LEAKED: Pakistan Army Requirements for Tender of 75,000 New 7.62x39mm Rifles

The CZ Bren 2 in 7.62x39mm - shown here - is a strong contender for the Pakistani rifle contract.

Thanks to a recent leak exclusively to The Firearm Blog, we have now become aware of a new tender for rifles issued by the Pakistani government. According to the tender document, the Pakistani Army is looking for 75,000 “modern 7.62x39mm caliber weapons”, presumably as part of the program to replace their aging fleet of G3 and Type 56 assault rifles. The specifications for the tender are given below:

The document that we have is not actually a raw tender, rather it is a manufacturer’s reply to a tender. As such, the document is divided into two parts. On the left of every sheet are the requirements as disseminated by the Pakistani government. On the right are the characteristics of the rifle from the company that is being solicited, according to its manufacturer. Essentially, on the left we have the solicitation, and on the right the reply.

Based on the characteristics of the rifle as listed on the right side of the document, it seems we are looking at either Česká Zbrojovka’s (CZ) or Beretta’s submission, with me leaning towards the former. We know that at least five companies are courting this Pakistani contract: FN, Kalashnikov Concern, CZ, Beretta, and Zastava. We can eliminate FN, as they have so far only offered the SCAR-H in 7.62x51mm. Zastava’s and Kalashnikov Concern’s offerings (the M21 and AK-103) do not meet the overall length criteria given by the manufacturer on page 1. That leaves Beretta and CZ as possibles. However, up till now Beretta has only offered their 7.62x51mm ARX-200, not their 7.62x39mm ARX-160A3, and it is also not obvious that Beretta offers a magazine with round counter for the latter rifle. This leaves CZ with their 7.62x39mm 806 Bren 2 as the most likely company for the rifle on the right.



Nathaniel F

Nathaniel is a history enthusiast and firearms hobbyist whose primary interest lies in military small arms technological developments beginning with the smokeless powder era. In addition to contributing to The Firearm Blog, he runs 196,800 Revolutions Per Minute, a blog devoted to modern small arms design and theory. He is also the author of the original web serial Heartblood, which is being updated and edited regularly. He can be reached via email at nathaniel.f@staff.thefirearmblog.com.


Advertisement

  • 22winmag

    If the leaked requirements for a proposed Pakistani military rifle fell in the forest, and nobody was around to hear it, would it make a sound?

  • Giolli Joker

    I’m surprised that, with POF being a pretty good manufacturer (excellent in the area), they’re not going for the licensing route.
    (unless they actually are and I missed the detail…)

    • FarmerB

      I read g (h) under logistics as just that. And the third party transfer means they can make it for others, I’m guessing.

      • Giolli Joker

        Then I missed it.

  • Reality

    “modern” and 7.62×39 in one sentence, ..lol..

    • 8166PC1

      The Russians still use 7.62×39 despite having the 5.45×39 and the GIGN want to replace the HK416 with 7.62×39 rifles.

      • Form Factor

        Because 5.45×39 is unoptimized, has less energy than 5.56×45 and they dont use the excellent EPR construction.

        The GIGN want to use really short barrels, thats the only point. And theyr a specialized group, propably never engage in the range military engagements can be, and certainly wont fight wars in pakistan.

        • 8166PC1

          Is there really such a big difference in energy?

          • SGTSCHMEGMA

            The raw numbers don’t tell the whole story. Annecdotal story, treated a guy with an AK wound slightly below his left clavicle. The round ice picked. He was able to keep going without much, if any, further treatment. Had that round been a 5.56 (that decided to fragment that day) it would’ve punctured the subclavian artery.

          • 8166PC1

            A 5.56×45 would have killed him and his future ancestors where a 7.62×39 is like being shot with a bb gun.

          • SGTSCHMEGMA

            You nailed it

          • Gus Butts

            “where a 7.62×39 is like being shot with a bb gun” I mean, I’ve been shot by a bb gun before, but…

          • No one

            Well considering the sperm he’s carrying down low would technically be his future ancestors, yeah, it kind of would actually.

        • pvw20

          …..and neither will you.

          • No one

            That doesn’t diminish his point in the slightest there champ.

