5.56mm Shooters: How important is fragmentation to you?

[Nightcrawler]

Curious about this. From information at Ammo Oracle, 5.56mm needs to be travelling at 2700 feet per second or faster to reliably fragment, and above 2500 feet per second to fragment at all. Fragmentation is mentioned in every discussion of 5.56mm weapons, and seems to the primary wounding mechanism of the round (even though it seems to have been an accident; I don't believe th M193 or M855 rounds were designed to fragment).

My question to you 5.56mm shooters is this: how important is fragmentation to you? Would you use an FMJ round that didn't fragment? Why or why not?

The chart below is also from Ammo Oracle:

Distance to 2700 fps, from a given barrel length (typical):

M193
20": 190-200m
16": 140-150m
14.5": 95-100m
11.5": 40-45m

M855
20": 140-150m
16": 90-95m
14.5": 45-50m
11.5": 12-15m

These numbers really make you wonder about those 8-9" barreled guns. You don't see these barrel lengths on AR-15s much, hence their not being listed, but the HK G36C, HK 53, and Sig 552 all have barrels of less than 10". There are also 10" barreled M16 variants (the Colt Commando, maybe?). I really wonder how those 6" AR-pistols perform. Anybody ever chronograph one?

These numbers serve to reinforce my believe that in a 5.56mm rifle, longer barrels are better than shorter ones. Fragmentation or no, it's a velocity-dependent little cartridge, and when you shorten the barrel you handicap it. I think the Marines were wise to stick with the 20" M16, even if it isn't quite as handy as an M4 carbine.

If you really rely on fragmentation, and consider it necessary to make the 5.56mm gun more than "just a .22", do you then consider your 20" rifle to be a 200 meter gun, tops? For those of you with M4-geries with 14.5" barrels, would you say that the maximum effective range is really 50 to 100 meters, tops?

Or, even at under 2700 feet per second (and not fragmenting) do you consider the 5.56mm round to be adequate for combat use? Why or why not?

Which would you consider better, an FMJ that will probably fragment or a soft point or hollow point that is designed to expand?

Granted, most of us have never shot anyone, so this is largely hypothetical. I'm just curious; I'd prefer to see the US forces switch to 6.8mm, since it's a power upgrade with virtually no weight or recoil drawbacks (a win-win for everybody), but I don't expect that this will happen anytime soon.

Note that the 5.56mm NATO round isn't the only service cartridge that uses a method other than punching a hole to wound. The Soviet 7N6 round (5.45x39mm) has, I believe, an air pocket in the nose that causes the round to tumble much sooner than it otherwise would. Old British .303 service cartridges had a similar air pocket, I believe.

Just asking the many 5.56mm shooters on this board how they feel. I'm hoping this avoids becoming some big argument.

 

[Mulliga]

I'm hoping this avoids becoming some big argument.

Wishful thinking.

Now some will argue fragmentation is just "bullet failure," and they'd technically be right. But given the rank and file of the U.S. military uses FMJ ammo, the fragmentation effect gives you maximum stopping power - assuming the bullet doesn't get deflected by a tree branch or something .

Everyone and their grandma would like a switch to a slightly bigger caliber, but 5.56 has been serving well for 40 years and it continues to do so. Plus, for any big stuff, real marksmen (like Delta snipers) will just use 7.62 anyway.

Personally, I'm glad there are no restrictions on civilian ammo construction. Thank God for .30-06 150 gr. hollowpoints .

 

[Vern Humphrey]

The major problem with the M16's terminal performance in combat ion Viet Nam was lack of penetration. People get behind things when you shoot at them!

A successful battle rifle has to be able to penetrate cover -- logs, dirt, walls, and so on -- and the more penetration it has, the better.

My first tour, I carried an M1 rifle (which I bummed from the ARVN after my issue M2 carbine got wrapped around a tree.) The M1, with armor-piercing ammo, was a fine rifle for jungle combat -- once you had some idea of where the enemy was, spaced shots would penetrate almost anything.

It was the M1 that gave me the experience to develop the "target box" -- imaginary lines just above where the enemy MIGHT be, and just below the point where he CAN'T be. Teaching troops to visualize this box and to put spaced shots into it did wonders. I later taught the same technique to the company I commanded on my second tour, but with the M16 it was less effective.

I want AP, not fragmenting ball.

What we SHOULD do is copy the Russian 5.45 bullet -- an armor piercing core, with a gilding metal jacket, and a hollow space under the nose. That round is highly lethal on impacting flesh, and still penetrates.

 

[Jeff White]

Am I limited to USGI ammuntion?

There are several 5.56x45 rounds available that give better terminal effects then either one of the USGI rounds.

