How is there even any question as to which is better?
Speed and volume of fire matters
>>28608576
Not when a round hits the target.
>>28608565
>implying bigger is better
Have fun hitting her cervix lankdick
No
7.62x63
Stay mad cutfags.
>>28608576
>Speed and volume of fire matters
>>28608623
>Not when a round hits the target.
Holy shit you are actually retarded.
>>28608633
That's my fetish, desu.
Yeah, the one on the right is better. And?
>>28608705
>someone posts a rebuttal to their post
>gets this upset
holy shit you are actually this upset
>>28608576
5.56 isn't even as good as 5.45 even though it's faster.
>>28608565
Ballistics indicate that the 223 fractions itselve in the body host so it's as lethal as any other hi velocity medium power bullet. It hits you'r vital parts it kills you. End of the discussion.
>>28608565
M855A1 has a MV of 2970 ft/s from a 14.5" barrel for 1213 ft/lbs of KE.
M43 has a MV of 2320 ft/s from a 16" barrel for 1456 ft/lbs of KE.
However, the M855A1 fragments reliably, transferring a greater percentage of it's KE into the target, while the M43 round might begin to tumble as it leaves the target, taking most of it's KE with it.
5.56 NATO is better, that's why everyone uses it. Here's your (You).
>>28608980
Jesus. What country are you from?
7.62 is superior due to penetration of common cover.
>>28609198
>common cover
Such as?
>>28609340
cover
the usual kind
>>28609124
>m43
Nice meme
>>28609124
>m855a1
lol, unobtainium
>>28609433
>lol, unobtainium
Standard issue in a combat zone, unobtainium, same thing.
>>28609421
>No you
What else do you suggest, it's kind of the round that Wolf and Tula are. It's the basic military loading for the cartridge.
>>28609433
Not for the military. Why would you use FMJ's as a civilian when there are much better options?
>>28609340
chairs, desks and doors
>>28608980
Delicious word-salad, bro.
The only reason there's any sort of "controversy" is cause of the 5.56 lobby and the fudds
inb4
>muh ar15
>muh speed
>muh low recoil
puh-lease. AR15 is an overrated design. All bullets go faster than it'll ever matter. And the only reason you need a low recoil round is cause you're a limp wristed faggot.
>>28609340
Bread!
Apples!
Very small rocks!
>>28609499
I'd do the m67 or an equivalent since its better, even though it still gets beat by 5.56, probably.
>>28609590
>the 5.56 lobby
I...
>fudds
Are you retarded?
Fudds like classic guns with wood grains, irrationally so, you're thinking of "Bubba's" who buy an AR-15 and add 3 flashlights, a laser sight, a cup-holder, a gravy boat, and a fleshlight
>>28609602
Why though? M67 isn't nearly as common or copied as the M43. It's semantics anyways, SCHV is better. Whether it's 5.45 or 5.56.
>>28608980
Le shot to wound myth
>>28609626
Please PLEASE somebody make a picatinny fleshlight attachment.
>>28609667
*SCHV cartridges
>>28608565
Because the pic looks like shit so I can't compare wtf you're trying to show me
>>28608565
300 blackout better than both of those
not in the picture
>>28608565
a brick is a waaay bigger projectile than a rifle bullet
go throw bricks you simpleton
![woundprofile[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/JjSBeqc.jpg "woundprofile[1].jpg")
very carefully
I don't know why you guys are arguing this, it's not like any of you even have experience with both guns, much less own a gun, much less would survive a shtf scenario.
>>28609340
Not him but telephone poles, trees, SUVs, houses, etc
>>28609809
>it's not like any of you even have experience with both guns
I do
>much less own a gun
I do
>much less would survive a shtf scenario.
On a scale of race riot to The Rapture what level of SHTF are we talking?
5.45 needs more love
>>28608650
>>28609433
>lol, unobtainium
From 2015 only one type of ball round purchased by US mil. It is pretty much standard issue.
