So I have been thinking about assault rifles a lot lately. In particular the bullets they shot. I got to wondering what the strengths and weakness of each
round was. There are several questions on those regards that I don't know the answer to so I thought I would ask every ones opinion and ask for some facts
while I was at it too. One thing I should probably clarify is that I am interested in what the rounds can do, not which platform that launches them is better.
I guess my first question is which one of these has the longest effective range? Next off which is general considered to be the best stopper. Last which one
penetrates obstacles the best. I guess those are my biggest questions.
On the following guess would any of these be right? I would guess out of these that the old 7.62x39 round probably has the best range and penetration of these
rounds due to it being a bigger bullet. On the other hand it seems like most major armies aren't using it any more. Which makes me wonder weather or not it
is all that great. When I read black hawk down many years ago lets just say I wasn't all that impressed with what it sounded like the 7.62x39 round could
do, where as before I was rather convinced it was the best assault rifle round.
The 5.56 seems to be a mixed bag, all depending on who you talk to. I have heard that it is great to I have heard it sucks. So I don't know what to think
other than it seems to matter a great deal what the bullet weight is and, what the barral length and twist rate is of the rifle shooting it. To me this seems
to make things far more complicted than they need to be.
5.45x39, on the surface seems to me to be vastly infirior to the 7.62x39 round it replaced. Then you have to ask yourself if it sucks so much why did it
replace the 7.62 round. I have heard that for some reasons the sovits felt they needed to copy us with out 5.56 round and for what ever reason they copied it
rather than sticking with the older 7.62 round. On the other hand I have heard that the 5.45 round can casuse really nasty wounds and has good stoping power
due to an air pocket in the tip that tends to make it tumble when it hits some one. So I don't know what to make of this round, especially on comparision
to the 5.56 round. From what I have gathered, 5.56 is a better stopper if it fragments, which is quite dependent on several factors. It would seem to me that
the tumbling of the 5.45, round while probably less lethal than the 5.56 when it fragments, is probably more likely to still tumble at ranges where the 5.56
round would not fragment. Is this right or wrong? If it is right it would seem to give it a slight edge over the 5.56 I would think. Then again though I would
think that the 7.62 round would be better at those ranges than either the 5.56 or 5.45. Which penetrates more the 5.45 or the 5.56? I would guess the 5.56. One
thing I have not been able to find out is weather or not all 5.45 ammo has this air pocket thing in the tip. It would seem to me that there wouldn't be
much point ot the round with out the air pocket.
Then we have the relitivly new rounds of 6.8 and 6.5. Of these two it would seem to me from what I have read that the 6.5 grendal looks better than all the
others, at least on paper. Though it also looks like it probably won't ever get to be a common round. It would seem to me that the 6.8 from what I have
read edges out the 5.56 in just about all regards. I don't know how it would compare to the 7.62x39 round though.
So opinions or even better facts on these questions would be greatly appreciated.









