.45acp Vs .223/5.56

Status
Not open for further replies.
G

GregGry

Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2005
Messages
994
Location
Milwaukee, Wi
I am not trying to start a huge low road war here, but I have been wanting to ask this question for a long time now. I fear the question might crash this server since it is a question that probably shouldn't be asked. Here we go:

People love the .45acp, many of which swear its the only good caliber to use for self defense out of a handgun. Lots of the "swear by .45" people often don't see the .223/5.56 round as being "good". I suppose, there are a lot bigger and more powerfull rounds out there, so its natural to want something bigger. Which really leads me to ask, how can .45 be so good, and the .223/5.56 be considered mediocre? Sure the .223 is no match when compared to a 30-06. You could say 223/5.56 is "mediocre" if the means of comparison is muzzle energy, bullet weight, and bullet size to more powefull rounds.

If a .45 is so good, how can the .223/5.56 be bad? Is the .45 really > 223/5.56? I would rather have a .223/5.56 then a .45.

EDIT: A common mentality around here is that the military made a mistake going from the .45acp to the 9mm. Often times I have heard "The 9 just shoots right through and doesn't stop someone". The 5.56 seems to suffer the same opinion of "When they switched from (insert bigger rifle caliber here) to 5.56, they just shoot through someone and the person doesn't stop". I think its more hype then anything else. However people rarely talk about the .45 being inadequte for self defense, yet there are lots of people that say 5.56 isn't enough. Thus my posting of this thread.
 
id take a .45 handgun over one of those mall ninja ar pistols, seriously conceale dcarry of 223?
 
Small, fast rounds shoot flat, but rely on velocity and bullet design for effectiveness.

Large, slow rounds shoot rainbow trajectories, but they don't need to be going fast, or to have bullets that expand reliably, to work.

Energy is bull. It's a great way to compare a .38 to a .357, but it does not tell you nearly enough about how a 55 grain bullet compares to a 230 grain bullet, no matter how fast either one of them is going.

For one thing, I've heard interviews and seen video, and it's pretty clear that people hit by small military rifle rounds often don't even feel it. One reporter who got caught up in a firefight said that he first felt pain 2 or 3 hours after taking several hits. You may have seen the video of the Iraqi "insurgent" about to fire an RPG, hit by a good few bursts of .223 with very little effect, until someone managed to hit his head or something.

OTOH, I've personally witnessed, at the end of my own gun, a .45-70 round go straight through a buffalo and drop it, at 80 yards. This was a black powder round, going only a little faster than pistol velocities, with relatively low energy. It was a non-expanding cast lead bullet (I cast it, and I saw entry and exit.)

Now a .45ACP is not a .45-70, but a human attacker isn't a buffalo, either. 230 grains ought to work, if 520 worked on a buffalo, which is ten times as heavy, and probably ten times as tough.

Now does that mean .223 is totally ineffective? Far from it. Would I want a .45ACP carbine? No way. I can carry a .45 in my pocket; I'd rather have a rifle round in a rifle.

I don't know which is "more effective", but I wanted to offer some food for thought.

Also, the .45 is never compared to a .223 in these discussions. It's generally compared with smaller pistol rounds, not rifle rounds. Rifles and pistols are different in many ways, as are what they shoot. And .223 is being compared with .308, not pistol rounds. The .223 may well be a mediocre rifle round, and the .45 may well be an excellent pistol round, but that is not an apples-to-apples comparison.

Still: energy is bull****.
 
That will not work. Every cartridge has it's place depending on the firearm and use / need. IE ccw 45, room clearing 45 in a mp5, patrol with medium distances 223, patrol with longer distances 762. Of course this is just my opinion. I personnally dont care for 556 except for varmits.
 
"By who?"

There are countless people on here that believe in the .45acp (with good reason), Saying the .45 is inadequte for self defense is asking to get flamed. On the other hand people often say that the 5.56 (even more so with short barreled weapons) wont stop the threat fast.

They are two completely different thoughts. One is light bullet and high speed, the other is a heavy bullet and slow speed. I don't see how its possible that one could be considered almost untouchable when it comes to its ability for self defense, and the other be considered inadeqte in some cases.
 
This is not an apples to apples thread.

The .45ACP is about as good as it gets for a hand portable autoloader--a great blend lethality and control. It is also the caliber of quite possibly the finest fighting handgun ever conceived.

As to the .223/5.56, I am not a fan. It's a decent round for a squad, where volume fire and maneuver is the standard tactic. For the individual, there are better choices than a lightweight round purposed for a role the individual cannot perform.

That, and the usual platform, the AR, is a love it or hate it system.
 
"There are countless people on here that believe in the .45acp"

Which has nothing to do with the 5.56. or directly comparing it to such... It's apples and oranges. For a handgun rnd, the .45 is a good man stopper, though fact is NO handgun round is a very good man stopper. The 5.56 is not a great man stopper compared to OTHER rifle rnds, but it's far more effective then any .45 ACP rnd out of a handgun, but that also depends on the bullet designs and barrel lengths.
 
