Welcome to the Colorado AR-15 Shooters Club Discussion Forums.
Over heard @ gun counter
Clerk to customer when asked about differences between 7.62 NATO and .308 Win. stated 7.62 NATO and .308 Win are the same and went on with sales schpeel.
Would you say anything?
Sent from my electronic ball and chain.
Plenty of time I've heard 556 NATO and 223 Rem are the same. Unless I'm a ballistic expert or they really messed up(like Clip mess up), i usually stay silent.
Last edited by UrbanWolf; 09-20-2013 at 10:07.
Disclaimer: I can't spell.
I don't like arguing with idiots so no, I usually don't say anything.Originally Posted by buffalobo
For your average gun counter customer's intents and purposes they are similar enough that an explanation would be a waste of time.
7.62 NATO is 100% safe to fired in a 308 Win chamber so i would not say a thing.
That's what I thought too.
I thought 7.62x51 was pretty much the NATO designation for the .308 Win.
Someone please correct me if I am mistaken.
7.62x51
Bullet diameter (0.308 in) 7.82 mm
Neck diameter (0.338 in) 8.58 mm
Shoulder diameter (0.447 in) 11.35 mm
Base diameter (0.466 in) 11.84 mm
Rim diameter (0.470 in) 11.94 mm
Rim thickness (0.050 in) 1.27 mm
Case length (2.010 in) 51.05 mm
Overall length (2.750 in) 69.85 mm
.308
Bullet diameter 0.308 in (7.8 mm)
Neck diameter 0.343 in (8.7 mm)
Shoulder diameter 0.454 in (11.5 mm)
Base diameter 0.470 in (11.9 mm)
Rim diameter 0.473 in (12.0 mm)
Rim thickness 0.050 in (1.3 mm)
Case length 2.015 in (51.2 mm)
Overall length 2.800 in (71.1 mm)
Another good read;
I have never had a problem with 308 in 7.62 nato and vice versa but never shot that MUCH through my 7.62 rifles. (Historical: HK91, CETME G3, Savage Bolt, and of course my short lived AR 308.)In December, 1953, the US T65 .30 caliber cartridge was adopted by NATO
as its standard cartridge. What this actually meant was that the five key
members of the alliance agreed to adopt the final version of the T65E3
(soft lead core) as their standard service round. Nominally, the round
adopted by the NATO countries had the following characteristics:
jacketed spitzer bullet of 147 grains (9.45 g) weight, a
brass case (conforming to the US Copper Alloy 260, Annealed,
MIL-C-50 standard) of 187 grains (12 g), for a muzzle velocity of
2750 +/- 50 fps (840 mps) measured 78 feet from the
muzzle.
The round had a variety of names. For example, in the US, the above
round is known as, Cartridge 7.62mm Ball M80 (or M59). In Germany, it is
Patrone 7,62x51mm, DM41A1. In Spain it is the Cartucho Ordinario, 7,62x51mm
OTAN.
Note that of the above nomenclature, there is no mention of a "NATO"
designation for the US or German cartridges. This is because there
were no other 7.62mm rifle cartridges made for and issued to either of the
respective armies. More importantly it is an eloquent statement of the
fact that only the cartridge itself was standardized and adopted. There was
and is no common nomenclature required by the 1954 NATO Standardization
Agreement (STANAG) which codified the adoption of the cartridge.
Spain however, was a different matter. Spain did not join NATO until
1982, and was therefore under no constraints to adopt the common cartridge.
Spain was also the only western European power to successfully adopt an actual
assault rifle (the CETME Model 58) instead of the "battle rifles" (M14,
L1A1, FAL, C1A1, BM59, G3) adopted by the NATO powers. Comcomitant
with the assault rifle, Spain adopted a true intermediate catridge,
the 7.62x51mm CETME. The intent was a cartridge that would allow
ballistic and accuracy performance from the Model 58 akin to that
attained by the 7.9x33mm (7.9 Kurz) fired from the StG44.
The performance and specifications of the 7.62x51mm CETME are
indicative of this intent. Nominal characteristics: jacketed
spitzer bullet of 112.5 grains (7.25 g) weight, a brass or steel case
of 151 grains (9.7 g), for a muzzle velocity of 2493 fps (760 mps).
The construction of the bullet is particularly noteworthy. The CETME
bullet has a 90/10 brass alloy (gilding metal) jacket, with a
plastic nose filler for the first third of the bullet, and a lead
antimony core. That is to say, the bullet jacket is not filled with
the lead core, but has what might be considered a lightweight
ballistic tip (not unlike the kapok tip in the .303 British service round).
