5.56 vs 7.62

I’m talking about rescue and raid missions where softening can’t happen.

Im going to be the fag that brings up over penetration. The 5.56 Nato is designed to tumble once it enters, yadda yadda...

You can't wind hearts and minds when you take out the mother and child on the other side of that door with an aloha snackbar between you and the door.

The M14 was "brought back", in the very limited sense that that is true, for fighting in Afghanistan, where sometimes shit is a long way away.

>This is clearly seen with the US Military bringing back the M14

M14 was just a stopgap measure until they could get real 7.62 DMRs in soldier's hands. Range was the issue there, not penetration.

>with modular rifles with longer barrels that can switch between 5.56, .300 black out and 7.62

This was a meme that FN pushed while shilling the SCAR. Being able to swap calibers on a gun in the field is useless. Thinking about having that option from a logistics perspective is laughable. Are you really going to expect your dudes to keep up with another three sets of parts for their rifle while in the field?

7.62 ball won't penetrate L3 plates.

After Fallujah, the Army learned from the Marines that M14 style rifles or more importantly going back to longer rifles is necessary now because enemies are getting better equipped with better protection

No they didn't.

I know that. Level 2 armor with 3 inches or more concrete or heavy brush/vines (ie Vietnam), 5.56 is basically worthless

No you fucking moron. They needed something with range. So they broke out old M14s to fill the gap until appropriate DMRs could be fielded.

Yes they did, which is why they are deploying more DMRs and going into the future building a modular caliber rifle based on the M16A2. The Army would have the ability during missions to choose a caliber to use. If they are going to be in light cover, rifleman can use 5.56. if they are going to be fight against well covered and protected enemies, they have the option before the mission starts to use 300blackout or the 7.62 round.

That was before Fallujah. After Fallujah, the Army implemented a 2 DMR per platoon because they needed intermediate to long range support because the insurgents were hiding in thick concrete buildings surrounded by human shields and the 5.56 round couldn’t penetrate and the rifleman were limited by Obama in using the grenade launchers. They also discovered that the M14 EBR was less likely to jam than modified M16 rifles

Damn, I fell for the bait fucking hard. Good job f a m. I r8 8/8 m8

The new modular rifles are stemming from the HK433 rifle. The 5.56 will still be the standard round most likely, but pre-mission the army can switch rounds just like the m17/18 pistol

It’s not bait. It’s common knowledge

>Why hasn’t the US switched back to the 7.62?
Because economy you dumb faggot, read a book.

Economy has no bearing here because the new modular rifle can switch calibers

If you read a book then you would know that when the army switched from the m14 to the m16, it was because of colt lobbying MacNamara, weight and the length of the rifle. If it was purely economics, then the army would have switched back to the m14 with a 16-19 in barrel because it took over 500 rds of 5.56 on average to kill one vietcong compared to 100rds of 7.62

Ever carry 300 rounds of 7.62 up a mountain in Afghanistan? I used to leave my wristwatch behind just to save a few grams.

I know how much 7.62 weighs and I know shaving off weight for soldiers patroling long distances and climbing is essential, which is why the new modular rifle allows caliber changes. But if the enemies are now using higher grade body armor, while having access to better coverage, 5.56 is significantly less effective.

Shoot twice then?

>it takes 1.5x more 5.56 to do a 7.62 job in dealing with enemies with better coverage

Video game balance is not real life.

YouTube cinder block ballistic tests. 7.62 is significantly better at breaking through them.

7,62 is lower velocity than 5,56 thus it is inferior when it comes to penetrating armor.

Only intelligent replies in the thread. Under 18s are the worst part of this board, worse than standard noguns. They're defacto noguns with retarded shit filling their heads.

