/k/ - Weapons

>>585218

>the virgin thin man 5.45x39mm

>the chad bloatlord 7.62x39

>the virgin caliber debating shit poster

>the Chad shot placement shooter

6,5 is a meme and 7,62x51mm is the best rifle round in the planet, period.

Prove me wrong. Protip:You can't

>>585262

7.62mm ballistic coefficient is .409 and the 6.5mm bc is .626. To complre it to others, a bc of 0.95 is a flechette, 0.05 is a sphere. The closer to 1 it gets, the more aerodynamic it is, the less energy it wastes.

6.5 is a more efficient cartridge because it loses less energy over distance traveled. In fact there must be a range at which even a grendel 6.5 (shorter) fired out of a gun has more energy than a 7.62, despite the second being bigger.

>>585268

>muh fudd

>here's the Europeen equivalent of fuddery

>>585292

>pulls bc gibberish out of his ass

it depends on the bullet weight, dummy

>>585249

lmao so true

>>585317

>heavy machine guns

>fuddery

6.5 is much more efficient but people talking about this tend to minimize or overlook that that OAL and aggressive shoulder is not going to feed in most assault style rifles.

>>585347

Is there some reason the AR-10 isn't considered an "assault style rifle"?

>>585352

It's a battle rifle.

>>585393

>7x46mm UIAC

>Speed: 2,650 fps

>Max effective range: 800 yards.

>6mm Russian

>Speed: 3,770 fps

>Max effective range : 1500 yards.

Yeah how about, no.

>>585397

>Fudd cartridge that the Russians dismissed for being unwieldy and a barrel burner

>Good

Wew lad, just go buy a 30-06 and a .45 you fucking fudder.

>>585398

>Not burning barrels as a sacrifice to the /k/ube

>>585401

>not turning your barrels into barrel bombs

>>585316

>>585410

<Army marksmen: We want .338LM

>Pentagon: You're not getting .338LM. Can you do something with .300WM?

<Why the hell not? Why don't we go ahead and work up a load that gets us a couple of hundred more yards and gets sub-1000 round barrel life.

>Brilliant, we'll make that the new standard!

<God-fucking-damnit.

And that's the story of modern .300 win mag.

>>585398

It wasn't dismissed for being unwieldy or burning barrels.

Sure it would have reduced a PKM style MG to 5 000 rnds before barrel change but it's not like LMGs are never issued with multiple spares barrels. Also PKMs barrels were literally designed to be a WW2 style "consumable", fairly light and fairly cheap. Russia subsequently more than doubled the barrel life on the PKP by simply making it sturdier (and heavier. The PKP is heavier than the PKM mostly due to a much better barrel).

There is no reason to believe they couldn't have gone that way instead. And suddenly 10,000 rnds isn't so bad…

It was stopped because TsNIITochMash literally ran out of money and was barely scrapping by for years after the USSR collapse and then Russia just doesn't have the budget margins to change shit that still does the job when they have to change so many shit that doesn't…

An old PKM is still better than even the last iteration of the FN MAG, an SVD is still better than a tuning M14…

>Wew lad, just go buy a 30-06

>Implying I don't have one.

>Implying a 163gr bullet at 2,800 fps has the same ballistic property than a 77gr bullet at 3,700 fps.

Kek.

>>585409

Mate don't play that game, the Russian HMG are dual mounted 14.5mm… AKA the-round-that-is-around-since-before-WWII-and is-better-than-even-modern-20mm-yet-nobody-has-realized-it.

And they also have fucking semi-auto rifles firing it…

It's like if you take your stupidity but instead of putting a copper buttplug on a 20mm case like an idiot, you take a 30mm that you neck down to sit a properly made .50cal tungsten bullet that will cut through anything save a modern IFV composite armor.

>>585402

Does make me wonder how bad of an idea making pipe bombs out of shot out barrels would be.

>>585476

I'm curious frog anon, how is the PKM better than an FN MAG?

Well aside from being lighter obviously.

The bigger point of the 6.5mm concept isn't just that it might beat the 7.62mm in terms of long range performance, but that it finally MIGHT bring about the dream of one universal squad cartridge. Sub machine guns won't go away, pistols wont' go away, long range speciality sniper and marksmen rifles will never go away, but the 8-12 man squad in the field on average load out might finally have the same caliber rifle and light machine gun ammunition once and hopefully a long time.

This was something the 7.62mm NATO could do that the 5.56mm could not. You can bitch about less ammunition for the same weight in load out, that most rounds are suppression and very few hit their target, but when a squad was all battle rifles and light machine gun there was no need for one or two guys to be marksmen with a specialty rifle, the whole squad could shoot back long range.

The 5.56mm was simply far too ambitious, it was greedy. They wanted the smallest cartridge they could get away with, or at least they thought they could get away with. The old schoolers like myself who said "its lack of long range performance will mean others with longer range weapons will take advantage of their range and get a huge advantage in the field" and we were right. All that "nobody shoots beyond 200 meters" bullshit went away pretty quick. All the talk of finally turning all the light machine guns to 5.56mm and having a squad with all 5.56mm NATO died in the light of this reality. The 5.56mm assault rifle, far from being the perfect super performer, needs to have battle rifle accompaniant and is better off with the old fashioned 7.62mm light machine gun to compliment it. End of story.

A high quality 6.5mm cartridge offers not only potentially better long range performance against some 7.62mm ammunition, but more importantly replaces the 5.56mm NATO as general issue service. 6.5mm of a proper build can service a light machine gun, and all rifles and carbines in the section will now have long range competency, at least in the cartridge and rifle. Its still lighter and less recoil than 7.62, so better in all regards as general purpose? Its an interesting idea, and probably the future.

They don't want to bring back battle rifles as standard issue for everyone, the 7.62mm NATO is too wasteful they claim, to much recoil, too much material in total war scenario, 5.56mm has proven itself incompetent, so now 6.5mm is the ideal solution to everyone's problems. Good enough for long range, light enough to carry, lower recoil for close in fighting.

I think it could be inevitable.

>>585508

>5.56 is proven incompetent

5.56 was never intended for long range, it was always an "intermediate" round.

the idea of "one round for everything" is F-35 tier Judaism incompetence.

>>585525

>head brass hasn't been pushing for "one round for everything" since forever, and especially during the Cold War.

Huge logistics problems solved and lower costs if one cartridge is accepted, and that's exactly what the brass wants. The whole "universal cartridge" thing may not speak to you, but it speaks to the guys who check the marks and sign the papers.

5.55mm has had it share of issues, but it was the first cartridge to ever have a full fledged campaign, a full propaganda war to push it on soldiers who weren't demanding a replacement for 30-06 and 7.62mm NATO. Much of its defense is not from combat, but from the propaganda that started in the 60's and still rings strong today.

Also yes, glad you admit, its an intermediate and has weakenesses. The current push to get people to accept it can be a 1,000 yard cartridge and still keep its "universal" appeal runs against reality and its original design.

Again, its going to be either the current mixed squad going on from here on out, or a switch to one rifle under the 6.5mm of some design that might get finalized at some point which may be never.

>>585533

>The current push to get people to accept it can be a 1,000 yard cartridge and still keep its "universal" appeal runs against reality and its original design.

I've yet to meet anyone besides redditspacing retards such as yourself claiming that 5.56 was meant to be a "1000 yard cartridge." It was never meant to be effective beyond 400 yards and the supporters of 5.56, and SCHV calibers in general, do not dispute this. Rather, the argument is that in those scenarios in which you are engaging the enemy beyond the effective range of your infantry service rifle, it's better to rely on full caliber MGs, DMRs, and similar weapons that are purpose-built towards long ranges. That's why you have specialized units, to deal with those fringe scenarios the generalist backbone of your military can't solve on their own. Especially when you consider that, even if the average infantryman were theoretically equipped to deal with threats at longer ranges, he generally isn't well-enough trained to exploit his equipment. To be classified an "expert" marksman in the Army you only need to average 4 MoA on the qualification course, giving the average grunt a longer range rifle won't mean shit if he can't make reliable hits past 400 yards anyways.

>but muh logistics

Bogging down your infantry with a heavy, difficult-to control rifle and equally heavy ammunition (meaning each man carries fewer rounds), the full capability of which won't even be exploited in 95% of cases, all so General Elmer Fudd's concerns about a few fringe cases are satisfied, is an equally retarded situation from a logistics point of view, which creates as many problems as it solves.

>>585525

There's a difference between "intermediate round" and a round having velocity-dependant terminal ballistics that cause the bullet to have zero terminal effect other than poking a .22-sized hole past 65 yards with a 14.5" barrel using M855.

Intermediate rounds don't have issues with range, 5.56 specifically does. 5.45 works at any range that you can hit the target.

>>585540

>5.45

My nigga. But while the Russians undoubtedly made improvements on the design, you'e giving 5.56 an unfair rap. M855 is a shit round for service rifles, sure. But there do exist workable loadings in 5.56, even if 5.45 is ballistically superior.

I like .270

>>585540

>5.56 is useless at 65 yards

>oh but muh 14.7 barrel

>oh but muh m855

glad to see you've never shot an AR-15 before

first I agree that the 14.7 inch barrel meme is pure reddit cancer and should be gassed. You shouldn't use below a 20 inch barrel with 5.56, only go 18 if you absolutely must reduce weight.

>muh m855 small holes dude lmao

what do you want to do with a bullet? To say "muh m855" is plainly stupid.

>>585540

>"intermediate rounds don't have issues with range"

you are a stupid fuck saying that

7.62x39 has the trajectory of a thrown rock. 6.8 is slightly better because muh BC. 6.5 Grendel is better only because at that point you're getting into actual rifle power territory and no longer "intermediate."

>5.45 is better than 5.56, it can work at any range

again, you're a moron talking out your ass

You know all those things you complained about with 5.56? How it needs velocity because of how small the bullet is? Well idiot the 5.45 is both smaller than the 5.56 and it is slower. It's even worse.

>>585551

Hey, the .270's not bad. Go .270

>>585545

>m855 is a shit round because of this epic meme from reddit

what do you want to do with a bullet? To ask the question requires the ability to remove yourself from the idiot memery, and that requires you to be smart, which you are not.

