[megatronrules]

I was wondering about this today. Many say the .223 is far better. Many others say that its a glorified .22 varmit round. What am I too believe? I think 7.62 is better. A .30 cal 122 grain bullet seems better than a .22 cal 55 grain bullet. Does the .223 actually tumble in the body? Is there only certain bullet weights that do this? Thanks for any info.

[AK103K]

Your a trouble maker, aint'cha boy? :D

Personally, I like the 7.62 better for an all around round, but I wouldnt want to get hit with either. I think the 7.62 will penetrate things that are cover to the 223. Reguardless what the 223 will do wounding wise, I want something that will punch through things, get to the target, be intact and/or have enough mass and still have the oomph to do something.

[megatronrules]

No sir:D Not me. Just curious is all:p

[SodaPop]

The M193 round tends to fragment or explode at certain velocities (approximately under 190yds). That's means those tiny little fragments turn into shrapnel and tear you up. The M193 round will do more damaged compared to the common 7.62 ball ammo uner 190yds. The 7.62 round has a tendency to just blow a 30 caliber hold threw something. That's why we use hollow points for hunting!!

Is there only certain bullet weights that do this? Thanks for any info.

Its the bullets design more than the weight. The little M193 is butt heavy and when it hits something, its little fanny swings around, and it starts tumbling. If its hits at velocities over 2800fps it most likely will blow apart.


What am I too believe?

Remember.... The 5.56mm round was designed to be used with artillery and air superiority.:uhoh:
If your enemy is 400yds away, you call in an air strike.

[telewinz]

The .223 may equal the .308 in wound effectiveness on occasion and if I had a choice in just about ALL situations I'd choose the .223 over the .308 but I don't delude myself that I have the superior cartridge. Only a lighter cartridge with less recoil.

[twoblink]

What might "deflect" your .223, a 308 will punch through..

Tall grass in the jungle, will most likely deflect .223's, and make them stray. So regardless of "superior" wounds, if you can't get the bullet there, it's useless. So I vote 7.62x51.

Also, if you want great penetration and expansion, nosler, bear claw etc... a HUGE choice of hunting tips.... JHP seems to do nicely..:what:

[Art Eatman]

For anti-personnel use in a "generally, near to home" situation, IMO it's six of one, a half-dozen of the other. A center-of-mass hit is gonna necessitate an ambulance.

The .223 is certainly the superior varmint round. And in my mule deer camp, if you show up with either the .223 or the AK round you'll tend the campfire, not hunt. :)

Art

[Zak Smith]

All you want to know about .223/5.56 is here: http://www.ammo-oracle.com/


-z

[curt]

for close in circumstances the 5.56 doesn't really give up anything to the 7.62 and has the added advantage of faster followups and less blast.

For longer ranges the 7.62 begins to enjoy more advantage, once the .223 velocity drops below about 2,700 fps its wounding potential drops dramatically. 7.62 offers less wind deflection and better penetration. Any round can be deflected by branches or twigs, however if your talking an obstruction close to the target like a wall or car door then the 7.62 will still retain enough energy to do the job.

[EchoSixMike]

Bullets do the killing gents, the case just gets them there. M80 is less effective than M855 from 0 to about 225m(M16A2) then it becomes more effective out to max range due to diameter.

Deflection is the same for either bullet, you can chew through things better with 7.62x51, but you ain't going to do that with a rifle before somebody zaps you for loitering, maybe a GPMG.

Same questions, always the same answers. S/F...Ken M

[Jrob24]

Go to this site and view the diagrams. Note how the .223 makes a much bigger permenant wound.

http://www.firearmstactical.com/wound.htm


edit: whoops. I was thinking of 7.62x39

[Blain]

Anyone who says the .223 is just as or even close to as damaging as the .308 round is relying on pure speculaton. Talk to combat vets who have used both, and have had to rely on both. All say the same thing, .308 takes one round to put just about anyone down while the M193 sometimes took as many as 2-3. The M193 *CAN* (can) be deadly, but to rely on something as speculative as "fragmentation" to do your damage is foolhardy. Anyone here consider the M193 a viable whitetail cartridge? Why or why not? Case in point .308 for man sized (whitetail sized) game.

M193 is only deadly to around 200 yards out of a 20" barrel. anyone suggesting that the .223 is even close to near the .308s equal at ranges exceeding that have no clue what they are talking about.

