JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Can't argue the 7.62 over the 5.56 except the cost and the weight of the bigger with all the advantages over the smaller. I sold off all my 308 equipment in the 1990s.
 
At the end of any one day, the choice is based on who will need to carry it. There are reasons that the M2 Browning 50cal is vehicle mounted.

A modern Infantry Squad/Company/Fire Team carries it's TO&E weapons load (unlike you the prepper, they do not have a choice). A SOCOM'ish team will task organize skills and non-organic armament more like a prepper team should (my opinion). For CQB I want my MP5/10MM, for patrolling/unknown I want my FAL. Standard METT considerations.

The FAL and ammo combat load of ammo is heavier than an AR with combat load of ammo, if you are willing to carry the load the FAL is a great all around battle rifle. There is nothing on this planet that I know of that can survive 20 rounds of .308 when you have the rest of your life to concentrate on shot placement (nothing organic that is). Ditto a 30 round mag dump from an AR.

That being said, in my experience, adrenaline causes inaccurate rifle fire, which usually results in multi-round requirements for .223 fight termination. Not so with the .308

Like the .45 ACP the .308 is a one round fight stopper, ammo conservation is a natural outcome.
 
Last Edited:
Well I decide to jump in on this. In my option unless you are battle trained your best decision would be to escape and evade unless cornered, So I would rather have a small caliber like 5.56 and Sxxxload of ammo. If my enemy was 1000 yards away I would try to double that and only fight if I had to. Now if I was stuck in a city with no place to run I'll opt for the big 308. That's just me OK
 
lol.. what a comedian.
The .223 is many more times more lethal than any handgun cartridge, especially upon humans at close to middling range. The .308 is around three times as powerful.
The .45 is essentially the same (but I'd take the 9 over the .45), when it comes to results, as the 9mm.. especially given hunting and or defensive ammunition. hence the lol
 
If the 5.56 was such a good round why did the military turn it down for 10 plus years??? The designer was the a heck of a salesman and had to right connections. Thats why in the end the military adopted the 5.56 in the M-16. The m16 also failed many of the acceptence tests and failed horribly when introduced in Viet Nam causeing a lot of casultys because of crappy barrels and jaming problems.
 
The difference between the M16 and todays modern M4 is night and day, completely different animals. I have talked to many of todays combat soldiers, and hand down would pick the M4 over other rifles. Me I'm just a hunter not a soldier, I like my trusty 30-06.
 
Sure. If I was to stand and fight somewhere I would use my Belgian FAL, HK91, Barrett 50 bmg, and all my other guns.
But to keep things light and have more ammo at hand. I would grab an AR. A 100 rounds of 5.56 weighs less than 100 rounds of 9mm. 7.62 is just to heavy to pack compared to 5.56 Add the weights of the 7,62 magazines and it gets heavy fast.
I would probably grab a M1 Garand if I wanted more power. clips don't add the weight of a magazine.

I see a need to move quickly in most scenarios. So I think light weight. Plus I need to be able to pack a med bag.
7.62 may be better. But 5.56 is probably good enough for me.
The ability to get away from trouble is a good thing! Just how many bad guys do you think you can fight off?
Two men is all it takes. One to engage you. And one to flank and kill you.
Just my thoughts.
 

Upcoming Events

Lakeview Spring Gun Show
Lakeview, OR
Albany Gun Show
Albany, OR
Falcon Gun Show - Classic Gun & Knife Show
Stanwood, WA
Wes Knodel Gun & Knife Show - Albany
Albany, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top