Educate me on the .223 caliber..useful for HD?


PDA






psyprofessor
May 29, 2009, 09:57 PM
Been thinking of getting an urban rifle... and I noticed that Wally World has plenty of .223 in stock. How effective is this caliber? For home defense of 7 yards....... or out in the field at 100 yards? Is it worth investing on this caliber?

How is it different from .22lr or .22 mag?

If you enjoyed reading about "Educate me on the .223 caliber..useful for HD?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
LoneStarWings
May 29, 2009, 10:03 PM
Well, it's a lot more effective than just about any handgun caliber, for starters.

It's different than the .22LR in that the casing houses a lot more powder, and therefore fires the bullet at a much higher velocity. At close range it will fragment and yaw, making it well suited for defensive purposes, I suppose. It will not penetrate as well as .30 caliber rifle rounds, but that is not necessarily a bad thing in close quarters.

http://img245.imageshack.us/img245/1373/17223comparisonimageih8.jpg

P.B.Walsh
May 29, 2009, 10:05 PM
I don't know, but the .223 round has a very good reputation for HD, as the 12ga., not as much power, but will penetrate body armor better than a shotgun.

It'll be way different than a .22lr or .22 Mag. because it's a centerfire rifle round, not a lower powered rimfire. And this is not saying that a .22 isn't bad for HD, but only as a last resort.

I'd pick up a .223 rifle than a .22 for HD any day of the week.

My humble $.02

LoneStarWings
May 29, 2009, 10:10 PM
Yeah, the .22LR velocities are going to be in the 1000 ft/s range, whereas the .223 is going to fire a similair sized bullet at 3000 ft/s. The added velocty makes a big difference.

psyprofessor
May 29, 2009, 10:13 PM
Just to clarify....

Does it have more stopping power than a .45 handgun at close range?
Would you prefer a .223 over a SG for home defense?

RatDrall
May 29, 2009, 10:13 PM
Hornady TAP

http://i588.photobucket.com/albums/ss323/RatDrall/223_55_URBAN_4website.jpg

http://www.hornadyle.com/products/more_detail.php?id=72&sID=73&pID=2

Does it have more stopping power than a .45 handgun at close range?
Would you prefer a .223 over a SG for home defense?

Yes, it has much more power, and both the .223 and .45 are close on the decible scale for noise. Just don't get a rifle with a short barrel and muzzle break, they're much louder.

I'd be fine with either a shotgun or rifle for HD.

LoneStarWings
May 29, 2009, 10:18 PM
.223 vs. .45? It's been discussed at length here:

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=422203

If we're talking about ballistic tipped .223's vs. JHP .45's, I'd think the .223 would be more devestating to most targets. But overall, I think they're probably petty similair in their effects at close range, especially if you compare FMJ to FMJ.

At 100 yards? No question...... .223.

Zach S
May 29, 2009, 10:18 PM
1) If available, I'd rather use my AR instead of my 1911 in just about any situation. Rifles are for fighting. Handguns are for fighting your way to a rifle.

2) I use my AR for HD. My Mossberg 590 stays in the safe.

RockyMtnTactical
May 29, 2009, 10:30 PM
It's an awesome round for urban use. I would much prefer it over any handgun caliber. There really is no comparison.

General Geoff
May 29, 2009, 10:31 PM
.45ACP is ~400 ft-lbf of energy.
.223 Remington is ~1200ft-lbf of energy.

I'd take the rifle calber any day of the week, for home defense.

P.B.Walsh
May 29, 2009, 10:31 PM
Really, I'd keep my AR beside the bed and a 590 in a closet (but not in a safe).

Sorry, let's not get off topic.

Maverick223
May 29, 2009, 10:32 PM
Does it have more stopping power than a .45 handgun at close range?That is a bit hard to answer...stopping power? It depends upon a lot of variables including but not limited to: shot placement, bullet construction, velocity, distance, and the type of target (does it need to penetrate a barrier/obstacle first?). Technically the .45ACP has a greater knockdown...I calculated it's Taylor Knockdown (henceforth referred to as TK) value as 13.0 for an average hollowpoint. I calculated a similar round of .223 to be 5.7. Both were Remington loads (neither would be choice for defense) and are very common (more info available upon request), and more importantly I had the loading info for Remington right beside me and I'm lazy. ;)
So the stopping power of the .45ACP is technically more than double that of .223. What does that mean? Exactly nothing. While I would take a .45ACP bullet over a .223, I would take a rifle in .223 over a .45ACP pistol. I think the .45ACP has a edge in sheer thumping capability, but the .223 is certainly better than "half as powerful". In short...don't take a knife to a gunfight...or a pistol to a rifle fight. :D

Maverick223
May 29, 2009, 10:36 PM
.45ACP is ~400 ft-lbf of energy.
.223 Remington is ~1200ft-lbf of energy. He didn't ask about energy...only stopping power...not necessarily the same results, and I agree the .223 wins for range (50yds is about all for a pistol, and 100yds for a .45ACP carbine).

