.280 British (.280/30 variant) -- flanked by a 7.89x33 mm (left) which inspired the idea of an intermediate NATO cartridge, and 7.62x51 mm NATO (right) -- what would have become the standard NATO cartridge, had it not been for the stubborn persistance of the US military not to accept anything smaller than a .30 calibre cartridge. The british tried desperately (but in vain) to appease the US military. Despite accuracy better than both .30-06 Springfield and T-65 (what would become the 7.62x51 mm NATO), good control even in full-automatic fire, and smaller and lighter weapon, while still retaining an effective terminal performance, the US military refused to accept the cartridge.
Seeing how it only took 5-6 years before the US military adopted the 5.56x45 mm NATO intermediate cartridge, and now the common complaints by modern soldiers that the 5.56x45 mm NATO lacks ballistic and terminal performance in the current-day combats, the original refusal to accept the .280 British cartridge seem quite ironic. With the designing of the 6.5 mm Grendel and 6.8 mm Remington SPC, the need for an intermediate cartridge such as the .280 British becomes even clearer. The 6.5 mm Grendel and 6.8 mm Remington SPC do increase performance of current 5.56 mm firearm systems, but they are still limited by the design and capabilities of said systems.
Now, 66 years later, many designers are becoming increasingly interested in reviving the .280 British. Rather than trying to improve the already lacking 5.56 mm systems, many have voiced the clear need for a new system all together, with the .280 British being one alternative. Others include the 7x46 mm (based on the Czech 7.62x45 mm cartridge), or one of several cartridges based on the German 7.89x57 mm IS, and a few others.
Similar problems have occured in Russia, where soldiers are increasingly reverting to the old -- yet reliable -- 7.62x39 mm SKS (and the AK-103 rifle built on the success of the AK-74M) for better terminal performance in short-range combat. Another interesting occurance is the success of the 9x39 mm VSS cartridge. It is a subsonic cartridge, but is incredibly controllable in full-automatic fire, is very accurate in short-range sniping (out to 400 m), shreds through armour like a hot knife through butter, and drops hostiles like flies. Even though much more expensive than a 7.62x39 mm SKS system, it is very popular among soldiers, and with several variations of the original VSS system.
Several improvements and modifications have been made to the Russian 5.4x40 mm AK, but it seems as if the situation is quite similar on the eastern front.
.280 British (.280/30 variant) -- flanked by a 7.89x33 mm (left) which inspired the idea of an intermediate NATO cartridge, and 7.62x51 mm NATO (right) -- what would have become the standard NATO cartridge, had it not been for the stubborn persistance of the US military not to accept anything smaller than a .30 calibre cartridge. The british tried desperately (but in vain) to appease the US military. Despite accuracy better than both .30-06 Springfield and T-65 (what would become the 7.62x51 mm NATO), good control even in full-automatic fire, and smaller and lighter weapon, while still retaining an effective terminal performance, the US military refused to accept the cartridge.
Seeing how it only took 5-6 years before the US military adopted the 5.56x45 mm NATO intermediate cartridge, and now the common complaints by modern soldiers that the 5.56x45 mm NATO lacks ballistic and terminal performance in the current-day combats, the original refusal to accept the .280 British cartridge seem quite ironic. With the designing of the 6.5 mm Grendel and 6.8 mm Remington SPC, the need for an intermediate cartridge such as the .280 British becomes even clearer. The 6.5 mm Grendel and 6.8 mm Remington SPC do increase performance of current 5.56 mm firearm systems, but they are still limited by the design and capabilities of said systems.
Now, 66 years later, many designers are becoming increasingly interested in reviving the .280 British. Rather than trying to improve the already lacking 5.56 mm systems, many have voiced the clear need for a new system all together, with the .280 British being one alternative. Others include the 7x46 mm (based on the Czech 7.62x45 mm cartridge), or one of several cartridges based on the German 7.89x57 mm IS, and a few others.
Similar problems have occured in Russia, where soldiers are increasingly reverting to the old -- yet reliable -- 7.62x39 mm SKS (and the AK-103 rifle built on the success of the AK-74M) for better terminal performance in short-range combat. Another interesting occurance is the success of the 9x39 mm VSS cartridge. It is a subsonic cartridge, but is incredibly controllable in full-automatic fire, is very accurate in short-range sniping (out to 400 m), shreds through armour like a hot knife through butter, and drops hostiles like flies. Even though much more expensive than a 7.62x39 mm SKS system, it is very popular among soldiers, and with several variations of the original VSS system.
