HD in suburban environment: AR15 vs Shotgun

Status
Not open for further replies.
Creature said:
I used to be of the opinion that a 18" pump shotgun was the way to go for serious home defense against motivated and resolute home invader/s. After I had the opportunity to handle both a shotgun and an AR15 carbine in a realistic training environment, I came to the conclusion that a run of the mill AR-15 carbine is far more effective in all areas of concern in regards to CQB and home defense: magazine capacity, maneuverability, reliability, speed, platform customization...and, most importantly for the civilian defender, accuracy of fire. For me, it was a no brainer.

Another real eye opener was to actually see how 223 compared to how 00 buck and slugs penetrated drywall and 2x4 modern dwelling construction and the very real possibility of endangering family and close proximity neighbors that the shotgun demonstrated repeatedly.

Very recently I ran into a colleague who I have respected for a very long time for his experience and knowledge. I was very surprised to learn that he favors a 12ga self-loading shotgun loaded with 00 Buck as his weapon of choice for HD. To this day he believes that the shotgun is superior to the AR15 carbine in terms of power and effectiveness of the one-shot-stop...and was of the opinion that accuracy, capacity and maneuverability are grossly over-hyped these days.

I know this subject has been discussed in the past ad nauseum, but I am still interested in hearing from both sides of the fence on the shotgun vs AR15 for HD debate.
Click to expand...
I live in an inner ring Cleveland suburb and I wouldn't use EITHER for home defense.

I live in a small apartment with narrow hallways.

There's no way that I can maneuver ANY non-NFA long gun in my home without banging into things. NEITHER a shotgun NOR a rifle is of much more utility in MY environment than a bamboo cavalry lance or a naginata.

My self-defense firearm is whatever handgun I carried that day, almost always a 3 1/2" M1911.

Generalizing on defense tools, absent SPECIFIC knowledge of the environment is worthless.
 
From watching the slow motion videos, I think the conclusion you can draw is that everything over penetrates dry wall. Therefore, the over penetration discussion is moot, and you might as well just look at stopping power. I am sticking with 12 gauge with #1 Buck, but would be OK with an AR also.

Zeal is good, but sometimes blinds people to reality.
 
I was under the impression that the reason the 5.56/.223 performed so well as an anti-personnel round despite its small size, was due to the way it tumbled inside the body once it hit. My understanding is that this only happens to the extent it does because the round yaws (I think that's the word) like a poor spiral throw of a football. So when it hits, the back of the round is not directly behind the front, and so it tumbles.

If I'm incorrect about this, I welcome an education from anyone willing to give it. But if this is truly how the 5.56/.223 is so effective as a stopper, surely the "yaw" on the round when in flight is not immediate upon exiting the barrel. So if it takes say 50 yards to start seeing this effect, at ranges as short as one would find in a house, is the bullet more likely to simply put a .22 caliber hole in an intruder rather than create the damage its known for? I really have no idea, and thought it was worth asking.
 
Last edited:
AR with soft point ammo if a long gun is called for. The only advantage a shotgun used to have was cost. Even that is about a wash anymore. Buckshot and slugs do work, but their effectiveness is way overstated. They are no more deadly than a 223 round with the same shot placement. At any range inside the home any shot from #9 up to 000 buck from a cyl bore will have a 1-2" pattern. Might as well have a rifle with 6x more ammo and 1/6 the recoil. I could see some advantage outdoors in the yard at ranges from 15-50 yards where a shotgun pattern would be useful in hitting moving targets.

But my 1st line of defense inside is still a handgun. Being able to use it one handed while keeping the other hand free and the being able to keep it concealed until needed is a huge plus.
 
I was under the impression that the reason the 5.56/.223 performed so well as an anti-personnel round despite its small size, was due to the way it tumbled inside the body once it hit.
Click to expand...

True enough with lightweight FMJ ammo fired at very high velocity. But heavier softpoint hunting ammo works exactly the way in 223 that it works in 30-06 or any other deer hunting cartridge.
 
