-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
Whats the truth about the 5.56 round?
- Thread starter Nemick
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
As for the majority of the few humans I have seen that were hit with the 5.56x45, they wasn't doing much complaining. Just kinda laying there with that gray look about them. The one that was still alive was hit through laminated automobile glass. He wasn't complaining much but he repeatedly said/whined about how he didn't want anymore of it. He is currently living in a nice state funded condo located at Pendleton Indiana. His lease is up in 2045.
Shot placement is the key. The little pathetic 25ACP will kill you just as dead as a .50 caliber browning if it hits the right stuff.
They say a 32acp hardball is like getting stabbed with a pencil. My understanding is,if you stab someone in the brain stem with a pencil,it wont be pretty.
People say 32acp is "useless for self defense" but Ive also see a 68% on shot stop rate quoted for it. Lets say its much worse than that,lets say 50%. My little MAB holds 9 shots. If I unload all 9 into you then chance of you not going down is (1-0.50)^9=0.00195,or about 2 tenths of a percent. That means a 99.8% chance that your going down. (My guess is that being shot 9 times is actually worse than that) The lesson is,if your in a situation where you have to shoot someone,you keep pulling the trigger untill your no longer in danger.
he actually recovered enough to stand trial for his insurgent activities, although my buddy, sgt carter (the shooter), who testified, said the guy was drooling on himself and twitching the whole time. so it scrambled part of his brain. he's not masterminding any more attacks on coalition forces.
Dang!
That was an interesting story. The insurgent is pretty lucky that he still can drool and twitch.
First, I don't want to be shot with one. I've seen how big of a hole it puts in steel and it isn't pretty.
Second, shot placement is always key, regardless of caliber.
When I was in and over I would have taken a larger caliber than 5.56 if I'd have had a choice in the matter. I never had to shoot anyone, but I know a bigger bullet is better for getting through walls, barriers and reaching out to distance. There is something to be said for 30 rounds in the magazine and 210 round of ammo on you as is the case of the standard GI load. There is also something to be said for a little less ammo, but a lot more power.
I think the arguement between 5.56 vs 308 has gone on so long because there is such a difference between the two. I think the answer is in the 6.8 or 6.5 or 6.something.
For me, I have a 5.56 AR at the house that I target shoot with. If I ever took it hunting you can believe I won't be using FMJ bullets. The bullet can make all the difference in the world when deciding how well any caliber works.
Second, shot placement is always key, regardless of caliber.
When I was in and over I would have taken a larger caliber than 5.56 if I'd have had a choice in the matter. I never had to shoot anyone, but I know a bigger bullet is better for getting through walls, barriers and reaching out to distance. There is something to be said for 30 rounds in the magazine and 210 round of ammo on you as is the case of the standard GI load. There is also something to be said for a little less ammo, but a lot more power.
I think the arguement between 5.56 vs 308 has gone on so long because there is such a difference between the two. I think the answer is in the 6.8 or 6.5 or 6.something.
For me, I have a 5.56 AR at the house that I target shoot with. If I ever took it hunting you can believe I won't be using FMJ bullets. The bullet can make all the difference in the world when deciding how well any caliber works.
I wish I could recall the source, but I read somewhere that the original 5.56/M-16 combination was very effective at closer ranges, but not so much at longer ranges. Apparently with the designed combinations of bullet weight/twist rate/?, the bullets would tumble in flight, causing not-so-great accuracy, but resulting in very effective damage when an enemy was hit. Later, the military changed combinations to increase accuracy. This resulted in much better accuracy, caused by a stable bullet in flight. A side-effect was that the stable FMJ bullet did not cause as much damage to the enemy.
This combination of bullet weight/design/twist rate/powder/primer/etc. is what causes handloaders/target shooters to strive for what works with A PARTICULAR rifle, not the mass-produced ones.
That all said, whether hit by a stable bullet or a tumbling one, shot placement is the key!
This combination of bullet weight/design/twist rate/powder/primer/etc. is what causes handloaders/target shooters to strive for what works with A PARTICULAR rifle, not the mass-produced ones.
That all said, whether hit by a stable bullet or a tumbling one, shot placement is the key!
ChalupaCabras
Expert
1) We are not at war with deer.