Several improvements and modifications have been made to the Russian 5.4x40 mm AK, but it seems as if the situation is quite similar on the eastern front.
(edit).300 wby mag, not winmag.......and 7mm being a remington ultramag
[/quote]
Kudos for accepting the 8.38x69 mm Lapua (.338 Lapua Magnum).
There's also 7.62x69 mm Lapua (.300 Lapua Magnum), and 6.5x47 mm Lapua (primarily for benchrest, up to 5.4-calibres long bullets, or even more in some cases).
(edit).300 wby mag, not winmag.......and 7mm being a remington ultramag
Kudos for accepting the 8.38x69 mm Lapua (.338 Lapua Magnum).
There's also 7.62x69 mm Lapua (.300 Lapua Magnum), and 6.5x47 mm Lapua (primarily for benchrest, up to 5.4-calibres long bullets, or even more in some cases).
I think something around a 6mm would have been better... The recoil of the .308 in the M-14 made the fully automatic almost useless, and the excessive weight of the ammunition made it - and the round a loser. However, in machine guns it is a good choice...
However, what REALLY pisses me off is that the US replaced the .45 colt pistol and cartridge with a damn, 9mm. This is the exact reverse - the Americans giving in to the Europeans. The .38 caliber (essentially a 9mm) was PROVEN a loser in actual combat as long ago as the combat in the Philippines during and after the Spanish American war...which, BTW led to the development of the .45 ACP (Keeping in mind here that we are talking military - therefore, FMJ projectiles).
I think - no, I am sure - that the .45 Colt 1911 is the best combat and defense pistol EVER - period.
I think something around a 6mm would have been better... The recoil of the .308 in the M-14 made the fully automatic almost useless, and the excessive weight of the ammunition made it - and the round a loser. However, in machine guns it is a good choice...
However, what REALLY pisses me off is that the US replaced the .45 colt pistol and cartridge with a damn, 9mm. This is the exact reverse - the Americans giving in to the Europeans. The .38 caliber (essentially a 9mm) was PROVEN a loser in actual combat as long ago as the combat in the Philippines during and after the Spanish American war...which, BTW led to the development of the .45 ACP (Keeping in mind here that we are talking military - therefore, FMJ projectiles).
I think - no, I am sure - that the .45 Colt 1911 is the best combat and defense pistol EVER - period.
[quote user=EdRoberts] I think something around a 6mm would have been better... The recoil of the .308 in the M-14 made the fully automatic almost useless, and the excessive weight of the ammunition made it - and the round a loser. However, in machine guns it is a good choice...
However, what REALLY pisses me off is that the US replaced the .45 colt pistol and cartridge with a damn, 9mm. This is the exact reverse - the Americans giving in to the Europeans. The .38 caliber (essentially a 9mm) was PROVEN a loser in actual combat as long ago as the combat in the Philippines during and after the Spanish American war...which, BTW led to the development of the .45 ACP (Keeping in mind here that we are talking military - therefore, FMJ projectiles).
I think - no, I am sure - that the .45 Colt 1911 is the best combat and defense pistol EVER - period. [/quote]
a .40cal in a sig or glock is much better than the .45acp...... also the 1911 is a stove pipe jam felon
and never put a re-load lead bullet in a .45......you're paying for steel jacket or you're not reliable
EdRoberts wrote:
I think something around a 6mm would have been better... The recoil of the .308 in the M-14 made the fully automatic almost useless, and the excessive weight of the ammunition made it - and the round a loser. However, in machine guns it is a good choice...
However, what REALLY pisses me off is that the US replaced the .45 colt pistol and cartridge with a damn, 9mm. This is the exact reverse - the Americans giving in to the Europeans. The .38 caliber (essentially a 9mm) was PROVEN a loser in actual combat as long ago as the combat in the Philippines during and after the Spanish American war...which, BTW led to the development of the .45 ACP (Keeping in mind here that we are talking military - therefore, FMJ projectiles).
I think - no, I am sure - that the .45 Colt 1911 is the best combat and defense pistol EVER - period.
a .40cal in a sig or glock is much better than the .45acp...... also the 1911 is a stove pipe jam felon
and never put a re-load lead bullet in a .45......you're paying for steel jacket or you're not reliable
[quote user=tuoni] [quote user=mmateri](edit).300 wby mag, not winmag.......and 7mm being a remington ultramag
[/quote]
Kudos for accepting the 8.38x69 mm Lapua (.338 Lapua Magnum).