Starting looking at numbers. If it takes 1.5 5.56 rounds to go through 3in concrete and 1 7.62 to go through, then 30rd standard 5.56 vs 20rd standard 7.62 magazine. The number of bullets to get the job done are equal. That being said start multiplying this by x amount of magazines one man carry and then multiply it by the amount of people used in a mission. The more people being used, it becomes more cost effective and weight effective to use the 7.62

Read the thread. Enemies are using level 2 armor, which both rounds would easily go through. Combine that with the fact that more and more threats have access to 3in or greater concrete walls, makes 5.56 less effective

...

>>>/MLP/

Plus 7.62 has 2x the impact energy than a 5.56 round against armor. Level 3 armor stops up to 7.62 meaning that a 5.56 would easily be stopped

Soldiers aren't going to waste ammo trying to chip away at concrete barriers with their service rifles. If they can't get through it with a belt fed 7.62 or .50, they will use mortars, rockets, artillery, or air support or something else. Burdening the soldier with a heavier rifle and less rounds because they might have to deal with a situation that they already have other proper tools for is ridiculous. The utility of a 7.62 service rifle over contemporary 5.56 rifles simply isn't there.

That is true, but it is rare that troops in no-go softening targets (ie can’t soften the target before hand) in heavily urbanized areas get .50cal support, which is why the m14ebr and m39emr are used a lot. In addition as enemies start getting better equipped with level 3 armor, soldiers will have significantly increase the amount of 5.56 rounds needed to deal that, which then defeats the purpose of shaving weight if carrying a slightly smaller amount of 7.62 magazines could do the same job

They are already expecting 5.56 to be phased out of all of nato with either going to a Valkyrie round or .300blackout because of threats having better body armor

Bigger and slower(lol 300 blackout) is worst at penetrating armor. You need to go faster, smaller, or harder. Stop talking out of your ass.

The round is trying to mimic an AKrd, which if you seen cinder block tests does significantly better than a 5.56.
americanshootingjournal.com/300-blackout-vs-556/#2zvfaxdc

>This was a meme that FN pushed while shilling the SCAR.

socom requested it, not fn.

level IV armor stops 30-06 AP rounds, so why the fuck would anyone switch to 7.62 to defeat armor when it can't even penetrate the most common armor?

holy shit, it's retarded.

Holy shit you fucking retards no one fucking spends hours shooting at cinderblocks

The M14 was brought back because they needed DMRs and they couldn't get money for new ones but they could get nearly the same amount of money to retrofit old sub par rifles.

> I'm talking about 1/10th of a percentage of all military operations

Partly. The Military was using a modified m16, but it wasn’t reliable enough for what they needed, so they then went to the m14 for dmr

Nah, that's all bullshit. Last I heard they're looking at 6mm rounds. Like a Grendel or 6.8 spc. Valkyrie would be a shit round for infantry and 300 would somehow be worse.

That’s level 5. Level 4 stops up to 5.56 armor piercing. Level 3 stops up to 7.62, so I stood 5.56 as well

The units executing those missions can already pick just about any weapon/caliber they see fit based on the circumstances. Want an HK417? Cool here you go. Good old fashioned M4? Alrighty. Brown bess? I mean sure if you really think best.

Valkyrie round performs better than a 5.56 and is very slightly heavier, but costs a lot more. The 300aac is being considered because the 300aac is better out of short barrel rifles like a m4 then a 5.56, which would allow infantry to have a one-gun approach so they can get rid of smgs all together. 6mm is on the radar like you said, but there is a strong presence of resistance to design another rifle platform than reconfiguring a 5.56 to a Valkyrie or a 7.62 to a 300acc

Special forces can, but you know that regular troops also do rescue, assault and raid missions.

why would goat farmers wear expensive soft armor when cheap steal plates are better?

A) the goat farmers have sugar daddies so they get whatever armor they’re given
B) it depends on the quality of the steel
C) they’re now wearing level 2 body armor

The US hasn’t tried to win hearts and minds in 75 years. Get over yourself.

You realize that the Military is now back to fighting in more urbanized areas than a small farm village with little to no-concrete buildings

Less than that. It has been since LBJ that US stopped trying.

Watch some videos of M855A1 on youtube.

