But I’d rather be hit with the 7.62x39 than the 5.56 pea-shooter. Are there any Western bloc assault rifles (i.e. not machine guns) that fire the 7.26x52, besides the M14?
I remember one of the Delta operatives in Black Hawk Down in Somalia preferred the M14. We never learned the lesson from Mogadishu that 5.56 is not an acceptable round for military purposes.
Oops, meant I’d rather be hit with the 5.56 than the 7.26x39.
The HK-417 is 7.62mm but the Bundeswehr doesn’t use it, they use the 5.56mm
You’d rather be hit with a 7.62? Me, I’d rather be shooting a 7.62 than a 5.56 at you, providing you were the enemy. Especially since the famous tumbling M-16 round isn’t made any more, or I don’t think it is.
The Israelis use the 5.56mm the Chinese use the 5.6mm and the Russians use the 5.45mm
762x39 is way easier to stop with a vest than 556nato. 556nato is just fine. it’s the dam short carbine rifles that suck.
1.Kimber 84M LPT, $1315
2.Steyr Arms SS69 PII, $1899
3.Ruger Hawkeye Tactical, $1172
All capable of repetitive less than MOA groups. Steyr hencho in Austria.
All tested this mo in Guntests Magazine.
M1 Garands with 30’06 black tips have that power. I’ve got one or two and I wouldn’t want to hit from one...
The FAL. And BTW, it's 7.62x51 NATO, not 52.
It has its uses, one of which is that it is very easy to train to proficiency/confidence. The M-14 is a much more powerful rifle, but it limits the amount of gear and ammunition the soldier can carry.
The original design for the M-16 was chambered in 7.62. Armalite still makes it, Bushmaster made it, LWRC and DPMS make them. Replacement cost pretty much eliminates the possibility of replacing the 5.56 rifles with 7.62 models. They played around with using the 6.8mm SPC cartridge, which is a short .270 that will function through lower receiver of the M-4 / M-16. But they wouldn’t make the switch, even though they only had to replace less than half of the rifle. I think cost was the factor. If they wouldn’t do that, they certainly won’t change the whole thing.
I also find the Major’s assessment of World War I equipment to be out of line. I had a 1917 Eddystone, the primary rifle used by the Doughboys. It was a great rifle, accurate and fun to shoot. It was also a five shot bolt action that loaded through stripper clips. It had a ladder sight and it weighed a ton. It was superior to the M-16 only in terms of bullet energy. It was larger and heavier. The ammunition weight reduced the number of rounds that could be carried. Recoil was significant. It didn’t bother me, but there are plenty of people who react poorly to recoil. It had to be taken off target to reload, a massive mistake in combat.
If he was referring to the infamous “walking fire” tactic with the Browning Automatic Rifle, he should go read the accounts of numerous soldiers who were ordered to fight that way, even after they demonstrated that they couldn’t hit anything using the method.
the G-3 style rifles
The 308 hk-417
The Knights Armament rifle
and of course the M-14.
If they just let a contract for several thousand HK-417s or the M-14 then this is no longer a problem.
Of course, they could just ressurect the FN-FAL.