a military commanders take on the .223 platform..

[Mr_Sheesh]

Look at what Col. Cooper does around his house; Couple hundred yards of white gravel covering the ground. Not exactly "covert", but, it will make someone heading towards your house stand out a little.

And in the "Old days", they used to have signs by the entry to a ranch etc., "Ranged for my 45-70" or whatever rifle they owned, basically reminding visitors to come in peace. As the places' owner knew exactly where their rifle would hit out to that range, maybe more.

In a SHTF situation I could see the people defending a given area marking an area as NO-MANS-LAND; it has been done before. Hoping that isn't any of our only plans for if things go bad, that helping others live will be in there somewhere, too.

[Lloyd Smale]

but everyone forgets that Germany conquered a large portion of Europe with bolt action rifles. if we had not have jumped in then they would have taken over the entire area over there.

They conquered large portions of Europe that also used bolt guns and most of those were inferior to the 98. but we did show up and showed up with semi auto guns and the germans found they were hamstrung by there bolt guns and scrambled to bring out semi autos of there own. Fact is theres not a military today that doesn't use a semi auto. None use bolts and for good reason. Same reason jets made prop fighters obsolete. Id have to wager that other then snipers theres not a single man in the service today that would rather have a bolt gun then a semi auto.

[Mauser 98K]

uh.. the The Danish elite naval unit "Sirius Patrol" uses the M1917 Enfield in 30-06..

the picture is in India.


and to say the bolt action is slow as molasses and is inferior to the semi auto is a farce. ever heard of the "mad minute"? in the correct hands a bolt gun can be as fast as a semi automatic rifle.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_a7pXWi6xo

but the idea is to hit the dang target, not just rapid fire and expect a cumulative hit. they used to teach this even with the semi auto rifles in the old days. but the problem with Germany and the largest reason they lost was they were fighting on 3 fronts. they were fighting the Russians, the US and the British all at the same time. they had spread their resources way too thin. that is what caused their loss.. Hitler got greedy and tried to bite off too much at once. if he had waited to invade Russia and England till after he had built up his troops and armaments again he would have been hell to stop, especially if they had succeeded in deploying a few of the new wonder toys he never got a chance to use.

but when a sniper is in the area, why is it they usually call a sniper team instead of sending in the 5 man fire team to do the counter sniper operations? after all the sniper only has a crappy old bolt action rifle.

a semi auto is only good to a certain range, short range. fast fire at ranges further than 100m will usually be all over the map due to recoil and shooter error.. semi auto don't mean **** if you cannot hit the target with it. at ranges further than 50m-100m you are back to slower fire rates that can be done with a bolt gun. most modern semi auto and automatic military arms are meant for close range MOUT and CQB operations. they are not designed for open country warfare. that is why they are all chambered in 9mm, 5.56, 40cal, and the other smaller cartridges that are of no use past short range. if you was to put these new guys up against the older WWI and WWII troops with the 03-A3 and the Mausers, the guys who know how to do accuracy with them in open terrain, the new guys would fail in epic manner. that is why CAS, drones, and other indirect fire is used so much in the sand box in the east. the commander in the opening article states this clearly. with the old bolt guns that everyone seems to hate, 200m and 300m would be no big deal. with them 600m is a real possibility. at longer ranges semi auto fire is meaningless except for area dispersion to keep an enemy behind cover.. the only place semi auto shines is at close range, usually within 100m.

[Love Life]

The semi-auto is quite effective beyond 100 meters. Especially when a whole Branch is trained to engage 300 meter rapid fire.

[one-eyed fat man]

i will note that the M1903 Springfield is STILL a legal service rifle to fire the National Match Course. When is the last time one finished in the President's Hundred?

[Rick Hodges]

This nonsense about not being able to hit anything is pure rubbish. I have killed running coyotes at over 300 yds. with a 5.56 AR.