RockyMtnTactical
May 29, 2009, 10:40 PM
Maverick223,

Are you saying that the .45 is a more effective man stopper than the .223?? :scrutiny:

You cant be serious.

W L Johnson
May 29, 2009, 10:41 PM
or out in the field at 100 yards
Lets put it this way, do you see 22lr or 22mag used in 1000 yd matches?

22lr effective range, maybe 50 to 100yrds, but lets not kid ourselves here we're only talking about something that only starts out with something around 100 ft lbs (depending on barrel & load) of energy at the muzzle and loses it fast. It can kill beyond that but it's dropping fast at this point.
223/5.56 on the other hand is deadly out to something around 600 yds or more (very very deadly to 200-250 yds) and starts out with something like 1200-1300 ft lbs of energy (again depending on barrel & load) and will go right through most body armor.

Note: These ranges can be argued about till the cows come home and are open to opinion

Maverick223
May 29, 2009, 10:45 PM
Are you saying that the .45 is a more effective man stopper than the .223??Not necessarily always, but at short range I think it holds an advantage in a carbine. It also has the ability to penetrate obstacles better than a smaller caliber. I would hands down take the AR or mini14 over a 1911, if that is what your asking. And the TK value is much higher, so technically it is a better stopper...but I think TK values are overrated and often lie...

noob_shooter
May 29, 2009, 11:12 PM
.223 is plenty good for HD. I just prefer an AK 47 instead

06
May 29, 2009, 11:29 PM
Your question was: is the 223 a good HD round. My answer is absolutely yes. BUT-and a big BUT, there are other factors to consider. where will that round go when you miss or it passes through-remember, you are inside your home. Is it as easily maneuverable as a handgun? Will a much cheaper weapon do the same job-a 500 Mossburg or 870?? Will a slower traveling much heavier pistol round have more "knock down" power?? For HD I keep an old S&W tactical 12 gauge shotgun close by. But,(there goes that but again) I keep a handgun even closer and an SKS not far from it. That covers the spectrum of HD for me. I have 7 rds of OO buck shot, 16 rds of pistol, and 60 rds of '39. That should well take care of most any problem. If given the chance and time the heavier rifles/pistols can be brought into the scenario. wc

627PCFan
May 29, 2009, 11:36 PM
Wait, which wally world is this your speaking of?:evil:

Maverick223
May 30, 2009, 12:05 AM
Is it as easily maneuverable as a handgun?Mine is...:D
http://i642.photobucket.com/albums/uu141/Maverick223_album/M17.jpg
I wish I could find a handgun this maneuverable. :neener:

john paul
May 30, 2009, 12:11 AM
i haven't found .223 in walmart in months

Arbor
May 30, 2009, 12:22 AM
I thought this was an interesting read, and should answer some of your questions.

.223 Penetration (http://www.olyarms.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=14&Itemid=26)

C-grunt
May 30, 2009, 05:56 AM
Its a very good home defense caliber. Just dont use varmint hunting rounds or military surplus M855 (has green tip usually) and you should be fine. The varmint rounds wont penetrate enough and the M855 might penetrate to much.

A good soft point of around 55-60 grain should be good. Even better are the "tactical" rounds or ones designed for defense like Hornady's TAP rounds.

MTMilitiaman
May 30, 2009, 07:22 AM
TKO Value is of limited usefulness. It mainly favors mass and diameter rather than energy as it was created to calculate effect on dangerous game species. It takes into account that the .30-.378 Weatherby and the .458 Win has similar muzzle energies, but one is clearly more useful for Cape Buffalo. In such situations, the TKO Value is more useful than energy alone.

Clearly, here, this is not the case.

