round, without necessitating the actuation of gripping a round and replacing it with another. ejecting the old round and chambering the new one will be sufficient, the rim being replaced with a flat shield of polymer that instead of being gripped is pushed as a solid face as opposed to a metal rim.

>>35142114

yes, go buy your TSA at your local LGS, I'm sure you can afford it, since your opinions are reality instead of what actually happens.

File: dogee.jpg (39KB, 598x608px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 598x608px

>>35142211
>local LGS
Isnt that a big redundant..?

>>35142230

no. your LGS has .308 in stock. they don't have telescoped polymer case in stock in any caliber. case closed.

>>35142185
Everything you typed except the thing about polymer case ejection, I understand already but my question was about how the bullet goes from the cartridge into barrel.

In regular cartridges the nose of the bullet sticks into the end of the barrel so when the powder goes pew the bullet is already aligned with the barrel. Its not immediately apparent to me how telescoped ammo achieves such alignment of the bullet and barrel. I guess the chamber is a bit longer or the walls of the telescoped case act as a chamber? I know everyone needs a chance to exercise their ego a bit but I think its a valid question.

File: JOKE.gif (2MB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 640x480px

>>35142242

>>35142068
Those goalposts though.

>>35142264
The joke missed you?

File: tumblr_lzjrsoo61q1r50h4io1_400.png (138KB, 372x365px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 372x365px

>>35142279
>local lgs

>>35142254

in telescoped ammo the powder closest to the primer burns first, pushing the projectile out and allowing the remainder of the powder charge (that is next to/adjacent to the projectile) to burn, adding velocity to the projectile. OAL to power and mass of charge, it's more efficient, but the geometry of the polymer rimless means it relies on the force of firing to eject the case (recoil/Gas operated only)

not common, or useful (yet) but it's (.308) one of the calibers in transition, and my OP argument is that .308/7.62x54 is superior in terms of usefulness and adaptability to other calibers, which it is.

>>35142279

there was no joke. he's just stupid, blindly using a .gif intended for satire, which hasn't effectively been used in this thread yet.

File: main-qimg-82ce570da2f85e41015bf872c9cf4906-c.jpg (14KB, 370x242px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 370x242px

>>35142307
K I get that but how does chamber alignment work with telescoped ammo? See with pic related the bullet is basically in the chamber already but with telescoped ammo that bullet is in the cartridge so it has to make a jump into the barrel kind of like with revolvers?

I'm curious how this affects telescoped ammo designed and whether the end of the telescoped cartridge has to be reinforced to withstand the pressure?

>>35142288
>atm machine

File: 120577-45020Martini-Henry20480gr205.jpg (37KB, 640x427px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 640x427px

>>35141706

>>35142332

it has less to do with chamber alignment than cartridge extraction. alignment is easy; extraction relies on geometry. there is no rim in telescoped ammo. The force of being fired must extract the spent cartridge. the need for a reinforced base is a trait of classic rimmed cartridges; in telescoped ammo the base is supported by the back of the chamber.

File: 31-dog-reactions-for-everyday-situations-2-7814-1411578646-0_dblbig.jpg (40KB, 625x415px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 625x415px

>>35142322
>make joke about redundancy of saying local LGS
>NOO 308 is BETTER YOU CANT BUY TELESCOPED AMMO YET REEE

>>35142337

I'd jizz my pants if they sold that at my local grocery store.

but they don't, so .308>that.

>>35142352
I guess ill take your word for it but it seems like telescoped ammo might be less accurate to me.

>>35142359

I didn't bring it up. .308 is the most effective ammo per cost of any other bullet and short of hippo hunting they make bullets to need. your argument is irrelevant and maligned.

>>35140529
Mission specific rounds are a thing, but as far as all around .308 is probably the best in North America.

If you had plentiful 7.62x39 that might be a contender tho

File: 1b2a3388b3e7b3d3f4fba29d27830528--funny-pets-funny-animals.jpg (11KB, 230x226px)

11KB, 230x226px

>>35142335
>PIN number

>>35142367

depends on the vibrations of the action. inherently, the case grip and parameters of the cartridge will determine the accuracy. we're two decades off from usable and affordable polymer case telescoped rounds of any caliber; but there are super deadly ultra affordable 7.62x51 rounds at your grocery store this instant that will work for anything short of elephants.

