Perfect Union banner
1 - 20 of 39 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
29 Posts
Can you be more specific? Are you comparing the rounds themselves, or the Mini-14 vs Mini-30 specifically?

Speaking for myself, assuming both of the above, I would go with the .223 (better US avalibility and supposedly better ballistics), used in either an AR-15 or AK-47 (the latter of which I have in .223).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
53 Posts
Anyone who reads the forums like Frugals, AK47.net, AR15.com etc. is very familiar with ongoing discussions concerning the two calibers. Apparently the subject is not burning on the minds of people who frequent this forum. For myself, reading about whether I can forage for either large or small game, carry more ammo, stock up on dead UN guys .223 ammo, shoot flatter compared to harder, punch through a bullet proof vest or car door, rely on my ( claimed reliable ) AK compared to my (claimed jam-a-matic ) AR, or any other arm chair made up scenario borders on the ludicrous. I'll tell you what, if you found yourself with the world gone mad around you I guaranty you won't be debating which round is better! War is hell. And you will take whatever providence places in your hands and do your damned best.

[This message has been edited by Dave (edited 02-15-2001).]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
29 Posts
Dave
[...]arm chair made up scenario borders on the ludicrous. I'll tell you what, if you found yourself with the world gone mad around you I guaranty you won't be debating which round is better! War is hell. And you will take whatever providence places in your hands and do your damned best.
It isn't so much of a moot point when you are trying to prepare in advance for such calamities.

My solution has been to diversity my collection as much as I can. I have rifles in .308, 7.62x39, and .223, as well as trusty old .22LR.

[This message has been edited by Jay_S (edited 03-01-2001).]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
53 Posts
Now don't get me wrong. I'm probably more prepared then most of you. I read alot of these posts for the information and unique sense of humor us gun guys have. And I have a variety of weapons and calibers also. But I have lived long enough to know that things can and do go wrong. The best laid plans, you know. Regarding the arm chair stuff, it seems to be peoples unrealistic attitude. Let's use one of the common scenarios. Commies are everywhere! So you say to your wife:
"Did you pack my lunch dear? gonna pick off some commies at 400yrds today with my .223."
"Is that your new match grade? You did that yesterday. Why don't you grab the reliable AK today."
"I know, but I made up some new reloads last night I wanna try out."
"OK, whatever, just pick up some milk on the way home. And don't forget little Jimmys school play tonight."
And then our warrior calls a time out because his AR fouls, or the AK dents the gas tube or ( God forbid! ) his mini 14 jams with a bad mag. The point is: How did I learn about these type problems? The forums, true. But it seems as if people are preparing for the horrors of something they know not about. Prepare, yes, but remember, WAR IS HELL.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
45 Posts
Ask yourself how many different rifles have been chambered in each of these calibers. Have Remington, Winchester, Ruger, etc. ever offered a bolt action rifle in 7.62x39 ? No! Has anybody ever shot it competitively? Not that I am aware of. Has anybody ever seen a T/C Contender or Encore in that caliber? Nope again. How about a wildcat round based on it? I don't think so. That ought to give you some idea of how good a round it really is. Then look at what's offered in .223 cal. The 7.62x39 cartridge is inferior to just about anything you care to compare it to. I'm not saying the Kalasnakov or SKS rifles are crap. Some are, but some are pretty good I'm told. The cartridge is, however, junk.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
53 Posts
The wildcat cartridge made from the 7.62x39 is the 22PPC, Hornady Vol I, page 110. 1st cousin is the 6mmPPC. The 7.62x39 cartridge is part of an *extremely* well thought out *system* of "gun and ammo ", right down to the tapper of the case for reliable extraction, quoting from American Gunsmithing Institute literature. After studying 3 million casualty reports from WWI & WWII, ALCLAD determind that rifle fire was seldom used effectively at distances greater than 300yrds. This cartridge was developed for that distance or less. It wasn't developed for hunting etc. Not knocking the 5.56 NATO, I'd be nuts. Both rounds are good.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
45 Posts
Let's compare notes here gentlemen. One manufacturer USED to make a sporting rifle in the 7.62x39, and one wildcat cartridge is derived from it too. Well, not exactly an avalanche of empirical data supporting the ballistic superiority of the round is it?
The Russians got smart back in the seventies when they rechambered the AK-47 for 5.45x39 and renamed the rifle the AK-74. Guess why they did that? To mimic the performance of the NATO 5.56 that was kicking their ballistic ass. See the information on the following site for a little historical perspective on why even the Russians think the 7.62x39 round is inferior to the .223. http://www.classicfirearms.org/ak74.html