>russians undoubtedly made improvements

you bitch about 5.56 being a tiny velocity dependent round

the 5.45 is

1) even smaller

2) but also slower

you are a moron

>>585553

never said it was. In fact, it's a great round.

If you are one of those people spending all that money for a new 6.5 mememoor setup and the $1.25-1.50 per round for the same recoil as and inferior ballistics to a .270 just because you're buttmad at .30 on the internet, you're are a moron and should gas yourself.

>>585547

>Well yeah, stuff like the 68 and 77 gr black hills OTM improve the maximum effective range and lower the fragmentation threshold, but it really isn't a good design if you have to go through a bunch of hoops to get a round that actually does what it's supposed to at range

Okay, but how is the 7n6 spoontip not that same kind of workaround? I don't deny that 5.45x39 is a more ballistically efficient cartridge. Like I said before, it's without a dout a superior design to the original 5.56. But your claim that "5.45 works at any range that you can hit the target" has less to do with ballistics and more to do with projectile shape, specifically the spoontip which causes it to yaw in soft targets. If you shot a lead fragmentation-based projectile out of a 5.45 gun, or a spoontip projectile out of 5.56, the effective ranges would be much more similar.

>>585552

>How it needs velocity because of how small the bullet is? Well idiot the 5.45 is both smaller than the 5.56 and it is slower. It's even worse.

5.45 is a longer, slimmer bullet that retains velocity better you mongoloid. It's superior in that it's more ballistically efficient.

>what do you want to do with a bullet?

Well that fucking depends now doesn't it? I specifically said that M855 was shit for service rifles. Out of an LMG it's not terrible due to its ability to chew through cover, but its terminal effect on soft targets is shit compared to other 5.56 loadings.

>>585555

I can't believe such a retard got quads.

>>585555

Oh, sorry, I'm not the guy you were talking to. I'm this guy

>>585546

I just like the .270

Sorry for intruding

>>585393

>>585392

>>585397

>barrel life

>800 rounds

>>585557

>epic BC meme

1) 5.56 is .224 inches in diameter

2) 5.45 is .220 inches in diameter

the 5.45 is roughly 400 fps slower

if you think that in such a scenario .004 inches is a massive, overwhelming difference, then that is proof that you are a stupid piece of shit and have never shot either of those rounds in real life before.

>m855 out of an LMG

>infantry men not armed with an m249 will never need to shoot through hard barriers, their targets are always tanding out in the open, standing still that is, and are naked with no clothes, always

here you go being a stupid ass again

>point out the stupidity of the 6.5 mememoor marketing campaign and how you're a useful goyim consumerbot

<"uhhhh ur a retard"

here you go being a stupid ass again

>>585538

>>585560

I'm not the one who said it could be used out to 800 yards, I've always argued it was a poor cartridge past 400, and I always knew and said it was only a 400 yard cartridge. I'm talking about people in the military I've even heard trying to talk up the 5.56mm and that with "good training" and improved ammunition maybe the higher ups might not have to backtrack on dancing on the grave of the battle rifle by magically making the M-4 suddenly effective at up to 800 yards.

I think we're on the same page but you keep misinterpreting me. I know how things work in the real world, so I'm stating it from the perspective of those in power who make the choices, that's all. The 6.5mm possibility is based on the kinds of decisions by the kinds of people who make those decisions, that's it.

Even then, I stated that the mixed squad is a possibility and might end up winning. But as far as real possibilities go, I also stated it could easily go the route of adopting a single cartridge. That's it. Glad you can take what people say and make other statements out of them.

MY actual CRITICAL response was AGAINST THE PENCIL NECKS and the brass in the first place. Am I arguing that we should return to an all battle rifle army, or did I simply say that the switch to 5.56mm and the Army's general constant push to make it a universal cartridge was wrong, it seems if you actually read my posts you would see I agree with you guys and you worked extra fucking hard to misread it.

Central planners were more concerned about obliterating the 7.62mm NATO into almost non existence, save for maybe a MMG round and sniper roles, but were overjoyed in their anticipation of replacing 7.62 light machine guns with 5.56mm, finally converting the whole squad to The One And Holy Round! They did this just in the nick of time to be proven wrong. Just as they were celebrating upon the grave of the battle rifle they were shown they still have a place on the field. Just as they were going to have ONE cartridge for the whole squad they were dragged back to the mixed squad.

The truth is over focus on single battlefields and the whole "future" thing has harmed the armed forces because it leads to too much proactive theoretical action. The whole idea that in the future infantry will ONLY fight 200 yards or less, and ALWAYS in cities has been proven false. The idea enemies will never exploit the shortcomings of a 400 yard cartridge is false. The idea that you know what the next war is before it happens is false.

Going forward, there are going to be two ways to go. The all 5.56mm ideal is shattered, the all 7.62mm is long buried, and know its going to be 6.5mm or the current mixed squad. That's it.

>>585566

No, I get that you didn't make that claim. I'm just surprised that anyone would try to say that 5.56 was at all lethal past 400 yards, even the military guys I know don't suck its cock that much.

>I think we're on the same page but you keep misinterpreting me. I know how things work in the real world, so I'm stating it from the perspective of those in power who make the choices, that's all. The 6.5mm possibility is based on the kinds of decisions by the kinds of people who make those decisions, that's it.

Fair enough. I still don't think it's a good idea, even from a logistics chain perspective, but I can see how some pencil pusher who didn't think things through would see that.

>>585505

>Well aside from being lighter obviously.

Well for infantry MGs, it's not a small thing, especially when it's 3 full kilos lighter than the titanium made FN MAG (obviously making the PKM considerably cheaper)…

By being that much lighter you can actually put a 200/250 rounds box/belt and still move both things alone (in a defensive setting for example) while if you're using it with it's regular 100 round box it is still light enough to do properly controlled short burst from the shoulder (or simply shoot from a kneeling position).

Also the thing has the slav magic of the PPSh, meaning it's just the right amount of weight for the fire-rate making it really comfortable to shoot in full auto (which the FN MAG never was. On the most modern ones they had to put in an hydraulic buffer to achieve a similar feeling. Which obviously negates most of the weight loss brought by the titanium).

And of course since it's lighter and with an easily controllable recoil it's also more accurate in use because it's just far easier to handle (while the gun itself is less accurate than a MAG).

I mean you see buffed spetsnaz just use modded version of those (and not PKPs) as you would any AR, that's how good the handling on those are.

And then there is the fact that's basically an AK internally, same foolproof piss easy to maintain design. The FN MAG isn't bad for that but it's not as good you need to take out the stock to take out the moving parts, there are pins. It's still very simple, FN engineers know their shit, but not as simple as a PKM.

So yeah "it's better because it's lighter", which isn't much of an argument when you compare other rifles (mainly because the weight variation isn't that big), but in that particular case being lighter is just so much an advantage you can't just dismiss it.

>>585600

Interesting, thanks frog anon.

I never really thought about it that way, it really is an end user thing hey.

>>585566

Honestly I'd say 5.56 is optimal only for 300 yards.

I'd be fine with a return to a full rifle powered battle rifle. Hell, we have the AR-10 ultra refined at this point and waiting.

I'd want full rifle power however, not even as much of a compromise as the grendel. Just go all the way with 6.5 mememoor, or 7mm-08, which imo is better, or something in the 6.5-7mm vicinity.

Or to cut costs, just re-adopt 7.62x51 and the m80 round.

>>585557

Because 7n6 doesn't have a spoontip, you're thinking of 4.6x36. 7n6 just has a hollow tip to create a back-heavy bullet which causes tumbling, which has been the standard since WW1.

Howdy /k/

/pol/ - greetings

I shoot an AR10. It's flat out fucking badass. Never shot a 6.5 , but would like to

The .308 seems like a much better choice if poo were to hit the fan of course. I reload my own. My bud and I went and shot some tannerite (home brew formula) and my loads did the trick good like

180 grAMAX w/ 40.5 gr IMR3041

Book said 2350ish fps

Fucking Kek bless you motherfuckers

>>585668

>placementcuck

>>585668

Gee billy I love paying $.75 a round to shoot a less efficient 7.62x39 out of inferior rifles.

Kinda like .300Blk.

>>585747

>Kinda like .300 BLK

Not wrong, but anyone using .300 memout as a replacement for 7.62x39 is retarded. It was a designed for good terminal performance when fired subsonic out of SBRs, and it fills that niche just fine. Trying to use it as a general-purpose intermediate cartridge is bizarre due to the availability and cost of 7.62x39. If you're a handloader of course the cost issue becomes less prevalent, and performance-wise .300 handloads have the potential to edge out 7.62, but not by a lot.

7.62 only exists because the USA had a hardon for 30-06.

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.

>>585540

> 5.45 doesn't fragment at any range and have zero effective range comparing to the 5.56

fixed

>>585566

> The idea enemies will never exploit the shortcomings of a 400 yard cartridge is false.

How many NATO soldiers were killed with gunfire at 400+ yards range? How many goatfucking terrorists were killed with gunfire at 400+ yards range? By 5.56? Other small arms?

>>585747

>dude my piece of paper says they are the same

>>585758

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

That's not really true and it make the story even the worse.

The FAL (and now the SCAR H) is the only rifle that does works well enough with 7.62 NATO in full auto.

Sure it's not great but it does work, it's not a G3 (that was redesigned in catastrophe to take 7.62 NATO) or Meme14.

That's why it was such a big commercial hit despite the US stuffing FN.

Had those been chambered in .280 they would still be used by everyone and it would have been the N°1 assault rifle instead of the AK…

>>585765

>he's never shot either on anything but paper

Adorable.

>>585766

>7.62 works on full auto

Fun fact: during ACR trials it was found that even 5.56 has to much recoil. M16 modified with muzzle brake at full auto had no increase of hit probability vs semi-automatic fire of base M16.

