Survivalist Forum

Advertise Here

Go Back   Survivalist Forum > Firearms and Other Weapons Forum > Military Weapons Forum
Articles Chat Room Classifieds Donations Gallery Groups Links Store Survival Files



Military Weapons Forum AR15, AK47, SKS, H&K, Galil, CETME, FN/FAL, Tanks, Ships, Jets, Helicopters....

Advertise Here
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-07-2010, 11:28 AM
sniperfx sniperfx is offline
DEFCON 4
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 6,586
Thanks: 6,298
Thanked 6,987 Times in 2,986 Posts
Default 7.62 nato vs 7.62 x 39



Advertise Here

can't compare, thread over..................................
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to sniperfx For This Useful Post:
Old 07-07-2010, 11:47 AM
Sampson1986's Avatar
Sampson1986 Sampson1986 is offline
Firearm Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Montana, USA
Age: 28
Posts: 862
Thanks: 264
Thanked 573 Times in 330 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sniperfx View Post
can't compare, thread over..................................
Am I missing something?
Old 07-07-2010, 11:48 AM
Hard Hittin 54r's Avatar
Hard Hittin 54r Hard Hittin 54r is offline
смерть на дальнем расстоя
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Georgia
Age: 57
Posts: 3,815
Thanks: 11,598
Thanked 6,978 Times in 2,507 Posts
Default

What...????????

HH54r
Old 07-07-2010, 12:26 PM
forrestdweller forrestdweller is offline
Hunter
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Georgia
Posts: 1,546
Thanks: 102
Thanked 932 Times in 478 Posts
Awards Showcase
Outstanding Thread 
Total Awards: 1
Default

Trying to get post and thread count up? No substance or content.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to forrestdweller For This Useful Post:
Old 07-07-2010, 01:48 PM
MikeK's Avatar
MikeK MikeK is offline
Walking methane refinery
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 51
Posts: 48,183
Thanks: 86,037
Thanked 95,247 Times in 31,453 Posts
Awards Showcase
Outstanding Member 
Total Awards: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by forrestdweller View Post
Trying to get post and thread count up? No substance or content.
Agreed. What possible purpose did this thread serve?
Old 07-07-2010, 02:20 PM
Sampson1986's Avatar
Sampson1986 Sampson1986 is offline
Firearm Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Montana, USA
Age: 28
Posts: 862
Thanks: 264
Thanked 573 Times in 330 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by forrestdweller View Post
Trying to get post and thread count up? No substance or content.
My thoughts exactly.

Thanks to this thread, I've added two extra (albeit worthless) posts to my overall post count.
Old 07-07-2010, 02:38 PM
sniperfx sniperfx is offline
DEFCON 4
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 6,586
Thanks: 6,298
Thanked 6,987 Times in 2,986 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by forrestdweller View Post
Trying to get post and thread count up? No substance or content.
please critique the rounds. i am interested in what people have to say. you can go first, if you like...
Old 07-07-2010, 02:42 PM
Duggo's Avatar
Duggo Duggo is offline
Me before coffee...
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Willamette Valley
Posts: 346
Thanks: 281
Thanked 253 Times in 125 Posts
Default

X39 is lighter and cheaper. Otherwise, Nato is better in every respect. Nothing else to say, your original post summed it up nicely.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Duggo For This Useful Post:
Old 07-07-2010, 02:54 PM
Sampson1986's Avatar
Sampson1986 Sampson1986 is offline
Firearm Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Montana, USA
Age: 28
Posts: 862
Thanks: 264
Thanked 573 Times in 330 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Duggo View Post
X39 is lighter and cheaper. Otherwise, Nato is better in every respect. Nothing else to say, your original post summed it up nicely.
I disagree. It really depends on the application. Would you use the 7.62x39mm round for long distance shooting? Probably not. The 7.62 NATO round is obviously superior in that case. Would you use the 7.62 NATO round to protect your livestock from wolves and coyotes? Maybe, but the 7.62x39 round is much better for that purpose.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Sampson1986 For This Useful Post:
Old 07-07-2010, 03:01 PM
CZDiesel's Avatar
CZDiesel CZDiesel is offline
I stand alone!
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Top of the Rockies
Posts: 3,218
Thanks: 5,167
Thanked 4,728 Times in 1,935 Posts
Default

OK, FX..... I'll bite

There is a comparison and neither is better than the other.... What I mean is neither is designed to do what the other does.
Try using the 7.62x51 in a true assault rifle or carbine and you have a inferior cartridge....
Try using the 7.62x39 in a true rifle or MG and you have a inferior cartridge....

