.223 not "effective" over 150 yards... I've heard it all!

slzy · Nov 10, 2007

173,the opium vials would certainly explain the demeanor of some of the enemy soldiers described in We Were Soldiers Once....

HorseSoldier · Nov 10, 2007

Because the M-16 and M-4 carbines are STILL not effective, our troops are abandoning their rifles to use captured enemy AK-47 rifles

No, we're not.

As myself and others have pointed out in other threads where this claim comes up -- some guys during the kick off of OIF did grab AKs because their issue weapon was a handgun, and an M9 just doesn't cut it for foot patrols in Baghdad and such. Basis of issue for long guns caught up pretty quickly with missions and you don't hear much, if anything, about guys carrying AKs since 2003.

and refurbished M-14 rifles brought out of storage.

And getting put right back into storage. The M14 has not had a very impressive career over in the desert as a Designated Marksman Rifle due to mechanical unreliability (so much for that myth) and poor accuracy of stock models and poor ability to retain accuracy on accurized models.

It's replacement? An ACOG on an M16A4 or M4.

they are developing the new 6.8 SPC bullet to replace it.

6.8mm Rem SPC has been a dead issue in the military for several years now, after SOCOM determined the effort was not worth the cost after combat trials. It's a good round, but I'll be surprised if we ever see a military issue weapon chambered in it. Particularly since all the focus on caseless or CTA ammo for the SAW replacement is currently looking at 5.56mm bullets. If anything, it looks like we may be shooting 5.56mm long after we're done with brass cased ammunition entirely.

Those who practice with it will use multiple shots into torsos or deliberately placed shots to the head at under 100 yards.

Just to clarify, you're describing drills we teach people to use with any caliber weapon, long gun or handgun, when conducting CQB. At ranges that close you can't afford to bet your life on a single bullet from any weapon, and relying on a single round to do the job is a good way to get yourself or your buddies killed when ranges are so close that even a jihadi with an AK can't hardly miss if he gets a burst off.

1lostinspace · Nov 10, 2007

The M16 jams.
The 5.56mm is designed to wound not kill.
Soldier throw their M16/4 away and pick up the AK.
It's not effective past 150 yards.

America has been in more wars and has killed more people then any other country I think we know what works and does not.
The m16 and 5.56 was been in service around the world and have been killing people for almost 50 years.

I think that 5.56mm is the perfect Military round.
They might experiment with heavier bullets and so on but the M16 will never go away it will be replaced by other m16 that shoot lasers.

Byron · Nov 10, 2007

My experience is with the M193 in Nam 68-69.I was in the Central Highlands.Shooting was close: point blank to at the very most 100 yards.My 16 never jammed, I kept is clean. I never had an NVA get up after hitting him.Drugs, yes,some were stoned running and running dead at times.The AK round,lethal.One man in my company was hit hard in the left shoulder by such.He was knocked down,got up and killed the NVA with his 16.
I have spoken to troops coming back.The M855 from an M4 doesn't seemto stop them. Troops using 20" M16's do not seem to have a problem. Byron
D Co,3/8th Inf,4th Inf Div

JohnKSa · Nov 10, 2007

Early on in Nam the distruction came from unstable bullets that were
overweight in comparison to the rifle twist. They exited the bore with
a pronounced bullet yaw that sometimes tumbled when it struck a body.
Accuracy was limited due to this combination.

55 grains is not overweight for the twist of the original M16 rifles (1:14)**, it's just that there's a difference in stability in air and stability in water. The bullets were stable (and accurate) in air but are not spun sufficiently to be stable in water (which is what humans are mostly made of). Therefore it flew straight in air but yawed and tumbled in the human target.

**If you look at various bullet maker's websites you will see that they recommend the 1:14 twist for bullets up to 55 grains.

The M16 twist was changed not long after its introduction to 1:12 which is suitable for normally constructed bullets (copper jacketed lead) up to 64grains.

