Full Auto at 1000m: The 7.92x41mm CETME Cartridge
Vložit
- čas přidán 13. 06. 2024
- / forgottenweapons
Cool Forgotten Weapons merch! shop.bbtv.com/collections/forg...
The US insistence on a full-power rifle cartridge for the NATO standard in the 1950s derailed a couple potentially very interesting concepts - including the 7.92x41mm CETME cartridge. This round was developed by Dr. Gunther Voss, formerly of Mauser, while working with other ex-Mauser employees like Ludwig Vorgrimler for the Spanish CETME concern. They were tasked with creating a rifle which could be fired effectively from the shoulder in fully automatic and also be capable of accurate fire out to 1000 meters.
This seemingly paradoxical concept was cracked by Voss, who designed a bullet which was both light weight to minimize recoil and also had an excellent ballistic coefficient for to retain velocity at long range and - most importantly - also had enough rotational inertia to remain stable at long range. He did this by making an aluminum bullet with a copper racket only around the center portion. The jacket's primary role was to add mass at the maximum diameter of the bullet to provide more rotational inertia for the round.
This bullet and the rifle built around it (the CETME Modelo 2) did quite well in both Spanish and American testing, as were well on the way to full Spanish adoption when the NATO trials became known. Spain opted to use the new international standard cartridge, but the CETME rifle was not built to withstand the much greater recoil of the 7.62x51mm NATO cartridge. Ultimately the rifle res redesigned for handle the NATO cartridge, becoming the CETME Modelo C, but one interim solution was the development of a 7.62x51mm CETME cartridge which was dimensionally identical to the NATO round but used a much lighter 112gr bullet. This round has become the basis for a number of myths about both CETME rifles and the FR-7 and FR-8 bolt action conversions made around the same time.
Note: I recognize that my statement about the FR-7 being designed for 7.62 NATO ammunition will be controversial, but that is the best reading of historical fact I can come to. As with any surplus rifle, any FR-7 should be inspected by a qualified gunsmith before being fired.
Contact:
Forgotten Weapons
6281 N Oracle #36270
Tucson, AZ 85704
When you turn physics and metallurgy into your playthings to meet an impossible goal, and then the customer changes their mind.
Welcome to the wonderful world of mechanical engineering.
Ha I was going to make a similar comment. How annoying.
Yeah, in the engineering biz we call that "Thursday".
If there is a hell, this is the hellish kind of hell.
I just have fun imagining those nazi engineers pulling their hair when the gov' decided to "go standard at the end".
+Spring Bloom Mechanical engineering? I know this as "Dealing with the military."
Man, between this and the EM-2, NATO standardisation really killed some great guns
I know, right?
"Technically interesting."
The *best* kind of interesting.
Very cool story. I always loved the derp factor of "we, the US, insist everyone in NATO use 7.62! we are not willing to budge on this!"
....
"actually now we like 5.56"
Weird, you'd think the main reason would be extended range, after Afghanistan. As far as I know, neither can penetrate a level IV plate very effectively.
+Crazy Canadian Meh, 7,62mm is good enough against Level IV armour plating, especially if you double-tap. It may not outright kill, but I wouldn't want to be the guy being hit anyway, the power of the hit is strong enough to break bones underneath the armour, if it doesn't go through.
That said, I don't think anybody would go back to 7,62mm because of that, because nowadays it would be far easier to just develop a new specific AP cartridge for that purpose.
The Weapon Collection Except it doesn't. M2 ball is no more effective at AP than M855.
"OH it can't penetrate level IV all that well"
Yes, we should ditch the 7.62 NATO cartridge, which is already a full power and somewhat difficult cartridge to control (especially in full auto). We should outfit out soldiers with automatic 300 Win Mag rifles!
In seriousness, you have to recognize sometimes just because it can't penetrate some heavy and uncommon armor that isn't used very much, doesn't mean it's unsuitable for an infantry weapon lmao. Level IV armor is rated to stop an Armor Piercing Black Tip 30-06... So unless you want to outfit infantry men with something BIGGER than 30-06...
Well, there are .338 Norma Magnum machine guns that may be entering service...
So in short, it's just Kraut Space Magic.
Nobody expects the Spanish Space Magik!
Hasburg Space Magic
Kraut Space Magic is my favourite German techno band.
Basically
HUNteRecon
Expected the cartridge to have springs and strings inside the casing
- "Hey Hans, do you think anybody will ever care for this rifle?"
