IDN TAKE: Is the 7.62x51mm Calibre Assault Rifle Suitable For Conventional War?

[GURU DUTT]

Where did I say anything about your spelling mistakes??That would be rude bro. Oh, you mean I marking parts of your posts in bold??Dude, I'm sorry but I didn't really intend to point out your supposed spelling mistakes rather, I was pointing out some technical impossibilities in your wishlist, @MilSpec would get it, oh and also, there is no such thing as a .303 Lapua Magnum though, that calibre has been out of production long since.There is one Lapua round .338 calibre but that wasn't the one we were talking about.

By the way @MilSpec sir, @GURU DUTT 's words got me thinking.I mean is it really possible to design a 7.62X51N chambered battle rifle with full auto mode with a good degree of stability during long bursts??!!How bout a piston arrangement something in the lines of the counterbalance recoil system of the AK 107, think such a configuration might work??You being an engineer and one who has a fair experience of shooting different cartridges out of different rifles, would be best suited to give a feedback.Thanks in advance.

sirji with all due respect towards DRDO and OFB for once they should serouslly just for R&D sake try making a full ine of assault/battle , sniper and even LMG based on BullPup version

 

[MilSpec]

to @Omega007 & @MilSpec why are you guys running after my silly spelling mistakes am i here to give a grammer exam waise bhee im just an avrage muhib e watan hindustani .... in short galtion pe matt jao ... bhaavnao ko samjho sirji

Don't get me wrong, Main aapki bhavnaoe ki bahut kadar kar t hu, galti idea mein hain.

I did not mean your spelling. i am a big fan of Bull pup designs. In a bull pup design you are transferring the action of the rile to buttstock area of conventional rifle, and gain very valuable real estate. What it does is make the system compact, and reduces a few ounces in weight. But when you shoot a 7.62x51 Nato round of it like say in the Keltec RDB the felt recoil is exactly as the FN FAL or the ScarH.

In other words, Bull pups as a design philosophy are excellent, but a for a assault rifle application, I would still pick a regular TAR21 Tavor over a oversized Tavor in 7.62x51 nato.

But I understand your intent, to get "Wohi Safedi Wohi Jhaag jub Bulpup me mile to koyi ye kyun le" which is quite noble. That is where the 6.8spc and 6.5 grendel come in . They are quite close to 5.56nato in dynamics, easier flat shooting round, and better engineered compared to 7.62x51 ... so you do get light weight and versatility of the 5.56, better terminal ballistics much better long range performance compared to the 7.62x51 nato.

hopefully that clarifies it.

regards.

 

[GURU DUTT]

Don't get me wrong, Main aapki bhavnaoe ki bahut kadar kar t hu, galti idea mein hain.

I did not mean your spelling. i am a big fan of Bull pup designs. In a bull pup design you are transferring the action of the rile to buttstock area of conventional rifle, and gain very valuable real estate. What it does is make the system compact, and reduces a few ounces in weight. But when you shoot a 7.62x51 Nato round of it like say in the Keltec RDB the felt recoil is exactly as the FN FAL or the ScarH.

In other words, Bull pups as a design philosophy are excellent, but a for a assault rifle application, I would still pick a regular TAR21 Tavor over a oversized Tavor in 7.62x51 nato.

But I understand you intent, to get "Wohi Safedi Wohi Jhaag jub Bulpup me mile to koyi ye kyun le" which is quite noble. That is where the 6.8spc and 6.5 grendel come in . They are quite close to 5.56nato in dynamics, easier flat shooting round, and better engineered compared to 7.62x51 ... so you do get light weight and versatility of the 5.56, better terminal ballistics much better long range performance compared to the 7.62x51 nato.

hopefully that clarifies it.

regards.

well thing is we have already huge stockpile of 7.62X51mm NATI ammo with us why not make Tavor with interchangable barrel setup of 7.62X51 for now and make a 6.5 or 6.8 for future and dump 5.56X45 completally

 

[MilSpec]

well thing is we have already huge stockpile of 7.62X51mm NATI ammo with us why not make Tavor with interchangable barrel setup of 7.62X51 for now and make a 6.5 or 6.8 for future and dump 5.56X45 completally

Because it's not as easy as you make it sound. For mating a tavor to 7.62x51 configuration, you will not just need a barrel change, but you will nead a different bolt carrier, a different gas piston, a different recoil spring, and a different gas tube. Other than the stock and the trigger group of the rifle you will pretty much have to change everything.