>>585758

>T-65 project never happens

>U.S. Army sticks with 30-06 service rifles until the adoption of 5.56x45

>The M-14 is just a Garand that takes improved B.A.R. mags, among other fixes

>U.K. and the rest of NATO adopt the F.A.L. in .280 British as planned

>8mm Mauser remains the predominant sporting cartridge in most of Europe

>Eventually the M16 is adopted as a stopgap measure until the SPIW (fails to) bear fruit, as per the OTL

>30-06 sticks around indefinitely as a DM and MMG chambering, like the Russians use 7.62x54R

If only.

>>585768

30-30 win blasts 7.62 out of the shooting range, no competition

>>585769

the m16/14k are amazing.

>>585773

>>585766

Actual AR-10's are comfortable to shoot in F/A.

>>585773

What gets me is its just a M60 gas system jerry rigged onto a M14.

>>585771

you do realize that 30-30 is also 7.62mm (which isn't actually 7.62mm)?

30-30 uses the same .308 bullet as the .308, but with less powder. It is by definition weaker.

>>585758

>30-06 sucks dude

in your haste to remember the history of the round, you forgot that it was very, very effective, which is why the USA fell in love with it.

Seriously, have you ever shot an animal with 30-06? If you did, you'd know why it is awesome. Now imagine shooting your despised enemy to pieces with it. Then, you'll love it.

Not hard to see. The confidence inspired in troops by giving them a cannon is probably more effective than all the "muh efficiency" tacticool ass flatulence in the world.

>>585847

The only reason why they kept on using it was because they had too much surplus ammo left over from ww1.

The m1 garand was going to be chambered in .276 Pedersen until the army cheapened out.

I would phase out 5.56 and 7.62 for 6-7mm cartridge such as 6.5 CM, phase out 9mm for something flatter shooting but not crazy recoil like 10mm & dangerous P++ overpressure such as 357 sig.

I don't see any point in replacing 50bmg, and if you need to shoot farmer then get a cannon caliber.

>>585853

I'll give you the 10mm recoil since

>women in military

and

>officers

but .357 SIG is actually one of the few reasonably designed and well-performing rounds out there.

>>585870

It's what the FBI should have adopted.

no heavy recoil as 10mm

shoots flatter than 9mm, no risks like you would take with P++ 9mm ammo.

It's a nice step up from 9mm.

>>585853

.357 Sig is designed from the ground up to handle the pressure, as are guns like the p229.

.357 is objectively the best handgun round we have.

fuck 9mm.

>>585870

>>585922

>>585937

And on top of all the ballistic advantages of .357 SIG, the bottlenecked cartridge means it's going to be far more reliable as well. FTF malfunctions are pretty much nonexistent, which also gives you much more flexibility with regards to bullet choice, whereas some 9mm guns won't feed certain hollowpoints correctly.

>>585940

The down side of 357 sig is that it costs as much to shoot as 10mm, if the FBI had adopted 357 sig instead of 40 S&W…

>>585940

Could you load .357 SIG with bullets used for 9mm Parabellum? Because imagine making a +P+ version of the cartridge loaded with the 9mm Russian AP rounds.

>>585983

what type of bullet construction do they utilize?

>>585990

I stand corrected, thank you sir for revealing great truth.

But, yes, .355 will work in the Sig. The only issue is there are a lot of dynamics in how cartridges work, how they burn powder, build pressure, interact with bullets and how it works in the firearms they are being fired from, so if they can improve upon the performance of 9mm Luger +P+, and how much they can improve it, is hard to determine.

In truth, some cartridges can see higher power for the same pressure with lighter bullets, many the exact opposite. Hard to say what the performance would be, not only with higher pressure but also increased case space and bottle neck dynamics.

Very interesting point you brought up.

>>585990

how does it compare to factory 5.7x28 AP ammo that's obtainable but at a premium?

>>585990

>forgotten weapons

lol ok

>>586001

That's more comparable to 5.45x18mm.

>>585969

>costs as much to shoot as 10mm

false because you can barely even find real 10mm

also false because you can buy .357 Sig fmj for 36 cents per round, same as .357 magnum, and you can get high quality JHP for around 42-50 cents per round, as cheap as any of the other popular rounds

.357 Sig is more popular than you think, and again, it is objectively the best semi-auto round in existence.

>>585983

yeah you're a faggot

>>586049

> it is objectively the best semi-auto round in existence.

.38 Super came long before .357Sig, besides that it was designed to replicate one loading of .357mag.

>>586070

.38 Super isn't bottlenecked and is limited to large-frame pistols.

>>585992

They also have a 9x21mm version that fires a longer bullet, but I'm not sure if that would work.

https://modernfirearms.net/en/cartridge/9x21-sp-10-sp-11-sp-12/

>>586049

>he doesn't want to add even more velocity to an already high velocity AP bullet

Surely, I must be replying to a card-bearing member of The Gay Community.

>>586049

.357 sig is just an upscaled 7.62 makarov prove me wrong

>>586095

>hue hue hue

what are you bitching about, you stupid piece of shit?

>>586124

ehh, not exactly, .357 Sig is just .357 Magnum, it's pushing a heavier bullet at almost the same velocity of the tokarev.

tokarev is a cool round though, certainly better than 9x18. Very low recoil and high energy, just gotta wonder about the penetration.

>>586070

>.38 Super

except it doesn't replicate .357 mag

.38 Super is shooting a 130 gr bullet at about 1250 fps. That is basically 124 gr 9mm +p.

>>586129

Tok tends to overpenetrate and leave pencil holes in people unless there's body armor or a car door, then it fragments and does more damage so shot placement was ridiculously important. It's why East Block cops switched to 9mm in the early 2000s, 7.62 tok was just too temperamental.

>>586129

Unlike you I'm not bitching, I've just pointed out that you prefer dicks in your ass over armour penetrating pistol bullets.

>>586135

I don't know what your "muh ap" shit is referring to and I don't give enough of a shit about your worthless loser ass to bother reading your undoubtedly idiotic posts, so fuck yourself and fuck off.

>>586132

how does an 85 hollow point grain bullet traveling at 1500 fps over-penetrate?

>>586132

Fragmenting is only good in rifle bullets that would otherwise not expand, the fragmenting allows for potential hydrostatic shock, while in pistols it just dissipates force and energy, potential, reduces penetration, and basically is the WORST of all things a pistol bullet can do.

Beyond its ability to punch through things due to its small size, the 7.62mm pistols are kinda trash. Poor terminal performance, simply not enough surface area on the bullet to crush enough tissue, not enough weight to help push an expanded bullet deep enough consistently enough to make it a great choice. Not enough dynamics for hydrostatic shock. Even when the bullets expand, they are not that great.

Its why even 5.7mm is facing resistance for acceptance and why 9mm and even 45 will never really die. All combat handguns lack ability to do hyrostatic shock, so the only way to kill and stop attacks is to crush tissue, and with the dynamics in play with low power bullets, bigger is better.

Also, how often do people and police deal with body armor? How important is hard barrier penetration to those who carry such guns? 7.62 handguns were a thing back in the early 1900's, and they kinda belong there.

>>586142

this is simply wrong. If it were true, then .357 magnum would never have had any success.

Speed kills.

>>586049

I'm just comparing what I saw on ammo seek.

I really wish that I could find those 357 ranger sxt hollow points.

>>586149

>ammoseek

decent site but to get actual deals you have to get a core group of websites and check them every day

but for .357 sig, even the popular sgammo.com sells fmj for 36 cents per round

>>586161

>"Energy translates into damage, not speed. It's just easier to build up energy by increasing speed than by increasing mass."

thanks for saying what I was saying

that 1) speed = energy

guns are dangerous because they shoot little balls really fast. Therefore the faster the ball is relative to its mass, the more dangerous the round.

That's why all a .45 does is poke a bigger hole in a target, whereas a .357 magnum for example causes an actual explosion inside the target.

the 600+ fps in velocity dramatically overwhelms the difference in bullet weight.

>>586162

I was just adding autistic detail to your post, not attacking or belittling you.

>>586143

You must know anything.

357 Magnum didn't create hydrostatic shock, or didn't create enough of it in enough amounts to make much difference. It stopped people because it had a reliably expanding bullet that punched deep and crushed a lot of tissue. It wasn't speed that made the 357 magnum useful, it was sheer power that turned into a bullet that crushed a lot of tissue.

There are many cases of people being shot with 357 Magnum that didn't stop or slow down from being shot. They certainly didn't see anything 'blow up". The idea that velocity was the effective part was JUNK SCIENCE from the late 70's based on 20% ballistics gel that NATO used for rifle rounds and the subsequent TEMPORARY cavity they created, and the FALSE theory that temporary waves were the cause of incapacitation. All of this was later proven to be 100% bullshit, temporary cavity does nothing, handgun rounds don't create hydrostatic shock, and velocity in handgun bullets is not a factor in effectiveness.

45 ACP was very effective, because it crushes large, deep holes in people that damage tissues that lead to bleedout. 357 Magnum was very effective because it did the same. Both were effective for the same exact reason. In fact, 158 grain bullets for 357 magnum are probably better than 125 grain bullets, but 125 worked well and it fit into the junk science of the late 70's when they were still carried by street officers as a front line service pistol.

If you look at the mistakes made during the late 70's and early 80's you will see you are completely wrong. The fast 115 grain bullets of the 9mm were thought to be super effective in stopping attacks because of their high velocity and how they created temporary shock cavities in 20% gel. Turns out they were poor performers in real life, not great expansion, and many cases were the bullets fragmented or otherwise failed to punch deep enough to hit organs and FAILED to stop attacks.

Same thing with the 38 Special 110 grain +p+ Treasury load. The theoriticians in the lab with the junk science thought they would be the best performing 38 Special of all time, turned out to be complete trash. They eventually went back to the FBI load of 158 grains of hollow point lead semi wad cutter because the heavier bullet actually punched deep and crushed tissue to cause bleedout, while the faster 110 grain did not.

All the nonsense you spout was disproven and known to be false 30 years ago. You are three decades behind the curve, friend, but more importantly, you are full of shit.

