Poll - if given the choice, would you take a round of .223 or .45?


PDA






Baron
July 29, 2007, 03:36 PM
Purely hypothetical situation. If you had to take a hit from 25 yards from either a .223 or .45, which would you rather?

Let's say the .223 (Remington)/5.56x45 is XM193 from a 16" barrel and the .45 (ACP) is 230 gr. Gold Dot from a 5" barrel.

I know rifles have much greater temporary cavities and shock the tissue far more. At that range, the .223 should fragment properly. However, what if it doesn't, resulting in a .22 caliber punctate wound?

A .45 round is only a pistol round, but under these conditions would not be stopped by bones and ribs. Even if by some slim chance it doesn't expand, it's still a 45/100ths" hole.

I really wouldn't enjoy being hit by either one of these, but if you had to choose, which would it be? We all know there's lots of talk about the effectiveness of .223, particularly from a 16" barrel. Logically, many folks (myself included) that question the lethality of .223 are also great believers in the stopping power of .45. So - when it comes down to it, would you rather a big, reliable pistol round or a small, usually-works rifle round?

For the purposes of staying on track, let's assume we have no control over where the hit would be with one stipulation - no headshots.

Thanks for your participation - I'm looking forward to the results.

If you enjoyed reading about "Poll - if given the choice, would you take a round of .223 or .45?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Yukonstorm
July 29, 2007, 03:40 PM
Tell me you're kidding. Are you insane, asking what caliber round someone would prefer to be hit with.I think most, if not all would prefer not to take a round of any caliber. You sound demented at say the least.

BBQJOE
July 29, 2007, 03:40 PM
I refuse to even entertain this.

Bazooka Joe71
July 29, 2007, 03:43 PM
Have someone shoot you in the leg with each round and tell us how it turns out

Lone_Gunman
July 29, 2007, 03:46 PM
I don't know why people don't want to answer your question. For those who say they don't want to answer, just think of the question worded slightly differently:

Which do you think is more effective at 25 yards, 45 ACP or 223 Remington?

That's all the question is really asking, and there is no insanity involved.

eltorrente
July 29, 2007, 03:46 PM
I'd rather get shot by a .45.

You are saying what if the .223 doesn't work properly and ends up being a .22 round. Well you gotta figure that it's gonna work as intended, and I would assume it would and therefore would choose to be shot by the .45 instead.

When you say "..resulting in a .22 caliber puncture wound", that isn't the case. There is a huge amount of energy and there would be much more damage than just a .22 cal puncture wound.

CajunBass
July 29, 2007, 03:46 PM
You go first. I'll let you know later.

Baron
July 29, 2007, 03:46 PM
Look people, it's a poll, not voting on a presidential candidate. When it comes down to it, everybody's got plenty of caliber and stopping-power ideas, but thinking of it this way makes you actually consider what you think it superior.

Please don't get bent out of shape - I'd just like your opinion.

eltorrente
July 29, 2007, 03:48 PM
LOL people are funny. They can't even use a little imagination. It's just another way of saying which is more effective - lighten up folks. Buncha wet blankets in here. :D

Baron
July 29, 2007, 03:48 PM
Right, ElTorrente, it does have far more damage, but I believe it's referred to as a punctate wound, being specifically a wound in which the round travels straight through. It would certainly be worse than a .22LR through-and-through, but would it be worse than expanding .45 ACP?

Vonderek
July 29, 2007, 03:50 PM
Can I add a category? I'd rather be shot in the buttock by a BB...only if fired from a Daisy Red Ryder...by a buxom country girl named Daisy.

sacp81170a
July 29, 2007, 03:53 PM
OK, so someone offers me a million bucks to take a round and for some strange reason I consent to. I'm gonna wear a vest or it's a no go. I'd obviously rather take a hit from a .45 than a .223. There is no comparison. A rifle round is a rifle round and a pistol is a pistol. .223 goes through most vests, .45 is stopped by a level IIa.

eltorrente
July 29, 2007, 03:54 PM
Right, ElTorrente, it does have far more damage, but I believe it's referred to as a punctate wound, being specifically a wound in which the round travels straight through. It would certainly be worse than a .22LR through-and-through, but would it be worse than expanding .45 ACP?