The .45 has a good reputation for being effective, for an automatic handgun cartridge. But it is still an automatic handgun cartridge. Even from a carbine, the damage it produces is significantly less than the .223.

It has to do with the fact that most tissue is elastic enough to absorb shock occurring under a certain velocity threshold (around 2000 fps), without permanent damage. With handguns, all that matters is the depth and width of the permanent wound channel, that is, tissue displaced by the bullet itself. The .223 is a whole different animal. It has enough velocity to damage tissue for several inches beyond the path of the bullet. This means that with the .45 you have an expanded projectile diameter of .65 to .85 inches, in most cases, and a penetration of 11 to 14 inches. The .223 is going to penetrate about the same, but is at distances experience in home defense, is going to yaw and fragment, and tissue displaced not only by the projectile and its fragments but also by the shock forces they produce are going to be damaged. So while the wound channels are of equal depth, the largest .45 wound channels are going to be an inch in diameter at the most, even out of a carbine, while the width of the wound channel produced by the .223 is more than likely going to be several inches.

The .223 is orders of magnitude more effective than the .45. Never forget that handguns are handguns, and rifles are rifles.

MrCleanOK
May 30, 2009, 09:40 AM
Psyprofessor,

.223 is a commonly known round that is plenty adequate for home defense with the right bullet. Just look at what the US military and all the other NATO countries are using. If the round wasn't capable of putting people down in urban environments, it wouldn't be used. Theirs is loaded to a slightly higher pressure (it is 5.56mm NATO and not .223 Rem), but it's practically the same.

This is a centerfire rifle cartrdige. Much more powder behind it than a rimfire cartridge like .22 LR or Mag.

Uncle Mike
May 30, 2009, 12:20 PM
Are you saying that the .45 is a more effective man stopper than the .223??

You cant be serious

Yea...I'm sayin' it... I'm just NOT going to go for the whole energy, woo hoo I'm shootin' you with a .223 thing.

Have you seen the .223 zip through a heavily clothed person... multiple times,
at close range, only to have that same .223 smacked gentleman re-engage you? :what:

Untill this you experience first hand, you may rest assuredly in the arm-chair publications produced by highly trained, experienced gun writers and bunny lab scientists... no offense to the multitude of bunny labs or their scientists, that the .223 will better deflate a bad guy than a .45acp at in-house ranges, considering center mass hits.

And... don't even throw up the soft point ammo line. Assumption is the mother of all f-ups... and in all fairness I was assumeing that the OP was talking about FMJ ammo. as I am.

BushyGuy
May 30, 2009, 12:53 PM
how effective is the 5.56mm out of a 11.5" hbar? does anyone have any data on it?

RockyMtnTactical
May 30, 2009, 05:07 PM
Uncle Mike,

Hate to break it to you, but you are wrong. Most experts would agree that .223 is far more effective than .45ACP. There's plenty of data (lab and street) to back it up.

Maverick223
May 30, 2009, 05:20 PM
Hate to break it to you, but you are wrong.Not necessarily...it depends upon the target, range, and bullet construction. I like the .45ACP myself, in this case I think bigger is better, but both will get the job done.

sterling7c
May 30, 2009, 07:02 PM
Somebody had better tell the .45, #1 shot, #4 shot and 00 buck that they're obsolete :) Can't believe what I'm reading here. Does everyone lives in a palace size home with 50 yard rooms surrounded by stone or brick walls or what. Is the 223 good for home defense - well yes - and by the same logic a bazooka would be even better. What the Hooly happened to mindset, training and shot placement. The old mil dictum that a handgun is only used to get to your rifle should have been put to sleep years ago UNLESS you're working in harms way when the rifle / shotgun is king and a handgun is very secondary.
Hate to break it to you, but you are wrong. Most experts would agree that .223 is far more effective than .45ACP. There's plenty of data (lab and street) to back it up.

Sure it is, as is the .50 BMG ... but for in-home defense?

RatDrall
May 30, 2009, 08:22 PM
... but for in-home defense?

Why not use the .223?

It has almost no recoil, fires accurately from the shoulder, is on the same decible level as a .45, actually penetrates less (with appropriate ammo, probably not a good idea to use FMJ in an apartment), and is significantly more powerul than any defensive handgun.

I've "maneuvered" through my house with a handgun investigating bumps in the night before. I've also waited at the top of the stairs with a rifle while the police came to do their thing. After doing both, I prefer the latter, it felt much safer.