          • Form Factor

            Thanks buddy, many experts here with a lot of (none) arguments.

          • Gus Butts

            Best post of 2017.

          • Form Factor

            Not really, just an annoying, senceless, post without any practical arguments. TFB might not be the right platform for that.

        • USMC_grunt2009-2013

          Yes. ^ What he said.

      • USMC_grunt2009-2013

        The Russians mostly use 5.45, they still use 7.62×39 in limited roles only. Supposedly Spetsnaz likes the 7.62 round in some urban situations because it can penetrate light cover consistently. It’d be like if the U.S. military had a number of .300 Blackout chambered M4s in the inventory for use in urban CQB and a few other limited roles.

    • Just Say’n

      Beat me to it!

    • Hey man, if a country doesn’t want to switch their supply chain off a dumpy round with the ballistics of a snowball, don’t let that stop people from selling to them.

      • Reality

        Omg, “ballistics of a snowball” never heard something better! I definitely have to keep that in mind, youre a genius.

      • TJbrena

        A snowball with a rock in it has superior external ballistics and effect on target, but is regulated by the Hague Convention.

  • Guido FL

    Recently I have built two AR15’s in 7.62×39 for several reasons. The 7.62×39 bullet has more energy at 100 yards than the .223 does at the muzzle ! Cheap Russian ammo at approx. .20-.21 per rd. which eliminates the .300 blk. from consideration cost wise. Given the round is very deadly at 100 yards. and with the AR platform it’s still kills game out to 200 yards. with ease

    On a recent wild boar hunt I had a snap shot at a 250 lb. boar on the move. One shot at 50 yards using Remington soft pt. ammo and he was down right now. My guide was amazed at the knock down power of the 7.62×39 saying; ” Been a long time since I saw that “. He also spoke in unkindly terms of the “morons using AR15’s” and not having clean kills even after 10 hits. So now you experts can tell us all about YOUR experiences, not second and third hand rumors.

    • Havok

      So on this snap shot, where did your round land?

    • Form Factor

      … still HILARIOUS trajectory and wind drift, also absolute extremly low steel penetration …
      Not to mention its ultra short supersonic range.

      M855A1 EPR laughs over 7.62×39

      • 8166PC1

        There must be some things that the 5.56×45 doesn’t do as well as the 7.62×39 like lethality and barrier penetration. I know the Russians still use the 7.62×39 despite having the 5.45×39, and the GIGN recently wanted to replace their HK416’s with 7.62×39 rifles.

        • Form Factor

          Yeah have fun after your arm/ leg/ organs/ lungs/ neck got shredded by M855A1 EPR.

          • 8166PC1

            M885A1 is like a mini nuke I heard.

          • FarmerB

            According to Form Factor, M855A1 is bigger than MOAB.

          • Form Factor

            No just efficient.

        • 7.62×39 was adopted by GIGN because it outperforms 5.56 out of very short barrels (7-9″) which they were using. Something like 123gr @ 2000fps from the tiny CZ SBR’s they selected.

        • No one

          What? 5.56x45mm throws 7.62x39mm in the dumpster in human target lethality goes even before rounds like M855A1, Mk 318 and Mk 262 came along for military use, M43 and M67 basically leave a keyhole style wound that “sometimes” yaws a bit but still has a very flat would channel in cross section. The only real round that could at least compete in Lethality would be things like 8m3 which is against the St. Petersburg Declaration/Hague Conventions to use for the military. And even then, 8m3 wouldn’t do nearly as well in things like ballistic trajectory, intermediate barrier and hard armor penetration (the latter of which the M855A1 has a massive upper hand in against pretty much all 7.62x39mm loadings) weight, and felt recoil.

          I do have one rifle in 7.62x39mm that I chose over .300 Blackout and 5.56x45mm chamberings, the only reason I did that was because It’s a 10″ SBR with a Suppressor attached. otherwise it would’ve been 5.56x45mm for sure.

          • iksnilol

            False, M43 icepicks, M67 tumbles.

        • john huscio

          The Russians use m43 sparingly and in certain specialized applications. We still use 308 in certain circumstances but its not issued service wide.

