What Round for Battle?

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by 1952Sniper, Mar 8, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. 1952Sniper

    1952Sniper New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2002
    Messages:
    5,133
    Location:
    Texas
    RugerNiner
    Member
    Posts: 8
    (2/21/03 10:44:48 pm)
    Reply What Round for Battle?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I read where our Boys in Afganistan have to pump three .223 rounds for a kill. Possibly because of winter clothing.
    I think we can find a better round than the .223, 7.62x39 and the .308
    The .223 is to light for devastation and .308 to heavy to carry.

    I don't know if it has to be a NATO round for a declared war. Anybody have the answer to that one? The 45cal wasn't NATO and we used that for almost the past century.

    With disregard to a Gun, what round would you choose for our Boys in battle? Does not have to be NATO.
    Remember...Terrorist are attacking Civilians; Not the Government. Protect Yourself!


    kdub01
    *TFF Senior Staff*
    Posts: 2130
    (2/21/03 10:48:58 pm)
    Reply Re: What Round for Battle?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Maybe one of the new WSSM rounds - say, .243 or .257?
    "Keep Off The Ridgeline"

    Edited by: kdub01 at: 2/22/03 5:20:50 pm


    AGunguy
    *TFF Staff*
    Posts: 3415
    (2/21/03 10:50:31 pm)
    Reply Re: What Round for Battle?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The .223 will kill, but our guys in Korea and ww-2 had to carry the Springfields and Garands...how did they ever carry those big heavy guns that really thumped the enemy.

    There will be something new coming along shortly no doubt.

    Gunguy


    Hydra Shok
    Member
    Posts: 10
    (2/21/03 11:06:24 pm)
    Reply Re: What Round for Battle?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    WSM in an auto rifle? Hmmm sounds interesting, and devestating. Maybe a new round altogether? How 'bout a 7mm-08? Naaa to oddball.


    kaylan1
    Member
    Posts: 15
    (2/21/03 11:12:10 pm)
    Reply Re: What Round for Battle?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    .308 worked for me on a few occasions, but I'd thought about the .300 or .300 mag. for reaching out. when your life depends on it your willing to carry whatever.


    ysacres
    V.I.P. Member
    Posts: 704
    (2/21/03 11:39:17 pm)
    Reply
    Re: What Round for Battle?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    How bou't 257 Roberts Ackley Improved.


    pickenup
    V.I.P. Member
    Posts: 216
    (2/21/03 11:58:50 pm)
    Reply Re: What Round for Battle?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    A 270 performs well, but then you are getting back to the same basic size as the 308 to carry.


    brassduck
    Member
    Posts: 8
    (2/22/03 1:01:58 am)
    Reply Re: What Round for Battle?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    after having to pump 20 rounds into a hopped up VC to stop him, I think the bullet is to light and that a 75 grain 6mm or a 120 grain 7mm would be more efficient. still light enough to carry an adequate supply and heavy enough to penetrate well.


    outdoorsman260
    V.I.P. Member
    Posts: 110
    (2/22/03 1:13:49 am)
    Reply Re: What Round for Battle?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    if we didn't sign that contract that said we couldn't use anything but FMJ's I'd say just switch to soft point 55-60 grain bullets in our current .223 round

    Since we can't, i'd go with something in the 6mm range. Like a 6mm Rem. or a .243 win.
    blake.prohosting.com/~redneck4


    Sigtrygg
    Member
    Posts: 20
    (2/22/03 2:27:19 am)
    Reply Why not?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Hi Forum.

    Why not only stay with what we know works?
    The .308 does work, and for close quarter, only a lighter bullet, lets say a 125grs would work fine.

    I like the "normal" 150-155grs Round, and I´m sure one hit with that should do the work.

    One should only reconstruct the bullet, to make it faster tumble after Impact.

    Then it should defeat an enemy even faster...

    Greets

    Michael


    ibtrukn
    V.I.P. Member
    Posts: 1734
    (2/22/03 11:08:16 am)
    Reply Re: Why not?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Think "daiseycutter" an I ain't just a woofin


    armedandsafe
    V.I.P. Member
    Posts: 148
    (2/22/03 11:54:31 am)
    Reply Re: Why not?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The best cartridge for battle? I've thought about this some over the years and have concluded there is no simple answer.