File: DDQ8PnAXoAA7JeI.jpg (22KB, 570x370px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 570x370px

>>35142375
Okay I'm sorry master, your highness, oh great one. I will refrain from ever mentioning telescoped ammo again, because it is not available at my *local* LGS.

>>35142381
7.62x39<7.62x51 both in accuracy, powre, overall performance, and availability. you can't buy x39 at united, hannaford, kroeger, albertson's or walmart.

>>35142412

you can't even buy it online. it's so new they don't even make it commercially, asshole.

File: brrrrt_mech.jpg (234KB, 1920x1028px) Image search: [Google]

234KB, 1920x1028px

>>35142399
but muh futures..

>>35142435

.308 is our futures

File: telescoped_grouping.jpg (29KB, 339x256px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 339x256px

>>35142399
I didnt have time to read the entire thing but i found a scientific study that actually corroborated my suspicious.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214914715000823
>As seen from this figure, as the chamber axis offset relative to the gun bore is increased, the mean point of impact is moved to the right for the horizontally offset chamber and upward for the vertically offset chamber. The shift in the impact location can be explained by the presence of in-bore yaw which results in a lateral throw-off and an aerodynamic jump component.

>>35142426
I guess we shouldn't ever talk about fighter planes or lasers anymore either because theyre also not available to the public.

>>35142447
.308 is our present and near future.

>>35142412
>>35142426

also I was mocking you but you seem to have missed the point. your loss.

>>35141576
well fuck you then, if i could take any calliber id take a 50 bmg, or even better a fucking 20 mm cannon. But why stop there ill just take a tactical nuke and kill off the the forest and the bears family as well.

>>35142463

I wasn't blindly excluding discussion of the unobtainable; I was stating that /.308 is the most adaptable and affordable round we have commercially available. I am right.

the yaw of the cartridge is the result of low chamber cartridges. I bet they'll have it fixed in a week.

also, for DM rounds, they will use .308 at the same velocities as 7.62x51 because there's nothing conceptually better until we develop a better bullet.

>>35142482
>not invoking another big bang

>>35142468
What the fuck did you just fucking say about me, you little bitch? I’ll have you know I graduated top of my class in the Navy Seals, and I’ve been involved in numerous secret raids on Al-Quaeda, and I have over 300 confirmed kills. I am trained in gorilla warfare and I’m the top sniper in the entire US armed forces. You are nothing to me but just another target. I will wipe you the fuck out with precision the likes of which has never been seen before on this Earth, mark my fucking words. You think you can get away with saying that shit to me over the Internet? Think again, fucker. As we speak I am contacting my secret network of spies across the USA and your IP is being traced right now so you better prepare for the storm, maggot. The storm that wipes out the pathetic little thing you call your life. You’re fucking dead, kid. I can be anywhere, anytime, and I can kill you in over seven hundred ways, and that’s just with my bare hands. Not only am I extensively trained in unarmed combat, but I have access to the entire arsenal of the United States Marine Corps and I will use it to its full extent to wipe your miserable ass off the face of the continent, you little shit. If only you could have known what unholy retribution your little “clever” comment was about to bring down upon you, maybe you would have held your fucking tongue. But you couldn’t, you didn’t, and now you’re paying the price, you goddamn idiot. I will shit fury all over you and you will drown in it. You’re fucking dead, kiddo.

>>35142482

yes, because the thought experiment didn't exclusively rely on the availability of the round or anything.

>>35142352
Anon are you alright? You've been writing very long posts babbling about extraction when he is asking a very simple question.

File: maxresdefault (1).jpg (86KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 1280x720px

>>35142495
>better bullet
So things like 338 are shit?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Klr0EXZty6s

File: a00e0174df45fcacede0d579e0ee6d1e.jpg (53KB, 425x634px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 425x634px

>>35142503

>my name is sarge, and I hate every single one of you

>>35142495
>the yaw of the cartridge is the result of low chamber cartridges
Also, did you read the study? I'm not sure what they meant and i have now idea what a low chamber cartridge is..

>>35142526

rimless extraction is no simple affair, friend.

>>35142540

I didn't write that. he's an idiot.

>>35142068
So you gonna post the vids, right?

