PDA

View Full Version : 7.62x39 or 5.45x39?



Warfighter
09-25-2006, 12:51 AM
Probably been posted before, but here goes...

Lets hear your opinions/experience with 7.62x39 vs. 5.45x39, both in AKs and RPKs...

Deucex
09-25-2006, 02:02 AM
I personally much prefer apples, citrus is too acidic.

yiorgo
09-25-2006, 02:14 AM
nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo but if I gotta answer 762x39

James
09-25-2006, 05:27 AM
http://img222.imageshack.us/img222/7665/ackbarsv6.jpg

oldsoak
09-25-2006, 08:25 AM
I wouldnt use either to hunt rabbits.

GazB
09-25-2006, 08:41 AM
On paper the higher velocity 5.45mm round offers less recoil, better accuracy with less problems with range errors effecting hit probability, and the 5.45mms projectile design offering better terminal effects at all ranges and velocities. Having said that the 7.62 offers a much heavier projectile that tends to be harder hitting and is less likely to be deflected or stopped by things in your line of fire. The 193 grain 7.62mm subsonic projectile is rather more lethal than the 80 grain 5.45mm subsonic projectile.
Personally I think necking the 7.62 x 39mm either out to a 9mm with a very heavy 250 grain subsonic bullet or necking it down to something like a 6.5mm bullet and ramping up the velocity to something like 1,100m/s with a 120 grain projectile would be very interesting. The former has already been done and sounds popular with those professionals that have used it, while the latter is just my idea and would probably result in serious barrel erosion... but it would be a nice flat shooting rifle.
The Russian armed forces seem to be happy with a combination of the two rounds, plus the 7.62 x 54mmR for the longer range stuff.


I wouldnt use either to hunt rabbits.

Actually the 5.45mm round would probably be as good as the 5.56 at that. (ie really good at killing them, skinning them, gutting them, and cooking them... all in one shot).
It is ironic that neither round (nor the 5.56 for that matter) is powerful enough to be considered humane for general use on Deer sized animals, yet they are the standard round used by modern armies against humans...

Lazarou
09-25-2006, 08:48 AM
Probably been posted before
http://img244.imageshack.us/img244/8154/orlybabyev7.gif

Durandal
09-25-2006, 10:18 AM
Probably been posted before, but here goes...

Lets hear your opinions/experience with 7.62x39 vs. 5.45x39, both in AKs and RPKs...

I think the the 7.62x39's straight six is pretty nice. Its reliable, has 4.0 liters per cylinder and doesn't stop.

But the 5.45x39 has a hemey!

DOOOOOOORK.

StukaJr
09-25-2006, 03:11 PM
Soviet and Russian SF consistently chose AKM's over the 5.45x39mm chambered weapons - AKM is also a lot more reliable under extreme operating conditions and is less likely to fail in prolonged operation. 7.62x39 is more stable, has better penetrating ability and is less likely to richochette unlike its smaller "tumbling" cousin...

In Civilian applications, 7.62x39 has an edge with higher quality ammunition available along with HP and SP bullets - offering a better terminal performance over a tumbling projectile... Enough manufacturers are making ammo for it, brass and .308/.311 caliber bullets can be readily used with good results. 5.45x39 pretty much leaves a shooter with what's available from a singular manufacturer - shortages of the last year certainly made that very clear. Maybe if the round was more known on the civilian market - considerable improvements could have been made.

RomanS
09-25-2006, 05:46 PM
Garry Has Both Now

Warfighter
09-25-2006, 06:54 PM
Thanks for the SINCERE replies gentlemen...I guess some people come to the forums just to attack others, so I'll do my best to ignore those people.

SMGLee
09-25-2006, 07:08 PM
Soviet and Russian SF consistently chose AKM's over the 5.45x39mm chambered weapons - AKM is also a lot more reliable under extreme operating conditions and is less likely to fail in prolonged operation. 7.62x39 is more stable, has better penetrating ability and is less likely to richochette unlike its smaller "tumbling" cousin...

In Civilian applications, 7.62x39 has an edge with higher quality ammunition available along with HP and SP bullets - offering a better terminal performance over a tumbling projectile... Enough manufacturers are making ammo for it, brass and .308/.311 caliber bullets can be readily used with good results. 5.45x39 pretty much leaves a shooter with what's available from a singular manufacturer - shortages of the last year certainly made that very clear. Maybe if the round was more known on the civilian market - considerable improvements could have been made.