    The .308 was adopted over the 30-06 because newer powders allowed smaller volume of powder to generate essentially the same ballistics. The .223 was adopted to allow more rounds to be carried by each weapons carrier. An individual cartridge was adopted to simplify logistics in the field, as it is desiralbe to have only one cartridge for all foot/assault troops.

    Practical experience soon destroyed the idea of a common cartridge being able to fulfill all needs of the front line in modern combat. The better ballistics of the .308/30-06 are necessary for range and sure penetration over open ground. Large numbers of rounds are necessary for close-in defense against massed attacks. Large, stable platforms are necessary for long range aimed fire to be effective. Small, light weapons are necessary for defense against close-in, guerilla attacks.

    The conventions of war, as proposed by treaty, call for FMJ bullets which are designed to wound, rather than kill, as it is thought preferable to have up to 20 percent of the enemy's force and resources tied up with caring for injured combatants. Soft point and hollow point bullets would not penetrate heavy clothing or light body armor any better than our present solids, anyway.

    When discussing combat rounds for civilian area defense (unorganized militia,) the guiding factor should be commonality. Thought should be given to the most common round used by those close enough to you to form a defensive party (posse.or defensive ground party.) Then thought should be given to resupply of expended rounds. Whether locally manufactured (reloaded) or obtained from local retail ("purchased,") which round is going to be most available?

    These are a few thoughts _I_ have had and worked with over the years, and are worth about what you paid for them.

    Armed and Safe - not just a theory


    cointoss 2
    *TFF Staff*
    Posts: 1353
    (2/22/03 1:55:47 pm)
    Reply
    Re: Why not?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Why reinvent the wheel just go to the 6.5 Swede.
    cointoss2


    RugerNiner
    Member
    Posts: 9
    (2/22/03 2:56:30 pm)
    Reply Re: What Round for Battle?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    It seems to me we need different rifles and calibers for the terrain in which we are fighting.
    Right now, the .308 seems to be in order, except when going into the caves.
    When we enter Baghdad, I think we will need something like the HK PDW
    www.heckler-koch.de/html/...index.html
    Look at the ammo choices with this gun.

    We cannot expect to fight in the mountains and cities of Iraq with the same equipment that we fought in Vietnam and Korea.

    Remember...Terrorist are attacking Civilians; Not the Government. Protect Yourself!


    505799
    V.I.P. Member
    Posts: 88
    (2/22/03 6:38:48 pm)
    Reply Military rifle calibers
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    It is not the caliber of the weapon that counts as much as the skill of the user.

    A guy named Bell used to shoot elephants a close range with a puny .256 Rigby. One shot. One dead elephant.

    Our military no longer requires the troops be proficient marksmen. THAT is the problem. There was a guy named Puller who summed it up best.
    Quote:
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    You've got to hit them, to hurt them.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Given the inadequate emphasis on marksmanship in our military, I have my doubts that folks are really hitting these guys 3 times.


    walter in florida
    V.I.P. Member
    Posts: 74
    (2/22/03 7:44:21 pm)
    Reply Re: Military rifle calibers
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Sound dumb but here goes. 7.62 X 54R. Government buy up all of M-44 and M-38 that are around. Offer 150.00-200.00 for individules to sell their MN to the government. And have them reworked at Rock lsland or Springfield. The MN are short and only bad thing, got to carry more weight or less ammo.


    LIKTOSHOOT
    *TFF Senior Staff*
    Posts: 7020
    (2/22/03 8:03:00 pm)
    Reply Re: Military rifle calibers
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The mouse gun will never go away....caliber either---sold to hard to admit a mistake......nothing more.

    LTS


    RugerNiner
    Member
    Posts: 11
    (2/22/03 9:51:13 pm)
    Reply Re: What Round for Battle?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    On June 16 1966, Colt was awarded a contract for nearly 840,000 rifles for $91.7 million, assuring the M16's future.

    That comes to $109.17 per rifle.
    Remember...Terrorist are attacking Civilians; Not the Government. Protect Yourself!


    Sigtrygg
    Member
    Posts: 21
    (2/22/03 10:13:22 pm)
    Reply Re: What Round for Battle?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Hi Forum!
    It was a nice idea to replace the .308 against the .223 to increase the number of rounds which can be carried to field by the individual soldier.
    But when now three hits are necessary for stop an enemy instead of one with a .308... thanks, not for me.
    Marksmanship is the word.
    But please, with a round with which the job can be done with one hit.

