7.62 NATO/.308Winchester..what's the diff?

Dikyllis · September 10, 1999, 11:50 AM

Is there a diference between 7.62 NATO and .308 Winchester? Which is OK to use in a Rem. 700PSS? Any accuracy issues?

Paul B. · September 10, 1999, 12:27 PM

Dykyllus. No problem. The 7.62 NATO and .308 Win. are one and the same round. The 7.62 is the military version, the .308 the civilian sporting version.
The round is one of my all time favorites. Enjoy!
Paul B.

Alan B · September 10, 1999, 02:46 PM

There was an article in Shotgun news last month that stated that the 308 Win had higher pressures than the 7.62 Nato. When I checked my reloading data books, I found no loads for 308 Win that were that much different from the 7.62 NATO loads published in the US Army field manuals( go figure). I was always told they were the same. Also if you look in the reloading data there is only a listing for 308 Win or 7.62 NATO not one for each. I have not found any other source yet stating the two cartridges were different. If you want the date and page post back and I will look it up

Patrick Graham · September 11, 1999, 08:04 AM

Here's what little I know about it.
Commercial 308 cases have slightly more internal case capacity than mil spec 7.62.
The Mil spec 7.62 is designed to operate the gas systems on m14's and m60's. It is possiable to buy commercial 308 that is loaded hotter than mil spec 7.62, like the Hornady Light Magnum series of ammo. This ammo could bend an m14 operating rod over a period of time.

Peter M. Eick · September 11, 1999, 05:49 PM

Actually there are pretty significant differences between the rounds, but they really only matter if you shoot military style auto-loading target rifles like the M1A SM.

Jerry Kuhnhausen wrote a book titled "The U.S. .30 Caliber Gas Operated Service Rifles; A Shop Manual". In this book on pages 43 and 44 he shows the chamber drawings for the 7.62 nato and .308 winchester. (You can also get the bulk of this information from fulton armory's web page. The key reason he goes into such detail regards the possiblity of a slam-fire with the M1A and M-14 rifles and the round getting chambered. Without going into very detailed specifics of the differences (I probably would be plagarizing his book to much) suffice it to say if you own an M1A you probably should buy this book and study the section on slam-fires, particualarly if you reload. In fact Springfield even recommends the book by reference in their new M1A rifles (or at least they did this spring when I bought 2nd M1A NM).

The differences particularly matter to poeple like myself that shoot a M1A Super Match and M1A National Match Rifles that have tight NM style chambers.

On the reloading front, I found that most NATO brass has almost 2 grains less capacity then convential brass and Federal Gold Medal has 1 grain less capacity. I had to change a lot of my reloading practices after reading his book, ie: how I primed the brass, which primers, which brass etc.

If I were shooting a bolt action rifle I would probably not worry about it, but I shoot only M1A's in 7.62 Nato, so I am very cautious about slam-fires. Those target rifles are to expensive to screw up because I rushed to the reloading process.

Hope this helps.
pete

Big Bunny · September 12, 1999, 11:50 PM

Well posted Peter !
The specification for military ammo is always different, and even for different applications too - and also between different countries . Remember not many Mil users reload ....and they couldn't care less what happens to their brass afterwards.
Despite the similarities of the two rounds(308W and 7.62X51 Nato) those who use the fired cases or loaded ammo interchangeably should do so with some caution.
This is DESPITE the milspec tolerances and dimentions used, heavier sometimes hardened brass, crimp/stab primers, less capacity=higher pressures etc etc.
Their ammo is right for THEIR military purposes and conditions -but it may not suit YOU or your rifle.
I have had no problems reloading with a standard 7.62 Simplex die set, except hard resizng (after use by auto M60s has "altered" the case rear a bit).
As my rifles are both bolts (M96 and M98 reworked from 30.06 and 7.92X57mm by FN for Israel)and in these Mausers either the new/surplus civvy or mil ammo appears OK and interchangeable. I have had no problems so far with mild target and hotter hunting loads.
I almost got into trouble once by firing milspec S&B (N07 not the super-hot Mk8 either!) .303Br in a No4 MK2(1941 Savage/Chicopee Falls manufactured)with a Sportco "civillian" spec(IE read - 'different tolerance' chamber).
Oh dear...only a bit stickey and bolt difficulty - BUT the pressures went sky high when simply the OAL was different -the throat machining (including a rare reamer "chatter") could be clearly seen in bas-relief on the neck brass !!

