Thread: rifle upgrades

Originally Posted by DrStealth

Originally Posted by Mr Happy

Originally Posted by stoatman

Mr Happy: "stopping power" is to all intents and purposes identical between the two weapons (same cartridge, similar barrel length).

Ja, accepted. Which leads me onto the question, why 9mm.

With the 226 we could have opted for 9mm, .40, .357 etc. So why did we stick with 9mm and did we miss a chance to upgrade to a better round (sod NATO rules etc)

Originally Posted by DrStealth

theres no difference in practical use between the HP and the SiG to be honest,

Ja, but the HP doesn't half hurt the web of the thumb and forefinger.... And because you mentioned "practical" I won't mention which is cooler...

good point on cals, I myself cant understand why for 'them' types they are not using .40 or others that are better than 9mm.
when ever the HP is replaced there should be a big yell and scream session for the services to ditch 9mm and replace with .40

and get a PDW (thats SMG for old hats) in .40 too.

and as for 'coolness' i agree, the Sig's 'ally factor' pis*ses all over the HP

Because UK plays the game as a good NATO ally and only issues NATO qualified rounds. At the moment no NATO military forces use the .40 round (unless you count the US Coastguard!).

Not sure that I agree about the need for an SMG. An SMG in a pistol calibre is an obsolete concept for military GS use when you can get 10" barreled C8 or SA80A2 carbines in 5.56. Three times the power for the same size and weight as an SMG. But see my earlier post on 'why everyone needs a rifle'.

Originally Posted by instinct

Why not 5.7x28mm?

i'm yet to be convinced of the latest FN (5.7x28mm) and HK (4.6x30mm) calibers to be honest, especialy if its to be used in a service pistol as well as an SMG, oops sry, PDW, i'm struggling with the concept of using high velocity micro cals in a pistol. i bet they make your ears ring.
looking at the ballistics they would be fantastic for hunting bunnies. ( yes i know they are 'special' hard core rounds developed for piecing body armour, let me get my dig in anyway please )
that said, once again mine is an uninformed opinion with no personal experiance of trying one out.

Here is my educated guess about the modern PDW cartridges:

They are designed with one thing in mind: penetration of modern body armour at short to medium ranges. In tests, they do remarkably well at this. now, in the case of a body armoured up bad guy, any hole in him is better than no hole at all, so stopping power take second place to actually getting the hole in him.

My best guess is that stopping power is consequently poor, particularly against unarmoured targets, and it would not surprise me if it is poor even in regard to the rather mediocre capabilities of 9 x 19 mm FMJ.

In an ideal world, truncated cone FMJ .40 S&W is probably the best you can do "stopping power"-wise without falling foul of either magazine capacity or the conventions.

12 gauge with longest barrel you can get away with (e.g. not quite sawn off). Job done. Special cartdrige with flechette and ball for fcking up the bad guys. The CBA penetrating requirement is a nice to have but if US civpol aren't doing anything 'uber special' (e.g. they are not arming all their boys with special penetration stuff - not even in LA) then I don't think we need to worry about it.

Originally Posted by Gun_Nut

Originally Posted by soldier.a

I was thinking that basically if your in a tank it's still much too bulky to have along side you. It might be ok in the turret but I can't see the driver being able to have it nearby. And surely unless it's right next to you, grabbing hold of it if you need to bang out of the tank really quick isn't an option?

Mr Browning is your friend.

Except unfortunately tank crews don't get them any more. The bean counters triumph once again.

Mug mod police for their shiny heckler koch mp7s .they can carry the sa80 carbines instead its not like they have to use them that often.
Its so small you could hand it out to people who normaly just get a pistol
and got to be easier to hit things with.

Originally Posted by stoatman

Here is my educated guess about the modern PDW cartridges:

They are designed with one thing in mind: penetration of modern body armour at short to medium ranges. In tests, they do remarkably well at this. now, in the case of a body armoured up bad guy, any hole in him is better than no hole at all, so stopping power take second place to actually getting the hole in him.