>>35141991
MDR, idiot.

>>35142555
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=1000+yd+shot+.308&t=ffab&ia=web

>>35142529

at range, yes. BC x ME doesn't add up to the versatility of .308 under any circumstances.

>>35142566
Making the opposing anon look for the sources kinda appealing to ignorance, wouldn't ya agree?

>>35142592
>>35142529

provided you're talking about .338 federal. .338 win mag is in a whole other class, and in either case good luck finding ammo.

>>35142602

I provided the sources. just press play. I did the work for you. you want me to watch the vids for you, too?

>>35141321
The funny part is, given a bolt action to be fired from, apparently shit like Tulammo and wolf can get 3" groups out to 600 yds.
Hand loading gets this smaller.

The problem is the complete lack of barrel harmonics in the design of the AK series of rifles, the guns that probably 65-70% of all 7.62x39 is fired from.
SKSes and VZ-58s are both praised for their accuracy and they're both 7.62x39.
So fuck off with your bullshit.
>>35141482
Good round if we stick our fingers in our ears and ignore the sound of a thousand dicks raping our wallets because no practice/cheap ammo exists.
Also, with the exception of some Gucci ARs and a bastard HK-33, .243 Win is bolt action only, so no semi auto for you.
>>35141697
You reek of too much beer, too little exercise, and shit you learned in the military or worse, your cousin who's a "soldier in the marines"
>>35141991
The FAL can be fixed by hammering on shit, fiddling with springs, and otherwise not much.
The M14 can be given parts from M14s and other variants which are still in use in the military in varying capacities.
The SCAR is the SCAR.
Yeah, parts exist, but good luck finding them.
No idea about durability.
The AR-10 is about as standardized as a Malaysian inch, but parts are somewhat common.
G3/derivatives are common, and as such you'll be able to gut other Guns for parts quite easily when you find them.
However actual parts on their own aren't crazy common.
Unless you're a leaf, don't bother with the autonugget.

And the pingerator.
Ahhh yes.
The pingerator. If you can find one in .308, it would be an excellent SHTF gun.
It's common, nice and fat and beefy for hammering busted parts back into shape, you could probably get a nice number of the parts made just with blacksmithing, and the best part is that clips are easy to carry and stash, quick to load, and cheap to purchase pre-SHTF.
It's also a fun gun to practice with, so you'll be quite ready when the S does HTF.

>>35142602
>>35142611

want me to make the arguments on your behalf? want me to provide your evidence for you?

last time I checked, "google it" wasn't enough of a source, so I fucking googled it for you. now I provide the links, and you still proclaim "I'm too fukken lazy to watch these videos of .308 out performing every other .30 caliber round" so you want me to provide information, easily obtainable, and illustrated in my links, against my own argument.

do it yourself, you lazy fucking commie.

>>35142642

well then it's a damned good thing this thread is about a particular caliber, and not a particular series of rifles, now isn't it?

>>35142651
Excellent, so that means we are in agreement that a caliber can be judged on its own instead of on the merits of the harmonics of the rifle it's normally fired from?

And that it's actually a fairly accurate round when given a chance to shine on its own?

>>35142651
*cartridge

>>35142664

well .308 is, but x39 is inherently short range and inaccurate...

so if you're talking about cartridges in general, no, BC's and mxv determine accuracy. however, using .308 win in terms of an all around perfect cartridge, the rifle determines the accuracy, not the capabilities up close

File: 1453758951037.jpg (83KB, 746x500px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 746x500px

>>35142185
>>35142307
>>35142352
holy shit dude

And not one of these posts refutes .308win being the most accurate and powerful round as per cost-bullet ratio, so fuck ya. you can't get better power, accuracy and effectiveness for the money. period.

>>35142726

how am I wrong? what does this have to do with .308 being anything less than superior?

>>35141350
>"A side effect of the short, wide case has meant that the Remington R-15 Rifle which was designed alongside the cartridge uses a four-round, single-stack magazine"
>FOUR ROUNDS

>>35142679
X39 is the basis for the 6mm ppu. One of the most accurate cartridges ever. Its shit ammo, using projectiles, using shit powder, assembled by drunks, and fired from rifles of similar quality that have given it a bad name.

