6.2mm OCC

[deadduck357]

Mods excuse me if I have posted in wrong forum as I am not familiar with this site, feel free to move if necessary.

Here is a link to a pdf of my 6.2mm OCC , would like some feedback
http://www.datafilehost.com/download-4a7c0ddf.html

 

[Laurie]

Very interesting ................... BUT

Google .280/30, .280 British, 7X43mm, 7mm Ball Mk1z (different names for the same cartridge), and Enfield EM2 rifle plus 7mm Taden Gun...................

and you'll find we Brits did the theoretical then detailed practical work on the ideal assault rifle / GP machinegun cartridge as long ago as 1946-49, and actually adopted both the cartridge and the EM2. The history books say it was the US Army in the personal form of one Colonel Renee Studler, Head of the US Small Arms Bureau of Ordnance which killed the 7mm off, because it and he were determined that the Frankford Arsenal T65 (aka 7.62mm NATO in developed form) and the new US wonder weapon the T25 (that never made it past prototype stage) were what the US Army - and that meant NATO in practice - wanted and were going to have.

The whole history of the NATO military cartridge over nigh on 60 years has been about swinging around either side of 6.5 - 7mm with first the over-powerful 7.62mm then a complete reversal (led by the USA too - Ha Ha) to the inadequate 5.56mm. Looking at your 6.2mm OCC, its ballistics are still inferior to the 7X43's 140gn FMJBT at 2,415 fps MV, and that was with the propellants available in the 1940s, early 50s.

And, before you counter with a mention of recoil and automatic fire, the EM2 with this cartridge allied to superb ergonomics and a low cyclic rate of 120 rpm, was regularly demonstrated by the Enfield Lock development team engineers in full-auto fire held single-handed as per a handgun without muzzle climb problems.

There have been attempts over here to resurrect the 7X43mm as a target and deerstalking cartridge, but sadly without success. It has no chance now in military cartridge terms thanks to its 0.473" case-head diameter in a world of government inventories of millions of rifles and LMGs built around the 5.56 cartridge and its 0.378" dia head.

I wish you well, but you've got to offer one whole lot of major and demonstrable benefits to government bean counters when you add up the work and costs of developing a new round then rebarrelling x-trillion existing rifles. Just a shame we couldn't get it right the first (or second) time round. I really can't see anybody taking a third bite out of this particular cherry!

Laurie,
York, England

 

[deadduck357]

I'm sorry but I don't see your point. The 280 Brit was a good design, probably better than the 7.62x51 but it has no place in the AR15/M16 platform.

 

[CanusLatransSnpr]

Platform aside! What the man was getting at was there have been some "proven" cartridges that come along over the years just to get shoved aside over bureacratic bs.

Mike