RE:Current Infantry Magazine: Military Rifle Effectiveness -- .223 Sucks

[ironman0311]

Infantry Magazine
28 Jan 07

Military Rifle Effectiveness

In an article in the current issue of Infantry Magazine, authors were assigned the task of articulating the current party-line with regard to continued lack of confidence in the military's M855 "62gr green-tip" 223 round, still being issued.

We are assured that extensive re-testing had been done in response to chronic complaints from the field. However, most such complaints are quickly dismissed as resulting from "inexperience" and "hazy recollections."

We are then told that all resultant testing only addressed close-range, exposed human targets (fifty meters maximum) that are unprotected by cover, ignoring the 223's (1) lack of acceptable terminal effect beyond 150m and (2) chronic lack of ability to penetrate commonly-used objects (like car doors)that the enemy uses for cover- the twin issues that are at the heart of complaints about this caliber and have for the past forty years. Government "studies" are all alike!

Authors went on to admonish us all that we need to be accurate shooters. No problem with that, but they then advocated "controlled-pairs" for engaging enemy soldiers. Funny, no one ever suggested the necessity of any such multiple-shot technique when we were using M14s, did they? Routinely firing " controlled-pairs" reduces a 28-round magazine to a 14-round one and effectively halves one's ammunition supply.

In conclusion, we are assured that inveterate complaints about the 223 round' s dismal failure as a main, battle caliber are merely "myth and superstition. " The Stoner rifle in 223 caliber is the "best... available" we are told. Then, almost as an aside, it is sheepishly admitted that ineffectiveness and long range and second-rate penetration really are problems with this combination and that "something even better" may come a long soon.

Well, it can hardly come too soon! The replacement forty years ago of heavy-caliber, main-battle-rifles, like the M14 and FAL, with light rifles in varmint calibers was, among other things, an attempt by "just-tech" types to degrade the importance and potency of the individual soldier and Marine, when it has been the heroism and gritty determination of the individual soldier and Marine that has consistently turned the tide of battle since this nation began! It is a forty-year old, procurement mistake, and all the trumped-up "studies" in the world will fail to convince soldiers and Marines in the field who are obliged to believe their own eyes!

The 223 round may be adequate for domestic, personal defense and domestic policing. A convincing argument could even me made for its military suitability in rear-area defense. But, as a main-battle-caliber, its glaring inadequacy is obvious to all but a few, party-lines and party-liners notwithstanding!

~ Author Unknown

[Lon Moer]

[mhg]

Originally posted by ironman0311
Infantry Magazine
28 Jan 07

Military Rifle Effectiveness

In an article in the current issue of Infantry Magazine, authors were assigned the task of articulating the current party-line with regard to continued lack of confidence in the military's M855 "62gr green-tip" 223 round, still being issued.

We are assured that extensive re-testing had been done in response to chronic complaints from the field. However, most such complaints are quickly dismissed as resulting from "inexperience" and "hazy recollections."

We are then told that all resultant testing only addressed close-range, exposed human targets (fifty meters maximum) that are unprotected by cover, ignoring the 223's (1) lack of acceptable terminal effect beyond 150m and (2) chronic lack of ability to penetrate commonly-used objects (like car doors)that the enemy uses for cover- the twin issues that are at the heart of complaints about this caliber and have for the past forty years. Government "studies" are all alike!

Authors went on to admonish us all that we need to be accurate shooters. No problem with that, but they then advocated "controlled-pairs" for engaging enemy soldiers. Funny, no one ever suggested the necessity of any such multiple-shot technique when we were using M14s, did they? Routinely firing " controlled-pairs" reduces a 28-round magazine to a 14-round one and effectively halves one's ammunition supply.

In conclusion, we are assured that inveterate complaints about the 223 round' s dismal failure as a main, battle caliber are merely "myth and superstition. " The Stoner rifle in 223 caliber is the "best... available" we are told. Then, almost as an aside, it is sheepishly admitted that ineffectiveness and long range and second-rate penetration really are problems with this combination and that "something even better" may come a long soon.