I would not want a 7.62x51, or for that fact a 7.62x54, in a AK assault platform. I have seen how they have started to import and manufacture a lot of 7.62x54 and 7.62x51 with 16" barrels... In this type of platform the 7.62x39 is the better cartridge.
Old 07-07-2010, 03:02 PM
Duggo's Avatar
Duggo Duggo is offline
Me before coffee...
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Willamette Valley
Posts: 346
Thanks: 281
Thanked 253 Times in 125 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sampson1986 View Post
I disagree. It really depends on the application. Would you use the 7.62x39mm round for long distance shooting? Probably not. The 7.62 NATO round is obviously superior in that case. Would you use the 7.62 NATO round to protect your livestock from wolves and coyotes? Maybe, but the 7.62x39 round is much better for that purpose.
I don't think you can really discuss application without bringing rifles into the discussion.

Price: 39
Weight: 39
Accuracy: Nato, although this too is rifle dependant.
Range: Nato
Stopping power: Nato
Variety of ammo: Nato
Old 07-07-2010, 03:18 PM
mightyoak mightyoak is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Eastern VA, on the bay
Posts: 2,244
Thanks: 1,166
Thanked 1,208 Times in 716 Posts
Default

They do overlap in usefullness however I have 7.62x25, 7.62x39, 7.62x51, 7.62x51R (30-30) and 7.62x63 to cover most bases.
Old 07-07-2010, 03:49 PM
sniperfx sniperfx is offline
DEFCON 4
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 6,586
Thanks: 6,298
Thanked 6,987 Times in 2,986 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CZDiesel View Post
OK, FX..... I'll bite

There is a comparison and neither is better than the other.... What I mean is neither is designed to do what the other does.
Try using the 7.62x51 in a true assault rifle or carbine and you have a inferior cartridge....
Try using the 7.62x39 in a true rifle or MG and you have a inferior cartridge....

I would not want a 7.62x51, or for that fact a 7.62x54, in a AK assault platform. I have seen how they have started to import and manufacture a lot of 7.62x54 and 7.62x51 with 16" barrels... In this type of platform the 7.62x39 is the better cartridge.

how do you find it inferior as a carbine? more power and better accuracy. is it the weight that you feel is the problem?
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to sniperfx For This Useful Post:
Old 07-07-2010, 04:16 PM
CZDiesel's Avatar
CZDiesel CZDiesel is offline
I stand alone!
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Top of the Rockies
Posts: 3,218
Thanks: 5,167
Thanked 4,728 Times in 1,935 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sniperfx View Post
how do you find it inferior as a carbine? more power and better accuracy. is it the weight that you feel is the problem?
It's not a matter of what I find.... It's a matter of fact.

Carbines, whether made for hunting or military, are made for short range applications. Both rounds are of same (308/311) 30 caliber so there is no difference in bore efficiency. There is however a difference in cartridge efficiency to the detriment of the 7.62x51. The Nato cartridge will lose more in all ballistic categories than the Russian round will.... And there is no difference in accuracy between the two rounds. A round is no more inherently accurate than any other. It may be more efficient in the way it burns powder but accuracy is left to the delivery system. Is a M1A more accurate than a AK? Yes. Is a M1A more accurate than a HK-32 or a PTR32? No.
So with the loses in a carbine you have to find the practical application for the round/weapon. When the 7.62x39 round is discussed it is almost universally discussed in military applications so we'll assume that this is what we are debating.
With the 7.62x39 within 300 meters, practical carbine range, you have a cartridge that can deliver every bit as much of a lethal blow as the 7.62x51 but is lighter, more portable, and has more firepower (carry more rounds).
This is the true purpose of a carbine/assault rifle. It is intended to be light, portable, and carry a lot of rounds..... In this application the 7.62x39 is superior to the 7.62x51.
I would take a HK-32 in 7.62x39 over a chopped M1A or chopped comm block weapon in 308 any day if we are talking carbines or assault rifles. No contest here, 7.62x39 by a long shot
Old 07-07-2010, 04:23 PM
VINCENT's Avatar
VINCENT VINCENT is offline
Pull up your Dora panties
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: lake county, florida
Posts: 7,367
Thanks: 20,381
Thanked 16,387 Times in 4,445 Posts
Default

Isnt the 7.62x51 the same as a 30-06?
Old 07-07-2010, 05:34 PM
Sampson1986's Avatar
Sampson1986 Sampson1986 is offline
Firearm Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Montana, USA
Age: 28
Posts: 862
Thanks: 264
Thanked 573 Times in 330 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Duggo View Post
I don't think you can really discuss application without bringing rifles into the discussion.
And I respectfully disagree.