It was around the now cancelled XM rifle program.

M855A1 easily defeats level 3 armor.

The new M80A1rd
Level 3 stops up to standard 7.62 and 5.56 FMJ rds. So yes an armor piercing 5.56, 7.62, regular 30-06. 300win mag etc. would easily go through level 3

you don't waste fucking ammo on cinderblocks you just blow them the fuck up holy shit

You realize that concrete walls and cinder blocks are now part of weapons testing for NATO and the US, which is why they made enhanced rds to deal with environmental penetration as well as armor penetration

Tungsten rounds like M993 and M995.

There is no level 5, level 3 is M80 ball and level 4 is M2AP.

The Army is adopting a 6.8mm cased telescoped round in its M249 replacement.

because modern infantry doctrine is to suppress the enemy and call in air support, artillery, etc to take out the enemy

M855A1 is ball ammo, the US has never adopted a proper AP 5.56 round unless you count specialty stuff like M995.

Obama was president in 2003?

L3 makes electronics, not plates you fool

Level 5 body armor has around the same strength as the armor piercing Level 1 vechile armor, but when lighter material comes in it will move up a level. The problem is that level 5 armor makes the person basically immobile because it is so heavy, so they’re considering making it into a moveable riot-shield like object.

Under him they adopted the neutered limited engagement protocol, which trump and Mattis repealed significantly

That is what the Army is replacing soon with all of its 7.62 weapons

There is no such thing as level 5 body armor.

ADVAP is a round being made specifically for the new M110A1 DMR rifle, which will also use M80, M80A1 and M118LR.

Fallujah happened under Bush though
Sounds like you just want to blame the too progun for the NRA president

A) yes, it is only for military usage as of now. Also it is impractical to wear because it is significantly heavier than level 4. Wearing all level 5 would more than likely get killed due to severely limiting mobility
B) it is also being considered to be put into retrofitted dmrs as well as the new modular rifle program
Yes it was. When Obama became president in 2009, he radically changed the ROE severely limiting air support in urban environments, which is why the military added concrete penetration to its test and began to heavily invest more in enhancing its rounds

>be infantry
>be trained to double-tap fist-sized targets while on the move in the dark at ranges of 100+/-100 meters
>assuming 67% accuracy at any caliber and equivalent lethality of any rifle bullet to the enemy's face or unarmored body location, plus numerous other factors & metafactors, we can kill twice as many enemies twice as fast with 5.56 than 7.62.
>t. infantry

Oh please do show how 2004 comes in 2009.

You’re assuming decent visability and no thick brush because Vietnam proved that the m16 was inferior to the m14

No, I agreed with him about Fallujah was under Bush. I was not specific in writing that in 09’ the ROE was changed, not Obama was in charge during Fallujah

A level 5 rating does not exist in any form, anything higher than the requirement for level 4 is still rated level 4.

Level does exist, but it is referred to Vechile Armor Piercing Protection lvl 1 because they are the same thing only that instead of being on a vechile, it is in a vest form.

Vietnam proved the M14 to be a huge fuckup, the Army was forced to decide whether the M16 was to become the primary service rifle or go back to the Garand.

You can stop now, vehicle ratings are not applicable to body armor.

There were many problems: half of the Military wanted to go to a lighter and shorter length rifle because soldiers complained about the m14 getting stuck in the dense jungle brush as well as having to carry heavy ammo and a heavy gun with strong recoil, even with the later addition of a foregrip, long distances. Also the m14 was harder to train soldiers in, which LBJ demanded that the Military needed masses of soldiers rather than well trained soldiers. the m16 could easily accomplish the fast pace mass soldier training. The other half thought that the m16 was bad because half the troops were already trained with the m14 and switching to the m16 would fuck them up. Also the m16 had problems jamming in jungle climates as well as the 5.56 not having the power to clear the brush, which the 7.62 had.
Level 5 body armor is lvl 1 vechile armor in a vest form. Like I said, anyone wearing it would be basically a sitting duck because it is so heavy.