It is just not feasible. By the way I don't see anything wrong with the 5.56 x 45 round. If I had to life with just one and only one rifle, most likely i would pick the 5.56x45 or the 7.62x39.

Edit: I take that back you won't be able to use the Tavor Stock either because of the molded mag well. The only interchangeable part probably will be the trigger group which costs about $10 on a $1800 gun.

 

[Omega007]

well thing is we have already huge stockpile of 7.62X51mm NATI ammo with us why not make Tavor with interchangable barrel setup of 7.62X51 for now and make a 6.5 or 6.8 for future and dump 5.56X45 completally

Or, more practically, dump the currently issued SS 109 and replace it with a match grade round like Mk 262 or M 855A1 and get a full length 20" barrel instead of an 18.4" one.

 

[GURU DUTT]

Because it's not as easy as you make it sound. For mating a tavor to 7.62x51 configuration, you will not just need a barrel change, but you will nead a different bolt carrier, a different gas piston, a different recoil spring, and a different gas tube. Other than the stock and the trigger group of the rifle you will pretty much have to change everything.

It is just not feasible. By the way I don't see anything wrong with the 5.56 x 45 round. If I had to life with just one and only one rifle, most likely i would pick the 5.56x45 or the 7.62x39.

Edit: I take that back you won't be able to use the Tavor Stock either because of the molded mag well. The only interchangeable part probably will be the trigger group which coasts about $10 on a $1800 gun.

well in layman terms an avrage bullpup rifle even if its made of titanium alloy still might need say 3 Kg of alloy why cant we make such a rifle and give it heavy duty spring and anty recoil and gas pistons and a new barrel maybe even 22 inch still the overall length of the rifle wont aceed 30inches and 3.5Kg empty wieght

now the same setup will give you a long range battle rifle which can be used even in CQ combat and make it in huge numbers and bring down the cost from 1800$ to somewhere around 1200$

 

[Omega007]

Don't get me wrong, Main aapki bhavnaoe ki bahut kadar kar t hu, galti idea mein hain.

I did not mean your spelling. i am a big fan of Bull pup designs. In a bull pup design you are transferring the action of the rile to buttstock area of conventional rifle, and gain very valuable real estate. What it does is make the system compact, and reduces a few ounces in weight. But when you shoot a 7.62x51 Nato round of it like say in the Keltec RDB the felt recoil is exactly as the FN FAL or the ScarH.

In other words, Bull pups as a design philosophy are excellent, but a for a assault rifle application, I would still pick a regular TAR21 Tavor over a oversized Tavor in 7.62x51 nato.

But I understand your intent, to get "Wohi Safedi Wohi Jhaag jub Bulpup me mile to koyi ye kyun le" which is quite noble. That is where the 6.8spc and 6.5 grendel come in . They are quite close to 5.56nato in dynamics, easier flat shooting round, and better engineered compared to 7.62x51 ... so you do get light weight and versatility of the 5.56, better terminal ballistics much better long range performance compared to the 7.62x51 nato.

hopefully that clarifies it.

regards.

By the way sir, don't you think that a rifle of bull-pup design will have higher muzzle rise compared to one of a conventional design, since in the former all the weight is shifted towards the butt??

 

[GURU DUTT]

Or, more practically, dump the currently issued SS 109 and replace it with a match grade round like Mk 262 or M 855A1 and get a full length 20" barrel instead of an 18.4" one.

il want to go for a 22 inch chrome vanadium plated barrel as standard and 18 inch for the carbine version

By the way sir, don't you think that a rifle of bull-pup design will have higher muzzle rise compared to one of a conventional design, since in the former all the weight is shifted towards the butt??

well as for muzzle rise why cant we make a twin slats cut in side way upper edges of the muzzle cage like they have on certain GLOCK pistols to control muzzle rise

 

[MilSpec]

well in layman terms an avrage bullpup rifle even if its made of titanium alloy still might need say 3 Kg of alloy why cant we make such a rifle and give it heavy duty spring and anty recoil and gas pistons and a new barrel maybe even 22 inch still the overall length of the rifle wont aceed 30inches and 3.5Kg empty wieght

now the same setup will give you a long range battle rifle which can be used even in CQ combat and make it in huge numbers and bring down the cost from 1800$ to somewhere around 1200$

Dude, I have given you ample explanations. Go ahead grab a sketch pad and start putting you thoughts down for such design, You will see exactly what problems you will have.

few points i would mention. You just shifted your goal, in the last post you wanted to mate tavor to 7.62x51 > I gave you the reasons why It cant be done, now you are talking about a new gun.