PT1911
May 30, 2009, 08:44 PM
.223 64 grain speer gold dot ammunition combined with the energy and speed of the .223 is gonna be ugly... and half dollar like expansion should provide plenty of "knock down"

Which is better?

with equal ammunition (fmjs to fmjs, soft point to soft point...etc) the High powered rifle will always be superior.

psyprofessor
May 30, 2009, 10:32 PM
The ammo I was referring to was a .223 hollow point. From the replies above, I take it that this is an effective round for HD ranges and that over penetration is not as great as a problem in comparison to a .45 pistol.

(Yes... I wanted an orange to apple comparison...)
(Yes...the Wally World down the street has plenty of .223 hollow points...looks like they are overstocked with it... Dozens of boxes...for the last couple of weeks... All other calibers are sold out though.)

Thanks for the replies...

mljdeckard
May 30, 2009, 11:02 PM
Yes. IF you use the appropriate ammo. Do NOT load it up with the cheapest M855 ball you can get and open up inside your house, you will shred everything, up to and including your neighbor's house. Use dedicated loads like Hornady TAP and you will be as fine as you would be with any other option.

.45 vs 5.56? No. Really, no. Do not confuse a pistol for a rifle, do not expect a pistol to do a rifle's job.

Arbor
May 30, 2009, 11:21 PM
Since people apparently don't like clicking links...

http://www.olyarms.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=14&Itemid=26

FBI Ballistic Tests
As a result of renewed law enforcement interest in the .223 round and in the newer weapons systems developed around it, the FBI recently subjected several various .223 caliber projectiles to 13 different ballistic tests and compared their performance to that of SMG-fired hollow point pistol bullets in 9mm, 10mm, and .40 S&W calibers.

Bottom Line: In every test, with the exception of soft body armor, which none of the SMG fired rounds defeated, the .223 penetrated less on average than any of the pistol bullets.

These tests were conducted by the FBI’s Firearms Training Unit (FTU), at the request of the Bureau Tactical and Special Operations personnel. Located at the FBI academy in Quantico, VA, this is the same unit with the encouragement of forensic pathologist Dr. Martin Fackler and other ballistic experts, that dramatically advanced the testing of modern handgun rounds to estimate their wounding effectiveness and potential lethality. Ultimately, this entity confirmed that permanent crush cavities, or "wound-channels," and deep penetration were the primary factors for handgun-fired projectiles. The FTU further determined that under various target engagement circumstances, a depth of penetration in soft tissue of between 12 to 18 inches was required for a handgun bullet to be effective.

Equipment Employed / Rounds Tested
For these series of tests the following firearms, ammunition and equipment were employed:

• Sealed, match grade test barrel to determine 25 yard, 10-shot group accuracy and 20-round velocity potential.
• 20" barreled, M16A1 rifle to stabilize and test rounds ranging from 40 to 55 grains in weight.
• 20" barreled, M16A2 rifle to stabilize and test rounds ranging from 62 to 69 grains in weight.
• Oehler Model 85 chronograph.
• Ransom type rifle rest, with laser bore sighting.
• Numerous blocks of Kind and Knox 250-A, 10% gelatin, to simulate living tissue.
• Federal’s 40-grain "Blitz" hollow point, 55-grain soft point and 69-grain hollow point; 9mm 147-grain Hydra-Shok, 10mm and .40 S&W 180-grain, jacketed hollow points.
• Winchester’s 55- and 62-grain full metal case, NTO-military spec. rounds.

As indicated, both rifles were fired from a mechanical rest. Ten-shot groups and 20-round velocity tests were fired for each round. 13 penetration tests were conducted. 95 rounds were fired for each type of round tested. A total of 760 rounds were tested and recorded for this project.

Test Protocol
Tests 1-6:
Bare gelatin, heavy clothing, automobile sheet metal, wallboard, plywood, and vehicle windshield safety glass, were shot a distance of 10 feet from the muzzle. The vehicle safety glass was set at an angle of 45 degrees to the horizontal, with the line of bore of the rifle/SMG offset 15 degrees to the side resulting in a compound angle of impact for the bullet upon the glass, which simulates a shot directed at the driver of a car closely missing the shooter. Furthermore, the gelatin was covered with light clothing and set back 18 inches behind the glass. All gelatin blocks, with the exception of the body armor barrier, were set 18 inches behind each solid obstacle shot.