2) Investigation of deer shot with appropriate bullets yields a lot of dead deer and many gruesome wounds.
There is a wild cat derived from the .223 parent case that has been used in Africa for many years, as a utility rifle round on small to medium game with great results.
It is called the 6x45, using standard 243/6mm bullets. Black Hills will be producing 6x45 ammo in the near future, with bullets in 62, 85, and 100 grains.
This is not the same round as the experimental 6mm SAW round from the 70's. The SAW round is longer than the AR magwell.
Corbon also offers (4) loads in the 6x45. Their 85 grain self defense dpx round produces 2800 fps with 1480 ftlbs. muzzle energy from a 16 inch barrel, as an example. It is effective on auto glass and steel. Not sure about concrete penetration.
The round can be used in AR platforms, with only a barrel change. Same magazines and bolt. I would imagine it would not take much to dope out changes, for the predetermined .223 ranges for the current optics used.
Les Baer is currently producing AR rifles for this caliber.
My point, is for the sake of economics. The 6x45 is one of a few viable wildcats based on the .223 parent case, that would offer larger and accurate bullets with better ballistic coeffients, only requiring a barrel change.
I am biased to the 6 mm round. But there are also current .223 wildcats using 6.5 and 7.62 bullets.
I am looking very hard at the 6x45. I do not currently own a 6x45. But I own a .243 Fal, and really like the 6mm round.
There is plenty of .223 brass and handloads could be a viable option for the civilian shooter, besides the current available Corbon and Blackhill ammo. There are certainly plenty of different 6mm/243 bullets to use.
I am not a fan of the .223/5.56, but I really believe, we should not throw away the .223 parent case yet. At this time, it would be counter productive.
Somebody really should try to pursue this avenue. Just actually try it in as near world conditions as possible, and try to be open minded and neutral in the testing process. LOL
The military .223 was originally designed for a 55 grain bullet to be shot out of a 20" 1x12 twist barrel. Urban legend has it as pretty tough to beat.
The AR platform has changed over the years to meet unforeseen operational changes, and made to perform many duties.
One rifle to replace WW II era submachine guns, M1 carbine, and full size battle rifles (M1 and M14). Can it be done?
The current AR platform, may not reflect the original intent or capability. Pretty tough assignment for one caliber. My opinion of course.
It is called the 6x45, using standard 243/6mm bullets. Black Hills will be producing 6x45 ammo in the near future, with bullets in 62, 85, and 100 grains.
This is not the same round as the experimental 6mm SAW round from the 70's. The SAW round is longer than the AR magwell.
Corbon also offers (4) loads in the 6x45. Their 85 grain self defense dpx round produces 2800 fps with 1480 ftlbs. muzzle energy from a 16 inch barrel, as an example. It is effective on auto glass and steel. Not sure about concrete penetration.
The round can be used in AR platforms, with only a barrel change. Same magazines and bolt. I would imagine it would not take much to dope out changes, for the predetermined .223 ranges for the current optics used.
Les Baer is currently producing AR rifles for this caliber.
My point, is for the sake of economics. The 6x45 is one of a few viable wildcats based on the .223 parent case, that would offer larger and accurate bullets with better ballistic coeffients, only requiring a barrel change.
I am biased to the 6 mm round. But there are also current .223 wildcats using 6.5 and 7.62 bullets.
I am looking very hard at the 6x45. I do not currently own a 6x45. But I own a .243 Fal, and really like the 6mm round.
There is plenty of .223 brass and handloads could be a viable option for the civilian shooter, besides the current available Corbon and Blackhill ammo. There are certainly plenty of different 6mm/243 bullets to use.
I am not a fan of the .223/5.56, but I really believe, we should not throw away the .223 parent case yet. At this time, it would be counter productive.
Somebody really should try to pursue this avenue. Just actually try it in as near world conditions as possible, and try to be open minded and neutral in the testing process. LOL
The military .223 was originally designed for a 55 grain bullet to be shot out of a 20" 1x12 twist barrel. Urban legend has it as pretty tough to beat.
The AR platform has changed over the years to meet unforeseen operational changes, and made to perform many duties.
One rifle to replace WW II era submachine guns, M1 carbine, and full size battle rifles (M1 and M14). Can it be done?
