A couple of airsoft guns i want are FN2000 and MP7, i just like the look of em
I heard going fishing with an mp7 isn't that bad either
if my friend had bought an XM8 instead of a G36 for me, part of the deal (the deal being he buys it i pay him back later) was that i would have to pose in an inflatable kiddy pool holding it like a fish i'd just caught
i kind of wish i'd bought it now
[QUOTE=Kill001;35429972]I heard going fishing with an mp7 isn't that bad either[/QUOTE]
it's just not as buoyant as the F2000 though
[QUOTE=catbarf;35428635]Yeah, well, regardless of how you feel about 5.56 (and I do agree that 5.56 is a bit weak for a DMR), it's a real thing, so at the very least it's 'realistic', right?[/QUOTE]
You obviously have never seen what a 5.56 does to the human body at 600m.
[QUOTE=MOS1371;35432008]You obviously have never seen what a 5.56 does to the human body at 600m.[/QUOTE]
no one has, it just bounces off the SAPI at that distance
I think he's talking about what happens when it hits flesh and bone.
and i was making a joke
[QUOTE=venom;35432045]and i was making a joke[/QUOTE]
It wasn't a very clear one.
[QUOTE=MOS1371;35432008]You obviously have never seen what a 5.56 does to the human body at 600m.[/QUOTE]
I have, actually- at that range, it [url=http://pictures.second-amendment.org/albums/userpics/10001/223-ballistics-1.jpg]has lost more than three-quarters of its energy[/url], will in just a 10mph crosswind shift close to four feet laterally from point of aim, and combines splintering on impact with a small stretch cavity to cause both failure to penetrate (assuming it goes through any protection at all, a problem with the huge energy loss) and a narrow wound cavity with a high likelihood of dispersing kinetic energy out the back of the target. That leaves a hole, but not enough damage to drop, say, a coked-up Somali militant.
I remember throwing 5.56 at cape buffalo from half a kilometer out, and they didn't even flinch at multiple hits at that distance, with the rounds that hit the head often failing to penetrate the skull. A .308 to the head, on the other hand, put them down hard.
The 'sweet spot' for the 5.56 is 100-300m, which is IIRC the recommended upper limit for its use in DMR applications. At that range, it has enough energy to penetrate while still retaining sufficient fragmentation to yaw on impact and cause deep wounds. For a DMR that's really all it needs to do, nobody uses the 5.56 for sniping applications at longer ranges and for good reason. In any case it's not that the round doesn't kill at that distance, as any bullet will do the job if it hits right, it's that the yawing that produces such damage at shorter range causes it to hemorrhage speed as it travels leading to a longer flight time, more deviance, and less energy on impact.
On a somewhat related note, I've seen some interesting reports by analysts calling for a return to the 7.62x51mm as the standard cartridge for a battle rifle to replace the AR15 platform. It'll never happen, but their reasons are interesting- primarily stemming from the shortcomings of the 5.56 at the ranges involved in firefights in Afghanistan.
[QUOTE=kenji;35429658]A couple of airsoft guns i want are FN2000 and MP7, i just like the look of em[/QUOTE]
Can we be best friends
Because i love you
total homo
[QUOTE=catbarf;35433674]I have, actually- at that range, it [url=http://pictures.second-amendment.org/albums/userpics/10001/223-ballistics-1.jpg]has lost more than three-quarters of its energy[/url], will in just a 10mph crosswind shift close to four feet laterally from point of aim, and combines splintering on impact with a small stretch cavity to cause both failure to penetrate (assuming it goes through any protection at all, a problem with the huge energy loss) and a narrow wound cavity with a high likelihood of dispersing kinetic energy out the back of the target. That leaves a hole, but not enough damage to drop, say, a coked-up Somali militant.
I remember throwing 5.56 at cape buffalo from half a kilometer out, and they didn't even flinch at multiple hits at that distance, with the rounds that hit the head often failing to penetrate the skull. A .308 to the head, on the other hand, put them down hard.