Tests 7-13:
All involved shots through heavy clothing, safety glass and bare gelatin at 50 to 100 yards, concluding with internal walls, external walls and body armor at 10 feet. Test eight however, involved safety glass at 20 yards, shot dead-on, without the 15 degree offset, to simulate a shot at a car’s driver bearing down on the shooter.

For the connivance of the reader, test results are summarized in the following chart. Please note that the data displayed represents the average penetration of these rounds as measured in 10% ballistic gelatin (see tables 1 and 2).

Considering that the average person’s torso is 9 inches thick, front to back, all the .223 rounds ranging in weight from 55 to 69 grains appear to be adequate performers on soft targets where frontal shots are involved. Although the majority of target engagements are frontal, profile shots can and do occur. A .223 round that is required to pass through an arm before entering the rib cage mat, upon striking bone, fragment, and while possibly shattering the appendage, would most likely not be successful in producing a sufficiently deep body cavity wound to be decisive. In this, as with any CQB encounter, "controlled pairs," or rapid-repeat hits may be required to ensure target neutralization.

Barriers and Structures
The Bureau’s research also suggests that common household barriers such as wallboard, plywood, internal and external walls are also better attacked with pistol rounds, or larger caliber battle rifles, if the objective is to "dig out" or neutralize people employing such object as cover or concealment. Although it is usually not advisable to fire at targets you can’t see in urban settings, it is done and some subjects have been stopped in this manner. Conversely, the ability of some pistol rounds to penetrate barriers tested puts innocent bystanders and fellow team members at greater risk in CQB scenarios. If an operator misses the intended target, the .223 will generally have less wounding potential than some pistol rounds after passing through a wall or similar structure. The close range penetration tests conducted indicated that high velocity .223 rounds were initially unstable and may, depending on their construction, disintegrate when they strike an object that offers some resistance. When concrete, brick or macadam are struck at an angle at close range, .223 rounds tent to fragment or break up, and ricochets are generally less hazardous. The .223 could consequently be considered safer for urban street engagements, because of its inherent frangibility within the cross-compartments created by street environments. In other words, in most shootings, the round would probably strike something, hopefully a hard object, break up and quickly end its potentially lethal odyssey.

As a point of interest, the rifled shotgun slug, while not possessing the .223’s flat trajectory, is still capable of attaining a maximum range of 900 yards. This fact illustrates that any errant law enforcement round regardless of caliber, or maximum range, is potentially dangerous to the community.

.223 Wounding Characteristics
Ballisticians and Forensic professionals familiar with gunshot injuries generally agree that high velocity projectiles of the .223 genre produce wounds in soft tissue out of proportion to their calibers, i.e. bullet diameter. This phenomenon is primarily attributed to the synergistic effects of temporary stretch cavity (as opposed to the relatively lower velocity stretching which typifies most pistol rounds) and bullet fragmentation on living tissue.

Maverick223
May 30, 2009, 11:29 PM
Arbor, while you are correct that I didn't read the above from the link...I did click on it and scan through it...if it makes you feel any better I didn't read the above passage either. :neener: Thanks for the info, I don't think .223 is marginal by any means, but then again it isn't my choice either.

mljdeckard
May 30, 2009, 11:36 PM
This is the big asterisk in the whole article: "may, depending on their construction, disintegrate when they strike an object that offers some resistance". The inverse is ALSO TRUE. IT MAY NOT, depending on bullet construction.

lvcat2004
May 31, 2009, 12:04 AM
We get these conclusions when we have people watching a lot of movies with tacticool mall ninja AR-15's with surefire, Eotech, BUIS, etc.... who don't even know how to handle them in CQB....





*some rare exceptions apply

RP88
May 31, 2009, 12:21 AM
I'd wager to say that a .223 "zipping through" someone will still transfer more of its energy than the total transfer of a .45.

A .223 has about 1300 ft-lbs of energy; a .45 has about 400 ft-lbs. It's no contest. Both will take out an organ, but i'd rather have the bullet that will go through god knows what to get to, obliterate, then go through said organ every time than have to worry about body armor, heavy clothing, body fat/composition, etc. The .223 is something that isn't going to be much effected by any of that - at least not compared to a shotgun or pistol projectile.

Arbor
May 31, 2009, 12:30 AM
While i agree that .223 will not always behave as expected, this goes for any bullet and you can never really be sure what will happen once it leaves the muzzle of the gun. The point of the article is that .223 rounds are less likely to pass through a wall and be dangerous than pistol rounds fired under the same conditions.

