I need a .276 Garand POD

I would suggest that you look at Fedorov's No5 cartridge. I think it might well give you the performance you are looking for.
 

Deleted member 1487

I would suggest that you look at Fedorov's No5 cartridge. I think it might well give you the performance you are looking for.
Who are you addressing?

Edit:
https://forums.spacebattles.com/thr...ian-summarizes-federov-rifles-history.378358/
By 1913, he submitted his first 6.5mm self-loading rifles for trials; these rifles fired new, rimless 6.5mm ammunition with case about 57mm (2”) long; pointed jacketed bullet weighed 8.5 gram (131 grain) and had a muzzle velocity of about 850 m/s (2790 fps)

I.E the performance of the existing 6.5mm Swedish:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/6.5×55mm
140.4 gr (9 g) DK 2,854 ft/s (870 m/s) 2,540 ft·lbf (3,440 J)

Or German 6.5
http://www.ballisticstudies.com/Knowledgebase/6.5x57.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I thought the M2 bullet was BT???

If you mean the PD-42 version of the .276 cartridge then you know more than I do. I thought it was flat. Everyone seems to use G1 ballistics to model it, not G7. Do you mean the T2 version of .276?

EDIT--- Hmm. Maybe not. Ian modeled it as G7. But he quotes a low BC of 0.248.

EDIT again:

Here's a photo with a pulled PD-42 projectile, which does indeed have a boat-tail:

the-rise-and-fall-of-the-light-rifle-part-i-prologue

From left to right that's: .30-06 M2 ball, .276 Pedersen PD-42, 7.62x39mm, 7.62x51mm NATO, 5.56x43mm M193, and the pulled Pedersen PD-42 projectile.
 
Last edited:
Oh, yeah, we mis-communicated. I'm talking about the PD-42 .276 Pedersen, which when adopted post-war will be the 7x51mm NATO. I'm not referencing OTL 7.62x51mm NATO.
 
Last edited:
Given the new BC and G7 model, here's what Hornady's ballistics calculator spits out:

BC = 0.248, G7 model
Projectile weight = 125gr
Muzzle velocity = 2740 ft/sec
Sight height = 1 inch, zeroed at 100 yards
Wind = 10mph at 90-degrees
Sea level, 78% humidity

range velocity energy trajectory come up wind drift
yards ft/sec ft-lb inches MOA inches & MOA

Muzzle 2740 2084 -1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
100 2560 1819 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.7
200 2387 1581 -4.3 2.1 2.8 1.3
300 2220 1368 -14.7 4.7 6.5 2.1
400 2060 1178 -32.2 7.7 11.9 2.8
500 1906 1008 -58 11.1 19.3 3.7
600 1758 858 -93.3 14.8 28.9 4.6
700 1616 725 -139.9 19.1 40.9 5.6
800 1481 609 -199.8 23.8 55.8 6.7
900 1351 506 -275.6 29.2 73.8 7.8
1000 1225 417 -370.6 35.4 95.6 9.1

This is why I've said that the .276 doesn't really qualify as "intermediate"- just more so than the .30-06 or .308.

EDIT- Goddamn the whitespace Nazis... How do I post an image from my computer rather than a URL?
 
Last edited:

Deleted member 1487

Not necessarily, it was roughly similar in performance to British .280 ammo:
By 1913, he submitted his first 6.5mm self-loading rifles for trials; these rifles fired new, rimless 6.5mm ammunition with case about 57mm (2”) long; pointed jacketed bullet weighed 8.5 gram (131 grain) and had a muzzle velocity of about 850 m/s (2790 fps)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.280_British
Bullet mass/type Velocity Energy
139 gr (9 g) Ball 2,545 ft/s (776 m/s) 1,980 ft·lbf (2,680 J)
140 gr (9 g) Ball
7 mm Mk 1Z 2,549 ft/s (777 m/s) 2,004 ft·lbf (2,717 J)

Faster, so flatter firing and perhaps longer range, but with roughly the same energy in Joules.

Given the performance of the 6.5mm Grendel round, which seems roughly similar, as cartridge No5 did not have round energy listed:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/6.5mm_Grendel
120 gr (8 g) Norma FMJBT 2,700 ft/s (820 m/s) 1,942 ft·lbf (2,633 J)

Seems like that performance is somewhat similar to what a 7mm 9 gram bullet (just like the British .280 bullet, cribbed from the Spanish 7mm Mauser) fired from a 6.5mm Carcano round would achieve:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/6.5×52mm_Carcano
10.5 g (162 gr) RN 700 m/s (2,300 ft/s) 2,572 J (1,897 ft·lbf)

In terms of the Pederson, that seems roughly in line with all of this too.
 
Not necessarily, it was roughly similar in performance to British .280 ammo

No, Fedorov's ammo was more powerful than 6.5x55mm, into the 3,000 J range. It isn't the intermediate round you're looking for.

I mean, already with .280's 2,700 J range we have people arguing it is manipulation of definition to fit in something that shouldn't.
 

Deleted member 1487

No, Fedorov's ammo was more powerful than 6.5x55mm, into the 3,000 J range. It isn't the intermediate round you're looking for.

I mean, already with .280's 2,700 J range we have people arguing it is manipulation of definition to fit in something that shouldn't.
Seems you're fight, my numbers were off. Yeah, too powerful. Seems like he lucked out by having to use Japanese 6.5 for the Avtomat.
 
Before the ZH-29 was given to the US to test in July 1929, the .30 Garand was already killed. It was after the testing of ZH-29 that work on the (dropped) .30 gas-operated Garand was resumed, leading to T1E1 and the subsequent survival of development. In other words, without the ZH-29 which showed that you could make a sturdy functioning full caliber semiauto that weighed less than 10.5 pounds, the .30 Garand's development would never have been revived, and thus only the .276 Garand would have made it into the final selection.

I'm still not getting this. All sources that I can find say that the ZH-29 that was submitted to the U.S. was in .276 Pedersen. How would it influence the SRB to resurrect the .30-cal Garand?

I've found a bit on the ZH-29, but nothing about this claim. Do you remember where you heard it?

I ask this because I'm getting very interested in the combined POD that I mentioned.
 
Last edited:
Now that I bother to look up why I had that notion in my mind: It was based on this blog post.

I might have overreached in swallowing up a theory without any concrete evidence. Shameful of me.

Oh, yeah. If the blog is correct it was included with the huge number of rifles tested in 1929 (and I had missed it, actually). But I'm thinking it was only in .276. Which makes sense, since it certainly seems like all of the boards were sold on that caliber by then.

Bummer, since I do still want to combine the PODs. I thought of a way that it might be easier to swallow MacArthur supporting .276 if the .30 Garand isn't quite as well developed. And having a clerk sneezing in Czechoslovakia making the difference seemed cute. ;)

That blogger certainly seems to think a larger-caliber ZH-29 was tested, though. Any idea where I can get copies of these Board reports? My Google Fu is failing me. Maybe I'll email Nathaniel F. or something.
 
Last edited:
You could have a fire break out at the Springfield Armory in early 1917, leading to the Army hastily adopting the M1891 Mosin Nagant rifles that Remington and Westinghouse were churning out by the millions, along with the 7.62x54R Russian cartridge...
 
You could have a fire break out at the Springfield Armory in early 1917, leading to the Army hastily adopting the M1891 Mosin Nagant rifles that Remington and Westinghouse were churning out by the millions, along with the 7.62x54R Russian cartridge...

How does that help the OP? Maybe because the U.S. has to adopt a crap-tastic rifle like the Mosin-Nagant (suck it, Nagant fanboys :p) due to it being the "most ready" by WWI, setting up adoption of a .276 Garand by virtue of being both NOT an awful rifle AND having that handy-dandy new 7mm cartridge the Army Boards of the '20s liked?
 
You could have a fire break out at the Springfield Armory in early 1917, leading to the Army hastily adopting the M1891 Mosin Nagant rifles that Remington and Westinghouse were churning out by the millions, along with the 7.62x54R Russian cartridge...

Springfield wasnt making many M1903s in early 1917 iirc annual production from Springfield and Rock Island was about 80,000. The loss of Springfield probably means Rock Island ramps up production and the US adopts the M1917 as per OTL
 
Top