C-grunt · Nov 10, 2007

Who are these Soldier/Marines who are saying the 5.56 isnt putting them down. I always hear about them but I have yet to meet one. All of the people in my old unit, all the guys I talked to in other units and all the veterans I have talked to have not had a problem when the shots were good.

Before I joined the Army I was one of the guys who believed the M16 was underpowered. After two tours in Iraq, 03 and 05, I am a huge advocate of the 5.56.

RockyMtnTactical · Nov 10, 2007

It's replacement? An ACOG on an M16A4 or M4.

+1

Here is an article I found and saved from a couple years ago.

New Scopes Make U.S. Marines Deadlier

The U.S. Marine Corps, which has been giving its Advanced Combat
Optical Gunsight (ACOG) rifle scope to troops in Iraq, has decided to
pass it out at home as well.

"The guys that can tell you the most about the ACOG are the terrorists
we kill daily in combat," said Chief Warrant Officer 5 Terry Walker,
2nd Marine Division gunner. "The first thing they say is, 'Call off
your snipers.'"

But they aren't snipers. They're just Marines.

"It is the biggest leap forward in combat-shooting assistance in
years," Walker said. "It takes Marines that were good shooters and
makes them better. It takes marginal shooters and makes them good."

The four-power scopes, manufactured by Trijicon of Wixom, Mich.,
magnify targets and allow riflemen to shoot at extended ranges — out
to 800 meters — with greater accuracy.

Eyes Wide Open

Mounted to the M16A4 rifle, the scope allows the shooter to keep both
eyes open, which is helpful in a combat zone. Said to be extremely
sturdy, the ACOG and its illuminated reticle work without batteries.
In daytime, light is drawn into the sight via fiber optics; at night,
it uses the glow from tritium, a low-level radioactive isotope that
illuminates some exit signs in buildings.

About 3,000 ACOGs are currently in Iraq with the I Marine
Expeditionary Force; they will be turned over to II MEF when the unit
arrives next spring.

The ACOGs were first purchased for Marines in Iraq as an interim fix
when the call went out for better gunsights.

After testing several optical sights at Camp Lejeune, N.C., the Marine
Corps decided to go with Trijicon's TA31. It is the same model as
those now used in Iraq, albeit with a red "donut" reticle instead of a
chevron pattern.

A total of 4,200 will go out to the Corps in December; the aim is to
field 53,000 scopes by 2010.

"The one thing that every Marine agrees [on] and wants is an ACOG
scope," said Chief Warrant Officer 2 Fred Bourne, gunner for 2nd
Battalion, 1st Marines. Bourne returned in August from Iraq, where his
battalion had 200 ACOGs.

"This scope alone has saved Marines' lives and has struck fear into
the enemy. It would be a crime not to field every Marine with a
magnified four-power optic," Bourne said.

With the optic, Marines in the battalion logged kills at distances as
far away as 722 meters, yet also found the sights helpful in close
engagements under 50 meters. They even used them as observation
devices, like binoculars, while on watch.

"In the city, it was much more valuable than the [M249 Squad Automatic
Weapon] or [M240G machine gun] because, for once, we had the ability
to look out into windows and down the alleys," Bourne said.

The ACOG also helps to tell whether their intended target is armed,
said Chief Warrant Officer 3 Jeffery L. Eby, senior gunner for
Regimental Combat Team 7 in Iraq.

"It is an absolute necessity in this guerrilla war where we have to
identify our opponent from the civilian-dressed masses," he said.

Scopes for Every Infantry Battalion

The 53,000 ACOGs will be distributed throughout the three Marine
Expeditionary Forces, the 4th Marine Division, the two Schools of
Infantry at Lejeune and Camp Pendleton, Calif., and Weapons Training
Battalion at Quantico, Va., according to Col. Mark Brilakis, who
commands the Quantico weapons training battalion. Every infantry
battalion will receive the scopes.

While those who have used ACOGs say they're easy to use, there's still
a need for training.

"You need to practice," said Sgt. Jeremy Boulware, a marksmanship
instructor with 2nd Marine Division. "You have to get used to it. You
can't just pick it up and go to combat with it."