Brother... What do you based on your statement of the russian SF? I have talked to some and they all stated the 5.45 are their choice of caliber. during the Afghan war, both side view the 5.45 AK74 as the best all around weapon for the conflict.

How can the AKM be more reliable since you are shooting out of the same exact platform with only the caliber difference?

It is true the 7.62 becomes more stable and does not tumble, but for best soft tissue destruction, you would want the bullet to tumbble and better to tumble and break apart like the M193 5.56. a steel core AK round will penetrat the tissue like a FMJ 9mm, one hole in and one hole out, very min. damage. AK with lead core are a much better man killer... the civilian market 7.62 JSP are like a 30-30, great man stopper. the commercial Wolf open tip are too irregular to be any good but plinking.

5.45 have a better soft tissue damage ratio, it shoots flater and it is more accurate, it also recoil less. only the ammo allocation are a problem but recently there are a lot of 5.45 in country.

AK does fail, it is a fallacy that AKs are unbreakable and it never fails.

Again.. all in due respect of a good discussion...

so when are we getting together and have a beer... I always like to head into town... LA is full of beautiful women.. although screwed up, but nevertheless beautiful... :)

yiorgo
09-25-2006, 07:14 PM
I have heard complete opposite and that SF do prefer 762x39 over the 545x39 and are making a push back to that round

joedirt
09-25-2006, 07:38 PM
I own 2 ak-74 rifles that are 5.45 and I love the round very little recoil and it does the job but I feel for a semi auto rifle the 7.62 is better. When it comes to full auto then the low recoil and controllability of the 5.45 would be much better then 7.62 but in semi stick with the one that has the knock down power.

Hollis
09-25-2006, 07:45 PM
I need to finish the AK74 that I am building, to find out for myself. But then again, I am always a sucker for another firearm.

Thanks to all that added positively to this dicussion, enjoyable read. I guess I need to upgrade my 1818 Springfield and try some of this newer stuff.

Do you think ACOG would work on my 1818?

oldsoak
09-25-2006, 07:51 PM
I need to finish the AK74 that I am building, to find out for myself. But then again, I am always a sucker for another firearm.

Thanks to all that added positively to this dicussion, enjoyable read. I guess I need to upgrade my 1818 Springfield and try some of this newer stuff.

Do you think ACOG would work on my 1818?

1818 springfield ? erm, as in flintlock ? or have I got that way wrong ?

Hollis
09-25-2006, 07:58 PM
1818 springfield ? erm, as in flintlock ? or have I got that way wrong ?


It started life out as a flintlock, was converted to percussion around 1942 (Belgium conversion), and then rifled for the Civil war. .69 caliber.

Durandal
09-25-2006, 07:58 PM
Do you think ACOG would work on my 1818?

rofl rofl rofl rofl

You rock...

oldsoak
09-25-2006, 08:04 PM
On paper the higher velocity 5.45mm round offers less recoil, better accuracy with less problems with range errors effecting hit probability, and the 5.45mms projectile design offering better terminal effects at all ranges and velocities. Having said that the 7.62 offers a much heavier projectile that tends to be harder hitting and is less likely to be deflected or stopped by things in your line of fire. The 193 grain 7.62mm subsonic projectile is rather more lethal than the 80 grain 5.45mm subsonic projectile.
Personally I think necking the 7.62 x 39mm either out to a 9mm with a very heavy 250 grain subsonic bullet or necking it down to something like a 6.5mm bullet and ramping up the velocity to something like 1,100m/s with a 120 grain projectile would be very interesting. The former has already been done and sounds popular with those professionals that have used it, while the latter is just my idea and would probably result in serious barrel erosion... but it would be a nice flat shooting rifle.
The Russian armed forces seem to be happy with a combination of the two rounds, plus the 7.62 x 54mmR for the longer range stuff.



Actually the 5.45mm round would probably be as good as the 5.56 at that. (ie really good at killing them, skinning them, gutting them, and cooking them... all in one shot).
It is ironic that neither round (nor the 5.56 for that matter) is powerful enough to be considered humane for general use on Deer sized animals, yet they are the standard round used by modern armies against humans...


I'm suprised the Soviets didnt go for a 6mm/.243 calibre pill in the 39mm case. We chose 5.56x45 because we had to. The Soviets would have been aware of better cartridges than the 5.56x45, and could have quite easily chosen a calibre to give that genuine all round performance - maybe a 100grn 6mm at say 2700 fps.

RomanS
09-25-2006, 08:05 PM
I owned both as well.
I also shot both real Russian military models quite a few times, with the Russian SF members. (Oh im sorry Spetsnaz MVD is not SPETSNAZ)
Ok I've shot with a bunch of overdressed, overskilled cops.

I must say there is a mixed view of AKM vs AK-74 between some of those guys.
But majority seem to favor AKM on their work trips to the Proud South. Plus you cant beat the good ol PBS.

Here are some photos from my friend

http://img158.imageshack.us/img158/4659/4vv6.jpg

http://img70.imageshack.us/img70/4026/img0627zj5.jpg

Here are 2 AKMs, his team uses the AKMs a lot. A lot of Recon groups use AKMS with PBS.
http://img70.imageshack.us/img70/8302/img0910ho7.jpg
http://img100.imageshack.us/img100/1362/img7342cg3.jpg
http://img71.imageshack.us/img71/7003/img9013ne0.jpg

RomanS
09-25-2006, 08:20 PM
The advantage of having AKM is the PBS ofcourse

http://img150.imageshack.us/img150/792/1avc8.jpg
http://img165.imageshack.us/img165/8202/2axb7.jpg
http://img85.imageshack.us/img85/3653/3afq5.jpg

StukaJr
09-25-2006, 08:25 PM
I've been speaking out of my knowledge field - I don't own an AK in compliance with the current Local Laws, but I've had some exposure while shooting my friends' AK variants. Also, I've sited "Civilian's View" on the subject and preference in using higher diameter HP/SP projectile - not allowed by the military and thus a mute point. I'm well aware of the 5.45x39 ball wounding pattern vs 7.62x39 ball - but the former was introduced since the Hague convention forbids the use of an effective expanding bullet by the military...

I'm a believer that bigger cartridge offers more capacity for modification

Ballistics wise, I can load top manufacturer like Sierra or Nozzler .308 caliber bullet into 7.62x39 and only suffer a marginal FPS drop while achieving excellent accuracy - loading lighter spire tip projectile can also give a flatter trajectory/high velocity encroaching in the domain of the 5.45 with still sizeable jump in bullet weight... Tumbling bullet looks good in two dimensions but loses when compared to the penetration of a high quality expanding bullet - this, of course, holds no military application. Availability of correct diameter .311 is also available, even though with less choice. The only thing I'm trying to imply is that popularity of 7.62x39 cartridge on the civilian market makes it a more robust design for shooting sport/hunting/potentual improvements - 5.45x39 could use the same treatment.

A good 7.62x39 cartridge is something I'd like to dedicate some time and experimentation to, even though I hear that they can't beat the performance of the .30-30.

Various memoirs of Spetznaz and other armed forces operators I have read site their preference of 7.62x39 - the only conclusion is that I haven't come across the percentage of the written word that states otherwise. The preference of 7.62x39 is held for penetration of cover in urban environment, availability of PBS suppressors for the 7.62 but not the 5.45, lesser chance of bullet deflection/tumble when hitting insignificant obstacles like branches.

Reliability of AKM vs AK-74 is something once again I've read and not something I've witnessed. The only time I "failed" and AKSU is when I've loaded half a mag of .223 into it (n00b!). I was also told that AKM pushing more gas to cycle the system makes it more reliable - I erroneously believed that the gas tube was a different design on the two models (that's what I get for living in Kalifornia - no visual aids).



AK does fail, it is a fallacy that AKs are unbreakable and it never fails.

Again.. all in due respect of a good discussion...

so when are we getting together and have a beer... I always like to head into town... LA is full of beautiful women.. although screwed up, but nevertheless beautiful... :)

And meet the internet legend? Anytime - unless I'm working 70 hour weeks that time of course - which unfortunately happens at the worst moments :D We do have a big group of forum members in the same County - and you already know Ryan. Beer or the full ATF program :)

I'll PM you my personal e-m addy.

Hollis
09-25-2006, 08:51 PM
The 30-30 has the advantage of heavier loads and bullets. The Ak is not recommend for any game larger than a deer at close range.

Also .308 is for the Ruger Mini 30 in 7.62 x 39, Original AK stuff is a .311 bullet diameter.

Other aspects is rifle twists.

Interesting note, is the 6mm PPC is developed from the 7.62x39 and is considered to be the most accurate round ever developed.

Issue in the states with 5.45, is that it is a unknown in reloading. But give it time, like the AK.

As far as a anti- two legged varmit load, I will those who have used it comment.