- "Nah. It'll be a forgotten weapon. You'd need someone really focused on that stuff. And to spread word he'd need sort of a movie platform, but over the telephone line.."
- "You know Hans, sometimes you're really funny."
Ha
:v
Booom 60 years later.....
Funny Farmer sometimes people forget books exist
@@scottsanders4589 Do you live in Washington by chance?
It's kind of amazing to me that "cheap Spanish steel" is a phrase when Toledo was known for high quality steel for centuries. o.o
And they made cheap very good shotguns to.
Ohio's in Spain wow ya learn something new every day
British words
it's the equivalent of made in Japan when I was a kid. we thought that meant cheap when it was anything but.
@@ProphTruth100 Ohio’s Toledo was obviously named after the old great Spanish capital
In Spain, there are many mountains, maybe they anticipated combats there, and hence the need for long range accuracy.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1582_Cagayan_battles The Spanish are ready to combat always with Few numbers
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Cartagena_de_Indias
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Bail%C3%A9n with many militia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Cerignola
Spain has BOTH kinds of (long-range) music: Country [plains] AND Western [mountains!] [w/ apologies to _The Blues Brothers_ movie... ;-) ]
He earned that Doctorate in engineering.
The most enigmatic thing about the 7.92 cetme cartridge is that the concept of using a light, long bullet, with a dense outer band in order to create a light recoiling but long-range capable bullet was not adopted by every military in the world. Something like that would have been a gift in the middle-east where engagement distances were substantially longer than the average before in history. But instead now people are developing 6.8mm to create a hybrid of 5.56 and 7.62 Nato that compromises the benefits of both systems rather than the 7.92 cetme concept that takes the benefits from both with less compromise between range and/or usability.
It wasn't a full metal jacket cartridge. Today it wouldn't be that difficult or that expensive to overcome that even for mass production.
Given the fact that all the small arms industrial capacity in the world is vested in the production of traditional projectiles, it simply isn't economically/logistically feasible to replace the current technology with what is honestly a radical departure in projectile design and composition when it doesn't offer enough performance gain over the established norm in realistic combat. That money would be much better spent on more effective force multipliers that transcend small arms like better bombs, rockets, automated weapons etc.
Very similar idea would crop up again as 5.56x38mm FABRL in 1970s.
If the military won't take it than I guess the civilians will
go check tex talk about military procurement and how corrupt it is
Before watching video: There’s no way this is an actual thing...
After hearing about it: WHY ARE WE NOT FUNDING THIS?!
After learning the reason: Of course, it had to do with 7.62 NATO...
you must have missed the first part where its mentioned that the spanish didnt have as much combat experience, a nice way of saying this is a pretty silly idea. cool engineering though
@@warshipsatin8764 Not as silly as the idea of 7.62 NATO tho thats basicly the same but in heavier and less usable in full auto for even more range.
@@warshipsatin8764 If you think the Spanish Civil War wasn't "much combat experience" you are sorely mistaken. In fact he says "didn't have the same combat experience" which means different not necessarily inferior.
The difference is that terrain in Spain is very hilly and mountainous. Making engagement ranges rather long. Terrain here has a lot more in common with Afghanistan than it does with the Central European Plain. This results in far longer engagement distances.
And if your argument is still no way you hit anything with full-auto, the same ammunition would be used with the machineguns making accuracy at long range very interesting.
Britain, Spain: Hey guys, this whole NATO standardization thing seems pretty cool. We got some pretty neat high-tech cartridges we've been tinkering around with...
US: We fucked around with some old Savage hunting cartridges. We're standardizing on this piece of garbage.
@@tomaspabon2484 Hey, if it works...
I was a conscript in Spain in 83-84 and always wandered why we had that special 7.62 CETME instead of NATO. Thanks for your info.
Pero si hiciste la Mili en los 80s no usaste el CETME C ya recamarado para el 7,62x51 mm NATO?
As usual they wanted the, as we say in german, eierlegende Wollmilchsau, the egg-laying wool-milk-sow.
What the fuck is an egg laying wool milk sow, I'm asking as an english person
@@frostedlambs The mystical farm animal which meets all demands.
And they got it, surprisingly enough.
Imagine a world were the 7.92 cartridge took off and the HK G11 wasn't cancelled. Mixing the two ideas of firing fast enough you don't feel a recoil impulse and a very low recoil cartridge would have matched up perfectly. Well I guess I'll just keep dreaming about German space guns.
