LRRPF52 Wrote:I've been looking at this cartridge more and more, and have always felt that the US really screwed the pooch by not adopting it.I really can't see it as a major screw up.
It would've allowed the machine gunner's ammo load to weigh slightly less, but a .280 M60 GPMG would've been only marginally lighter and insignificantly shorter than the 7.62 M60.
And a .280 M14 rifle would still have had the same production setbacks as befell the 7.62 M14, leading again to the forced adoption of the 5.56 M16.
Quote:The whole ordeal sounds like a case of "not invented here syndrome"."NIH" may have been involved to an extent, but I think it was more an honest disagreement as to what was the better approach. Remember, at the time a MAJOR war had just been fought against a peer foe equipped with large numbers of light armored vehicles, and after that conflict we were faced off against an even larger mechanized opponent.
The .30-06 had proven superior to .276 Pedersen in "hard target" penetration tests in the 1930s, and IIRC the .30 Light Rifle round was also better in this regard when tested against .280 Enfield.
Considered in that light, the 7.62x51 was a more prudent choice than the British 7x43.