Combat Calibers For Rifles

P

Photon Guy

New member
From what I know two of the most popular combat rounds used for rifles are the 5.56 by 45 and the 7.62 by 39. i also know there is the 7.62 by 40 combat round as well. I was wondering how good the 7.62 by 40 is. By the description its just a little longer than the 7.62 by 39 but aside from that I assume the rounds are identical. Is it a good round? Also, can a rifle designed to fire the 7.62 by 40 round also fire the 7.62 by 39 round? After all a rifle that fires the 5.56 can also fire the .227 so I would think the same would apply to a rifle that firs the 7.62 by 40.
 
I'm guessing you meant firing 223 rather than 227 in a 5.56x45 chambered gun? That is mainly the throating of the rifling more than the chamber. Similar in concept as what Weatherby did with their ultra-high velocity cartridges and chambers compared to more common American sporting rounds. They throated them long to achieve higher velocity with less pressure, all things considered.

Do you have more info about the 7.62x40? The closest one I know of that saw much actual use was the 7.62x45 that was used by Czechoslovakia before they standardized to Russian chamberings (7.62x39)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.62×45mm
 
No.
The 7.62x40 is a Wilson product. It is on the .223 head diameter. I figure they arrived at the 40mm case length because it gave the longest OAL that the AR15 action would handle. Magazines have to be downloaded a few rounds. If 24 is not enough, they have magazines modified to take 28, maybe 29 rounds.

It has NO connection to the Soviet 7.62x39 AK round and is not interchangeable in either direction.
 
Not a one.

After all a rifle that fires the 5.56 can also fire the .227 so I would think the same would apply to a rifle that firs the 7.62 by 40.
Click to expand...

And also not. Those are for the 5.6X52R AKA .22 Savage HiPower, which does not work in a 5.56 rifle.
 
There seems to be a rash of people on this form lately that want to stick the wrong round in their rifles. Why? There seems to be no shortage of the correct round.
 
Wildcatting AR platform rounds is so rampant as to be considered a plague.
It's not a new thing. Just look at a copy of "Cartridge Conversions" and you'll say "Huh, what were they thinking?".
The 7.62x40 may(?) be something worthwhile but it's hardly a commercial round so better to stick to something like the 6.8 which offers enhanced performance and factory ammo. OK, the 6.8 requires different bolt and magazines. To me, neither of those requirements is a deal breaker.
Let's face it, Joe Blow isn't going to war with his 6.8 AR. Anyone who is really looking at a combat scenario is going with a 5.56/223 simply because of ammo and magazines being universally available.
At the very best, the "odd rounds" (300 AAC, 6.8, 7.62x40, 277 Wolverine) ammo supply will last long enough to get you a supply of 5.56 so you can continue.
 
The 7.62 X 40 isn't a "combat" round. It's Wilson's idea of what a .223 necked up to .30 cal should be. Complete with unproven claims regarding accuracy. Another example of the over use of marketing term, "Tactical", as well.
Like Mobuck says, wildcatting the .223 is the current rage. Especially considering there was never any intention by Stoner et al for the .223/5.56 to be anything but a varmint and air crew survival round.
"...the 5.56 can also fire the .227..." No it can't. .227" is too big for the barrel of any .223.
 
"Combat" rounds? Hmmm. Munitions for military weapons are usually standardized within a nation or group of allied nations. This is why we have the 7.62X51mm NATO, 5.56X45mm NATO, 9X19mm NATO, etc. Similarly, back in the day of the infamous USSR and Warsaw Pact, they had the 7.62X39mm COMBLOC, 9X18mm COMBLOC (aka Makarov), etc.

Have there been other cartridges introduced to try to dethrone these standardized cartridges? Sure, new cartridge designs are submitted for consideration all the time. Supplying and consulting with the military procurement establishment can be very lucrative. Have any of them gotten any traction? Nope. Not the 300 Whisper (or its misbegotten twin the Blackout), or the 6.8SPC, or the 6mm SAW, or . . .
 
I though Wilson Combat was a good, reliable, legitimate company in terms of firearms. They do have a reputation for being top of the line. I am looking to get a good rifle in the 7.62 by 39 caliber but it appears Wilson Combat doesn't make them in that caliber. Im looking into Sig Sauer now.
 
Just curious...

Unless you already have a substantial investment in the .30 Russian short (7.62x39mm), Or you are going to a place where that is the only commonly available round, I have to wonder, why bother with that particular round??

In power, it is slightly below the hoary old .30-30 Winchester, though it has a flatter trajectory, allowing relatively easy use out to 300yds or so. Many, MANY other rounds out perform the 7.62x39mm at both close and far distances.

And several of those rounds are available in various semi auto designs.

Most of the surplus ammo is not high quality stuff, and neither are MOST of the common rifles in that caliber.

I do get a kick out of the "if you are going to war" questions though. Lots of answers, though few are well thought out. Face it, if you (or I) as a private citizen are "going to war", then there are essentially only two choices, use what you already have, no matter what it is, or join with one side, or the other, and use whatever they will give you.

And speaking of that, its very likely that in a collapse of order situation (and that's what a combat zone is), the people who already have arms and ammo (like the military) are NOT going to share it with you.

In fact, tis likely that if you ask them for some, they will take away whatever it is you already have. (its called security)

SO, if you are in combat, and on your own, your only real option for resupply is whatever you can pick up on the battlefield (without being killed), which means the using the weapons, caliber and equipment of one side, or the other.

Enjoy all the exotics, as a civilian, but realize that if you "go to war" (or it comes to you) all you can really count on is what you ALREADY HAVE.
 
44 AMP,
I was waiting for someone to say that.

Once a rifle runs out of the correct ammo it turns into a club. 6.5 and 7.7 Jap was a abundant go to war cartridge 80 years ago but today it is near impossible to find on shelves. Pretty much makes those rifles a club unless you reload or are in line for a hornady shipment.

The best way to get combat ammo is to enlist.
 
"SO, if you are in combat, and on your own, your only real option for resupply is whatever you can pick up on the battlefield (without being killed), which means the using the weapons, caliber and equipment of one side, or the other."

And this is why I have longarms in 5.56, 5.45, 8x57, 7.62x39, and 7.62x51. I can acquire ammo from a wide variety of "other side sources".
 
"SO, if you are in combat, and on your own, your only real option for resupply is whatever you can pick up on the battlefield (without being killed), which means the using the weapons, caliber and equipment of one side, or the other."

And this is why I have longarms in 5.56, 5.45, 8x57, 7.62x39, and 7.62x51. I can acquire ammo from a wide variety of "other side sources".
Click to expand...

Exactly why I want to get a rifle in the 7.62x39 caliber. I've already got a rifle in 5.56 caliber as well as .30 06.
 
Look, if you find yourself in a fight any round you have in your rifle is a "combat round".
If you win you have a good chance of getting a re-supply. Not just the other guys ammo, but his rifle too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top