netstorm 90 Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
thebuns1 4,323 Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 5.45 for the win. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
timy 1,185 Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 Dunno Cap, I think I'll still go with the 308 (maybe different bullets) for penetration. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Venia 249 Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 I learned not to take cover behind a tree 2 1/2 feet in diameter. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SwissyJim 117 Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 Wonder how the green tip .223 'penetrator' rounds would do... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
thebuns1 4,323 Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 For me, depends. I know I dont want to get shot by any of them, but I found the test pretty interesting. I thought the 5.56 would have done just as good as the 5.45, and expected the .308 to own them all. In the end it did. He should have thrown a Mosin in for good measure. It makes me wonder about a bullets frontal mass vs. velocity vs. density of the wood. Ive always been a fan of the 5.45, but feel that a persons preferences on caliber selection will vary as wide as ones' taste in music. I like the .308 a lot too, but dont currently have any rifles that shoot it. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
XXXSilverXXX 11 Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 (edited) So it seems we are all safe from American rounds in a forest, and 7.62x39... I never wanna see a bunch if Russian soldiers in the forest now... Although this isn't scientific at all, so ill still go with 7.62 and .308 Edited January 12, 2013 by XXXSilverXXX 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Maxwelhse 1,285 Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 Screw it... I'm selling my guns and buying trees! COME GET ME! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MT Predator 2,294 Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 Penetration doesn't equate to cavitation/wound channel damage. 5.45 x 39 mm didn't fare too well in Afghanistan for the Soviets who had to revert back to 7.62 x 39mm for a primary small arms caliber. With all of the hardware and ammo left upon their withdrawl, even the Dirkas aren't using the 5.45. 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
netstorm 90 Posted January 12, 2013 Author Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 If anything it seems to disprove that 5.45 doesn't penetrate that well. It seems to penetrate just fine. Maybe those russians are smarter than we thought. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
timy 1,185 Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 For me, depends. I know I dont want to get shot by any of them, but I found the test pretty interesting. I thought the 5.56 would have done just as good as the 5.45, and expected the .308 to own them all. In the end it did. He should have thrown a Mosin in for good measure. It makes me wonder about a bullets frontal mass vs. velocity vs. density of the wood. Ive always been a fan of the 5.45, but feel that a persons preferences on caliber selection will vary as wide as ones' taste in music. I like the .308 a lot too, but dont currently have any rifles that shoot it. I agree. From what I've seen and heard though, the 5.56 has a real problem with penetration as compared to the 5.45. I haven't looked at loading charts for the two but I thought the 5.56 would have to have more powder pushing it. Guess I should check chamber pressure for the two. Other than that, it pretty much has to be bullet design. Now the 7.62x39 and 308 should be a more direct comparison with bullet diameter being almost identical. I still suspect it's the bullet itself rather than the push behind it. Also as was stated, this is not a scientific test. Too many variables involved. I will say this though. While I haven't shot a 5.45 and thus can't comment on it, I have shot the other three. In my observations, the 308 puts up a far more massive dirt explosion behind the target than the other two. Comparable to the 7.62x54r. Screw it... I'm selling my guns and buying trees! COME GET ME! Coolish! I was gonna throw my Christmas tree out but maybe you want it instead. Wonder how the green tip .223 'penetrator' rounds would do... Got some but have never shot them, so again, I dunno. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
VR762Shooter 838 Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 I don't know. I like footage of a SP .308 in ballistics gel more than I like FMJ in a tree. If I'm ever home invaded by Pinocchio I'll refer to this for facts but until then, I'll stick to ballistics gel for a display of what rounds will do 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