Tyler Green 'Well, we can either get the g11 functioning and adopt it... Or we can rebuild Germany.' $$$
The 4.73x33mm cartidge developed for use in the G11 had a small, light weight projectile. So in this case of caseless ammunition the Cetme 7.92 projectile would add mass and recoil impulse, not lessen it. And both the ammunition and many of the components in the rifle would be heavier and bulkier. Still, it is an interesting thought. Then you'd have a bullpup rifle effective out to a 1000m.
What does this round and caseless ammo have in common? I really don't think you fully understand either of those rounds lol.
The G11 had some beastly recoil in burst fire; you can see the videos of the soldiers testing them being pushed back quite violently even whilst prone. The high RoF was meant to allow the rounds to leave the weapon before the recoil impulse hits the user.
G11 didn't "fire fast enough" so you don't feel the recoil... the ENTIRE ACTION floated inside the receiver. That's right, the barrel, breech and magazine all could move in the housing of the firearm and yes, that is exactly as complicated as it sounds. The fast firing was to fire off more than 1 shot before this whole recoilling mass bottomed out.
I don't think it would ever have worked, Cold War ending or not, it was an example of "yeah, you can build it, but can you make it work practically?"
Honestly loving this “I will sit down and tell you something” format!
Wish we could have a comparison of 7.92 CETME and .280 British, fired from the guns they were designed for and all.
Rate of fire? $20,000 per minute.
And the .276 Pedersen while you are at it. The cartridge intended for the M1 Garand until MacArthur killed it.
It would be very interresting indeed. But with the scarcity of the ammunition in question, one would have had to re manufacture a batch of rounds. It would take some eager machinist with alot of time on his hands or access to a CNC machine to turn the bullet cores, but it could be done. Also, the powder in the old cartidges could have deteriorated over time, so fresh powder that gives the same chamber pressure as the originals would have to be found.
@@havareriksen1004 not impossible but definitely expensive and a bit impractical
US really fucked it up be forcing everyone to convert or change to 7.62x51.
"Fernando, you are man now, you have to choose wife.
Will you choose:
Insane 7.92x41mm cartridges that are effective at 1000m for cetme rifle that everyone in the army loves?
or
5.56x45mm G36E that no one asked for?"
Fernando: "..."
its fun because Spanish-Made G36E actually had a heavy barrel with over-rifled bore and actually had a crazy long range up to 1000m, shorter versions or german G36 had shorter range but very flat shoot. (and uses heatsink handguard, because spanish army rifle its actually based on... MG36, not on G36)
@@SargentoDuke What caliber for the Spanish G36, first time I've heard that, thanks
@@Kz3andMore Spain use a self version of 5.56mm nato HK-G36 but with the heavy barrel over-rifled as you can get on the USA civilian SL-8 or had the MG36 machinegun version, basically all spanish made HK G36 are MG36 (even with a metal heatsink on the handguard), not standart Hecker&Koch G36 that had problems. But "heavy barrel" G36E(spain)/MG36/SL8 had so much rifling so it had absurd range but the trajectory isnt flat. Best regards.
@@SargentoDuke Thanks for the info man!
quick, go tell the joint chiefs that their mythical "ballistic overmatch" was met by Kraut space magic in the early 1950s
This sounds like it would be the perfect LMG cartidge
Nadie de Interés Thema Look Up MG 34 anderen MG 42 cardrige
nurox3 Mg34 and 42 fire 7.92x57
Maybe needs more mass for amry bros to be happy
@@frostedlambs I dunno, they seem to run 62gr 5.56 often enough.
This is the greatest mysterious cartridge of all time.
The concept sounds like a bloody dream comes true for fighting in Afghanistan.
amin johari yeah. A full auto rifle effective for 1000 meters is not really necessary for a all out world war where everywhere is on fire, but for small scale conflict it is quite reasonable.
bilibiliism ?...
+Jonathan He refers to the difficulties that arise from irregular warfare. Let's say you're a guerilla unit commander and had the decision over how to engage your enemy (and all the intel to know how your enemy is equipped right now), you'd pick a situation your enemy is neither prepared nor properly equipped for. Additionally, kill rates go down significantly for attackers at longer ranges (if you manage to keep the initiative before your enemy regroups) - this means drastically lower casualties on the attacker's side.
With this knowledge in mind, it becomes clear why every involved Western nation brought back battle rifles and marksman rifles in relatively large numbers pretty quickly into the Afghanistan conflict, as their assault rifles turned out to be inferior at the distances required and in the combat environment of Afghanistan.
+bilibiliism
Nothing new. its what they were trying to do with the FG42. Essentially a sniper machinegun.
Mirdarion i wasn't questioning the first comment about Afghanistan. I was questioning the second comment why having a round thats effective up to 1000m is a negative. It just means you can be effective up to 1000m and in between which is a positive especially in open long range mountain firefights. Its like saying a faster car is a bad thing.
Nice video on the mythical CETME! The reason for long range is due to Spanish geography: Spain is one of the most mountainous countries in Europe, and long range is very useful in this kind of terrain. Either if you fire upwards or from hill to hill, it comes very handy. That's why also the Spanish Army has always been fond of the .50 caliber machine-gun, to the point they thought of using the .50 cal machine-guns from the shelved M-48's on the Leopard2E pint mount. On the end they decided it was better to not add another cartridge to the tank's logistics and keep two MG3 on it.
Ian, you should make a "Forgotten Cartridges" playlist and do more of these kind of videos. As fascinating as I find the history of gun development, I think I like the stories of these lost cartridges even more.
Ian, the early CETME 7.92x40 and 41 were actually used in a small conflict we had in Sidi-Ifni. The terminal ballistics were quite impressive but there were some british complaints that this proyectile breached the Geneva conventions on inhumane proyectiles. Also Franco wanted to join Nato and adopting 7.62x51 Nato was a necessity. After models 1and 2 came models A and B in 7.62Nato. the later two models were very problemátic. I know a gunsmith who participated in the trials and he told me they had terrible problems handling the pressure at first and the catridges needed greasing.I have some early bolts I have to insoect
Someone should recreate this cartridge.
No guns to put it in
Thomas Jackson just rebarrel a bolt action
The wizard how so? Take a long action savage, build a barrel with the proper chamber ,and the rest is bolt head and magazine.
The wizard no worse than some of the wildcats floating around.
Make it in an existing caliber.
Load it telescoping in the existing cartridge.
Then it will work (enough) to play with.
Thinking back at the whole .308 / .280 / M-14 / FN FAL debacle, and finding out that Aberdeen had tested the CETME 7.92x41 in early 1950s, make me understand the expression "fury of the powerless". A few dusty mummies in the US Ordnance, well and truly deprived of their brains, determine that modern soldiers must be competition target shooters, ignores 60+ years of technical experiments, including its own ( .276 Pedersen) and two world wars worth of combat experience, and lo and behold a dozen or so major military powers are railroaded into a beyond sub-optimal equipment choice. That done they manage to make an ash of their own rifle choice, the M-14. They waste 10 to 15 years to develop it when down to heel Italians manage that in 5, for about half the production price, with the BM-59. It is said that Jean-Paul Sartre relieved himself on the grave of a writer he deeply despised. I feel the same for those characters that determined that .308 was a great choice for a select fire rifle.
Just think, all that time spent on the EM-1 and its relatives, wasted.
Dedfaction Rather not. I do not want to get in a hissy fit. I already made a positive effort non to lard my previous post with expletives in 3 languages ...
Wait until you have to carry linked 7.62 NATO as part of a gun team in a Weapons Squad in a Light Infantry, Airborne, or Airmobile unit. Loads of fun! We used to frequently find piles of linked 7.62 NATO that AGs, and ABs had dumped from their rucks at night while moving through the woods.
Well, I was just an humble REMF during my National service time. My max load was - I think - 6 or 4 clips for my Garand, plus the mandatory bayonet. My march basically consisted of walking round the perimeter of the barrack a few times over the 48H sentinel duty, perhaps 1km altogether. That said, I can see that your outfit was laxer than us on how we treated ammo. A missing round for us meant a swift move through court martial, 3-6 months brig experience, to be capped by spending the remainder of the national service period in a punishment barrack in some Devilforsaken shithole. We were bloody well careful around our handful of 7.62x51mm rounds. For what was worth, I wish we were given a PM12S with a couple of magazines, rather than those beaten up Garand with the reduced charge 7.62s.