Hollis
09-25-2006, 09:06 PM
The advantage of having AKM is the PBS ofcourse



Thank you for the photos. A quick question what do you prefer a Underfolder or Wood stock?

RomanS
09-25-2006, 09:21 PM
Thank you for the photos. A quick question what do you prefer a Underfolder or Wood stock?

I am, as a civie prefer the solid wood stock. I had the underfolding AKMS, it was good, but ofcourse not as comfy.
Alot of Russian operators like the underfolding one. They put a med kit into it.

StukaJr
09-25-2006, 09:36 PM
Also .308 is for the Ruger Mini 30 in 7.62 x 39, Original AK stuff is a .311 bullet diameter.


In the loads I've researched, I notice that .308 diameter bullet will work quite nicely in 7.62mm barrels chambered for .311 diameter bullets - loss in velocity yet not in the accuracy department. At least that's what both Speer and Sierra Manuals suggest

Since I'm planning to own both SKS and Mini-30 - my loads are planned with .308 caliber bullets - I'm bad enough when it comes to loading wrong caliber cartridges into wrong firearms as is! I don't need additional headache of seeing which caliber is suited for which firearm! :D

CZ needs to make a nice four legged varmint load chambered in 5.45x39 - the rest will follow...

ADDED: I have encountered claims of 5.45x39 being reloaded in US - no details on how much torque nor die wear sizing steel casings involved... Also no mention of the bullets used - could be BS for all I know...

Hollis
09-25-2006, 09:40 PM
CZ needs to make a nice four legged varmint load chambered in 5.45x39 - the rest will follow...


Oh YEAH!!!! And then the bullet companies will make all sort of Bullets, and the fun begins.................

Those field rats won't know what hit them.

Warfighter
09-25-2006, 09:49 PM
Thanks for the pics Roman! I guess the good old AKM is still in use...

Also, nice jab at those nitwits on that other thread regarding MVD Spetsnaz...

This is turning into a good discussion!

Catch22
09-25-2006, 09:49 PM
A voice from Poland says: AK milled reciever, telescope buttstock, some rails, Eotech and PBS (optionally drum mag) FTW! Most old school guys here prefer 7.62. Just combine the best form west & east/

asch
09-25-2006, 11:37 PM
Originally Posted by RomanS http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?p=1951531#post1951531)
http://img70.imageshack.us/img70/8302/img0910ho7.jpg


eeee... coffee with sguschenka...
woot

oldsoak
09-26-2006, 04:45 AM
hot coffee with condensed milk ? - works on many a cold morning!
incidentally a mate in NZ has a Zastava in 7.62x39 and bags red deer and boar with it. Where he hunts, you wont see the deer much beyond 50m. I would never have credited it until he bought back the bacon so to speak.

Hollis
09-26-2006, 11:24 AM
hot coffee with condensed milk ? - works on many a cold morning!
incidentally a mate in NZ has a Zastava in 7.62x39 and bags red deer and boar with it. Where he hunts, you wont see the deer much beyond 50m. I would never have credited it until he bought back the bacon so to speak.

That is a good range, Most will say your ok under 100M, with small game, (deer).

The other neat thing is the round will make a decent sub-sonic load, using a 200+ grain bullet. to develop a highly accurate sub sonic load, one needs to go to a 1 in 8 twist.


edit to add, In RVN I saw a bolt action rifle in the caliber. I later have thought it would be nice to have a bolt gun in my collection.

oldsoak
09-27-2006, 05:38 AM
CZ and Zastava do mini mausers in 7.62x39. Handy and light and not that expensive in your kneck of the woods IIRC - dunno what your local hunting laws allow though. Mind you, an old winchester 30-30 is pretty handy as well.

Hollis
09-27-2006, 12:01 PM
7.63 x 39 is good for deer here. Where I live is pretty wooded and range is not alway out there. Mule deer are not that big. I tend to carry a 30-30 for deer. I have many choices is that it just easier to mess with. My son has a savage 99 in 300 Savage for deer, and other critters, it is great cartridge. I'll maybe post some pictures later. I really like lever actions, but then I like most firearms. (been listening to Geezah to much).