[AK103K]

Dont sugar coat it Blain :D

[Zak Smith]

Blain,

megatronrules ain't talkin' about 7.62x51 (aka .308WIN):

? I think 7.62 is better. A .30 cal 122 grain bullet seems better than a .22 cal 55 grain bullet.


.308WIN has way better terminal ballistics than 7.62x39 or .223/5.56.

The right bullet choice of 5.56 is probably better than your average 7.62x39-- you can see terminal ballistic data on Ammo-Oracle or FirearmsTactical.

The heavier .223/5.56 bullets - that is 68, 69, 75, 77gr, 80gr and even 100gr - have much better terminal effects than the old 55gr or 62gr offerings. Again, see Ammo-Oracle.

-z

[megatronrules]

OOPS! I was refering to 7.62X39mm. As in SKS and AK's :( I should have been clear there. Sorry for any confusion here.

[gryphon]

megatron,

you're OK, I think the confusion fell in when calibers were being referenced without the last number, and some brought in the aspects of both 7.62x39 and 7.62x51.

[cratz2]

And since we're clarifyin' and all... are we limiting the discussion to military issue ammo or any factory ammo in said chamberings?

Ball ammo to ball ammo, either will be about as effective as the other and withing 100 yards the 7.62x39 is more than likely going to go right through leaving a 30 caliber hole that seals itself back up pretty quickly. The 5.56 I believe will create a wound that requires more immediate attention and is likely to cause more internal damage.

If we're considering other bullets, I'd really hate to get hit with 50 or 55 Gr Ballistic Tips... May not go too deep but deep enough and the wound would be really nasty.

[Sam]

Soda Pop,
The 30's make just as fine a hole as the 22 do. Just take s lot more meat for the bullet to swap ends. I've seen a coupkle shot side to side and 1 endwise and I'll assure you, the 30 makes aplenty nasty wound.

Soda Pop,
Nothing personal but I don't want an airstrike 400 yards from me.
that $#1+ hurts. I'll stick to my M1

Sam

[Andrew Wyatt]

.223 ball is more effective than .308 ball under certain circumstances.


.308 hollowpoints are more effective than .223 hollow points under ALL circumstances.

[Turk]

FYI ALL

Concerning the following post.

twoblink
Senior Member

Registered: Dec 2002
Location: Jung He City, Taiwan
Posts: 918
What might "deflect" your .223, a 308 will punch through..

Tall grass in the jungle, will most likely deflect .223's, and make them stray. So regardless of "superior" wounds, if you can't get the bullet there, it's useless. So I vote 7.62x51.

Let me give you all some sound advice. If you think tall grass will deflect a M-193 round you lose.

Turk

[TacticalSquirrel]

Art-
Just a question for you, and not trolling or anything, but wish to clarify a point you made. ;)
You said if someone shows up with a 7.62x39, they will not deer hunt in your camp.
The 7.62 Soviet is only slightly less in ballistics than the 30-30 Winchester cartrtridge, which has killed countless deer since its creation. It may not be a long distance cartridge, but a shooter skilled in its baliistics and the rifle can bring kills to 200 yards, with 125 yards being the more common maximum range. Also, the vast majority of deer kills are made under 50 yards. So with these numbers in mind, why would the 7.62 Soviet not be a valid cartridge in your deer camp? Is the similar 30-30 also not allowed?
Again, not flaming or trolling, but I am a pretty stout defender of both these cartridges for hunting, and wish to still stimulate discussion. :)

[Bostonterrier97]

In regards to Surplus Ammunition....If we compare the wounding ballistics of M80 to M855 or M193, within 250 yards fired from a barrel at least 20 inches long, M855 and M193 will outperform M80. At ranges greater than 250 yards...M80 outperforms the .223 ammo.

On a side note: Hirtenberger 7.62x51mm surplus ammunition has a thinner metal jacket than M80, because of this the Hirtenberger Ammunition disentegrates inside of a human body...in a similar fashion that M855 and M193 Ammunition does..the bullet jacket seperates from the lead core... as a result the wounds resulting from Hirtenberger 7.62mm NATO ammunition is on the average 60 percent LARGER than wounds produced by M193 and M855 for ranges less than 250 yards...for ranges greater than 250 yards...the hirtenberger Ammunition still outperforms the .223 M855 and M193 Ammunition.

When it comes to Penetration and bucking wind..7.62 NATO has the .223 beat.

As for 7.62x39mm...I think that this round is better at not being deflected than .223 Ammunition.

