Hatterasguy |
04-16-2009 09:29 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmbdiesel
(Post 2173294)
Don't know the stats, but I can put 10 of 10 into a 7" diameter target at 200yds with my SKS. Of course I don't use chinese ammo either. These guys did a 25yd and 50yd side by side test of 7.62 and .223
http://www.ar-15.us/223_vs_762x39.php (their results may well be skewed by their choice of Wolf ammunition, whose inaccuracy would have more impact on the more accurate weapon)
What is typical distance to target for our troops? (wide range I'm sure)
If typical distance is under 200yds, then the 7.62 brings more to the table. When the distance is greater, how many guys can utilize the greater reach of the .223? Most people I know get real spread out with their groupings, even at 200yds, let alone over (they are not military guys). What training is the military giving our troops? Do they practice long range shooting with the .223
My point is, in house to house combat, I would much rather have the 7.62x39 over the 5.56x45
one note, correct me if I am mistaken, but I have been using .223 and 5.56 interchangeably.
|
Ahh the old round debate. I actualy like smaller rounds, I really like the .30 carbine round.:D
My thoughts are this, any bullit will do the job as long as you hit them. Something like an M16 is pretty easy to control when your firing fast, as opposed to say a 14, or SKS. You can empty a clip fast and have the rounds land pretty much where you want them. From my experiance...
The argument usualy is the larger rounds have more knockdown power, and they do. But the lighter rounds are so easy to shoot, double tap them. IMHO within 100 yards its a mute point, any bullit will kill you, so I rather have a small very fast round and carry a lot of them.
So insted of an M14 and .45, give me a P90 and Sig 226. The P90 is very compact and I can carry 50 rounds in the mag.
|