I trained with the M-16 A2 after the introduction and correction in training, maintenance, and ammunition issues. (1971) Hits to 350 meters on 1/2man sized silhouette targets are routine. We had to train and qualify in automatic rifle mode as well. Full auto, 3 shot burst (no automatic burst mode, trigger discipline) making hits to 450 meters on the same targets...single and in groups, with regularity. I would not want to be downrange with a rifleman shooting at me.

The bolt action rifle as a standard infantry arm was rendered obsolete by the Garand in WWII. The AR platform rendered the large bore, heavy ammunition load infantry rifle obsolete. It has set the standard for over 50 yrs., longer than any other in the country's history.

The only place it lacks is as a club, and bayonet mount.....I would much rather have a Garand for that....but then as my instructors told me...."if you have ammo shoot the ......-......'s!" Seeing how I can carry 3 or 4 times the ammo with the AR platform, I can live with that.

[ofitg]

Despite all that, the deadliest thing in an infantry squad is the push to talk switch on the radio. You should not shoot anyone you can get someone else to shoot for you.

Excellent point, sir. The development of radio communication after WW1 transformed the battlefield. As close air/armor/artillery support evolved, the rifleman's role (and his rifle) became more specialized.

[Mauser 98K]

Was this 5.56 AR a stock AR with no modifications and military issue ammo when you killed those coyotes at 300m? A coyote is a smaller creature than a man, man is dam hard to kill sometimes. But the only thing the AR has over the heavy large bore weapons is A:weight is lower, and B:you can carry more ammo.. That is it, and is the main reason it was adopted. Go read the history behind the platform and it will say this.

But long range hits in controlled conditions is not an accurate assessment of what happens in a battlefield situations. The variables change real fast. The opening article also says this, that everyone expects the target to remain stationary for long enough for them to aim and fire, this is hardly ever the case. You can do hits on stationary targets at 400m, add in the target that moves and other real world varbles and first round hits are dropped to under 200m.

[Love Life]

That applies to any rifle platform concerning moving targets in a battlefield situation.

[Mauser 98K]

That applies to any rifle platform concerning moving targets in a battlefield situation.

exactly..

[Multigunner]

Early testing of jacketed bullets used with the .303 with Mk1 Cordite resulted in many jacket separations and blown through cores.
In further testing they drilled a tiny hole nearthe base of the bullet and observed a spiral pattern of atomized lead on screens and with high speed photography the could see a spiral cloud of lead surrounding the bullet in flight.
Bullet to bore friction was enough to melt the pure lead core where it contacted the jacket.

When .220 Swift bullets disintegrated in flight it was because they were still using .22 bullets manufactured for much lower velocity cartridges.
Heating of the core wasn't the only factor the centrifugal force of rotation of the bullet was enough to rip apart a softened core that by heating had lost most of its tensile strength (if that's the right term).

As for bullets heated by friction in penetration of materials When I shot a bowling ball with an M2 AP round the ball split and I found the core with tip melted just inside the far side of the ball. I don't remember seeing any remains of the jacket.

When a bullet strikes a structural steel plate thick enough to prevent the bullet core from passing through intact but not thick enough to stop it, the core , whether steel or lead, flattens then punches a hole much larger than bullet diameter in the plate. The plug pushed through the plate is generally white hot. I've seen these arc through the air behind the plate looking like a bright light bulb. The hole left by the plug was about 5/8" diameter for a .303 bullet and smooth sided and shiny as if cut by a laser beam.
Effects on armor plate are no doubt very different.

[Mauser 98K]

strange that i am using pretty much pure lead for the core of my .308 varmint rounds and have never seen any melting of the core.

[Mr_Sheesh]

If the rotational speed of the jacket is so fast that the jacket is ripped apart by centripetal force, the lead (having less tensile strength) will likely follow suit. Something else to consider. If lead is melting a lot, how exactly does Paper Patching EVER work, I'd think the paper would smear instead of engraving (if the lead's melting) - and how do lead boolits with lube in the groves, EVER manage to make it to the target, without the lube vaporizing en route? Something's wrong in that model or reality, seems to me, it doesn't match the real world data we see accurately.