This cartridge, adopted in 1957, remained the standard Spanish service round
for the next twenty-five years. Hardly a "diversion" or a flash in the pan!
Confusing the issue, however, were the facts that the external
dimensions of the cartridge were so similar to the NATO round,
and the fact that the
Spanish themselves produced a round to NATO specifications for use, I
understand, in the MG42/58 machine gun. This round was adopted in 1964.
Its specifications were identical to the NATO round mentioned above.
The designation was 7,62x51mm OTAN. Of particular note is the augmentation
to the case necessary to safely fire the NATO load. In 1961, an attempt
was made by the National Factory of Toledo (a Spanish arsenal) to achieve
NATO-esque ballistics by employing a 147 grain bullet at 2,625 fps (800
mps) using the standard CETME case. The attempt failed due to the light
CETME case being too weak to handle the pressures generated by the loading
used. A loading of notably less power than the NATO standard loading.
This cartridge became standard with the Spanish Army after Spain's entry
into NATO in 1982, supplanting the 7.62x51mm CETME. The CETME rifles in
service at that time were modified with new bolt carriers to enable
them to safely use the more powerful NATO load.
Which brings us back to the original issue of .308 Winchester vice
7.62x51mm NATO. As previously stated, the specifications which
have to be met in order for a round to be a NATO standard 7.62mm
are very stringent, and apply to case, bullet, pressure, performance,
etc. The composition and thicknesses of the case are, therefore
rigidly controlled. There are no such specifications for commercial
cases. Something to keep in mind when selecting cartridges for
firearms chambered for the NATO 7.62mm round.
Non-NATO spec cases are the failures experienced by the Spaniards in
1961 when attempting to use lightweight 7.62x51mm cases to emulate NATO
ladings.
Sources:
"Cartucheria Espanola (Spanish Ammunition)," Angel Molina Lopez and
Alfonso Orea Maestro, Merino Publishers, Palencia, Spain, 1995
"Die Militarpatronen Kaliber 7,62x51mm NATO ihre Entwicklung und
Abarten (The Military Catridges 7.62x51mm NATO their Development and Variants),"
Brandt, Hamann, Kaltmann, and Kiehn, Journal-Verlag Schwend GMBH,
Wiesbaden,Germany
"US Rifle M14, From John Garand to M21," R. Blake Stevens, Collector
GradePublications, Toronto, Canada
"The FAL Rifle," R. Blake Stevens, Collector Grade Publications,
Toronto,Canada
"Army Ammunition Data Sheets, Small Caliber Ammunition, FSC 1305, TM
43-0001-27,"HQ, Department of the Army
"US Army Manufacturing Engineering Product Guide Book," Section E-2
Last edited by Skully; 09-20-2013 at 10:38.
"The rifle itself has no moral stature, since it has no will of its own. Naturally, it may be used by evil men for evil purposes, but there are more good men than evil, and while the latter cannot be persuaded to the path of righteousness by propaganda, they can certainly be corrected by good men with rifles. --Jeff Cooper"
My feedback
They're similar enough.
7.62NATO is based off the commercial .308
However, I would hesitate running hot .308 loads in an M-14(M1A), many op rods have been bent by doing such. I would also hesitate running polymer tipped .308 loads in a battle rifle. Some mfr specifically say to not use polymer or lead nose ammo in their guns.
Last edited by brutal; 09-20-2013 at 13:32.
My Feedback
Credit TFOGGER : Liberals only want things to be "fair and just" if it benefits them.
Credit Zundfolge: The left only supports two "rights"; Buggery and Infanticide.
Credit roberth: List of things Government does best; 1. Steal your money 2. Steal your time 3. Waste the money they stole from you. 4. Waste your time making you ask permission for things you have a natural right to own. "Anyone that thinks the communists won't turn off your power for being on COAR15 is a fucking moron."
Damn I thought they were the same. That being said, pointing out the difference would make you look like an assclown trying to show everyone how smart you are.
You wouldn't want people to think your "Superior" or anything.
Sometimes it is not worth it to correct people. Even if someone told me something I usually research a little to verify, I have learned to not follow peoples facts blindly. Modern age it is a few google/BING clicks away.
"The rifle itself has no moral stature, since it has no will of its own. Naturally, it may be used by evil men for evil purposes, but there are more good men than evil, and while the latter cannot be persuaded to the path of righteousness by propaganda, they can certainly be corrected by good men with rifles. --Jeff Cooper"
My feedback
98.5% isn't 99%
Close enough for me.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
