".223/5.56 isnt effective enough"

[Socomike]

Where does this rumor come from? Is it the media reports that interview soldiers that "know they hit the bad guy" and he just walked it off? Is it personal experience?

I am so tired of reading that people are so surprised that the Marine Corps went with the M27 to supplement the SAW and it is ONLY a 5.56 and that they thought they would go to a more effective round.

If you are the guys saying that, have you ever witnessed the effectiveness of a 5.56 on a human? Deer? Hog?

Ill add my personal experience here and hope that others will as well. If it is not your personal experience and you are regurgitating unfounded BS (As in you don't have anything to back it up) please do not post it.

I have a quick story that I personally pulled the trigger so I know how everything went down from target acquisition, to the shot landing, to providing first aid or calling the truck to come pick up the body.

Story 1
Gun Used-Colt M4 with Acog and bipod.
Round- standard M855

I observed bad guy carrying an AK47 in Mahmudiyah, Iraq. He was terrorizing the locals by beating them with the rifle, punching, kicking, and slapping. We had reports that this was going on and that Al Queda Iraq or AQI was using the area as a meeting place. I was part of a designated marksman team that was placed in a 3rd story hotel room that consisted of myself, my spotter/240B gunner, and a rear security man.

I got authorization to take the shot if he shot at anyone. A few minutes later he murdered a man in the street that wanted to fight back. I estimated that he was approx 175 meters from my position and about 30 feet lower then my elevation. I put the chevron on his neck and squeezed the trigger. A small burst of dust from his chest and he was down and not moving. I called a QRF element to the scene and left my hide. The bullet entered between his nipples. The entrance would was just a bullet hole. The exit was about the size of an acorn and directly behind the entrance wound. The wound cavity, when viewed from behind was impressive with smashed bone and destroyed soft tissue inside of it. He was dead shortly after hitting the grond The round was not recovered.

Bottom line is that the 5.56 is a great round for a modern soldier. Supplementing squads with .308 rifles, such as the M14, is not a bad idea and is being done in both Iraq and Afg. It is plenty effective within 300 meters and is getting kills much farther out then that.

/Rant

 

[RichardR]

I like the 5.56x45mm round, in my experience it's a great round for everything short of turning cover into concealment, for that it's hard to beat the .308 as a general purpose round.

 

[the1kidd03]

Well said soldier

I too wonder where this reputation comes from....it's a bunch of BS.....I can tell you first hand that they will penetrate body armor quite effectively (855)...it's an excellent round that is still effective at reasonably far distances....it penetrates normal structures just fine(drywall) of course it is questionable through concrete but unless it's suppressive fire why would you want to dump on a wall without seeing your target..... of course HP would make a bit worse exit wounds, but unfortunately certain regulations restrict that......in any case, I think this rumor is kept alive by all the expert "armchair commandos" and "couch grunts"....but whatever, let them believe their video games all they want

 

[gunowner930]

Story 1: Well I heard from someone who knows someone that has a third cousin that was in Iraq and he shot terrorists dead center in the forehead from 25 meters, and the terrorists would still charge him, he couldn't kill them until he a picked up a AK. He said the 7.62 round sent them flying 30 ft back, I'm not sure what 7.62 round it is, they're all the same right?

Story 2: I know someone or read on the internet, I don't remember. that someone was unable to kill 45 lb coyotes with a 5.56, however this anonymous person was able to blow them into unrecognizable pieces with a .45. I also read somewhere on the internet that a 5.56 produces almost 3x the energy of a .45 but that can't be true because the 45 is a man-stopper that has knockdown power and the 5.56 is a poodle shooter varmint round.

 

[Disposable Heart]

Socommike,

First, thank you for your experience and your service. I will also agree I tire quickly of those screaming and yelling and slapping the pavement besides themselves about the switch to 5.56. Everyone I talked to that has ACTUALLY shot someone (unfortunately ) says it's fine. Problems arise in a variety of ways:
BS dripped down from above: Old guys that are still in or are trainers now got mad because they switched not only tactic of smaller ammo, but tactics in the field (movement from emphasis on marksmanship to volume of fire). That being said: Every Marine I talked to (a branch that still emphasizes marksmanship) has NEVER had a problem with 5.56 UNLESS they were in Vietnam. Further inquisitions proved that it wasn't the round causing them problems, but the situation of being in a hopeless fight where the individual counted for nothing. There, it seemed nothing mattered or would work, short of nuclear weapons. What a horrible war...