MTMilitiaman
May 31, 2009, 12:34 AM
Most people don't know how to properly handle a handgun or a shotgun in a CQB environment either. While I agree that people should get the most training they have access to and use the best equipment they can afford, I don't see how the AR is a disadvantage, no matter how much training you have.

It has already been demonstrated by raw data achieved first in a lab, then consequently based on those results, in the streets, that an 5.56mm carbine firing purpose built ammunition such as the 69 to 77 gr SMK and Hornady TAP loads, or Federal's Tactical Bonded rounds, is safer in an urban environment than pistol rounds. It has also been demonstrated to be much more effective in tissue and much more effective against body armor. When you combined the safety and effectiveness of the round with the fact that a relatively short, light carbine with the inherent accuracy and low recoil impulse of the AR, esp one equipped with a good reflex or red dot sight, is also much easier for users of all skill levels to hit with under duress, and the simple fact of the matter is that there is no logical argument against using an AR or other 5.56mm carbine for home defense. The same arguments applied in favor of the 5.56mm carbines also apply to rifle carbines in larger calibers as well. An AK or a FAL Carbine or an M1A Scout can be loaded to provide adequate penetration for home defense as well. And there is no reason not to if the option is available to you as all of these will be many times more effective than any handgun while providing most of the shotgun's terminal effect from a platform with less recoil and far greater magazine capacities.

Rifles are king. They are simply the most versatile implement available to most users. Shotguns and handguns are specialty items, and all have a lot more disadvantages compared to rifles than vise versa.

And I still have yet to have someone give a single reason not to use a AR (or AK, or M1A, or... ect.) instead of a handgun if the option exists.

mljdeckard
May 31, 2009, 12:47 AM
There's a difference between "a pistol is the best option for me" and "I haven't taken the time and trouble to learn how to use a rifle correctly." Just because you haven't LEARNED how to correctly use a rifle doesn't make a pistol better.

dacavasi
May 31, 2009, 12:56 AM
Just make sure there's nothing that's not expendable behind the BG you're shooting at, if you cut loose with a .223 at 7 yards in an HD situation.

Uncle Mike
May 31, 2009, 01:02 AM
Just make sure there's nothing that's not expendable behind the BG you're shooting at, if you cut loose with a .223 at 7 yards in an HD situation.

Ahhh shucks... don't you know,the .223 is magic.:D

No worries, that magic bullet will not exit a BG at 7y. hehehe:neener:

mljdeckard
May 31, 2009, 01:35 AM
"Just make sure there's nothing that's not expendable behind the BG you're shooting at, if you cut loose with a .223 at 7 yards in an HD situation."

But if you're shooting with something else, it's OK if grandma is standing behind the target? Would you make a list of which rounds you think will and will not go through more than a person?

NEWS FLASH: You should ALWAYS assume that your shot is going through a few layers, no matter what round you are using.

MTMilitiaman
May 31, 2009, 04:38 AM
NEWS FLASH: You should ALWAYS assume that your shot is going through a few layers, no matter what round you are using.

Finally, a little bit of common sense.

RockyMtnTactical
May 31, 2009, 04:49 AM
"Just make sure there's nothing that's not expendable behind the BG you're shooting at, if you cut loose with a .223 at 7 yards in an HD situation."


FBI studies have indicated that over penetration at CQB ranges have in the past been exaggerated in 5.56/.223 and it penetrates less in human tissue than most common pistol rounds (including JHP's) on average.

NEWS FLASH: You should ALWAYS assume that your shot is going through a few layers, no matter what round you are using.

Precisely.

C-grunt
May 31, 2009, 06:22 AM
We've been having this argument a lot lately havent we. I think some people believe the 45 ACP has way more power than it does. It is a great pistol round. But the problem is its still a pistol round and as such is weak.

I have never seen a .5.56 zip through a heavily clad person several times and ad them attack me. Every bad guy that my unit shot (with a good hit) fell down and died.

Pun1sher
May 31, 2009, 06:22 AM
Sounds like the general idea is .223 is practically the perfect round! Good thing I got my rifle in that caliber.

C-grunt
May 31, 2009, 06:39 AM
Well its not a good medium or large game round.