        • USMC_grunt2009-2013

          See my reply on your other post.

    • ostiariusalpha

      7.62x39mm does have a very nice energy budget, it can make for a very fine hunting round with the right bullet design. That doesn’t make it optimal for a combat round though, or we’d still be shooting .30-06 (which also does its best work as a hunting round).

      • “Energy budget.” Heyo!

        • Don Ward

          The harder you pull the trigger, the higher the energy budgeted.

          Simple battlefield knowledge. Just ask Abu Hajaar.

          • Gus Butts

            That thing on the top of your AK that has numbers and that slides front to back is for how much energy you’d like to budget into your bullets. Disclaimer: Some Taliban fighters in Afghanistan genuinely thought this.

    • Aerindel Prime

      Yep. x39 all the way. I don’t think I will every shoot 556 in an AR again.

      • No one

        Your loss I guess, but I guess I won’t tell you how to waste your money.

        • pvw20

          Oh don’t worry butthurt, you’ve said enough already.

          • Form Factor

            As much sencefull progressive arguments as ever by you…

          • No one

            Calling me butthurt when you’re the one that’s being salty and stalking my comments in here now because I made a passive aggressive jab at you for making a statement that makes no sense at all earlier and contributing nothing to this post.

            Whatever you say buddy, might want to look up the definition of “Projecting” in the dictionary.

      • USMC_grunt2009-2013

        Clearly you’ve never seen someone hit by a 5.56, compared to a 7.62×39.

      • USMC_grunt2009-2013

        The Pakistanis have literally millions of rounds of 7.62×39 already, that’s the reason they’re sticking with it.

    • No one

      “Recently I have built two AR15’s in 7.62×39 for several reasons. The
      7.62×39 bullet has more energy at 100 yards than the .223 does at the
      muzzle !”

      And a significantly worse ballistic trajectory regardless and much worse bullet drop at range that means the 5.56mm will still be able to hit targets at ranges the 7.62x39mm pretty much falls flat in with much worse projectile designs! Oh sorry, I forgot very slight differences in energy was all that mattered.

      “Cheap Russian ammo at approx. .20-.21 per rd. which eliminates the .300
      blk. from consideration cost wise. Given the round is very deadly at 100
      yards.”

      “Very deadly at 100 yards” which is why pretty much every test says otherwise and several battlefield surgeons and soldiers alike have gone on record saying that 7.62x39mm is much easier to treat then 5.56mm wound, or that they’d much rather be struck by an AK-47 projectile then an M4/M16 projectile if they had no choice but to take one.

      “On a recent wild boar hunt I had a snap shot at a 250 lb. boar on the
      move. One shot at 50 yards using Remington soft pt. ammo and he was down
      right now. My guide was amazed at the knock down power of the 7.62×39
      saying; ” Been a long time since I saw that “.”

      You know, I feel like I can pretty much instantly discredit you right now for actually using the term “knockdown power” and be done with this, but I’ll humor you, first off, I love it when people give anecdotes of hog or boar kills as if they’re talking about Cape Buffalo. News flash, Swine and Sheep are the closest physiological matches to humans out there, they’re not hard to kill, want a better anecdote? I know of someone who was culling Boar and Wild Hogs, first with increasily less powerful guns, then bows, then he finally got bored at how flat out easy it was and started killing them with a cold steel brand spear he bought online to make it actually challenging, if they didn’t die to the initial thrust, he could literally just hold their heads under the waters of the irrigated fields until they quickly drowned. he posted on the SA forums under the username Bushman and recorded it, go there and see how exactly impressive your Swine kills are.

      “He also spoke in unkindly terms of the “morons using AR15’s” and not having clean kills even after 10 hits.” I guess bubbas like you still haven’t learned how to actually aim properly then according to him, I’ve culled Wild Hog for a friend using a bolt action .204 Ruger before, they all went down in one, rarely 2 hits in quick succession if I was off (usually by misjudging the wind) the first hit because 1. Swine aren’t hard to kill, sorry to tell you this, and 2. I guess I actually know how to aim a rifle and am a better shot then your average Bubba. clearly .204 Ruger is the military round of the future because it brings down hogs at 50-100m! (which we all know are what wars are fought against, and not you committing the ever so classic “wars are fought against animals” fallacy.)