There's also 7.62x69 mm Lapua (.300 Lapua Magnum), and 6.5x47 mm Lapua (primarily for benchrest, up to 5.4-calibres long bullets, or even more in some cases). [/quote]
you put that .338 into a sako trg42 you've got a very expensive, but very worth it, extremely accurate rifle
tuoni wrote:
mmateri wrote:
(edit).300 wby mag, not winmag.......and 7mm being a remington ultramag
Kudos for accepting the 8.38x69 mm Lapua (.338 Lapua Magnum).
There's also 7.62x69 mm Lapua (.300 Lapua Magnum), and 6.5x47 mm Lapua (primarily for benchrest, up to 5.4-calibres long bullets, or even more in some cases).
you put that .338 into a sako trg42 you've got a very expensive, but very worth it, extremely accurate rifle
[quote user=mmateri] [quote user=EdRoberts]I think - no, I am sure - that the .45 Colt 1911 is the best combat and defense pistol EVER - period. [/quote]
a .40cal in a sig or glock is much better than the .45acp...... also the 1911 is a stove pipe jam felon
and never put a re-load lead bullet in a .45......you're paying for steel jacket or you're not reliable
[/quote]
Never had a jam in a .45. Manufactured 'loose' from the factory, they were designed to work every time in the dirty, muddy combat environment. While I like and have .40 S&W, it is NOT the .45 ACP. Only improvement on the 1911 I would make is to add a magazine safety - as the gun retention issue is one that gets a lot of people shot with their own weapon - I hate carrying a pistol without a manual safety for that same reason...and the 1911 safety is the fastest and most natural I've ever seen...I draw the pistol with my thumb on the safety and fire/release the safety in one smooth motion akin to closing my fist - as the thumb snaps down disengaging the safety and closing the 'grip' I pull the trigger.
Also, I know that it gives people 'pause' being on the other end of the Colt, looking down the huge maw of the .45 and seeing it "cocked and locked."
mmateri wrote:
EdRoberts wrote:
I think - no, I am sure - that the .45 Colt 1911 is the best combat and defense pistol EVER - period.
a .40cal in a sig or glock is much better than the .45acp...... also the 1911 is a stove pipe jam felon
and never put a re-load lead bullet in a .45......you're paying for steel jacket or you're not reliable
Never had a jam in a .45. Manufactured 'loose' from the factory, they were designed to work every time in the dirty, muddy combat environment. While I like and have .40 S&W, it is NOT the .45 ACP. Only improvement on the 1911 I would make is to add a magazine safety - as the gun retention issue is one that gets a lot of people shot with their own weapon - I hate carrying a pistol without a manual safety for that same reason...and the 1911 safety is the fastest and most natural I've ever seen...I draw the pistol with my thumb on the safety and fire/release the safety in one smooth motion akin to closing my fist - as the thumb snaps down disengaging the safety and closing the 'grip' I pull the trigger.
Also, I know that it gives people 'pause' being on the other end of the Colt, looking down the huge maw of the .45 and seeing it "cocked and locked."
12
| 835 views
| 492x565
| 224KB
Seeing how it only took 5-6 years before the US military adopted the 5.56x45 mm NATO intermediate cartridge, and now the common complaints by modern soldiers that the 5.56x45 mm NATO lacks ballistic and terminal performance in the current-day combats, the original refusal to accept the .280 British cartridge seem quite ironic. With the designing of the 6.5 mm Grendel and 6.8 mm Remington SPC, the need for an intermediate cartridge such as the .280 British becomes even clearer. The 6.5 mm Grendel and 6.8 mm Remington SPC do increase performance of current 5.56 mm firearm systems, but they are still limited by the design and capabilities of said systems.
Now, 66 years later, many designers are becoming increasingly interested in reviving the .280 British. Rather than trying to improve the already lacking 5.56 mm systems, many have voiced the clear need for a new system all together, with the .280 British being one alternative. Others include the 7x46 mm (based on the Czech 7.62x45 mm cartridge), or one of several cartridges based on the German 7.89x57 mm IS, and a few others.
