3 ms·

I think it's well established in the literature that the modern military doesn't use the old larger battle rifle cartridges anymore because the extra range it o

I think it's well established in the literature that the modern military doesn't use the old larger battle rifle cartridges anymore because the extra range it offered was almost never needed and the smaller assault rifle cartridge allows more ammunition to be carried by each soldier.

j9461701 7y ago
Additionally, intermediate cartridges allow more rapid followup shots compared to full power rifle cartridges. An M4 fires lightly enough that soldiers can "miss their way to a hit" - as in fire, fire, fire, oh I'm aiming too low, fire, fire, fire oh i'm a little left fire, fire, fire bullseye. Trying that with an M14, which has much stronger recoil, would just result in your shots going increasingly wild.
- dsfyu404ed 7y ago
  You're not wrong but the M4 is particularly good at follow up shot performance (stock in line with barrel and raised sights to keep the barrel in line with your shoulder will do that) and M14 is particularly terrible about being hard on the user. If you want to be all proper and sciency about it you should probably compare guns that are on the same general platform (M4/AR10, AK/PSL, G3/G33, list goes on).
  - CydeWeys 7y ago
    Anecdotally, proper sling usage makes a huge difference with the larger cartridge battle rifles. The sling needs to be wrapped around your off-arm tightly and seriously pull the rifle into your shoulder, which substantially helps to mitigate the recoil knocking it off its aim. Yes, your shoulder is still gonna be taking a bruising, but that's the much better end of the rifle to be on.
Foober223 7y ago
Depends on the area. In Afghanistan there was a much stronger need for range. Old hunting rifles, not AK's were the most powerful small weapon used by the locals. The US had to bring back the old .308 rifles to compete. And even brought in some newly designed .308 rifles.

j9461701 7y ago

Additionally, intermediate cartridges allow more rapid followup shots compared to full power rifle cartridges. An M4 fires lightly enough that soldiers can "miss their way to a hit" - as in fire, fire, fire, oh I'm aiming too low, fire, fire, fire oh i'm a little left fire, fire, fire bullseye. Trying that with an M14, which has much stronger recoil, would just result in your shots going increasingly wild.

dsfyu404ed 7y ago
You're not wrong but the M4 is particularly good at follow up shot performance (stock in line with barrel and raised sights to keep the barrel in line with your shoulder will do that) and M14 is particularly terrible about being hard on the user. If you want to be all proper and sciency about it you should probably compare guns that are on the same general platform (M4/AR10, AK/PSL, G3/G33, list goes on).
- CydeWeys 7y ago
  Anecdotally, proper sling usage makes a huge difference with the larger cartridge battle rifles. The sling needs to be wrapped around your off-arm tightly and seriously pull the rifle into your shoulder, which substantially helps to mitigate the recoil knocking it off its aim. Yes, your shoulder is still gonna be taking a bruising, but that's the much better end of the rifle to be on.

Foober223 7y ago

Depends on the area. In Afghanistan there was a much stronger need for range. Old hunting rifles, not AK's were the most powerful small weapon used by the locals. The US had to bring back the old .308 rifles to compete. And even brought in some newly designed .308 rifles.