XCR Accuracy in .223 vs. 7.62x39 out to 300 yards?

redrams9

redrams9

CGN Regular
Rating - 100%
106   0   0
Location
Edmonton
Hi, I be read the whole 96 page XCR sticky but could not find a definitive answer there, even after posting this question there. (Am assuming most XCR owners don't check that thread regularly).
I own an XCR in .223 and love it and am trying to decide whether or not to buy the 7.62x39 conversion kit, or just jump to the XCR-M? Is the 7.62x39 in the XCR a more accurate round? My range is 300 yards max. Or will I see no real difference in accuracy between 100-300 yards?
At distances up to 300 yards, will the XCR-M be noticeably better?
 
redrams9 said:
Hi, I be read the whole 96 page XCR sticky but could not find a definitive answer there, even after posting this question there. (Am assuming most XCR owners don't check that thread regularly).
I own an XCR in .223 and love it and am trying to decide whether or not to buy the 7.62x39 conversion kit, or just jump to the XCR-M? Is the 7.62x39 in the XCR a more accurate round? My range is 300 yards max. Or will I see no real difference in accuracy between 100-300 yards?
At distances up to 300 yards, will the XCR-M be noticeably better?
Click to expand...

I can't speak for the XCR in 7.62x39mm, but I can say that .223 out of anything is in general more accurate than any 7.62x39mm that I have ever shot.

Same goes for .308, it's a much more accurate round than 7.62x39mm, especially at 300m. 7.62x39mm really suffers in the ballistics department out past about 200-250m, it just doesn't have a very flat trajectory.
 
I doubt you'd see a significant difference between an XCR-L in .223 and an XCR-M in .308 at 300 yards. At that distance, ammunition quality will be the major concern in regards to accuracy. As for the 7.62x39, it is not as good a round in terms of ballistics as either .223 or .308, plus high quality 7.62x39 ammo is not readily available.
 
That's the question right there. When I first got my M I thought it was more accurate at 300 than my L in .223 until I took the higher powered optic off my M and start using it in my L. My groups where much better with the .223. Mind you I was only using bulk MSF but still I attribute that to being more comfortable with the .223 having less felt recoil. Generally speaking most people are going to be running lower powered optics(1-4x) as I was.
 
we did some testing at 300 meters with the 762 39 five rounds stayed in 5 1/2" on a idpa target (1.5/5 optic surplus ball ammo)but its hit power sucked we had a car with about 6" of snow on it and none of those rounds got threw the windshield
 
If your chasing accuracy for punching targets stick with the .223 and as you said maybe upgrade your scope. If you want to hunt with it and up your effective range to have the power to knock down game go to the XCR M.
I believe for "accuracy" the .223 and .308 will be simular out to about 500yrds. The lighter .223 bullet will be effected more with wind than the .308 over distance. I run a Vortex 1-4X PST Scope on my XCR M, awsome bang for the buck and I am comfortable in knowing I can shoot to 400yrds with this comibination for hunting (coyotes and deer) and get clean kill shots. It has an MOA reticle so if you know your load and what it does 400yrds for hunting should be no problem. I will be trying to stretch it out to 800 yrds for targets, not precision shooting but ringing a gong. I love my M, and in my experiance the supposed recoil is a myth. The M is smooth as butter. One downfall with the .308 is ammo cost, expect almost double .223.

At the end of the day if you are punching paper, stick to the .223. If you want to upgrade to a hunting caliber or more stable longer range bullet go to the .308. 7.62X 39 does not have any advantage over the other two caliber options in the XCR platform. There have been alot of magazine issues with the 762X39 from my understanding. I have absoulutely no experiance with the 6.8 so it may be a viable option that out performs the others as well.

Just my 2 cents worth.
 
That's great advice and that certainly clears things up about getting the 7.62x39 kit for my XCR, will pass on it then. I do love the idea of having an XCR in both .223 and .308, but am not much of a hunter so will just buy more .223 ammo and call it a day.
 
What are the advantages of the 6.5? Is it accuracy? Would it not also be correct to assume that because its an uncommon round, that ammo costs in that calibre will be much higher?
 
The main reason getting the 7.62x39 is short range ballistics with cheap surplus ammo. To 600 meters in an XCR or AR15 the .223 is hard to beat and cheaper than .308.
The main reason getting into 6.5 mm is for improved long range ballistics.
Match ammo is always more accurate. expensive than surplus. It all depends what your goal is and deciding what you want to achieve.
 
redrams9 said:
What are the advantages of the 6.5? Is it accuracy? Would it not also be correct to assume that because its an uncommon round, that ammo costs in that calibre will be much higher?
Click to expand...

Not really... accuracy has more to do with rifle design and ammunition quality rather than the cartridge itself. The advantage to things like the 6.5 are improved ballistics over the .223 while staying within the XCR-L action/magazine length restrictions. So at 100 or even 300 yards, you won't notice much of a difference between a .223 and a 6.5 in the accuracy department, but as you stretch out to longer distances, the 6.5 maintains velocity better and bucks the wind better than the .223. This means that there will be less drop, you will not have to dope for wind as much, and it will hit harder.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom