Author Topic: New Military Caliber Being Tested-  (Read 2891 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Henry Bowman

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 80
New Military Caliber Being Tested-
« on: January 25, 2003, 11:25:38 AM »
Evan Marshall let the new slip that the Army is testing a new wildcat 6.8 caliber based on the 5.56 NATO.
It sure sounds like someone stole JDs 7mm TCU!??

Offline Graybeard

  • Administrator
  • Trade Count: (69)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26939
  • Gender: Male
New Military Caliber Being Tested-
« Reply #1 on: January 25, 2003, 12:37:34 PM »
The TCUs aren't JD's rounds. His all are JDJs.

The TCUs are Thompson Center Uglade for a man named Wes Uglade that came up with them for all to enjoy. They could sure do a lot worse than the little 7 TCU. I love that little round and it really works well.


GB


Bill aka the Graybeard
President, Graybeard Outdoor Enterprises
256-435-1125

I am not a lawyer and do not give legal advice.

Jesus is the way, the truth, and the life anyone who believes in Him will have everlasting life!

Offline Daveinthebush

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1732
Heard that too...
« Reply #2 on: January 25, 2003, 02:01:16 PM »
I remember reading a few months ago in a news article that some US troops in Afganistan were complaining that it sometimes took more than one bullet to knock the enemy down and to keep him down.  

I have known know this since I was in the Jewel of the Orient back in 1970-72.  If it did not work then, why would it now?

Jeff Cooper once suggested the .243 or the 7mm/08 as a better choice. He has a point and it seems that the military is now listening to someone.

It will be interesting to see what developes from this. At least it will give us some new rifle calibers and military rifles to play with.
AK Bowhunting Certification Instructor
AK Hunter Certification Instructor
IBEP Bowhunting Certification Instructor

Offline Matt in AK

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 457
9mm
« Reply #3 on: January 25, 2003, 05:31:22 PM »
Sure wish they'd get rid of the 9mm Beretta while they're at it...or at least let us carry a 45 (1911 would be nice).  I chose my .38 over my 9mm  first time I went to the Middle-East.  Just don't like that Beretta or the cartridge it carries.
Isaiah 6:8

Offline Nobade

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1927
New Military Caliber Being Tested-
« Reply #4 on: January 26, 2003, 02:32:01 AM »
Maybe they'll decide to go to a real rifle cartridge, say a 7.62X51 or something novel like that.
"Give me a lever long enough, and a place to stand, and I'll break the lever."

Offline myronman3

  • Moderator
  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4837
  • Gender: Male
dont hold your breath...
« Reply #5 on: January 26, 2003, 07:37:48 AM »
on the 7.62 coming back.   too heavy.  now before ANYONE rips on me hear me out.  the standard load is 210 rounds of 5.56 ball.   we always carried 4 times that(and that was for the riflemen).  i wont even start on what the crew served weapons load was.  a round that puts down(and keeps down) is great,  but keep in mind that a joe has to carry all that up and down the mountain, through the desert,  on his back while swimming, and every other $*!@hole you cant imagine.   the requirements are grueling,  and let your mouth not run unless you been there, done that(i am sure many have been).   i aint saying that a more powerful round isnt needed, i believe it is;  but i know that with a solid hit  the 5.56 takes the fight out of a person really quick ( speaking from experience ).   i would think that a light 6mm or maybe even a 7 would be the ticket.  alot of me wonders about the military's decision to go with the short barreled m16 carbine.  i dont think it is a viable STANDARD battle rifle.   great for squad leaders on up;  but not the line.   as a last thought,  keep in mind that the recruits the military gets today are not experienced riflemen.   they are folks from all over,  most having never shot a gun before.  it takes alot of training to master a bigger round like the 7.62 and the budgeting just aint there.   that is the reason the m16 is such a success:  it is really an easy rifle to master, and there is no recoil.   all that said,  i still would like to see a more powerful round get the nod.  jsut keep the weight down.   and would  REALLY  like to see the 9mm tossed out and the 45 brought back.