The 'sweet spot' for the 5.56 is 100-300m, which is IIRC the recommended upper limit for its use in DMR applications. At that range, it has enough energy to penetrate while still retaining sufficient fragmentation to yaw on impact and cause deep wounds. For a DMR that's really all it needs to do, nobody uses the 5.56 for sniping applications at longer ranges and for good reason. In any case it's not that the round doesn't kill at that distance, as any bullet will do the job if it hits right, it's that the yawing that produces such damage at shorter range causes it to hemorrhage speed as it travels leading to a longer flight time, more deviance, and less energy on impact.
On a somewhat related note, I've seen some interesting reports by analysts calling for a return to the 7.62x51mm as the standard cartridge for a battle rifle to replace the AR15 platform. It'll never happen, but their reasons are interesting- primarily stemming from the shortcomings of the 5.56 at the ranges involved in firefights in Afghanistan.[/QUOTE]
Why the fuck were you even trying to hunt buffalo from a kilometer away, let alone with a .223?
[QUOTE=FPKawaii;35433886]Why the fuck were you even trying to hunt buffalo from a kilometer away, let alone with a .223?[/QUOTE]
Cape buffalo have a very good sense of smell, especially in groups, so even staying downwind they will react to threats from a considerable distance, so 400-500m was a good distance to avoid risk of detection. As for why a .223, the embassy had a couple of accurized M16s that were due for routine testing so my dad and his co-workers got permission to take them out on a hunting/culling trip. When it became apparent that they were pretty much useless for the task, they got left in the truck and the .308s did the work.
[QUOTE=catbarf;35434287]Cape buffalo have a very good sense of smell, especially in groups, so even staying downwind they will react to threats from a considerable distance, so 400-500m was a good distance to avoid risk of detection. As for why a .223, the embassy had a couple of accurized M16s that were due for routine testing so my dad and his co-workers got permission to take them out on a hunting/culling trip. When it became apparent that they were pretty much useless for the task, they got left in the truck and the .308s did the work.[/QUOTE]
Why not just use the .308 in the first place, as it's pretty obvious that you're not going to kill large game from a kilometer away with a round that is known for not always killing humans in it's intended distance?
[QUOTE=FPKawaii;35434459]from a kilometer away[/QUOTE]
Again, 400m. Bit of a difference there.
And because when a 5.56 fails to kill a human, it's because it hit a non-critical area. If a 5.56 hits the brain or heart at any distance it'll kill a human pretty easily, but that's a very difficult shot and all but impossible on a moving target. Hunting very large, mostly static targets affords the luxury of aiming for such critical areas. I don't think it was anticipated that it would have difficulty piercing the skull at that range, but using them at all was definitely more of a 'hey we have these and need to use them, let's give it a try and kill two birds with one stone' thing.
G&P M14 and Emerson FAST Helmet. Just painted the rails and NVG mount tan, but I think I need a darker tan. I'll try to get some better pictures outside tomorrow.
[img]http://img19.imageshack.us/img19/5093/dsc0071mqh.jpg[/img]
That stock...
I love it and i hate it at the same time.
[QUOTE=xXEnder007Xx;35436637]G&P M14 and Emerson FAST Helmet. Just painted the rails and NVG mount tan, but I think I need a darker tan. I'll try to get some better pictures outside tomorrow.
[img]http://img19.imageshack.us/img19/5093/dsc0071mqh.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
why do I feel like those front rails should be black/gunmetal?
i feel like the helmet should be tan
So you compared thick skulled buffalo at 400m with 5.56? We are talking 5.56 on your normal muj,sunni,shitte, not some heavy bonned animal...
