M14 in .276 Pedersen

Jim Smitty

Jim Smitty

Ok assuming the US adpot the .276 Pedersen round in the 1930s how would the M14 rifle in .276 Pedersen look like? Or would they go with the Belgian FAL which was one the guns being looked at as a unviserital NATO gun in the early 50s. I just don't see the US Army going with the EM-2 because its a bullpup. But what kind of weight savings would an M14 in 276 bring to the table over the OTL M14 in 7.62 NATO? Would it be an assault-rifle or still be a battle rifle? Would the M14 in 276 Pedersen be controllable in full auto which the M14 in 7.62 NATO never was outside highly trained sergeants.

Thoughts?
 

Deleted member 1487

Jim Smitty said:
Ok assuming the US adpot the .276 Pedersen round in the 1930s how would the M14 rifle in .276 Pedersen look like? Or would they go with the Belgian FAL which was one the guns being looked at as a unviserital NATO gun in the early 50s. I just don't see the US Army going with the EM-2 because its a bullpup. But what kind of weight savings would an M14 in 276 bring to the table over the OTL M14 in 7.62 NATO? Would it be an assault-rifle or still be a battle rifle? Would the M14 in 276 Pedersen be controllable in full auto which the M14 in 7.62 NATO never was outside highly trained sergeants.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...
The US would never go FAL or any non-US made weapon post-WW2. The FAL would of course exist and would be in the Pedersen assume that round is made NATO standard. It would be more controllable in full auto than 7.62 NATO, but not nearly as controllable as 5.56 in full auto or potentially even 7.92 Kurz (or 7.62x39). The EM-2 could potentially work in Pedersen, so that would be interesting if the Brits adopted it.
TTL's M14 might well be the AR-10 in 7mm Pedersen, assuming butterflies prevent the barrel issues in testing IOTL.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ArmaLite_AR-10
It might potentially make the AR-15/M-16 a niche weapon if it gets adopted at all.
 
Jim Smitty

Jim Smitty

wiking said:
The US would never go FAL or any non-US made weapon post-WW2. The FAL would of course exist and would be in the Pedersen assume that round is made NATO standard. It would be more controllable in full auto than 7.62 NATO, but not nearly as controllable as 5.56 in full auto or potentially even 7.92 Kurz (or 7.62x39). The EM-2 could potentially work in Pedersen, so that would be interesting if the Brits adopted it.
TTL's M14 might well be the AR-10 in 7mm Pedersen, assuming butterflies prevent the barrel issues in testing IOTL.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ArmaLite_AR-10
It might potentially make the AR-15/M-16 a niche weapon if it gets adopted at all.
Click to expand...
I gave some thought to the AR-10, I just view the AR-10 as too far ahead of the curve to be a buyable weapon system. Honestly its a good weapon IMO but just too far ahead of the curve.
 

Deleted member 1487

Jim Smitty said:
I gave some thought to the AR-10, I just view the AR-10 as too far ahead of the curve to be a buyable weapon system. Honestly its a good weapon IMO but just too far ahead of the curve.
Click to expand...
Perhaps. Don't you think they might upgrade the Pedersen round though? The M1 ITTL might be upgradeable to full auto with a box magazine as the Italians did with their BM59 (AFAIK just a modified M1 Garand). Having a 7mm round with different properties than the OTL .30-06 would create some significant butterflies for rifle design post-WW2.
 
Jim Smitty

Jim Smitty

wiking said:
Perhaps. Don't you think they might upgrade the Pedersen round though? The M1 ITTL might be upgradeable to full auto with a box magazine as the Italians did with their BM59 (AFAIK just a modified M1 Garand). Having a 7mm round with different properties than the OTL .30-06 would create some significant butterflies for rifle design post-WW2.
Click to expand...
Its a possible. But I still trying to dig up more info on the 276 Pedersen and some of the off the wall stuff they did on the Garand.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top