St Fubar
09-27-2006, 01:06 PM
Too bad all the biggest manufacturers seem to agree that the .308 does the same job and more, and therefore there's no need to make hunting weapons in 7.62x39. Rifles in .308x39 are even more rare, but I know at least Sako used to make them.

maw
09-27-2006, 01:13 PM
i own a cz-527 in 7.62x39, it is indeed a mini-mauser. it's a handy little gun. i bought it with the sole intention of converting it to 6.5mm grendel. brockman rifles does the conversion for around $500. i just haven't gotten around to it yet tho...

accuracy wise, i've not really tried shooting an ak beyond 200 yards, but at rifle class i was at recently there were guys shooting 500 yards with sks's. you need 4 moa to hit a man size target at 500, a decent ak/sks with a good bore and some decent ammo is capable of better than 4 moa.

in defense of the 5.45, in my limited experience i feel the mil surp ammo is certainly more accurate then its 7.62 counterparts. i've also seen better penetration with 5.45 fmj through metal, masonry and processed wood, but interestingly not live wood. of course none of these observations are based on any scientific data, so take it for what it's worth.

oh, fwiw2 - when snap shooting i double tap out of my ak-105gry faster than my ak-104gry. in a two legged varmint scenario this can be a big deal.

St Fubar
09-27-2006, 01:19 PM
Indeed, but just for prespective, a quality AK clone is easily capable of 1.5 moa and a quality bolt action sub-moa. It just pisses me off so much that the manufacturers fail to see the potential this cartridge has.

Hollis
09-27-2006, 01:23 PM
Too bad all the biggest manufacturers seem to agree that the .308 does the same job and more, and therefore there's no need to make hunting weapons in 7.62x39. Rifles in .308x39 are even more rare, but I know at least Sako used to make them.


Ruger Mini 30 is a .308 x 39. Because........ at one time in the USA.. .311 was very uncommon.

Look at Remington, they offer many calibers in other than .308. It may be the market is not preceived that big. Ruger thought so, when it produced the Mini 30.

With the increase of popularity of the 7.62 x 39 and it being a inexpensive round, who knows.

Also SKS, is a popular rifle. For hunting it needs a 5 rd magazine.

Hunting, is about all sorts of game, the .308 is not the choice for many of the small game. Also some people own more than one "all around" fire arm.

St Fubar
09-27-2006, 01:40 PM
Hunting, is about all sorts of game, the .308 is not the choice for many of the small game. Also some people own more than one "all around" fire arm.
What I meant, was that the manufacturers, not the hunters, choose not to include the 7.62x39. I considered it for my small game caliber, but the only factory (hunting)rifles I found had the .311 bore, so my "all-round" caliber is still 7.62x53R.

Hollis
09-27-2006, 02:01 PM
What I meant, was that the manufacturers, not the hunters, choose not to include the 7.62x39. I considered it for my small game caliber, but the only factory (hunting)rifles I found had the .311 bore, so my "all-round" caliber is still 7.62x53R.


I notice we don't live in the same country. 7.62 x 52R is picking up in popularity in the States. It is similar to the 30-06 which was consider one of the best all around cartridges in the States.

The availability of the Mosin Nagants and the fact they can be bought for about $100 USD. Has added to the popularity. One can build a very nice sporting rifle from a Nagant for about $250 USD, plus the cost of the scope.

Createdeemcee
09-27-2006, 02:03 PM
I notice we don't live in the same country. 7.62 x 52R is picking up in popularity in the States. It is similar to the 30-06 which was consider one of the best all around cartridges in the States.

The availability of the Mosin Nagants and the fact they can be bought for about $100 USD. Has added to the popularity. One can build a very nice sporting rifle from a Nagant for about $250 USD, plus the cost of the scope.

Oh yes are you talking about the monte carlo stock??

ed316
09-27-2006, 02:05 PM
I have a Mosin and I'm leaving the it the way it is. Good shootingr rifle. Only thing I need to get for it is a PU scope.

Hollis
09-27-2006, 02:08 PM
Oh yes are you talking about the monte carlo stock??


Yes, there is a kit, synthetic stock, bolt handel, scope mount for around $150 USD. I did a conversion for a friend, we also cut off about 6" of barrel length. It came out real nice.

Personally, Like Ed, I will leave mine stock. For a budget shooter, up to them.

Ghetto Defendant
09-27-2006, 04:04 PM
Indeed, but just for prespective, a quality AK clone is easily capable of 1.5 moa and a quality bolt action sub-moa. It just pisses me off so much that the manufacturers fail to see the potential this cartridge has.

I agree...Although Lapua makes excellent 7.62x39 ammunition, but I can't find it anymore.