thebuns1 4,323 Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 5.45 x 39 mm didn't fare too well in Afghanistan for the Soviets who had to revert back to 7.62 x 39mm for a primary small arms caliber. With all of the hardware and ammo left upon their withdrawl, even the Dirkas aren't using the 5.45. I dont know MT. I cant say what they did over there. Ive looked all over trying to find info in the past on this issue, but never came up with shit. I was under the impression that the 5.45 did fairly well in terms of performance.. Very comparable to the 5.56. Got a link to any info that can shine some light on it? 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Maxwelhse 1,285 Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 Screw it... I'm selling my guns and buying trees! COME GET ME! Coolish! I was gonna throw my Christmas tree out but maybe you want it instead. Sounds good. Guns are for sale at current market prices... I think that makes my s-12 around a bazillion dollars! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
BigChongus 765 Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 Here's the million dollar question: Where did he find Golden Tiger 5.45?!? 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
BigChongus 765 Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 (edited) Penetration doesn't equate to cavitation/wound channel damage. 5.45 x 39 mm didn't fare too well in Afghanistan for the Soviets who had to revert back to 7.62 x 39mm for a primary small arms caliber. With all of the hardware and ammo left upon their withdrawl, even the Dirkas aren't using the 5.45. Source(s)? I will say this though. While I haven't shot a 5.45 and thus can't comment on it, I have shot the other three. In my observations, the 308 puts up a far more massive dirt explosion behind the target than the other two. Comparable to the 7.62x54r. You're really missing out. I've not yet had a single person - including .223/5.56 guys - fire my 5.45 without immediately falling in love with the round. Edited January 12, 2013 by W8lifter 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
thebuns1 4,323 Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 I will say this though. While I haven't shot a 5.45 and thus can't comment on it, I have shot the other three. In my observations, the 308 puts up a far more massive dirt explosion behind the target than the other two. Comparable to the 7.62x54r. You're really missing out. I've not yet had a single person - including .223/5.56 guys - fire my 5.45 without immediately falling in love with the round. Ive had this happen a few times. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
timy 1,185 Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 I will say this though. While I haven't shot a 5.45 and thus can't comment on it, I have shot the other three. In my observations, the 308 puts up a far more massive dirt explosion behind the target than the other two. Comparable to the 7.62x54r. You're really missing out. I've not yet had a single person - including .223/5.56 guys - fire my 5.45 without immediately falling in love with the round. Ive had this happen a few times. Oh yeah? Just wait til I get my 338 Lapua! That's right, that's right, we bad! 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
thebuns1 4,323 Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 I want one of those too Tim, but I couldnt afford to feed it. lol. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jpanzer 1,265 Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 (edited) As a AK74 owner I like the result, but meh, it doesn't really prove much. Too many variables. Tree sugars and water content inside the trunk were most likely frozen due to being exposed to freezing temps for a considerable time period. This would naturally inhibit penetration by any round. He should have at least made this a two parter by doing the same experiment during summer temperatures and comparing penetration from both tests... Edited January 12, 2013 by Jpanzer 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
BigChongus 765 Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 He should have at least made this a two parter by doing the same experiment during summer temperatures and comparing penetration from both tests... Nothing to say he can't. Couldn't hurt to suggest it. I'd like to see 54r thrown in the mix as well. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Redhunter2486 22 Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 For shtf ammo/gun I use .308- this doesnt push me away from that at all, id really like to see this done at 50 yds. I would have confidently used those trees (especially the bigger one) as cover before seeing this! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
thebuns1 4,323 Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 Id trust any of the calibers to get the job done if I had to. And the trees would be better than not having any cover. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