Well, it can hardly come too soon! The replacement forty years ago of heavy-caliber, main-battle-rifles, like the M14 and FAL, with light rifles in varmint calibers was, among other things, an attempt by "just-tech" types to degrade the importance and potency of the individual soldier and Marine, when it has been the heroism and gritty determination of the individual soldier and Marine that has consistently turned the tide of battle since this nation began! It is a forty-year old, procurement mistake, and all the trumped-up "studies" in the world will fail to convince soldiers and Marines in the field who are obliged to believe their own eyes!

The 223 round may be adequate for domestic, personal defense and domestic policing. A convincing argument could even me made for its military suitability in rear-area defense. But, as a main-battle-caliber, its glaring inadequacy is obvious to all but a few, party-lines and party-liners notwithstanding!

~ Author Unknown

This looks like a letter to the editor kinda thing

Matt

[Krummlauf]

[hagar]

Replace the M855 bullet with a 75 grain Hornady, and all of the above becomes redundant.

[Pope Lando]

If we'd just adopted .276 Pederson in 1932 we'd still be using it today, and so would most of the rest of the world.

[tulsamal]

I didn't even think they were using M855 over there anymore. All the short-barreled M-16's changed the velocity profile too much so they went back to M193. Or at least I _thought_ they did!

I'm using the Sierra 77 grain Match bullets in my handloads. I really want to shoot a deer with one and then really look at the damage in order to make up my own mind.

All said, I would still rather have an M-16 in 6.5 Grendel if I was given a free choice in a combat situation!

Gregg

[xcpd69]

Originally posted by tulsamal
I didn't even think they were using M855 over there anymore. All the short-barreled M-16's changed the velocity profile too much so they went back to M193. Or at least I _thought_ they did!

I'm using the Sierra 77 grain Match bullets in my handloads. I really want to shoot a deer with one and then really look at the damage in order to make up my own mind.

All said, I would still rather have an M-16 in 6.5 Grendel if I was given a free choice in a combat situation!

Gregg

Last I heard through the grapevine (Yeah, I know...) was that M193 was specificly NOT authorized for combat use, but relegated to training only. Supposedly, it is accurate enough out of the current 1/7 twist for reduced range qualifying, but not for longer distances. Especially since most of the older weapons in inventory have been upgraded to modern 1/7 twist from the old 1/12 twist with new uppers.

Keep in mind that I'm just an Armchair Commando, with no military time, and only "know" what I've read.

I DO keep hearing that the current setup IS adequate at CQB distances encountered in MOUT. It seems that the trouble starts with the longer range encounters that pop up from time to time.

Guess the bad guys don't know they're supposd to close in before engaging.

I will listen more intently to those who have had "boots on the ground" more recently on the "two-way range.."

The jury may still be out.

[USMC 0341]

Funny how the people who argue that "you can carry more 5.56 rounds per pound" never quite catch that you need more 5.56 rounds to do the same job.

Ever notice how people who feel under armed with a 9mm if it doesn't have a magazine with more than 10 rounds see no problem with a shotgun that only holds 5 or 6?

The problem with the argument that "more little hits can equal one big hit" is that in combat Murphy's law comes in to play way too often and sometimes you are only going to get that one shot before your dancing partner makes better use of the cover and terrain.

[traines]

last time i posted anything of the sort about the .223 i got flammed.

[1carlson]

I recall the outcry from the public how dare we arm our soldiers with Humvees with inadequate armor. Where is the outcry that our soldiers are being sent into battle with an underpowered weapon?
If I knew I were going to be in a fight, I would certainly want the most knock down power that I could control under the conditions. Having fired the FAL and a modern .223 weapon (HK SL8) back to back, it is nice to have the light weight of the plastic gun with small rounds, but if I knew that the enemy would have AK's or worse, I would prefer the FAL in a heartbeat. I can reach out and hit him hard at a range where his x 39 is loosing efrectiveness and I can kncok him down with one shot in close.
But if I could have my FN49 or Hakim in 8mm... Now there is a round!
And yes I know that the 8mm might loose out in the diminishing return department(too big?), but when someone is shooting at me I want to hit them with something convincing, like 200 grains of steel and lead wraped in a FMJ.

[US Marine1833]

I would take a para-FAL over an AR any day! Thats my choice for MOUT aka Urban fighting!

[tulsamal]

(2) chronic lack of ability to penetrate commonly-used objects (like car doors)that the enemy uses for cover

That line doesn't ring true. Remember that website where the guy took an old car and shot it with a bunch of different calibers from all different angles? Even the 9mm was whistling through both car doors. 5.56 of the M193 should do the same thing. And the M855 was made for just that sort of thing. Unless it is going so slowly that it destabilizes, it should go through any sheet metal without any pause at all. I've seen cars that were shot up at Iraqi check points. The smaller 5.56mm holes still went through everything!

re: M193 for practice, etc. I know I've read/heard from returning Iraqi vets that M193 had been reissued, especially for the short-barreled carbines. Somebody reading this who has been over there in a combat capacity want to weigh in? I would like to know what the general combat troops are actually using when they engage the enemy.

I stated my preference for 6.5 Grendel for personal use. But I can't really get behind the whole "5.56mm sucks" idea. I think M193 out of a 20" barrel works just fine. I'm not sure I have an opinion on M855 out of a 20" barrel. But then we went to mostly 14.5" barreled M4's. And even the 10.5" barrels. What SHOULD have happened was that somebody should have realized the possible problems that was going to cause with the ammo. From what I've seen, the alternative then is to go to a much heavier bullet. The guys with the Designated Marksman Rifles firing the heavy bullets don't seem to have any problems putting people down. And at extreme range.

I was a Drill Sergeant. I've been on the range with privates. One cycle I even had all female troops. They did a good job actually but they are smaller in size. For that matter, a lot of male troops aren't exactly giants at 19 years old. Something like the M-14 is just too big for them. That's reality. Without even considering full-auto or burst fire! IMO, the M-16 was a step in the right direction. The M16A2 was a real favorite of mine when I was in the 25th ID (L). We just need to resolve these ammo issues with the short barrels. Or go to a mid-caliber that the AR rifles can still use.

Gregg

[chet]

I have seen 5.56 break up in vehicles, specifically a Nash Rambler. I found a lot of the jackets, as well as base and tip chunks laying on the seats inside the vehicle after going through one door. This was Guat fired from FA Galils between 50 and 100 yards. CAVIM 7.62 from a MAG 58 did not have that problem. I went right on thru, occasionally keyholing the opposite door. It also went right thru the rims.
While I think the AR/5.56 platform does have a use, I place it in the same class as the M1/2/3 .30 carbines. (The military finally caught on too, with the M4 designation for the 14" units). It's not a "rifle", it's a carbine. 100 to 150 yards. Lots of ammo, lightweight, low recoil. Yep, that's a carbine. No controversy here.
Chet

[ironman0311]

For that matter, a lot of male troops aren't exactly giants at 19 years old. Something like the M-14 is just too big for them. That's reality

A lot of those who actually carried an M-14, M1, BAR, 1919, M-60 in combat would beg to differ with that assertion. They adapted to whatever they were issued.

Funny; small guys usually were, more often then not, the gunners on the 60's, BAR's, MG's (and radiomen) and they could hump em and use em all day ... most of them humped better than the bigger guys.

I never saw one of my Marines (Large or small) drop his weapon because it was too heavy. I'll bet Martin never saw anyone in Korea do the same.

Conversely, I have seen men (and have done so myself) shit-can chow, and creature comfort gear, so we could carry more ammo and frags when we knew we were headed into a fight.

I've seen men pass-out, but I never saw one fall-out ... especially because his weapon was to big for him.

The M-4 is not a battle rifle.

The M-16 is not a battle rifle.

(Albeit it's better than the M-4)

The 7.62 M-14 and FAL are a far more versatile and effective choice across the worlds battlefields ... now, and in the near future ... unless a better mousetrap comes along.

But, as of right now -- "older is better" IMHO. And, apparently a lot of guys in the sandbox think so too, based on the info I get from the ones I am in contact with.

[chet]

Here's your references:
1. Reissue of the M14
2. Wider issue of the M21
3. Development of the SCAR
4. Development if the Mk 262 77gr SMK/Nosler 5.56 round

Bigger is better and everything old is new again.
Chet

[Survey Punk]

Whatever round you pick make it fully steel cored.