GazB
09-28-2006, 12:17 AM
Most modern cartridges seem to have the common trend of heavier bullets over time. The 5.45mm started out as a 52 grain bullet and seems to have moved to a 60 grain projectile. The US 5.56mm bullet seems to have gone from 55 grain to 62 grain. The 7.62 x 39mm round has the 122/123 grain projectile but the 154 grain heavy bullets seem to be popular in the field and of course for quiet work the 193 grain subsonic rounds are ideal.
There is a chap in Christchurch who converts rifles and does a rather nice De Lisle conversion of old 303 rifles. Have heard he also offers to alter 303s to 7.62 x 39mm now that 303 ammo is starting to get scarce and expensive. The 303 uses .311 calibre bullets so you can use a 303 barrel for AK or 7.62 x 54R calibre weapons.
At close range (within 150m or so) the 7.62 x 39 is pretty similar to the 303 in performance. At longer range the heavier 303 bullet retains energy better but the difference really only shows at longer ranges.

Have read of Russian soldiers having preferences for calibres but each different soldier prefers a different calibre for different reasons. The cost is logistics, but the benefit is flexibility. Old pictures I have of soldiers in combat zones with one of each (ie 5.45 and 7.62) that are captioned stating that the soldier was issued one weapon but preferred the other calibre suggest the soldier can please himself once on the battlefield to a degree.
Have got pictures of Spetsnaz with AKMs and AK-74s in the same group in Afghanistan. That seems to show popularity of ammo was mixed as Spetsnaz can pick their weapons based on the mission they are on. I would assume that on a mission where being quiet was important then the AKM would become more popular...


Garry Has Both Now

If you mean me, I only have a Type 56S Chinese AKM knockoff in 7.62 x 39mm ATM. If you don't mean me forget this comment :)

Regarding lethality the 5.45 should have an edge due to its tumbling and ability to turn 90 degrees in a wound and travel latterally in the body. The 7.62 x 39mm round is described as a .38 Special but with much longer range. Of course shot placement is rather more important than lethality.

Jippo
09-28-2006, 01:06 AM
It is a very bad comparison. 7,62x39 is not a handgun round, nor is it comparable to one. It'll be on the far side of half a kilometer when it's energy will be comparable to .38.

7,62x39 has 1,5 times the energy of 5.56 NATO.

Also do note M43 does tumble but slowly, and that there are other rounds that tumble very well. Like the before mentioned Lapua round.


-jippo

GazB
09-28-2006, 10:31 PM
It is a very bad comparison. 7,62x39 is not a handgun round, nor is it comparable to one. It'll be on the far side of half a kilometer when it's energy will be comparable to .38.


Both make a similar sized hole in the target and unless they hit bone or belt buckle the resulting wounds are very similar. The 7.62 x 39mm with a lot more velocity will exit the body at higher speed, and will cleanly penetrate the body out to much greater range but the practical wound effects are the same.


Also do note M43 does tumble but slowly, and that there are other rounds that tumble very well. Like the before mentioned Lapua round.

All pointed supersonic rifle bullets are rear heavy and will eventually end up pointing backwards if they travel far enough in tissue to stop. Most will also travel point forward through tissue for 10cm or so before they start to yaw. For many targets this means they are leaving the target just as they start to tumble. regarding the target the higher exit velocity of the 7.62 x 39mm over the .38 is simply wasted energy. Of course if a bone is hit then the energy transfer is greater for the bullet with the most energy. At the end of the day a well placed shot will kill whether 7.62 x 39 or 38 special or 7.62 x 51 or 5.56 or 5.45.
Lethality is less of a problem for rounds designed to tumble like the 5.45 or fragment like the 5.56.


7,62x39 has 1,5 times the energy of 5.56 NATO.


I personally prefer heavier slower projectiles. They are less effected by things on the battlefield. Heavier projectiles tend to lose velocity much slower too and therefore maintain energy better.

KillerBD
09-28-2006, 10:37 PM
Okay the 7.62x39mm is older and has alot of stopping power, but thats about its only advantage over the 5.45x39mm ammunition. The 5.45x39mm can pierce armor better, is more accurate, and has a flatter trajectory, and greater range than the older 7.62x39mm ammunition.

Jippo
09-29-2006, 02:21 AM
Both make a similar sized hole in the target and unless they hit bone or belt buckle the resulting wounds are very similar. The 7.62 x 39mm with a lot more velocity will exit the body at higher speed, and will cleanly penetrate the body out to much greater range but the practical wound effects are the same.

No, .38 Special like any other handgun round is not able to produce any significant temporary wound cavity. Terminal ballistics are quite different with these two.