[QUOTE=MOS1371;35440662]So you compared thick skulled buffalo at 400m with 5.56? We are talking 5.56 on your normal muj,sunni,shitte, not some heavy bonned animal...[/QUOTE]
Please read everything else in my post, the anecdote is not crucial to the argument. 5.56 failing to penetrate the skull of a buffalo at 400m was not to say that 5.56 won't penetrate the skull of a human, but rather to illustrate that if the round is useless at even harming a decently tough animal at 400m even with shots to vital areas, its usefulness and effectiveness at a significantly greater range where it has only about two thirds the kinetic energy, against much smaller, more mobile targets who may be even tougher if they have any protection (homemade or otherwise), is seriously called into question.
This is then contrasted with the .308 which continues to have absolutely no problems killing things dead at that distance.
I did read your entire post.
The thing is that my family, relatives, ect have been around 5.56 since it was issued to us. Between being deployed overseas or hunting we never had problems with killing anything from human to animal from 1 meter to 500 meters.
I can see your argument with 5.56 not penetrating Kevlar/SAPIs at range due to it tumbling on impact instead of direct cut like a 7.62/.308. But when have we fought a country that uses complete sets of armour? Vietnam,Grenada,Iraq,Afghanistan never issued full kevlars.
I do agree with a 7.62 platform but like you said it will probably not happen in a while due to certain reasons. There is a reason tha 5.56 is used by alot of countries and not just because its a NATO specific cartridge.
Well my uncle and his best friend were issued 5.56 in Vietnam, and the way his friend looks at you when he tells you he put 5 rounds into someone, and saw them turn around and shoot back, you know he's not lying.
[editline]5th April 2012[/editline]
IMO, the greatest rifle round ever produced is the 6.5x55
I dont believe your story. What branch? The Army was trained to spray and pray an area. Just like airsoft when somebody says they hit you but in reality they missed.
You get hit by 5.56 within 400 and your not laoded on some kind of drug, your dead. Pure tumble and carnage inside.
Both were Marines.
Are*. Your a Marine till you die.
Anyways, VC were either pumped with pure hore adrenaline or they Missed. Both my uncles were deployed during the Tet offensive and they have many stories of men falsy claiming hits and no kills.
My uncle later "lost" his M16 and acquired an M14 and had no problem getting kills with it.
The flaws with 5.56 are very well documented. And actually, even with the tumbling effect, the 7.62 still causes greater cavitation and internal damage than 5.56
[editline]5th April 2012[/editline]
The Geneva Convention actually has a stance that 5.56 is inhumane as a combat round because it will bounce around and cant off in different directions inside your body and [I]not[/I] kill you.
"lost" good for him, no cleaning kit+ wrong cartridge powder causes to many problems. I love my M14 and wouldnt trade it for anything....kinda ;)
[QUOTE=MOS1371;35442846]I can see your argument with 5.56 not penetrating Kevlar/SAPIs at range due to it tumbling on impact instead of direct cut like a 7.62/.308. But when have we fought a country that uses complete sets of armour? Vietnam,Grenada,Iraq,Afghanistan never issued full kevlars. [/QUOTE]
You're absolutely right, but a lot of the non-armored enemies we've fought have been drugged-up irregulars who won't care if the round does anything less than immediately incapacitate. In that case the lack of armor penetration isn't what's important, it's the low energy, which is the root cause of lack of armor penetration, that limits the amount of physical damage the round can do. Even if it yaws wildly and tears a huge gash that will make the target bleed out in half an hour, he still has enough time to get even, and that's what's worrisome.
[QUOTE=MOS1371;35442846]I do agree with a 7.62 platform but like you said it will probably not happen in a while due to certain reasons. There is a reason tha 5.56 is used by alot of countries and not just because its a NATO specific cartridge.[/QUOTE]
It's perfect for typical assault rifle ranges, since it has low recoil, decent accuracy, and pretty good ballistic properties out to the first couple hundred meters. Plus it's light and cheap, two ever-important concerns. It's great at what it was designed for, it's when it gets pushed past its intended envelope that it shows some limitations.
So Im guessing no 2,000 5.56 super rifle =[
Kinda makes me wish we told NATO to fuck off when they told us to switch from .45 to 9gayometter
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