Deanimator hit on something that I was going to mention. "Best" is subjective. What's best for you might not (and probably isn't) best for me or anyone else. Choosing a firearm for real world use, as opposed to games or sports where the purpose is clear and the method of use is narrowly defined, is game of compromise. Give a little up here, gain a little there. Using Deanimator as an example, we all know that handgun bullets tend to over-penetrate due to lack of velocity and fragmentation. So he gives that up and gains mobility needed in his smaller environment. AR or shotgun? Yes, please, depending on the situation.
 
Another thing to consider with shotguns is that we usually talk about 00 Buckshot for defense, but really for inside the house its probably the worst choice you could make. #1 Buck will penetrate wall less and still penetrates humans well enough to score lethal hits. #4 Buck is also good for inside, though it will penetrate less than #1.

If you drop to #1 or #4 Buckshot, the over penetration concerns of the shotgun are nullified.

Another thing to consider is the fact that over penetration is mostly a concern if you miss your target. With a long arm, whether its a shotgun or a rifle, you are less likely to miss your target, and therefore over penetration is less of a concern than with a handgun.
 
WrongHanded said:
I was under the impression that the reason the 5.56/.223 performed so well as an anti-personnel round despite its small size, was due to the way it tumbled inside the body once it hit. My understanding is that this only happens to the extent it does because the round yaws (I think that's the word) like a poor spiral throw of a football. So when it hits, the back of the round is not directly behind the front, and so it tumbles.

If I'm incorrect about this, I welcome an education from anyone willing to give it. But if this is truly how the 5.56/.223 is so effective as a stopper, surely the "yaw" on the round when in flight is not immediate upon exiting the barrel. So if it takes say 50 yards to start seeing this effect, at ranges as short as one would find in a house, is the bullet more likely to simply put a .22 caliber hole in an intruder rather than create the damage its known for? I really have no idea, and thought it was worth asking.
Click to expand...
That's half correct. The yaw does increase terminal performance, but it only begins once the bullet impacts something (be it a person or a wall or something else). If the bullet started to destabilize in flight, you would see keyholing in targets as opposed to the nice, round punctures that actually happen.
 
JONWILL said:
From what I have gathered.

5.56 will fragment in drywall and won't penetration much.

00 Buckshot will go through most building materials and kill those behind it.

So 00 Buckshot will deny cover to perps while 5.56 won't

Made my choice of a shotgun even better
Click to expand...
I guess we don't need to remind you that, as a civilian, you are responsible for every shot you take and where your shots end up.
 
I have both ARs and shotguns at my disposal. I choose the shotgun solely due to years of hunting over bird dogs and shooting clay targets with one.

If over penetration of walls inside the home is the main concern, why not drop down in shot size until you find a good compromise.
A 1 1/4oz load of #2s or #4s isn't confetti, especially at 'down the hall' distances. Put a couple of 00buck loads in the mag tube first so they will be there for the grand finale if necessary.

Mine has #4 buck in the gun, 00 in the ammo sleeve on the butt. 20170520_105805.jpg
 
For me it's the AR for multiple reasons, least of all I have 23 years of experience with it courtesy of the Army.

1. As mentioned with the right ammo in has reduced chances of over-penetration
2. The caliber is effective "enough" without recoil my wife and son find objectionable, neither find the shotgun with buck "fun" to practice with, so they don't.
3. Capacity, neither one of them is going to work on reloads any time soon.
4. Lightweight and easy to adjust for shooters of smaller stature.
5. Modular, easy to mount optic and light.
6. I don't know why, but it seems there's more classes/training opportunities for carbines then there are shotguns.
7. Increased range, we live on acreage in the country, the HD gun serves double duty. Withe the AR there's no reason to practice "Slug Drills" to increase range should it be needed.

I find it easier to practice with but I view the AR as a "system":

.22LR "Trainer" (I also have a .22LR conversion unit):
ZnTg429.jpg

9mm carbine, set up like my 5.56, wife & son think it's great fun to run steel plates with it, both shoot it quite well:
GVgRIG8.jpg

The real deal:
k0qDWGJ.jpg

The above are simply MY reasons YMMV,

Chuck
 
Armored Farmer, although it has been the main point of discussion in this thread, over-penetration isn't actually the main concern. Speed, maneuverability, accuracy and capacity can all come into play in a HD situation. I am trying to figure out why anyone, given the choice, would select a shotgun over an AR-15 carbine for HD. There is no denying that experience and comfort with a shotgun is a valid reason.
 