Similar problems have occured in Russia, where soldiers are increasingly reverting to the old -- yet reliable -- 7.62x39 mm SKS (and the AK-103 rifle built on the success of the AK-74M) for better terminal performance in short-range combat. Another interesting occurance is the success of the 9x39 mm VSS cartridge. It is a subsonic cartridge, but is incredibly controllable in full-automatic fire, is very accurate in short-range sniping (out to 400 m), shreds through armour like a hot knife through butter, and drops hostiles like flies. Even though much more expensive than a 7.62x39 mm SKS system, it is very popular among soldiers, and with several variations of the original VSS system.
Several improvements and modifications have been made to the Russian 5.4x40 mm AK, but it seems as if the situation is quite similar on the eastern front.
Seeing how it only took 5-6 years before the US military adopted the 5.56x45 mm NATO intermediate cartridge, and now the common complaints by modern soldiers that the 5.56x45 mm NATO lacks ballistic and terminal performance in the current-day combats, the original refusal to accept the .280 British cartridge seem quite ironic. With the designing of the 6.5 mm Grendel and 6.8 mm Remington SPC, the need for an intermediate cartridge such as the .280 British becomes even clearer. The 6.5 mm Grendel and 6.8 mm Remington SPC do increase performance of current 5.56 mm firearm systems, but they are still limited by the design and capabilities of said systems.
Now, 66 years later, many designers are becoming increasingly interested in reviving the .280 British. Rather than trying to improve the already lacking 5.56 mm systems, many have voiced the clear need for a new system all together, with the .280 British being one alternative. Others include the 7x46 mm (based on the Czech 7.62x45 mm cartridge), or one of several cartridges based on the German 7.89x57 mm IS, and a few others.
Similar problems have occured in Russia, where soldiers are increasingly reverting to the old -- yet reliable -- 7.62x39 mm SKS (and the AK-103 rifle built on the success of the AK-74M) for better terminal performance in short-range combat. Another interesting occurance is the success of the 9x39 mm VSS cartridge. It is a subsonic cartridge, but is incredibly controllable in full-automatic fire, is very accurate in short-range sniping (out to 400 m), shreds through armour like a hot knife through butter, and drops hostiles like flies. Even though much more expensive than a 7.62x39 mm SKS system, it is very popular among soldiers, and with several variations of the original VSS system.
Several improvements and modifications have been made to the Russian 5.4x40 mm AK, but it seems as if the situation is quite similar on the eastern front.
[/quote]
Well duuuh, the 7.62x51 mm Winchester (.308) is the civilian version of the NATO cartridge. Dumbfuck.
Well duuuh, the 7.62x51 mm Winchester (.308) is the civilian version of the NATO cartridge. Dumbfuck.
(edit).300 wby mag, not winmag.......and 7mm being a remington ultramag
(edit).300 wby mag, not winmag.......and 7mm being a remington ultramag
(edit).300 wby mag, not winmag.......and 7mm being a remington ultramag
[/quote]
Kudos for accepting the 8.38x69 mm Lapua (.338 Lapua Magnum).
There's also 7.62x69 mm Lapua (.300 Lapua Magnum), and 6.5x47 mm Lapua (primarily for benchrest, up to 5.4-calibres long bullets, or even more in some cases).
(edit).300 wby mag, not winmag.......and 7mm being a remington ultramag
Kudos for accepting the 8.38x69 mm Lapua (.338 Lapua Magnum).
There's also 7.62x69 mm Lapua (.300 Lapua Magnum), and 6.5x47 mm Lapua (primarily for benchrest, up to 5.4-calibres long bullets, or even more in some cases).
However, what REALLY pisses me off is that the US replaced the .45 colt pistol and cartridge with a damn, 9mm. This is the exact reverse - the Americans giving in to the Europeans. The .38 caliber (essentially a 9mm) was PROVEN a loser in actual combat as long ago as the combat in the Philippines during and after the Spanish American war...which, BTW led to the development of the .45 ACP (Keeping in mind here that we are talking military - therefore, FMJ projectiles).
I think - no, I am sure - that the .45 Colt 1911 is the best combat and defense pistol EVER - period.
However, what REALLY pisses me off is that the US replaced the .45 colt pistol and cartridge with a damn, 9mm. This is the exact reverse - the Americans giving in to the Europeans. The .38 caliber (essentially a 9mm) was PROVEN a loser in actual combat as long ago as the combat in the Philippines during and after the Spanish American war...which, BTW led to the development of the .45 ACP (Keeping in mind here that we are talking military - therefore, FMJ projectiles).