The No4 Enfield rifle in SSAA "perfect" condition happily was unharmed. But my new excellently marked and historic collectable (purchased ex New Zealand) and $200(1987 price) was so nearly wasted...

You have been warned.

------------------
***Big Bunny***

Nestor Rivera · September 13, 1999, 01:43 PM

My FR-8 does not seem to care, and I reload at the bottom of the power curve. For those that try to MAX-OUT a cartridge, my advice is STOP, if x cart is not big enough for you need get a bigger gun.

As to the SGN article by "The gun guy" I was reading it with some intrest but when this autority used the WRONG picture in his disortation I sort of lost intrest in his views The photo claims to be a FR-7 (reformed rifle - 7 ) but was acutally a FR-8 (reformed rifle -8).

Big Bunny · September 13, 1999, 05:40 PM

Nestor, is the FR7 an aperture sighted 7.62/308W training/police Spanish mauser M96 conversion ?
I have seen these for sale for AUD$350. What is the difference between it and an FR8, I would be interested in your reply.

------------------
***Big Bunny***

Big Bunny · September 14, 1999, 11:07 PM

No reply...I will try Harley Nolden over this as I am interested.

Nestor Rivera · September 16, 1999, 01:45 PM

No Problem.

The FR-8 is the Apature Sighted rifle, based on a 98K action (3 lug). When the Spanish started changing over to the CETME rifle which is a variant of the German G3 rifle the
FR-8 was made from older stocks of 8x57 rifles by shorting the barrale and welding a G3 style sight on the receiver, aslo the stock was changed. What appers to be a gas tube is part of the bayonet mount and also holds the cleaning gear (like a butstock tube on the M14)

The FR-7 was converted from older rifles based on the mauser 93 actions and orginaly chamberd in 7x57 I think it was called a M38 carbine originally.

A nice page detaling all of this is
http://web.jet.es/apraiz/e_spsteel.html

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

September 10, 1999, 11:50 AM	#1
Dikyllis Senior Member Join Date: March 2, 1999 Posts: 150	Is there a diference between 7.62 NATO and .308 Winchester? Which is OK to use in a Rem. 700PSS? Any accuracy issues?

September 10, 1999, 12:27 PM	#2
Paul B. Senior Member Join Date: March 28, 1999 Location: Tucson, AZ Posts: 3,800	Dykyllus. No problem. The 7.62 NATO and .308 Win. are one and the same round. The 7.62 is the military version, the .308 the civilian sporting version. The round is one of my all time favorites. Enjoy! Paul B.

September 10, 1999, 02:46 PM	#3
Alan B Senior Member Join Date: August 26, 1999 Posts: 335	There was an article in Shotgun news last month that stated that the 308 Win had higher pressures than the 7.62 Nato. When I checked my reloading data books, I found no loads for 308 Win that were that much different from the 7.62 NATO loads published in the US Army field manuals( go figure). I was always told they were the same. Also if you look in the reloading data there is only a listing for 308 Win or 7.62 NATO not one for each. I have not found any other source yet stating the two cartridges were different. If you want the date and page post back and I will look it up

September 11, 1999, 08:04 AM	#4
Patrick Graham Junior member Join Date: January 18, 1999 Location: Kokomo, Indiana USA Posts: 674	Here's what little I know about it. Commercial 308 cases have slightly more internal case capacity than mil spec 7.62. The Mil spec 7.62 is designed to operate the gas systems on m14's and m60's. It is possiable to buy commercial 308 that is loaded hotter than mil spec 7.62, like the Hornady Light Magnum series of ammo. This ammo could bend an m14 operating rod over a period of time.

September 11, 1999, 05:49 PM	#5
Peter M. Eick Senior Member Join Date: August 3, 1999 Location: Houston, Texas Posts: 2,991	Actually there are pretty significant differences between the rounds, but they really only matter if you shoot military style auto-loading target rifles like the M1A SM. Jerry Kuhnhausen wrote a book titled "The U.S. .30 Caliber Gas Operated Service Rifles; A Shop Manual". In this book on pages 43 and 44 he shows the chamber drawings for the 7.62 nato and .308 winchester. (You can also get the bulk of this information from fulton armory's web page. The key reason he goes into such detail regards the possiblity of a slam-fire with the M1A and M-14 rifles and the round getting chambered. Without going into very detailed specifics of the differences (I probably would be plagarizing his book to much) suffice it to say if you own an M1A you probably should buy this book and study the section on slam-fires, particualarly if you reload. In fact Springfield even recommends the book by reference in their new M1A rifles (or at least they did this spring when I bought 2nd M1A NM). The differences particularly matter to poeple like myself that shoot a M1A Super Match and M1A National Match Rifles that have tight NM style chambers. On the reloading front, I found that most NATO brass has almost 2 grains less capacity then convential brass and Federal Gold Medal has 1 grain less capacity. I had to change a lot of my reloading practices after reading his book, ie: how I primed the brass, which primers, which brass etc. If I were shooting a bolt action rifle I would probably not worry about it, but I shoot only M1A's in 7.62 Nato, so I am very cautious about slam-fires. Those target rifles are to expensive to screw up because I rushed to the reloading process. Hope this helps. pete