Creature said:
Armored Farmer, although it has been the main point of discussion in this thread, over-penetration isn't actually the main concern. Speed, maneuverability, accuracy and capacity can all come into play in a HD situation. I am trying to figure out why anyone, given the choice, would select a shotgun over an AR-15 carbine for HD. There is no denying that experience and comfort with a shotgun is a valid reason.
Click to expand...


Speed, maneuverability, accuracy, and capacity are important, but it kind of depends how one will go about home defense to determine how important. In my home, the plan if I have an intruder is not for me to try to clear the house. Bedrooms are all on one end of the house. My plan if the alarm goes off it to take a covered position that prevents entry into the bedroom end of the house, stay put, and call the police. I do not plan on trying to clear the house. Police can do that. I am not sure the average homeowner should try to clear the house. You don't know how many bad guys there are. Easy for someone to get the drop on you. Might be safer to defend than go on the offensive. Its less glorious of course, but probably less likely to get you killed.

As for capacity, it is hard to imagine a realistic scenario where a homeowner would need more than 8 rounds of buckshot. Its possible, I guess, but don't think I have ever heard of a homeowner whose complaint was his home defense shotgun ran dry during a defense situation.

That said, I am OK with either a shotgun or AR for home defense. I use both. I think the details of how an event will go down are too random to be able to paint with too broad of a brush as to which is better. For any particular, one may be better than the other, but either will likely be a better choice than a handgun.
 
Last edited:
I agree on not clearing the house. Set up a defensive position, ready to fire if a perp sticks his head in.
A shotgun is very good for this, as is an AR or HG.
It depends on where you live too, I think. In my part of Dixie most everyone is armed, home invasions are not a problem.
 
I have to wonder how much fight would be left in an individual wearing Level III armor that was hit in the chest with a load of 00 buck or a slug or two from a 12 ga?
 
WrongHanded said:
I was under the impression that the reason the 5.56/.223 performed so well as an anti-personnel round despite its small size, was due to the way it tumbled inside the body once it hit. My understanding is that this only happens to the extent it does because the round yaws (I think that's the word) like a poor spiral throw of a football. So when it hits, the back of the round is not directly behind the front, and so it tumbles.

If I'm incorrect about this, I welcome an education from anyone willing to give it. But if this is truly how the 5.56/.223 is so effective as a stopper, surely the "yaw" on the round when in flight is not immediate upon exiting the barrel. So if it takes say 50 yards to start seeing this effect, at ranges as short as one would find in a house, is the bullet more likely to simply put a .22 caliber hole in an intruder rather than create the damage its known for? I really have no idea, and thought it was worth asking.
Click to expand...

Actually the opposite is true.

The 5.56 round is properly stabilized in flight. It achieves this stability like every other bullet by having a proper amount of rotational velocity for its length. However, it is only stable in air. When a projectile hits something more dense than air it tends to become destabilized because it doesn't have the rotational velocity to keep it stable in a medium more dense than air. This effect is exaggerated with pointed (spitzer) rifle bullets because the center of mass is near the base. The bullet wants to fly mass forward and so has a tendency to tumble and flip base forward. If it does this with enough remaining velocity, the forces sheer the bullet at the cannelure and cause it to break in half.

Depending on the bullet's length, all bullets take a short distance from the muzzle to fully "sleep" or settle into their properly stabilized flight. So actually at extremely close distances before the bullet has been allowed to settle, it actually tumbles and fragments easier.
 
I"m alone and rural, so I'm unconcerned about over-penetration.

AR? Oughta work okay. Shotgun? My Model 12 holds seven rounds. Oughta be enough, inside the house.

Handiness? You mean that you have not figured out various realistic scenarios about where in the house you might be? Time of day--or night? Probable entry point by the bad guys? Alarm system, whether electronic or puppy-dog? All that stuff.

Like somebody said, "Mindset, skill set, tool set." In that sequence.
 
MTMilitiaman said:
all bullets take a short distance from the muzzle to fully "sleep" or settle into their properly stabilized flight.
Click to expand...