Energy and velocity don't do damage, bullets crushing tissue does damage, hydrostatic shock causes damage when there is enough force TO TEAR TISSUE BY STRETCHING IT BEYOND ITS CAPACITY TO EXPAND. If the bullet isn't fast enough, if it doesn't have enough energy, but most importantly if it does not cause the right dynamics to stretch tissue beyond its failure point, it will do NO HYDROSTATIC SHOCK. Handgun rounds do not have the velocity, nor the energy, nor the dynamics. It stretches tissues in a way that DOES NOT DAMAGE THEM.

Because handgun rounds lack those things, velocity and energy are no indicators of damage, only potential, and it has been realized that crushing is the only means by which handguns do damage. More energy, more velocity, even larger TEMPORARY stretch mean NOTHING. A slow, heavy bullet that expands and punches deep is ideal. A fragmenting bullet will not cause hydrostatic shock, only lose bullet face and see 1. less expansion and 2. loss of mass leading to shallow penetration. This is why fragmentation is considered purely, PURELY bad in terms of handgun bullet performance.

Slow heavy bullets that expand well are the BEST performers, fast light bullets that fragment are the WORST. Speed does not kill in handguns, direct crush cavities do.

>>586161

Momentum plays an extremely important role in penetration in living tissue, because soft tissues are closer to air and fluid than hard barriers like metal or plastic. Heavier bullets have always been known to be better penetrators in people and animals, hunters have known this forever. Lighter bullets that have less mass lose energy faster in soft tissues, meaning they penetrate poor and "give up" energy faster.

Velocity may be very important punching through hard barriers like glass, metal, ect., but the dynamics of tissue means it is not a crucial factor in tissue penetration. Momentum is more crucial in punching through tissue, like how it is vital in punching through air for better long range performance.

Because momentum plays a vital role in penetrating soft tissues, heavier bullets actually can cause more damage, because they use their energy and potential better. They can conserve their force better and punch deeper, they can better turn the energy into potential. Heavy bullets can push a far larger expanded head hollow point farther than a light bullet can.

It has long been observed that high velocity, low weight bullets that cannot cause hydrostatic shock turn their energy and force into almost harmless temporary cavitation, while heavier slower bullets turn their force into penetration. This is why heavy for caliber bullets are considered superior in handguns, because one wastes its energy, while the heavy bullet with momentum actually uses it more effectively.

>>586166

>>586167

the few things you get right are only by coincidence

the rest of it is just you parroting bullshit like HYDROSTATIC SHOCK that you read on the back of a cereal box

>>586169

Please elaborate. How do I get things right by coincidence? Also, HS exists, but is the most misunderstood and explained thing in terminal ballistics. It does exist as an effect, even thought the term itself is completely inaccurate, it is the term used and abused to describe a real effect.

Some handgun people claim it does not exist and must be explained that certain dynamics and effects in rifles do occur that are different. Also, many people, like I stated, still believe in all the "handgun shock" nonsense of the 70's and 80's and you have to bring up the term hydrostatic shock because people who think fast handgun bullets work are on the same mindset and track.

Like it or not, you have to fight with people over things in the discussion of terminal ballistics and the term has to be used because of people's misconceptions.

>>586166

so you're saying .45acp is more effective than .357 magnum?

virtually every historical instance of implementation of those rounds, every gel test, every professional douchebag, every cop shooting disagrees.

>fast 9mm 115 grain

it barely hits 1200 fps on a good day. relative to it's weight, like I said, it's not particularly fast

the 9mm is simply a weak round that doesn't go fast enough, as I've been saying this whole thread

>38 special

>speed

into the trash it goes

>le epic all handguns are weak meme

a stupid bromide parroted ad nauseum by 9mm shills, now being borrowed by a .45 guy who thinks anything shot with a .45 will magically disappear into thin air because it's a FORTY. FIVE.

look, I like .45 acp, but I don't pretend it has the same energy and therefore stopping power as a magnum, which is to say .357 Sig.

>was disaproven

where? Gel tests are a good measure because they simulate the fact of the human body's majority liquid composition. Are you going to deny that we're not water based creatures?

>"energy and velocity don't do damage"

you're so blatantly wrong here that I wonder if you're a shill

>>586178

Lugers design is an evolution of the .380acp, and even the .357 line of ammo is similar. It's all one broad species of handgun ammunition that evolved purely because of technological improvements.

In another 50 years, something like a 10mm steel alloy case is going to be necked down to bullets like that >>585990 and then overloaded to 55,000psi for a grand total speed of 2500fps.

And then people will pretend that's the "final" 9mm for another half century.

>>586178

Seems like you are all strawman, once again I'm facing people's conclusions and I'm being attacked after receiving a label. Suddenly I'm a "45 guy" because I mentioned that the 45 ACP has had a successful history of effectiveness which can be backed up.

I didn't say the 9mm small rounds were fast, 9mm proponents say this kind of bullshit. The 110grain +p+ treasury load 38 Special isn't fast, but that's what its proponents claimed. We are on the same page. But, for that matter, the 357 Sig and Magnums aren't fast either, 1,350fps, 1,450 fps are RELATIVELY fast for handguns, but are still objectively slow in terms of terminal performance. The advantages of the Magnum and Sig are that they provide extra energy, this energy gives more potential to the bullet to both expand and penetrate, but their velocity does not equal automatic damage. They don't have the kinds of velocity or dynamics to create effective permanent stretch cavities, its not the velocity's effects alone that give it effectiveness.

Truth is, a 45 ACP bullet that expands to, let's say for hypothesis, .65 inches and penetrates 20 inches is going to have roughly the same effect as a 357 Magnum bullet that expands to .65 inches and penetrates 20 inches. There is nothing super duper special about the way those bullets expand, its the final crush cavity that matters. When gel tests tell us that they 45 ACP has similar expansion and penetration, in some cases the 45 ACP has bullets that outperform the 357 Magnum, one can conclude that the 45 ACP is as effective or perhaps potentially superior. Apparently you don't look at gel tests if you are drawing your conclusions. I've seen evidence that backs my point and makes you "every gel test" thing nonsense.

Again, you label me a 45 guy when I made a single mention about 45, and now you are saying things I never said. I never said the 45 was super, one shot stop, never anything to this effect. Methinks you make a lot of things up in your head.

Plenty of professionals back up the 45 ACP. Plenty of soldiers who fought with it vouch for it. Many police have used and swear by it. Its performance in real life and defense by professionals is well established and is only attacked by 9mm shills and fanbois who try to dispute the indisputable to pretend their cartridge performs better. Your claim that every cop shooting is bogus, there are cases of people being stopped dead by 45 ACP and accounts of people being shot by 357 Magnum who kept fighting.

The was disproven was accurate, what part didn't you read or understand? 10% gel tests are more like human tissue, 20% gel tests are not. 20% gel tests exaggerated temporary cavities and made them look superior to what they would actually do in real life. Also, you seemed to miss the point that TEMPORARY CAVITIES DO NOT MATTER. Temporary cavities play little to no role in incapacitation, so their effects in gel do not matter. They look fancy and are nice to watch, but the extra temporary stretch in gel blocks do not equate to real life performance, so no, it was disproven. Velocity's effect in creating larger temporary cavities does not make them any more effective in stopping an attacker.

Damage is caused by the effect of the bullet on tissue. Energy alone does not magically translate to damage, nor does velocity. The bullet has to create resistance against tissues to crush them or to stretch them. The way the bullet creates this resistance is important, its not just some sort of "energy dump" the force must effectively be used to keep the bullet pushing forward to directly crush tissues, or it must create resistance to stretch tissue to the breaking point, not simply move it around a little.

High energy bullets create permanent stretch cavities when they cause resistance and stretching to a breaking point, not by "dumping", energy alone does not cause damage. Velocity helps to move tissue faster than it can react to help tear it, but without sufficient force and dynamics it cannot tear tissue alone. These things need to be implemented into force that affects tissue, there is no set video game like equation of Xfps = x damage, or Xenergy = xdamage.

No, higher velocity in handguns has not been proven to be the key factor in handgun effectiveness, nor even energy is the energy cannot be used by the handgun bullet effectively. A bigger, slower, less powerful bullet can and will do more damage because it uses its forces and momentum better. Its how the bullet interacts with the tissue, not just autistic numbers vs. numbers on paper.

I'm not a shill. But I'm getting the idea you either don't do real research, aren't that bright, or are honestly autistic

>>586183

The biggest problem in combat handguns is that too much recoil and force makes the guns harder to handle, and gets pussies to complain that the gun isn't pleasant to shoot. Handguns aren't limited by power, they can easily make more powerful cartridges, its the fact they simply won't issue combat handguns more powerful than the current issue because the guns finally become to hard to control, or hurt the hands of people who don't like to shoot in the first place.

9mm, 357 Magnum, 357 Sig, 40 S&W, 10mm (watered down, mind you), maybe we could put 41 Magnum on the list because at one time it was theoretically going to be the next service revolver cartridge, 44 Special and 45 ACP will stay around because they are at loadings deemed combat effective and not too hard to handle. Its not for a lack of ability to make more powerful cartridges, but lack of will to use them.

44 Magnum combat revolvers exist, but people shove light magnum or strong 44 Special loads into them. 10mm can be loaded to high end performance, but has traditionally been issued with low end performance rounds to reach some sort of a balance. Both cases reflect that the performance exists but is not desired.

There will be no evolution. There is a reason why the most popular cartridges are 100 years old.

>>586183

But 9mm Luger was developed years before .380 ACP

>>586194

Not just that, it's a necked up version of 7.65 Luger, and 7.62 Luger is a shortened version of 7.65 Borchardt. Even more, 7.63 Mauser is just a hotter load of 7.62 Borchardt, and 9mm Mauser Export is 7.63 Mauser necked up to 9mm. In other words, one could claim that Mauser developed a magnum version of 9mm Luger. Or go the other way, and say that 9mm Luger is the .357 SIG of the Borchardt-derivatives.

>>586199

Fugg, I've managed to write 7.62 instead of 7.65 more than once.

>>586200

Tbh, it's .309", which is 7.62 if you measure land-to-land like the Russians did when they produced it as 7.62x25mm

>>586191

>there's a reason why *pulls platitude out of ass*

because of goofy morons like you that regurgitate nonsense already circulated ad-nauseum within the dumbshit confines of the "gun community."

