From: "Peter Webb", [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gentlemen.......
I keep hearing it suggested that the 5.56mm NATO round
(.223Rem) offers superior penetration to the 7.62mm NATO.
IIRC, this claim is based on a comparison test utilising
DISsimilar projectiles. Can anyone confirm this?,,, and what
tests have been done using proj's of identical design in the
two different calibres?
I know of at least one conflict in which Australian troops
came to prefer SLRs over M16s due to the capacity of the
7.62mm to penetrate cover (rubber trees) and kill the enemy
behind it. (That and reliability, but I understand
that the '16s have improved since then.)
Regards all,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Peter Webb.
--
The SS109 apparently has superior penetration to the 7.62
NATO on certain things, such as a standard NATO steel helmet
(that no-one uses anymore), however on trees and brickwork,
stuff like that 7.62 NATO has the edge. That is the
reasoning behind using the 5.56mm for infantry squads and
GPMG in 7.62mm for more heavy duty missions.
I think it depends on what you want to get through.
The steel tip on the SS109 provides better penetration
on some types of thin armour, but the 7.62 NATO has
more mass, thus more momentum, and is better on other
materials.
It's a bit like 9mm v. 5.56mm in that regard. 9mm will
penetrate far more deeply than 5.56mm, but 5.56mm will
penetrate certain types of body armour that 9mm won't.
I am sure Nick or someone can quote the NATO tests chapter
and verse.
Steve.
Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org
List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___________________________________________________________
T O P I C A The Email You Want. http://www.topica.com/t/16
Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