JB

[splattermatic]

lonny,
where did you hear that m193 is not accurate out of a 1/7 twist barrel ?
i beg to differ, for you cannot over stabilize a bullet.
i can possible see that because of the fast spin and the m193 ammo is just lead and copper , that maybe penetration suffers.
but , oh how the wounds would look, with a fragmenting drill bit !!!

i'd like to see some real data on this, for i know 55 gr bullets will stabilize and shoot accuratly in a 1/7 twist barrel at any distance.
i have shot them at paper and was more than satisfied with the results.

[W.E.G.]

I don't think the .223 is really a sniper round.

But, if I got shot in the head with a .223, I might change my mind.

[Skilter]

but you cant go kicking in doors with a battle rifle unless it is of carbine length and even then it is tough...

my cousin was in western iraq kicking in doors... there were several instances where they had bad guys not go down after 3 to 4 body shots of 223, but that the 16" m16 with an acog did the job pretty good with head shots. he said he wished he had designated riflemen with 308's as guys with a 308 could usually get 1 shot 1 kill, but that the m4's were really handy when working in tight quarters in and doing cordon and searches

ultimately... he said a lot depends on the mission but try to explain that to the guys sitting behind the desks...

[AzDak]

If stopping power is the only factor you look at, we'd be issuing everyone rifles that shoot the 700 Nitro Express.

Ergonomics counts for a ton. Why do you think ARs are favored so heavily in tactical competitions? Because you can do mag changes in a heart beat... far faster than you can change out an FAL or AK.

One thing that impresses the hell out of me constantly about ARs is just how easy they are to use. Hand anyone, regardless of size or shooting experience an AR and they can be ringing a metal plate at 300 yards easily.

With manageable recoil, it's far easier to get back onto the next target with an AR. Hell, I can double tap 5 targets faster with my AR than I can put a single .308 into each.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for us finding the best weapon to arm our soldiers with. I also love my FALs and AKs and I think the .308 is a thing of beauty. But there are valid reasons why we've stayed with the AR style rifles for as long as we have. It's not quite the black and white issue some folks paint it to be.

[mhg]

Originally posted by AzDak


Don't get me wrong, I'm all for us finding the best weapon to arm our soldiers with. I also love my FALs and AKs and I think the .308 is a thing of beauty. But there are valid reasons why we've stayed with the AR style rifles for as long as we have. It's not quite the black and white issue some folks paint it to be.

A wise man has spoken


Matt

[indy_Muaddib]

Originally posted by tulsamal


That line doesn't ring true. Remember that website where the guy took an old car and shot it with a bunch of different calibers from all different angles? Even the 9mm was whistling through both car doors. 5.56 of the M193 should do the same thing.

Gregg

http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/buickot4.htm

now let him shoot it at 150 yards and check the results.

[rcnpthfndr]

hmmmm......... i wonder what facts this was written on.

for most the 5.56 green tip sucks because of

1. they missed the target (happens more than naught)

2. bad marksmanship resulting in a non debilitating wound (hadj got away this ammo sucks)

3. in the heat of things, the are just sending rounds downrange in the proximity of the target.

4. they tried to penetrate the cast iron engine block of an approaching car and it didnt work.

what i have seen,

one of my snipers drop a guy at 820yds with an OA 20" AR SDM platform (made by Oly arms, oh yeah oly arms sucks, dont buy their shit, ) Pre Mk262 issue.

hadj have a pin hole entry wound and all his vital organs shredded and blown out the back.

friend shot @ 15 feet through the upper thigh, small hole in front, i could fit my fist in the exit wound. (yep negligent discharge)

hadj run away from over penetration. only to realize he doesnt have either lungs to breathe with and piles up down the block.

damn look at hadj, he has 50 hits, i told you 5.56 sucks, until you notice the guy who shot him has a M249 SAW and dumped a 200rd drum at him.

vehicle stopped with shots through the windshield killing all 4 insurgents inside, most went through hadj and out the back window.

5.56 does what it is supposed to do for the most part. but regardless this debate will go on and on and on.