Stopping power and one-shot stops data are not all some people make them to be, but they aren't completely worthless either. In a 68 gr BTHP, a 223 is a formidable round.

Reporters and the like who are shot in combat zones are shot with non-expanding 'ball' ammo (FMJ). The AR by my bedside is stoked with that same 68 gr BTHP. With that type of expanding ammo, I expect soft tissue damage would be considerable. Some of the even heavier rounds bear inspection as well.
 
Ljnowell is right. Comparing a pistol round, no matter how good, with a high velocity rifle cartridge is absurd. The .45 would be fine for home or self defense in civilian life. But anyone in military combat who would carry a M1911A1 instead of an M4 or an M16 is just not thinking.

Jim
 
As HANDGUN rounds go, the 45acp is a good performer. As good as a 10mm? Maybe, maybe not, depends on the 10mm.

As RIFLE rounds go, the 5.56 is mediocre to poor. When fired from a short barrel it becomes even worse. All the paper data read in reloading books is usually based on 20" to 24" barrels the MForgeries out there barely beat out a 22 Hornet and that is due to velocity loss in the shorter barrel. The round (5.56x45) is very efficient for a very small cartridge but efficiency doesn't equate to effectiveness in tiny 22 caliber stuff. I know, bullet tumble, bullet fragmentation. etc. etc. None of it works all the time and especially not at reduced velocity.

In a self defense situation, one uses what they have on hand. I prefer large calibrer rapid firing large capacity MBRs for self defense, but plan to make do with what I carry at the time which will be either a 45 or a 10mm.
 
Apples to oranges? Yes they are both different, thats the point. I am trying to find out why some people see the .45acp as a great self defense round, yet claim the .223/5.56 out of a short barreled ar/pistol (even a standard size rifle) is questionable for stopping the threat. I believe the performance of the .223/5.56 to be better then the mighty .45acp when it comes to self defense.

I realize people are going to have a hard time comparing the .45acp to a typical rifle caliber, because then the .45 might not seem so mighty. However since many people own .45 pistols, and many also own .223 pistols/rifles, I think the comparison is fair. Again I am going back to how many people on here and other places seem to think the .223 5.56 is anemic for self defense yet anemic and .45acp is never spoken in the same sentence.
 
this is kind of like comparing a peterbuilt tractor & trailer (say 20,000 lbs)to a ferrari (say 2,500 lbs) hitting the same target (another auto, say a dodge intrepid. the peterbuilt plowing along at 45 mph, and the ferrari screaming along at 130 mph. either way, the person in the intrepid is dead. but the colateral damage from the peterbuilt is going to be much more devestating! it is way easier to change the direction of something light than something heavy. so your 55g bullet, hitting almost anything can easilly be deflected. where the 230g bullet is going to plow right on through. plus, the difference in hole size. that 45 is going to mess with way more tissue that the 224 projectile, especially if you are talking fmj (ball) bullets. if you want to discuss jhp's the difference in diameter really gets significant. plus the 45 probably will not exit, depositing all of its energy into the subject, while the 223 will blow right through. like i said, both will kill, but you may have to wait for the 223 shot person to bleed out, especially if he is all hopped up. i must admit, that until i did some testing of my own, i was not really impressed with the 223. it is a mean little round, if i were fighting at distances over 50 yards, i would chuck the 45 in the ditch. it penetrates way more that i ever gave it credit for. but in close quarters, hunting humans, penetration is really not the key for a quick stop. i think the 223 will blow right through without dumping much of its energy.
 
Is that why spec ops are going back to 45 handguns and 6.8 or 7.62 rifles???? If I have to go back to the sandbox, I wish I could carry my 10mm and my 7.62, cause even with FMJ, I have faith that they will stop a threat. If I can only carry ONE caliber to do battle whether handgun or rifle, I think I would lean toward something like a 44 mag.
 
The .45 is a great round. The .223 is a great round. Both have proven themselves combat effective. I would trust either.
 
There is also the issue of hydraulic (hydrostatic)shock. At speeds over 2000fps or so, a projectile is moving fast enough that it causes the tissue to cavitate and create a permanent deformation of tissue (and resulting trauma) well beyond the actual wound channel size.
 
Boats touched on it and I agree. It has to do with employment. A squad weapon in rapid-fire 5.56, supported by light/medium rifles in 5.56 is a near perfect setup. If you have a low opinion of a 5.56, remember it's a different story when you are using a SAW that shoots 15 of them a second. I would like to see some more versatility for actual riflemen in the military, something like the SCAR that allows some versatility for the mission, but for regular support troops, I can see little if any reason to switch from the M-4.

I do believe that the pistol is what you use to fight your way back to the rifle you never should have put down, and a lot of guys use them for HD, which I think is fine if they use the right ammo. (NOT 62 gr. steel core.) I happen to already have an M-1 carbine that I think is the perfect backup to my shotgun, and my wife shoots it very well.

