.308 vs...

[chrisb]

7.62x51mm..... whats the difference? or is the 7.62x51mm just the NATO designation like 5.56 is for the .223 round? I've seen some good deals recently on 7.62x51mm and i've got a .308 rifle but i don't want to make the mistake of damaging myself or my gun.

[Straight Shooter]

7.62x51mm..... whats the difference? or is the 7.62x51mm just the NATO designation like 5.56 is for the .223 round? I've seen some good deals recently on 7.62x51mm and i've got a .308 rifle but i don't want to make the mistake of damaging myself or my gun.

The 7.62x51mm is loaded at higher pressures than the .308 Win round... just like the 5.56 NATO vs .223 Rem round.  Not recommend that you interchange unless you start off with a firearm designed to handle the higher pressures of the 7.62 or 5.56 NATO rounds.

[addicted]

Why are the NATO rounds supposedly higher pressure? it seems like a hunting round would be higher pressure and teh Military would save money by making soft rounds

[Mike450r]

The NATO rounds are not loaded to higher pressure that I am aware of and any rifle chambered in .223 or .308 will handle whatever increase if any just fine.

The issue with higher pressure as far as I know comes from reloading military brass, it is thicker which decreases case capacity causing compressed loads in military brass that would not be if loaded with commercial brass i.e rem, fed, win etc...

[Straight Shooter]

I do stand corrected.  Looks like the .308 Win round has the potential to damage rifles that are designed for the NATO round due to the .308's higher pressure... I always thought it was the other way around.    Also, like Mike450r said, milspec brass is thicker... thus, reducing case capacity.

[chrisb]

So then am i OK to shoot 7.62 in my 308?

[Straight Shooter]

So then am i OK to shoot 7.62 in my 308?

I would still be careful.  I've shot surplus NATO ammo in my commercial firearms and had what I considered "pressure" issues... i.e. heavier than normal recoil, stuck bolts, etc.  I'd personally do my own research and make my own educated decision.   

[Aperson]

Military wants the stopping power...Thats what it's all about, stopping power.

If i can get to be a snioper for the army, i'm gonna try and get my own gun, with an .06.

[grousetracker]

fire away, the f.m.j. are highly corrosive so clean your gun after every session. if its a new hunting rifle i have no idea why you would want to shoot them, but ive shot thousands of them out of an old 742 rem.happy shooting

[chrisb]

I don't think this is military surplus. The pictures in the catalogs and on the websites show newer looking boxes from reputabel brands. I understand there may be differences in pressure and powder load, but my biggest concern was that the 2 bullets and cartridges were not the same size and it would get stuck in and blow up my barrel.

[Bigbuckhunter_1996]

there is really no difference between the two i shoot military loaded 5.56 out of my .223 & there is really no difference in accuracy vs. a standard .223 load

[ADAMS]

As I recall, there isn't an appreciable difference in pressure.  Each is tested to different standards.  (CUP v. PSI and each is tested at a different location)  While the cartridge dimensions / specs are the same, the chamber dimensions for each are different and while as a rule 7.62 NATO fits nicely into .308 Win chambers, some 7.62 NATO chambered rifles have longer throats.  As a result, there is a risk that weaker commercial .308 Win brass can fail in a NATO chamber.

[BigGoonTuna]

7.62x51 is designed to be fired in semi-autos and machine guns, and the chamber tolerances are a little bigger than a .308.  you can safely shoot 7.62 out of a .308 rifle, but you really wouldn't want to shoot full powered .308 hunting loads out of a 7.62x51 rifle.

i have heard that the difference between .223 and 5.56x45 are the other way around -- the milspec ammo is loaded to higher pressures than .223.  a lot of guys shoot it through their .223 rifles so it's probably OK.

[FALFire]

Here is an interesting read if you are, well, interested.

http://www.thegunzone.com/30cal.html

[addicted]

Military wants the stopping power...Thats what it's all about, stopping power.