If I had to choose the best all around rifle round it would probably be the .308.

sterling7c
May 31, 2009, 06:44 AM
If I had to choose the best all around rifle round it would probably be the .308
+1 ... with a Nato chamber to use all that good milsurp that's still around, but not FMJ for HD of course :)

RockyMtnTactical
May 31, 2009, 02:57 PM
Sounds like the general idea is .223 is practically the perfect round! Good thing I got my rifle in that caliber.

No round is perfect. Different tools for different jobs.

Uncle Mike
May 31, 2009, 05:28 PM
NEWS FLASH: You should ALWAYS assume that your shot is going through a few layers, no matter what round you are using.

But a few layers of what???

Our point exactly.... the good ol' .223 WILL go through a few layers and then some... at 7y it most likely will go through the BG.

We don't have to state to be aware of your back shoot area in every post... if your shooting at all, this you should already know and adhere to! :banghead:

If not... shame on you! :cuss:

RockyMtnTactical
May 31, 2009, 05:34 PM
Uncle Mike, you must have a hard time reading.

This and many other things like it have been posted SEVERAL times in this thread but you must have missed it somehow.

FBI studies have indicated that over penetration at CQB ranges have in the past been exaggerated in 5.56/.223 and it penetrates less in human tissue than most common pistol rounds (including JHP's) on average.

Do you understand that??

Arbor
May 31, 2009, 05:36 PM
Our point exactly.... the good ol' .223 WILL go through a few layers and then some... at 7y it most likely will go through the BG.

This is irrelevant, because most self-defense rounds fired in self defense shootings miss their target. What is important is how much it penetrates wood, sheetrock, and other housing materials.

Uncle Mike
May 31, 2009, 05:50 PM
NEWS FLASH: You should ALWAYS assume that your shot is going through a few layers, no matter what round you are using.

Can YOU read... what does his post say???

Going through a few layers of...... of what??

FBI studies have indicated that over penetration at CQB ranges have in the past been exaggerated in 5.56/.223 and it penetrates less in human tissue than most common pistol rounds (including JHP's) on average

I understand this... but do you understand I was NOT commenting on this particular statement... which, to be honest, I do not totally agree with... but we all know if the FBI says it... it must be true.. huh?

RockyMtnTactical
May 31, 2009, 05:54 PM
Yeah, I actually get all of my credible gun information from Uncle Mike. The FBI is not a professional agency with a lot of street and lab data to analyze or anything. They don't know much about ballistics.

but we all know if you don't agree with it... it must NOT be true.. huh?:)

rbernie
May 31, 2009, 06:09 PM
Settle, guys.

Any round capable of penetrating adequately in BGs is also capable of penetrating several wall's worth of sheetrock and such. Giving up wall penetration also means giving up BG penetration, and that sounds like a poor choice to me.

Instead, you should focus on picking rounds that are adequate to the task, and gain proficiency in you SD/HD weapons.

Anyone that wants to continue to debate barrier penetration better go spend some time reviewing the Box O' Truth tests first, or show up with FBI-protocol barrier test data in hand. Bandying about wall penetration homilies and anecdotes in response to a deadly serious topic is simply NOT on The High Road.

Travis Bickle
May 31, 2009, 06:33 PM
Been thinking of getting an urban rifle... and I noticed that Wally World has plenty of .223 in stock. How effective is this caliber?

Most .223 hollow points are excellent man stoppers. Most FMJ rounds are so-so. The best of all possible worlds is probably SS109, if you can find any that isn't factory seconds. It has excellent stopping power and is cheap because it's a milsurp FMJ round.

For home defense of 7 yards....... or out in the field at 100 yards?

You should have no problems hitting a goblin's vital zone at 100 yards with any .223 rifle on the market today, if it's in good condition.

mljdeckard
May 31, 2009, 08:30 PM
The SS109 is exactly what we are talking about for BAD HD rounds. I suppose you can decide if there is some 'urban combat' situation for which it is applicable, but this is a round that will go through multiple targets and damage whatever stops it. Ask me how I know.

Pun1sher
May 31, 2009, 10:49 PM
Where do you get hollow point .223? All I ever see is FMJ.

Travis Bickle
May 31, 2009, 11:21 PM
The SS109 is exactly what we are talking about for BAD HD rounds.

That's true, but he was talking about ranges out to 100 yards. That doesn't sound like home defense to me.

Where do you get hollow point .223?

