US Army Considers Adopting an Interim Battle Rifle in 7.62NATO: eventually adopt 6.5
#76
JASmith Wrote:I'm with BFT -- choose what works. Lead has its place.
The EPR design works. Lead is not necessary.

Quote:Pushing these little gotchas further starts to smell more like baiting than a genuine exploration of ideas and knowledge.
It's not a "gotcha." It's a reasonable question.

Why get upset about having to use lead-free construction, when the lead-free (M855A1) projectile reportedly outperforms the lead-core (M855) bullet on all counts?
Reply


Messages In This Thread
US Army Considers Adopting an Interim Battle Rifle in 7.62NATO: eventually adopt 6.5 - by stanc - 04-28-2017, 05:25 AM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)