Offline Robert

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1618
I agree with Myroman, great post...I aint been there but...
« Reply #6 on: January 26, 2003, 03:24:29 PM »
Small cartridge/large caliber....might as well train a bunch of kids with bows and arrows because that is what they would need to learn...Archery. They just dont take the time to try and train these kids for trajectory with  heavy caliber bullets and a small powder charge.  Yes, a well trained sniper, these might be great.  But some young kid that never shot a rifle before enlisting and couldnt care about  learning about what a bullet does between 50 to 400 yds.....You better give him the fastest, flattest shooting rifle possible or we are going to have a bunch of dead kids.
....make it count

Offline KING

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 632
New Military Caliber Being Tested-
« Reply #7 on: January 26, 2003, 05:08:24 PM »
:-)   Greetings guys.  Thgat little 5.56 will do what ya want it to do.   As long as ya dont bite off too much.  I heard that they were experimenting with some rounds also,but I heard it was a hyper vel. round in the area of a 4.5mm(pushing 5000fps).  The soldiers of today have not handled firearms before the got into the military,and hence,are not familiar with them as some of us older guys might be.  They need that fast little round cause it does not have any holdover.  Put the sight on the bad guys chest and its a good hit out to about 300 yards,might be inna pelvic  area,but still the bad guys is down and otta action for the time being.  king
THE ONLY FEMALE THAT I TRUST IS A LABRADOR.......AND SHE DONT SNOORE,AND DONT COMPLAIN ABOUT MY COOKING...THE ONLY GODS THAT EXIST ARE THOSE THAT HAVE ONE IN THE CHAMBER,AND 19 IN THE MAG.......

Offline JeffG

  • Trade Count: (5)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1503
  • Gender: Male
New Military Caliber Being Tested-
« Reply #8 on: February 07, 2003, 04:39:35 PM »
5.56 is the all purpose anti personnel round for me, Police work, Military anything.  The only exception I would make for that, is sniping.  When people started needing 350 rounds a night for a firefight (1968)  the 308 became a squad automatic, and sniping round. Then, the more .308 you have it, the better.  
One of the biggest reasons is wound channel ballistics.  That "varmint" round has the temporary wound channel of an NFL football, the 308 in FMJ is still considered a "leaking" wound to trauma surgeons.  Great if you want to draw Osama's buddies into the open for a rescue.  Not necessarily incapacitating.  A chest wound centered with the 5.56 makes blood pudding out of the heart, liver,and lights.  Seen it. Done it. My 2 cents... :D
Young guys should hang out with old guys; old guys know stuff

Offline willis5

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 489
New Military Caliber Being Tested-
« Reply #9 on: February 16, 2003, 07:27:09 PM »
in reply to the comment about kids not knowing what the balistics are for longer ranges.

What is the average range of combat for say some grunt in the sand over in the middle east? If it isn't over 100 yards near those caves, I vote for a round that is a little larger. If the ranges are long... smaller and fast for those kids that don't know how to shoot.
what do you guys think?

Cheers,
Willis5
Cheers,
Willis5

Offline S.S.

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2840
All in the Rifling!
« Reply #10 on: February 17, 2003, 08:19:16 AM »
The first Combat trials of the 5.56x45 were
"VERY" positive. This was due to the slow twist
in the rifling that MATTELL equipped their rifles with.
The speedy little 5.56 was quite unstable in flight.
Therefore it tumbled very easily upon impact.
Accuracy left a lot to be desired though.
When the rifling was "tightened up", The
accuracy increased and the tumbling decreased!
More accuracy, Less wounding ability!
Seems that there is no happy medium with this round.
In this case I think change would be good!
Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit
"A wise man does not pee against the wind".

