Abandoning the AR(223) ship. Now what?

[kwatters]

If you've already made up your mind about dumping the 5.56 mil then this advice isn't for you. But if you reconsider and you're looking for a defense, hog-busting, bad ass round in that caliber try the Hornady TAP 75 gr OTBT (Open Tip Boat Tail.)

This is what I was thinking. NATO rounds are all FMJ, we don't use that in our pistols, why would we think that it is a stopper in a rifle?
Have you ever seen what a varmint grenade will do to a critter? Sure it doesn't have penetration but the damage...

 

[mrortega]

This is what I was thinking. NATO rounds are all FMJ, we don't use that in our pistols, why would we think that it is a stopper in a rifle?
Have you ever seen what a varmint grenade will do to a critter? Sure it doesn't have penetration but the damage...

The 75 isn't your "red mist" round that you use on ground hogs. It will open up but the extra weight really makes it penetrate.

 

[dross]

This is what I was thinking. NATO rounds are all FMJ, we don't use that in our pistols, why would we think that it is a stopper in a rifle?
Have you ever seen what a varmint grenade will do to a critter? Sure it doesn't have penetration but the damage...

The reason is the velocity. Above 2700 fps, the 5.56 round tends to fragment, which causes pretty massive wounds and is a good stopper.

Pistol FMJ rounds don't fragment that I'm aware of.

The argument that I've heard about varmint bullets is that they don't penetrate deep enough.

 

[nipprdog]

The reason is the velocity. Above 2700 fps, the 5.56 round tends to fragment, which causes pretty massive wounds and is a good stopper.

There's a youtube video that shows a good example of that. guy shoots a 5.56 round into a large water bottle. It fragments, and doesn't exit. However, it dumps enough energy to make the bottle jump up 2 feet. I wont post the video since the language isn't safe for work or kids. Search youtube for "5.56mm vs 44mag vs 12guage".

 

[Yeah]

Watching people shoot bottles to assess a bullet's effectiveness on living tissue, in lieu of shooting living tissue, would be a hoot I'm sure.

I have a 22-250AI load using a 75 Amax that at 120 yards is going roughly 3100 fps. At that impact speed the bullet can make it through a whitetail doe's front shoulder, traverse her torso, and come to a stop against her pelvis. It can also have 98% weight retention. The doe likely expetienced more fragmentation. I can also report remarkably similar results with a 62 TSX going even faster than that.

Your results may vary but mostly by bullet, impact velocity, and target.

 

[2cool9031]

Time to move up to a .308

 

[AF Gunner]

SIG556R

 

[U.S. Patriot]

5.56/.223 rounds yaw when entering the body. Which creates a much larger wound channel, as does the 7.62x39.

 

[gunowner930]

I think i am going to have to trade or sell away my beloved HBar bushmaster "m4"(variant). Mostly due to my acceptance of the reality of the underpowered .223. Yes it is a very deadly weapon in my hands, but I know what it can and cannot do. It just doesnt serve the purpose fully.

I have considered an alternate caliber AR, but the whole idea is to be able to resupply easily. The most common rifle round you will find on US soil is 5.56x45(.223). That is a huge advantage for someone who thinks they will fire a billion rounds, having aquired it all from their dead enemies.

If my idea is to stay with a service type rifle my next caliber choice should be 7.62x39. I figure this is a no brainer to many of you. My issue lies in my lack of enthusiasm for the AK platform. I know their capabilities and shortcomings. I also know the 7.62x39 deals quite a wound.

So in closing, I would like to see some suggestions on what AK's would impress me with their accuracy in say the $700 range. I got to admit my greatest dislike with the ak is the sights and sight radius.

You've identified a problem. You feel as though the 5.56x45 is underpowered. I disagree, but you want more power, fair enough. Why is the 7.62x39 the choice? It produces only marginally more energy than the 5.56x45 when both have equal barrel lengths. The difference in power isn't mcuh at all. You want more power, and it has to be a common caliber, so why not a 7.62x51?

I assume you're a Marine based off of your screen name, but every modern military has gone to a standard cartridge that is closer to the 5.56x45 than the full-powered cartridges or 7.62x39 (not a full-powered cartridge). If the 5.56x45 was so bad, the Russians would have never designed the 5.45x39.

 

[alan robert]

If you are going to stay with a intermediate cartridge, keep your AR.

There are AR uppers in wildcat calibers based on the .223 parent case, requiring only a barrel change. 6x45 and .300 Blackout (American answer to the 7.62x39) for example.

I own a 6x45 and am working towards a .300 Blackout upper. I am not a .223 fan myself (it is a personal choice), but I have rediscovered the AR platform after many years.

Your bushmaster would only need a barrel change and you could save some money.

The AR is too modular, versatile, interchangeable caliber ability, and cheaper to ignore. lol There also some really nice and affordable DI and gas piston option uppers in 7.62x39 and 5.45x39 available.

7.62x39 is common, but usually in the AK platform. I like this intermediate round a lot myself.

I own a custom Saiga AK and a PTR 7.62x39. I am waiting for Sig to produce the 556R with a few upgrades I feel are necessary.