M855 is also designed to have an air pocket between the jacket and the lead. It's been suggested that the difficulty in producing the round with this air pocket may have something to do with some of the anecdotal references to less then optimal terminal effects that have been documented.

I don't consider any 20" barreled weapon to be a 200 meter only rifle. I think you are confusing the search for the mythical one shot stop with a weapon that is effective for military purposes. As I've said before, neither M193 or M855 will bounce off your BDU coat at velocities below 2500 fps. There have been kills made out to 500 meters with M855 out of 14.5" M4 barrels. I hardly think the Taliban that died from effective rifle fire would agree with your assertion that the combination of M855 out of a 14.5" M4 is only lethal to 50 meters. SPecial Forces shooters have made some kills out past 600 mteres with 18" barrelled SPRs shooting MK262 Mod 0.

The incidents that started 5th SF on the road to developing the 6.8 SPC were CQB fights not any failure to kill the enemy out past 100 meters or so.

Human beings are hard to kill. There are only two places you can shoot someone and turn them off like flipping a switch. The designer of the human being did a pretty good job of protecting these areas and they are hard shots to make even up close. Other then that we depend on exsanguination to rapidly incapacitate our foes. Of course that doesn't figure in the psychological factor. There are numerous examples in the history books where soldiers from both sides of a conflict have been wounded numerous times, often with several wounds that should have been fatal in and of themselves who have continued to function for minutes or sometimes hours before succumbing to their wounds. There are also just as many examples the other way, where people from both sides have succumbed from wounds that should have been easily survivable. How do you account for that? I can dig out numerous anecdotal examples of people being shot with M2 .30 caliber, 8mm, 7.62x51 etc. and still functioned. Yet we didn't indict any of those rounds as beeing combat ineffective.

I have full confidence in both M855 and M193 out to the listed maximum effective range.

Jeff

 

[Nightcrawler]

Well, as I've said before, the fragmentation is a double edged sword.

So 5.56mm will penetrate less drywall and sheetrock than 9mm, they say. Okay, in combat, say you're being shot at by a guy hiding behind a wall, or in a window. Wouldn't it be handy to have rounds that'll punch through the wall intact so they can get him? AP ammo is great for this, but how often is it issued to the line troops? (For this reason I believe Armor Piercing Ammo...M995, I think it's called...should be standard-issue for the M249 SAW. Good weapon for hosing down walls and windows that a badguy is hiding behind.)

On the other hand, the fragmentation makes a larger wound in a person's body.

Tradeoffs.

And, I made no assertations one way or another about the effectiveness of the 5.56mm round. The numbers I pulled were from Ammo Oracle, a website often referenced in these discussions, and a website that is (I believe) hosted by AR-15.com, so they're not likely to be 5.56mm bashers in any case.

I'm simply asking what people that actually shoot this round think; what I think is irrelevant. I already know what I think; I'm trying to find out what you guys think.

I bring this up because in every discussion of 5.56mm, somebody mentions the fragmentation. It seems to be a common belief that such fragmentation is necessary to make the 5.56mm any more effective than a .22 Magnum. I don't believe this; I believe velocity and momentum have a lot to do with things. (If not, .30-06 FMJ would be no more effective than .30 Luger, and .45-70 wouldn't work any better than .45ACP.)

Jeff White made his position that he doesn't think that the fragmentation is necessary to make the 5.56mm round effective, and he made his point well. What do the rest of you folks think?

Come to think of it, I should've posted a poll.

So what do you think about 5.56mm fragmentation?

1. I consider it necessary to make the 5.56mm round combat-effective.
2. I consider it to be nice if/when it happens, but 5.56mm works well enough without it.
3. I consider fragmenation to be detrimental to combat effectiveness.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

I'll go with 3 -- I want to penetrate whatever stands between me and the guy I'm shooting at.

And, as I said, you can have both penetration AND good terminal effects on live targets with the Russian 5.45 design.

 

[Andrew Wyatt]

for me, the reason i use 5.56 is because i picked a platform that happens to use it.

for critter shootin ammo, i'd pick one of the commercially available softpoint or hollowpoint loadings.

 

[wanderinwalker]

All I ask of my 5.56mm ammo is that it hit where my front sight is pointing!

Okay, if I had a carbine or lightweight rifle for defensive purposes, I'd want a polymer-tipped or hollowpoint bullet in the 55-65gr range. For combat usage I think ball would suffice.

As to the 6.8mm... WTH were they thinking? If you want superior ballistic performance and penetration, why not go with the 6.5mm? But then again, I like 6.5s and am therefore biased.

FWIW, I always get a kick out of people espousing the virtues of the .270 calibers vs. 7mm, .30cal, 6.5mm, etc. Terminally, I have no clue which is better. In terms of flight, all I have to do is look to my left and right at any gathering of Highpower shooters and note what they're using.