[Lloyd Smale]

that a bolt guns is magicaly more accurate is hog wash. Military 98s, springfields, enfields ect were not tack drivers. Especially with the ball ammo they shot. An m16 is every bit as accurate out to any distance. Many military snipers today use semi auto ar10s and the might 50bmg barrett is a semi auto last I checked. It has made the longest sniper shots ever. Look at what the m14 has done at camp perry! bottom line is most military bolt guns were two to three moa guns out of the box.

Shoot one just as fast?? In a pigs eye. You sit on the firing line with your 8x57 or 3006 bolt and put some clay pigeons out at 200 yards and see. Sure you might be able to make it go bang fast but that is if you don't care where the bullets are going. Making hits with an ar15 is much easier. For one you can see your misses and stay on target MUCH easier because of the fact theres MUCH less recoil. You don't have to take your hand off the trigger to work a bolt and take the time to insure your trigger finger is precisely where you want it. Your eye doesn't leave the optic and have to be repositioned. Now there are some that can run a bolt FAIRLY fast. But there very rare and didn't learn to do it in 8 weeks of boot camp.

This whole thing is kind of silly. If there was some superiority to a bolt wed still be using mausers and springfields. They wouldn't be antique collectors items like a model T ford. Even third world countrys that have no money seem to find a way to put Aks and ARs in the hands of there soldiers. I too was trained and used a M16 in the military. Ive heard them bragged on and bashed (much more bragging then bashing) . I HAVE NEVER HEARD A SINGLE MAN want to swap his for a 98 mauser. Seem some that would rather have a m14 or an ak but never (other then a few snipers and even that is changing as many are switching to the ar10 platform) saw one of them looking for a bolt gun.

Its about right up there with a abrams tank commander wishing he had a Sherman. theres some cool factor to old military guns. Never did much for me other then a few years that I was into m1 carbines in my teen years. Bolt guns are hunting guns and do a fine job of shooting something that doesn't shoot back. the military moved on in the 40s. 15 years before I was even a sperm cell.

[AggieEE]

I'll chip in my 0.02 cents on the bullet temp question. When I was in college I ran across a formula for something called stagnation temp and pressure. When you have a bullet, airplane etc. in flight the air at the nose stacks up, becomes stagnant, with the higher the speed the higher the temp and pressure. Just for fun I plugged in a speed of 3000 fps turned the crank and out popped 600 degrees F. I don't remember the pressure but it was several thousand psi. I was wondering why the tip didn't melt but now know heat transfer takes time. I think this might be where that 600 degree number might be coming from. My dad was telling me one of his uncles was telling about being shot in WWI and said it was like being burned by a cigarette. Don't know I've never been shot.

[Rick Hodges]

For the record the coyotes at 300 were with a Ruger A5.56 with a 3x optic. Really not much different than current issue M-4. 16" bbl. instead of 14.7"....but pretty close. Stock trigger and all. Ammo was reloaded LC cases and 55 gr. Sierra's at just under 2900fps.

I love bolt action rifles....for hunting. The Garand made all of them obsolete as a fighting rifle. Col. Cooper talked of a practical rifleman controlling a radius 300 meters....his solution was a 30 cal. bolt action rifle with forward optics. The scout rifle. I suggest he was wrong. 7.62x51 is more power than is necessary for unarmored men and not enough if they are armored. The rate of accurate aimed fire is much too slow. The AR does a better job.

Shoot an AR platform for a while...with optics if your eyes require it, or a red dot or as issue sights if you are still young enough to use them well. Sight it in...learn where it hits.....then engage targets at multiple ranges...rapidly. Shoot the same course of fire with your bolt, or Garand, or M1A. If you don't make accurate hits twice as fast as the big bore semis' or 5 time faster than with your bolt gun you aren't trying. You will walk away with a smile on your face. The beauty of the AR lies in the ease of making hits rapidly.
Try it and see, the hits come easier and faster, the weapon doesn't beat you up and I don't know of anyone who wants to act as a bullet stop for 5.56 ammo at any range.

