[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / ausneets / donkey / fur / games / had / kemono / sw / thestorm ]

/k/ - Weapons

Salt raifus and raifu accessories
Email
Comment *
File
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options
Password (For file and post deletion.)

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf
Max filesize is 16 MB.
Max image dimensions are 15000 x 15000.
You may upload 5 per post.


There's no discharge in the war!

YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.

b9580c No.541818

The US push for the T-65 cartridge (that became 7.62NATO) and adoption of the M14 fucked over the Belgians (and the yanks themselves) far more than it fucked over the Brits.

The US needed the Belgians to vote in favor of adopting the T-65, and so the US promised the Belgians that they would buy FALs from Belgium, if Belgium voted in favor of the T-65. The Belgians agreed and suddenly 7.62mm NATO was a thing. But the yanks had never planned to actually buy the Belgian rifles, they were dead set on an M1-based rifle since they were sure it would be much cheaper to produce. You see the Americans were convinced that M1 production lines could easily and cheaply be modified to build the M14. To make sure the M14 got adopted they rigged the rifle trials against the FAL by using an incredibly shitty copy built by H&R using blueprints incorrectly converted to US-measurements.

They made sure the M14 had well over a year and an entire team to work out any problems with the rifle. The H&R team had less than 3 weeks and two guys. The H&R team was not allowed to actually attend the trials and tinker with their rifle, the M14 guys were. And then just to make sure the FAL-clone failed, the Army fucked over the FAL even harder by downright cooking the books on the trials report. Some of their cheating was incredibly obvious, for example they wrote that the M14 was more or less impervious to mud.

Well then it turned out that the M14 was pretty shit, the T-65 cartridge was overpowered for use in full auto rifles, and they never saved money by converting old M1 factories to building M14s since it was deemed nigh impossible and all the tooling for making M1 rifles was obsolete, worn out, and needed to be replaced anyway.

cb8689 No.541859

File: 4c116a1006fc8a3⋯.webm (3.35 MB, 640x360, 16:9, america.webm)

And yet we still run the world. Stay mad eurocucks.


0cef1f No.541864

All of the above is true. What I don't get is this: The point of the T-65 project was to use modern powder chemistry and metallurgy to make a cartridge ballistically equivalent to 30-06 but lighter and with a shorter overall length.

Now compare 7.62 NATO to 30-06. It's, what, a half an inch shorter and negligibly lighter? Whoop de fuckin' doo. They might as well have not bothered and just stuck with what they had until the SPIW or whatever else bore fruit.

I'm just pissy that all modern full size self loaders are chambered in .308/7.62 and not my pet cartridge.


71b527 No.541866

>>541818

>the T-65 cartridge was overpowered for use in full auto rifles.

It's not though. On a FAL or a SCAR-H you can use the 7.62 NATO in full auto burst without losing sight picture and the rifle is heavy enough, the rate of fire properly tuned and the whole thing is properly balanced to allow such use without any real issue ("It hurts my faggot shoulder" isn't an issue).

It's not because burgers can't wrap their head about the fact that you need to properly design the rifle for both the cartridge and the usage of the rifle, and instead prefer to niggardly put elements of their previous guns together to maximize the profits of private companies and wonder why it doesn't work, that 7.62 can't be used in full auto.

A M-14 or an AR in 7.62 full auto is a fucking uncontrollable mess.

That's a big difference.


88532d No.541874

>>541866

I was surprised by the FAL when I first shot one. Semi only but the recoil was more push than jolt. Like an AK in 7.62x39 with a slightly longer recoil impulse, not much harder. And with the weight it kept the gun from jumping much.


39079d No.541928

YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.

>>541866

7.62 ARs in full auto are reasonable, it has a lot of buffer.


259b5b No.542048

File: fb8b21b479dafc8⋯.png (319.33 KB, 845x634, 845:634, LSAT ammo.png)

File: 7cd30807e06beb8⋯.jpg (133.15 KB, 1200x1174, 600:587, lsat_cutaway.jpg)

>>541818

>not a single "CETME free" pun

I want a Voss-type bullet in a plastic cased telescopic case, fired from a weapon with a calibre of 6.66mm!

Bonus: Hungary has copper, aluminium and coal mines. The bullet only needs the former two, and in theory you can manufacture plastic from coal the same way you do it from oil. So we could manufacture these bullets even if we were under an embargo.


52231e No.542175

>of FN FAL in FN FAL in 7.92x41?

So a giant FN FAL that fires normal FN FALs firing 7.92x41?


ddcddd No.542179

>>541818

>ian mccuckold

anyways 7.62 NATO doesn't use case capacity all that well.


619cdc No.542188

>>541818

Wouldn't it make the ammunition somewhat more expensive to manufacture, particularly back in the 50s/60s?


6ca30f No.542243

File: 7b0a098738ecc3e⋯.jpg (98.45 KB, 1280x720, 16:9, 7.92x41mm CETME.jpg)

Wouldn't a steel rod in the middle of the aluminium part work as a long rod penetrator, but without all the drawbacks of a flechette? Modern projectiles have a similar design, but that's usually just a small steel penetrator inside a copper bullet, and it's not nearly long enough to work the same way. Of course the steel rod should be rather thin and lightweight, designed to yawn inside the body of the enemy soldier after penetrating his body armour.


872b6f No.542329

>>542179

But isn't the only downside of that an inefficient use of brass? I can't see how that would change the overall performance except that you could probably size down the case for the same results.


6e9770 No.542734

File: 24fb1e91bf1c47c⋯.png (92.15 KB, 660x371, 660:371, 556FABRL.png)

>>542243

I think the aluminum bullets didn't perform well against hard targets and it is fair to wonder just how much steel would need to be added to get sufficient performance. I don't know what that would do to the weight/velocity targets for the projectile. Twist rate for the barrels would also be interesting. The CETME bullet was something like 5.7 calibers in length. Another interesting idea in lightweight bullet materials and novel shape was the FABRL AR2.


65415e No.542805

>>541866

Underrated post. FAL in 400rpm would be god tier.

20rd mag weighs similar to 30rd mag of M16. But shooting 20rds at 400rpm would give it longer fire time than M16 firing 30rds at 800rpm.

Its easier to handle recoil wise, and has more effective ammo per weight carried.


6d5279 No.543805

>>542179

>heresy against gun jesus

I hope you like burning at the stake, lad.


c1d7fc No.543812

>>541818

Better make FN FAL in 5.45x39 and call it AK-74.

Pro tip: 7N6 5.45x39 has very low drag bullet that is not very far from 7.92x41 from aerodynamic perfection point of view.

Though people don't appreciate it enough because "le slavshit" "muh 5.56"


ddcddd No.543864

>>543805

>I hope you like burning at the stake, lad.

>cuckchan /k/ meme loyalty to a dude that supports mandates of gun safes and gun checkups (its in his vlog videos. there was a thread on it a several moths ago but deleted because hurr suck ian cock threads are allowed but not threads criticizes the fag).

>literally has been ousted as a jew loving foreskin eating democrat against the 'ebil mean h-wuite wacis'

we are all one race. the human race. - ian mccuckold 2016

take the black dick out of your head, faggot.




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Nerve Center][Cancer][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / ausneets / donkey / fur / games / had / kemono / sw / thestorm ]