 

[Blackhawk 6]

I am going to go with option #4: I consider a piece of metal entering an individual's thoracic cavity to be a bad thing and I have no control over what it does once it gets there.

 

[ARperson]

Paper punching doesn't require much fragmentation so I don't really care.

 

[capt_happypants]

Given that my AR-15 is loaded with M193-spec ball, I consider fragmentation to be critical. Sure, it's an 11.5" bbl - but the rifle will be used primarily for in-house defense, not outdoors.

I believe that the most reliable way to incapacitate an attacker is blood loss. Therefore, a bullet must disrupt critical blood-bearing organs, causing a rapid drop in blood pressure.

A non-fragmenting bullet will simply punch a .223 caliber hole. M193-spec ball will punch a .223 caliber hole, AND cause significant damage outside of the permanent cavity.

 

[Onslaught]

First, let me start with these...
and

Just to show that I'm not arguing.

NOW...

I guess this just depends on who we're discussing here. Are we talking specifically about this round and our military? Or are we talking about "us" here in this forum? I'm going with the latter for the majority of my response.

Anyone who lives within the city limits like most of us WILL NOT be involved in a life or death situation involving a 150+ yard confrontation. PERIOD. The odds of being in an armed confrontation are high enough. Factor in that 99.9% of them happen within what, 10 feet? And THEN factor in the fact that, if both #1 and #2 fall into that 1% of 1% category, the odds of you HAVING your LOADED rifle in your hand at the time is, well.... just buy a lottery ticket, you've got much better odds. And for those who say "well, I live out in the country, where I can see for 300 yards"... well, you're even LESS likely to encounter the type of "mob" situation that the average SHTF'er is planning for anyway. It's us city folk that are gonna get the zombie hoardes.

Time for another

OK - with that out of the way...

do you then consider your 20" rifle to be a 200 meter gun, tops? For those of you with M4-geries with 14.5" barrels, would you say that the maximum effective range is really 50 to 100 meters, tops?

I have a 14.5" barrelled Carbine (*NOT* an M4-gery) that can consistently hit sillouettes at 300 yards. I have a scoped 20" AR that can do the same at 500. The 14.5 can do 500, but with irons, it's not consistent... There are a couple guys on AR15.com who, to prove a point, have been shooting 6" - 7" groups at 600 yards with an ACOG topped Dissipator, and a sub 3" group with an 18" SPR using the heavier ammo. I certainly do not consider either of my AR's a 150 or 200 yard rifle... Those 1/4" steel cutouts don't stand a chance!

If you are not in the military, but you actually "WORRY" about fragmentation, and you consider your rifle only effective to 140 yards, you're severely handicapping yourself by underestimating the round, or you're severly not old enough to purchase alchohol yet. And zero that rifle at 200, NOT 140!

I gotta give you credit though NC - you're just about the first poster I've seen give actual acknowledgement to the fact that the 5.56 will still fragment below 2700fps. It's NOT like it just hits the ground at 141 yards... it can still fragment, and it will yaw and deform well below 2500fps. It's not just punching a straight .22 caliber hole for quite a while yet.

The situations our troops may have found themselves in where multiple shots were required to put down a target at distance just AREN'T going to be encountered outside of Rainbow Six for us civvies. Even if the world did end, and an angry mob began charging your garden home... SHOOT 'em! Out of 100 people, how many are going to keep coming after they've been shot with a lowly 5.56? OK, out of those 7 people still standing, how many more times can you shoot them before they cover the 200 yards they still have to come before they get within fragmentation range?

Oh, and

If you really want to be prepared, just buy 2 boxes of the "good stuff" like GA Arms ballistic tip in 55gr, and keep two mags loaded with 20 rounds each. That will cover any issue you ever come into contact with. Zombies don't require fragmentation, so you can store thousands of rounds of FMJ for them.

You can use whatever you want, because we live in a free country and everybody has a preference, but for self defense, as a civilian, using an AR, anything over 11.5" would do the trick just fine.

NOW, for the short answer... If we're talking specifically military, I'll take the enlisted man's word on it and say YES, most of them want something more effective, so give them something more effective.

 

[444]

"5.56mm needs to be travelling at 2700 feet per second or faster to reliably fragment, and above 2500 feet per second to fragment at all. "
That is for military issue ball ammo. Just wanted to note that.

"Would you use an FMJ round that didn't fragment?"
No, not I. If I was still in the military, I wouldn't have any choice in the ammo I would use, as a civilian I would choose better ammo than FMJ. I still think that at those minimum velocities you mention, FMJ is still devastating even if it doesn't fragment. I am sure of it in fact.