      “So now you experts can tell us all about YOUR experiences, not second and third hand rumors.”

      Just told you about “my” experiences regarding me being better then you apparently, also, I didn’t realize years of actual battlefield surgeon testimony, soldier accounts, actual ballistic testing, data and evidence performed and gathered on the Military and FBI level, the fact that Both the USSR/Russia and a vast majority of the former USSR satellite states dropped and the PRC dropped 7.62x39mm for their own versions of a SCHV round (the USSR/Russia in 1974 with 5.45x39mm, and the PRC in 1987 with 5.8x42mm respectively) along with NATO holdouts still using 7.62x51mm almost all going to 5.56x45mm themselves after realizing it was a much better idea by the 70s-80s along with countless non-NATO countries dropping 7.62×51 or 7.62x39mm for it means that clearly this is all just second and third hand rumors and not massive evidence of the truth that 5.56x45mm is just a flat out better round then 7.62x39mm in almost every way possible because some poorer nations can’t afford to change and some bubbas kill the nearly indestructible beasts known as the Swine family with 7.62x39mm is the real truth!

      In short, you’re wrong, horribly, sorry to break it to you.

    • No one

      “Recently I have built two AR15’s in 7.62×39 for several reasons. The 7.62×39 bullet has more energy at 100 yards than the .223 does at the muzzle !”

      And a significantly worse ballistic trajectory regardless and
      much worse bullet drop at range that means the 5.56mm will still be able
      to hit targets at ranges the 7.62x39mm pretty much falls flat in with
      much worse projectile designs! Oh sorry, I forgot (a very slight)
      difference in energy was all that mattered.

      “Cheap Russian ammo at approx. .20-.21 per rd. which eliminates the .300 blk. from consideration cost wise. Given the round is very deadly at 100 yards.”

      “Very deadly at 100 yards” which is why pretty much every test
      says otherwise and that 7.62x39mm is prone to keyholeing with very little yawing at all and several battlefield surgeons and soldiers alike have gone on record saying that 7.62x39mm is much easier to treat then 5.56mmwound, or that they’d much rather be struck by an AK-47 projectile thenan M4/M16 projectile if they had no choice but to take one.

      “On a recent wild boar hunt I had a snap shot at a 250 lb. boar on the move. One shot at 50 yards using Remington soft pt. ammo and he was down right now. My guide was amazed at the knock down power of the 7.62×39 saying; ” Been a long time since I saw that “.”

      You know, I feel like I can pretty much instantly discredit you
      right now for actually using the term “knockdown power” and be done with
      this, but I’ll humor you, first off, I love it when people give
      anecdotes of hog or boar kills as if they’re talking about Cape Buffalo.
      News flash, Swine and Sheep are the closest physiological matches to
      humans out there, they’re not hard to kill, want a better anecdote? I
      know of someone who was culling Boar and Wild Hogs, first with
      increasily less powerful guns, then bows, then he finally got bored at
      how flat out easy it was and started killing them with a cold steel
      brand spear he bought online to make it actually challenging, if they
      didn’t die to the initial thrust, he could literally just hold their
      heads under the waters of the irrigated fields until they quickly
      drowned. he posted on the SA forums under the username Bushman and
      recorded it, look him up and see how exactly impressive your Swine kills
      are.

      “He also spoke in unkindly terms of the “morons using AR15’s” and
      not having clean kills even after 10 hits.”

      I guess people like you and him who fall into a certain category of “hunters” still haven’t learned how to actually aim properly then according to him, I’ve culled Wild Hog for a friend using a bolt action .204 Ruger before, they all went down in one, rarely 2 hits in quick succession if I
      was off (usually by misjudging the wind) the first hit because 1. Swine aren’t hard to kill, sorry to tell you this, and 2. I guess I actually know how to aim a rifle and am a better shot then your average *apparently offensive word according to TFB regarding people looked up negatively in the gun community*. Clearly .204 Ruger is the military round of the future because it brings down hogs at 50-100m! (which we all know are what wars are fought against, and not you committing the ever so classic “wars are fought against animals” fallacy.)

