Safety issue: 7.62 NATO == .308 Win NOT!!!

[Reese]

At 07:09 PM 1/19/01 -0500, Harmon Seaver wrote:
 >     Duh! Reese, you better learn to read.

Actually, I did read - the text at the top of the page, where it said
.308 Win and 7.62 NATO owners.  A quick look at the pictures, and I
then hit the <send>.  If anything, I'm guilty of haste.  Sue me.

I am not willing to place my life and extremities in the safety of your 
anecdotal experience.   I'll take the lumps and remain steadfast; owners
of arms chambered in 7.62 NATO should not be firing .308 Win ammo in
them, unless the unit in question has been headspaced and pronounced
"safe" for the comparatively flimsy-walled .308 Win ammo, per the .308
Win headspace specifications.

It'll be interesting to see what comes of the investigation Clint McKee
has offered to perform, and don't get me started on 7.62 CETME.

Reese

 >In the first place, the ammo
 >was clearly German 7.62 NATO military surplus, not commercial .308
 >Winchester ammo. Secondly, as a handloader who has done some wild
 >experiments with many calibres, rifle, pistol, and shotgun, over at least
 >35 years, there just ain't no way that a little headspace problem causes
 >anything like that -- in fact, I've had a number of rifles with excess
 >headspace and all that happens, even with hot loads, is you blow off the
 >back of the case. I've had literally hundreds of case head separations --
 >they don't blow up the gun.
 >     In fact, there is almost nothing that could do that sort of damage
 >except someone loading the shell with semtex or the like. And the article
 >also makes that *very* clear. They theorize that possible that shell got
 >loaded with .30 carbine powder which is a fast burning pistol powder, but
 >I really doubt that would explain it either. Bullseye powder, possibly,
 >but it had to be a deliberate thing. And it seems to me that I recall
 >somewhere someone writing about that sort of sabotage being done at
 >various times to make soldiers afraid to fire their weapons.
 >
 >
 >
 >Reese wrote:
 >
 >> Another quibble.  This is a safety issue, so READ it.
 >>
 >> One of our members wrote:
 >>
 >>  >It was introduced in 7.62 mm NATO, very, very close to .308
 >>  >Winchester. (Some say there are headspace differences, though I have
 >>  >used 7.62 mm NATO in my Remington 700 VSSF, ostensibly chambered for
 >>  >.308 Winchester, and I have used .308 Winchester in my Federal Arms
 >>  >FA-91/G3, ostensibly chambered for 7.62 mm NATO.
 >>
 >> Here's a 7.62 NATO gun that blew up with .308 Win ammo not long ago:
 >> http://communities.prodigy.net/sportsrec/gz-762d.html
 >>
 >> These two cartridges are NOT the same, more here:
 >> http://www.fulton-armory.com/308.htm
 >>
 >> Reese