[chet]

Well, debate generally generates improvement over time. And the .223 round certainly could be improved on. Does it kill people? Sure, it kills people. So does .30 carbine. But we found a way to improve on it, didn't we. We don't issue .30 carbine anymore because everything in inventory outclasses it.
Wouldn't it be great if we could outclass the .223? Sure it would.
The 6.5's are interesting and in a lot of ways better, I think. But in the end, the 6.5's will be a stop gap to get us to the next generation of weapons development which some people think may be a paradigm shift away from brass cased ammunition and fixed barrels firing FMJ ammunition. I tend to agree.
If it can be done, caseless ammunition that uses bonded core OTM projectiles in a reciprocating barrel could "conceivably" answer a lot of questions in recoil and round effectiveness.
When it comes right down to it, a man simply does not have a lot of time to get a round on his target. It's hard. *IF* and when a grunt gets that chance we want to make it count in every way. My opinion is, that in a lot of cases, minimal cover will ruin a lot of those chances when using a .223 in the MBR role.
I'd like to see us improve on that since MOUT is likely to get more prolific, not less.

Chet

[bykerhd]

Wait a bit and see what happens once the Dems declare "Peace with Honor" (the 21st century version of it anyway)and evacuate the troops from Iraq and turn the rest over to U.N, or whatever forces. All this talk about changing over to something other than current issue weapons will stop. The Dems won't PAY for anything else. Peace dividend and all that you know. They will probably reinstate Clinton's "Captain Krunch" program and finish off the M-14s for good.
The next war will be fought with the same stuff that is then older and the arguments about effectiveness will begin again.

[skeeterbay]

I have had a first hand expierience or two with the M-16 on human targets. Not all with FMJ either.

Man hit in the chest at less than 100 yds away. As I recall it was a Winchester PSP load. Bullet hit him just slightly left of center. He was running right face into the rifle. He stumbled forward about three steps and regained his footing and picked up speed. Note he never went down. Next shot was about an inch from the first. He stumbled forward, did loose his footing and fell. He was still alive and trying to get back up when I got to him. Dime size entry wounds and maybe quarter size exit wounds. Don't know what it did to his insides as I didn't open him up. He was wearing a "T" shirt, no heavy clothing and the bullets hit chest bone on the way in. I have seen hits on human's with FMJ as well, with like results. I always figured the dismal results were because of the FMJ. That was until I started using commercial ammo in the M-16.

I have heard all the stories and read all the writers articles. About how the 223/5.56 kills all the tissue within "X" amount of inches around the bullet wound. How if your hit in the chest it will exit your hip or ankle, stuff like that. They may be right I sure won't argue with experts. They sure know more than me. But based on my expieriences, I just didn't see any of that. Now in all fairness I have never used anything heavier than 65 grain bullets. These new heavier bullets may be the cats meow. I don't know!

I am not knocking the AR/M-16. Heck I got a couple and I always keep one handy in the house. But I also keep a 45-70 handy as well! I like the AR's, they make great fox and coyote guns. They are also handy for house work and in tight spaces. Used to search and clear a house the M-4 is a handy little item. But based on my dealings with them and what I have seen. I would rather have a heavier caliber if I was heading into a real bad spot.

Just my 2 cents worth! Not trying to dispute anyone or knock anyones choice of weapon or caliber! You guys may have had great results with the caliber/gun. I am just giving you my expierience with it.

Respectfully!

Skeeter!

[skeeterbay]

Keeping in mind everything I said in my previous post.

I still wouldn't want to get hit with the 223!

[0302]

i don't think there will ever be a one rifle that is great for all occasions - the rifle should be selected based on the mission, enemy, terrain, etc. trying to make one gun fill all combat situations like mout, mountain, desert, jungle will always result in a compromise. the 5.56 seems to be the best "compromise" for all situations but not great for anyof them. most infantry unit armories would have to be very large to accomodate enough weapons specifically tailored for each situation and the cost would be very high. the fal would be my first choice, but the though of humping 200-300 rounds of 7.62 isn't a pleasant one

[jaykden]

i've shot deer in the head with SP and HP .223 rounds, it blew their heads all to bits. the skull felt like a bunch of gravel with an exit like you wouldnt belive.

i think the .223 is not suitable when using a FMJ bullet, but a SP or HP round would do just fine against a body.

now, obviously the military can only use FMJs but in a situation of personal defense, i'd go with SP anyday, for 2 reasons.

