Just wondering - Page 2
Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > Gear & Accessories > Ammunition & Reloading > Just wondering

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-21-2013, 07:20 PM   #11
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Kitsap County, Washington State
Posts: 577
Liked 195 Times on 122 Posts
Likes Given: 35

Default

Just to add a little, I remember reading recently that 30-30 doesn't lend itself very well to auto loading guns because they're rimmed. I don't know if it's 100% accurate but that's what I read.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

__________________
sbeezy is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2013, 07:26 PM   #12
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
kaido's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Alberta
Posts: 1,722
Liked 346 Times on 222 Posts
Likes Given: 2

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sbeezy
Just to add a little, I remember reading recently that 30-30 doesn't lend itself very well to auto loading guns because they're rimmed. I don't know if it's 100% accurate but that's what I read.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
You're probably right. But I think 30-30 was just a random example, sort of like my 30-06.
__________________
kaido is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2013, 07:28 PM   #13
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
manta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: UK.
Posts: 1,481
Liked 391 Times on 271 Posts
Likes Given: 120

Default

Quote:
But the goal of the 5.56 it's self it's not to kill. It's to mane. So if it hit like a .22LR, it causes the target to freak out still which intern takes his friends attention off of you for a period of time while they do what ever they need to in order to treat him.
I have read similar before I don't buy it. The 5.65 like all military bullets are designed to kill. It would be stupid to design a bullet to injure leaving the injured person to shoot and kill you. As for the 5.65 its a compromise the army are not going to redesign or change the rifle for a different bullet with a marginal performance gain.
__________________

Last edited by manta; 08-21-2013 at 08:01 PM.
manta is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2013, 07:37 PM   #14
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
kaido's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Alberta
Posts: 1,722
Liked 346 Times on 222 Posts
Likes Given: 2

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by manta
I have read similar before I don't but it. The 5.65 like all military bullets are designed to kill. It would be stupid to design a bullet to injure leaving the injured person to shoot and kill you. As for the 5.65 its a compromise the army are not going to redesign or change the rifle for a different bullet with a marginal performance gain.
If you injure the target, chances are they aren't going to be able to focus well enough to put effective fire down range towards you. It's also more then likely not going to instantly kill him, giving his allies the displeasure of hearing him in pain. But we're actually taught that if all you see is even so much as a toe of an enemy, take the shot, it'll at least put him out of the fight or better, make him stumble out from cover giving you a better shot.
__________________
kaido is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2013, 08:02 PM   #15
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
JW357's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 6,724
Liked 3726 Times on 2283 Posts
Likes Given: 1224

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kaido View Post
If you injure the target, chances are they aren't going to be able to focus well enough to put effective fire down range towards you.
I disagree with this slightly, but only because during the wars of the last decade, especially in Iraq, insurgents were often under the influence of drugs, especially Khat. There were many reports of a Soldier or Marine hitting an insurgent with a shot or two from his M16 and the insurgent staying in the fight, because he was simply so laden down with drugs that he couldn't feel much pain. Eventually the body kicks in and realizes it can't go on much longer, but that actually takes a surprisingly long time in those cases.
__________________

Always have clean socks.

JW357 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2013, 08:08 PM   #16
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
manta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: UK.
Posts: 1,481
Liked 391 Times on 271 Posts
Likes Given: 120

Default

Quote:
If you injure the target, chances are they aren't going to be able to focus well enough to put effective fire down range towards you.
Would it not just be better to kill him. Obviously any hit is better than nothing. I don't even how you would design a bullet to injure to many variables if its capable of killing 500 meters its just chance weather it kills you are not. To say that the bullet manufacturer designed a bullet for the military to injure and not kill is rubbish. The injure not kill was probably BS put out after complaints about the effectiveness of the round. It is an intermediate round and was never designed to match the 7.62 for example.
__________________

Last edited by manta; 08-21-2013 at 08:12 PM.
manta is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2013, 08:13 PM   #17
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
JW357's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 6,724
Liked 3726 Times on 2283 Posts
Likes Given: 1224

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by manta View Post
Would it not just be better to kill him.
In old-war thought, it is better to injure an assailant than to kill him. When you injure him, it used to take at least two of his buddies to pull him off the battlefield. So an injured soldier in actuality takes three people out of the fight. A dead soldier is left to lie where he fell. So only one is out of the fight.