Rifleman 173 · Nov 10, 2007

If you're going into combat you want something that works. The only reason I ever used a .223 caliber rifle was because I had no OTHER option. I learned in Nam that sometimes even a direct hit with a 40 millimeter grenade wouldn't drop a hopped-up enemy soldier. We had one guy actually hit an enemy soldier in the chest with a 40 millimeter grenade and watched as the enemy soldier wandered downhill a ways to die. That was one of the ones we found some of the glass vials on with the laced drugs on him. Granted, the .223 is a lot more accurate than most battle rifles but isn't the best or more effective UNLESS you change your tactics to make up for the thing. That means multiple hits on the bad guy's torso to make it work quicker. That means head shots at close range which are hard to do in some cases for one reason or another. If I were to go back into combat or send my kid into combat I would want him armed with a decent rifle that shot a medium diameter bullet instead of a wimpy .223/5.56 bullet because of what I learned from MY EXPERIENCES. If you give me a choice, to this day, for carrying a .223 rifle or a .308 rifle into combat, I'd choose the .308 EVERY time. I saw one guy dump 20 rounds of .223 into the torso and head of an enemy soldier at close range. The enemy soldier just stood there with a look of shock on his face for a few seconds, finally his eyes rolled back and up into his head and then he dropped to the ground. With the .308 that I carried, very seldom did it take more than one round to drop an enemy soldier. If I did my part, the rifle and ammo would do their part. Typically I would shoot, the bullet would hit the enemy soldier, he'd spin around 180 degrees and then he'd fall down on his face. That was pretty much the typical IMMEDIATE reaction I saw when a .308 hit right. It was bang-spin-drop. Not bang-bang-bang-bang-bang-bang-bang-bang-bang-bang-look of shock-eyes roll back-drop. So all those stories about Navy SEALS, Special Forces personnel, Rangers and airborne going to different or bigger caliber rifles isn't true, eh? Funny because I have people in Iraq, right now, that are telling me different. One of them is even a weapons specialist from Armalite working on all the different rifles over there. He's actually there to gather more information about which rifle calibers EFFECTIVELY work so that a new rifle can be made to replace the .223/5.56 caliber rifles our military uses. As he is fond of saying, "The M-16 platform is presently peaked out with the .223 caliber rifle. In order to make advances on the M-16 or military rifle we NEED to go to a bigger or better caliber form. That means an almost complete re-design of the M-16 system."

JohnKSa · Nov 10, 2007

Funny because I have people in Iraq, right now, that are telling me different. One of them is even a weapons specialist from Armalite working on all the different rifles over there.

Who's paying Armalite/Eagle Arms to put a person in theatre to work on rifles--none of which are made by Armalite/Eagle Arms?

"The M-16 platform is presently peaked out with the .223 caliber rifle. In order to make advances on the M-16 or military rifle we NEED to go to a bigger or better caliber form. That means an almost complete re-design of the M-16 system."

And what kind of "weapons specialist" doesn't know that the M-16 system will work with more than one caliber? Go browse Midway arms and you'll see that there is a variety of chamberings that work with the M-16 system, some of which offer pretty impressive on paper performance numbers. If 30 caliber bullets are your thing, you can even get an upper chambered in 7.62x39mm. Of course it's wise to keep in mind that the Russians were so impressed by the performance of the 5.56 that they copied it and dropped the 7.62x39mm.

1lostinspace · Nov 11, 2007

but here is the thing most guys here are talking 55-62 fmj what does a 75-77gr bullet do at 150 yards? I have never heard a complaint about Mk-mod and Mk-mod1 all I have heard is that marines are getting kills out to 300 meters.

.223 not "effective" over 150 yards... I've heard it all!

slzy

Member

HorseSoldier

Member

1lostinspace

member

Byron

Member

JohnKSa

Administrator

C-grunt

Member

RockyMtnTactical

Member

Rifleman 173

Member

JohnKSa

Administrator

1lostinspace

member

Similar threads