The bottle-neck shoulder and the neck are both 4mm long. The 5.8mm cartridge has a 42mm-long case with a one-degree taper in the body from its 10½mm (.413) base. The steel penetrator is 16mm in length, 4mm in diameter and weighs 23 grains (1½ g). The bullet has a composite core that consists of a pin-shaped hardened steel penetrator located near the base of the bullet, with lead as the filling material between the penetrator and the jacket, as well as the tip cavity. The 24mm-long projectile has a very streamlined external shape with a sharp bullet ogive and a sizeable boattail. The 5.8mm standard rifle load has a 64-grain (4.15 g) FMJ bullet with a jacket made of steel and copper-washed coating. The 5.8mm is intended to replace the 7.62mm as the standard Chinese assault-rifle caliber. Development of the 5.8mm heavy-load cartridge was completed in 1995. The 5.8mm heavy-load variant was created as a replacement for the obsolescent Type 53/Mosin-Nagant 7.62x54R rimmed full-power cartridge. Shortly afterward, in 1988 Chinese small arms engineers started work on a long-range, heavy-load version of the 5.8mm cartridge to be used with the corresponding developments of a 5.8mm sniper rifle and 5.8mm lightweight General-Purpose Machine Gun (GPMG). The project completed its development in 1987, and the new SCHV assault-rifle cartridge was officially designated as the DBP87. By 1979, the 5.8mm caliber and the 42mm case were chosen as the final design for the new SCHV round. The actual initiation of the project didn't begin until late 1978 after most of the cultural-revolution turmoil had died down. However, the new small-caliber cartridge development was mostly a paper project for the initial eight years. The cartridge case was to be selected from seven designs with overall cartridge lengths ranging from 56mm to 59.5mm. The following 744 Conference narrowed down the calibers under consideration to 5.8mm and 6mm caliber. The design criteria called for a cartridge of approximately 6mm caliber, 1,000 meters-per-second muzzle velocity, with the goals of reducing recoil and ammo weight while improving accuracy and terminal ballistics over the Type 56/M43 7.62x39mm round. In March 1971, the Chinese military logistic department commenced a small arms research meeting known as the 713 Conference in Beijing to develop the design criteria for an SCHV cartridge. As with the Russians, the advantages of SCHV assault-rifle ammo observed in Vietnam War battle reports did not go unnoticed by the Chinese military. Surprisingly, in the mid-1990s the Chinese military introduced an indigenous 5.8x42mm SCHV assault-rifle round of its own. HPs are nice, but I'd take a CZ-75 or CZ-S101 (or whatever it's called) over a Hi-Power any day.Įdit: Oh, and what do you mean by 40mm length restriction? Maybe I'm misinterpreting, but the 5.56 is 45mm long and the 6.8 is 43mm long, if I recall correctly.For the last few decades, the American 5.56x45mm and the Russian 5.45x39mm have dominated the world's small-caliber, high-velocity (SCHV) ammunition. Not the least of which is, from what I hear, Bill Alexander being a dick when it comes to other people chambering "his" caliber.Īnyway, back on topic. Of course, there's a relatively small difference in lethality, which is where the other factors come into play. And there's more to determining lethality than just bullet weight and velocity, otherwise we'd all be using FMJ. Everything's a compromise with guns, after all. I'm not saying the 6.5 isn't a good round, but for most civilian use, the 6.8 fits the niche a little better. Namely, a round that's near-identical to the 5.56 as far as length goes (lessens the amount of shit you have to replace), good terminal ballistics up to 300-500 yards, hi-capacity (negligible difference here), blah blah blah. The 6.8 was developed by people who tried all sorts of different calibers for their "need," including the 6.5 Grendel, and didn't find what they wanted in any of them. If you're looking for a bullet that's still almost as good at 700 yards as it is at 350 or 400, then the Grendel's what you want. Terminal ballistics are a different matter.Īs for the 6.5 > 6.8 bullshit. Meaning if you're just killing paper, the 5.56 works almost exactly the same as a 6.8. From what I understand, the 6.8 and 5.56 have trajectories similar enough that any minute differences can be all but entirely dismissed.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |