I've read a lot about these two and how they're roughly comparable, what I am wanting to know is which one shoots a flatter trajectory? I always see people saying the 30-30 at 200yds is marginal at best, but how about the 7.62x39? A round that is only good to 200yds (while probably more than enough for assault rifle purposes) doesn't sound like something many militaries would approve and field. Please, oh forum gurus, satisfy my curiosity!
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
30-30 & 7.62x39 trajectory?
- Thread starter RoyalWe
- Start date
Using 150 gr bullets a 30-30 gives similar trajectory to a 125 gr 7.62X39 bullet. On paper the 7.62 bullet has more energy at 200 yards simply because it is moving faster. But in my experience and opinion the heavier bullet will penetrate better at those ranges and do more damage.
I know there are some 150ish gr bullets available for 7.62X39. I'm not familiar with their performance. The difference between RN and pointed bullets of the same weight is insignificant as to trajectory at these speeds and ranges, so I doubt the 150's from a 7.62 make a significant improvement in trajectory. But the pointed bullets will hit with a little more energy at long range. Long range being a relative term here.
Some will disagree, but for hunting I consider 200 yards to be pushing the limits and is actually farther than I'd shoot game with either. You can always hold high enough and hit stuff much farther away than 200 yards with either. But that ain't the same as hunting and killing game quickly.
For 99% of all soldiers 200 yards is a lot farther than they will ever shoot their rifles. That is what other weapons are for. The 5.56 round we use shoots flatter and is easier to hit with at longer ranges, but offers even less energy past about 200 yards. Not a real negative in my opinion.
I know there are some 150ish gr bullets available for 7.62X39. I'm not familiar with their performance. The difference between RN and pointed bullets of the same weight is insignificant as to trajectory at these speeds and ranges, so I doubt the 150's from a 7.62 make a significant improvement in trajectory. But the pointed bullets will hit with a little more energy at long range. Long range being a relative term here.
Some will disagree, but for hunting I consider 200 yards to be pushing the limits and is actually farther than I'd shoot game with either. You can always hold high enough and hit stuff much farther away than 200 yards with either. But that ain't the same as hunting and killing game quickly.
A round that is only good to 200yds (while probably more than enough for assault rifle purposes) doesn't sound like something many militaries would approve and field.
For 99% of all soldiers 200 yards is a lot farther than they will ever shoot their rifles. That is what other weapons are for. The 5.56 round we use shoots flatter and is easier to hit with at longer ranges, but offers even less energy past about 200 yards. Not a real negative in my opinion.
Blindstitch
New member
Echo of above.
Plus when a soldier is just trying to get a body shot shooting moa doesn't matter.
Plus when a soldier is just trying to get a body shot shooting moa doesn't matter.
Model12Win
Moderator
You often hear the AK and SKS have an effective range of about 300 meters, but I just don't see it.
Shooting my WASR-10 and Yugo SKS at 200 yards, I notice extreme drop and it is virtually impossible to get rounds on a 12" steel plate past this range. Both these guns are sub 3-MOA with the right ammo as well, it's just the 7.62x39mm has such a rainbow trajectory that it makes it immensely difficult.
Shooting my WASR-10 and Yugo SKS at 200 yards, I notice extreme drop and it is virtually impossible to get rounds on a 12" steel plate past this range. Both these guns are sub 3-MOA with the right ammo as well, it's just the 7.62x39mm has such a rainbow trajectory that it makes it immensely difficult.
Cor-bon makes a 150 grain load rated @ 2300FPS from a 20'' barrel. That's just shy of what the 30-30 can do. The difference is the 7.62x39 usually uses pointier bullets that tend to have higher BC's which will retain velocity and energy over a longer range. Even the LEVER REVOLUTION bullets don't quite hold up with similar weight x39 bullets because the O-give is still flatter on those types of bullets giving them a lower BC.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n4SVwSGPLOc
...you were saying..?
You often hear the AK and SKS have an effective range of about 300 meters, but I just don't see it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n4SVwSGPLOc
...you were saying..?
kilimanjaro
New member
Correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding of the military term 'effective range ' means a 50% probability of a hit on an enemy soldier, including extremities, at the given range by a trained soldier.
Effective range has two major components - the maximum distance at which a trained shooter can hit a target (man size) at least 50% of the time, and the maximum distance at which bullet will be lethal. So it is not a matter of just power but also of accuracy. Is 300 meters too far to hit a paper silhouette target with a given rifle? If so, the accuracy component is not met and the 300 meters is beyond the effective range. Is a bullet from the round in question lethal at 300 meters? If not (a .22 LR probably would not be dependably lethal), then the power component is not met and 300 meters is beyond the effective range.
The maximum range is another matter, and usually well beyond the maximum effective range.
Jim
The maximum range is another matter, and usually well beyond the maximum effective range.
Jim
To answer the original question asked: the 7.62X39 with a 125 gr bullet starts out about the same speed as a 30-30 with a 150 gr slug, but since it is lighter the bullet has about 15% less energy. The 150 gr bullets out of the 7.62X39 starts out a little bit slower, but by 150 yds they are even, and at 300 the 7.62X39 has a slight advantage. In order to use of this energy advantage, you need to use a bolt rifle so that you can place the bullets on target. I have a 93 Mauser I chambered for 7.62X39, and it is a real shooter, I wouldn't hesitate to take on a deer with it.
I had no trouble at all routinely banging the 300 yard gong on our local range with a friend's SKS. It was a bit tougher with an AK, but do-able.
The range "limits" commonly heard about are due to the common RIFLES in these calibers, NOT the calibers themselves.
The crude, coarse sights, and trigger pulls of both common Combloc designs, and the usual lever guns in .30-30 are what limit the usable range for the shooter. Not the small difference in bullet velocities, weights, and nose shapes.
The range "limits" commonly heard about are due to the common RIFLES in these calibers, NOT the calibers themselves.
The crude, coarse sights, and trigger pulls of both common Combloc designs, and the usual lever guns in .30-30 are what limit the usable range for the shooter. Not the small difference in bullet velocities, weights, and nose shapes.