>>586213

>getting mad at a few paragraphs of text

>getting mad at paragraph spacing

>>586223

sage negated

>>586227

>epic triggered meme

triggered

>>586223

Actually I just do it because my cell screen is narrow, so a run on sentence like people post on imageboards looks like a fucking paragraph.

Ergo I start another paragraph….. however putting a space AFTER THE POST LINK looks like a load of reddit spacing.

>>586223

if you weren't so assblasted, you'd notice that I was directing the reddit-spacing towards you, dumbshit, not mr. wall-of-text non-argument

>>586188

>damage is caused by the effect of the bullet on tissue

>the way high velocity rounds explode the tissue isn't really bad, it's actually kinda good for the target

come back when you learn how to think, stupidass. maybe google the word "contradiction" on your way out.

>>586213

>therefore 9mm is best

The exact opposite. I'm saying the 9mm is already technologically obsolete. As is .357 sig. The firearms community is just slower to incorporate improvements than the engineering community is to create them.

I'm not impressed with any performance of any modern day cartridge to the point where I'm a delusional fanboy about it.

>>586194

Same species, not direct descendant. Sorry, should have been clearer.

>>586191

Cartidges are small fish problems.

Biggest problem in combat handguns is that soldiers are taught to shoot a pistol while using the sights. Vidrel. Any soldier that needs a gun, needs to be able to fire it at a moments notice, or in smoke filled conditions where he can't really see his hand.

I think if you train your soldiers to shoot by instinct using their sense of proprioception instead of their sense of sight, you'd increase their lethality by an order of magnitude no matter what cartridge they used.

That's why Russians are introducing guns with ANGLED grips, which lets a more natural hand position be used.

>>586191

But ok to address your main point and not be rude…

Recoil is a function of action-reaction, in other words momentum of firing a bullet impacting on the weight of the gun. It would be possible to reduce momentum by using lighter, faster bullets. Re-chamber .22short to fire small flechettes and there wouldn't be any recoil, and you could stack 40 of the things in a standard grip.

Vidrelate, even soft, unpointed lead bird ammo goes through steel plate like a fucking laser. And it makes a hole in a watermelon larger than a FMJ .45acp. And all this is powered by a nail gun blank bushing the soft air rifle projectile at 2500fps.

>>586239

>i-i-i'm not a .45 shill

>exposes himself with the youtube video

you're a FOTY FIVE shill, I'm sorry but that is the argument you're pushing here

you are saying

1) velocity is meaningless

2) the size of the bullet is everything

basically you're just shilling your good ol' .45acp

>>586239

>to the point where I'm a delusional fanboy

yes, yes you are a delusional .45 fanboy

here is an actually sophisticated line of reasoning, not shilling like you:

1) speed matters

2) size also matters

that's why .357 magnum is such a great round. It has a fairly good size bullet, but incorporates the understanding the speed matters more, and thus is faster in speed relative to its weight.

to say speed just doesn't matter is a fundamental ignorance of the nature of physics occurring when a bullet leaves the barrel. I really can't help you here, you have to remove your ego from the .45acp and try to actually think because as of now, you're undergoing an existential crisis.

A question for the people that say 9mm isn't good enough: If you were forced to carry it what load would you carry? I carry a 147g JHP doing 990-1,000fps, how fucked am I?

>>586248

147 grain is the worst load because the size isn't enough to compensate for the lack of speed, unlike the .45

147 grain 9mm is closer to 950ish fps max

with 9mm, you either have to take expansion or penetration, you can't have both because the round is so weak.

Do Hornady's +p critical duty for penetration, but it has shit expansion because it's bonded and the round is still relatively slow for its size

115 grain +p, or +p+ for huge expansion/energy dump but dogshit penetration

I'd go 115 grain high pressure

>>586248

specifically this load

https://www.targetsportsusa.com/federal-law-enforcement-9mm-luger-ammo-115-grain-p-jacketed-hollow-point-9bple-p-3012.aspx

>>586251

also

>inb4 u can't practice with it

unless you're shooting something like a 44 magnum, you won't notice the difference in recoil when your adrenaline is pumping in a self-defense situation, so practicing with normal velocity 115 grain and jumping to the +p or +p+ when you need to kill won't matter. Yes, it will be snappier, but the difference is trivial.

One thing I was surprised by when shooting .357 Sig for the first time was how mild the recoil was, that's out of a p229 however, which is designed to handle that round. I can practice with .40 and then drop the .357 sig barrel in for carry, the .40 actually kicks more, just not as much blast of course.

>>586244

I didn't create either post, friend. You are so careless that you don't even take the time to actually figure out who posted what before you start hurling insults and accusations. You don't so much read this thread but make things up in your own mind.

>>586240

>>586241

He shot through extremely thin, soft steel. Again, I've stated, high velocity is helpful in piercing through solid barriers, so this is not so surprising. He didn't penetrate anything that offered too much resistance. Keep in mind, metal can gain quadruple the protection against certain projectiles if the thickness doubles; this also means that the thinner it gets, its protection goes down exponentially.

An extremely thin piece of very soft metal was pierced by a projectile going at very high velocity, and it only seems relevant because it barely managed to stop much slower bullets, if heavier. Not surprising knowing what we know about piercing metal with velocity and setting the bar on the ground to jump over.

Watermelons are shot because they are very weak and tear open easily, without much force, making them blow up and fun to shoot, especially to make a scene with. Now, consider that how easy it is to crush a watermelon, or drive your fingers into one and tear it to pieces, then try to do that to a person. Human and animal tissues are far different, far stronger, human tissues flex and absorb energy better, a watermelon is no indicator of performance on a person or animal. This test proves very little.

>>586235

What don't you understand about the two types of stretch cavities? Do you not understand there are two very distinctive types of stretch cavities? The TEMPORARY stretch cavity simply causes ballistics gel and human tissue to flex and bend, it simply pushes the tissues aside WITHOUT HURTING THEM. Like punching someone in the stomach, you move their skin, muscle wall, internal organs inwards and move them around, the organs flex instead of explode or shred to pieces, then when you remove your fist the skin, muscle organs all flex back to normal in their normal positions. TEMPORARY cavity is not tearing organs and tissue to bits, just moving and stretching them. If you pull on a rubber tarp strap it stretches, when you take force off it returns to normal. The tarp strap is not hurt, the tissues in temporary cavitation are not hurt.

The second type of stretch cavitation is PERMANENT stretch cavitation. This is also known by the inaccurate, but commonly used term, HYDROSTATIC SHOCK. In this case we basically pull the tarp strap till it pulls apart and snaps, destroying it. In tissue we pull and force tissue till it tears apart, destroying it. In this case, the PERMANENT stretch does indeed tear apart flesh and causes mass damage, almost making it look like it explodes.

Handguns don't blow up organs with velocity, they create TEMPORARY cavitation, not PERMANENT stretch cavitation. The stretch from higher velocity handgun rounds does not damage and does not help stop an attack. Only PERMANENT stretch cavities can do this. The TEMPORARY cavitation caused by higher velocity handguns does no good and doe snot contribute to stopping someone. Thus, high velocity handgun rounds do not create the kind of stretch cavity that counts, and this effect does NO GOOD.

>>586248

>>586249

>>586251

Go with 147 grain bullets. 115 grain bullets don't perform nearly as well, under penetrate and are a poor choice. That Federal load was celebrated by the junk science of the late 1970's and 1980's because it caused great and harmless temporary cavities in 20% gel block tests. In the field those bullets fragment, under penetrate, and have expansion that is extremely poor.

>>586231

>lol triggered

Shouting words without knowing what they mean doesn't help you fit in, neither does sperging out on everyone

>>586244

Talking about pistol calibers, >>586188 is right. All handgun boolets fly much slower than rifle calibers, so diameter and weight of the bullet matters most for them. Sure, if you shoot someone in the heart it doesn't matter if it's a 22lr or a 45, but if some nigger jumps you in an ally you're probably going to be mag dumping him wildly out of surprise, and you're going to need every hole you make in his chest to be big to effectively stop him. In scenarios like that, 9mm isn't the best option, but it's on the fence of being okay if you are a skeleton who can't handle the recoil of something like 10mm or 45, and won't be able to control the gun.

One more thing, don't overestimate yourself and have an attitude of, "I'll be able to think clearly and aim true while a nigger is running at me with a knife." If some shit ever happened to you, unless you're an experienced cop or vet or something, you're probably going to act on adrenaline, and the shit will be over before you know it, hopefully with the nigger dying on the ground. Don't overthink what kind of scenarios you could run into, just practice being able to rapid fire accurately enough when some unexpected shit happens. Shoot realistic scarecrows with knives or toy guns glued to their hands to train yourself to not be hesitant to shoot a human target

>>586254

ok, you pissed me off

>cavities

Your permanent cavity

1) the hole the bullet cuts through the body, not through shock but simply by the bullet itself passing through the body as if someone just pushed it through the body in slow motion: that hole is your permanent cavity

your "temporary" cavity

2) the explosion caused by the energy generating by the bullet, i.e., the speed multiplied by it's mass.

there is no "temporary" cavity. You are imaginng bullets just passing through a body and the rest of the medium remaining constant and unaffected by the force: that only what is directly in front of the bullet is what will be removed and everything else is going to stay nice and neat and functioning.

Anyone that has ever shot anything with a gun or an animal knows this is a remarkably idiotic way of thinking. That "temporary" cavity actually rips open the primary hole the bullet alone creates, to such an extent that "permanent" and "temporary" is a ridiculous distinction because through the energy applied they both become on and the same thing. That's why for example if you shoot an animal without ideal placement with a 45-70, the animal will be incapacitated, but still relatively conscious, and has a large but very distinct, localized, and confined hole clean through the animal. The hole is so big that the animal is mortally fucked, but nothing around it is really harmed, so it is still able to actually move and be aware, until it bleeds out in a few seconds. However, you shoot the same animal in the same place with, say, a 180 grain 300 win mag sp load, and there is no longer an identifiable "hole" in the animal: there is a jagged and huge path blow clean through the animal, to such an extent that the surrounding flesh is liquefied into jello. I know this, I've done it many times myself in person to pigs with both of these rounds.

