HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Justice & Public Safety » Gun Control & RKBA (Group) » America's Gun: The Rise o... » Reply #14

Response to tridim (Reply #12)

Fri Apr 26, 2013, 01:08 PM

14. no it wasn't designed to tumble and shred flesh

it is strategically better to wound than to kill. The reason being it removes two additional people from the battlefield and puts more strain on the enemy's logistics.

so, was your grandpa's Remington bolt action manufactured for returning WW1 vets? It is a case of "tactical to practical" as the History Channel called it. Of course, the AR isn't the only design.

There has been much criticism of the allegedly poor performance of the bullet on target, especially the first-shot kill rate when the muzzle velocity of the firearms used and the downrange bullet deceleration do not achieve the minimally required terminal velocity at the target to cause fragmentation.[23] This wounding problem has been cited in incidents beginning in the Vietnam War, first Gulf War, Somalia, and in the current conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. The change of the original 1 in 14 inch barrel twist rate of the AR15 to the 1 in 12 inch barrel twist rate in the M16 and XM16E1, resulted in greater long range accuracy and better bullet stability. However, it also resulted in making the bullet less likely to tumble on impact with soft tissue. Much of the spectacular wounding ability of the original AR15 in the Vietnam War was on account of the 1 in 14 twist and the bullets tendency to tumble and possibly also fragment after impact. In recent lab testing of M855, it has been shown that the bullets do not fragment reliably or consistently from round-to-round, displaying widely variable performance. In several cases, yawing did not begin until 710 in of penetration. This was with all rounds coming from the same manufacturer.[23] This lack of wounding capacity typically becomes an increasingly significant issue as range increases (e.g., ranges over 50 m when using an M4 or 200 m when using an M16) or when penetrating heavy clothing, but this problem is compounded in shorter-barreled weapons. The 14.5 inches (37 cm) barrel of the U.S. military's M4 carbine generates considerably less initial velocity than the longer 20" barrel found on the M16, and terminal performance can be a particular problem with the M4.

while this tumbling did occur, changing the rifling twist fixed it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5.56%C3%9745mm_NATO

When you are fighting in a arid environment, the round is a poor choice be it from a M-16 or a HK G36, what the Germans use. There have been cases of the Taliban being out of the effective range of US and NATO forces, but they would be within the effective range of the WW1 era Lee Enfields which uses a round that has more power.

I disagree with the "gun nuts" in the documentary on one thing, I think ARs are fucking ugly.

Reply to this post

Back to OP Alert abuse Link to post in-thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 90 replies Author Time Post
Pullo Apr 2013 OP
Chipper Chat Apr 2013 #1
Pullo Apr 2013 #2
gejohnston Apr 2013 #4
ileus Apr 2013 #3
tridim Apr 2013 #8
hack89 Apr 2013 #13
tridim Apr 2013 #18
hack89 Apr 2013 #20
sylvi Apr 2013 #23
ileus Apr 2013 #24
lastlib Apr 2013 #35
ileus Apr 2013 #36
lastlib Apr 2013 #37
clffrdjk May 2013 #65
lastlib May 2013 #66
Lizzie Poppet May 2013 #73
lastlib May 2013 #74
Lizzie Poppet May 2013 #75
oneshooter May 2013 #86
norge May 2013 #67
lastlib May 2013 #68
CokeMachine May 2013 #69
AnotherMcIntosh May 2013 #78
Howzit May 2013 #89
ileus Apr 2013 #26
lastlib Apr 2013 #38
ileus Apr 2013 #43
Name removed Apr 2013 #62
AnotherMcIntosh May 2013 #77
tridim May 2013 #79
AnotherMcIntosh May 2013 #81
tridim May 2013 #82
AnotherMcIntosh May 2013 #83
hack89 May 2013 #90
Ernesto Apr 2013 #5
gejohnston Apr 2013 #6
AnotherMcIntosh Apr 2013 #29
tridim Apr 2013 #7
rrneck Apr 2013 #10
lastlib Apr 2013 #39
rrneck Apr 2013 #40
lastlib Apr 2013 #42
rrneck Apr 2013 #44
lastlib Apr 2013 #45
gejohnston Apr 2013 #46
lastlib Apr 2013 #47
gejohnston Apr 2013 #48
Ghost in the Machine Apr 2013 #59
gejohnston Apr 2013 #61
rrneck Apr 2013 #49
gejohnston Apr 2013 #11
tridim Apr 2013 #12
LineLineLineLineReply no it wasn't designed to tumble and shred flesh
gejohnston Apr 2013 #14
tridim Apr 2013 #16
gejohnston Apr 2013 #17
AtheistCrusader Apr 2013 #22
ileus Apr 2013 #25
Pullo Apr 2013 #19
supernaut Apr 2013 #51
mwrguy Apr 2013 #58
lastlib Apr 2013 #41
benEzra Apr 2013 #15
Pullo Apr 2013 #21
krispos42 Apr 2013 #30
Deep13 Apr 2013 #9
lastlib Apr 2013 #27
gejohnston Apr 2013 #28
dookers Apr 2013 #31
Joseph Ledger Apr 2013 #56
jimmy the one Apr 2013 #32
gejohnston Apr 2013 #33
Pullo Apr 2013 #34
hack89 Apr 2013 #50
jimmy the one Apr 2013 #52
gejohnston Apr 2013 #53
hack89 Apr 2013 #54
Joseph Ledger Apr 2013 #55
jimmy the one Apr 2013 #57
GreenStormCloud Apr 2013 #63
jimmy the one May 2013 #64
benEzra May 2013 #71
benEzra May 2013 #70
jimmy the one May 2013 #72
benEzra May 2013 #85
ileus Apr 2013 #60
geckosfeet May 2013 #76
ladjf May 2013 #80
AnotherMcIntosh May 2013 #84
geek tragedy May 2013 #87
benEzra May 2013 #88
Please login to view edit histories.