I think - no, I am sure - that the .45 Colt 1911 is the best combat and defense pistol EVER - period.
However, what REALLY pisses me off is that the US replaced the .45 colt pistol and cartridge with a damn, 9mm. This is the exact reverse - the Americans giving in to the Europeans. The .38 caliber (essentially a 9mm) was PROVEN a loser in actual combat as long ago as the combat in the Philippines during and after the Spanish American war...which, BTW led to the development of the .45 ACP (Keeping in mind here that we are talking military - therefore, FMJ projectiles).
I think - no, I am sure - that the .45 Colt 1911 is the best combat and defense pistol EVER - period.
[/quote]
a .40cal in a sig or glock is much better than the .45acp...... also the 1911 is a stove pipe jam felon
and never put a re-load lead bullet in a .45......you're paying for steel jacket or you're not reliable
However, what REALLY pisses me off is that the US replaced the .45 colt pistol and cartridge with a damn, 9mm. This is the exact reverse - the Americans giving in to the Europeans. The .38 caliber (essentially a 9mm) was PROVEN a loser in actual combat as long ago as the combat in the Philippines during and after the Spanish American war...which, BTW led to the development of the .45 ACP (Keeping in mind here that we are talking military - therefore, FMJ projectiles).
I think - no, I am sure - that the .45 Colt 1911 is the best combat and defense pistol EVER - period.
a .40cal in a sig or glock is much better than the .45acp...... also the 1911 is a stove pipe jam felon
and never put a re-load lead bullet in a .45......you're paying for steel jacket or you're not reliable
[/quote]
Kudos for accepting the 8.38x69 mm Lapua (.338 Lapua Magnum).
There's also 7.62x69 mm Lapua (.300 Lapua Magnum), and 6.5x47 mm Lapua (primarily for benchrest, up to 5.4-calibres long bullets, or even more in some cases).
[/quote]
you put that .338 into a sako trg42 you've got a very expensive, but very worth it, extremely accurate rifle
Kudos for accepting the 8.38x69 mm Lapua (.338 Lapua Magnum).
There's also 7.62x69 mm Lapua (.300 Lapua Magnum), and 6.5x47 mm Lapua (primarily for benchrest, up to 5.4-calibres long bullets, or even more in some cases).
you put that .338 into a sako trg42 you've got a very expensive, but very worth it, extremely accurate rifle
a .40cal in a sig or glock is much better than the .45acp...... also the 1911 is a stove pipe jam felon
and never put a re-load lead bullet in a .45......you're paying for steel jacket or you're not reliable
[/quote]
Never had a jam in a .45. Manufactured 'loose' from the factory, they were designed to work every time in the dirty, muddy combat environment. While I like and have .40 S&W, it is NOT the .45 ACP. Only improvement on the 1911 I would make is to add a magazine safety - as the gun retention issue is one that gets a lot of people shot with their own weapon - I hate carrying a pistol without a manual safety for that same reason...and the 1911 safety is the fastest and most natural I've ever seen...I draw the pistol with my thumb on the safety and fire/release the safety in one smooth motion akin to closing my fist - as the thumb snaps down disengaging the safety and closing the 'grip' I pull the trigger.
Also, I know that it gives people 'pause' being on the other end of the Colt, looking down the huge maw of the .45 and seeing it "cocked and locked."
a .40cal in a sig or glock is much better than the .45acp...... also the 1911 is a stove pipe jam felon
and never put a re-load lead bullet in a .45......you're paying for steel jacket or you're not reliable
Never had a jam in a .45. Manufactured 'loose' from the factory, they were designed to work every time in the dirty, muddy combat environment. While I like and have .40 S&W, it is NOT the .45 ACP. Only improvement on the 1911 I would make is to add a magazine safety - as the gun retention issue is one that gets a lot of people shot with their own weapon - I hate carrying a pistol without a manual safety for that same reason...and the 1911 safety is the fastest and most natural I've ever seen...I draw the pistol with my thumb on the safety and fire/release the safety in one smooth motion akin to closing my fist - as the thumb snaps down disengaging the safety and closing the 'grip' I pull the trigger.
Also, I know that it gives people 'pause' being on the other end of the Colt, looking down the huge maw of the .45 and seeing it "cocked and locked."
[/quote]
After last week and the end of DADT, I'm sure the Marines have a Purchase Order out for a bunch of those babies...
After last week and the end of DADT, I'm sure the Marines have a Purchase Order out for a bunch of those babies...