Wooo Hooo, I'm getting that Jungle Carbine!

I'm not missing the point, I never said the .303 is under powered. Whether it was over powered is a matter of opinion.
As recent developments in the mid east have shown theres still a place for the main battle cartridges.
The intermediate cartridges have often fallen short on todays battle fields, and would not have been a good choice for most of the fighting of WW2.
The Assault Rifle is a jacked up SMG when it comes down to it.

In the more open battle fields of mountain ranges and in dense forest and jungle foliage the Main Battle cartridge is king.
The intermediate cartridges often can't penetrate common urban barriers for that matter.
The LMG in 7.62 and the Designated Marksman Rifle in 7.62 must take up the slack.
 
I'm not missing the point,
Click to expand...
Actually you are. I was referring to this posted earlier, not any comment you made.
the second is the anemic 303 British round and the third is the rifle's reputation for having a less than robust action that is rated for only moderate pressure levels.
Click to expand...

It wasn't about you.
 
Then we have been in agreement on that point, the rest is just back story.
Nothing over powered about the .303. Other even more powerful cartridges were sucessfull in autoloading infantry rifles and LMGs.
The Assault Rifle and its intermediate cartridges are an entirely different animal, no better than comparing a intermediate rifle cartridge to a pistol cartridge. Some overlap there these days as well.

The 150 gr loads which were never adopted would have been better suited to the lightweight No.5 Carbine, lesser recoil and lower trajectory, plus less stress on the lightened action body, etc.
A faster burning propellent with coolant additives would have reduced muzzle blast. But there was no impetus to further develop the cartridge after WW2.
 
Last edited:
Hi guys, new here and just chiming in on my favourite topic :D

Looking at the numbers comparing .308 and .303Brit, (Military loads) you find the lighter .308 pill getting out of the gate a bit quicker, mainly due to developments in case design and propellants.. where the heavier .303 projectile carves a slightly higher curve, at about 1000yds their speeds have converged and the .303 actually has more retained energy.
Doesn't matter, really... a CBM hit from either at that range will seriously ruin your day.. the whole point here is these days you are more in danger of having dirt flicked into your eye by bouncing bullets at 1000yds than you are of skin breaking wounds. Ha! .223 why would you bother?
 
Looking at the numbers comparing .308 and .303Brit, (Military loads) you find the lighter .308 pill getting out of the gate a bit quicker, mainly due to developments in case design and propellants.. where the heavier .303 projectile carves a slightly higher curve, at about 1000yds their speeds have converged and the .303 actually has more retained energy.
Click to expand...
Thats why the 7.62 NATO M118 SB and LR cartridges with 175 gr boat tail bullets are used for long range shooting by MG or Sniper.
The 150 gr .30-06 load had less effective range than the .303 in indirect MG fire so they developed the .30 M1 ball and matchgrade with bullets of 170+ gr.
They settled on the 150-152 gr M2 Ball for rifle use because the M1 Ball exceeded the safety limits of the rifle ranges in use in those days. That and recoil of the heavier bullet loads contributed to shooter fatigue.

At normal infantry ranges where the individual soldier is likely to score a hit on a mansize target the lighter and faster bullet will have the lowest maximum trajectory. The kill zone at a point blank sight setting is much greater if the velocity is even a few hundred FPS faster.
The difference can be made up for by better training and range estimation techniques.

For hunting the bullet choice, (weight, profile, etc) depends entirely on the game being hunted.
 
This is where the technological advances and experiences of tried and proven battle equipment from about the late 1950's onward comes out. Where the humble .303Brit was already forgotten for all intents and purposes, ongoing development of the .308/ 7.62 x 51 saw it making a name for itself as being a very adaptable case wrt propellant types and loads as well as projectile forms and masses.
I would not be surprised if the round is still in use in another fifty years.

I have had the pleasure of trying a lot of platforms for the 7.62 x 51 as well as the .338Lap and the 50BMG quite recently. I enjoy shooting the variety of arms and ammunition natures- nothing beats clanging a head sized steel spinner continuously at 800m, hitting torso sized out to 1500... but for real old style grin factor, I still roll out a No1 MkIII* and a few dozen rounds of MkVII ball (none of those squib rounds for me... the use of which will never show up a wandering zero in a No5 BTW... :rolleyes:) and shoot something that makes a noise when hit.

Cheers :)
MAX P
 
The .303 is actually a better case for the heavier bullets than the .308.
Till they developed the Winchester Palma match case with semi balloonhead the short neck and short OAL of the .308 meant the base of heavier bullets could intrude into the powder space with resulting diminishing returns as powder charges had to be keep increasingly smaller in volume to avoid excessive chamber pressures.

Improved propellents have offset that diminishing return aspect. Still with the heavier bullets chamber pressures are greatly increased compared to the .303 with relatively little increase in velocity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top