If you had a ranch and you needed a rifle to shoot at varmints and predators that were messing with your livestock, which round would you most likely choose? Personally, I'd go with a 7.62x39mm carbine (AK, Mini-30, etc).

On the other hand...

Let say you hunt in a mountainous terrain, where a majority of your shots will be at 300+ yards. In this case, the 7.62 NATO wins hands down. It would be asinine to use the 7.62x39mm round in this case.

It's mostly about cartridge application. Firearm application is secondary.

BTW, my personal philosophy is to own as many different caliber weapons as possible. Why limit yourself?
The Following User Says Thank You to Sampson1986 For This Useful Post:
Old 07-07-2010, 05:35 PM
Sampson1986's Avatar
Sampson1986 Sampson1986 is offline
Firearm Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Montana, USA
Age: 28
Posts: 862
Thanks: 264
Thanked 573 Times in 330 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VINCENT View Post
Isnt the 7.62x51 the same as a 30-06?
No. The 7.62x51 cartridge is basically the military version of the .308 Winchester, although there are some minor differences.
The Following User Says Thank You to Sampson1986 For This Useful Post:
Old 07-07-2010, 06:21 PM
Declan Declan is offline
I love this forum
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Best place in the world...but we're full
Posts: 6,671
Thanks: 2,082
Thanked 15,909 Times in 4,195 Posts
Default

Is this one of those threads where people can show off their arm chair commando "knowledge" in the realm of theory, on which round is superior?

If any of you had ever had bullets whistling by your ear, you would know that these idiotic arguments about which calibers and which rifles are "the best", are lame beyond reason.

Combat is a totally unpredictable, fluid, nonsensical, "can't put a value on it" kind of occurrence. Somebody with a black powder rifle could totally kick the butt of someone with the latest and fastest rifle if he is in the right spot at the right time and things come together for him just right....And that happens more often then you guys would like to believe.

Do you know how many people equipped with the best gear available fall victim to someone with a home made POS? You'd be surprised.

Learn to love what you have and stop second guessing yourself and your gear. A rusty, $150 SKS will kill you just as dead as a $3000 AR15 with all the bells and whistles.

Your mind is the only thing that will make a difference in this game.

And yes, I have been drinking...
Old 07-07-2010, 06:25 PM
CZDiesel's Avatar
CZDiesel CZDiesel is offline
I stand alone!
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Top of the Rockies
Posts: 3,218
Thanks: 5,167
Thanked 4,728 Times in 1,935 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Declan View Post
Is this one of those threads where people can show off their arm chair commando "knowledge" in the realm of theory, on which round is superior?

If any of you had ever had bullets whistling by your year, you would know that these idiotic arguments about which calibers and which rifles are "the best", are lame beyond reason.

Combat is a totally unpredictable, fluid, nonsensical, "can't put a value on it" kind of occurrence. Somebody with a black powder rifle could totally kick the butt of someone with the latest and fastest rifle if he is in the right spot at the right time and things come together for him just right....And that happens more often then you guys would like to believe.

Do you know how many people equipped with the best gear available fall victim to someone with a home made POS? You'd be surprised.

Learn to love what you have and stop second guessing yourself and your gear. An rusty, $150 SKS will kill you just as dead as a $3000 AR15 with all the bells and whistles.

Your mind is the only thing that will make a difference in this game.

And yes, I have been drinking...
I totally agree! With just one caveat..... The OP is trying to compare a carbine round to a rifle round....
Old 07-07-2010, 06:43 PM
divinginn's Avatar
divinginn divinginn is offline
Falcons
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: north georgia
Posts: 1,186
Thanks: 3,010
Thanked 1,078 Times in 537 Posts
Default

They are both good at what they were designed for,apples and oranges as far as I see it.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to divinginn For This Useful Post:
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
.308, 308, 308 winchester, 7.62 nato, 7.62 nato vs 7.62 x 39, 7.62 nato vs 7.62x39, 7.62x39



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Un/nato bs kenxkillz Controversial News and Alternative Politics 31 08-04-2010 07:41 PM
NATO vs .308 beulah Military Weapons Forum 2 10-07-2008 04:36 AM
.308(7.62 NATO) or .223(5.54 NATO)? ManOfVirtues Firearms General Discussion 26 09-26-2008 08:36 AM
7.62 nato JRNC26 Firearms General Discussion 5 09-13-2007 08:55 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:01 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright Kevin Felts 2006 - 2012,
Green theme by http://www.themesbydesign.net