My best guess is that stopping power is consequently poor, particularly against unarmoured targets, and it would not surprise me if it is poor even in regard to the rather mediocre capabilities of 9 x 19 mm FMJ.

In an ideal world, truncated cone FMJ .40 S&W is probably the best you can do "stopping power"-wise without falling foul of either magazine capacity or the conventions.

I thought that being a 'light' round they would stop(ish) in the body transferring most of their energy. I am sure I read this in the Sunday Times when ol' Fayed said that Di was whacked by the Establishment. He reckoned 'they' (as opposed to 'them') shot the tires but there was an aside as to what the 'Five seveN' (see what FN did there?) or some homo spelling could achieve.

T_B_B

Not a firearms guru. Fires what he is told to but in training mostly shouts 'BANG!' so please no flaming.

Originally Posted by Bisley_Bob

Originally Posted by Gun_Nut

Originally Posted by soldier.a

I was thinking that basically if your in a tank it's still much too bulky to have along side you. It might be ok in the turret but I can't see the driver being able to have it nearby. And surely unless it's right next to you, grabbing hold of it if you need to bang out of the tank really quick isn't an option?

Mr Browning is your friend.

Except unfortunately tank crews don't get them any more. The bean counters triumph once again.

Really? So if my tank is hit and starts to burn like a Taiwanese tarts crotch and I don't have time to reach for my carbine (That will still probably have to be stowed in the bins) I'm pretty fcuked in the old shooting back stakes?

What a wonderful decision.

Light rounds depending upon the speed of bullet tend to either destruct on solids or zip through. The problem with bullet design and construction is balancing weight, stability and strength against the speed needed to propell the distance required and still have an effect at the other end. The best bullet designs tend to be limited, in pistols its a trade of stopping power (Immeasureable in my opinion) versus penetration and with rifles its range and accuraccy versus stability and penetration.
With rifles all good bullet design really ended when the Hague convention decided upon FMJs and the 6.5 mauser and 7mm Mauser bullets were designed. The only improvements since have been in bullet construction i.e. materials. They dont stabilise any better than 6-7mm at 140-180 grains between 2500 and 3000 fps. Anything else is compromising.
Sad but true and all the latest bullet designs are wheel come full circle. Yes you can go faster/burn more powder more efficiently but its essentially the same.

I'm not that much of a gun nut but is the 5.56's claimed lack of stopping power the reason we are seeing 6 and 6.8mm weapons starting to appear? What is the likelyhood of us moving over to that cartridge?

Originally Posted by Mr Happy

With the 226 we could have opted for 9mm, .40, .357 etc. So why did we stick with 9mm and did we miss a chance to upgrade to a better round (sod NATO rules etc)

Because 9mm NATO has been merrily killing people for fifty years or more, and seems quite adequate for the job at hand?

Originally Posted by soldier.a

I'm not that much of a gun nut but is the 5.56's claimed lack of stopping power the reason we are seeing 6 and 6.8mm weapons starting to appear? What is the likelyhood of us moving over to that cartridge?

It has more to do with perception than fact. The standard 5.56 is ok in an M16A3 or an L85A1 but when fired from a short barreled weapon like the M4 Carbine (flavour of the month with the spams) it is less accurate and travels a little less distance due to lack of barrel length to use all of the proppellant.
They obviously want to make things better so they decided to reinvestigate (been done before) the 6-7mm group of bullets. This has been going on for a long time as the Yanks like to invest lots of time and money into R&D thank god and as such eventually we all reap the benefits of this research. Lets face it we cant fund it ourselves.
Maybe they will change to the new calibre as it basically requires a rebarrel but beyond that its a bean counters job I suppose.
Remember 5.56 has only really just made it globally so there is possibly another 20 to 30 years in that calibre yet!

most spam gun nights can easily be wound if you mention any handgun that isn't a 1911 :D

.40 SW is for puffs :P
Now 10 mm, that's a mans' round!

the FBI binned the 10mm
when they found out most of there people were not real men :D