>Nato uses 5.56>Everyone remembers it's hella gayWhen is Nato returning to 7.76mm?
>>64405558nah unc we finna move to 6.7mm :fire: the most skibidi ahh round fr
>>64405579this but 6.5
>>64405558>Nato returning to 7.76mmWhat a funny way of spelling 7.62mm.
>>64405558you mean, .280 british ? the real round that was supposed to be the NATO standard but got shut down by the amerimutts who then realized it was actually good just only 80 years later ?
>>64405642same thing
>>64405706>.280 british?>the real round that was supposed to be the NATO standardAnon, .280 British performed so poorly that the Brits were about to replace it with .270 British instead. It was never good.
>>64405642Isn't 7.76 something like the real diameter of 7.5 Swiss?
>>644058727.5 Swiss has almost an identical bullet diameter to .308 Winchester (.306"). It is usually described as 7.78mm but I think it is actually measured differently (groove to groove vs land to land). I know that people frequently reload for it with .308 Winchester projectiles.
>>64405642Fuck it, return to 7.92x57mm Mauser, or her 'roided up cousin, 9.3×62mm Mauser.It would be significantly less retarded than what the Yanks are doing with the M7 and SIG-Israel's new bullshit cartridge.Since the US is already slowly moving towards violating the ban on expanding ammo and just seeing if anyone objects, they might as well be throwing .366-cal 286gr Swift A-frames at collar bone busting velocities.
>>64405918You know how I know you have never fired a 9.3? Lol. Most of the posers on chan would fire a shot or two into front of friends then never touch one again. Same for 338-06. Both the 9.3 and the 338-06 are frankly the best worldwide hunting calibers you can find. For literal any medium up to and including dangerous game. But the recoil while not overly harsh or punishing compared to magnums is still...uncomfortable for those who shoot more off the bench than freehand.
>>64406100Yeah, I've never fired a 9.3I own no rifles chambered for this cartridge.I just have some 800 rounds of mixed ammo in this caliber around for no reason.
>>64405706.280 british is an anemic piece of shit round. why do so many people think it's good? is it just contrarianism?
>>64406279Classic forbidden fruit/ what could've been. Same mentality that has Cuban cigars as some gift from God (they're okay, I still prefer Dominican) and people still creaming their pants at the YF-23 and XB-70
>>64406279>why do so many people think it's good?They honestly believe this round that is almost the size of .308, but has slightly less performance than 6.5 Grendel is special just because they can't have it. It's the same way that everyone who watched "Back to the Future" wants a DeLorean while those cars sucked when they were actively in production.
8.89 is the superior caliber
>>64405918>would be significantly less retarded than what the Yanks are doing with the M7 and SIG-Israel's new bullshit cartridge.Fucking dumb ass bong. Why would a 308 oal cartridge mogging 300wm trajectory, firing boutique cartridges made specifically for the cartridge by the most advanced military in the world be inferior to some shitty African cartridge only used by poorfag colonist who got genocided?
>>64405558as soon as ian mentioned the bullet they use it made complete sense why the gign went with 7.62x39. when you're a completely bespoke counter-terror agency you can have whatever stupid custom ammo you want.
>>64406169Why? Are you a post Boer African farmer?
>>64405558Why are calibers always in such weird numbers?
>>64406702Ian from Forgotten Weapons had a long-ass video explaining why he thinks that is, but if we cut to the chase, it's because most projectiles have similar diameters, and they need a distinct/unique name so that even the dumbest customers don't get confused when buying ammo.Imagine if .40 S&W was called "10mm Kurz/short" like in Europe, and every nog buying ammo would later call the store complaining that their ammo doesn't fit in their gun because they bought 10mm long rather than "10mm Kurz/short." Gun stores already have to deal with customers buying a SIG pistol, buying SIG ammo later, and then complaining that the SIG brand ammo didn't fit into their SIG gun.
>>64405594this is a novelty gun that will end up like the SCAR faster than the SCAR
>>64405594>we want more range but a 20" AR is too long!>14.5 with a can and a longer receiver, multiple inches longer than a 20" ARwhy are milfags like this?
>>64405558Nyet. Round is fine.
>>64405558556 for regular troops300 chimpout for secret squirrels308/6.5 sneedmoar for supa snipersdone
>>64406169>>64406100Any reason to pick 9.2x62 over .30-06 or .308 if you're not planning on hunting dangerous game?
>>64406702i think it is because they were based on some ancient unit, then we kept the bore size. not long ago, the metric system wasnt the standard accross the worldsometime you get ammo made in a system it make sense (.22 / .45 / 9mm)7.62 is 0.10 лaдoнь (old russian unit)5.56 is .22 but there is already a .22 and since its nato, they switched to metric (.223 in fact)the last part is case lenght, because if you put 7.62(x39) in your 7.62(x54R) gun you have a bad daycombine with >>64406732 and there is a sensible explaination (like 9mm, .357 and .38 being the same bullet diameter, almost)there is also a difference between groove and land measurement, 9mm makarov is not the same bullet diameter as 9mm luger, because of it we can also add that mass grow to the cube of diameter, so if you are tuning a cartridge to some specific characteristics, you cant just add a full millimeter without fucking your mate shoulderthanks for reading my blog post
>>64409126my bad, just checked, 7.62 is 3 линии, so 3 lines, giving the name of the mosin nagant (still named like that in stalker 2 for example !the point still stands, calibers may be based on defunct units
>>64408335Both are fantastic cartridges, well suited for all medium and large game. I own both and regularly practice and hunt with them.The 9.3 offers more stopping power on larger game, but I would absolutely not say the .30-06 is lacking in that department either, especially with modern bonded bullets that work great on large game.Everything animal I've shot with .30-06 has died almost instantly.Choose the correct bullet and hit the right spot, and the .30-06 will get the job done every single time.Aside from having a bit more peak power, and a slightly larger permanent wound cavity, another advantage of the 9.3, is that it doesn't cause quite as much meat loss as .30-06.If you're hunting medium game such as regular-sized deer, you can use a 9.3 with a heavy bullet and get very good effect on target with less meat loss than a .30-06, especially if the .30-06 in question is some light high-velocity borderline varmint loading.Recoil is another factor where some may prefer the 9.3, while it certainly has a fair bit of recoil, it's not quite as snappy as .30-06 can be.Although that may just be from my own personal bias as all the 9.3 rifles I've shot have been fairly heavy.I'm sure that either round would be outright unpleasant to shoot out of some ultra-light bolt action with a composite stock and a featherweight carbon fiber-wrapped pencil barrel.If you already have a good .30-06, you don't have much to gain from buying a 9.3. Especially if you live somewhere where the caliber is obscure and ammo is expensive and hard to find.I already had an old 1950s .30-06 Winchester mod-70 and an ancient .375H&H FN-Mauser safari rifle when I bought my 9.3, so I didn't really have a need for a rifle chambered in 9.3, but I wanted a powerful fast-shooting rifle for dog-driven boar hunts and came across a used 9.3 semi-auto for a great price and figured that it would work well in that application. I ended up loving that rifle and the 9.3 cartridge.
>>64406690all i can imagine is some achmed getting half of his chest blown off. Would be cool to see
