Is there a hunting rifle that shoots 7.62x51?

[Working 4 U]

My first problem is I am left handed.

So I like Savage firearms, I have an 7mm Mag an old 110L model and I feel I am accurate with it, but man I am getting old and it's gotta kick.

One day I would like to buy an AR-10 left handed, if Stag Arms ever decides to release it, but in the mean time I would like to buy a rifle chambered in .308 for this hunting season.

That brings me back to my Question, is there a "Hunting rifle" out there that will shoot 7.62x51 and 308? I understand there are minute differences?:huh:

Can any one elaborate for me.

Thanks guys.

Read More

 

[BANE]

I shoot a remington 700 and have never had a issue shooting 308 or surplus 7.62x51..

 

[jake2far]

My first problem is I am left handed.

So I like Savage firearms, I have an 7mm Mag an old 110L model and I feel I am accurate with it, but man I am getting old and it's gotta kick.

One day I would like to buy an AR-10 left handed, if Stag Arms ever decides to release it, but in the mean time I would like to buy a rifle chambered in .308 for this hunting season.

That brings me back to my Question, is there a "Hunting rifle" out there that will shoot 7.62x51 and 308? I understand there are minute differences?:huh:

Can any one elaborate for me.

Thanks guys.

Perhaps this is what you want:
http://www.northwestfirearms.com/rifle-shotgun-classifieds/85351-savage-model-99e-308-carbine.html

Any modern rifle will shoot both 308 and 7.62x51. The case wall is thicker in the 7.62 for auto fire.

Jim

 

[drew]

I picked up a Browning BLR in 308 because I didn't want a right handed bolt rifle.

You can shoot 7.62x51 in a 308 rifle.
http://www.6mmbr.com/308Win.html

.308 Win vs. 7.62x51--The Straight Scoop
Before we go much further, we want to address the oft-posed question "Are the .308 Winchester and 7.62x51 NATO one and the same?" The simple answer is no. There are differences in chamber specs and maximum pressures. The SAMMI/CIP maximum pressure for the .308 Win cartridge is 62,000 psi, while the 7.62x51 max is 50,000 psi. Also, the headspace is slightly different. The .308 Win "Go Gauge" is 1.630" vs. 1.635" for the 7.62x51. The .308's "No-Go" dimension is 1.634" vs. 1.6405" for a 7.62x51 "No Go" gauge. That said, it is normally fine to shoot quality 7.62x51 NATO ammo in a gun chambered for the .308 Winchester (though not all NATO ammo is identical). Clint McKee of Fulton Armory notes: "[N]obody makes 7.62mm (NATO) ammo that isn't to the .308 'headspace' dimension spec. So 7.62mm ammo fits nicely into .308 chambers, as a rule." You CAN encounter problems going the other way, however. A commercial .308 Win round can exceed the max rated pressure for the 7.62x51. So, you should avoid putting full-power .308 Win rounds into military surplus rifles that have been designed for 50,000 psi max. For more information on this interesting topic, read the following articles: Gun Zone's 30 Caliber FAQ; Cruffler.com Technical Trivia, June 2001; and last, but not least, Steve Redgwell's .308 vs 7.62x51 Analysis, which really provides a definitive explanation. Reloaders should also note that military ammo often is made with a thicker web. Consequently the case capacity of 7.62x51 brass is usually less than that of commercial .308 brass. You may need to reduce recommended .308 Winchester loads by as much as 2 full grains, if you reload with military 7.62x51 brass, such as Lake City or IMI.

 

[Mark W.]

To answer your question Hundreds of different models of hunting rifles have been chambered in .308 (What NATO calls 7.62 x 51) since its introduction by Winchester in 1952.

Since you can't hunt with Military FMJ ammo it shouldn't be a concern. You can use cheap surplus ammo in a hunting rifle for target practice or plinking.

Savage alone makes 44 different models in .308

 

[rdb241]

Win model 70 short action, 26" heavy barrel. This rifle has taken 8 of my 9 deer. I can hold a 4" group at 200 yards.

 

[madcratebuilder]

I picked up a Browning BLR in 308 because I didn't want a right handed bolt rifle.

You can shoot 7.62x51 in a 308 rifle.
.308 Winchester Cartridge Guide

I see 6mmbr still gives out incorrect information on the .308/7.62 pressures.