Offline Holiday

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 474
  • Gender: Male
    • http://home.bellsouth.net/p/PWP-holidayhayes
New Military Caliber Being Tested-
« Reply #11 on: February 17, 2003, 09:23:42 AM »
It doesn't matter what round you use, when you have to use a full metal jacket round you are going to have problems. The rules of war such as the Geneva and Hauge Conventions forbid expanding ammo. Increasing to a 6mm or 7mm round will do little to help. I have even heard of the larger 7.62X39mm Soviet round as having problems and it is a .30 caliber! If our troops could use a hollow point or soft point type bullet, I would dare say very few Taliban would get up. But this will never happen. Think about it. If you shoot a deer with a FMJ, what happens? Generally, it will run off and has to be tracked. Often, it will even get away and heal, if the wound isn't in a kill area. In fact, FMJ ammo is illegal in most places for deer hunting. But the dang Europeans have straddled us with this type of ammo, so we will just have to make do.
Holiday Hayes
Darksider, Gunfighter
"Just a simple Cowboy, tryin' ta git along"

Offline myronman3

  • Moderator
  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4837
  • Gender: Male
good point holiday..
« Reply #12 on: February 17, 2003, 05:21:24 PM »
a better bullet would do wonders on people.   problem being,  in combat,  you aint always shooting people.   sometimes apc's,  sometimes through kevlar,  sometimes through walls,  you get the picture.   the twist rate was really high in the m16 when i was in.  i want to say 1 in 8 or maybe even 1 in 7 (been a few years).  the point is that with all that spin,  when it hits,  it does some crazy $*&^!!  it aint exactly a pass thru.  there are so many factors to consider,   but i still say a hit is better than a miss and stand by the 5.56 (a.k.a. 223)

Offline willis5

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 489
New Military Caliber Being Tested-
« Reply #13 on: February 18, 2003, 07:49:36 AM »
These fmj rounds are designed not to kill. or they would go with larger and or expanding bullets right?

These "conventions" have rules that protect and hinder saftey in battle situations I can imagine. I have not been in a battle situation, but I would like some imput from some of you who have experianced these fmj's and other rules. Do they help keep war "humane" or do they hurt us by not giving us enough to defend ourselves?
Cheers,
Willis5

Offline myronman3

  • Moderator
  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4837
  • Gender: Male
rules, shmules.
« Reply #14 on: February 18, 2003, 12:20:40 PM »
there is only one rule.  win.   the geneva convention is as limp as the u.n.  you start paying attention to those and the next thing you know your dead.   do what yu have to in order to survive.    you think the enemy is following them?   my message to all those who would impose limitations    ( if they could ) is " try to stop us.  what are you going to do about it?  if you cant make some p*$$ant like saddam obey,  what you going to do to us?   it is high time we told some of the less loyal elements to kiss off.   any country (whether they owe us their freedom or not [or even if they would be decent enough to remember it] ) that thinks we answer to them, i say  " come get some ".    that is what their rules mean to me.

Offline dragthewaters

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 122
New Military Caliber Being Tested-
« Reply #15 on: February 20, 2003, 01:20:23 PM »
i forget were, but i have seen that a 5.56 round is a good round in war because, it is worse on your opponent to have wounded than dead, they must take care of their wounded, nad must walk into, obviously the line of fire to get them, is this a fact or opinion?, i dont really know, but it makes sense
i dont think the 5.56 is the best though, i think we should have somthing bigger, it just dont seem right that our militarys' bullets, whitch are used to kill 150-200 pound men, is the same bullet that is chosen among varminters that kill animals that weigh 20-100 pounds :)  :? , i know it will kill much bigger animals, but will they get away? :?