There is a reason why the AR platform dominates Service Rifle Competition. There is a good reason it has been the US service rifle for longer than any other in this nations existence.

[GREENCOUNTYPETE]

the original post talks about SHTF and civilian use by comparing it to Military use.

this seems apples to oranges for comparison.

at 200 meters you can't even see someones face without magnification , how would you be positively identifying them to shoot them ?
how would you justify the use of force if they were not already shooting at you ?

if you take into consideration that the effective range far exceeds most civilians ability to shoot or that they are comparing an ammo that is not prohibited for civilian use to military ball ammo.

last summer I was at a clinic the girl next to me was 17 we were all shooting AQTs 100 yards 2 minutes standing , 200 yards transition to seated 55 seconds with reload , 300 yards transition to prone 65 seconds with reload, and 400 yard prone slow fire 4 minutes .

isn't the hole point of the M16 so that you can get a 17 year old girl qualifying on an AQT with a few days training ?
no one said they couldn't move on to something bigger but certainly your support troops making up more than 50% of your enlisted personnel would be well severed with a 200 meter light easy to use rifle.

the police department was discussing building a range , they were saying they needed 75 yards , when asked why not 100 , 200 or more , they qualify with the M4 at 75 yards they just are not seeing a need for longer engagements. that is what SWAT or ERT teams are for they can practice further but John or Jane police officer handling patrol duties really don't need 100 meter + qualification.

yes a lot of it is budgets

but in some cases not everyone is going to be a 600-1000 meter rifleman

[Multigunner]

If the rotational speed of the jacket is so fast that the jacket is ripped apart by centripetal force, the lead (having less tensile strength) will likely follow suit. Something else to consider. If lead is melting a lot, how exactly does Paper Patching EVER work, I'd think the paper would smear instead of engraving (if the lead's melting) - and how do lead boolits with lube in the groves, EVER manage to make it to the target, without the lube vaporizing en route? Something's wrong in that model or reality, seems to me, it doesn't match the real world data we see accurately.

How many paper patch loads exceed 2500 FPS, much less 3,000+?
How many paper patched .303 boolits were driven by a full charge of Cordite Mk1?
How many paper patched Boolits have you put through a structural steel I beam Web?

The higher the muzzle velocity the higher the rotational speed of the bullets even when the rifling twist rate is the same. A bullet exiting the muzzle at the higher level .220 Swift's 4,000 FPS will be rotating at far higher RPMs than the same bullet fired from a .22 Hornet.

The major factor in high bore friction heating of Cordite Mk1 loaded .303 bullets was the remarkable lack of fouling in the bore. To provide a barrier between bullet and bore (after the first shot burned away any residual oil) Mineral jelly was added to the Cordite formula.

A great deal of work was done on hardening of bullet cores and redesigning of jackets and their alloys and claddings to prevent further problems with bullet over heating and core separations.
Modern powders contain additives to cool the gases of combustion and in some cases Teflon or similar additives have been introduced to the formula of some powders to reduce bore friction.

The reality is that friction produces heat and compression produces heat. If the bullet is designed to stand up to the heat there will be no ill effects, if not there will be ill effects.

I've picked up a soft point bullet from a mild 2500 FPS 7.92 Mauser load after it passed through a stump and it was as hot as a match head. Due to compression on impact along with friction of passing through solid wood. Of the dozen or so bullets of the same type dug from a clay bank half had lost their core or in some cases the core simply fell out of the jacket when I picked it up.

[Shingle]

I'm not going to start a caliber debate but we have two of the best choices available to us rite now. The 6.8spc spec.2 and the 6.5grendal sec.2.IMHO either one would be great choice of range and weight.