September 12, 1999, 11:50 PM	#6
Big Bunny Senior Member Join Date: August 9, 1999 Location: New South Wales - Australia Posts: 605	Well posted Peter ! The specification for military ammo is always different, and even for different applications too - and also between different countries . Remember not many Mil users reload ....and they couldn't care less what happens to their brass afterwards. Despite the similarities of the two rounds(308W and 7.62X51 Nato) those who use the fired cases or loaded ammo interchangeably should do so with some caution. This is DESPITE the milspec tolerances and dimentions used, heavier sometimes hardened brass, crimp/stab primers, less capacity=higher pressures etc etc. Their ammo is right for THEIR military purposes and conditions -but it may not suit YOU or your rifle. I have had no problems reloading with a standard 7.62 Simplex die set, except hard resizng (after use by auto M60s has "altered" the case rear a bit). As my rifles are both bolts (M96 and M98 reworked from 30.06 and 7.92X57mm by FN for Israel)and in these Mausers either the new/surplus civvy or mil ammo appears OK and interchangeable. I have had no problems so far with mild target and hotter hunting loads. I almost got into trouble once by firing milspec S&B (N07 not the super-hot Mk8 either!) .303Br in a No4 MK2(1941 Savage/Chicopee Falls manufactured)with a Sportco "civillian" spec(IE read - 'different tolerance' chamber). Oh dear...only a bit stickey and bolt difficulty - BUT the pressures went sky high when simply the OAL was different -the throat machining (including a rare reamer "chatter") could be clearly seen in bas-relief on the neck brass !! The No4 Enfield rifle in SSAA "perfect" condition happily was unharmed. But my new excellently marked and historic collectable (purchased ex New Zealand) and $200(1987 price) was so nearly wasted... You have been warned. ------------------ *Big Bunny*

September 13, 1999, 01:43 PM	#7
Nestor Rivera Senior Member Join Date: October 20, 1998 Location: San Antonio, Texas, USA Posts: 446	My FR-8 does not seem to care, and I reload at the bottom of the power curve. For those that try to MAX-OUT a cartridge, my advice is STOP, if x cart is not big enough for you need get a bigger gun. As to the SGN article by "The gun guy" I was reading it with some intrest but when this autority used the WRONG picture in his disortation I sort of lost intrest in his views The photo claims to be a FR-7 (reformed rifle - 7 ) but was acutally a FR-8 (reformed rifle -8).

September 13, 1999, 05:40 PM	#8
Big Bunny Senior Member Join Date: August 9, 1999 Location: New South Wales - Australia Posts: 605	Nestor, is the FR7 an aperture sighted 7.62/308W training/police Spanish mauser M96 conversion ? I have seen these for sale for AUD$350. What is the difference between it and an FR8, I would be interested in your reply. ------------------ *Big Bunny*

September 14, 1999, 11:07 PM	#9
Big Bunny Senior Member Join Date: August 9, 1999 Location: New South Wales - Australia Posts: 605	No reply...I will try Harley Nolden over this as I am interested.

September 16, 1999, 01:45 PM	#10
Nestor Rivera Senior Member Join Date: October 20, 1998 Location: San Antonio, Texas, USA Posts: 446	No Problem. The FR-8 is the Apature Sighted rifle, based on a 98K action (3 lug). When the Spanish started changing over to the CETME rifle which is a variant of the German G3 rifle the FR-8 was made from older stocks of 8x57 rifles by shorting the barrale and welding a G3 style sight on the receiver, aslo the stock was changed. What appers to be a gas tube is part of the bayonet mount and also holds the cleaning gear (like a butstock tube on the M14) The FR-7 was converted from older rifles based on the mauser 93 actions and orginaly chamberd in 7x57 I think it was called a M38 carbine originally. A nice page detaling all of this is http://web.jet.es/apraiz/e_spsteel.html