The current AR platform, may not reflect the original intent or capability. Pretty tough assignment for one caliber. My opinion of course.
Last edited:
larrylegend
Plinker
I believe one of the biggest issues lies in the fact that our troops are using the same bullet/rifle for engagements ranging from less than 100yds out to beyond 500yds. Now think about if you were going to be making a shot at 100yds and 500yds, chances are you wouldn't use the same rifle and bullet for both shots. I think that is why there is so much exploring/testing going on right now with different rounds and rifles. I find it hard to believe that one bullet(weight,speed,etc) and one rifle would be great at both scenarios. That being said, I think the current 5.56 round is about one of the best rounds that would perform well in the broadest range of situations.
The truth about the 5.56 is it gets the multitude of jobs done.
Never failed me or the Marines around me.
Trick with close-quarters and M-16/M-4 is double tap or continue til he drops. (I'd do this with any weapon in close-quarters).
If need be, it's 1 shot, 1 kill.... all day. Just gotta know how to use your boomstick, baby!
Never failed me or the Marines around me.
Trick with close-quarters and M-16/M-4 is double tap or continue til he drops. (I'd do this with any weapon in close-quarters).
If need be, it's 1 shot, 1 kill.... all day. Just gotta know how to use your boomstick, baby!
The two largest reasons the Military switched from .308/7.62x51 to .223/5.56x45 is;
1.) Weight of load for combat carry. Standard load-out for a basic Infantryman is 210 rounds. On a normal day, on a bad day I have plussed up to 3x that for operations. How many here think they can carry 630 rounds of .308 for very long... Remember each 30 round GI AR mag loaded weighs in at 1 pound. Don't forget the rest of the kit either...
2.) After numerous records were reviewed from WWII and Korea it was noted that most combat operations were in Urban or Dense landscapes. Ruling out the need for every rifleman to need a 1000 yard gun that can stop an Elephant. The other piece of information that came out of this research was that .308 lead to a lot of fratricides in Urban and Dense Landscapes...
Been using 5.56x45 to smite the enemies of our nation for the better part of 20 years of my adult life. Never had it fail me yet... I will say I do miss they longer barrel of the M-16, but I do not miss the weight.
1.) Weight of load for combat carry. Standard load-out for a basic Infantryman is 210 rounds. On a normal day, on a bad day I have plussed up to 3x that for operations. How many here think they can carry 630 rounds of .308 for very long... Remember each 30 round GI AR mag loaded weighs in at 1 pound. Don't forget the rest of the kit either...
2.) After numerous records were reviewed from WWII and Korea it was noted that most combat operations were in Urban or Dense landscapes. Ruling out the need for every rifleman to need a 1000 yard gun that can stop an Elephant. The other piece of information that came out of this research was that .308 lead to a lot of fratricides in Urban and Dense Landscapes...
Been using 5.56x45 to smite the enemies of our nation for the better part of 20 years of my adult life. Never had it fail me yet... I will say I do miss they longer barrel of the M-16, but I do not miss the weight.
Last edited:
pinshooter45
Master
What happened to the 6.8 spc?
I read an article in a gun Mag, (probably still have it some where) that the military was looking into developing an 6.8 spc cartridge based of the Remington .270. I belive one can get your AR converted to shoot this caliber. The reason given in this article was that in Afgahnistan the ranges were longer and the 5.56 wasn't putting the enemy down. And this was being developed as a good comprimise between weight and power. That being said, a friend of mine who has several buddies in Iraq they were disapointed in the performance of the 5.56 even in CQB because of the layers of clothing being worn by insurgents would cause the 5.56 round to start to break up and only wounding the enemy. Therefore most of the time the first guy through the door had a 12ga loaded with slugs or buck shot. Also many soldiers were getting Hornaday 75gr TAP ammo through unoficial channels...I wondered why that stuff was so ard to find. 