Well if you want to limit the question to only defective .223's vs perfectly performing .45 JHP's, then maybe it would be closer. I really don't know, but I suspect that the energy imparted from the .223 would still damage/destroy more tissue than an expanded .45. This is just based on seeing gel tests, and no real data to back it up. Both would suck really bad though. :D

10-Ring
July 29, 2007, 03:55 PM
I would prefer my son's supersoaker :neener:

Zeke Menuar
July 29, 2007, 03:56 PM
Is this fired from a gun or is someone going to throw a round from across the room?

Sometimes the logic that emanates from the Internet is positively baffling.

ZM

turtlehitman
July 29, 2007, 03:57 PM
the 223 is going to transfer a lot more energy into your tissue than the 45 will. 45 is a bigger bullet but 223 does more damage.

Baron
July 29, 2007, 03:57 PM
I gotta agree - I would have to say .45, bad as it would be. I must confess I expected a few die-hard mall ninjas to claim the .223 would be no big deal compared to the venerable. Oh well. I guess the bottom line is how the heck would any of us know what either is like with few possible exceptions. There's only so far armchair commandoing will take us.

RobTzu
July 29, 2007, 04:01 PM
Its a valid question, I do not see the need to whine. If it seems dumb, don't bump the thread with posts....

I picked the 45, as someone else already said a pistol round is going to hurt less than a rifle round.

Brian Williams
July 29, 2007, 04:07 PM
223 out of a Keltec PLR or 24 varmint barrel JHP or FMJ
45 out of a carbine or a 3" 1911, 185 gr JHP flying ashtray or FMJ


Now we are getting 223 vs 45, next we are going to have 308 vs 9mm???

alucard0822
July 29, 2007, 04:10 PM
I picked the 45, as someone else already said a pistol round is going to hurt less than a rifle round.
well depending on where it hits you, I think a 45 in the arm probably would "hurt" more than a 5.56 that grenades your heart.

I took a slug from a 45 and all I got was this lousy T-shirt:D

Creature
July 29, 2007, 04:43 PM
Its a valid question, I do not see the need to whine. If it seems dumb, don't bump the thread with posts....

Valid how? It is a stupid question/poll and I am saying so.

W.E.G.
July 29, 2007, 04:46 PM
Dead either way.

I find both equally repugnant.

Outlaws
July 29, 2007, 05:03 PM
I think the XM193 would be more likely to go cleanly through the body at 25 yards than Speer Gold Dot which is designed to cause as much damage as possible.

Voting on this is dumb, but all the people that actually picked a Gold Dot .45 is even more mind boggling.

Joe Meyer
July 29, 2007, 05:06 PM
I picked none of the above.....

MudPuppy
July 29, 2007, 05:11 PM
I'd rather be missed by a 50BMG round than hit by a 22LR.

But, I'll play (if it didn't want to play, I'd stay out of the thread--or at least start a poll on whether on not this one was morbid/dumb/etc).

Out of the two options, I'd prefer the 45. There's a reason they say the pistol is for fighting your way to the rifle.

C-grunt
July 29, 2007, 05:15 PM
I have seen a few people shot by 5.56 and have never seen a .22 caliber exit wound. If your unlucky enough for it to hit bone, then it gets really ugly.

C-grunt
July 29, 2007, 05:20 PM
Theres a reason why SWAT teams all over the US went from sub guns to ARs. A light wieght .223 at close range is very effective.

Sistema1927
July 29, 2007, 05:22 PM
I'm not playing. IBTL.

glockman19
July 29, 2007, 05:53 PM
I prefer not to be shot by either. Both will kill @ 25 yards.

Next stupid question:
"Where would you rather be shot with any caliber in the head of in the foot?"

DMK
July 29, 2007, 06:03 PM
Hmm, 55gr projectile at 3000fps or a 230gr at 900fps?

I give the rifle bullet a little more respect than a pistol round. Of course, shot placement is always the key, regardless of the point spread.