Around 550m the 7.62x39 round will be close to the MACH 1 and will start to behave like a handgun round you mentioned.



All pointed supersonic rifle bullets are rear heavy and will eventually end up pointing backwards if they travel far enough in tissue to stop. Most will also travel point forward through tissue for 10cm or so before they start to yaw. For many targets this means they are leaving the target just as they start to tumble.

Leadcore(for instance mentioned Lapua FMJ) 124gr bullet will be significantly yawed at 9cm.



Lethality is less of a problem for rounds designed to tumble like the 5.45 or fragment like the 5.56.

That is at best somewhat questionable. Lack of overall energy becomes an issue at some point. Why 6.8SPC?

Should there be lethality considerations, that is if the round is for personal defense use (I doubt anyone here is in charge of some nations military procurement) one should definately use soft point or hollow point hunting rounds. They will be less likely to penetrate your whole block and will have better effect on target which is not armored.


-jippo

Hollis
09-29-2006, 12:09 PM
The other aspect is Bullet design. A good cartridge with a bad bullet will not/may not be as effective as a bad cartridge with a great bullet.

Same with cartridge design, there are trade off with bullet designs, Over penetration, under penetration, etc.

GazB
10-01-2006, 10:25 PM
No, .38 Special like any other handgun round is not able to produce any significant temporary wound cavity. Terminal ballistics are quite different with these two.


Temporary wound cavity means zip. The only human organ effected by temporary cavity is the brain which has no elasticity. For every other part of the body temporary cavity mean nothing. A typical gallstone operation involves blasting a gall stone with 5,000 times the energy of a temporary cavity and apart from the gallstone being reduced it does no damage.


Leadcore(for instance mentioned Lapua FMJ) 124gr bullet will be significantly yawed at 9cm.


Properly stabilised bullets will not lose their stability in less than 10cm of ballistic gelatine. What you are wearing will effect the result as will any bone or hard item being hit on the way through but in most cases the permanant wound cavity created by a 30 cal bullet is very similar to the permanent wound cavity of a 30 cal pistol round. Both will begin to yaw on their way out of the body. The boat tail design of the 7.62 x 39mm reduces yawing.


That is at best somewhat questionable. Lack of overall energy becomes an issue at some point.

Where that energy is applied is more important once you get to "enough". It could be argued that a front on shot that simply passes through the target is rather less effective than a much weaker round that turns inside the target and travels a much longer path and may not even exit the body. A straight hol through the body will bleed along its length. The larger the calibre of the hold the greater the blood loss. The easiest way to increase bloodloss is to increase the size of the hole (ie greater calibre is an expensive way of doing it as it requires larger heavier weapons and ammo and more training). The easiest way to increase the size of the hole is to get the bullet to tumble, increasing the size of the permanant cavity or to make the bullet fragment which also increases the size of the permanant cavity.


one should definately use soft point or hollow point hunting rounds. They will be less likely to penetrate your whole block and will have better effect on target which is not armored.


They are more lethal because they enlarge the diameter of the wound channel and increase the surface area the target will bleed from.


A good cartridge with a bad bullet will not/may not be as effective as a bad cartridge with a great bullet.

Same with cartridge design, there are trade off with bullet designs, Over penetration, under penetration, etc.

Problem for the military is that the best bullets (soft nose and hollowpoint) are outlawed for use in war. Problem for everyone else is that bullet design is a compromise. Penetration is important to get to a target under cover, but lethality is better achieved through methods that reduce penetration. (ie large calibre, tumbling ammo, disintegrating ammo, etc etc).

Jippo
10-02-2006, 05:48 AM
Temporary wound cavity means zip. The only human organ effected by temporary cavity is the brain which has no elasticity. For every other part of the body temporary cavity mean nothing. A typical gallstone operation involves blasting a gall stone with 5,000 times the energy of a temporary cavity and apart from the gallstone being reduced it does no damage.

Slightly different things aren't they? Having a rifle round going through your stomach or having a gallstone operation?



Properly stabilised bullets will not lose their stability in less than 10cm of ballistic gelatine..

Read more:
http://www.btammolabs.com/fackler/wounding_patterns_military_rifles.pdf
page 2



What you are wearing will effect the result as will any bone or hard item being hit on the way through but in most cases the permanant wound cavity created by a 30 cal bullet is very similar to the permanent wound cavity of a 30 cal pistol round. Both will begin to yaw on their way out of the body.