- the rounds will break up in the body, causing massive trauma.

-they won't make it through walls like a FMJ will, at least as far.

think about loading light and fast Vmax bullets for personal defense in an AR? that would mess a guy up.

if required to use FMJs, either 762X39 or 762nato would be the way to go.

[mparrish]

Hmm, lots of thugs and bad guys here in the states that are feeling the effects of the .223 on their bodies and heads. In the soft or ballistic tipped versions, it's doing a pretty decent job at making them do dirt angels. I dunno, must be fuckin' magic or something like that.

But then again, this worn out argument of what is better will never die. I'm yet to find the perfect round and platform combination. Well, I take that back, a nasty mother in law with a bitter tongue may be the perfect weapon of destruction. But I digress.

[Skilter]

ok... but I will offer this... if you had to pick a gun in an urban enviroment, would it be the AR in 223? I wouldn't... and that is where I live.

Quite frankly, I would take a SBR 10 inch AK47 that was F/A with a side rail optic. But then I am hijacking the thread....

[splattermatic]

i'm with skilter on this one !


mmmmmmm, v-max's..........

[mparrish]

Why do I have a feeling that due to this thread, more kittens are being killed or more dead horses being flogged?

[Beepy]

a nasty mother in law with a bitter tongue may be the perfect weapon of destruction. But I digress

[Wadman]

Originally posted by splattermatic
lonny,
where did you hear that m193 is not accurate out of a 1/7 twist barrel ?
i beg to differ, for you cannot over stabilize a bullet.
i can possible see that because of the fast spin and the m193 ammo is just lead and copper , that maybe penetration suffers.
but , oh how the wounds would look, with a fragmenting drill bit !!!

i'd like to see some real data on this, for i know 55 gr bullets will stabilize and shoot accuratly in a 1/7 twist barrel at any distance.
i have shot them at paper and was more than satisfied with the results.

According to the Vihtavuori manual, it's possible to over-stabilize a bullet. Their diagram shows that the bullet point will maintain a nose up orientation rather than following the trajectory.

VihtaVuori Manual 3rd Edition, page 77.

[Low Drag]

Originally posted by skeeterbay
Keeping in mind everything I said in my previous post.

I still wouldn't want to get hit with the 223!

Ya know I've run into a lot of gun shop commandos that poo poo the 5.56. You know the same old saw, it's "no good" over 150 yards etc. But thus far I've not found anyone who will let me shoot at them at 200 or more yards. Even when I offer to bring a garbage can lid for them to use as a shield and band-aids in case the shot penetrates the lid.

[splattermatic]

at what range ?
and first i've heard of it ? they the only one's saying that, or is there a link to more info ?
by over stabilizing, i mean spin it too fast to not be accurate....
sure, with enough velocity, thin jacketed varmint bullets blow apart in mid air, and become nothing more than dust so to speak..
but at normal speeds, you can't make a bullet spin too fast to impair accuracy.

that was the question, not trajectory and where the nose is pointing..

[Wadman]

I'd have to scan the pages but they're saying that it won't be accurate.

[Kyrottimus]

Originally posted by traines
last time i posted anything of the sort about the .223 i got flammed.

Ditto

[Jerod]

The .223 is just fine and I would not want to be hit with it. The 1in12 w/ 55 grn bullet out of a 20 inch barrel is nasty . 1in7 w/62 grn out of a 141/2 inch m4 barrel is a pussy ! The military fucked up by changing the twist to 1 in 7 and then changing the grain to 62 . Once again the military brass / Ordinace people screwed up ! I spoke to a guy who just came back from the sand box and he KNOWS the .223 puts them down first hand. He did not give me all the details but he said IT DOES WORK ! [ He had the 20 inch M16A4 ]

[VoceNoctum]

Originally posted by mparrish
Hmm, lots of thugs and bad guys here in the states that are feeling the effects of the .223 on their bodies and heads. In the soft or ballistic tipped versions, it's doing a pretty decent job at making them do dirt angels. I dunno, must be fuckin' magic or something like that.

