Small arms cartridges




 
--
 
January 27th, 2006  
2dold4this
 

Topic: Small arms cartridges


What should we expect from our small arms cartridges? Should a cartridge be able to defeat body armor? Is the weight of a cartridge important? Is recoil a factor? How about stopping power?


I'm more interested in rifle cartridges than handgun cartridges but feel free to address them too.
January 27th, 2006  
major liability
 
 
By "expect" you mean "What will they be like in the near future," right? Otherwise your question can be answered by 20 minutes of reading online.

I think that in about 50+ years most small arms will be using caseless, self-propelled ammunition. Self-propelled ammo makes the most sense to me because it could be perfectly accurate (and actually change course slightly) until it runs out of fuel, and since most of the missile's velocity is gained after it leaves the barrel, it could reach speeds that would normally produce far too much recoil to be fired by a person. Ideally the tip will have an armor piercing shell with a high-explosive core.
January 28th, 2006  
Rosenrot
 
 
1: Exact Penetration: A bullet that will expand its energy within the target and not over penetrate

2: Recoil Factor: The larger the round the more recoil. In a serious of larger burst accuracy will suffer due to larger recoil cycles. Larger rounds such as the 7.62 have their advantages as well as their disadvantage this being one of them.

3:Round Availability: A common round that one will come in contact with frequently.

My round of choice is the 5.56 Rem
--
January 28th, 2006  
5.56X45mm
 
 
Firearms design is hitting a the upper limits of what it can do.

Most of the new calibers and cartridge design are of simply economics. Most new calibers due what the older ones due. Firearm and ammunition companies still need a source of income. And guess what, new calibers and wonder weapons do it.
January 28th, 2006  
2dold4this
 
Maybe we are at the upper limits of what we can expect a cartridge to do. How much better is the 5.56x45 than the hundred year old 7x57 Mauser?
January 28th, 2006  
zander_0633
 
 
HAH! I think you can even use a match lock rifle!
January 28th, 2006  
Rockyroad
 
 
Shrapnel is effective as a killing tool. And it's harder to trace. Why else did the mob use .22 dum dums as their choice for a single hit? In the head... death and not a good slug to trace.

January 28th, 2006  
5.56X45mm
 
 
....
January 28th, 2006  
5.56X45mm
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2dold4this
Maybe we are at the upper limits of what we can expect a cartridge to do. How much better is the 5.56x45 than the hundred year old 7x57 Mauser?
7X57 Spanish Mauser is a great full size rifle cartridge. I had a Model 1916 Spanish Mauser chambered for 7X57mm. I loved that rifle, I wish I never sold it. It was one flat shooting, hard hitting round.

5.56X45mm is a intermediate size rifle cartridge. It's like what's better, a 9X19mm or a .454 Casual?
January 30th, 2006  
2dold4this
 
That is a good point, 5.56. The 7x57 is a full power round while the 5.56x45 is an intermediate round.

As far as matchlocks go, I'd have to say that both the 5.56x45 and the 7x57 have several advantages over the paper cartridge that was introduced by Sweden for its matchlock muskets. The metallic cartridges of the 7x57 and 5.56 are more water resistant, less prone to damage from mishandling, are more accurate, have a flatter trajectories, are easier to load, produce less fouling and make less smoke than the paper matchlock cartridge. More importantly they have self contained primers, eliminating the need for a smoldering match.

I guess what I'm trying to get at is why do we select an intermediate cartridge over a full power cartridge? What limitations do we incur and what advantages do we reap? Are some intermediate cartridges better than others? Are there things we would like our current cartridges to do better?