I have personally enacted 5.56 violence upon an animal, a 150lb wild hog in KY. A 64 gr. softpoint to it's side worked well and dropped the animal quickly and minimum of fuss. Tough beast, far tougher in my humbled opinion than a human.

 

[RichardR]

it penetrates normal structures just fine(drywall) of course it is questionable through concrete but unless it's suppressive fire why would you want to dump on a wall without seeing your target.....

Eh? that's a bit limited in scope to really make such a determination on whether or not a round "penetrates" enough for any given combat situation.

For example, vehicles play a huge role in modern warfare, heck even semi-trained insurgent forces know to duck down behind engine blocks or wheels (cover) rather than behind a vehicles doors or body panels (concealment).

While I personally think that the 5.56 is more than capable as a general issue round, it does have it's limitations & because of them it should be augmented with either GPM's or DRM armed with something with a bit more OOMPH, regardless of the theater in which they are deployed.

 

[chadc11]

I believe the 5.56 round gets its bad rep partly from the military itself. Let me start off by saying that I am not in the military nor have I ever served, so this is second hand knowledge. When my brother came back from basic at Ft. Benning, he told me the Drill Sergeants/rifle instructors told them the round is to wound not kill. They say this takes 3 men out of the fight: the wounded combatant and the 2 men it takes to drag him away.

Like I said, I don't have any personal experience with it. I am just relaying what my brother told me.

 

[Redskinsfan]

Story 1: Well I heard from someone who knows someone that has a third cousin that was in Iraq and he shot terrorists dead center in the forehead from 25 meters, and the terrorists would still charge him, he couldn't kill them until he a picked up a AK. He said the 7.62 round sent them flying 30 ft back, I'm not sure what 7.62 round it is, they're all the same right?

Story 2: I know someone or read on the internet, I don't remember. that someone was unable to kill 45 lb coyotes with a 5.56, however this anonymous person was able to blow them into unrecognizable pieces with a .45. I also read somewhere on the internet that a 5.56 produces almost 3x the energy of a .45 but that can't be true because the 45 is a man-stopper that has knockdown power and the 5.56 is a poodle shooter varmint round.

Good one. You got the 45 cal. guys down pat.

Terry

 

[Tandor]

As A Vet, never seen any action, not much going on in the Gulf in 1990. But I want to say thank you & God bless.

 

[ViperJock]

Great stories! I do know that at least one 62grain 5.56 that hit an enemy combatant slid off the sternum and went subcuticular instead of penetrating the chest. I am unsure as to the range the round was fired from. Guy ended up in one our hospitals and treated by a personal friend. Or was that a friend's cousin's roomate... Nope never mind, this was a dream.

Seriously though this is a true story. I don't know how often this happens but it happened at least once

 

[gunowner930]

I believe the 5.56 round gets its bad rep partly from the military itself. Let me start off by saying that I am not in the military nor have I ever served, so this is second hand knowledge. When my brother came back from basic at Ft. Benning, he told me the Drill Sergeants/rifle instructors told them the round is to wound not kill

Basic training is not exactly the place to call them out, but that is the biggest load of horseshhhh well anyway, next time you hear this ridiculous myth ask the person telling you this to please cite design requirements or anything official from the U.S. military or Remington that states this as a fact. This myth of the .223/5.56x45 being designed to wound not kill is kinda like Bigfoot, many people have seen Bigfoot but nobody can provide reliable documentation of his existence.

 

[the1kidd03]

Eh? that's a bit limited in scope to really make such a determination on whether or not a round "penetrates" enough for any given combat situation.

For example, vehicles play a huge role in modern warfare, heck even semi-trained insurgent forces know to duck down behind engine blocks or wheels (cover) rather than behind a vehicles doors or body panels (concealment).

While I personally think that the 5.56 is more than capable as a general issue round, it does have it's limitations & because of them it should be augmented with either GPM's or DRM armed with something with a bit more OOMPH, regardless of the theater in which they are deployed.

it was meant to be general....indicating it is an excellent round for what it's meant for....if you need to shoot through excessive barriers, that's why you have machine gunners.....it was in reference to people's general argument that "it doesn't penetrate enough"

 

[badmac183]

umm idk about any of you but I have shot groundhogs with .223s and have had them run off before I can get out their with a shovel. I for one would not trust a round that can't stop groundhogs to stop a grown man with a gun.

