Jump to content
Sturgeon's House


Contributing Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Curly_

  • Rank
  • Birthday 05/20/2001

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

208 profile views
  1. From: Dr. "Curly" Aberdeen, Researcher, Rapid City Ballistics Research Laboratory To: Caliber Selection Committee, Rapid City Union Ammunition Plant The .224 ZM cartridge has been revised as per the Committee's suggestions following the first evaluation and the revised technical data package is enclosed with this message. Projectile construction has been simplified with the deletion of the cup sealing off the lead core, and the rather embarrassing meplat of the original submission has been replaced with a rounded meplat of 0.12 calibers in diameter. The core material has also be
  2. I present my own cartridge in this competition, the .224 Zoomer Magnum, also known as the 5.7×47mm. In order to increase the number of rounds that each individual Sioux Scout can carry, I felt that a small caliber, high velocity cartridge would be in order, one that would have light recoil while also meeting (if not exceeding) the requirements set forth. I originally started off with a 1.775" case length (said case was designated as "No. 1"), but the case capacity was found to be woefully insufficient for the desired muzzle velocities. A second cartridge case (designated "No. 2"), with the len
  3. I have, actually. Pretty informative stuff. The i7 FF was the same as 7N6, which is .929 if Wikipedia is to be trusted. I figured that you'd be able to bump up the weight by making the core a bit like M855A1's (copper slug, steel penetrator) since military 5.45 typically uses a steel penetrator core. Some messing around in Fusion 360 helped confirm that for me. As far as the ballistics go, yeah, the energy is definitely not going to be the same. (Also, I must've misremembered the original velocity I ran it at, it was actually 2,920 ft/s. Still, good stuff.)
  4. I'm pretty big into SCHV rounds myself. Running a 60 grain 5.45×39 at 2,900 ft/s though the JBM ballistics calculator was a real enlightening experience, seeing as it managed to meet, if not outright exceed, M80 ball's ballistics. Also, what would be a better theoretical replacement for 7.62 NATO, in your opinion?
  5. That's pretty similar to my thoughts on the subject, though I look at things more in terms of supersonic range and sectional density (as well the capacity to use special effects rounds like the Mk 211 Raufoss). Theoretically one could make a .224-caliber cartridge with that matched the external ballistics and sectional density of a 140-grain 6.5 Creedmoor (which according to my math should be about 100 grains), but the projectile would end up being too far long for a standard ball loading, especially if it has to be lead-free.
  6. This came up in a recent discussion I had with a friend over Discord, concerning a hypothetical near-peer conflict (particularly in an urban environment). My friend is of the belief that in such a conflict there isn't no reason to field any small arms (not just service rifles or light machine guns) in anything larger than something like 5.56 NATO, the rationale being that a.) you can carry more of it compared something like 6.5 Creedmoor or 7.62 NATO, b.) you're mostly going to be using it suppressing the enemy so that you can drop high explosives on their heads, and c.) since most combat take
  • Create New...