BigChongus 765 Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 I really just can't figure out why the x39 did better than the .308 considering the similarities of the bullets themselves. Only thing I can think is that somehow the higher velocity of the .308 was causing more deformation of the bullet against the frozen tree, similar to how 5.56 only reliably fragments above a certain speed. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MT Predator 2,294 Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 5.45 x 39 mm didn't fare too well in Afghanistan for the Soviets who had to revert back to 7.62 x 39mm for a primary small arms caliber. With all of the hardware and ammo left upon their withdrawl, even the Dirkas aren't using the 5.45. I dont know MT. I cant say what they did over there. Ive looked all over trying to find info in the past on this issue, but never came up with shit. I was under the impression that the 5.45 did fairly well in terms of performance.. Very comparable to the 5.56. Got a link to any info that can shine some light on it? I've seen numerous tests in gel and animal carcasses where the round did not produce a significant wound channel or tissue damage. The Afghanis called it the Poison Bullet because it didn't necessarily kill immediately. First hand experience from being over there, the weapons being recovered are 7.62 x 39/54 mm, not 5.45. It is an interesting video showing penetration in cover versus wound characteristics. Ballistics gel behind the tree would have been a good test. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
thebuns1 4,323 Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 5.45 x 39 mm didn't fare too well in Afghanistan for the Soviets who had to revert back to 7.62 x 39mm for a primary small arms caliber. With all of the hardware and ammo left upon their withdrawl, even the Dirkas aren't using the 5.45. I dont know MT. I cant say what they did over there. Ive looked all over trying to find info in the past on this issue, but never came up with shit. I was under the impression that the 5.45 did fairly well in terms of performance.. Very comparable to the 5.56. Got a link to any info that can shine some light on it? I've seen numerous tests in gel and animal carcasses where the round did not produce a significant wound channel or tissue damage. The Afghanis called it the Poison Bullet because it didn't necessarily kill immediately. First hand experience from being over there, the weapons being recovered are 7.62 x 39/54 mm, not 5.45. It is an interesting video showing penetration in cover versus wound characteristics. Ballistics gel behind the tree would have been a good test. From what Ive seen, I cant say that it is any less effective than 5.56. I feel that the round had to have performed satisfactory for the Russians, or they wouldnt still be using it if it indeed was a shit round, or ineffective. But for it not being used in wide service today by the middle east, meh. It dont bother me, but shows me what they already have an abundance of, and better access to. And I dont think the Taliban and Mujh are being supplied top of the line equipment and munitions from Russia, especially 7N24 rounds. Most likely whatever they can get their hands on. I do agree though, ballistics gel would have been a nice test on the other side. Heres an interesting vid on the 5.45 in gel. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mostholycerebus 415 Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 I agree. From what I've seen and heard though, the 5.56 has a real problem with penetration as compared to the 5.45. That's exactly why 5.56 is the perfect round for HD or CQB in urban/suburban environments, assuming you don't want to kill dozens of bystanders. Worked like crap in the jungles of 'nam though, compared to the x39. Bring the right tool for the job Quote Link to post Share on other sites
rnemhrd 165 Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 All BS aside, I'll pass on a shot from any of thee above. It all = a bad day. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jpanzer 1,265 Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 5.45 x 39 mm didn't fare too well in Afghanistan for the Soviets who had to revert back to 7.62 x 39mm for a primary small arms caliber. With all of the hardware and ammo left upon their withdrawl, even the Dirkas aren't using the 5.45. I dont know MT. I cant say what they did over there. Ive looked all over trying to find info in the past on this issue, but never came up with shit. I was under the impression that the 5.45 did fairly well in terms of performance.. Very comparable to the 5.56. Got a link to any info that can shine some light on it? I've seen numerous tests in gel and animal carcasses where the round did not produce a significant wound channel or tissue damage. The Afghanis called it the Poison Bullet because it didn't necessarily kill immediately. First hand experience from being over there, the weapons being recovered are 7.62 x 39/54 mm, not 5.45. It is an interesting video showing penetration in cover versus wound characteristics. Ballistics gel behind the tree would have been a good test. Most of the gel tests I've seen about the 5.45x39 including the one posted by Captain Hero DO indicate a pretty nasty wound channel and decent penetration. BTW, I believe the reason you saw 7.62 x 39/54 mm weaponry being recovered is that's still primarily the most common small arm available to the Jihadi. When you have a beat up AK that's over 50 years old along with every other opium farmer on the block why would you want 5.45? Hell, you can probably find loose rounds of 7.62x39 in just about every hovel in Iraq and Afghanistan... 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Rhodes1968 1,638 Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 (edited) Roughly 12" of living hardwood in winter... Fun but not all that helpful this side of a zombie tree event. Use the 308 to fell the tree on top the guy. Edited January 12, 2013 by Rhodes1968 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.