My rifle needs do not exceed 200 yards. I can live with a intermediate cartridge and the smaller platforms that shoot them.

I usually have (1) high powered cartridge, either .243 or .308. For here in Indiana all I need is a intermediate rife caliber and a shotgun to fill in the close range gap. lol

With the AR a person can have many caliber options with (1) good lower.

I was in your shoes, good luck with your choice.

 

[Socomike]

.223 is not underpowered for man sized targets PERIOD. I wouldn't make such a strong statement if I had not witnessed the devastating effect it has on soft tissue more times then I can count unfortunately. Within 200 yards, .223 is absolutely lethal with good shot placement. The same can be said about 7.62X39. At 300 yards the .223 hits with plenty of force to penetrate soft tissue. Past 200 meters, the 7.62X39 starts to loose steam very quickly. Is it still deadly past 200? You bet your sweet ass it is.

Your problem with .223/5.56 is unfounded and a product of internet and gunshop bull****. .223 may not be the best choice for engagements 200+meters, but to say "im moving to 7.62X39 instead because of its AWESOME KNOCK DOWN POWER!!!" is a testament to how little you know and understand about ballistics and the intermediate rifle round in general.

If you are seeing guys with M4/M16's shoot guys and they continue to run, they need to practice their rifle marksmanship. Or maybe....just maybe, the Hollywood one shot one kill doesnt work like that. Of course landing one round to a mans gut doesnt always kill them immediately. Thats not the way it works. Sure they may have kept running, but without immediate medical attention, they stand little chance of surviving. Landing a short burst (6-9 rounds) from a M249 directly on a man will put them down every time.

Like it was already said. Please give this a read.
https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...on/174426-223_5_56_isnt_effective_enough.html

 

[flatlander]

Oh c'mon SOCOM, your first hand experiance isn't nearly as valuable as what the interweb tells me!!

Bob

 

[Socomike]

Oh c'mon SOCOM, your first hand experiance isn't nearly as valuable as what the interweb tells me!!

Bob

Haha. There are literally hundreds of stories out there about the 5.56 failing to take down a bad guy. There are 45 years and thousands of bad guys dead at the hands of American servicemen wielding a 5.56 chambered rifle.

You can pick out flaws with any round ever developed. The idea is to find one that fits your situation and need the best. For light infantry/ self defense/ some hunting/ and carrying a load long distances, the 5.56 is a great cheap'ish round. Are there better? Maybe. You could probably argue it either way. Im not disputing that. Im only disputing the fact that .223/5.56 isnt potent enough for 2 legged creatures.

Edit: Thanks Nipprdog

Mike

 

[nipprdog]

Im only disputing the fact that 5.56/.223 is plenty potent for 2 legged creatures.

I think you meant to say;

Im only disputing the fact that 5.56/.223 isn't plenty potent for 2 legged creatures.

 

[Socomike]

I think you meant to say;

Thanks bud. Fixed.

 

[windellmc]

After Vietnam the Russians redesigned their primary round to the 5.45x39. So they had 7.62x39 and switched to a completely new round that is very similar to the 5.56. I wonder why they would do that if the 7.62 was so superior? From what I have read and seen from guys shooting through bricks and other common building materials, the 5.56 has trouble shooting through intermediate barriers while 7.62x51 and 30-06 are more effective in that role. Of course you can carry twice as much 5.56 into combat which would seem to give it a big advantage when using suppressive fire to manuever is a common tactic.

 

[malern28us]

Are you ruling out things like the M1 Garand? What about the Russian semi auto in 7.62x54?
I had a lot of disdain for the 5.56 and actually went so far as to build a 6.8 SPC and a 7.62x39 version. I dont think I am good enough to hit a target consistently past 200-250 yards so but serve a purpose for me.
My wifes 5.56 is slowly changing my mind.
I always have my 7mm Rem Mag if I really want to reach out.

 

[gunowner930]

After Vietnam the Russians redesigned their primary round to the 5.45x39. So they had 7.62x39 and switched to a completely new round that is very similar to the 5.56. I wonder why they would do that if the 7.62 was so superior?QUOTE]

They did that because they designed the 5.45x39 to wound instead of kill, thus tying up more enemy resources caring for the wounded... Furthermore, they realized that the knockdown power of the 7.62x39 was so great that they decided it was unhumane to use on people, and redesignated the 7.62x39 as an anti-tank cartridge.

 

[Socomike]

After Vietnam the Russians redesigned their primary round to the 5.45x39. So they had 7.62x39 and switched to a completely new round that is very similar to the 5.56. I wonder why they would do that if the 7.62 was so superior?QUOTE]

They did that because they designed the 5.45x39 to wound instead of kill, thus tying up more enemy resources caring for the wounded... Furthermore, they realized that the knockdown power of the 7.62x39 was so great that they decided it was unhumane to use on people, and redesignated the 7.62x39 as an anti-tank cartridge.

Haha. Im pretty sure sarcastic posts are supposed to be in purple so everyone gets that you werent serious.

 

[Panama]

I changed calibers ma'self, and I am quite happy with the 308/7.62 format.