3 ms·
>Wouldn't it be possible to carry the same amount of kinetic energy with lighter ammunition? There have been ongoing efforts for years, but there are significa
by jdietrich 8y ago
>Wouldn't it be possible to carry the same amount of kinetic energy with lighter ammunition?
There have been ongoing efforts for years, but there are significant technical obstacles to producing reliable, effective ammunition with reduced weight.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightweight_Small_Arms_Technologies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightweight_Small_Arms_Technol...
- nasredin 8y agoSurprised nobody mentioned https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polymer-cased_ammunition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polymer-cased_ammunition
- djyaz1200 8y agoIt's worth mentioning that 7.62 ammo weights about 3X more than .223. It's my understanding most US military units use .233 largely for this reason. The whole concept of .223 is to put more propellent behind a smaller projectile. This gives the projectile more speed which makes it exceptionally lethal and accurate at very long distance. Unlike handguns that basically poke a hole, .223 generates a shockwave when it strikes at a multiple of the speed of sound.