If i can get to be a snioper for the army, i'm gonna try and get my own gun, with an .06.

if they want stopping power then why did they change from the .06 for their primary rifle? its all about saving money.
 
....or away from the 45 for that matter. 45 is made for killing people.

[BigGoonTuna]

when you wound the enemy, it's a much bigger drain on their resources to care for the wounded than it is to just pile up the dead.

keep in mind that the '06 was designed back in the day when you had horses on the battlefield.  it was a big game cartridge from the beginning!

[addicted]

keep in mind that the '06 was designed back in the day when you had horses on the battlefield.  it was a big game cartridge from the beginning!

good point.

[superdown]

I put one round of 7.62 thru my new ss m77 mkII 308 and had to cycle the bolt 3-4 times pretty harshly to get the spent case out so that was enough for me to never do that again .  

[chrisb]

I put one round of 7.62 thru my new ss m77 mkII 308 and had to cycle the bolt 3-4 times pretty harshly to get the spent case out so that was enough for to never do that again . 

That's good enough for me to not try it at all then.

[addicted]

I put one round of 7.62 thru my new ss m77 mkII 308 and had to cycle the bolt 3-4 times pretty harshly to get the spent case out so that was enough for to never do that again . 

That's good enough for me to not try it at all then.

ditto

[Aperson]

well, they also want to put as many rounds down on the enemy as much as possible. So, thats ones reason.
They also wanted to brake down on the noise that the .06 makes(fired it many times, and is really loud). But it still has more stopping power then most sniper rounds these days(and it can match a .50 in range, seen it done).

And, just so you know, i'm telling you what i know, my opinoin, and from what my dad has told me(who is hoping to retire as a Lt. Col. in the next year). So, i do apologize if anyone knows differently, just telling you, what i know.

[Alchase]

7.62 to 5.56 was mainly considered because of weight savings. The more weight a soldier can eliminate from the weapon the more rounds that soldier can carry and the fact more soldiers can put more rounds on target with a lighter faster round with less recoil.

You can find stories about how Soldiers of (pick any battle..the latest being Foluga) picking up the enemies weapon during a firefight "because of a lack in stopping power of the 5.56" Sorry but these stories are like fish stories and anyone who has had to rely on the weapon for survival to throw down there own weapon for some unknown shooter regardless of caliber is just plain ridicules.

Carry an M14 around for awhile with two hundred rounds of ammo

Here is a quote from wiki, Stoner believed and proved this to be true.

"Fighting between the ground and similarity groups reached a peak in the early 1960s, when test after test showed the .223 Remington round fired from the AR-15 allowed an 8-soldier unit to outgun an 11-soldier unit armed with M14s. U.S. troops were able to carry more 5.56x45mm NATO ammunition which would allow them a better advantage against a typical NVA unit armed with AK-47s. In 1964, the U.S. Army started replacing their M14s with the M16"

[chrisb]

7.62 to 5.56 was mainly considered because of weight savings. The more weight a soldier can eliminate from the weapon the more rounds that soldier can carry and the fact more soldiers can put more rounds on target with a lighter faster round with less recoil.

You can find stories about how Soldiers of (pick any battle..the latest being Foluga) picking up the enemies weapon during a firefight "because of a lack in stopping power of the 5.56" Sorry but these stories are like fish stories and anyone who has had to rely on the weapon for survival to throw down there own weapon for some unknown shooter regardless of caliber is just plain ridicules.

Carry an M14 around for awhile with two hundred rounds of ammo

Here is a quote from wiki, Stoner believed and proved this to be true.

"Fighting between the ground and similarity groups reached a peak in the early 1960s, when test after test showed the .223 Remington round fired from the AR-15 allowed an 8-soldier unit to outgun an 11-soldier unit armed with M14s. U.S. troops were able to carry more 5.56x45mm NATO ammunition which would allow them a better advantage against a typical NVA unit armed with AK-47s. In 1964, the U.S. Army started replacing their M14s with the M16"

What does this have to do with the original question? I'm sorry not trying to be rude i just don't see the connection.