Posted on 09/04/2010 8:10:09 AM PDT by em2vn
I have a Colt 7.62x39 upper to match my Colt match target Elite and I’ve had it well over a decade.
From the article linked in post 15:
Initial SOF requirements included two basic versions of SCAR system - the SCAR Light (SCAR-L), available in 5.56mm NATO, and the SCAR heavy (SCAR-H), which should be initially available in significantly more powerful 7.62x51 NATO chambering, and should be easily adaptable in the field to other chamberings. These other chamberings initially include the well-spread 7.62x39 M43 ammunition of the Soviet / Russian origins, and probably some others (like the proposed 6.8x43 Remington SPC cartridge, especially developed for US Special Forces). The key idea of SCAR rifle system is that it will provide the Special Forces operators with wide variety of options, from short-barreled 5.56mm SCAR-L CQC variation, tailored for urban close combat, and up to long range 7.62x51 SCAR-H Sniper variant, as well as 7.62x39 SCAR-H, which will accept "battlefield pickup" AK-47/AKM magazines with 7.62 M43 ammunition, available during the operations behind the enemy lines.
The 7.62 x 39mm is an East block round. It is used in the AK-47 that just about all of the people we're opposing have at the moment. Would be nice to pick up and use their own ammo against them, eh?
LOL..... Thanks for the years of service .
40 ....wow !
Bell curve union workers with a dose of high tax base tossed in is my first guess.
I own no new lawyer designed firearms made in the USA.
That’s my swag on the matter...:o)
That’s my carry load......
Said they watched a slo-mo video of an AK being fired with the top cover off. Apparently the spring, bolt, and all thrashing and flexing around was a sight to behold.
They also studied the vaunted Dragunov, were told it is a 5 MOA gun, Difference between what is a sniper to us is not the same for Russia, where simply putting a round into the body is sufficient precision. I tagged Joe Boucher on this, as he mentioned his son has improved his Dragunov from a 5 MOA gun to one capable of about 0.2 MOA. I ain't calling BS, but you got to wonder..........
Thanks, man, but there was a break in service; I missed Desert Shield/Desert Storm but got reappointed in 1994 so it’s more like thirty two years total as of January 2011.
So glad I got to serve in a time when the US military is once again respected. Got deployed in 2003 and received the nice welcome back. Not like 1972, believe me. I’m blessed to be part of the mission this late in life.
And these young soldiers who keep deploying and deploying again and the ones who survive with horrible wounds and disabilities and are so cheerful they bring tears to my eyes I am so honored to serve in their time at this late date I’ll be 62 next month I don’t know what more to say our soldiers are so wonderful they are a blessing upon America!
I guess, but will the troops have to qualify on each round? Each will have different firing characteristics and a different point of impact at different ranges. If you wanted to simply spray and pray in a firefight why not just pick up a dropped enemy weapon or pick it up off a dead enemy and shoot? Seems unnecessary to me.
Now, I can see having the capability to shift between 5.56 and 7.62 x 51 with a barrel change to go along. That would shift the effort from an assault rifle in the 5.56 to a possible designated marksman in the heavier load and longer barrel. That makes up for the middle ground between the rifleman and the sniper.
The rifleman covers the area from the muzzle out to about 300 meters. The sniper engages at 700 to 1000+ meters. The new category of "designated marksman" (born of combat necessity) covers the ranges from between 300 and 700 meters. That is the perfect operating range for the .308 Winchester with only minimal training.
Two calibers seems like a good idea, but essentially it means that you now get to carry twice as much ammo.
My kid has been in to guns forever.
He likes the AK style because of exactly what you say, you can put it under water, throw it in sand and it will still fire, unlike the M-16 in Viet Nam that had a habit of getting stuck with one or two grains of sand.
When he got his saiga it would not fire cheap 12 ga. shells.
Researched it and opened some exhaust ports to allow for other than high brass expensive shells to be shot.
With his dragovov he imported a night scope, better firing mech. and trigger. I believe a 1/2 popund pull as opposed to three. Not sure what all else.
Then to make it legal he had to include at least three American made parts, Stock, etc.
To learn about it he went on line and used an russian to english conversion program so he could read about the guns he’’s bought on line from the foormer soviet block. Then he started buying 1000 rounds from same that is delivered home.
We usually go to the rifle range in Sebastian Florida, as good a range as you can find. Has a two hundred yard target.
As for real long shooting we simply shoot wild hogs on the 4000 foot runway we live on.
B.S.?
Ok pal, think what you may.
Simple answer: Our production capabilities have long ago been given away to China, Taiwan, and...anywhere but here.
You’ve been sold on the BS global economy concept. Think about it...Staples, Office Depot, Office Max...everything is about “office” and not tooling and production.
In WWII, we overwhelmed German technology with our ability to make so much so fast. Could we do that today?
Thank you very much.
Thank you very much. Strange that this would be the only size round used by the military that would have the date modified as how it is referrenced.
Remember, this thing started off life as a SOCOM weapon. Resupply of an ODA can be a tricky business depending on their circumstances. So the ability to use indigenous weapons and ammo can be of a great benefit to such soldiers.
You do bring up a good point about using the opposition's weapons, but again remember the characteristics of the AK-47. While it is dependable, and fires under extreme conditions that the soldier encounters in the field, it isn't a very accurate weapon. This is due to the loose tolerances that are used to achieve the advantage of dependability. Designated marksman capability would deteriorate, let alone sniper capability.
Sniper capability is going to be attenuated anyway under those conditions in that the availability of match grade ammo used in such weapons might not exist.
This is a case of the military planning for every situation. Perhaps they got it right this time.
As a stop gap, i don't know why the Army didn't go back to the M-16A2 for Afghanistan. It has a lot longer range than M-4. The M-4 worked well enough for Iraq, but combat in Afghanistan is a different situation.
My boy used an M-25 when he wasn't stuck on an M-240 or Ma Duce aboard an MRAP on convoys. He got his Bronze Star doing things best not remembered with an M-25
Thanks for the 411 on the AR-15. i’ll look into it. Got more pressing things to spend my $$ on at the moment though.
Lately, i’ve been playing with the SKS. IMO, it’s a much better weapon than the AK-47. It’s a lot more accurate, or maybe i just got one that was put together better.
It is, but that's the way we used to designate them. For instance the famous 1911 pistol is known as that because of the year it was adopted for military use. But that's just the pistol, not the cartridge. We don't call it the "45-11".
That's also how the AK-47 got it's moniker. The full name of it is "Avtomat Kalishnikov 1947" or "Automatic Rifle, Kalishnikov, Year of 1947".
Best,
L
I agree about our industrial loss to China et al in a general way. But don’t we still make superb hunting rifles in this country?Beyond hunting rifles, I’ve looked at the Springfield Arms improvements and upgrades in the old M14 and they look damn good. And we are also talking design. Everything Apple makes is designed here. Don’t we still have excellent firearm designers?
Thank you very much.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.