Considering I own many rifles, it depends on what your talking about here, if your talking velocity or accuracy over range. 7.62R will have better velocity at range, and likely some less accuracy (depends on range and rifle) as 7.62R was made back in… 1876? Sometime around there. .308 didn’t take hold till around the 1950s
But anyways back to the topic eh?
No, it’s the other way around.
NEVER AND I MEAN NEVER PUT 5.56 into a .223 it’s a 20k pressure difference if i remember right.
.223 is about 30k
5.56 is about 52k
No I know .223 vs 5.56, but .308 vs 7.62 NATO is the opposite
62k for .308, 60k for 7.62 NATO
I think that’s the other way around no? They even said that in the USMC
Tbf I am a 6.5 creedmoor enjoyer, probably my favorite rifle round. Smaller, but vastly more accurate over .308
I just checked wiki, it is not the other way around
If you were a marine, they probably told you that to discourage you guys from taking ammo for any .308 you guys owned (not that I think you would, but would make sense as a general precaution)
I only own one rifle myself, a Peabody Gahendra so nothing I can take to a range but its a real nice rare antique bur growing up around firearms from small arms to howitzers I learned a fair amount.
1891 but was updated several times, current cartridges arent really comparable to the original in ballistics
.308 is a modernised 30-06 from 1952.
yea they arent the best comparison, a small arm isn’t in the same league as a canon
Well, that’s odd. Firing my .308, using 7.62x51mm had symptoms of over pressure while .308 would shoot fine.
But anyways. Back to the 2a72 vs rarden
I was a Lance. But I’ve seen plenty of people steal, so it makes sense.
But you got what I was getting at about pressures and the like. But if 2a72 is operating as if it was a 30x173mm (pressure wise)
Then the rarden being 3mm (pressure wise) shorter will have less power. Combine that will Russian rounds typically having larger amounts of pressure, it leaves me to believe the 2a72 is definitely under preforming.
And what i was trying to compare originally was the say Wolf or Tula .308 vs USA Winchester .308,
The Wolf recoils, and outputs more power compared to the Winchester.
Like I’m talking big fire ball vs little flash.
I dont think either of us thought about where the casing bottlenecks to barrel bore width as it looks (at least from photos) like the 2a72 starts to do that a little earlier than the RARDEN. We cant be completely certain on powder charge size until everything is declassified so our speculations will have to be down to shell ballistics, which is where rarden is king
Well I don’t have the dokuments to add to that. That would be on gaijin.
But I’m still hard pressed to believe there is a 28mm pen difference. Like I said before I could see it being
Thus they should be far closer to equal I will assume. And if they gave the 2a42 94-98mm pen I would be satisfied.
As I don’t know the exact specs of the 2a72 but from the data I’ve found, pretty much the Rarden has higher velocity but a heavier shell. Thus meaning it will have an initial benefit, but rapidly drop.
They seemingly have similar pressures, and with the lighter projectile of the 2a72 it’ll do slightly less damage which it accurately does in game. But have higher velocities in the long range aspect.
And a buff to the btr may make it 7.7, but when you struggle pen a lot of tanks in game. It’s not fun. There being better light tanks above 7.7 would be better.
But the fox still should be at 8.0, it will more than likely never have a perfect place, but it gets further from 6.7’s that can’t fight it.
But we are on two issues now.
if things like the BTR, R3 and especially the XM800 get put up significantly id support it out of fairness. for now it just wouldn’t be fair facing equal vehicles with sabilisers
I don’t know if the xm would survive 8.3+ but I don’t think it’s better than the fox. Perhaps equal to.
R3 ain’t all the greatest. And has been moved up in br.
BTR getting a buff then seeing how it’s doing may move in br.
But the ballsitics need to be sorted first.
i probably should grind the usa tree to get the XM800 to just prove its cracked but I just can not build the resilience to play that many shermans in a row
I have played all vehicles mentioned.
The xm may be a better light tank killer,
The BTR is the multi role
And the Fox is leaned more towards a tank killer but can multirole. That’s the best way to explain it.
However out of all three I would say:
Fox will certainly always be the most fin to play just because there’s only two tanks it cant kill, maus and E100 (without an unbelievably lucky shot trap, Ive only managed a one shot kill on a maus from a shot trap once and I’ve never seen any footage of anyone else pulling it off in a battle)
bullying an abrams in the fox is really really hilarious and you need to try it.
I can imagine you can pull off near enough the same in XM800 although the “bully only, cant kill” list does grow a lot more. BTR would only ever be relegated to base rusher duties for me as I cant see any value in how I play something that’s basically the same thing but the size of a heavy tank
Just add the SLAP ammo to all US m2hb on 80’s and post 80’s vehicles and issue fixed
Just don’t give it to Kentucky ballistics
Poor guy, that had to have been excruciating
I would’ve been like “wtf” I’ve been stabbed and shot at before. Never really freaked out. Was more like “well… that happened” a lot of people were convinced I was part alien in my unit:
As I,
Didn’t dip / smoke
No caffeine drinks,
No protein powder
Didn’t vape.
And I got stabbed twice and didn’t bleed either time. Once was in the wrist, other as In the shoulder.
They said and I quote “You run on something otherworldly, and that scares me”