Where you are wrong is assuming that the laws of physics stops at handguns. I think what you are doing here is the same thing 9mm shills do because they know their bullet is obsolete, and therefore try to dismiss everything that's happened over the past 100 years in firearms innovation in their own mind because it makes them feel better about their ego invested round. Interesting that a .45 shill is doing the same thing, and it makes sense as it relies on an obsolete 19th century way of thinking about firearms.

Physics doesn't stop because "muh handguns." The same thing is happening, just on a smaller scale because of course a .357 magnum is not a 300 win mag, but the same laws are still happening. Again, you are saying that the laws of physics occuring in the rifle world, which you implicitly agree with, are straight up ceasing to exist as soon as someone grabs a handgun. This is obviously fallacious.

>>586256

I hope you do end up cc'ing a .22lr so you end up getting murdred or harming innocent bystanders by irresponsibly spraying that round everywhere. .22lr is good for hunting rabbits or squirrel, not 250 lb niggers, you idiot.

>>586256

>can't handle the recoil

>goes into this ol' grandpa way of talking down to me about how I gotta be careful and shit

if you can't "handle" the recoil of a 10mm, which I doubt you've even shot before, or a .45, then you're a pussy. I'm sorry but that's pretty much it. I'm a 160lb manlet and I can shoot a glock 20 easily.

>spraying everywhere

the good ol .45 acp one shot, "capacity doens't matter because it's a .45 argument"

just to put this into perspective again, the absurdity of you two

you're talking about 0.095 inches of diameter that the .45 has over the .357 magnum

you're saying 0.095 inches totally overwhelms the +600 fps difference in velocity. You're saying that 0.095 inches more than compensates for how the .357 is almost twice as fast as the .45.

you're dismissing outright the nature of physics because "handguns are weak."

and therefore 0.095 inches is going to……well the .355 won't harm the organs passing through because it's so small, but that extra 0.095 inches will get us the heart, liver, kidneys, lungs, the whole torso….it's a .45 afterall, .45 inches in diameter man, covers the whole body

that is what you're saying. You are ridiculous or a troll.

>>586258

I'm pretty certain at this point you are a troll. I've explained that even higher velocity handguns can't make those kinds of wounds because they lack the energy and sheer velocity, so there not just "less than the 300 Win Mag" they are producing no permanent stretch cavity at all. I think you are just arguing for the sake of arguing, purposely taking people's comments out of contexts to make trouble, and I'm realizing this is just pigfighting at this point.

The other guy just said a 22lr COULD kill someone, he didn't recommend it. Obviously you are making strawmen so you can keep trolling.

>>586258

>I hope you do end up cc'ing a .22lr so you end up getting murdred

Why would you carry a gun when you have so much edge to slice up muggers with? To explain it in a more direct way to accommodate your assburgers, good shot placement will kill anything no matter what you're firing, but in a sudden self defense scenario you probably won't have good shot placement.

>>586259

I'm saying that in general bigger bullets are better when it comes to pistol calibers

>>586262

I think this is genuine assburgers, and calling him autistic would be an insult to autistics. Asspies are the scum of the spectrum, they are always all around unpleasant with no redeeming features, while autists usually find some niche hobby that they're really good at and interested in and make themselves friends with people with their same interests. If an asspie gets into a hobby, he does everything incorrectly, and gets angry at everyone else interested in the hobby, no matter if they're better or worse at it than him, because they aren't doing it his specific way. Trying to talk to him leads to a debate, and the debate quickly, and usually instantly, degrades into an argument, with him flinging shit at you while shouting off his retarded opinions

>>586262

yeah, you're a stupid piece of shit

you didn't explain shit

what you say, stupidass, is that velocity is meaningless for handguns. What you said is that the laws of physics we observe when we shoot things with rifles, which you agree with, correct me if I'm wrong but you seem to agree that rifle speed is what contributes to their energy, you are imagining that reality ceases to exist when someone picks up a handgun and shoots, that the performance of handgun rounds might as well be occurring in another dimension of existence, that the laws of this world no longer apply because .357 happens to be slower than for example .223

that is what you are saying. There is no other "explaining" or "sophistication" to what you've posted here. All you have said is that "it's a handgun" and therefore physics itself no longer matters, that 0.095 inches in added diameter will compensate for everything, and anything to the contrary is "junk science from the 70's and 80's."

I called you out on this stupid shit, I finally got tired of your stupidity and posted a long, detailed post spelling this out for you, and now you "muh troll." You are saying that I'm equating 300 win mag with .357. No, no dumbass I did not, I was making an example.

Since you agreed that rifle energy and speed do matter, I established that fact, and did not equate rifles and pistols, I inferred that the same physical events occurring when you shoot something with a rifle also happens when you shoot something with a pistol, because the same laws of physics and mass apply, JUST ON A SMALLER SCALE. There is no radical inversion of reality just because we lose 1,000 fps. However, that is what you're saying here. You are saying that losing 1,000 fps is a world-altering change, but it is one that 0.095 inches in diameter will compensate for.

You can call me strawman, a shill, that doesn't change the basic absurdity of your nonsense.

>>586263

>good shot placement

yet you also say that we will be experiencing so much adrenaline in a self-defense situation that shot-placement is no sure thing

this is what you call a "contradiction."

>>586263

what you're saying is the same as the other guy and it is this:

there is a 0.093 difference in diameter between .45 and .357 mag, not 0.095, PLEASE oh please don't come at me with 0.002 inches. You're saying that 0.093 inches in diameter is an overwhelming difference, far greater than the nearly doubled velocity a .357 magnum has over .45acp.

here we come back to physics, and this is where you deny that physics has any bearing on the pistol world, because it's a pistol, but the extra 0.093 inches will knock out all the organs in a human that the .357 will miss, because "it's a bigger bullet."

>>586263

>I'm logical

>that's why I'm unironically saying assburgers

>don't disagree with me or ur assburgers

>he disagrees with people, he is assburgers

it's like the very idea of a "contradiction" does not exist to you.

>>586266

Another symptom of assburgers is being a brainlet who can't understand what points people are making when they say something

>(36) posts of lashing out at everyone

This is why I'm calling you an asspie

>>586268

>complains that I'm not arguing

>make the big detailed posts he was asking for

>now he doesn't contend what I've said, he's reverted to calling me a shill, an aspie, he thinks my post count across multiple issues in a thread that has long since gone off topic is grounds for dismissal

>the best he can do is straight up say "dude ur just don't understand"

>I'm logical because you're an asspie because I said so on the internet

>>586269

>ignores everything

>epic reading comprehension insult to try to win the internet argument, lowing it to the level of shitflinging the other serious logic boy accuses me of

snarky

Again, for the sake of argument, the issue here is that the guy I was responding to agrees that speed matters in rifles, and that therefore physics applies, but this is no longer with the case with pistols because we lose 1,000 fps and therefore the microscopic difference in diameter of 0.095 will compensate for everything and allow us to hit all the vital organs

basically it's the same old .45 fudd mentality

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYTd1lNx_TQ

>>586264

I'm saying that handguns don't have the ability, not that handguns magically are in a different world. Also, the difference between a 5.56mm and a 7.92mm Mauser is 0.099 inches, but the surface area is roughly DOUBLE. If we talk about total area, which is really important, the hole is twice the size even if its only 0.099 inch different diameter, so its not some tiny nothing you can just throw out. Also larger bullets don't have to expand as much to expand well and large, while smaller bullets have to expand a great deal more to achieve the same expanded diameter because it starts smaller.

The extra velocity in 357 Magnum and Sig does not equate to greater damage, does not create permanent stretch, so no, you are wrong.

>>586275

>I'm saying handguns don't have the ability

and therefore you're saying that we are indeed in a different world. You're saying the same physical events we observe with rifles absolutely do not apply to pistols because they happen to be traveling slower. What you're saying is that they might as well not be traveling at all.

What I'm saying is that the same physical events also occur, just on a different scale since obviously we are traveling at lower speeds.

You are at once accepting the facts of physical reality, and then denying them outright to suit your own emotional bias

I'm saying that the same thing is happening in both cases, but I'm adjusting for the change in velocity, and therefore adjust for size.

You are saying that speed ceases to matter entirely below a certain threshold.

You are irrationally in full denial

I am arguing for a rational mixture of both positions.

You by definition do not have an argument. All you have is the same old .45 fudd mentality. That's all there is here. You are literally saying that the microscopic 0.093-0.095 inches in diameter will allow us to cover all the vital organs in the body. That is the corner you've put yourself in by irrationally denying the possible influence of energy and speed long ago.

>surface area

that is what the diameter of a bullet is. Bullets are circular objects, we measure the width as the diameter of the object. Since only one aspect of the bullet will be impacting the enemy, the front, the size of that area is what matters. You're saying 0.095 inches in diameter will allow us to hit the vital organs in the body, which is obviously ridiculous. Now you're trying to retconn yourself back into admitting that energy matters without saying so, because you already denied the possible influence of energy in handguns. You're admitting that you're wrong. If you want to compensate for the total surface area of the whole bullet, not just the impacting aspect, that formula requires the inclusion of mass x velocity, as total surface area is only meaningful with the incorporation of speed and energy, otherwise it cannot exert it's influence and exists in a vacuum. Thanks for finally admitting that energy matters.

>>586275

also, why did you include that video?

in that video, you can clearly see that the 150 grain HST has poor expansion, and therefore a small comprehensive bullet channel, because of the low energy of the round, but acceptable penetration. The 147 grain has slightly better expansion because it is more energetic, meaning it is traveling faster.

this contradicts your earlier claim that slow heavy bullets expand well….because they're slow and heavy

contrast that with a video on the .357 sig from the same guy you posted, and we see that the bullet has 1) dramatically better expansion 2) a gigantic wound channel compared to the 147 grain and 3) no fragmentation

so basically everything you've said has been proven wrong

faster bullets with a still good amount of bullet weight expand better. You said they don't expand at all, over penetrate, and fragment. None of that happened in this video

you said that heavy slow bullets expand better, which you proved in your own video that they do not

you're wrong

>to prove that heavy for caliber 147 and 150 grain bullets can perform very well in the 9mm Luger, which they did.