I was in 7 different Combat Arms units. I never saw one of my ABs or AGs dump rounds from the ruck, but found several piles in different training areas. These were blanks, not live rounds. Even the blanks weigh so much that you end up with a spine-crushing ruck. When I did my time as an AG, we didn't have any ABs, so I got to carry the combat load in ammo plus tripod, T&E, pintle, Steiner binos, and my packing list. It required my Weapons Squad Leader and Gunner both to lift me up after I had donned my ruck on the ground.
We normally expended all of our live ammo, so I never saw things escalate to Judicial Punishment. My point is that 7.62 NATO is too heavy of a round to carry practically by dismounted Infantry in any significant round count, especially for gun teams and riflemen. Even 5 x 20rd mags of 7.62 NATO is very heavy and bulky for a rifleman to carry. The Army Ordnance Board refused to learn the lessons that had already been learned in The Great War, which drove the development of the .276 Pedersen, and continued to insist on a .30 caliber, high pressure cartridge with over 40gr of case volume. This is a recipe for reduced combat endurance for any dismounted unit trying to prosecute the fight and maneuver.
So this is where the urban myth of Spanish Mauser's that where converted to 7.62 nato not being able to handle 7.62 nato comes from
This is a fascinating cartridge. This is why i watch Forgotten Weapons and became a Patron.
Thanks!
Back when Germany didn’t need 10 years to build an airport
Kriegt nen Like
At this point, I think it is safe to say that the Ordnance Board was bordering on self-sabotage with their absurd insistence on 7.62. It left a trail of great weapons in its path.
The more I learn about the ordnance board, the more I start to think that self-sabotage is their goal.
I'm truly amazed and glad that there's a lot of people that actually like "weird" calibers and accept the fact that they could've done better than the standard calibers. Even more glad to see that the spanish guns are appreciated from outside my country.
Ian not only did copper add weight but prevent aluminum friction welds which is just as bad if not worse that lead only ammo fouling in modern rifles.
Miguel Hernandez he did sortof allude to the idea of aluminum in a steel barrel being a not good solution, but you are correct as to why that is.
Aluminum is a sticky metal.
Scott Watrous he did a little. I just feel like it wasn't really said so I just had to say it. Lol.
aluminium also forms oxide on the surface wich is pretty hard stuff, not much softer than diamond. probably not good for the rifling ;)
I can't even tell you how much aluminum I've had to sandblast off of steel engine cylinders, not to mention how long it took at times. Couldn't use a hone until it was all blasted off because the aluminum would melt from the friction and fill into the porous surface of the hone, then cool which both ruined the hone stones and could possibly deposit more aluminum into the steel cylinder should you not change them out immediately. Aluminum is an absolute shit show if it gets imbedded in steel lol.
Honestly this is my favorite idea that never really got explored enough
This is probably the most fascinating Forgotten Weapons video in a long, long time. And that's saying a hell of a lot.
As a spanish guy , with a father who perform military service (for me is not longer mandatory like in the past) I always listen to history's about the Cetme and it's durability .
I don't even think it was so unique in terms of ballistic and design.
Yo hice el "servicio militar en 1979 . Utilice el CETME C de 7.62x51 . FANTASTICO . Agrupaba a 100m. muy bien .
Yo con el L ya de profesional y era una grandiosa porquería. Luego pase al G36 y al fin un fusil militar de verdad. Pero te aseguro que la ergonomía me parece muy pobre. Demasiado tocho. En cambio la ergonomía de un M16 es magnifica
Thank you! I can't tell you how many times I've had to correct people on the Spanish Mausers. It's all a bunch of fuddlore. You didn't even touch on those that say 7.62CETME is a lower pressure cartridge. IT'S NOT. It's only a lower recoiling round.
The Spanish Manual for these rifles lists the pressures for the CETME round at 3,300 kg/cm2 and 3,500 kg/cm2 for the NATO round. That’s 47,000 PSI and 50,000 PSI. Santa Barbara arsenal, which made the rounds lists the pressure for both at 3,500 kg/cm2. 7.62CETME using flake powder that dumps all of it's energy at once, while 7.62NATO used extruded powder that builds up pressure over time.
When you listed the requirements I couldn't help but to think of the FG-42. It pretty much does everything they needed a gun to do and a whole lot more while avoiding the trans-sonic problem altogether (at least for 1000m+ ranges).
Now, I'm not sure how well one could fire an FG-42 from the shoulder in full auto, but it does have some rather effective recoil compensating features, so I guess it might work.