Bazooka Joe71
July 29, 2007, 06:06 PM
Would you rather get poked in the eye, or punched in the face?:rolleyes:
















:neener:

Roccobro
July 29, 2007, 06:12 PM
I'm still undecided....

Justin

66912
July 29, 2007, 06:30 PM
I took a .45 through my lower right back and it went clean through my lower right front. Adrenaline aside, I never lost conciousness or my cool and made it through the whole nasty experience alive. Thank god this individual could not afford anything but target/ ball ammunition.

Mr White
July 29, 2007, 06:38 PM
If I couldn't get to my carry gun and fight back, I'd consider groveling. :eek:

66912
July 29, 2007, 06:45 PM
Groveling was and never will be an option. Either fight to the end with what you've got or try to break Steve Prefontane's record for the 400M!

a1huntingsupply
July 29, 2007, 06:53 PM
:what: if given the choice, would you take a round of .223 or .45? :banghead:
Hmm, 55gr projectile at 3000fps or a 230gr at 900fps?

I give the rifle bullet a little more respect than a pistol round.

I agree .... the .223 will do the most damage.

rantingredneck
July 29, 2007, 06:55 PM
If I had a choice, neither. If it's one or the other, I'd prefer the pistol to the rifle.

XD Fan
July 29, 2007, 07:07 PM
I would prefer neither if it is all the same to you folks:confused:.

ctdonath
July 29, 2007, 07:08 PM
.45ACP will dig a wide, long hole.
.223 will blow things apart.

Seen the autopsy photos.
There's a reason rifles are rifles, pistols are pistols, and a pistol is the tool to fight your way back to the rifle you shouldn't have left behind.


I understand the premise of the question: distasteful, but forces people to think about terminal ballistics in a different way. Easy to banter about one vs. another in the abstract; quite another to imagine being on the receiving end. The Way of the Samurai is found in death. Meditation on inevitable death should be performed daily. Every day, when one's body and mind are at peace, one should meditate upon being ripped apart by arrows, rifles, spears, and swords, being carried away by surging waves, being thrown into the midst of a great fire, being struck by lightning, being shaken to death by a great earthquake, falling from thousand-foot cliffs, dying of disease or committing seppuku at the death of one's master. And every day, without fail, one should consider himself as dead. This is the substance of the Way of the Samurai.
- Hagakuri (ancient text on the Samurai way)

MT GUNNY
July 29, 2007, 07:19 PM
After reading the question I thought, after weighing all the posibilities,
I picked the 45. mainly cuz if it is a good placed shot I wouldnt suffer to long,
second if it was poorly placed maybe the docs could fix one wound and save me
As for the 5.56 a poor shot would prolly fragment off a bone and cause several wounds within body, less likely to be repaired, more suffering then death.

I now question the very calliber I carry 45.?

U.S.SFC_RET
July 29, 2007, 07:25 PM
You have to be a fool to take a 5.56 round instead of a .45 acp. I assume you did not include whether hollow point or ball. I conducted a very unscientific experiment with a 3/4 full sandbag tied to a horizontal steel pole and let it hang 2 feet. I shot 7 rounds of ball ammunition .45 acp from 15 feet away into the sand bag. Three went through and four did not. The sand bag only rocked back at the most 2 inches during the seven rounds being emptied. I spaced the rounds 7 to 10 seconds apart. No violent load dumping or knock back noted. I will take the .45s please.

meef
July 29, 2007, 07:39 PM
Baron:Purely hypothetical situation. If you had to take a hit from 25 yards from either a .223 or .45, which would you rather?

Purely hypothetical situation. If you had to be beaten into a bloody, mangled pulp by either Randy Couture or Chuck Liddell, which would you rather?

:cool:

geez.........

operator114
July 29, 2007, 07:40 PM
Baron,

I think your post has the potential of being vastly misunderstood, because my initial reaction was call you a nut job for asking such a silly question.

Anyway, if in some bizzarro combat reality, if you could choose what you were going to get hit with, and not being shot at all was not an option, I would choose the .45 ACP.

Any rifle cartridge (not including the .22 LR), is vastly more powerful than a pistol cartridge.