Offline TopGun

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 223
223 and 9mm
« Reply #16 on: February 23, 2003, 01:24:29 PM »
I agree with most. It's (AR Rifle) not the best, but I think the rifle/ctg combo is easy to teach, train, and shoot. Please guide me to your dump site-I want to collect all the AR-15's you throw away. I think the same is true for the M92. a guy can carry ready to go with a loaded gun and 2 hi-cap mags and be ready to fight. It's fast into action, very managable recoil, and believe it or not, I think it's faster for a second shot follow-up. Now you're going to say you don't need a 2nd shot with a 45? You know as well as I do a hit in marginal hit with a 45 is just that, and the gun can be tough to use unless you use it alot. There are alot of guys out there with CCW permiits that DO NOT practice enough! I don't think any of you guys really want to get shot in the chest with a 9mm 125gr hollow point? I know I don't. I compete IDPA and IPSC stock with a M92FS and it is a very competitive gun. I don't win all the time, nor have I ever finished last, and I am one of the few using the 9mm gun. some use SA's, Kimbers, and Baers. The 92 always feeds and ejects, unless I have the only 92 from the factory that does? Unlike the reports I've read, I have no frame or slide cracks and I have shot it over 4000 (US MIL Hardball) times this year alone! I have a Kimber 45 and I love it, and I understand its merits as a personal self-defense gun. I carry it at times. that being said, I'm willing to bet the Beretta has seen very little actual firing in the gulf, Afganistan, or anywhere else. Maybe never in a real Military fire-fight? Nor would it have been if it was a .45! War has changed! USMC and Seal's use the M14 and rightfully so. I really think it comes down to the dinky, liberal, non-gun, non-shooting enthusiasts that get sucked into our Armed forces. They go in today planning on training, or being trained for a job or career, not a war.   Rifles are an afterthought. The M4 is even a worse compromise. It's harder to shoot than the standard AR. But the grunt can carry lots of suppressive ammo for missing! It's just my views.  Beware-the black helicopters are coming!
The first shot is the best shot, it may be your only shot!  Do it with a single-shot.
NRA Life Member 1980
HHI Member #2933
NAHC Life Member
RMEF Member

Offline jerrl

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 28
new mil round
« Reply #17 on: February 25, 2003, 11:22:22 AM »
I've heard the next step will be lighter and faster yet.  I have also heard the next big step will be "smart" bullets out of something like the M203 that will "hunt & Kill."  I can tell you though from first hand knowledge that there are dang few folks that would trade their mouse gun in for an AK either in 7.62 or 5.45.  I can also tell you from first hand knowledge the M-14 or the M1A ain't all that it is cracked up to be and had more than it's fair share of problems in S/E Asia.  A dirty M-14 is just as apt to have problems as a dirty M-16 plus the fact on full auto the 7.62 M-14 is a joke.  When the "mouse gun" was first introduced, nobody understood it.  That is not the case today.
Sometimes you eat the bear.  Sometimes the bear eats you.

Offline williamlayton

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15415
New Military Caliber Being Tested-
« Reply #18 on: March 03, 2003, 02:21:11 PM »
the one really good thing about the 16---they didn't charge ya for the bullets and you could get all ya wanted.
blessings
TEXAS, by GOD

Offline DoubleA

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 56
New Military Caliber Being Tested-
« Reply #19 on: March 05, 2003, 07:18:07 AM »
My question is why can't we use expanding bullets against non citizens, while police force in the country can use expanding bullets against our citizens??  No offense to the police, I support them in using exploding bullets against bad guys if that's what they need, I'm just saying that our military should be able to use whatever they need too.  I'm sure that some special ops folks use whatever they need, so our normal troops should have some options as well.
DoubleA

Offline Holiday

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 474
  • Gender: Male
    • http://home.bellsouth.net/p/PWP-holidayhayes
New Military Caliber Being Tested-
« Reply #20 on: March 05, 2003, 08:31:58 AM »
Double A, it has to do with the Geneva and Hague conventions that the US and most nations signed years ago. Police forces are not subject to these rules as they ar technically civilian orginizations. Useing expanding ammo in combat is technically a war crime. Screwwed up, ain't it?
Holiday Hayes
Darksider, Gunfighter
"Just a simple Cowboy, tryin' ta git along"

Offline JeffG

  • Trade Count: (5)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1503
  • Gender: Male
New Military Caliber Being Tested-
« Reply #21 on: March 10, 2003, 01:56:37 PM »
Ok, my turn... :grin:

The .223/5.56 was chosen for its weight and logistical convenience.  The high cyclic rate made it easier to perform sugmachine gun-like functions such as area contamination and ambush suppresive fire.  (does anyone do the figure 8 or Rhodesian 7 anymore??)
It was incidental that the round had HUGE wound channels, both temporary and permanent.  Enemy soldiers were seen to have a red mist emmiting from chest wounds at the point of bullet impact... The same round punched through light sheet steel and auto glass...oh yes it did, I done it!  :lol: It was deflected by brush and such if the target was well behind the intervening brush.