Every online retailer I know of carries at least a few types. Here's Midway's selection:

http://www.midwayusa.com/Search/Default.aspx#.223%20hollow%20point__653__-_1-2-4_8-16-32_1_16_BrandName%20asc

Needless to say, almost every type is out of stock right now.

hawmanai
June 1, 2009, 05:09 PM
I'll bring up the subject that the .223 is too high a pressure round to be firing in a small enclosed area. Unless you are wearing hearing protection, you'll be dazed with your ears hurting.

12 guage, 9mm, .45 pistol or carbine would serve better for close indoor shooting.

RockyMtnTactical
June 1, 2009, 05:16 PM
hawmanai, that point has already been addressed. The decibels of a .223 out of a rifle and a .45 out of a handgun are essentially the same. Not to mention the fact that people in gun battles rarely ever even recall the sound at all.

Bartholomew Roberts
June 1, 2009, 05:18 PM
Check out www.freehearingtest.com for gunshot decibel levels. A 55gr .223 from an 18" barrel is 155db. An 18" 12ga. is 161db. The 9mm and .45 are in the 157-160db range (.45 is quieter).

JShirley
June 1, 2009, 05:23 PM
If you have the option, you should always wear ear pro. Electronic ear protection is now affordable for virtually everyone.

Is the 223 good for home defense - well yes - and by the same logic a bazooka would be even better.

Not at all true. A "bazooka" employed at close range would be enormously destructive to the structure, in addition to being a hazard to the person employing it.

A .223 carbine with good ammunition is my first choice for home defense. I don't think it's the only good choice, and there are plenty of platforms I'd also feel comfortable with (I currently have a #4, MK 2 with softpoints and an Model 94 in .45 Colt close at hand, in addition to handgun choices). I do think my AR-15 is an overall better choice than either, though.

John

bearmgc
June 1, 2009, 05:25 PM
Talking home defense, right? Heck, 9mm in a carbine is more than adequate. OK, if ya gets a.223, surely can't faullt you, but consider penetration in close home defense/urban setting. If you really want it get it though.

JShirley
June 1, 2009, 05:38 PM
So...you're saying you want more penetration than afforded by .223?! I mean, sure, overpen is frequently exaggerated as an issue, but you make it sound like the 9x19mm is better in some way.

benEzra
June 1, 2009, 11:28 PM
Where do you get hollow point .223? All I ever see is FMJ.
Wal-Mart or your local sporting goods store (until the recent run on ammunition, anyway). I like Federal 55-grain JHP, myself.

Talking home defense, right? Heck, 9mm in a carbine is more than adequate. OK, if ya gets a.223, surely can't faullt you, but consider penetration in close home defense/urban setting. If you really want it get it though.
You do realize that typical .223 JHP penetrates less than 9mm JHP, yes?

Arbor
June 1, 2009, 11:53 PM
Talking home defense, right? Heck, 9mm in a carbine is more than adequate. OK, if ya gets a.223, surely can't faullt you, but consider penetration in close home defense/urban setting. If you really want it get it though.

Did you actually read any of this thread? Just wondering.

Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
June 2, 2009, 12:01 AM
Does it have more stopping power than a .45 handgun at close range?

Here, I'll take a stab at it.... Yes, hell yes, unquestionably yes, no comparison yes. :)

CZguy
June 2, 2009, 01:50 AM
Here, I'll take a stab at it.... Yes, hell yes, unquestionably yes, no comparison yes.

I'm not sure what you are saying there...........could you elaborate? :D

capt obvious
June 2, 2009, 01:57 AM
but consider penetration in close home defense/urban setting. If you really want it get it though.

Why do people post things like this?

Art Eatman
June 2, 2009, 11:57 AM
capt obvious, I have a problem with what's implicit in the opening post: Essentially, "Can I use our military's rifle cartridge to kill a person?"

'Scuse me? Howzat again?

Uncle Mike
June 2, 2009, 12:03 PM
Why, why, why... why ask why, there is no right or wrong answer here....
For some a high power rifle is fine for home defense, others a pistol... yet another, a shotgun is the only feasible choice.

If one could stay adequately calm during a home invasion, call their shots under fire, if this so takes place, picking suffciant back shot area, then I should think any weapon platform mentioned above would be of a sufficiant nature. :D

Peace :D

If you enjoyed reading about "Educate me on the .223 caliber..useful for HD?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!