Of course, that is old-war thought. Nowadays, things are different.
__________________

Always have clean socks.

JW357 is offline  
2
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2013, 08:26 PM   #18
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
kaido's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Alberta
Posts: 1,722
Liked 346 Times on 222 Posts
Likes Given: 2

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by manta
Would it not just be better to kill him. Obviously any hit is better than nothing. I don't even how you would design a bullet to injure to many variables if its capable of killing 500 meters its just chance weather it kills you are not. To say that the bullet manufacturer designed a bullet for the military to injure and not kill is rubbish. The injure not kill was probably BS put out after complaints about the effectiveness of the round. It is an intermediate round and was never designed to match the 7.62 for example.
Well clearly this is going to be a battle of wording things better. Haha

I guess it's more likely to wound then it is to kill compared to other rounds. A 7.62 is going to have more damaging effects at any range then a 5.56 will, thus the smaller of the two is more likely to knock more then just the person it hits out of the fight. But as stated, now days our advisories for the most part seem to be using pain numbing drugs, which cancels out being shot while still in the system.

Where we to be fighting an army that was like ours and didn't allow the use of such drugs, that theory of hitting one, taking out three would work a lot better.
__________________
kaido is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2013, 08:37 PM   #19
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
spack762's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 191
Liked 23 Times on 17 Posts
Likes Given: 6

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sbeezy View Post
Just to add a little, I remember reading recently that 30-30 doesn't lend itself very well to auto loading guns because they're rimmed. I don't know if it's 100% accurate but that's what I read.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
I belive it to be false. Heres why. The 7.62x54r is a rimmed round. The Russains have been useing it for a very long time in thier auto loading guns.
I watched a show on the History channal a while back and it said that designers liked a rimmed case for a machin-gun because it was easy to extract.

It's what I heard.

Also I was wondering if anyone has heard or seen a AK platform chambered in 45acp?? I think it would be neat!
__________________
spack762 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2013, 11:41 PM   #20
Moderator
FTF_MODERATOR.png
Feedback Score: 1 reviews
 
robocop10mm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Austin,Texas, by God!!
Posts: 10,020
Liked 2707 Times on 1416 Posts
Likes Given: 221

Default

Your information is a bit dated. We do not use 55 gr bullets. We use 62 gr bullets.

If you think the .30-30 and the .270 recoil in the same class with the 5.56mm, I begin to wonder if you have fired any of the above. night and day difference in recoil.

Military doctrine has changed since WWII and Korea. We have very large stores of crew served weapons for the 800 meter situations. M-2 to B-52 and the ability to communicate. We EXPECT to have air superiority in short order. If the enemy is that far away, you call for support. 81mm, 105mm, 155mm, MLRS, Apache, Super Cobra, Commanche, Warthog, Spectre, Hornet, Lancer, Buff, etc. Not to mention Mk12 Mod 0/1, M-21's, M-24's, M-110's, M-82, M-107.

Such targets are not the "target" of the rifleman anymore.

__________________

In life, strive to take the high road....It offers a better field of fire.
"Robo is right" Fuzzball

robocop10mm is offline  
texaswoodworker Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
im just wondering gunguy1997 Legal and Activism 5 05-05-2012 08:35 PM
just wondering rjgnwdc 1911 Forum 12 04-10-2012 09:45 AM
I'm wondering somawas .22 Rifle/Rimfire Discussion 3 04-04-2012 06:39 PM
just wondering? shootitout Auto & Semi-Auto Discussion 5 10-17-2011 01:13 PM
Just wondering could someone help me out with something Chaosut The Club House 8 11-28-2007 09:11 PM