>>28608565
Right! How could anyone think that a slow and heavy LOL45STRONK-tier round would surpass the all purpose and well performing 5.56? People are morons
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ky7Zb6inCEU
Imbel IA2 5.56 VS 7.62
>>28608701
Kek I lost 10/10 irl
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a233190.pdf
>Purdy fired 106 rounds in three minutes, killing five children and wounding thirty others, including one teacher.
>That 86% of the wounded survived is not surprising to those who are familiar with the relatively mild
wounding characteristics of the AK-47
>86%
>7.62 is not even powerful enough to deal with 8 yo kids
>7.62 fags BTFO
>>28610124
>7.62 NATO
>Not 7.62x39
Literally not relevant to the discussion.
>>28610162
with basic shit ammo
select something that expands or fragments to put that extra energy to use to make 7.62x39 shine
>>28608623
Good thing we have a 1:1 shot to kill ratio
Oh wait, it's actually 250,000:1
>>28610188
pardon me.. i'm from Brazil and our gun laws are ultimate sh1t plus i don't know much but.. wouldn't it be best to compare
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5.45%C3%9739mm vs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5.56%C3%9745mm_NATO
and
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.62%C3%9739mm vs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.62%C3%9751mm_NATO
>>28610543
Yeah, it would, but that's not what OP wanted with his retarded bait thread.
>>28610685
>retarded bait thread
that you keep replying to
>>28610058
<3
>>28610832
I'm bored and wanted to see more shitposting. I like arguing.
>>28609340
You know that outside America walls aren't made of cardboard?
>>28610399
>with basic shit ammo
But this what Russian and Muslim terrorists around the world use and for this use muh 7.62 is praised for its powahr (when actually it just sucks).
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/workhorse-rifle-failing-us-troops-in-afghanistan-1979987.html
>>28610543
No.
5.45, 5.56, and 7.62x39 are all intermediate cartridges that serve the same role and take up about the same amount of space.
7.62x51 is a full power rifle round in a whole different category.
Cavitation, http://tacmedaustralia.com.au/why-id-rather-be-shot-with-an-ak47-than-an-m4/
>>28608980
>Ballistics indicate that the 223 fractions itselve in the body host so it's as lethal as any other hi velocity medium power bullet.
5.56 has a fragmentation threshold of 2,000 ft/s to 2,600 ft/s based on the construction of the bullet. For M855 out of a 16.5 inch barrel its fragmentation envelope is out to ~190 m, for XM193 out of the same barrel it is ~210.
Past the fragmentation envelope of 5.56 its lethality is almost whole centered on shot placement. For a well trained shooter at a range with good visibility it is rather easy to get good shot placement at 200 to 300 m. For someone who just barely passed rifle qualification, is under fire, and there is poor light/ dust in the air shot placement passed 200 m is is very difficult.
>>28608633
>can't doggy style with my friend because I hit her cervix
I want to get it like they do in the porno films
>my dad drunkenly told me one of his stories about a girl telling him the he was hurting he because he hit her cervix
Thanks dad
>get .223 if you want it to fly far
>get 7.62x39 if you want it to destroy cover
>get .308 if you want it to do both
>>28608980
>in the body host
>>28617069
>destroy cover
This is honestly my favorite part about the caliber. Even with cheap ammo like Tula, it blast chunks out of rocks, breaks cinder blocks, tears wood apart, ruins the steel prongs holding up my self-healing target, etc.
I get a freedom boner just thinking about it.
>>28608633
>brings up penis size out of nowhere
>being this insecure
>never been able to deep dick a girl therefore thinks no girls like it
I almost feel sorry for you
>>28617033
If the girl you are with doesnt tell you that it hurts then you are good to do it that way.
The girl Im with right now loves when I hit her cervix, though I have better luck fingering her there then with my dick.
>>28617209
I try to go to pound town and she tells me to stop and pulls away
>>28616821
>Past the fragmentation envelope of 5.56 its lethality is almost whole centered on shot placement.
Past 0 (zero) meters 7.62x39 surplus have no fragmentation and its lethality is almost whole centered on shot placement.
don't mind me, just posting a guy that's been laced up with 556