But then again, this worn out argument of what is better will never die. I'm yet to find the perfect round and platform combination.

It's just funny when everyone wants to go to the M14 days, but the M14 was one of the shortest lived main rifles in service. I've never been a fan of M14's though, so I'm not the best advocate. I've had several 308's and none appealed to me enough to keep. I'll maybe give the Keltec a try.

Until then, I'll stick with my 11" AR with 75gr's for my hurricane gun. If I need something further out, I've got an M1 Garand with some AP and other assorted ammo in nice little clips that don't compress.

[Wadman]

Originally posted by VoceNoctum
I've had several 308's and none appealed to me enough to keep. I'll maybe give the Keltec a try.

You got rid of your FALs?

[Boz]

I spent some time in Afghanistan lately and saw a number of people shot with the 5.56. Most of them died. Some took longer than others.

Lets face it, we're shooting a lot of people now. As with any caliber, there are going to be a percentage of hits that are ineffective. The way some people talk about it, the 5.56 is about as useful as a slingshot. I think they are full of crap.

I like the .308 but carrying an M-4 is a whole lot nicer and seemed to do the job just fine for me.

[Skilter]

Originally posted by Jerod
[ He had the 20 inch M16A4 ]

very important point here...

[VoceNoctum]

Originally posted by Wadman



You got rid of your FALs?

I've had a G3 copy, 2 FALs (SA58 and StG58 para) and two AR10's. Each had advantages/disadvantages, but were just not worth what I had into them. (As compared to selling them and buying some new widget.

[Low Drag]

Originally posted by Boz
I spent some time in Afghanistan lately and saw a number of people shot with the 5.56. Most of them died. Some took longer than others.

Lets face it, we're shooting a lot of people now. As with any caliber, there are going to be a percentage of hits that are ineffective. The way some people talk about it, the 5.56 is about as useful as a slingshot. I think they are full of crap.

I like the .308 but carrying an M-4 is a whole lot nicer and seemed to do the job just fine for me.

I keep telling my buddy that bought a DSA para (that shoots low) that there's been a whole lot of people killed by the 5.56.

As I posted above, no one will let me shoot at them with my AR at the 200 yard line, even if I supply the band-aids.

[1carlson]

Originally posted by Low Drag

As I posted above, no one will let me shoot at them with my AR at the 200 yard line, even if I supply the band-aids.

I think that the point is, in this game we stand 200 yards apart and you shoot at me with .223 and I fire back with .308 (or insert your favorite round here). It is not a "game" for either of us. Any gun is good for shooting at unarmed targets...

[Low Drag]

The point is if the 5.56 is "no good" then it should be no big deal to get shot with it.

Feel free to shoot at me at 200 or 300 yards with a 7.62 and I'll use a 5.56. What will count is who hits first, not the round that is being fired.

[Beckman]

Please read the following article written by Dr. Martin Fackler, Wounding Patterns of Military Rifle Bullets. For those that do not know, Dr. Fackler is a top wound ballistician. The article is relatively old, from 1989, but it presents a good overview of the effectiveness of various military-style rifle bullets. I'm sure that some of you have already read the article, but it may be interesting and informative to those that have not read it.

http://matrix.dumpshock.com/raygun/basics/pmrb.html

In short, according to Dr. Fackler, the M193 and M855 from M161A and M16A2 rifles, respectively, can create wounds that are no less damaging than some 7.62 rounds. The typical wound profile of then-current Soviet 7.62x39 and U.S. 7.62 x 51 NATO indicated less tissue disruption than 5.56 M193 and M855. West German 7.62 x 51 NATO produced typical wound profiles greater than either the U.S. 7.62 NATO or any 5.56 ammo.

Please note, these tests are against un-armored simulations. They are only tests of military-type bullets, not hunting bullets. Although not mentioned in the article, a comparison between similar hunting bullets in .308 and .223 will virtually always produce a greater wound profile for .308.