Latest Ordinance/Small Arms News.
Posted: Sat Dec 03, 2005 8:07 pm
HI:
As a reader of several Small Arms Magazines, some odd information comes my way.
You may know that since its adoptions in the 70's, (late 60's actually) the 5.56X45mm Nato (aka ,223 Remington) has always had it's detractors.
The M16 Rifle has, of course, become a western world standard chambered for this round.
The cartridge was originally adopted with a 1 in 12 twist ration allowing it to barely stabilize the originall 55 grain 'ball' ammunition.
Since it was not overly stabilized, it would 'upset' fairly easily and was noted in it earily days as the "little rifle that left big holes". This was due to the fact that the 55 gr bullet would 'keyhole' on imparct and disintergrate causing fearsome exit wounds at short to medium ranges.
When the twist rate was changed to 1 in 9 and later to 1 in 7 the 55 grain bullet would no longer result in such exit wounds.
The faster twist rates would stabilize heavier projectiles and thus is effective out to longer ranges.
(62 , 68 grains generally)
A 6mm round has often since been considered as the best 'balance' in terms of effective range, retained energy and penetration. This was gained to some extent in the SS109 5.56 x 45mm Nato round now in general western use.
The Russians were the next to jump into the "small bore" military cartridge trend by simply necking the 7.62mm X 39 cardige down to about 21 caliber in the 5.45x39 mm catridge which could be handled by AK 47 type rifles (AK74).
Now, however, the Chinese have adopted a 5.8x42mm cartridge for their QBz95 type assualt rifle family which I am not familiar with.
One can view this as a dangerous development and i will write more this later.
The M1 Carbine will become more readily available as it will now be manufactured on new receivers and possibly GI surplus parts by Kahr/Thompson Arms based (to my surprise) in Worcester Mass.
According to reports in SGN (from which the above info was also taken) the Army may be slippinp back to the 7.62 Nato and military M-14's are supposedly being refurbished at a quickened pace.
What configurations the refurbished M14's will be issued in is not clear to me at this time.
If some have futher questions on any of these matters please ask and I will zero in on any matters of interest raised.
JT
As a reader of several Small Arms Magazines, some odd information comes my way.
You may know that since its adoptions in the 70's, (late 60's actually) the 5.56X45mm Nato (aka ,223 Remington) has always had it's detractors.
The M16 Rifle has, of course, become a western world standard chambered for this round.
The cartridge was originally adopted with a 1 in 12 twist ration allowing it to barely stabilize the originall 55 grain 'ball' ammunition.
Since it was not overly stabilized, it would 'upset' fairly easily and was noted in it earily days as the "little rifle that left big holes". This was due to the fact that the 55 gr bullet would 'keyhole' on imparct and disintergrate causing fearsome exit wounds at short to medium ranges.
When the twist rate was changed to 1 in 9 and later to 1 in 7 the 55 grain bullet would no longer result in such exit wounds.
The faster twist rates would stabilize heavier projectiles and thus is effective out to longer ranges.
(62 , 68 grains generally)
A 6mm round has often since been considered as the best 'balance' in terms of effective range, retained energy and penetration. This was gained to some extent in the SS109 5.56 x 45mm Nato round now in general western use.
The Russians were the next to jump into the "small bore" military cartridge trend by simply necking the 7.62mm X 39 cardige down to about 21 caliber in the 5.45x39 mm catridge which could be handled by AK 47 type rifles (AK74).
Now, however, the Chinese have adopted a 5.8x42mm cartridge for their QBz95 type assualt rifle family which I am not familiar with.
One can view this as a dangerous development and i will write more this later.
The M1 Carbine will become more readily available as it will now be manufactured on new receivers and possibly GI surplus parts by Kahr/Thompson Arms based (to my surprise) in Worcester Mass.
According to reports in SGN (from which the above info was also taken) the Army may be slippinp back to the 7.62 Nato and military M-14's are supposedly being refurbished at a quickened pace.
What configurations the refurbished M14's will be issued in is not clear to me at this time.
If some have futher questions on any of these matters please ask and I will zero in on any matters of interest raised.
JT