Indian police pistol!

[surajshuresh]

Well when i was in NCC i had gone for a camp and we were training with .22lr but those were 2A converted to .22lr single shot there was barrel inside the 2A barrel...Has anyone seen this...

[brihacharan]

Brno/ CZ? They may not be fancy, but make no mistake they are really nice rifles

> Yes - every inch of it
> I had the good fortune to be trained by the Mumbai Police using this very model...
> Well balanced & accurate even though we were issued IOF (Kirkee) ammo
Briha

[farook]

A little info on the Rifle. Its good to hear some positive comments on a Indian Product from a American gun reviewer. ( Though he does point out that it was formally a British Factory. )

The last one I heard about a .32 revolver was something like this. " I heard this Thing costs an Indian as much as an entire years wages, made of shoddy quality with no eternal competition. So much for a dis armed society.

[youtube][/youtube]

[youtube][/youtube]

[Safarigent]

The irony of the situation where indians themselves dont have the privilege/right to own an IOF 2A/2A1 but others do!

[farook]

The irony of the situation where indians themselves dont have the privilege/right to own an IOF 2A/2A1 but others do!

308 is government service bore therefore restricted for civilians. Without a doubt its my favorite bore.

Timmy A lot of aspects contribute to the accuracy of a bullet. Aerodynamics, burn rate, quality of power house and of course the length and quality of the barrel itself. Though the 308 and 30.06 have the same bullet the former is inherently known to be a lot more accurate. Any logic behind this.

[brihacharan]

308 is government service bore therefore restricted for civilians. Without a doubt its my favorite bore.
Though the 308 and 30.06 have the same bullet the former is inherently known to be a lot more accurate. Any logic behind this.

Hi Guys!
> Having owned a Winchester .30-06 & enjoyed shooting with it, the question of 308 vs 30-06 sounded very interesting...
> A bit of search revealed the following....

The Great .308 versus .30-06 Debate
(Ref: http://www.huntingnut.com/index.php?nam ... cle&sid=58)

There’s no significant difference between the ballistics of the two in hunting situations, or for that matter in any other situation. So let’s first take a quick look at the history of both cartridges.
• The .30-06 Springfield started life as a US military cartridge in 1906.
• It was derived from the “.30 Model 1903” cartridge that was designed to replace the .30-40 Krag. The ’03 cartridge used the same 220 grain round nosed bullet as the .30-40.
• The ’06 is essentially the same case as the ’03 with a 150 grain Spitzer bullet at 2800 fps. The .30-06 was the primary cartridge for the US military until it was “replaced” by the .308 Winchester/7.62x51mm NATO in 1954.
• The .308’s original load was a 149 grain Spitzer at 2800 fps. Both cartridges have certainly been very successful in military, match and hunting use! (Reference “HANDLOADING” by William C. Davis, Jr.)

To quote the SPEER #13 manual...

“In the hunting field, ballistic differences between the 308 and the 30-06 are negligible.” The .308 was designed to duplicate the .30-06 for military use, but in a half inch shorter package. Both guns use the same 0.308” bullets. These bullets range from 100 grains to 250 grains in various styles. The .30-06 would have an advantage as the bullets get over 180 grains because its case was originally designed for the heavier bullets.

Here is a chart of the muzzle velocities for each bullet for both cartridges, the difference between them (.30-06 minus .308) and the percentage of that difference:
Bullet wt .308 .30-06 Difference %
150 2919 2847 -72 fps -2.5
165 2812 2803 -9 fps -0.3
180 2623 2756 133 fps 4.8

From the chart we can see that the average difference in velocities for the three bullets is 17 fps, or 0.6%, in favor of the .30-06. Now don’t forget that these are average velocities. In a string of shots a cartridge/gun’s velocity can easily have a standard deviation of 1% or more. In other words the normal variations in loads result in a built-in error that pretty much means we can’t count on such a small difference to be meaningful.

So, what does all this mean downrange? We’ll zero both guns at 200 yards and compare the bullet energy there. Let’s also take a look at what the bullets will be doing at 400 yards, which is a heck of a long shot for hunting. I used the “Point-Blank” ballistics program to make the comparisons.

With the 150 grain bullet the .308 has 2093 foot-pounds of energy at 200 yards while the .30-06 has 1985 foot-pounds. Out at 400 yards the .308 will have dropped 20.9 inches, and still has 1512 foot-pounds. The .30-06 will have dropped 22.13 inches and maintains 1428 foot-pounds. The .308 shows 5.9% more energy at 400 yards.

Then with the 165 grain bullet at 200 yards the .308 shows 2202 foot-pounds versus 2187 foot-pounds for the .30-06. At 400 yards the .308 drops 21.90 inches and has 1645 foot-pounds. The .30-06 drops 22.06 inches with 1633 foot-pounds left. At 400 yards the .308 has a tiny 0.7% energy advantage.

Finally we take the 180 grain bullet, which should give the biggest advantage to the .30-06. At the 200 yard mark the .308 will have the energy of 2143 foot-pounds and the .30-06 will have 2379 foot-pounds. The .30-06 has about 11% more energy. When we get out to 400 yards the .308 will be 24.64 inches low and still have 1647 foot-pounds while the .30-06 will be 22.10 inches low and still carry 1840 foot-pounds. That means that at 400 yards the .30-06 has an 11.7% advantage in energy.
When it’s all said and done does either the .308 or the .30-06 really have any ballistic advantage over the other?

I’ll concede that an 11% difference in energy with the 180 grain bullet is an advantage...
But I wonder if the deer on the receiving end can tell the difference between 1647 and 1840 foot-pounds of energy!!!

Considering the overall differences and performance of both cartridges I’ll stick to my assertion that there is no SIGNIFICANT BALLISTIC ADVANTAGE with either cartridge.

Now just pick which ever you like and enjoy shooting it!
Briha

[timmy]

A little info on the Rifle. Its good to hear some positive comments on a Indian Product from a American gun reviewer. ( Though he does point out that it was formally a British Factory. )

True. However, I don't think that there is anything wrong with Polish Radom rifles. They are essentially Mauser M98s made with the tooling the Poles got as war reparations from the Germans after WW1. The Poles then moved the tooling from Gdansk to Radom. It is widely agreed that the steel in these Polish Radom rifles is of top quality - a very hard surface finish and tough inside, which gives them a lot of strength and a slick feel in operations, because of the hard surface. Does this story remind you of the 2A? I love my Radom. Like the 2A with the Ashoka, it has the Polish White Eagle crest on the receiver.

I also like my Finnish M39. The Finns didn't even get arsenal tooling from the Russians, like the Poles. They had to use Mosin Nagant actions they scrounged from a number of sources to make up their M39. The accuracy of the M39 is not doubted, either by anyone who knows guns, or by me. I love mine.

My point here is the background on any and all of these three rifles has nothing to do with how good they are as a rifle. They are all a credit to the abilities of the country, from which they came. I love mine and would recommend any and all to whoever was interested in one.

[farook]

This video just had to be added to this thread...