[andy]

"proved" 308 was superior to 223. 223 was already kicking 308 butt at both combat and realistic combat mathes. Since the AR223 starting beating 308's at the 600 yd matches, SUDDENLY such match performance "has no real value". " Two faced, hypocrite LIARS.

 

[Garand]

Yep, all you need is a good armourer and lots of bells and whistles to make it happen!

 

[Aslan]

"proved" 308 was superior to 223. 223 was already kicking 308 butt at both combat and realistic combat mathes. Since the AR223 starting beating 308's at the 600 yd matches, SUDDENLY such match performance "has no real value". " Two faced, hypocrite LIARS.

You might want to let the military in on this, as they are mistakenly supplimenting the M4/m16's with M14's to effectively engage targets at 500yds and beyond.

For some strange reason, people react differently than paper at those ranges. Weird, but true. The .223 just isn't working well enough at those ranges.

Oh well, I'm sure that you, the mighty GunKid, could straighten them out.

While you're at it, you can tell them that they are fos for wanting the 6.8.

:devil:

 

[Hard Rock]

Punching holes in non moving paper targets is one thing. Putting down live creatures at those ranges is a whole different ball game. I'll stick to the .30 cals thank you very much.

Remember something Tard, I choose .308 because it is a common round and in use by our military. If I had the option with regards to ammo supply, I'd be using my .338 Lapua.

Mike

 

[Aslan]

Hey Mike!

How goes it? long time no see.

:devil:

 

[DJetAce]

Stup*kid, matches do not take into consideration things like power, penetration, and effects (like tracer and incinerary).

On a good sunny windless day, I am sure the 5.56 is a better weapon to punch holes in paper targets that are not moving. But when the targets are moving, have heavy web gear, and it's not so sunny or windless day, the 7.62 is a better weapon.

Go back to your target shooting magazines.