"You don't seem too happy ?"
Well, Rav, it's like this. I'm old. That makes me persnickety. I bet on horse races after they've been run. That's why on this last deployment I carried a regular old, rack-grade, solid plastic stock, M14 that had been made by Winchester in 1958. Stoked it with AP exclusively. Used iron sights out to and including 700M. It ain't a "death-ray" but it'll do till one gets here. Total failures of any kind: 0.0
I require two things of my weapons: 1) Reliable as sunrise. This is first and foremost. Non-negotiable. 2) As accurate as possible without violating requirement #1. Must shoot Minute-Of-Hajji, day or night, rain or shine, world without end, amen. 3) The round has got to be able to do the job when it gets there. Is there anyone who retains any lasting doubts about 7.62x51mm in this regard?
Truth is, I have seen enough aluminum gim-cracks, plastic goo-gaws and carbon-fiber whizz-bangs for one life-time. Enough to know that the summbitches asking me to bet my life on it won't be anywhere to be found when it gets upgefucht. I'd rather carry a few extra pounds and have the fuquer work when I need it, than go light with something that fails at random intervals.
Also, even though I have been in SF for fifteen of my eighteen years of AD, I am still a grunt at heart. You never quite lose the "Spirit of The Bayonet". The aggressive drive to close with and destroy the enemy still stirs within my loins. The thought of executing a horizontal butt-stroke or the smash to Mr. Hajji's noggin with an M4 or SCAR does not fill me with happiness.
As Boris "The Blade" says, "Heavy is good. Heavy is reliable. If it doesn't work, you can always hit him with it."
Is there anyone who retains any lasting doubts about 7.62x51mm in this regard?
I love that round, I'd take it as my round of choice. However there were some reports from the Falklands war about the round not doing what was expected of it.
Are you Sure? Compared to what?
"There were several instances where the 7.62 simply wasn't knocking people down."
"If I had my choice I wouldnt use an AP round as it doesnt deform as well as a standard round for that very reason, if is doesnt hit anything hard or vital it will pop straight through with minimal damage."
We're supposed to start getting these starting around the beginning of Jan.
1) "Knockdown" is a myth. Action = reaction remember? If the bullet was capable of knocking someone down the recoil would knock down the shooter.
2) Bullets poke holes. Period. Big holes are better than small holes. 7.62mm > 5.56mm. Two holes (entrance and exit) are better, and bleed more, than one hole (entrance).
3) The single biggest deciding factor in dropping the bad guy is shot placement. Most accounts of rounds failing to stop involve peripheral hits. You gotta hit 'em in the boiler room. Preferably through a major blood-bearing organ.
3) I used M993 AP exclusively for two reasons: a) because it re-defined cover. It consistently penetrated whatever Mr. Hajji got behind with sufficiently energy remaining to poke one or more holes in him. Vehicle bodies, mud walls, etc. didn't matter. No place to hide. b) with a bullet weight of 126 grains, the M993 has a lighter recoil than either M80 ball or M118 Special Ball and a muzzle velocity of 2,950 fps. At close distances the round would go side ways in soft tissue and then come apart.
In my experience, everybody I hit with it was DRT.
2) Bullets poke holes. Period. Big holes are better than small holes. 7.62mm > 5.56mm. Two holes (entrance and exit) are better, and bleed more, than one hole (entrance).
3) The single biggest deciding factor in dropping the bad guy is shot placement. Most accounts of rounds failing to stop involve peripheral hits. You gotta hit 'em in the boiler room. Preferably through a major blood-bearing organ.
A 5.56 that yaws/tumbles etc... does a lot more damage than a undeformed 7.62 that goes straight through (providing it does'nt hit anything hard).