Because of the nature of the internet and the inherent tendency of human beings towards believing
anything that sounds reasonable, without applying critical thinking skills (probably a result of trends in
government school systems – but that is another treatise), there is much misinformation available to the
casual gun enthusiast about a variety of subjects concerning firearms.
One of the most pernicious of these “urban legends” is that there is a significant difference in the
pressures between the 7.62x51mm NATO cartridge and the 308 Winchester cartridge. The
misinformation indicates that using the commercial offering in a military weapon will visit death and
destruction of biblical proportions upon the miscreant who would attempt such a thing.

Pressure
Despite working together, the two main industry standards organizations SAAMI and C.I.P. have
assigned different standards for some cartridges. This leads to officially sanctioned conflicting differences
between European and American ammunition and chamber dimensions and maximum allowed chamber
pressures.
Under SAAMI proof test procedures, for bottlenecked cases the center of the transducer is located .175"
behind the shoulder of the case for large diameter (.250") transducers and .150" for small diameter
(.194") transducers. For straight cases the center of the transducer is located one-half of the transducer
diameter plus .005" behind the base of the seated bullet. Small transducers are used when the case
diameter at the point of measurement is less than .35".
Under C.I.P. proof test standards a drilled case is used and the piezo measuring device (transducer) will
be positioned at a distance of 25 mm from the breech face when the length of the cartridge case permits
that, including limits. When the length of the cartridge case is to short, pressure measurement will take
place at a cartridge specific defined shorter distance from the breech face depending on the dimensions
of the case.
The difference in the location of the pressure measurement gives different results than the C.I.P.
standard.
According to the official C.I.P guidelines the .308 Winchester (referred to as 7.62x51 by CIP) case can
handle up to 415 MPa (60,190 psi) piezo pressure. In C.I.P. regulated countries every rifle cartridge
combo has to be proofed at 125% of this maximum C.I.P. pressure to certify for sale to consumers.

The .308 Winchester and 7.62x51mm NATO cartridges are not identical and there are minor differences
in their inner case dimensions, though SAAMI does not list either cartridge as unsafe in a firearm
designed for use with the other. [ <broken link removed> .

NATO EPVAT testing is one of the three recognized classes of procedures used in the world to control
the safety and quality of firearms ammunition.
EPVAT Testing is described in unclassified documents by NATO, more precisely by the AC/225 Army
Armaments Group (NAAG).
EPVAT is an abbreviation for "Electronic Pressure Velocity and Action Time". This is a comprehensive
procedure for testing ammunition using state-of-the-art instruments and computers. The procedure itself
is described in NATO document AC/225 (Com. III/SC.1)D/200.
Unlike the C.I.P. procedures aiming only at the user's safety, the NATO procedures for ammunition
testing also includes comprehensive functional quality testing in relation with the intended use. That is,
not only the soldier's safety is looked at, but also his capacity to incapacitate the enemy. As a result, for
every ammunition order by NATO, a complete acceptance approval on both safety and functionality is
performed by both NATO and the relevant ammunition manufacturers in a contradictory fashion.
For this, a highly accurate and indisputable protocol has been defined by NATO experts using a system
of reference cartridges.
The civilian organizations C.I.P. and SAAMI use less comprehensive test procedures than NATO, but
NATO test centers have the advantage that only a few chamberings are in military use. The C.I.P. and
SAAMI proof houses must be capable of testing hundreds of different chamberings requiring lots of
different test barrels, etc..[7.62 mm. STANAG 2310 and NATO Manual of Proof and Inspection AC/225
(LG/3-SG/1) D/9.]
The US Army continues to use (as of 1995) the M-11 Copper Crusher device for pressure measurements
of small arms ammunition. The M-11 was enhanced, when in 1982, it was noted that the results
generated at the high end of the test range did not meet NATO standards. [Defense Technical
Information Center, ARMY BALLISTIC RESEARCH LAB/APD, Accession Number : ADP000024]
What is interesting to note is that around the time of the engineering change to the M-11 Copper Crusher
device, the US Army changed the units of measurement for the device from PSI to Copper Units of
Pressure, or CUP. Both SAAMI and CIP used the copper crusher method until the advent of inexpensive,
reliable piezoelectric strain gauges, at which point, both organizations converted their methodologies to
take advantage of the newer technology.
The copper crusher method was the standard for small arms pressure measurements since the late
1800s. A copper pellet just like a small watch battery in placed in the test pressure chamber which is
attached to the cartridge chamber, the test round is fired and the copper pellet is then measured with a
micrometer. The micrometer measurement is then converted into a PSI reading by using a chart that
converts the length of the pellet into a pressure reading. The charts are constructed using the theoretical
modulus of compression for the particular copper alloy used in the pellet, and may or may not have any
relation to the actual absolute pressure. BUT, the results of the copper crusher method are always
relative to previous results, which allows for determining what is safe and what is not.
Both SAAMI and the CIP have detailed specifications for the arrangement and dimensions of the copper
crusher. Because these two systems are not identical, the two crusher standards cannot always agree.
Further, as explained above, CIP crusher ratings are generally a bit higher than SAAMI's due to
differences in definitions. Also, SAAMI is generally more conservative with older military rounds, such as
the 8mm Mauser.
With the SAAMI methodology, the piston is positioned over the brass case, and the case will rupture
somewhere below 20,000 PSI. The resulting sudden jump in pressure under the piston magnifies
problems with piston inertia, and this makes the reading more sensitive to parameters such as burning
rate, case strength, and true peak pressure. The CIP methodology requires the piston case be drilled at
the sensor location, and the benefit is that crusher and piezoelectric ratios are much more consistent from
cartridge to cartridge, allowing them to reasonably use a conversion formula.
The table below outlines some of the salient differences in testing:

