XM-8

• May 10, 2005

• #21

the lancaster kicks ass

Major General

19,937

17

Dec 20, 2003

yes i too say bring back the 7.62mm, now that was a proper round......

 

• May 10, 2005

• Thread starter
• #22

cheddar cheese

Major General

20,265

21

Jan 9, 2004

WSM, England

12.7mm is a better round....

 

• May 10, 2005

• #23

plan_D

Lieutenant Colonel

11,643

22

Apr 1, 2004

A .50 calibre Assault Rifle is an over-kill and a waste. The .303 will drop a man with ease. They have .50 cal Sniper Rifles, the Royal Marines use one the Snow Wolf, I think it's called.

But then, they have a Czech made M-20 20mm Sniper Rifle in US service.

 

• May 10, 2005

• #24

the lancaster kicks ass

Major General

19,937

17

Dec 20, 2003

yes i can sorta understand the 20mm sniper rifle but CC, using a .50cal rifle is stupid, there is no realistic combat situation where an infantryman would need a .50cal as the .303 can do anything the .50 can in terms of rifles.............

 

• May 10, 2005

• Thread starter
• #25

cheddar cheese

Major General

20,265

21

Jan 9, 2004

WSM, England

I know, but just saying ".50 cal" sounds so good

20mm sniper rifle you say? Ill have to check that out...

 

• May 10, 2005

• #26

the lancaster kicks ass

Major General

19,937

17

Dec 20, 2003

but you didn't even say .50cal first time........

 

• May 10, 2005

• Thread starter
• #27

cheddar cheese

Major General

20,265

21

Jan 9, 2004

WSM, England

Who cares?

 

• May 10, 2005

• #28

plan_D

Lieutenant Colonel

11,643

22

Apr 1, 2004

There's the Czech M-20 and a South African built one but I can't remember it's designation. They have a very big counter-recoil on them.

The most powerful handgun in the world is .50cal. The Desert Eagle .50.

 

• May 10, 2005

• #29

the lancaster kicks ass

Major General

19,937

17

Dec 20, 2003

i thought it was the S&W 500??

 

• May 10, 2005

• #30

DAVIDICUS

Staff Sergeant

915

20

Feb 23, 2005

DerAdlerIstGelandet,

I'd be interested in reading that article. I didn't know that the Beretta was so problematic. I have only heard that it is very reliable, even in sandy desert conditions.

I think the main downside of going from the 9mm to the .45 would be a loss of capacity. You just can't fit as many big fat rounds into the handle of a handgun. No combat handgun, with military spec ammo, has decent accuracy (3-1/2" groups at 25 yards would be impressive). Moreover, no one expects decent accuracy from a handgun. That's why the sights are fixed. In light of this, having lots of rounds is advantageous.

Keep us posted on any info about replacement of the M-9 or the 9mm.

 

• May 11, 2005

• #31

plan_D

Lieutenant Colonel

11,643

22

Apr 1, 2004

No, it's the Desert Eagle and it's semi-automatic. Personally, I'd rather have a revolver...they don't jam.

 

• May 11, 2005

• #32

DAVIDICUS

Staff Sergeant

915

20

Feb 23, 2005

The .500 Smith Wesson Magnum cartridge is much more powerful than the .50 Action Express cartridge that the Desert Eagle is chambered for.

 

• May 11, 2005

• #33

plan_D

Lieutenant Colonel

11,643

22

Apr 1, 2004

The .500 S&W is reported as the most powerful revolver. I was wrong, the AE .50 isn't the most powerful. I can safely say though, it wouldn't really matter if you got shot by one.

 

• May 11, 2005

• #34

Matt308

Glock Perfection

18,961

95

Apr 12, 2005

Washington State

David is right. .500 S&W is leaps and bounds more powerful than .50AE.

Here is some evidence from the Hogdon Loading manual for both;

.50AE - 325gr bullet launched at 1431ft/sec for about 1485ft-lbs energy

And now (drum roll please)...

.500 S&W 325gr bullet launched at 2002ft/sec for 2907ft-lbs energy!

The .500S&W has double the muzzle energy of the .50AE. No small statement either! For those not familiar with these numbers, the .500S&W has a little MORE muzzle energy than the .308 (7.62 NATO). A typical .45ACP or hot 9mm has around 370ft-lbs or so muzzle energy.

Any one who claims to shoot full power .500S&W (or .50AE for that matter) on a consistent basis is either a liar, stupid, or destined for a serious case of carpal tunnel syndrome.

 

• May 11, 2005

• #35

Matt308

Glock Perfection

18,961

95

Apr 12, 2005

Washington State

I can safely say though, it wouldn't really matter if you got shot by one.

Click to expand...

That's an affirmative!

 

• May 11, 2005

• #36

DAVIDICUS

Staff Sergeant

915

20

Feb 23, 2005

"I can safely say though, it wouldn't really matter if you got shot by one."

Sure it does. When you're in Heaven and everone is standing around making small talk and someone asks how you got there, you can brag about how you were hit by a train.

Speaking of unpleasant recoil and muzzle blast, I have a 7-1/2" .44 Magnum Ruger Redhawk. I received some Garrett 330 gr. / 1,400 fps. "Hammerhead" loads as a gift that I am positively frightened to shoot.

 

• May 11, 2005

• #37

Matt308

Glock Perfection

18,961

95

Apr 12, 2005

Washington State

Geez David! Those things are monsters. But you gotta try just to say you did. As I recall, the Ruger is one of the few pistols that can chamber those hammerheads since the OAL requires a longer cylinder, right?

 

• May 11, 2005

• #38

DAVIDICUS

Staff Sergeant

915

20

Feb 23, 2005

Yes. Definitely not for use in the S&W M29, Freedom Arms revolvers, Ruger single actions, etc. with their shorter cylinders.

Seriously though, the thrill of touching off guns with painful recoil no longer has any appeal to this sissy. In addition to those Garrett cartridges, I also have a box of 3-1/2" magnum 00 buckshot loads and a box of 225 gr. Federal High Energy .338 Winchester Magnum loads that I won't shoot either. Those .338 loads develop 4,300 fpe!

 

• May 11, 2005

• #39

S

Sal Monella

Airman 1st Class

223

1

Apr 20, 2005

Redwood City

What does the "Redhawk" look like?

 

• May 11, 2005

• #40

DAVIDICUS

Staff Sergeant

915

20

Feb 23, 2005