Nobody REALLY knew why this little sucker performed the way it did 'till an Army Colonel by the name of Marty Fackler came along and started SCIENTIFICALLY testing the round with ballistic gelatin.  He is the father of all current day wound effectiveness (stopping power) and bullet performance standards.  Please, don't take my word for it, read the info included in the links I have provided.  Thanks, Good shooting!  :D  JeffG

http://www.fen-net.de/norbert.arnoldi/army/wound.html

http://www.firearmstactical.com/images/Wound%20Profiles/M193.jpg

http://www.vnh.org/EWSurg/ch02/02Projectiles.html
Young guys should hang out with old guys; old guys know stuff

Offline Henry Bowman

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 80
Of Col. Fackler and 5.56
« Reply #22 on: March 11, 2003, 04:24:30 PM »
Hello, stranger thn truth I've found that Fackler agrees with Evan Marshal on the actual effectiveness of the SS-109!
The NATO round has been tested and proven to be an extremely effective man stopper and endorsed by both groups, the jello heads and anti-jello heads.
The Ruskies were ahead of the curve with their 5.45 as proven in the Afgan conflict and documented early on (mid-80s) in SOF.

Offline Mikey

  • GBO Supporter
  • Moderators
  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8734
New Army round
« Reply #23 on: March 14, 2003, 10:37:16 AM »
Fellas:  It doesn't matter a schmidt if the cartridge you're using is supposed to be the end all to be all, or if some feel it is better to wound an opponent so that it takes two of his buddies to cart him away.  If the dang thing doesn't just knock them down and out of the fight with the first hit it is going to be a useless exercise in self defense when there are so many of them that they compleetely overwhelm you, whether they are shot up or otherwise.

If you have a 30 round magazine and a 3 round burst devise and find that you need three rounds to drop a charging opponent, you are gonna be schmidt outta luck before you know it.

It is fine to talk ballistic theory about what round is best in combat and it is a warming thought to the grunt behind the rifle to know that one hit from a such and such caliber all the way out to the end of the ball field will penetrate this and that, but if they are comin' head on for all they're worth and your hits don't take 'em down, things get real critical real fast.

It was often said that if the 401 Winchester had been chambered in the M1 Carbine, there would never have been a 30 caliber carbine round.  I can agree with that.  A fat slug at medium velocities usually pounds them right down and keeps them there.  So do the faster moving 30 calibers.  

We used to know when Charlie was gonna hit us.  You could smell his hasish and hear them getting all psyched up for the attack.  When they would come at us, we found the M16 didn't knock em down and keep them there. Sometimes we would have to unload too many rounds to either hit them or keep them down.  What worked was the M14 and the M3 greasegun (at closer ranges).  What works is a heavy, slow or medium speed bullet.  Maybe if we take the 223 and straight case the dang thing, load it up with something in the range 160-220 grains, it would work better as a close range weapon with some different loads for longer ranges.  

Yes, the new SS-109 rounds will penetrate a helmet at 800 meters, if you can hit it.  You might be able to even see a slow fat slug moving out that far but you would know that if it hit an opponent, they would go down, regardless of the range.  You know, the AK is considered a medium range assault weapon.  Although they have ladder sights for up to 2 klics, the darn things can't hit beyond 300 meters, with any effectiveness.  Now, straight case that round and you are real close to the old 401 Winchester.  At the same ranges that would make an excellent battle round.

If it's a matter of battle gear weight for the GI, then instead of carrying more of the lesser effective rounds, toughen up and carry the same number of heavier rounds.  It sure seems to me that no matter what weight bullets you carry, when the schmidt hits the fan and you have to rapid fire at multiple approaching targets that don't take 'no' for an answer, the only answer is to puyt them down hard, and regardless of bullet weight, you are gonna keep firing until they hit the ground - preferably dead.  Just my two cents worth.  Mikey.

Offline Toad

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Posts: 2
New Military Caliber Being Tested-
« Reply #24 on: April 06, 2003, 01:06:05 PM »
The purpose of the fmj is not necessarily to be "humane" or to kill.  It takes a soldier out of the fight and also drains manpower and resources.  A wounded soldier needs one or more men to remove him from the site of conflict, plus the extra manpower and money to nurse him back to health.  
The 7mm TCU makes sense if you consider the larger wound channel which can be further escalated by making the bullet marginally stable as per the long twist in the first ar's and m-16's.  The old rifles were accurate with 55 grain bullets, but needed a tighter twist for the 62 grainers for longer distances with better retained terminal performance.
This can go into a whole long argument, but Sierra determined years ago that the 7mm had the best ballistic coefficient of any bullet they tested.  I suspect the same is still true unless the laws of physics have changed.
El Sapo del Norte...."Toad"

Offline colt451911

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 41
New Military Caliber Being Tested-
« Reply #25 on: May 22, 2003, 06:18:55 PM »
In a war with a relativly civilized enemy like the soviets the "wound instead of kill" theory probably would have worked great, however what are the chances of al-qaida psycos or somali war lords caring about retrieving wounded men?  Also, this theory does not work well with the contemperary US stratagy of attacking fast and powerfully.  Long, drawn out battles where there is even an oportunity for the enemy to remove wounded are probably not going to be as common as they were in the 60's when the m16 was developed.  Special operations troops that specialize in quick, violent assaults also need something that will incapacitate the enemy with the first shot, as does the regular army.  Troops in Vietnam, Somalia and Afgahnastan complained about the inefectiveness of the .223.  The bottom line is that we need a larger round.  Recoil is a concern although, something anything smaller than a .308 is not gonna put a strong, well trained soldier on his or her ass.  Carryability is also a concern, although once again something between .223 and .308 would probably be acceptable.  At the very least specail operators need to be able to carry something with more knock down power than the .223.  Maybe the Bush administration could campaign to revise the Geneva convention based on the over penatration of fmj rounds and the danger to civilians, this would possibly make the .223 at least less unaceptable.

Offline RollTide

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 457
New Military Caliber Being Tested-
« Reply #26 on: June 12, 2003, 05:05:34 PM »

Offline RollTide

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 457
New Military Caliber Being Tested-
« Reply #27 on: June 12, 2003, 05:08:01 PM »
I wonder if the military or anyone else has ever experimented with a flat nose FMJ in the 223?  At the effective range of the caliber, it would still be "combat" accurate and would probably create a much larger temporary and permanent wound channel and still be within the Geneva convention because it is FMJ.

Just a thought.

Roll Tide

Offline Savage Tactical

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 32
New Military Caliber Being Tested-
« Reply #28 on: July 26, 2003, 01:15:36 PM »
I think that a necking the 223 up to 243 would be a good Idea. You could nearly double the weight of the bullet. Another good Idea is to copy the what the Russians did with their 5.45 x 39 mm in their Ak-74. If you are not familiar with that round, they made the bullet very long, and they left a little bit of empty space between the lead core and the jacket in the front of the bullet. When the round is fired, it is very stable in flight, with the center of gravity (cg) towards the rear of the bullet. However, when it hits the target, the lead core moves forward into the empty space, causing the round to destabilze. It then whips wildly around inside the person, causing tremendous damage. During their war in Afghanistan, the afghanies reported that they were very effective, and produced very bad wounds. I know if this is legal though.