Pressure Confusion
However, neither method addresses the figure “50,000 PSI” that is so often misquoted, especially by
“expert” sources such as 6mmbr.com and surplusrifle.com.
This figure comes from the US Army in various technical manuals, most notably, TM-D001-27
The real problem is the confusion between the old and the new methods of pressure testing. The old
pressure testing method used for the 7.62 NATO cartridge started out life in the 1950s and is still
published today in the US Army Technical Manuals. The figures are based on the copper crusher
method in CUP, but are published as PSI.
The new method is the piezoelectric strain gauge transducer method; it is the same technology used
today to show an automobile’s oil pressure. The piezoelectric strain gauge transducer pressure method
is a direct pressure reading based on an absolute standard, where the older copper crusher method a
conversion based on a relative measure and a conversion chart. And this is why you see the difference in
the pressure readings, but the older 52,000 CUP is equal to 62,000 PSI (piezoelectric transducer
method).
Today, these two methods are called CUP and PSI and the readings are different, but 52,000 CUP
equals 62,000 PSI and both are the same pressure, similar to the way 60 MPH equals 100 KPH.

Conclusions
The pressure difference between the two rounds is insignificant, the real problem is commercial
ammunition has thinner cases that were not designed to shoot in military chambers BUT we do it all the
time anyway and this why you see more case head separations on commercial cases fired in military
chambers.
The M118 special long range round is loaded to 52,000 CUP (all other U.S. 7.62mm are 50,000 CUP)
which would be equal to the pressure levels of commercial ammunition, this means actually there is no
pressure difference between the .308 and 7.62 NATO for the M118 cartridge.
No accurate conversion between copper crusher and true pressure exists, but approximations can be
made. In all the conversions outlined above, pressures are in thousands of PSI (KPSI). Expect errors of
several KPSI, or about 15%, with such formulas. Many factors determine how much the indicated
pressure reading from a crusher misses the true pressure, and the error varies among cartridges and
even among different loads for one cartridge. The conversions might be accurate enough for many
practical purposes.
So, to sum everything up, the pressure difference between the 308 Winchester and the 7.62x51mm
NATO is less than 2,000 PSI which is statistically insignificant. The same pressure variation may be
achieved by firing any rifle on a hot day and on a cold day or by changing brands of primers. It is safe to
shoot 308 Winchester in your 7.62x51 rifles (even the Ishapores) and vice versa. Handloaders should be
aware that they should reduce the amount of powder when using military 7.62 NATO cases by about 10-
12% and work up to safe pressures with corresponding velocities.

 

[Ding]

Change out your recoil pad to vented pad.I am guessing yours is solid.Reduces the kick by 60% or more.I have a 7 rem mag and changed the pad and can shoot all day long,even with the 175 grain slugs.

 

[Flopsweat]

Nice write-up madcratebuilder. I've never seen it explained better. Is the .223 vs. 5.56 issue different, and if so, how?