I don't believe this is true. Spinning at over a quarter million revolutions per minute, the average two twenty three bullet will remain in it's axial rotational position, regardless of flight time, causing a linear procession from the point of aim. The bullets body does not give any surfaces for rotational stability to accumulate like an arrow's fletching. While the air pressure can act on the bullet in a way so that it hits nose first on the target, it does not have the proper force to change its rotation. If a bullet is sent down a barrel out of axial alignment it will rotate in the same manner until impact.
With very fast for caliber twist barrels, over stabilization is a concern. If the bullet is spun so fast as to resist the trajectory arc, it may impact the target at an angle, key holeing, and while on the way there losing precision.

Bryan Litz has an interesting challenge with reward, provided any one can show proof of the "bullet goes to sleep mode" phenomenon.
 
The advantages of using an AR are undeniable, as noted by Chuck R.

But for me, the 12ga will probably always be King of the first 100ft radius.
If ARs are so quick, pointable and effective at close range...wouldnt we be shooting sporting clays with them.,(if it weren't for bullets raining down).
 
.308 Norma said:
A "civilian" - as opposed to?
Click to expand...
Demi-human said:
I don't believe this is true. Spinning at over a quarter million revolutions per minute, the average two twenty three bullet will remain in it's axial rotational position, regardless of flight time, causing a linear procession from the point of aim. The bullets body does not give any surfaces for rotational stability to accumulate like an arrow's fletching. While the air pressure can act on the bullet in a way so that it hits nose first on the target, it does not have the proper force to change its rotation. If a bullet is sent down a barrel out of axial alignment it will rotate in the same manner until impact.
With very fast for caliber twist barrels, over stabilization is a concern. If the bullet is spun so fast as to resist the trajectory arc, it may impact the target at an angle, key holeing, and while on the way there losing precision.

Bryan Litz has an interesting challenge with reward, provided any one can show proof of the "bullet goes to sleep mode" phenomenon.
Click to expand...

http://rugerforum.net/reloading/67814-does-bullet-stabilize-immediately.html

I've actually seen a high speed video of an M16 firing in SOI in which you can clearly see the bullets wobble until they settle in flight. It's true, believe it.
 
Either is better than a handgun in all reasons except size. Handgun is great for carry outside the home and one handed use inside the home. Both have their advantages and disadvantages. If I were walking down the streets of Mogadishu, Sadr city, or the Korengal Valley I would not want a shotgun anywhere near me. I would want an AR with as much ammo as I could carry. For home defense against some smash and grab robbers? Could go either way.
 
I've fired several types of guns in a "shoothouse" at the range. Of those, the two long guns most easily compared are the semi-auto R5 (an improved Galil) and a semi-auto 12g BR99 shotgun with 10 round magazines.
For a quick grab the R5 with a mag inserted and one in my pocket offers 60 rounds with one mag change. The BR99 offers 20 rounds with one mag change.
For reliability the Galil beats the BR99 and it also offers better flexibility in terms of range of fire and precision if needed.

For that reason if I was in the US I would pick an AR, prererably with a suppressor (even if it only reduced muzzle blast).
 
http://forum.accurateshooter.com/threads/applied-ballistics-shoot-thru-target-challenge.3861880/

It's all very interesting, but really, what is the force that constricts the second funnel? As Iowegan states the yaw has dissipated and no longer acts upon the bullet's flight. He may be a great gunsmith, but not a physicist.

I fear I am drifting too far from the intended subject.

As far as home defense goes, I think a shotgun with appropriate barrel length and loaded with less than buckshot would be advantageous. I know what a thirty eight special sounds like inside. I can not imagine an AR, especially one compensated as mine is. All that said, I keep a fourty five auto by my bedside.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

1
  • Locked
Question to LEOs: Shotgun or AR15 for you?
2 3 4
Replies
78
Views
4K
Moondoggie
M
W
  • Locked
Ar-15 as handy as a shotgun?
2 3 4
Replies
96
Views
4K
Robert
Robert
T
  • Locked
Shotgun or AR15 for all-purpose
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
134
Views
7K
Warp
Warp
R
  • Locked
Newbie Question - Handgun vs. Shotgun for HD
2
Replies
47
Views
1K
50caliber123
5
9
  • Locked
Next HD gun for the family -- shotgun/carbine
Replies
24
Views
926
9mm+
9
Back
Top