>Most of the people that the US fight are equipped with Level 2 or better armor

5.56 will defeat Level 2 and 3a armor just as readily as 7.62 and are both equally ineffective at penetrating level 3 and above. You are right in that 7.62 is more effective at penetrating light cover and concealment in most cases though.

>it takes 1.5x more 5.56 to do a 7.62 job in dealing with enemies with better coverage

You can stop pulling things out of your ass now.

>This is clearly seen with the US Military bringing back the M14 and going with modular rifles with longer barrels

The U.S. is phasing out the M14. It was only re-issued as a stopgap for a few years before people remembered why it was ditched in the first place. It's a shit rifle. And the U.S. is generally transitioning to shorter barreled rifles and has been for more than a decade.

>Also the m16 had problems jamming in jungle climates as well as the 5.56

The M16 had problems with the jungle climate because they were initially produced without chrome lining, issued without cleaning kits, had soldiers improperly taught that it didn’t need cleaning, and ammunition manufactured without proper standards.

>Level 5 body armor is lvl 1 vechile armor in a vest form

I imagine this sounds cool in your head but it isn’t a thing.

>access to better coverage

this has been said a few times, and its fucking retarded. Do you really think the enemy just didnt hide behind good coverage back in the 70s, 80s, and 90s and now all of the sudden does?

Cinder blocks prove the penetration which is coverage, so yes 7.62 is better at destroying coverage than a 5.56. 7.62 can easily penetrate a 3in cinder block while it takes 2 5.56 rds to do the same job.

True the m14 ebr is being phased out, but the army is using different rifle platforms, one of them is the m14 platform. The m14 receiver is a more reliable one in terms of maintenance and environmental factors than the m16 family, but it has a slower rate of fire and more expensive to replace than the m16 family. The m16 family to this day still has problems dealing with very harsh sand, mud and jungle environments, which requires it to be maintained a lot more as compared to an m14.
The m14 receiver is almost reliable as an AKs, but it has a slower rate of fire and is very expensive to replace compared to the m16 family. It is like comparing a SUV to Porsche, which is why the army is working on gen 4, which will bridge the gap between the m16 and the m14 families.
I am talking about in general compare the mudja hadid vs the Taliban. The taliban had more access to heavily urban areas which have more protection health than the Mudja hadids open desert and limited amount of captured soviet outposts. The enemies we are facing are better equipped and have access to better coverage ie fortified compounds vs small Vietnamese village

Lol they weren’t thinking about going back to the garand you fucking moron why do you make that up? What special ability does the garand have to not be objectively inferior to its own magazine fed iteration?

The m1 had the loud and magical clicking sound when it ejected it’s clip and fired a 30-06.

>The m14 receiver is almost reliable as an AKs

The M14’s open Garand style action was extremely susceptible to the jungle, the AK and M16 were far more reliable.

No it didn't stop making shit up

The M14 was considered a failure, it was either go all in on the M16 or go back to the Garand, which the Army would have had warehouses of in the mid sixties.

>The m14 receiver is a more reliable one in terms of maintenance and environmental factors than the m16 family.

This is flat out false. The M14 is the least reliable of any of the major battle rifles. It has a massive opening for debris to enter from the top and the mechanism can't blow dirt out of the way like the Stoner gas system can.

>but it has a slower rate of fire and more expensive to replace than the m16 family. The m16 family to this day still has problems dealing with very harsh sand, mud and jungle environments, which requires it to be maintained a lot more as compared to an m14.

And yet in real life the AR shits all over the M14 in harsh environmental conditions.

youtube.com/watch?v=PYfGq1yk66Q

The only one making things up is the user who thinks STANAG 1 vehicle armor (rated for M80 ball, which is NIJ level 3 body armor) is level 5 body armor.

There is no documented evidence or recollection ever of the M1 Garand clip ejection making such a loud noise that it gave away any position ever. Its literally fudd science

most of people the us fight are sand niggers wearing sheets, not body armor