      “So now you experts can tell us all about YOUR experiences, not second and third hand rumors.”

      Just told you about “my” experiences regarding me being better at hunting swine
      then you apparently, also, I didn’t realize years of actual battlefield
      surgeon testimony, soldier accounts, actual ballistic testing, data and
      evidence performed and gathered on the Military and FBI level, the fact
      that Both the USSR/Russia and a vast majority of the former USSR
      satellite states dropped and the PRC dropped 7.62x39mm for their own
      versions of a SCHV round (the USSR/Russia in 1974 with 5.45x39mm, and
      the PRC in 1987 with 5.8x42mm respectively) along with NATO holdouts
      still using 7.62x51mm almost all going to 5.56x45mm themselves after
      realizing it was a much better idea by the 70s-80s along with countless
      non-NATO countries dropping 7.62×51 or 7.62x39mm for it means that
      clearly this is all just second and third hand rumors and not massive
      evidence of the truth that 5.56x45mm is just a flat out better round
      then 7.62x39mm in almost every way possible because some poorer nations
      can’t afford to change and some *offensive word for people in the firearm/hunting community here* kill the nearly indestructible
      beasts known as the Swine family with 7.62x39mm is the real truth!

      Or it could just be that 5.56x45mm is infact better then 7.62x39mm in nearly every way possible and all signs point to this.

      In short, you’re wrong, horribly, sorry to break it to you.

      There you go TFB, I sterilized my post of the horrible “Bu” word, I hope it lives up to your standards now!

  • Is the CZ 806 compatible with standard AK mags, or does it use a proprietary mag?

  • john huscio

    Theyve already signed a letter of understanding with CZ to licence produce CZ rifles at POF.

  • 300BLK fanboi

    The main shortcoming of 7.62×39 from my perspective is that you can’t force it into a 5.56 chamber and blow up your gun. These guys should DEFINITELY choose .300BLK instead. Cause, you know, tactical.

    • Top comment!

    • Johannes von’ Strauch

      Absolutly made my day, haha! Youre so right.

  • Vitor Roma

    The only advantage 7.62×39 has over 5.56 is short barrel perfomance. Btw, since it is relatively low pressure for a rifle round, I always thought that a delayed blowback action would be ideal.

    • PK

      I’ve thought similar, and have toyed with the idea of a long-lever Király blowback with that in mind. Technically, it’s doable of course, as guns like the ТКБ-517, and AB-762 showed. For 5.56x45mm, the FAMAS springs to mind, and for 7.62x51mm the LCZ-B20.

      Funny enough about the ТКБ-517, it was considered better than the AK-47, cheaper to make, more accurate… but a little harder to use and explain to people with no formal schooling of any kind. In 1952 Russia, that was a big deal! Also, it hadn’t been very long since the AK’s adoption, and militaries are always hesitant to change primary rifles too often.

      • 8166PC1

        According to a book I have they delayed blowback designs were less reliable than the AKM.

    • No one

      As a civilian shooter, the different standards in approved max chamber pressures for 7.62x39mm is really irritating to me (I only have 1 rifle in 7.62x39mm currently, but still.)

      For reference, C.I.P., which is the standard Russia uses, rates it at a maximum safe PSI of 52,500 PSI, SAAMI on the otherhand, who a vast majority of North American companies follow, list it at only 45,000 PSI.

      Normally I don’t mind minor differences, but a 7,500 psi difference is pretty large actually. and makes finding optimal powder/projectile loadings difficult (Finding 8m3 loaded to C.I.P. standard is a godsend, stocked up on that when I first saw it come back this way.)

      • int19h

        To clarify, are you saying that all 8M3 is loaded to CIP standard?

        Is it just 8M3 specifically, or all Russian and Ukrainian made ammo?

        If the latter, it feels like no-one would be insane enough to make guns chambered in 7.62×39 that can’t shoot that stuff… I mean, it’s 90% of all the ammo on the market.

  • Vojtech

    This isnt BREN 2 in 7,62×39. Weight doesnt match (BREN 2 is significantly lighter), length (BREN is shorter) and ROF is lower (BREN has 850, this is 700 something).