The problem is that FG-42 was a specialty weapon, so it also had some individual freedoms, for example being almost prohibitively expensive. As fine as that piece of German engineering is (And as we both undoubtedly agree, a damn fine piece it is), it required skilled workforce and was not well-suited for standard issue duty. The Spanish were looking for exactly that, a standard rifle.
Because of its innovative straight-line stock and excellent muzzle brake, the FG42 could be fired in full-auto - but it was very hard to control, thanks to the powerful 7.92x57 cartridge. No surprise, right? The paratroopers preferred to use them in semi-auto, with occasional use in full rock-and-roll mode, and then only in short, controlled bursts to avoid overheating the barrel.
I'd like to see the penetration potential for a round like this at various distances and how this stacks up against different levels of armor. The aluminum seems like a very interesting concept b/c it's light and it can be made to be pretty hard. So you have the increased speed/hyper velocity and the hardness of the bullet compared to a lead bullet that is much slower and softer but higher density. This would be very interesting comparison for some channels!
I've been shooting my M1916 Spanish Mauser in 7.62 Nato since I first purchased it back in the early 1980s with absolutely no signs of over pressure. I have a letter from back then from the NRA verifying that the weak Spanish Mauser scare was just a myth, and their tests proved it. Today I like to shoot mainly cast bullet loads at 7mm Mauser pressures but just to lessen leading, not due to any over pressure fears.
Like how the new gun wall makes a nice background.
Fascinating! I know that was the odd cut but it still amazes me that Ian can talk expertly and fluently about a subject for so long, when I would be tripping over myself after about 30 seconds
I've always wondered why many were so set on the .30 and above calibers post war. Seems so obvious in hindsight to merely scale it down. Nice to see another cartridge video, very interesting.
I think it was mostly the higher ups being resistant to change, would make a good video subject for Inrange or Forgotten weapons to cover though, If they could get the right people to interview, that in it's self would be a minor miracle bringing in Sociologists, psychologists and the right military peoples. but i think both Ian and Karl have enough on their plates for that video in any real depth
Part of the reasoning is logistics - if you continue to turn out .30 cal, that is a significant investment in new calibre barrel, bullet etc. machinery you do NOT have to make. If you want to criticise the decision of the US not to downscale from .30 cal, you also have to criticise the USSR. Of course that was no reason not to go to a lighter bullet at lower velocity (which the USSR *did* do), but that's another discussion.
The thinking behind the .30 Cal Light Rifle was they wanted streamlined logistics without losing performance from what the M-1 Garand and M1919 Machine-guns offered, but wanted more mobility and increased firepower for the riflemen and machine gunners.
Instead of fielding a weapons mix of .45 ACP M3 and M1928 SMGs, .30 Cal M1 Carbines, .30 Cal Rifle Garands, .30 Cal Rifle BARs, and .30 Cal Rifle M1919 MGs, they figured they could encompass all of these weapons into 3 shoulder-fired weapons firing the same cartridge. These would be:
M14 7.62 NATO for Riflemen and everyone else
M14A1 7.62 NATO Automatic Rifle to replace the BAR
M60 GPMG to replace the M1919
All 3 weapons were horrible failures, with the M14 being quickly replaced with the AR15 (M16/M16A1), but the malfunction-prone M60 unfortunately lived on into the 1990s and early 2000s. I used the M60 extensively in several light Infantry units, and we always had issues with them. "Ca-chunk" was a common FTFire mode of that system, along with FTExtract and FTEject. It was the most handy to carry GPMG I've ever used because of the half-bullpup layout and comfortable handguard, but they just didn't run.
the soviets sawed a mosin nagant barrel into two and voila, two ppsh barrels.
Excellent video, Ian. I like how you ignored not having an example rifle to show (what are there, a handful of prototypes all in Spain?) but just went ahead and gave us a lot of technical and historical detail on this fascinating development project.
The CETME Modelo 2 in 7.92×41 in full auto shooting targets at 1000 meters away would be a great experience.
This is a fascinating story to me. Thank you very much.
Those requirements really sound like the Spanish government was just taking the piss, man.
the philosophy of this cartridge reminds me a lot of the 90gr 224 valkyire and 7mm-08 cartridges
During this time in France, we're not even allowed to own one .22 bullet, and my great father, descendent from a hunters family, is technically outlaw because of owning the 150 y.o. black powder double barrelled hunting rifle of his ancestors
Only rich people can own guns here
www.armes-ufa.com/spip.php?article1406
Ian,
Great Piece! I just finished a 7.62x41 cetme clone (.30BRX wildcat chamber) for an AR15 based off this piece on the original 8x41CETME. lovely rifle. very accurate and fun.
Diy aluminum ammo?
@@thekraken1173 I reload with cast bullets and swaged brass jacketed bullets with lead cores and compressed aluminum foil in the tips of the jackets. I’m not setup to make aluminum cores out of solid aluminum .
@@brucedrake5493 Thanks for the answer
I love the little teaser nuggets on the gun wall you leave for observant viewers
I've been eyeing off that airborne MAS 36 for the last few videos.
I watched it when this video first came out, and it's still one of the most fascinating stories I've seen or heard, and has stuck in my head, through the years. It has that feel, that it's so absurd, that it has to be real. Real genius and brilliance colliding with bureaucracy. Thank you again Ian, for sharing it with us!
I love these videos because it makes me admire all the engineering beauty behind what looks like a simple, weird cartridge. You do a great job at showing the complexity and the beauty behind the engineering, Ian. Very nice!
Really enjoy all the info on older and sometimes obscure weapons, and how some evolved into weapons we know today. Keep up the great work!
"We don't want nice things."
-Spaniards, probably
"This is too good, we don't deserve it"
Spaniards?
Indeed. We need efective ones... "Nice" is secondary.
que dices de tu madre,que no te gusta?
well, if you can go along with a speacial cartridge only produced in your country when all of the NATO countries goes with the standart cartridge
despite how good your new redesigned space-age cartridge is.
Ian. I thought that was a very interesting story. Thanks for the obscure history. I knew the CETME and FR-8 did indeed fire the 7.62 NATO round but had no idea of this intermediate round that they considered prior to being bullied into the full power NATO cartridge. Good story and articulated well. Thanks again
Wow, now I know what the "Maxximum Effective" range is determined by- the transition of the bullet to subsonic speeds....
The way you can go through he entire history of a product is amazing. Well done you have a great mind and they way you can convey info is just awesome. great story thanks!
I need that sweatshirt
shop.bbtv.com/collections/forgotten-weapons/products/forgotten-weapons-black-hoodie
Forgotten Weapons Thanks Ian, I just completed my order, you are the best
Need another design in there for the Finns as well as the cool existing patterns.
@@ForgottenWeapons Ian, about the "R" on the selector in automatic assault rifles made in Spain or México, it does not mean "rápido" (quick), but "ráfaga" (burst.), just like in italian "raffica", used in the designation of the Beretta 93R, which is also automatic.
7:15 Not a bad estimate, assuming the numbers are right, the recoil impulse goal was 65% of the original NATO 7.62
Fascinating ,.. just fascinating, the vast plethora of knowledge you entail in these ballistic lectures. I cant get enough.
That's a brilliantly designed cartridge.
Last comment - "It is in fact one of many potentially interesting ideas that met their dooms in the hands of American Insistence on a cartridge that had all of the power of original .30-06 springfield."
*facepalm*
Johny_Baba Well what would you expect? It's the USA after all
Wish Murica had never messed up such innovative rounds by forcing 7.62 x 51mm on NATO.I knew about .280/30 British but this one is quite disheartening.
Ha ha ha. Was Laughing. In fact as far as I'm concerned USA insisted not only for one cartridge for NATO but for one rifle as well, and of course M14. It occured then, that FN FAL is way better in many aspects and it required solid "interpratation" of the test results to decide that M14 will be used in US Army.
What rogues of that Belgians to be sure. Design better rifle for US Cartridge than USA itself.
What I find incredibly funny and amusing, is the fact that after all this pressures and impositions which "doomed other interesting ideas" forcing all Nato countries to expend the limited resources at the time in a 7.62 rifle, shortly after the U.S Military suddenly said: "Sorry guys it seems we got it wrong after all; a intermediate cartridge, 5.56, is much better. We are changing".
6.8
Great history lesson!! We need to redevelop this round!
Brilliant job by the engineers in figuring out how to make the seemingly impossible possible. I imagine the 7.92x41 would have been quite expensive though.
With modern optics pushing the effective engagement distances further and further I could imagine something like this being considered again though.
Fascinating. Thanks for the comprehensive feature, from historical setting to developmental milestones.
Great video. Just one correction. Civil guard is not national guard. It's a paramilitary police force depending on our ministry of interior during times of peace and depending on our mod in cases of war, seige, or foreign missions.
