₦airaland Forum

jl115:
I was talking to Shma and I didn't even once mentione the AR15 in our discussion.....here is my qoute to you yesterday :



See the bolded..... Now move on because you are talking out your ass

now you are desperate

jl115:
nobody said you don't need skill, however you certainly need an accurate rifle...

Every rifle has accuracy if you've perfected shooting with it, so it is all about skills

jl115:
look at the diameter of the wound.... The 7.62 is much bigger

look at the fragmentation in the wound
The 5.56 has 36% and a 105 degree angle from impact while the 7.62 has 33% and a clean cut straight wound from impact to penetration at 40cm

That is what the lethality of a bullet is.

jl115:
source for what I bolded muppet:

you just can't see it

This is from a Navy seal retired

jl115:
when was I talking about the AR15?

just go back and read your quotes

NTSA:
Which ever the case from the images tell me which rifle is superior using your wound theory.

that is not a 7.62

Don't be desperate

jl115:
source?

Read

The SCAR is not a bad rifle, but when they actually tested it in troop trials, the guys who tried the SCARs (including the very units that had pushed for the SCAR to be designed and adopted) found out that by the time the SCARs arrived, the incremental improvements to the M4 had eliminated the problems that pushed them to look at the SCAR, the M4 weighed less, and the M4 cost less. Thus, the SCAR didn't actually improve anything important, and had issues of it's own where the M4 was better.

The SCAR heavy (in 7.62x51mm) fared better, because, realistically, it wasn't competing with the M4 - it was competing with obsolete (and they were obsolete the day they were adopted) M14s.

jl115:
not according to the images I posted

yes according to the images posted it does



say you dont know how to read the image so that I can help you.

jl115:
so accuracy is not important in a rifle?

I never said that

But in a range competition, anything can be king depending on skills

jl115:
when was I talking about the AR15?

Just before you pulled out that comment

Return to topic

NTSA:
Which ever the case from the images tell me which rifle is superior using your wound theory.

jl115:
it has a much more reliable firing system.... The US just don't like it because it is similar to the AK

No they don't like it because it didn't out performed the M16 during testing for it price tag.

It also didn't pass the endurance test they were expecting. So they will rather stick with the trustworthy M16A4 than to splurge large on something new that will put their soldiers at a disadvantage on the battlefield.

jl115:
I see the 7.62 making a big mother fvcking hole yes!!

yes it will make a big hole but the 5.56 makes a bigger cavity and lunges in the body.

Bigger cavity means bigger internal damage.

jl115:
we were talking about rifle accuracy...... Which apparently doesn't factor in combat rifle competitions

and you went for a competition while we were talking about rifle effectiveness

jl115:
I was referring to assault rifles.... Where in my post did I even once talk about the AR15?..... It is very clear that I was using AR as an abbreviation for Assault rifles and not ArmaLite Rifles

You referred to AR meaning Assault Riffle when we were talking about AR-15.

But what ever you say bro

NTSA:
Still doesn't make it less superior.

it does

NTSA:
You are clown fragmentation seems to be your newly discovered term.
Prove to me that the 5.56 wound is more lethal/ superior than a Lapua magnum.338

except we are not talking about a magnum but a Winchester/NATO variant

No diversion, clown

NTSA:
Not unless you can prove it.

As an infantry on the battle field carrying out an assault, you don't need weight drawing you down.
Infantries rejected it in 1954 and they've done same again.

NTSA:
Preference due to reliability is not superiority.
There are way more superior ammo but that doesn't mean 5.56 is superior since it is used by US military.
The mere fact that 7.62 x 51 has more energy than 5.56 makes it superior end of story.

Funny

The impact report tells a different story

jl115:
Dude I ain't confused

The M16 like the M4, AR15 ect ect all use a Direct impingement firing system which is prone to jamming.

The FN Scar uses a short-stroke gas piston firing system which is very reliable and very similar to the AK.....its a good rifle, not great but it won't give you sh1t in tough condition like the M16 and m4

It has it own problems and won't won't even survive what the M16 has survived.... And that is why scar is not trusted.

[quote author=jl115 post=107694267][/quote]you see how it is just a straight wound?

You see how it's fragmentation is lesser than the 5.56 hence lesser secondary wound?

jl115:
my bru, just stop

just stop comparing apples and oranges

jl115:
I wasn't referring to the AR you muppet.....

clown, you referred to the AR

jl115:


5. M16... Prone to jamming
4. Tavor... Literally so sh1t the Israelis are getting rid of it after only 10 years
3. Ak103.... Great rifle
2. HK416... Great rifle
1. FN Scar... Hated by the Navy seals personally I think its a good rifle

Youare mistaking the M14 for the M16....the M14 was prone to jamming hence why it was dumped

FN SCAR has been dropped from the selection process of US military new weapon platform to replace the M16 and M4.

They dropped it because it didn't come with as much advantage as the M16... That makes it not good.


The weapon that they will most likely select for their entire military will be the 6.8mm NGSW from General Dynamics

That weapon is superb

jl115:
yeah i found it...and it's much more devastating... Especially if using hollow points

waiting for you to post it so I can educate you

jl115:
so not about the accuracy of the rifle?? In other words I can come with a fvcked up AK and beat an m4 because of my skill alone?

at a shooting range, yes

AR does not stand for Assault Rifle

Its an abbreviation of the name of the original producer of the rifle

jl115:
AR.... As in Assault rifle

jl115:
so the accuracy of the rifle has nothing to do with it...... Interesting

shooting at a range in a competition is about skill

jl115:
now go find me an image of a 7.62 wound

I don't have to do that work for you

You can easily find it

NTSA:
Prove to me that a 5.56 (apart from the fact it's lighter.) Is superior to a 7.62 x 51 end of story...

the fact that it's the dominant shooting bullet of the US military shows it superiority..

The wound report I posted shows it superiority

NTSA:
Lethal in terms of what ?... killing.?. .as far as I know a 7.62 x 51 will kill you faster than a 5.56

Open a dictionary and find out what lethality is

The wound profile from both bullets does not prove your theory

jl115:
they were using R4s vs American M4s and beating them hence its relevant

Not relevant to what we are talking about

A shooting competition has to do with the shooter shooting skills