I love .308 and all, but if your going to hate on something, hate on it for the right reasons

>>35142420
Wally world sells tulammo x39 in Texas at least Idk about elsewhere

>>35142753

you're right

>>35141350

wasted space. try harder.

>>35142760

it's still in a whole other category. good luck making 600+ M shots with x39. not gonna happen.

>>35142770
With a Laser range finder, kestrel, ah who am i kidding.

>>35142760
in yours, maybe. doesn't have the range

>>35142778

Idk. yourself? not gonna hit the mark past 300 M

>>35142114
>How does telescopic ammunition go into the barrel from the chamber?
Through the throat, probably.

>>35142679
Anon, the problem is not that you're saying .308 is accurate.
It's that you're saying 7.62x39 ISNT accurate.
It is more accurate than you give it credit for, and while doesn't hold that accuracy to as absurdly long of a range as .308 does, few of any intermediate cartridges can do that.

>>35142420
I live in New York of all places and every shop, Walmart included, has boatloads of x39

>>35142643
You have the gull to call someone else lazy when you could do something as simple as upload a youtube link here yet refuse (which literally takes five minutes)? Burdens of proof is on you all the way, asshole.

Go get late stage bone cancer and a free helicopter ride.

>>35142860
>late stage bone cancer

Now that's just mean.

>>35140981
You're probably too young to remember this, but in the time before manufacturers started accommodating for both .223 and 5.56x45mm it was actually pretty easy to make a grenade out of a rifle not chambered for the military cartridge. Why do you think there's so much talk about it even though it's basically pointless now? Nothing dies in the gun world like it should, people still hold up dumb fuddlore as gospel even though it's been proven to be absolute nonsense.

>>35141011
Automatic fire is basically the only thing that's important though, in another universe the .30-06 never died because the Johnson was made sooner and didn't need to use gimped rounds.

For the purposes of SHTF literally fucking anything works as long as it's reliable and available, and even then the amount of rounds you need is still going to fit in an ammo can. I'd wager you could have a pocket full of ammo and that's about as much as you'd need in reality, because the moment you blast a looter is when they decide to stay the fuck away. I'd obviously advise having more than that, but even the most fucked up situation is probably going to be weathered with zero trigger time.

>>35141991
>>35142053
>>35142642
Very few things go wrong on a G3 and AR10 parts are going to be a split between "I can find this" and "I can't find this." Downside of the G3 platform is the fact that it violently rapes brass.

M14 is a piece of shit, it's a waste of money.

I'm assuming the "pingerator" is a Garand and for the love of fuck don't do that. Just get an AR in .300BLK and reload if you want to be "unique" until FEMA shows up and starts passing out salmon-colored MREs. Since we're talking about the best overall performance of an easily-obtained round we're kind of limited, so I'd suggest going with a FAL for reloaders and a G3 derivative with a tardload of spare ammo for everyone else.

As I said above, if it's strictly "oh no shtf halp" anything you have that's reliable and can be fed will be A-OK.

>>35140713
>not enough rifles chambered for it.

Every single unconverted Garand, just to start.

>>35140529
>No cartridge is as available, as inexpensive, or as useful as .308/7.62x51

12 gauge beats .308 in availability, price usefulness AND versatility.

File: smugo.png (65KB, 184x184px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 184x184px

>>35142753
>>35142764
Hue hue hue its not like it's impossible to redesign the magazine to hold more rounds.

Jesus Christ since when was 4chan so full of trolls! Yikes!

File: IMG_3091.jpg (72KB, 1200x265px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 1200x265px

>>35141885
>>x39
>>accurate gun
Welcome to the current year

>>35141576
>HS being a myth and all

Not exactly. It's misused, true (and often confused/bundled with hydraulic shock, which is totally different), but not a total myth.

The short of it is that a strong enough hydrostatic shock will send a shockwave through the CNS, putting the victim in a temporary coma. If your shot placement is good, he'll bleed out whilst still in that coma, giving the illusion of an "instant kill."

This is where stories of moose coming back from the dead and mauling the hunter as he goes in to collect his kill comes from.