    Michael


    kaylan1
    Member
    Posts: 17
    (2/23/03 12:38:00 am)
    Reply Re: What Round for Battle?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    There was a guy named Puller who summed it up best.
    Quote:
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    You've got to hit them, to hurt them.

    When I was working as a PMI in the Corps, I saw alot of non-shooters that had only gotten a pizza box for a badge move up to border line sharpshooter- experts. It's in the communication/teaching skills of the instructors and the desire to teach these men how to shoot to stay alive. Maybe the dedication isn't as strong because they know they'll be here training instead of in the field beside there students.

    " Stay Alert Stay Alive" "One Shot One Kill"


    Xracer
    *TFF Senior Staff*
    Posts: 3782
    (2/23/03 8:54:28 am)
    Reply Re: What Round for Battle?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I agree kaylan.....the Corps seems to be the only U.S. Military organization that teaches it's members to shoot.

    Back when the switch was made to the M-16, the Marines wanted to keep their M-14s. They didn't think that every man had to be a machinegunner.

    It was the "spray and pray" philosophy (officially known as "Volume Of Fire") that led to the adoption of a varmint cartridge as our main battle round.

    The .308 may not be a "do everything" round, but it's a hell of a lot closer to it than the .223.


    Predator Ridge
    Member
    Posts: 2
    (2/23/03 10:14:06 am)
    Reply Re: What Round for Battle?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Yeah , what cointoss 2 said--best round in my opinion. Have used .308 and .223 in combat. The .308 was needed in heavy vegetation growth areas--especially bamboo. The .223 was good if the enemy wasn`t fortified in his position. Also the .233 was flatter shooting. Now the 6.5x55 Swede ,it is flat shooting , accurate and heavy enough for heavy vegetation.
    The weight issue is not of concern--with todays synthetic stocks , that reduce a weapons weight somewhat


    Yabra Kadabra Doo
    V.I.P. Member
    Posts: 221
    (2/23/03 4:29:27 pm)
    Reply Re: What Round for Battle?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Quote:
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The .223 will kill, but our guys in Korea and ww-2 had to carry the Springfields and Garands...how did they ever carry those big heavy guns that really thumped the enemy.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Perhaps because they weren't carrying body armor, night vision equipment, communications equipment, etc? In WWII and Korea, soldiers often dropped their packs before going into battle. Today's soldiers don't have that luxury. The weight goal for pre-assault is 48 lbs (for Marines). Currently, Marines are still carrying 55-60 lbs. I'd rather wear Interceptor body armor that stops a 9mm round and have an M-16 than hope cloth will stop bullets and have a Garand. But that's just me...


    kaylan1
    Member
    Posts: 19
    (2/23/03 5:22:00 pm)
    Reply Re: What Round for Battle?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    "weight goal for pre-assault is 48 lbs (for Marines)."

    That was the weight of a ghillie suit after the morning dew, sweating a few buckets of water and humidity set in. Not to mention an unexpected rain.


    fredarmory
    Member
    Posts: 27
    (2/23/03 6:14:13 pm)
    Reply Re: What Round for Battle?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Anyone that can't carry 308.
    Is just not paying attention!
    And if the military thinks 223. is a battle round,
    someone needs to give the rank out, to more intelligent persons in the near future!!


    Smokin Guns
    V.I.P. Member
    Posts: 775
    (2/23/03 6:32:35 pm)
    Reply My turn...
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    ...to weigh in. In the past the 30-06 was a best choice. Now I too would have to say the .308 wins out, hands down...


    inplanotx
    V.I.P. Member
    Posts: 151
    (2/23/03 8:14:58 pm)
    Reply Re: My turn...
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Okay. now that everyone has chimed in. How about the .257 loaded in the 222 Rem. Mag. I know that the .257 was tried in the Pedersol outake of the M14, but maybe it's time has come. Anyone have a Powley computer to tell us how the velocity will be with the .257 in a .222 Rem mag case? Also, maybe we can achieve the same ballistics with the .223 case necked up to .257? I tried this weekend, but the neck split. However, if I had the .243 pellet on the sizing die, maybe this would not have happened. I'm thinking of an 87gr .257 headed down range at about 2600 fps? Comments?
    Improvise...Adapt...Overcome
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.