Look at what the bullets do in flight. Assuming a typical military type load for the .223 is 55 gr fmj with muzzle velocity of 3200fps and 1250 ft lb of energy. A 100 yard zero produces -3.0" drop at 200 yds with a remaining energy of 723 ft lbs and 2433 fps. At 300 yards it's a -10.2" drop, 536ft lbs energy and 2095 fps.
Now look at the startling difference in that and a 7.62x39 military type load. The ballistics table didn't have a 123 grain bullet listed so I used the next lighter one.
110 gr fmj with a muzzle velocity of 2300fps and 1292 ft lbs of energy.(That's 900 fps less than the .223 right out of the box! And even though the bullet is twice as heavy,the muzzle energy is a virtual toss up.) A 100 yard zero produces -8.7" drop at 200 yds with a remaining energy of 538 ft lbs and 1484 fps. At 300 yards it's a -33.5" drop, 349ft lbs energy and 1195 fps. It only gets uglier as the distances increase. In a nutshell the russian round looses by a land slide. And the military ballistics of the 7.62 can't be improved upon much by reloaders due to the limited powder capacity of the case. The .223 can be improved upon by a bunch.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
53 Posts
Good link Mike. Now I'm not knocking the mouse rounds, but we should have the info on both calibers as accurate as possible. 7.62x39 is 123gr @ 2350fps. Using your bullet size 5.56x45 NATO is/was 55gr @ 3000fps. http://www.ar15.com/docs/primer/
7.62x39
muzzle - 1445 ft lb
100 yd - 1092 ft lb
200 yd - 813 ft lb
300 yd - 599 ft lb
NATO 5.56x45
muzzle - 1099 ft lb
100 yd - 836 ft lb
200 yd - 626 ft lb
300 yd - 460 ft lb
Clearly more energy all the way out.
As to bullet drop, sighting in the M-43 at 200 yds works. It is 4" high at 100 yds, on at 200 yds and down 15" at 300 yrds. No argument that the .223 is flatter, but zero the 7.62x39 at 150 to 200 yrds.
As to handloading, I use 150 gr boat tail, ( high ballistic coeffecient), @ 2200 fps.. Flatter trajectory than standard military 7.62x39 123 gr and more energy. I am still checking on the .223 fps though. AR15.com was the fastest place to look and the link above states 3000 fps.
...and it can punch through kevlar and car doors, hunt big game, down planes, stop tanks, oh no, I'm catching it. BBS
BullletinBoard Bu!! S***

[This message has been edited by Dave (edited 02-15-2001).]
 

·
No Longer Involved
Joined
·
2,398 Posts
M193 (milspec 55gr) 5.56x45 is 3250 fps at the muzzle.

Can you run that through a calculator?

Wait, let's see if I have my spreadsheet...

The BC on a 55gr boat tail is about 0.27.

A 300 yard zero (like the US military uses) gives you a max of about 4.25" high at 175 yards, dead on at 300, dropping to 11 inches low at 400.
Energy is as follows:

Yards: Energy (lb/ft)
0 - 1289
100 - 1019
200 - 798
300 - 617

------------------
[email protected]
http://perfectunion.com/

[This message has been edited by Bill (edited 02-15-2001).]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
53 Posts
Thanks Bill. Hmmm, well, I wanted the truth. Maybe Mike has me about convinced. I better take another look at the little cartridge. I'm not lowering my outlook on 7.62 just getting a greater respect for the .223.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
45 Posts
If you want to shoot down A-10's with the .223 you gotta lay on a store of Green tip SS109. I heard they are good for rhino out to 500 yds too. LOL Just kidding, the Rhino has to be within 250 yds for a clean kill.

Seriously, this is the kind of discussion that does us all some good. You have to read up on the subject a little and that's never a bad thing.

BTW, if it were me, and money was no object, and if I wasn't so old and weak, I'd go for the M1A. Now that's a rifle!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
I see where CZ has come out now with one of their bolt actions in 7.62x39. Perhaps this round has something going for it after all. I'd probably have a .223 excepting, they're not legal for deer here in Washington State... and since I don't shoot dogs, big or little, I've no real use for a .223. I would say though, .223 is just fine if ya have a use for it.
 
1 - 20 of 39 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top