MT GUNNY
July 29, 2007, 07:51 PM
Meef

Thats funny , either way its gona hurt

Baron
July 29, 2007, 11:42 PM
Thanks to all who replied constructively - some excellent insights.

For those of you who wish not to think in this very personal way about what you REALLY believe in terms of terminal ballistics, please don't bother posting to that effect - it only amounts to trolling.

To futher clarify, the reason I suggested we think in terms of ourselves is not to be morbid or somehow imply that one could find oneself in a situation in which one could chose a caliber with which to be shot; instead, while we all have well- and ill-founded conceptions of what certain rounds are capable of, I believe thinking about being on the receiving end forces us to be very realistic.

As before, many thanks to those of you who have participated in this exercise - keep it up!

brerrabbit
July 30, 2007, 01:26 AM
How about you take your choice of either while I log the results?

I just as soon would not get shot with anything more lethal than spitwad, and that is up to debate.

XD Fan
July 30, 2007, 01:34 AM
For those of you who wish not to think in this very personal way about what you REALLY believe in terms of terminal ballistics, please don't bother posting to that effect - it only amounts to trolling.

:confused::confused:

Say what?

Sav .250
July 30, 2007, 09:15 AM
" No head shots." Glad you threw that in.

Correia
July 30, 2007, 09:37 AM
For those 30 people who posted that they would rather be hit with the .223, I would really suggest you guys quit believing everything you read on the internet, and go look at some autopsy photos of what .223 does to people at that range.

I spent 6 hours in a classroom last week taking a wound ballistics class, looking at hundreds of photos of people who had been shot in every way you can think of, with just about every type of round.

I would much rather get shot with the handgun.

berettashotgun
July 30, 2007, 09:40 AM
I'd pick the 22, Everyone knows a 45 will vaporize a softball sized area on a human.

LaEscopeta
July 30, 2007, 09:55 AM
I would rather the .45 ACP take the hit from the .223/5.56.

(OK not exactly the old dangling participle joke but close enough.)

arthurcw
July 30, 2007, 10:03 AM
.45 ACP. But the question does come close to "Which would you rather? The left one pulled off slowly or the right one mangled in a drill press?"

Mannix
July 30, 2007, 10:07 AM
If given the choice, would I take a round of .223 or .45? No, I much prefer my paintballs and airsoft pellets, TYVM.

I believe a better question would be "Which round would you rather trust your life with?".

heron
July 30, 2007, 10:13 AM
If I absolutely HAD to be shot with one of those, I'd take the .45. That .223 round is going at supersonic speed, remember, and that shock wave, through wet squishy flesh -- well, I'd rather not think about the mess it will make.

If I HAD to be shot with a firearm, and could choose the round, I think I'd have to go with .22 short, or maybe a .25. And let me wear body armor. I don't like pain.

arthurcw
July 30, 2007, 10:19 AM
If I HAD to be shot with a firearm, and could choose the round, I think I'd have to go with .22 short, or maybe a .25. And let me wear body armor. I don't like pain.

NEYT!!! A .22 CB Cap. While wearing Body armor and a trauma plate as well as one of the North Korean "capable of stopping .30 carbine bullets" winter coats. I REALLY DONíT LIKE PAIN!

Jetto Funk
July 30, 2007, 10:36 AM
Damn guys, cut the guy some slack.
I've never shot anyone with a .45 but I have shot people with .223 and .762 rounds.
From personal experience, I'd rather take the 223 (556) round.
Those things, when they fly right, just go right through people. Hoping they don't hit bones, bounce or hit something mid way and start to tumble.
I'd rather super sonic speed fly through me than the blunt force of a 45.

Justin
July 30, 2007, 10:39 AM
Closed, for an exceedingly lopsided taste-to-content ratio.

Correia
July 30, 2007, 10:56 AM
Jetto, that is because you guys are stuck with AP, (I'm assuming you're military, so SS109) which sucks for use against people. A soft point, hollow point, or something like TAP blows a chunk of meat out your back like a softball.

If you enjoyed reading about "Poll - if given the choice, would you take a round of .223 or .45?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!