Can I inquire what exact problem do you have with the 5.56x 45? IDF and US is happy with it, so is IA, all of Nato, Australia, are happy with it. What exactly is the gripe with it?

 

[Omega007]

il want to go for a 22 inch chrome vanadium plated barrel as standard and 18 inch for the carbine version

20" is optimum length for 5.56 NATO, no need to go any further.In fact, 20" in itself is too long for easier manoeuvring.And as for carbine version, you would not need to have a 18" barrel for the intended job if you are using match grade ammo.

well as for muzzle rise why cant we make a twin slats cut in side way upper edges of the muzzle cage like they have on certain GLOCK pistols to control muzzle rise

Well, it might work to some extent.But I'm not even sure if the muzzle rise is really a problem or not since I've never seen let alone fired a bull-pup.

 

[MilSpec]

By the way sir, don't you think that a rifle of bull-pup design will have higher muzzle rise compared to one of a conventional design, since in the former all the weight is shifted towards the butt??

I haven't shot the RDB so I don't know, (please dont call me sir), From what I have seen it doesn't seem like there is much of a muzzle rise.


@GURU DUTT
Tum sab log ameer ho yaar, I am astounded with the changes you guys wan't to make to a $2000 gun...

 

[Omega007]

I haven't shot the RDB so I don't know,

I see.

(please dont call me sir),

Alright man.

From what I have seen it doesn't seem like there is much of a muzzle rise.

Thanks.I think since the entire recoil force is channelling into your body through the butt stock, might make the recoil and muzzle rise much more easy to control than conventional designs, just a thought.

By the way, please check out post no 30 in page 2.

sirji with all due respect towards DRDO and OFB for once they should serouslly just for R&D sake try making a full ine of assault/battle , sniper and even LMG based on BullPup version

No need to respect the OFB by the way.

@GURU DUTT
Tum sab log ameer ho yaar, I am astounded with the changes you guys wan't to make to a $2000 gun...

Seriously!!

 

[GURU DUTT]

20" is optimum length for 5.56 NATO, no need to go any further.In fact, 20" in itself is too long for easier manoeuvring.And as for carbine version, you would not need to have a 18" barrel for the intended job if you are using match grade ammo.

Well, it might work to some extent.But I'm not even sure if the muzzle rise is really a problem or not since I've never seen let alone fired a bull-pup.

well sir im not a soldier or a scientist but what i want is one weapon that does all the jobs or assault rifle+battle rifle+carine+medium range sniper rifle and a BullPup with 22inch baller and 7.62X51mm bullpup rifle can do all those jobs (one for all and all for one )which in long run save time , money and load on soldier to carry diffrent types of ammo and weapons ... bhavnao ko samjho sirji

 

[cerberus]

Dude FN SCAR H is in 7.62 X 51 and also SIG-716 and also HK 417 and also MPT-76 and also other Assault Rifles in 7.62 X 51 caliber


@cerberus No not just for Sniper but for ASSAULT RIFLES. SCAR H and BERRETA ARX 200 and SIG 716 and new COLT 901 and MPT 76 and HK 417 are all assault rifles

These Rifles are Used only in Special Op Units And And Limited Numbers These not Basic Infantry rifles The are harder to handle in combat Unless you are specially trained
Germans uses the G28, a modified version of the Heckler & Koch MR308, as a designated marksman rifle. And the standard HK417 A2 with a 13" barrel as "G27
Read
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_rifle

 

[GURU DUTT]

I haven't shot the RDB so I don't know, (please dont call me sir), From what I have seen it doesn't seem like there is much of a muzzle rise.


@GURU DUTT
Tum sab log ameer ho yaar, I am astounded with the changes you guys wan't to make to a $2000 gun...

mazrat ke saath arz karoonga sirji im not ameer im just a paleed short dark evil baniya who works seven days a week with no holidays