[Nightcrawler]

My personal feelings are this:

.308 Winchester: Best "all rounder". Can do anything from taking fairly large game to shooting AP, depending on the load. Would prefer a mix of soft points and armor-piercing (steel core on top of a hot charge) for "serious" use. Best served up in an 18-22" barreled rifle, though I'd be sorely tempted by a 16" FAL carbine with a folding stock.

.223 Remington: Can carry more for the same weight, but you shorten up your ranges a bit, especially if windage comes into a play, or you're relying on fragmentation. Often over-rated for home defense, in the sense that people rely to heavily on FMJ ammo fragmenting to avoid overpenetration, and to my mind relying on a full metal jacket rifle round while living in a thin-walled aparement is nuts. .223 is best served up in a lightweight rifle with an 18-20" barrel. Save the shorty carbines for CQB only. The carbines are a bit shorter, and therefor a bit handier, but there's nothing they can do that a 20" can't do better, ballistics wise.

5.45x39mm: The Russians' equivalent to our .223. Little bit lower velocities, but with proper ammo selection is just as effective. Use with the same limitations as you would .223. Best served up out of a 16" barreled AK variant, with either genuine Russian 7N6 ammo (that tends to tumble in soft media) or hollow points.

7.62x39mm: The world's first widespread "assault rifle" round. Has a trajectory similar to .30-30, but with lighter bullets, so it's best used at 200 yards an in, though 300 yard shots are perfectly doable with a little bit of practice. Basic FMJ ammunition won't do anything more than put a hole in somebody (which is usually enough), so I think that soft points or hollow points are the best choice for any serious usage. Due to the combination of larger bore and lower velocity, this round has less chance of defeating armor than any of the other rounds, though it'll still punch through most soft vests (especially with FMJ ammo). The 7.62x39mm round is best served up, in my opinion, in shorty submachine guns, like the Krinkov (albeit modified with a good compensator). In this fashion, and when used for close quarters only, the round is much superior than any pistol round submachine gun, in a more compact package than your typical military rifle. For hunting use, definately stick to soft points or hollow points, and keep your ranges about the same as you would for a .30-30.

[DAL]

Kindly wake me when the debate's over.;)
DAL

[Nightcrawler]

Another thing. 7.62x51mm is the absolute best choice for suppressed use. Here's why.

In order for a suppressed weapon to be REALLY effective, you need a subsonic bullet. So, basically, your bullet has a speed limit of about 1000fps.

So, if your bullet can't go any faster than that, you'd want the heaviest bullet possible, right? Well, 5.56mm subsonic loads are somewhere around 72 grains. Not much. With .308's larger case volume, you could hotload it to shove a much heavier bullet to the same velocity. The heaviest .30 cal bullets I know of (that are commonly available) are 220 grain, but I'm sure a custom one could be worked up for this purpose. (Somebody correct me if I'm wrong on this)

[Art Eatman]

TacticalSquirrel, my mule deer country is 99% walking hunting. You'll jump a buck at some range between underfoot to 200 yards, and he's in instant-overdrive. Even if you're not dealing with a big, running buck, there's reasonable odds that you'll see one out at 200 or 300 or more.

Few folks are good enough to use iron sights and smaller cartridges when dealing with these very-typical circumstances. My attitude is that these desert deer are realatively scarce and I don't want somebody to waste a wounded deer from a bad hit or from "not enough gun".

IMO, my 7mm08 or a .308 is about a 200-yard gun. My '06 is my long-time pet, and I'm far more confident of what I can do with it "way out there".

:), Art

[TacticalSquirrel]

Sound reasoning. Just as I wouldn't use my 30-30 in farm country where I have to shoot across open fields, I also wouldn't use a 7.62x39 there either. But I would use both in the thick brush woods that I hunt the majority of the time. My main concern with the statement you had made came across as if it was that those types are"bad" guns without sporting purpose, which effectively divides gunowners. Happy hunting!

[Dave Markowitz]

A major advantage of the 7.62 NATO round over the 5.56mm is the ability to penetrate cover like branches, brick walls, etc. In combat, people tend to hide behind things. I've seen a green sapling as big around as my arm (and I'm pretty scrawny) stop multiple M193 rounds at a range of ~40 yards. In comparison, the .303s (similar to a 7.62) from my buddy's No.4 sailed right through.

A couple of concrete (pardon the pun) examples of the 5.56mm's lack of tactical penetration appeared in the book Black Hawk Down.

The US Army had it right during WW2 when the standard frontline issue load for the M1 Rifle was .30 M2 AP, not Ball.