Effects of supersonic ammunition doing MACH 2 are quite different from effects of rounds barely reaching MACH 1.



The boat tail design of the 7.62 x 39mm reduces yawing.

Only boat tail bullet used in 7.62x39 I know of is 200gr D166 used in the Finnish subsonic round. M43 is not a boat tail, and FMJ rounds of rit are DEFINATELY NOT boat tails


-jippo

GazB
10-02-2006, 09:47 AM
Slightly different things aren't they? Having a rifle round going through your stomach or having a gallstone operation?


So what are you saying? A bullet exerting x amount of force as it passes through tissue will do more damage than medical instruments applying 5,000 times more of the same type of energy?


Effects of supersonic ammunition doing MACH 2 are quite different from effects of rounds barely reaching MACH 1.


Yes they are. But the practical medical effects are unimportant. Yes, the temporary cavity caused by a very high velocity projectile are quite impressive, but after impact the permanant cavity is what is bleeding and what needs to be treated.

Suggest you read this:

http://www.rkba.org/research/fackler/wrong.html

Particularly the sections headed major misconceptions where the belief that high velocity and temporary cavity is important in any way to the terminal effects of the projectile.
Here is an excerpt:
"It should be noted, however, that stretch from temporary cavity tissue displacement can disrupt blood vessels or break bones at some distance from the projectile path (40), just as they can be disrupted by blunt trauma. We can produce this in the laboratory by careful choice of projectile and projectile trajectory in tissue (48), but in practice this happens only very rarely. Data from the Vietnam conflict show that the great majority of torso and extremity wounds were attributable to the damage due to the permanent cavity alone (59). "

Bullets a different from knives in that they create damage by crushing, whereas a knife creates damage by cutting. The area effectively crushed basically equals slightly larger than the diameter of the penetrating projectile. If the projectile expands then the damaged area is slightly larger than the projectile as it expands. Temporary cavity means nothing. A PreWWI 50 cal soft lead ball from a musket will do more damage than any new fangled super high velocity uber round of today. In fact the tiny Flechette round proposed for the OICW program died because although it promised excellent penetration and a velocity of over 1,400m/s it wasn't very lethal... unless it got bent as it passed through the target. Velocity was once considered the pancea... now it is recognised as not being all it was cracked up to be, hense the 6.8mm projectile is larger calibre than the current 5.56mm. ie calibres are going up again, not down further like the 4.85mm caseless german round for the G11.

StukaJr
10-02-2006, 03:20 PM
This is all very nice, in regards to bare terminal performance of a 5.45x39 round versus the 7.62x39 - provided both rounds enter their intended target unnaffected by various battlefield conditions, most importantly intermidiate barriers... And 5.45x39 will perform more erratically after encountering those barriers - ****e to richochet off of oblique surfaces that heavier/more stable round is more likely to penetrate etc. Most of the proponents of the 7.62x39 voiced their choice as the round more likely to find their target in a firefight, not because of what happens when the bullet enters it. If one just chose to shoot both ball rounds in a controlled enviornment, then 5.45x39 would clearely be a winner - similar to the dog and pony shows done for US troops gearing up for their service in Vietnam. Shooting a water jug with M14 and M16 side by side and endowing troops with feeling of having far supperior weapon. Obviously, if there were various barriers between the shooters and the water jugs - many would have felt better armed with a clean hole of a .308 every time over inconsistent exploding water jug with 5.56

I also remember that creation of 5.45x39 came from an order to evaluate and create an improved version of the 5.56x45 cartridge brought back from Vietnam. I'm not aware of any tests performed in regards to increase of terminal performance of the older service cartridge, but possibilities certainly present themselves.

Kaapeli
10-02-2006, 03:32 PM
I don't know much about ballistics or lethality but 7.62 is cheaper and more common so I'd go with that if I bought an assault rifle. Though I'd prefer less recoil since I'm a relatively bad shot and the kick does nothing to improve my aim.

Hollis
10-02-2006, 04:17 PM
I don't know much about ballistics or lethality but 7.62 is cheaper and more common so I'd go with that if I bought an assault rifle. Though I'd prefer less recoil since I'm a relatively bad shot and the kick does nothing to improve my aim.

That is very practical way of looking at it. Nothing really wrong with being impractical, BUT... out side of military (Combat) lethality is not a real issue, fun is.

Warfighter
10-07-2006, 06:14 PM
Anybody have any info on penetration/lethality of the 70gr 5.45x39 vs. the 53gr?