I read an article in a gun Mag, (probably still have it some where) that the military was looking into developing an 6.8 spc cartridge based of the Remington .270. I belive one can get your AR converted to shoot this caliber. The reason given in this article was that in Afgahnistan the ranges were longer and the 5.56 wasn't putting the enemy down. And this was being developed as a good comprimise between weight and power. That being said, a friend of mine who has several buddies in Iraq they were disapointed in the performance of the 5.56 even in CQB because of the layers of clothing being worn by insurgents would cause the 5.56 round to start to break up and only wounding the enemy. Therefore most of the time the first guy through the door had a 12ga loaded with slugs or buck shot. Also many soldiers were getting Hornaday 75gr TAP ammo through unoficial channels...I wondered why that stuff was so ard to find.
Really, huh never noticed that problem... That is not the reason for the 12 gauge either...
Would love to see proof of this...Also many soldiers were getting Hornaday 75gr TAP ammo through unoficial channels...I wondered why that stuff was so ard to find.
Yes, it is all about shot placement. But while a well placed shot causing fatality is great a well placed shot causing a serious wound is almost as good with the 5.56 round. It will take 1 or more enemy combatants to remove the wounded from the battlefront and care for him.
Airborne33
Marksman
The 5.56 round works quite well. It causes a lot of damage with a vital hit, has low recoil allowing quick follow up shots, and it's accurate. Remember there is no "Perfect" round that works for every situation. The round is not deadly, unless the shooter holding the rifle is.
I like to think that the reason the 5.56 is the designated nato round is because of it's proven combat effectiveness. There have been a lot of rumors about the round, why it was created, what it's supposed to do, and how it behaves. It's important to understand that most of this is just passed down word of mouth and it's not true.
The 5.56 round used to tumble back in the days of Nam. Since then the twist on the M16 platform has been tightened to sustain a heavier bullet with a flatter tradjectory. It may tumble once it hits the target, but again it does not start tumbling from exit of barrel. If it did, good luck hitting a 300 M target accurately.
The M16 has had it's fair share of bad rep, mostly originating from Nam, it was fielded too early, when it should have had more extensive testing, but from what the military could tell at the time, it was the best weapon and they wanted to get it into the hands of Soldiers and Marines as quickly as possible. It's a great platform now, has served many years honorable service allowing the military to kill threats to our nation and it will continue in some form for many years to come. Don't try to fight it or get hung up on rumors. It's a great weapon that can be adapted for any mission and until something comes around that can seriously out perform in every aspect, it will not be retired.
-Wu
I like to think that the reason the 5.56 is the designated nato round is because of it's proven combat effectiveness. There have been a lot of rumors about the round, why it was created, what it's supposed to do, and how it behaves. It's important to understand that most of this is just passed down word of mouth and it's not true.
The 5.56 round used to tumble back in the days of Nam. Since then the twist on the M16 platform has been tightened to sustain a heavier bullet with a flatter tradjectory. It may tumble once it hits the target, but again it does not start tumbling from exit of barrel. If it did, good luck hitting a 300 M target accurately.
The M16 has had it's fair share of bad rep, mostly originating from Nam, it was fielded too early, when it should have had more extensive testing, but from what the military could tell at the time, it was the best weapon and they wanted to get it into the hands of Soldiers and Marines as quickly as possible. It's a great platform now, has served many years honorable service allowing the military to kill threats to our nation and it will continue in some form for many years to come. Don't try to fight it or get hung up on rumors. It's a great weapon that can be adapted for any mission and until something comes around that can seriously out perform in every aspect, it will not be retired.
-Wu
Site Supporter
Staff online
-
mom45Momerator
Members online
- KLB
- chef larry
- cmstuard
- frenchiectfd2203
- blueskies
- Bugzilla
- Jim5528
- cobber
- Andyccw
- jwamplerusa
- Squid556
- keger
- mom45
- Wstar425
- Loar
- zoglog
- Revdev86
- DoggyDaddy
- cakndsn
- Taurus the turtle
- AndreusMaximus
- Firehawk
- OneBadV8
- LokhXIV
- Hayden F
- ditcherman
- Nice_Ron_
- Romero Zombie
- Magyars
- Defensive Shooting Concepts
- mmpsteve
- TJ Kackowski
- tge45
- boblade
- yotehunt
- Rburney
- Longhair
- XDdreams
- EODFXSTI
- nobletucky
- 4sarge
- abraham743
- bocefus78
- POG_88
- Etcatt
- Hinkle
- oldfish15
- snowwalker
- Snapdragon
- Cavman