 

[chadc11]

Basic training is not exactly the place to call them out, but that is the biggest load of horseshhhh well anyway, next time you hear this ridiculous myth ask the person telling you this to please cite design requirements or anything official from the U.S. military or Remington that states this as a fact. This myth of the .223/5.56x45 being designed to wound not kill is kinda like Bigfoot, many people have seen Bigfoot but nobody can provide reliable documentation of his existence.

I find it hard to believe that the military would intentionally put an inferior round in the hands of our soldiers. It is prob what this one DS has heard or personally believes and tells it to new impressionable soldiers so they take it as fact and thus the myth lives on.

 

[the1kidd03]

umm idk about any of you but I have shot groundhogs with .223s and have had them run off before I can get out their with a shovel. I for one would not trust a round that can't stop groundhogs to stop a grown man with a gun.

this brings into question the shooter(accuracy of the shot) and the round being used (velocity, FMJ/HP/etc)........small target, greater distance, excessive penetration through a non vital portion of a small animal.....there are far more variables which can't be accounted for in such situations.....I think this is why the OP was ideally looking for accounts of actual military experience...otherwise it's simply specualtion/theory of could haves/what if's/ etc

 

[the1kidd03]

I find it hard to believe that the military would intentionally put an inferior round in the hands of our soldiers. It is prob what this one DS has heard or personally believes and tells it to new impressionable soldiers so they take it as fact and thus the myth lives on.

Also, this IS BOOT CAMP we're talking about......they don't have to be infantrymen as it is their job to teach military BASICS......his MOS could have been administration for all we know.........he'll learn more and better information at infantry training if that's where he's headed, by more knowledgeable/experienced soldiers

 

[DoggyDaddy]

umm idk about any of you but I have shot groundhogs with .223s and have had them run off before I can get out their with a shovel. I for one would not trust a round that can't stop groundhogs to stop a grown man with a gun.

Maybe you missed?

 

[sbcman]

I can't think of any round I would voluntarily take one in the chest from- rimfire or centerfire.

Thus, I respect the 5.56.

 

[gunman41mag]

I've read that the problem with the 5.56x45 ammo is when it's being shot out of barrels less than 20 inches, cause they lose velocity

 

[.452browning]

I also have heard the negative reports about the 5.56mm. The information I trust the most comes from my brother who served 16 months in Iraq in 03-04 and then 2 more tours in Afghanistan in 06 and 08. He also has personal experience and witnessed the power of the 5.56mm on human targets. He has told me stories about one round from his M4 would immediately drop a threat. He has also stated that they have shot a threat 6-8 times before he completely stopped. He also stated that the threats struck multiple times took hits all over the body before taking 1-2 more in a vital area to stop them. Most of these incidents were with running enemies. He attributes they varying results to a couple of things.

1. Shot placement. He has even seen threats get hit with 7.62mm rounds and continue to try and move or fight. The round struck low in abdomen or hit extremity. A round in high center of mass or head by 5.56 or 7.62 will have a devastating effect and will most likely stop the threat.
2. Round interference: Several instenses of firing 5.56mm rounds through doors and walls slow the round and deflected it causing not as much power as a direct hit would cause on the threat. He has captured wounded enemies that were injured more by shrapnel thrown by rounds then the bullets themselves, or bullet fragments.
3: range of threat: in Iraq in close quarters or ranges of 400 meters or less the 5.56 was excellent. When in Afghanistan they began issuing 7.62 rifles to marksman for increased power at range. He said the 5.56 can get hits on targets beyond 400 meters easy, but the 7.62 dumps more energy into the target at long range increasing the possibility of stopping the threat. However, he stated the 5.56 does a good job for stopping a threat and has the added advantage of light weight and lighter recoil and carrying more ammunition.

Overall he was pleased with the 5.56 round in combat. It did it's job well. It kept him and the guys in his teams alive. If he had any real quarrels it was with the M4 rifle itself. Too sensitive to sand and dirt and took too much maintenance. But as long as it was kept clean it continued to fire.

They will always try and find fault in any rifle round used in combat. Until we have lasers there will be people going against them. Who knows they may have problems with laser rifles saying they don't burn the target enough. Battery goes dead too soon, etc.

All I know is I don't want to be shot with any of them.