Originally Posted by jackehammond

PS> The term Dum-Dum comes from a British arsenal in India which some how or another an urban legend (maybe not an urban legend) came about that they made these kind of bullets for their Enfield muzzle loaders. Who knows?

During the Boer War, the Brits used to execute Boer Kommando's on the spot if they found Dum-Dum bullets on them. The Boere would sit on the hills and scrape the bullet tips against rocks to flatten them, then take a knife and X it - all this while laying in wait of a British Patrol to move into the ambush.

The Boere almost bought the horrid Martini Henry .577 (IIRC). Luckily a Mauser Rep showed up during the triels and did a quick demo - he had a soldier with a martini on the range and he shot with a 7mm Mause (pre 94) himself - in the time it took the soldier with the martini henry to shoot down a certain number of targets, the rep with the mauser shot twice the amount of targets -at greater range and with more accuracy.

In South African history, my vote is for the martini henry and the new R4 AR.

My contribution would be to nominate the Chinese SKS as the most pathetic pos (this is not a knock against China just the weapon folks). If you grab ahold of one of these bad boys one of the first thing you might notice is the amount of play in the weapon. It doesnt give you that warm tingly solid feel of say a baseball bat or a Mini-14. And the accuracy is something that requires a healthy dose of Kentucky windage. I thought maybe it was just a bad weapon or two but after getting to handle more than a dozen I am pretty much 100 percent behind my nominee to take top (dis)honours.

The 5.56mm has a high MV than the older 7.62mm rounds. This causes a massive shock wave in the body as it passes through causing massive damage around the area it passes through

Sorry Jack... You.Are.Wrong.

It is the 7.62 that creates a bigger "shock" wave on the body.
The 5.56 has a different strike and disintergration/travel pattern through the body... that is what causes the damage, not the shock. This is a well documented and heavily taught fact in the Australian military mate.

Heard the same thing in comparing the 7.62 vs the .223 round Nick. Piercing round (7.62) versus the tumbling round (.223). I also remember the trade-off was accuracy as a blade of grass could deflect a tumbling round whereas the piercing round continues on towards target.
Right or wrong?

It's true about the deflection of the rounds, M16 rounds were notorious for deflection in the Vietnam undergrowth, but the SLR 7.62 wasn't troubled in the same way.

Originally Posted by AussieNick

Sorry Jack... You.Are.Wrong.

It is the 7.62 that creates a bigger "shock" wave on the body.
The 5.56 has a different strike and disintergration/travel pattern through the body... that is what causes the damage, not the shock. This is a well documented and heavily taught fact in the Australian military mate.

Dear Member,

We will just have to agree to disagree. A lot of things are taught military forces -- ie for years they were taught that HEAT warheads like those used by the M72 LAW burned through armor. So we will have to disagree.

Jack E. Hammond

Originally Posted by jackehammond

Dear Member,

We will just have to agree to disagree. A lot of things are taught military forces -- ie for years they were taught that HEAT warheads like those used by the M72 LAW burned through armor.

Who was taught that? We were taught that "spalling" caused a burning effect inside armor vehicles.

Jack your info seems to be conflicting with the info given to those in the military. What is your source Jack?

Originally Posted by jackehammond

Dear Member,

We will just have to agree to disagree. A lot of things are taught military forces -- ie for years they were taught that HEAT warheads like those used by the M72 LAW burned through armor. So we will have to disagree.

Jack E. Hammond

A HEAT has a probe on the tip of the round upon contact it launches a penatrator with the shaped charge warhead, punching into the armor and the explosion fallows causing "spalling" within the vehicle.

Originally Posted by AussieNick

It's true about the deflection of the rounds, M16 rounds were notorious for deflection in the Vietnam undergrowth, but the SLR 7.62 wasn't troubled in the same way.

Same complains with the M249, the Navy dislikes that the round can bedeflected off course by a twig, while the M60 firing the 7.62mm doesn't have that problem.