|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sun Oct 11, 2009 11:56 pm
OberFeldwebel Sgt Buckner Desert_Fox_Rommel Requiem in Mortis Actually, I think we should move up to 6.8mm SPC. Lighter than the 7.62, but has a lot more stopping power than the 5.56mm. I think you need to stop watching future weapons. razz 6.5>6.8SPC 6.5x55? ^.^
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 12, 2009 1:48 pm
Fresnel OberFeldwebel Sgt Buckner Desert_Fox_Rommel Requiem in Mortis Actually, I think we should move up to 6.8mm SPC. Lighter than the 7.62, but has a lot more stopping power than the 5.56mm. I think you need to stop watching future weapons. razz 6.5>6.8SPC 6.5x55? ^.^ coool! when?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 12, 2009 4:28 pm
OberFeldwebel Fresnel OberFeldwebel Sgt Buckner Desert_Fox_Rommel Requiem in Mortis Actually, I think we should move up to 6.8mm SPC. Lighter than the 7.62, but has a lot more stopping power than the 5.56mm. I think you need to stop watching future weapons. razz 6.5>6.8SPC 6.5x55? ^.^ coool! when? When what? I'm kind of curious to see if -284 would make a good long-range hunting round. I know it has a solid impact at 1000 yards... I've been downrange to see the berm when they hit. There's still a lot of energy left at that distance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 12, 2009 9:43 pm
Fresnel When what? I'm kind of curious to see if -284 would make a good long-range hunting round. I know it has a solid impact at 1000 yards... I've been downrange to see the berm when they hit. There's still a lot of energy left at that distance. Probably will. But will the outdoor conditions still keep it that accurate?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 12, 2009 9:47 pm
OberFeldwebel Fresnel When what? I'm kind of curious to see if -284 would make a good long-range hunting round. I know it has a solid impact at 1000 yards... I've been downrange to see the berm when they hit. There's still a lot of energy left at that distance. Probably will. But will the outdoor conditions still keep it that accurate? I've seen people hold the 10 ring in a full downpour. I was honestly surprised they could still see the target.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 13, 2009 3:58 am
Fresnel OberFeldwebel Fresnel When what? I'm kind of curious to see if -284 would make a good long-range hunting round. I know it has a solid impact at 1000 yards... I've been downrange to see the berm when they hit. There's still a lot of energy left at that distance. Probably will. But will the outdoor conditions still keep it that accurate? I've seen people hold the 10 ring in a full downpour. I was honestly surprised they could still see the target. Then it'll probably be good. I'm thinking it could take deer. Dunno about bigger.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 14, 2009 12:01 am
Requiem in Mortis Every account I heard of the 5.56mm in Vietnam was that the guy would turn around to see who shot him, whereas the 7.62mm would knock him flat on his a**. EDIT: 5.56mm NATO is good for modern combat. 7.62mm NATO was designed for longer ranges, and 5.56mm is designed for closer combat like the kind we're fighting now. Why are M16 rifles designed and tested at longer range (600m, IIRC?) than weapons such as the AK-XXX weapons that use a 7.62 round?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 14, 2009 12:31 am
Maelthra Reloaded Requiem in Mortis Every account I heard of the 5.56mm in Vietnam was that the guy would turn around to see who shot him, whereas the 7.62mm would knock him flat on his a**. EDIT: 5.56mm NATO is good for modern combat. 7.62mm NATO was designed for longer ranges, and 5.56mm is designed for closer combat like the kind we're fighting now. Why are M16 rifles designed and tested at longer range (600m, IIRC?) than weapons such as the AK-XXX weapons that use a 7.62 round? 600m is well within the range for an M16 series weapon... I think it's 600 for the M4, 800 for the M16, but I could be wrong. After that point, with iron sights, you'll probably have trouble SEEING your target anyway, if they're taking any kind of cover. Anywho, it's because AKs are reliable, not accurate. They're kind of ineffective past probably 300 yards or so.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 14, 2009 7:16 am
Fresnel Maelthra Reloaded Requiem in Mortis Every account I heard of the 5.56mm in Vietnam was that the guy would turn around to see who shot him, whereas the 7.62mm would knock him flat on his a**. EDIT: 5.56mm NATO is good for modern combat. 7.62mm NATO was designed for longer ranges, and 5.56mm is designed for closer combat like the kind we're fighting now. Why are M16 rifles designed and tested at longer range (600m, IIRC?) than weapons such as the AK-XXX weapons that use a 7.62 round? 600m is well within the range for an M16 series weapon... I think it's 600 for the M4, 800 for the M16, but I could be wrong. After that point, with iron sights, you'll probably have trouble SEEING your target anyway, if they're taking any kind of cover. Anywho, it's because AKs are reliable, not accurate. They're kind of ineffective past probably 300 yards or so. Man sized target @ 100 yards right?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