.357 sig

1) 8 inch sustained permanent cavity of 1 and 1.4 inch in width generally

2) 15 inch total penetration

3) huge expansion

9mm 150 grain

1) widely inconsistent penetration across 3 shots. One at 12 inches, one at 16, one at 15.

2) 12 inch penetrating round had very bad expansion. The other two had objectively mediocre expansion, certainly well below that of the Sig.

3) The 147 grain actually penetrated to around 17 inches. Slightly better expansion but mediocre still, which is why it penetrated so deeply.

4) The bullets are actually tumbling in the gel. This is no surprise given the poor expansion of the round. Interesting that the 147 grain actually tumbled while only penetrating 12 inches, which again is at least party due to the very poor expansion. This happened because the denim doubled-up on that shot, and this evinces the round's low energy and therefore power that merely a second layer will totally negate the round's intended performance.

4) the 147 grain plus p had 15 inches of penetration but long and wide sustained permanent cavity, and therefore better performance due to the greater energy. Tnourdoors9 himself says in the video that there is clearly "more tissued destroyed" by the plus p round, he literally says that, exact words. He also admits that the 150 grain and 147 grain rounds over-penetrated at about the 7 minute mark. Over penetration is caused by the lack of expansion and therefore the inability of the bullet to leave its damage in the medium, carrying it along out the other side, which is to say a smaller permanent cavity and less tissue damage. This is caused by the bullet's low velocity, which prevented it from expanding well.

So again, all your points thus far are refuted. The slow but also heavy bullets expand poorly, over penetratde, and have small primary cavities. In fact, they penetrated further than the .357 Sig! Underwood .357 Sig no less! They had permanent cavities of about 1 inch wide for about 4 inches, or 'half' of the .357 Sig, and yet in total they penetrated further. So basically you have the worst of both worlds here: a bullet that does not have a good permanent cavity but over penetrates.

Let me go back to your earlier post. >>586275

You literally said that the Sig does not equate to greater damage, does not create permanent stretch, and overpenetrates. THE EXACT OPPOSITE of all those points happened in the video. The Sig had 'twice the sustained permanent cavity in length, the 9mm over penetreated, and even the guy filming the video says that the +p round, the faster round equated to greater tissue damage, because it's going faster. It did not over-penetrate as much as the other's because its greater energy allowed it to expand better, which is why it had a longer sustained cavity but lower overall penetration.

Also, not only do the videos posted thus far refute everything you've said, but you're still trying to retconn your original position of denying outright the influence of energy and speed, to the point of talking about "tissue damage." Now you're saying that the total surface area of the bullet matters, which implies that the force exerted of the total bullet matters, not just it's frontal diameter. You say here >>586254 and else where that SPEED DOES NOT MATTER FOR HANDGUNS. That was your position.

>The stretch from higher velocity handgun rounds does not damage and does not help stop an attack. Only PERMANENT stretch cavities can do this

yet not only are you now trying to sneak energy back into the discussion by talking about "surface area," again your whole tangent about energy NOT equating permanent cavity has been demonstrably proven false in the videos.

Everything you've said so far has been proven wrong, by your own videos.

>(which I stated velocity and energy can be useful, but they are not automatic and their effect is dependent on how the bullet crushes and resists against tissue

that's a complete lie, you never once said that. Your primary argument thus far has been that velocity and energy does not matter for handguns

>>586188

>No, higher velocity in handguns has not been proven to be the key factor in handgun effectiveness, nor even energy is the energy cannot be used by the handgun bullet effectively.

You're backtracking and think no one will notice, which is why you use that reaction image, to try and quell your emotional frustration. You've been proven wrong, again and again, and I'll keep pointing out how wrong you are now that you're pinned down.

>>586286

meant for >>586284

>>586289

>>586284

here's a video from paul that further illustrates the proof of my correct points and the falsity of yours, just substitute .357 Sig for the magnum. Actually, that green and white box is slightly over-loaded, so it should be an even poor performer by your incorrect standards, which it of course is not because you are wrong.

You said that the 150 grain 9mm is more effective than the sig because

1) better sustained permanent cavity

2) better expansion

3) more tissue damage

the exact opposite occured. The lighter faster bullet had

1) a better sustained cavity, twice as long sustained

2) dramatically better expansion

3) even the 147 +p had more tissue damage than the normal pressure 9mm by your video guy's own admission

and the 9mm actually over-penetrated, which again is due to the lower velocity/energy, not allowing the round to expand properly, thus causing an inferior permanent cavity, and in the case when the denim doubled up, the hollow-point's intended performance was entirely negated, so weak is that bullet. They expanded so poorly that they actually tumbled in gel

>>586289

and yes, this is autism

but the kikes kept going it at it, kept pretending like they had an argument, and I got pissed off. They bit off more than they could chew and got their shit pushed in. The facts won, the 147 grain is objectively shit, the +p version less shit by *the same fucking author* Mr. FuddyFive quoted, and truth won. Yes 115 grain +p+ will fragment, with that speed and BC it has to, but the sustained cavity is superior to the 147 grain, as the same guy tnourdoors9 admits, and evinces that load's strong street reputation, which FuddyFive said didn't exist. He was proven to be pulling nothing but air out of his gaping asshole, and this board is better off for the lack of another dumbshit fudd shill.

FuddyFive had a loud bark, bit off more than he could chew, and got his shit pushed in as a result.

>>586291

>inb4 FuddyFive comes at with me "IT FRAGMENTED" after I myself admitted it must

yes, that's why you go with .357 Sig, or 165 grain .40 for that matter, or 10mm.

If you can't do that, you have to take either expansion or penetration in 9mm, *like I said at the very fucking beginning." The 147 or god that god fucking awful 150 grain 9mm is dogshit by every JHP performance standard, so use that if you are a fudd or if you want to be fucked and think over-penetration, low expansion, and small cavities are good. Use the +p or +p+ 115 grain load for maximum expansion and energy. If someone is behind a barrier, well, that's what you get for using 9mm. If they're not, they're fucked.

>>586292

Its quite clear you are melting down and can't even think or put things together any longer. Then again, you've never been able to think or put any thoughts together, everything you think is just a thought within your mind and not an observation of things around you.

The permanent stretch cavity in the front part of the gel blocks is usually discarded because gel isn't the same as tissue, because the stretch in the very first part of the block is not found in real life gunshot victims, that this initial impact is in the skin which acts quite differently in muscle and will not replicate the gel block results in living tissue, and is not considered of major relevance to terminal effectiveness.

Skin can account for 2-4 inches of gel, and the outer part of the gel blocks are weaker than the center. If you've ever worked with the blocks and torn them apart, stabbed/cut them with a knife you would know this. Ask yourself, do entry wounds look like the opening part of tnaoutdoor's simtest blocks? No?

Have you read the literature by those who invented modern 10% gel blocks and their conclusions of real life gunshot victims, their wounds, and gel? That all the real experts deny that permanent stretch cavities are caused by handgun wounds in real victims?

Keep in mind the other reason why the shallow, small permanent stretch in the gel block doesn't matter is because the vital organs that are of value to hit aren't in the first couple of inches of penetration anyways. A permanent stretch cavity that only extends for the first small bit of a wound track will only tear up a little muscle, and damaging non critical tissue may be of little accomplishment. We are concerned about how much damage is delivered to the vitals, not any potential shallow damage that will not affect them. Your focus on the first few inches of stretch in the GEL BLOCK that is not seen in real tissues is mistaken.

So, which bullets expanded and penetrated the best? The 147 grain 9mm Luger bullets expanded better and penetrated on par or superior to the 125 grain 357 Sig round in our two videos. This means that the 9mm 147 grain bullets performed better. Open and closed case. The 9mm bullets punched deep enough, and deeper, in order to hit critical vitals, and would have done more damage with their greater expansion. The Sig lost.

The Sig saw fragmentation and LOWER expansion, so I don't know where you come off at. The 125 grain bullet had inferior expansion to every 147 and 150 bullet tested. So I'm wondering if you aren't smoking crack or something.

You took the time to watch his video on the overhyped shitty 115 grain +p+ garbagefest in order to listen to what you wanted to hear. I'm surprised you listened to anything at all since you make up everything in your head. He also said in the video that it performed terribly in his test, also said it had fragmentation issues and was taken out of service for poor performance. its street cred was heavily bullshit pushed by junk science and the shit work of Marshall and Sannow, who's works are wholly unscientific and utter trash.

So, no, your rounds you touted didn't outperform the slow heavy ones, and no, the measure of the test isn't the small short stretch cavity that only occurs in gel and not in human tissues, but rather the penetration and expansion of the bullet. You are wrong in every way.

>>597496

The argument against shot placement over caliber choice is that everyone's a terrible shot and that it's better to use bigger projectiles to compensate.

>>597504

Heis somehow correct, for you are bound to hit at least something if you keep shelling the same place with 18 inch battleship guns for a whole day.

>>597514

>tfw battleship age is gone

Feels bad, man.

>>597504

>implying that you choose one over the other

There are a lot of people who can handle a 45 better and shoot more accurate than someone with a 9mm or even a target 22lr. We don't live in a magical fantasy land where choosing a smaller caliber makes you instantly a good shot, there is no guarantee it will help you increase the quality of shot placement at all, it won't make you magically become incapable of bad shots either.

Choosing a more powerful/larger caliber does not mean everyone flinches and crushes their gun handles and bends their triggers and fires wildly hoping their more effective bullets hit something because they can't shot well. For someone who is trained and capable one can make the same high end shot placement with a 10mm, 45 ACP as a 9mm. There is nothing inherently inaccurate about more powerful rounds or anything inherently more accurate about lower power rounds.

Its the most useless non argument in firearms in the last 50 years. Its used by people who choose lower performing cartridges to pretend there is a false "either/or" argument that higher terminal performance actually creates some sort of magical loss that makes poor choices somehow magically better. Its a false scale argument to falsely discredit better shot for shot choices because you have no real argument in that regard to defend your inferior choice.