For the .45, it's so great in that it's near the top of all of the inferior pistol rounds. Particularly with ammo like the HST, it makes a NASTY wound channel. If it's more difficult to shoot than a 9, I've never really noticed. The end result is, no matter how big of a hole the other rounds make, the .45 makes a bigger one.
 
You are comparing a hand held nail driving hammer and a sledge hammer.

The .45 is a great pistol round. The .223 is a great moderately powered rifle round. The .223 will stop you faster than a .45 as it has much more kinetic energy. It's a rifle round after all. These cartridges are two very different tools.

The .223 is meant to be an easy to shoot, medium range rifle round. It works well where a .308 may be too much and the extra cap. will be appreciated.
 
Anyone who says the .223/5.56 is a poor manstopper is kidding themselves. I have NEVER seen a 5.56 not kill a person if given a good shot. A matter of fact is the only person I have seen take a good solid COM shot from a rifle and live was hit by a 7.62 from an Abrams coax.

Does that mean the 5.56 is better than the 7.62? No. It means that some people just dont die easily and since, now-a-days, the 5.56 sees more action than the 7.62, people dwell on these very rare occurrences.

If you watch the video of the insurgent with the RPG getting hit, he is down after the first rounds hit him. He's done. He isnt reaching for anything or trying to crawl away. The second burst was just a cou de grah (spelling???).

To many think that gunshot victims will just instantly drop to the ground and never move again. In my experience, from 2 tours in Iraq and as a police officer, this isnt the case most of the time.
 
The .45 serves its purpose very well. The .223 serves its purpose adequately. Either way, given the choice, I would take a high powered rifle over a pistol round anyday. A pistol is what it is-a sidearm. i.e. a secondary weapon.

Which is a better man-stopper at close range? That would be tough to say. A .45 with good HP's (or not) will put a big freakin' hole in someone. Then again, the hole isn't what stops people with bullets. It is the "shock" that the bullet causes internally. Bigger and slower, light and fast? I got it-compare two desired loads in some ballistic gel! That will tell you all....

With either of them, at 25 yards and a double-tap to the chest, it's lights out for a while.
 
"Apples to oranges?"

Yes.

" I am trying to find out why some people see the .45acp as a great self defense round,"

For a HANDGUN rnd

" yet claim the .223/5.56 out of a short barreled ar/pistol (even a standard size rifle) is questionable for stopping the threat."

For a RIFLE rnd


Thus, the apples and oranges comments. It's not rocket science...:rolleyes:

"I believe the performance of the .223/5.56 to be better then the mighty .45acp when it comes to self defense."

Um, again, that has been covered. Belief of course does not alter facts, thus, if the topic interests you, read up on the objective data on the terminal ballistics of various 5.56 rnds and various .45 ACP rnds. Read works by people such as Dr Anthony Roberts and others.


Again, the two can't be compared outside their respective categories.
 
"With either of them, at 25 yards and a double-tap to the chest, it's lights out for a while."

Or not...

This is one of those essential reading articles that reminds us none of the common duty rnds people carry are effective man stoppers unless something vital is hit. People can take an amazing amount of damage:

"Palmer had taken 22 hits from Soulis' .40-caliber Glock, 17 of which had hit center mass. Despite the fact that the weapon had been loaded with Ranger SXTs—considered by many to be one of the best man-stoppers available—Palmer lived for more than four minutes after the last shot was fired. His autopsy revealed nothing more than a small amount of alcohol in his bloodstream."

Cont:


http://www.lawofficer.com/news-and-...l;jsessionid=10BDC02F0CF4D0B083E43EA06A47B949

Another essential read, if you all have not already read it, is report from the DOJ via the FBI called HANDGUN WOUNDING FACTORS AND EFFECTIVENESS written by Special Agent UREY W. PATRICK. Although written some time ago, my understanding from those in the terminal ballistics field I have spoken with, the essential take home messages are still totally valid. If you have not read this, it's a must read for sure. My favorite line from this report:

"Thousands of books, movies and television shows have educated the general population that when shot, one is supposed to fall down." Clearly, this agent has a sense of humor...

Download report here:

http://www.firearmstactical.com/hwfe.htm

Stay safe..
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
  • Locked
.223 vs. 5.56
Replies
4
Views
707
ReefRaider
R
S
  • Locked
.223 vs 5.56
Replies
5
Views
599
rcmodel
R
S
  • Locked
.223 and 5.56 differentiation?
2
Replies
27
Views
2K
Elm Creek Smith
Elm Creek Smith
W
  • Locked
These 9mm get no repect threads got me thinking
2 3 4
Replies
93
Views
4K
Carl Levitian
C
N
  • Locked
5.56 / .223 bolt action?
Replies
8
Views
731
andyjason
A
Back
Top