[Mauser 98K]

Lloyd, you do know that Rem700 that the military uses and that people are so proud of is a copy of a Mauser, don't yall? the 03-A3 was a direct rip off of the Mauser, which is why Mauser sued after the war and collected.. almost every bolt gun made to date uses Mauser designs. if the Mauser was so antiquated and obsolete then why does everyone seem to want to copy the design in one way or the other? and if you still think it is obsolete and useless then stand 500m out and let me shoot at you with it and 200gr FMJBT.. and b4 you get your panties in a wad over the accuracy, get a new barrel in one that is not shot out and does not have cleaning rod wear at the muzzle as 90% of the surplus mausers usually have.

and the Barret M82 semi automatic .50cal was originally intended as an EOD rifle, it was never meant for sniping operations. it is by no means a MOA or sub MOA rifle platform. and i think you will find that it is the mcmillan tac 50, a bolt action rifle, that holds the worlds longest recorded kill shot at 3,871 yards using the Hornady A-MAX.

and as for "An m16 is every bit as accurate out to any distance". tell you what we will do.. we will do an easy test that you should be able to do at home. get your AR or M16 and go outside right now and fire a 20 shot group at 100m. if you can cover the group with your thumb then we will talk, because i can do that with my obsolete and antiquated Mauser. hell back it up to 50m and try it. ill wait. and if you ever get a chance, take that 5.56 to 1,000m and tell me how well it does.

and b4 you call BS on me, here is a picture of my group..


and a bunch of moron drunks in the woods with their 30-06, who groups get worse and worse the more beers they get in them using cheap ammo is not an accurate assessment of the capability of civilians. im by no means a great shot, there are people i know who make me look like and idiot child as with accuracy.. just because you or your drunk buddies can't hit the side of a barn from inside the barn proves nothing.

but show me this super accurate 5.56 hits on clay pigeon at 200m rapid fire exercise that you speak of. video or pictures or it never happened.

the "Bolt guns are hunting guns and do a fine job of shooting something that doesn't shoot back." tell that to Carlos Hathcock.. he more or less had a modified 30-06 bolt action and went up against guys with AK47, SKS, and full auto ****, and got over 100 confirmed kills. he would not say that bolt action was garbage.

but the reason that a lot of snipers in the middle east are using the M110 7.62x51mm is that everything is urbanized and multiple targets arise at the same time. hell even "The Devil of Ramadi", Chris Kyle used the bolt action, against guys with RPGs, RPK, AK47 and 74s, and did quiet well. became one of the deadliest guys on the planet. because of tactics. it all comes down to tactics and training. you never see the snipers bouncing around in the open trying to spend as many rounds as possible as you see with the AR guys, it is one shot, one kill. there are many ways of concealing oneself during sniper operations. that might be from inside a room shooting through a keyhole, or shooting through a gap created by buildings.. or between trees from deep inside the woods. but if the bolt gun was so dam worthless in combat, how is it that a single guy with a bolt gun can rack up so many kills on guys with the wonderful semi automatics?

but this is how it usually goes with the spray and pray morons when they go up against a sniper.. i laugh at this video..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=soWjZgEpReI

here is another..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LN8EXUgNJpk

how many rounds did the moron fire and still got taken out by one round? rapid fire accounted for nothing. but it takes a totally different thought process to use the bolt action effectively.. you can not go rushing people. but it is the old fight that has raged on for over a century between the regular grunt who waste thousands of rounds per kill and the sniper.. everyone poos on the sniper and the bolt action rifle he carries, but who do they call on for effective direct long range fire when pinned down by another sniper? why even have snipers if the bolt action is so dam ineffective against guys with AR and AK47s? because they are effective..

but as for "the bolt gun is not useful in combat anymore". i think that has been proven to be 100% Grade-A grass fed and pasture raised BS..

and no. you will not learn in 8 weeks. i myself have been shooting since i was 6yr old. started with a Daisy lever action in the hallway of house and worked to 22cal at 8 and then worked up the older i got. but ill tell you right now, you need to learn about bolt action rifles and how snipers operate b4 poo pooing on them.

recommended reading is FM 23-10.