If ANYTHING shot placement people are those who should carry the most powerful weapon they can handle, because if they are such great shots isn't it more important to make your fewer, higher quality shot placements more effective and ensure terminal effect? Isn't choosing a less powerful cartridge for its higher magazine volume and SUPPOSEDLY quicker follow ups more about hosing someone down with bullets instead of proper shot placement, and cover fire because you didn't take the guy out?

Shot placement first people are the ones who should carry 10mm, 45 ACP, 357 Magnum and Sig. Make that well placed shot count.

In the end it was invented to push the 9mm Luger on the US army that didn't want it, trashing the 45 and building a religion cult of worship for the 9mm Luger sooper moon beam shooter death ray that does not wrong and is perfection. Everyone who defends poorer terminal ballistics uses this fake argument, all the way down to 22lr in a handgun "I CAN'T miss with my old plinker pistol, and nobody can hit anything with a big boomer cartridge, they are so scary I am so scared and shivering from the fear of wristsmashing recoil I'm goig to cry" and also appeals to egotists who claim " I don't need a more powerful round because I'm so damned awesome as a shot I can kill anything with a 22 short derringer".

Perhaps the greatest irony of all is the people with the smallest guns have by far the biggest egos. "I don't need no terminal performance because I am perfect and never miss" is a common problem. These are the kinds of people who wound deer with 22lr rifles and wound them trying to poach for bragging rights of hunting minimalist. The kinds of folks who shoot underpowered rifles of all types and wound game because 'muh shot placement". They are arrogant and choose calibers by feel, to feed ego, not to kill effectively.

>>585758

>>585766

>>585770

T-20E2 was thrown away too soon. RIP

>>597553

Pretty muich.

I mlight not be entirely sobert too.

>>597535

>using metric

Poland please. In real math Lebel is .327, Mannlicher is .329, Early Mauser being .318 and standard stuff being .323. Nambu being .320 though some later war stuff was .322. The Yugos called 8x57, 7,9. They never bothered with the two.

>>597567

Because slavs dont measure from grooves but lands. Or something silly like that I forget.

>>585552

>You shouldn't use below a 20 inch barrel with 5.56, only go 18 if you absolutely must reduce weight.

That thinking is just as dumb as SBR retards. 16.5 is fine, nothing wrong with longer lengths either but it does become an issue with CQC.

>>597539

When you're talking about shotgun, you're referring about buckshot, and not slug isn't it?

Because you only can get rifled shotgun in the C category so..

>>597710

>tor kike

1.5 more inches becomes a CQC issue?

is it because that's how big your dick is so you project that onto everything else?

>>597762

>Because you only can get rifled shotgun in the C category so…

It's all B cat. in France now (well you have 2 day left before it is).

Also a lot of European made "rifled shotguns" are rifled… straight (almost) just to comply with laws but not enough to really disperse shot (not that it really matter in a self defense situation it's really more for hunting that it's a problem, short range you will still hit).

Look up Fabarm or Verney Carron rifled shotgun "special hunting".

>>597710

It has to do with how slow the powder in 5.56 burns, and how long it takes it to get up to a certain velocity, because that velocity is needed to outweigh the downsides of using a light bullet in the first place.

If you want to fight in close quarters get a sword or a pistol. Rifles are designed for long range combat, using one in close quarters is like using a tank to fight a submarine. The fuck out of here.

>>597768

16.5 is a good balance, you get perfectly adequate pressure and it's not overly long. Yes every inch counts when attachments and muzzles or even bayonets enter the equation. 20in is fuggin long for room clearing.

>>597791

I know how powder works.

>Rifles are designed for long range combat, using one in close quarters is like using a tank to fight a submarine.

Confirmed for not knowing shit. ARs are stellar for CQC and they're not even that big as far as rifles go. The 5.56 doesn't overpenetrate and overall the system has proven to be dead reliable, which is more crucial close range than it is at 300+ yards with your battle rifle where you can usually find cover during a malfunction.

>>597802

>muh cqc

>ar

>not big

>dont overpenetrate

>dead reliable

yeah you know a lot about guns.

>>597809

Actually, that seems to be rather close to a rimless .500 S&W, and it just needs moonclips to work with a revolver.

>>597812

or a barrel swap on a 45 raptor? Those look short enough to feed through an LR-308 magwell …

>>597802

>every inch counts

since we know 5.56 is hyper velocity dependent, yes, every inch does count, which is why 20" is the best.

So my one question about 6.5 is how good is it at barrier penetration in comparison to .308? I'm talking about cinder blocks, cars, walls, etc.

>>597790

Is that a fucking joke? Every shotgun in fucking cat B now?

The fucking fuck, I have no money right now… Putain de merde if it's true…

>>598206

>Every shotgun in fucking cat B now?

Not every shotgun but every pump-action shotguns (I think pump action carbine are fine. Don't ask me why).

>>598209

But it was already the case, that pump action carbin were in cat C. Are you not saying that they're now going into cat B with this new degree?

It seems that they're limiting the length of the barrel, and the number of cartidge you can put in at something like 4 or 5.

Fuck this shit. I'll buy a 308. bolt action. I don't know what to buy, maybe a savage.

>>598225

>But it was already the case

No it wasn't. 8 shots rifled shotguns were still C cat. Only smoothbore shotguns were B cat.

>>598225

>Fuck this shit. I'll buy a 308. bolt action. I don't know what to buy, maybe a savage.

Depends what's your price range but shit like this https://www.chassezdiscount.com/carabine-impact-la-one-verney-carron,fr,4,IMPACT-LA-VERNEY-CARRON-SYNTHETI.cfm are pretty great guns in Cat C (and aren't concerned by the law changes

https://www.verney-carron.com/decret_2018-542 ).

But just do what needs to be done to get cat. B weapons.

>>585316

>the chad 300 win mag

the chad 300 win round* FTFY

>>597810

If you're actually refuting any of that then you truly don't know shit about the AR platform.

>>597811

because it's a bullpup

>>598285

Close quarters combat is bullshit with a rifle, for reasons already explained.

AR is an especially bad rifle for close quarters combat.

AR is as long as a battle rifle, it is the longest assault rifle by far.

Its projectile requires full length barrels to be of any use.

Any attempt to shorten the barrels renders the cartridge useless, and creates ridiculous amounts of flash.

AR in its normal configuration is one of the best penetrating rifles out there.

In its original configurations is also widely considered the least reliable assault rifle.

You're wrong on every fucking level.

>>598318

>Any attempt to shorten the barrels renders the cartridge useless, and creates ridiculous amounts of flash.

14.5'' barrel with birdcage has no visible daylight flash only puffs of the smoke.

As for "useless", anyone who says it should be shoot with "useless" cartridge.

>>598318

You really live up to every maple nigger stereotype there is. It's obvious you don't know what you're talking about, and I bet you've never fired an AR in your life. Your post >>597791 here is such blatant regurgitation of some bullshit you read, hoping no one would be able to tell how little you actually know about guns.

>If you want to fight in close quarters get a sword

fucking retard

>or a pistol.

Shit capacity, less attachment options, harder to control, worse shot placement with the same speed and accuracy of subs or ARs, actually longer in length than an AR would be when held in combat stance (especially if suppressed), shitty to deal with in hand to hand combat situations and easier to have it wrestled away from you. Even light calibers have more recoil than an AR and the heavier ones, again, have even worse capacity, worse recoil and generally worse penetration than 5.56 unless you're talking handcannons, which is just stupid for these scenarios. Some well thought out combat pistol setups (say, USP45 tac, red dot w/ suppressor and +P hollow point) wouldn't be all that bad but they still fucking pale in comparison to almost anything else when talking about cqc. Pistols are backup weapons, and that is how they are used in LEO/military service, period.

>Rifles are designed for long range combat,

I guess that's why every LEA, SWAT team, all US military branches and SF units routinely use the AR platform in room clearing situations. Go read about the Iraq war, you fucking dunce. Read about the retaking of Ramadi where small SEAL units would clear building after building every night for weeks with ARs and M240s.

>using one in close quarters is like using a tank to fight a submarine.

You are a fucking teenager.

The rest of your second post is 100% mall ninja nonsense, but just so you can't say I didn't explain to you why you are full of shit:

-gas ARs are go-to-hell reliable, you can oil that fucker once and not need to clean it for the next 10k rounds, both the Afghan and Iraq wars are proof of this

-not that large, standard 16.5" barrels are shorter than a shotgun. go up to 20" and you're still around the size of a mossberg 500 with 4x the capacity (or more depending on mag size)

-again absolutely superior capacity to literally anything else which is a major factor in these situations

-5.56 tends to shatter in building material, less worry of over penetration

That should give you plenty of things to research on youtube.

>>598394

>actually longer in length than an AR would be when held in combat stance

Daily reminder this is what the ayynigger wants.

>>598414

>Who cares about daylight flash?

Soldiers shotting during the daytime.

Night 14.5'' flash isn't that serous too. With naked eye observation its just slightly visible from the enemy side, it becomes big only with NVG use (still not detrimental from the user side)

>Considering the stock can't fold,

>using rifle with folded stock

>14.5 inch barrel puts an AR into an OAL category with other assault rifles

Nah, you said other thing

>Any attempt to shorten the barrels

>Any

Say it hundreds times loud and clear

>5.56 fragments at 2869 fps

>using m193/m855 for killing in the year 2018

Anyway you should be shot. Even m193 from the 10'' barrel' would put your stupid posting to an end forever.

>>598414

this

5.56 SBR is scum of the earth cancer. Coincidentally, reddit kikes at r/gundeals/ love it.

9mm out of an equivalent barrel length would be far more effective in close quarters. .40 jhp would be a beast in a 14.5" barrel.

people keep trying to make 5.56 something it is not, was never intended to be and never will be.

It is a 20" designated barrel length rifle round effective inside 300 yards. Get the fuck over it.

>>598476

>observation its just slightly visible from the enemy side

Nigger you realize flash is an issue because it ruins night vision of the SHOOTER right?

>>598416

I want to see that thing on a chrono.

>>598593

>reading comprehension