Venture Surplus ad

AR-15 - Mini 30 Tac

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Texas

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • jmsfmtex

    New Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Aug 11, 2008
    45
    1
    Fischer
    Please disregard my question as I have made up my pea brain not to get the new mini-30 tac.


    Is there a significant difference in moving from an AR-15 (5.56X45) to the new Mini-30 Tactical in 7.62X39?

    All comments appreciated.
    ARJ Defense ad
     

    Texas42

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Nov 21, 2008
    4,752
    66
    Texas
    You mean, besides that they are different calibers, different magazines, and different manual of arms?

    I'd like to have both. : )
     

    jmsfmtex

    New Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Aug 11, 2008
    45
    1
    Fischer
    Worth it

    I just do not know if getting a 7.62X39 is beneficial. All I do is target shoot and already have several home defense rifles. I did not want to go to a 308Win caliber. Just looking, asking questions and thinking.
     

    Texas42

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Nov 21, 2008
    4,752
    66
    Texas
    I think there isn't anything wrong with either 5.56x45 or 7.62x39 or 5.45x39 for defensive round. I doubt the 7.62 is as good ballistically, but . . . there is a lot of cheap ammo out there.
     

    dobarker

    Active Member
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Mar 26, 2010
    946
    31
    Sonora
    I think there isn't anything wrong with either 5.56x45 or 7.62x39 or 5.45x39 for defensive round. I doubt the 7.62 is as good ballistically, but . . . there is a lot of cheap ammo out there.
    It's a lot of give and take. During the Vietnam war and any since when the 7.62x39 has gone against the 5.56, when the terrain goes from open plains to having to fire through trees and undergrowth (or building walls), it's nice to have a slower heavier round that can plow through things.
     

    M. Sage

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 21, 2009
    16,298
    21
    San Antonio
    It's a lot of give and take. During the Vietnam war and any since when the 7.62x39 has gone against the 5.56, when the terrain goes from open plains to having to fire through trees and undergrowth (or building walls), it's nice to have a slower heavier round that can plow through things.

    You don't suppose it's a coincidence that the USSR had advisers in Vietnam and suddenly decided to develop a 5.45mm round that's a ballistic twin to 5.56mm right around the end of that war, do you?
     

    dobarker

    Active Member
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Mar 26, 2010
    946
    31
    Sonora
    You don't suppose it's a coincidence that the USSR had advisers in Vietnam and suddenly decided to develop a 5.45mm round that's a ballistic twin to 5.56mm right around the end of that war, do you?
    No coincidence at all. It was thought then that the next World War would take place in eastern Europe, an environment where the 5.56 or 5.45 would prosper. The 7.62x39 is a lot like a .30-30, it's slow and heavy, and best suited for things within 200 meters. It may work well in the Urals but not so well in a farming plain where your targets are out around 500 meters or more.
    And I don't know if it's of any extra value, but the 5.45x39 has an awful wound pattern.
     
    Top Bottom