>>35143123
>You're probably too young to remember this, but in the time before manufacturers started accommodating for both .223 and 5.56x45mm it was actually pretty easy to make a grenade out of a rifle not chambered for the military cartridge.
This time being when? I've never heard of this and it's definitely not that easy to blow up a a .223 Remington rifle. Even using a minimum spec chamber with 5.56 NATO. Nothing short of a case rupture is going to cause a rifle to 'grenade'.

>>35140910
>Only one has firearms capable of handling greater pressures as a result of BBLs (what?) and novice handloaders

So basically users of 7.62 nato are retards who dont know how to handload

>>35141973
Pro-tip: aim for the head.

>>35140529
Perfect all around? How about short range in thick brush? What, you forgot spitzers suck in brush?
>there is no all around perfect round you mouth breathing moron.

>>35143884
>This time being when? I've never heard of this
Probably because you were born in the 90's or some such thing.

Don't put milsurp ammo in a .223 rifle made before 1975 because bad things can happen. Even 80's-era rifles might be dangerous, you should ask the barrel manufacturer about what they proofed at. Some did so under milspec pressure and that is proof, that isn't use, there's a difference between the two. (for reference milspec proof is 77,958 psi which spikes to 83k in .223 chambers, while commercial .223 ammo never ever exceeds 70,000 psi)

It's nice that people can neglect to remember these things nowadays thanks to .223 Wylde and modern manufacturing, but rifles don't have an expiration date and are still around.

>>35146496
>for reference milspec proof is 77,958 psi which spikes to 83k in .223 chambers, while commercial .223 ammo never ever exceeds 70,000 psi)
Yea, prove that. How was this tested? What specification of chamber was this tested in? Are you trying to imply the proof loads somehow changed from the standardization of the cartridge by SAAMI in the early 60s?
>It's nice that people can neglect to remember these things nowadays thanks to .223 Wylde and modern manufacturing
You're not implying every rifle out there marked .223 is using a Wylde spec chamber, are you? It's generally safe to shoot 5.56 NATO into .223 Remington chambers because most .223 Remington chambers are reamed far larger than the SAAMI minimum spec chamber that most of this "5.56 NATO in .223 Remington chamber" testing uses. It has nothing to do with the 'standardization' of the Wylde chamber.

>>35146532
>Yea, prove that.
>How was this tested?
>What specification
>proof loads
>I don't know what I'm asking but I want answers!
Talk to the people that came up with NATO EPVAT, not me, I didn't actually do the testing.
>You're not implying every out there marked .223 is using a Wylde
Well here's your problem, you can't read, I never said that and I'm not even sure how you thought I did.

Hell, son. Just load whatever you want, get the most pressure possible and just grip hard right around the chamber when you pull the trigger. With any luck you'll stop tying.

>>35146602
God, you're a fucking moron. Fuck off, grandpa.

File: that's nice honey.png (277KB, 502x419px)

277KB, 502x419px

>>35146619
>suspect teenager, probably European
>humor teenager
>teenager gets angry, replies
>tell teenager to go bitch at the feds who came up with the numbers
>"Fuck off, grandpa"
>be under 40
>laugh
When your balls drop, let me know.

>>35142332
Looks like it the forward part of the case acts as the throat and the chamber just goes right to freebore.

>>35141885
The ranges a bear is a problem at don't require sub-MOA accuracy. If it's far enough that the accuracy of .308 is crucial, that bear isn't even a threat. If it's so close you only have one shot, you can't take advantage of that accuracy anyway because you're about to be skullfucked by a bear. Your scenarios are retarded.

>>35140529
eh .270 - shoots flatter and is everywhere

>>35141482
lovely but barrel wear

>>35142420
i have never been in a gun store or sporting goods store that sold .308 that didn't also sell 7.62x39

everyone in this thread is SO FUCKING MAD

>>35151484

yes I've outdone myself. didn't expect it to last this long... maybe I should've mentioned that cats were better than dogs in every regard, too.

>>35140950
>has a shoulder
>belted
It's shit

Whenever there's a gun panic I can only ever find 30-06, .270, .243 on the shelves. I actually own a 30-06 just because there have been long periods of time I couldn't feed my .308.

>>35142053
>piston ar10>di ar10

You dumb nigga.

>>35142114
Idk why they dont round the nose of that telescoped ammunition to facilitate better feeding, seems like a no brainer compared to the flat face to that cartridge.