45acp vs .223

i dont want to get hit by any of those 2 from 10 yards away... but just remember.... the bigger the caliber the bigger the wound.

Like sarduy said, at 10 yards I don't want to be hit with either round. The bigger the hole going in, the more damage it will cause.

what about the energy and tumbling of the 223

Click to expand...

Unless there is a problem with the bore's rifling or someone purposely rifled the bore wrong for the caliber the .223 shouldn't tumble.

majic the .223 was designed to tumble when it hits resistance thus making a .7 " hole instead of a .223" hole...

however when it comes to rifle vs pistol and you have access to a rifle a rifle is usually better (easier to shoot, normally carries more rounds, and usually contains more power) however like i have said at least a million times stopping power is all relative... each person reacts differently...

The .223 has twice the energy, although I think a softpoint would go through a human at 10 yards, therefore not transferring all of its energy.

Regardless, they both win.

majic the .223 was designed to tumble when it hits resistance thus making a .7 " hole instead of a .223" hole...

Click to expand...

The .22 caliber bullet was not designed tumble and the .223 chambering did not reinvent the .22 caliber bullet. The original M16s bullets tumbled because Colt purposely rifled the barrels wrong. The idea was to increase the wounding because it was a big step to go from a 150 grain .30 caliber down to a 55 grain .22 caliber bullet. The Army then requested the rifling to be corrected for the caliber and that was the end of the tumbling. Ask any hunter using the .223 if their bullets tumble. Now those using bullets that expand will have extra damage, but those using FMJs, such as a pelt hunter, will have a .22 inch hole going in the animal and coming out.

I'm thinking the obvious is obviously being ignored.

We have no ballistic or range info other than .223 vs. .45?

To the OP, think about it before you post.

i have personally tested this before...
if you would like i will do the test again and document it for your approval

the russians developed an improvement on the .223 btw which is 5.45 x 39 which does the same thing as .223 just does more damage due to it being a longer bullet and making a larger wound cavity

it did when i tested it multiple times... now i will clarify it does not tumble until it hits resistance ... im not saying that it keyholes as soon as it leaves the barrel

i am also not saying that im never wrong either i more than welcome suggestions when i do my ballistics testing... i for 1 want to be the most informed on what to carry etc...

so if you have any ideas to help during my tests i would like it and i have no problem posting my results with pictures, video, or whatever you would like to see

so if you have any ideas to help during my tests i would like it

Click to expand...

Fire the full metal jacketed bullet (any weight as long as it's correct for the rifling as the .22 caliber bore has different twist rates) for the .223 into a medium and see if it tumbles. Ballistic gelatin is not needed. Modeling clay or even styrofoam should be sufficient.

i normally perform most of my tests with newspaper that has been soaked in water to give it the same resistance as ballistics gel..

however i have also done the bullet test tube before as well its just newspaper gives me the same results as all the other more expensive test medias... i will test it again and present my results

i will also test it with different barrels to see if i can produce different outcomes with the differing twist rates

Although I'm hyjacking this thread I think the OP may have an interest in this. Mr or Mrs/Miss (however it applies) hotshotshoting,
Since the .223 inch bullet is loaded in a variety of .22 caliber centerfire firearms with no special attention given to the .223 or 5.56 chambering. A barrel maker will just need to know the bore size, number of lands and grooves, the direction and rate of twist. You cut your own chambering and leade. How does the bullet of the .223/5.56 chambering knows to tumble after it has met resistance when any other .22 caliber firearm using the .223 inch bore barrel does not tumble it's bullets?

The original M16s bullets tumbled because Colt purposely rifled the barrels wrong. The idea was to increase the wounding because it was a big step to go from a 150 grain .30 caliber down to a 55 grain .22 caliber bullet. The Army then requested the rifling to be corrected for the caliber and that was the end of the tumbling.

Click to expand...

Source?

so does this .7 hole make it superior to the 45acp?

Click to expand...

A .45 JHP usually expands to .7-.9" so going by that, the .45 is still better because it makes a larger entrance wound.
That said, rifles are rifles and pistols are pistols...

I'd figure it would depend on if the bullet dumps its energy in the target.

With ball and minimal loss of energy, a .45 would make a bigger hole front to back.

With good expanding rounds, the .223 has more energy. The .45 would hardly be gentle, but I think the .223 would have a hands up in the total volume of wound channel.

That said, at ten yards, dead is dead.

I am learning all kinds of new things in this thread.

I am learning all kinds of new things in this thread.

Click to expand...

Are you believing them?

At 10 yds. I'd say the .45

It depends entirely on the load. One can load a round to go very slow or very fast. The faster a bullet goes, the flatter it's likely to shoot (up to a point) and the most destructive it will be on impact. The comparison is impossible to make without load and chronograph information and you must know the type of each bullet. Which will expand and at what speed?

But, there is one rule of thumb to consider: if you have a chance to bring a rifle or a pistol, choose the rifle. It's almost always faster shooting, more accurate, and more deadly with typical loads. Bigger holes are good but faster, expanding bullets are usually better.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Yikes.