 

[DieselScout]

Nice write-up madcratebuilder. I've never seen it explained better. Is the .223 vs. 5.56 issue different, and if so, how?

Here's a great write up from Rifle Shooter Magazine a few months ago.

5.56 vs. .223

From the article.

When the .223 was invented, it was meant as a benchrest and varmint round. As such, accuracy was paramount. Velocity was a good thing, but not if it meant losing accuracy. So the .223 was designed with a short leade and steep rifling engagement, which is fine for shooting varmints or targets.

When the Army was forced to adopt the M16, however, it tried to avoid adoption by moving the goalposts, insisting on 500 yard penetration performance. To get that, the designers had to boost pressure and velocity. To control pressure (and also to get full utility out of tracer ammo, which uses bullets nearly twice as long as typical full metal jacket ammo), they modified the shape of the leade and rifling angle. And later, taking advantage of the longer leade and gentler angle, ammo makers tuned the 5.56 round to maximum performance using that extra margin.

Today, the difference can be marked. The leade on a proper 5.56 chamber is twice or more than that of a .223 chamber, and the onset angle of the 5.56 rifling creates a ramp with four times the distance. Firing .223 in a .223 chamber, or a 5.56 chamber, is not a problem. But firing real-deal 5.56 ammo in a .223 chamber can be a big problem.

The SAAMI-spec maximum average pressure for the .223, measured at the middle of the case, is 55,000 psi. The NATO spec for 5.56 is determined by SAAMI’s European counterpart, CIP. CIP measures at the case mouth and lists the 5.56 pressure spec of 62,000 psi. Measured at the case middle as SAAMI does, it shows 60,000 psi—so either way it’s higher than the .223.

But the problem isn’t just pressure. That CIP pressure of 62,000 psi? It is measured in a 5.56 chamber. If we take the same round, which shows 60,000 psi per SAAMI (which is already 5,000 psi over the .223 max) and put it into a .223 chamber, things get ugly. The pressure spike piles onto an already over-pressure round.

There is more information and some great pictures in the article and it's a pretty great read if you've got some time.

 

[tedium27]

madcratebuilder, ACE dude. Excellent!
My one request to all is, "Please identify and use foriegn milsurp 7.62X51 ammo with caution until you prove it in YOUR firearm."
European stuff "seems" alright, depending on projectile grain weight, but more than once I have purchased rounds produced in So. Africa or Egypt or... and had it clearly exceed safety margins. Extruded/flattened/blown primers, seperated cases at the head, base (cracked) deformation, shoulder cracking, etc.
Especially if you see external case markings like the round was forced out of a belt (machinegun). Some ammo seems to have had it's load limit exceeded to better "run" full auto fire.

 

[madcratebuilder]

My one request to all is, "Please identify and use foriegn milsurp 7.62X51 ammo with caution until you prove it in YOUR firearm."

Any "SURPLUS" ammo could cause problems. When you by surplus you have no idea haw it has been stored, or handled in the past. Ammo stored at very high or very low temps can see changes in the propellents characteristics that may cause changes in pressures when fired.

The surplus ammo that is most commonly associated with this is Egyptian, Pakistani, Indian, South African and even some German. I avoid repacked surplus and only buy in sealed containers, unless I know the person selling and know it originated from sealed containers.

Personally I've had all good experiences with SA and German surplus, luck of the draw I guess.

Especially if you see external case markings like the round was forced out of a belt (machinegun). Some ammo seems to have had it's load limit exceeded to better "run" full auto fire.

Everyone should be aware of the pressure difference in machine gun ammo, it's normally higher than standard issue. This goes back to before WW2.

In regards to the .223/5.56 debate IMHO it's the barrel leade that is different. On paper it is possible for the longer OAL 5.56 round to have the bullet jammed into the leade of a .223 barrel. On paper, that may cause a pressure spike. This pressure spike is not because the round is loaded to a higher pressure but because the bullet, jammed into the leade, is not free to move that first few thousandth of an inch. People have been shooting 5.56 in .223 chambers for as long as the two rounds have been around and I have never read about a proven problem from doing so. It is theoretically possible.

Some precision shooters load with a OAL so the bullet is touching the leade, then use very little crimp.

 

[Working 4 U]

Thanks everybody for your input. Now its time to start deciding on what I want. Thanks all