Talk:7.62 mm caliber

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Firearms (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Firearms, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of firearms on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Military history (Rated Start-Class)
MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality assessment scale.

Comment[edit]

"However, it was found that there was no way to make a controllable 7.62x51mm assault rifle light enough to be practical. Weapons such as the FN FAL were big, clumsy, uncontrollable, and fragile."

From what I understand about firearms this statement is somewaht misleading. Most nations discovered that it was not possible to make a 7.62x51mm rifle (which was light enough to be a standard infantry rifle) controllable when fired at FULL AUTO, however most weapons were found highly effective and reasonably accurate when fired at semi auto. Further, though weapons such as the FN FAL and M-14 do tend to be long (and thus clumsy in cramped environments) when fired in semi auto mode they are quite contollable and are often as or more rugged/reliable than the 5.65mm rifles that replaced them (For example both the M-16 which replaced the M-14 in the US military and the SA-80 which replaced Britain's FAL suffered extensive teething problems). Another example of a successful 7.62x51mm weapon is the German military's H&K G3.


The 7.62x39 cartridge was originally developed for the SKS rifle, designed not by Kalishnikov, but by Simonov. It's unlikely that Kalashnikov had anything at all to do with the 7.62x39 round

I don't think it's misleading. Earlier in the paragraph, the requirement for full auto mode was stated. Additionally, that very sentence refers to assault rifle, which, by definition, has full auto mode. I did add a link to the assault rifle article. (No comment on the 7.62x39 cartridge.) Lefty 23:15, 2004 Feb 24 (UTC)
AFAIK 7,62x39 hadn't been designed for any particular type of weapon. It had been developed as new general-purpose round for military weapons and several competitions were held for automatic and semi-automatic weapons utilizing this cartridge. Both SKS and AK-47 came out winners. SKS itself is semi-auto version of pre-WWII AVS rifle chambered for Russian 7,62 x 54 mm cartridge.

Regarding 7,62 TT versus 7,62 Mauser cartridge, it is possible to use Mauser cartridges to fire TT-family weapons (TT pistol and many Russian SMGs), but not vice versa. TT cartridge has more powerful powder charge and can damage Mauser-chambered weapon. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 206.186.8.130 (talk) 20:44, 6 February 2007 (UTC).

The Springfield 1903 rifle and M1 Garand did not chamber the 7.62x51mm NATO round. They both chambered the 30-06 round; which has similar performance to the 7.62x51mm NATO but is physically very different. And as long as 30-06 rifles are being listed, the Model 1917 rifle ought to be added. It was more widely used in WWI than the 1903 Springfield and is generally thought of as a better weapon (for infantry, at least).

Nitpicking[edit]

The title of this article should read cartridge rather than caliber and even that is not technically correct. To be precise, the article should be titled "7.62mm Military Cartridges", as it describes more than one such cartridge. Caliber is a measurement of bore diameter, not a specific round designation. 7.62 mm or .308 inches includes a vast number of cartridges, a very abbreviated list of which would include the .30 Carbine; 30-30 Winchester; 30-40 Krag; 30-06 Springfield; .300 Winchester Magnum; .300 Weatherby Magnum; and .308 Norma Magnum.hipshot49

Personal opinion in this article[edit]

The second paragraph under NATO contains a personal opinion. Can anyone fix it?

Anything left worth keeping?[edit]

I'm pretty sure that there's nothing left here worht keeping, and I can safely turn this into a redirect to 7 mm caliber, copying over a note about 7.62 mm. If no one objects in the next couple days, I'll go ahead and do it. Night Gyr 07:36, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Might as well lump them all into one big firearm cartridge disambiguation.
I do not feel that your comment displays any familiarity with the subject of this particular page. Please restrict you're edis to subjects you know. If you want we can redirect them both to 9 mm cal and 12 guage while we're at it. 7 mm and 7.62 mm/.30 cal are not the same thing. Somewhat related in that both are popular bore diameters for firearms, but not the same damn thing. —unsigned edit by 136.159.78.35 19:44, 16 Mar 2006
I've made numerous constructive edits to subjects which I very much don't know. I disagree strongly with your advice to Night Gyr. However, your assessment that "7 mm and 7.62 mm/.30 cal are not the same thing" appears to be correct and to have carried the day, possibly due only to inaction.—BozoTheScary 18:30, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

7.62 x 42 mm[edit]

I'm fairly certain that I saw a Russian sniper rifle that takes a 7.62 x 42 mm round at a gun show. I've been able to find only one extremely cursory reference to it on the web, so I'm doubting my memory. Can anyone corroborate or dismiss this? —BozoTheScary 18:13, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

7.62mm[edit]

Should there be a link in here to the game "7.62mm" from Russian developers C1? I'd do it myself, but I don't know how. 70.182.53.66 (talk) 20:49, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

7.562 ammunition[edit]

Can some one tell me how many grains are their in standard NATO 7.62 mm ammunition —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.114.74.104 (talk) 18:20, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

7.62 NATO not exactly same as .308[edit]

The article states that the 7.62 NATO cartridge is the same as the civilian .308; while this is almost nearly true, it should also be stated that there are small differences in headspace clearances that can cause unsafe conditions when using a reloaded 7.62 NATO case in a .308 designated rifle. If a shooter loads his own ammunition then he/she should be cautious using NATO surplus casings. Dslayer202 (talk) 11:21, 2 March 2009 (UTC)dslayer202