Quote:
Originally Posted by Red October1984
I've never seen any of his videos. I'll check them out tomorrow.
I'm not doubting the 9x19's effectiveness or reliability or anything...I really like the caliber...but it's just the "shortage" (if you can call it that) is bad on the 9x19 as well as the .223
I'd rather get something different. Something a bit heavier...but not overkill...and not too expensive.
.40 seems just about right. I liked how it handled when I fired that .40 Compact and it's not an overrated caliber by any means IMO.
That was the end of that. JHP will make a nice hole. If militaries were allowed to use it, there would be some ugly holes for the doc to patch up. But since they can't use HP ammo, they use smaller calibers.
And anything FN makes is pretty cool anyway.  |
.40 cal is just about as in demand as 9x19mm is in fact if a person does not have 9x19mm they have a .40 and it is not really a controlled shortage it is supply and demand if you make ammo for the open market it does you no good to have a surplus because then the value goes down.By having your ammo in demand you make much more money.Renumber firearms manufactures and ammunition manufactures are for profit businesses.I think many people forget this important fact.
There is limit on caliber size under the Hauge Convention you just are not allowed to use certain types of ammunition.FMJ are used because they cause the cleanest wounds which in theory causes less suffering.The Hauge Convention has been around in one shape or form since the end of the 19th century and for over 70 years of it existence nations used full size rifle cartridges and still do in machine guns,sniper rifles and other specialist roles.
Most armed forces use smaller caliber ammunition for two reasons:
1.the ammo weighs much less and this allows a combatant to carry a much larger amount of ammunition under the same weight. If the cartridge is large a full size rifle round the typical solider will only have about 180 rounds in a smaller cartridge they can carry 240 rounds for the same cost in weight as the larger caliber.
2.It is far easier to train a person to have good marksmanship with a smaller caliber round than it is a heavier round additionally people of smaller frame can much more easily use a smaller caliber rifle while a larger may reduce their combat effectiveness.
All in all I think that the choice to use smaller caliber round was a wise one.Even in Vietnam where there where teething troubles with the M16 largely due to poor training and poor maintenance practices the advantage of 5.56mm was clear it encumbered troops less and they carry a large amount of ammunition that would have been very encumbering if it had been a larger caliber.You have also recall that in addition your ammo you also might be carrying a belt or two of ammunition for the machine gun in Vietnam that was the M60 7.62x51mm.
These days a platoon might only have two GPMG M240 and each squad will have at least one M249 which greatly increases the suppression ability of a squad so only the members of the weapons squad where the GMPG will be have to carry the heavier ammo and in the other squads usually one extra man carrier belts for M249(5.56mm) they use canvas bags told hold them so they really do not add that much weight.Both the M240 and the M249(sometimes known as MK46) are very highly rated by combat troops in yearly reviews.