"Did you see those warriors from Hammerfell? they've got curved swords. curved swords!" sorry i couldn't resist after hearing "you can recognize the early CETME's by their curved magazines."
Awesome video!
Really appreciate the time you take to make these episodes
Yet another EXCELLENT offering illustrating that thinking outside of the box can bring surprising results! Thanks!
Sounds like its perfect for that NGSW program.
Not only I watch and like your videos, I love you because you use metric system. Ian, the Gun Jesus
I really enjoyed this video. You should make more cartridge videos! Awesome job Ian
I love your videos so much! Very inspiring that you do this by yourself. Thank you for sharing your knowledge and expertise with us
Being from Spain I like this kind of trivia, it reminds me of the spanish rail width, which is wider than the rest of Europe by virtue of needing bigger locomotives to have enough power to deal with the altitudes problems when tunneling was not an option. This cartridge seems to deal with the same situations, this place is a geographical mess.
Very interesting. Great info. I knew the basic story of the rifle development, but not much about the cartridge. It does sound innovative and effective. So many things that could have been if Rene Studler had not been so hidebound on the 308. A CETME rifle in 280 British would have been very interesting as well. Great video as always. Thank you
Would love to see some real testing of this concept and design against other modern more common cartridges. Great video and one hell of a forgotten weapon.
What a different firearms world we'd be in today if the original Spanish CETME had come to fruition, and intrigued the United States. Lighter rifles, light ammunition, 1000 ytd accuracy...
This gun sounds incredible. I wonder what it would look like today
You should do a video on the French Très Haute Vitesse (THV) armor piercing rounds. Some people say they're armor piercing, but then others say they dump their energy immediately and won't over-penetrate soft targets either. They look really wicked, with their reverse-tapered tip.
R. H. There nuts I've seen clay test with them
As always most informative. I enjoy the history that you present.
Wonderful video Ian, I love the history in your videos. Thumbs up
He's basically talking Swahili to me but I still love watching lol
This is really interesting. You can really make some strange and cool stuff if you impose heavy constraints.
While on the subject: Any chance of that telescoping ammo video? :)
I learn so much from your videos. Teh are a treat to me. Keep up the good work!
Love the new wall. Looks slick.
Thank you for the video, history of my country. We call it the "Chopo"
Only reason I can see to discontinue that cartridge and adopting the NATO is in case of war getting supplies from third countries.
So they built a thin-shaped, lightweight flywheel
I always enjoy ur content along these lines, keep it up sir
Masterful as always.
I can imagine the projectile for that ammo would be fairly expensive.
Depends on the production method
With all the effort to create "long range intermediate cartridges" today, I'm guessing the only reason no one is digging up this concept today is because it would be difficult to fit in an AR magazine.
ian please do more cartridge videos this was awesome and a very interesting subject thank you very much btw i advertise your channel to all my friends in the chat rooms
Excellent video, thank you.
The cartridge blueprints look like a 6.5grendel on steroids.
I was asking myself during a past video already, what is that weird rifle with the metal (or metal encased) butt stock? And great, very informative video, as always. :)
Robin Schuhmacher Pretty sure it's a MAS with a folding metal stock for paratroopers. Stock is hollow and open on the bottom, and folds under and over the bottom of the rifle.
norwegianwiking Thanks for the reply! Now that I knew what I was looking for I found a couple of photos, never seen that thing before. Weird and cool, classic Forgotten Weapons stuff. :D
It's called CR39
Also with a clockwork-ish gadget retracts the sling when folding up the stock, it would be really nice to take a look at that.
I seriously had no idea, a great video
Ballisticaly elegant ... that’s great GJ
How awesome would it be if they stuck with the original aluminum projectile
Hi, one wonders what the terminal ballistics of this projectile would of bee! Would it have drilled a neat hole being long and high velocity or would it have become unstable and tumbled soon after impact and been a very effective round given a tumbling and breaking up long high velocity round would cause huge tissue damage. Its armour piercing ability I think would have been low! Thoughts?
That cartridge sounds like a really well thought out concept, of course you couldn’t use aluminum anymore but a similar density cheaper material with the copper band with less recoil than 7.62 NATO and supersonic out to at least 1000 yards, hell I’d jump on that train!
Knowledge bomb! Kappow! I love this type of stuff!
Thank you for sharing this information.