SinoDefence Forum

petty officer1

Could you guys feed some more info on this cartridge? and Why is it claimed to be "superior" to NATO and Soviet? Back then in WWII, cartridge are made alot bigger for mainly for size impact (that is why M1 is so strong), today cartridges are alot smaller. where this new cartridge stand?

Red Guard

are you asking why the calibre is getting smaller and smaller?? well.. you see in physics.................................
chinese believe 5.8 is better than the others from the testing datas we got on the field. this kind of test with steel plates, that test with kevlar helmet and this and that, so they say ja, i think 5.8 is better than the others, so.....they use it.....

Red not Dead

In fact the Chinese round wasn't at all te best it was merely the best compromise.

While it inflicted less damage on internals cavities and organs it conserved a better trajectory (flatter, less bullet drop) and stopping power than the Soviet 7n6 while it was still under the m855 in terms of accuracy, range and energy conservation.

The round was labelled a intermediate range small round...you could shoot it up to 500+m (with opticals) with good hitting probability and very little disspersion. But it was still way behind the 650 m you can reach with the m16+m855 combination (although that range needs a heavier accurized barrel).

The soviet round although the most damaging couldn't be effetively aimed (with opticals) beyond 450m.


But the test was biaised since the soviets are using the 7n10 round wich can reach somewhere near 500m with opticals.

MadMax

the 5.8 mm is easier to design a gun to use because the tappered shell casing is easier to extract from the chamber but this is a double edge sword becaus tappered cases are less acurate then a straight case like the 5.56 mm NATO round

sumdud

Which Soviet round? The 5.45, or the 7.62 intermediate?

__________________

Give us a break. Don't try ranting at SDF.

Red not Dead

the 7n6 5.45x39mm

Kampfwagen

I personaly think Chinese reports are seriously B-Sing when it comes to the power of the 5.8MM bullet. It is likely superior in firepower when it comes to the 5.56 NATO and the 5.45 Soviet/Russian, but to say it outdoes both NATO AND Soviet 7.62MM in the power department?

I call shenanigans.

Besides, not to offend China in any way, but I wont beleve a word of what is said about anything new from China untill someone else feild tests it. All world governments, not just Chinese or 'Red' countries (although I realize China isint technicaly Communist any more.) but America as well as many others, especialy from a country as famous for it's secrecy as China tend to put in little white lies about what they make. By no means a bad thing; it scares the other guys. So...I dont really think we can count for sure anything the Chinese say except that it is AT LEAST slightly superior to the 5.56MM round, which as one author put it eloquently "A Varmint Hunting Calliber in Military Clothing."

Red not Dead

Actually they've never stated that. And the tests have been conducted by a canadian sniper magazine not the chinese. The mood actually in Chung Kuo is to small rounds. And I never proclaimed the round to be even better to the Us m855. It's a better round for frontline engagment but never the less it has flaws when compared to what exists. It is a sort of compromise between the two small round logics NATO and Soviet.

Actually most people that have used small rounds (soviet and US) feel the soviet is a better wounder overall but lacks range (due also and mainly to the weapon used to fire them). While the US system gives you surgical precision and a better finished weapon better suited to long ranges (not to mention ergonomics and the numerous instruments that can be incorporated-sights, bipods, scopes) the russian stands higher on reliability, simplicity and staopping and wounding power.

sumdud

Simplicity? I don't think it is represented in this round.
It should be easier to mold full bullets and fit on a copper top than making a hollow in it.

__________________

Give us a break. Don't try ranting at SDF.

Kampfwagen

I seem to remember a statement like that...Oh well, you would certantly know more about this than I would. And I myself never really intended to accuse you of anything, so sorry if I made it sound that way.

But I understand that much about this being the middle ground, which is a good thing.

dannytoro

........Actually the .223 Remington (5.45 x 45) is a tapered case:

http://www.again.net/~steve/jpg/cd223remington.jpg

..It's also not very effective much beyond 400 meters, where it's energy rapidly falls off . I'd like to see more on the 5.8 Chinese round. I would not think it would be much better then 5.56. Personally I concur with the british study which found bullets near 7mm to be the ideal trade off. In particular, 6.5mm bullets of 120 grains weight offer low recoil, high velocity,high ballistic co-effecient,ideal sectional density for good penetration and normally very good accuracy. As an added bonus, snipers can move up to the excellent long range qualities of low drag 140 grain bullets.........

UCSDAE

if i m not mistaken, China is the only one with the 5.8mm right now. in another word, shall other factions(like terrorist org.) get their hands on it, they can't use their own ammo clips on it. (remeber the sino-vietnamese war and the AKs?)

Red not Dead

China can't affort such a spreading. Pollitically. Since they're the only to use the round the finger would be pointed towards them pretty quickly. Guess the m43 has still some bright days to come.

soaringsoul

Oh no, how could chinese spread their weapons to terrorists? The terrorists trying to make several chinese province independent...

Red not Dead

Yeah but they could help other terrorists like the Iraqi resistance groups or the south Asian cells.