"Which would you consider better, an FMJ that will probably fragment or a soft point or hollow point that is designed to expand?"
I would prefer a soft point, followed by a hollow point, followed by FMJ

I consider it to be nice if/when it happens, but 5.56mm works well enough without it.


AP ammo: I just finished the book Blackhawk Down. There is an interesting segment on that very topic.
"......And, sure enough, the man with the white Afro practically walked right up to them. He ducked behind a big tree about fifty yards off, hiding from Eversmann's Rangers, but oblivious to the threat off his left shoulder. He was loading a new magazine in his weapon when Nelson blasted about a dozen rounds into him. They were slap rounds, platic coated titanium bullets that could penetrate armor, and he saw the rounds go right through the man, but the guy still got up, retrieved his weapon, and even got off a shot or two in Nelson's direction. The machine gunner was shocked. He shot another twelve rounds at the man who neverthe less managed to crawl behind the tree. This time he didn't shoot back. ............................... But Nelson could see the Afro moving behind the tree. The man was kneeling and evidently still alive. Nelson squeezed off another long burst and saw bark splintering off the bottom of the tree. The afro slumped sideways to the street. His body quivered but he seemd to have at last expired. Nelson was surprised how hard it could be to kill a man."

But wait a minute, this is the mighty .308 and not just any .308, a belt fed machine gun.

Pat Rogers told a similar story in a carbine class I had with him. It was funny, but funny only because I wasn't there. He shot a guy at fairly close range with an M14 and the guy dropped. He engaged another target and looked over and the first guy was getting back up. So, he shot him again. This continued until he had shot the guy like 4-5 times. The guy would go down and get back up. He claims he was hitting the guy in the chest every time.
His explanation: the 7.62 NATO ball round was just putting nice clean .30" holes through the guy. These killed him eventually, but it took awhile.

Obviously the point is that AP rounds don't seem to be very effective antipersonel rounds. 5.56 or 7.62, they punch a hole, you wait on the guy to die.

 

[natedog]

A 0.224 55gr bullet going at 3100, 2700, 2500, or even 1000 to the chest is going to ruin someone's day, no matter what.

 

[Nightcrawler]

If all non-expanding or non-fragmenting rifle rounds do is punch a hole the same diameter as the bullet, does that mean that .30-06 is no more effective at close range than .30 Carbine? 7.62 Tokarev? .30 Luger? In FMJ form, all should penetrate clean through the squishy parts of a human body...

Or is AP ammo less effective than FMJ? If so, why?

Note that SLAP rounds are not standard AP. They're sub-caliber sabot rounds, using very light projectiles at very high velocity. (It's possible that the author of BHD didn't know this. I don't know to what extent SLAP is issued, though; generally the belt-feds are given a ball-tracer mix.) The ineffectiveness of such things as SLAP rounds is why I'd be opposed to our military adopting something like the Steyr ACR, which fires 10 grain .22 caliber flechettes at about 5,000 feet per second. Small, light projectiles zipping through a human being just don't incapacitate quickly.

Some info on SLAP:

CLICKY

 

[444]

" does that mean that .30-06 is no more effective at close range than .30 Carbine? ........."

No, you are right, velocity plays a huge role in the rounds effect.

I didn't even know what SLAP rounds were. I have heard of them, but always assumed they were just AP. So what diameter and weight is the bullet ? And what velocity would you get in 7.62 out of an M60 ?

 

[capt_happypants]

Well, the exact phrasing I should've used was "a non-fragmenting .223 bullet will punch a hole not much larger than the diameter of the bullet."

A 30.06 delivers much more payload than a 30 Carbine (180 vs 110 grain). Is it possible that the increase in mass, coupled with higher velocity causes more drastic effects on organs?

At least in the 5.56mm world, fragmentation is an important part of terminal effectiveness.

 

[Nightcrawler]

I think the diameter of 7.62mm SLAP is around 0.22", but I can't seem to find any info on the projectile weight or muzzle velocity. Needless to say, if the incident in BHD is typical of SLAP performance, it doesn't work very well regardless.

 

[Zak Smith]

Terminal effects are important. (So is hitting your target, but one can do that with M193, M855, or OTM.)

Give me 77gr OTM in .223. Or 6.8SPC. Another advantage of 6.8 is the ability to load bullet heavier than 115gr - a 140gr should be possible. Better yet, I'll grab the AR10 (.308).

For any likely goblins, a rifle caliber should have enough armor penetration without resorting to AP.

-z

 

[Nightcrawler]

Is it possible that the increase in mass, coupled with higher velocity causes more drastic effects on organs?

Of course it is. Drop a 1 pound rock into the water, and see what happens. Then, throw a two pound rock into the water, and see what happens then.

Bigger splash. That's sort of what temporary cavity is. Human flesh is elastic, but not completely fluid; it'll stretch back, but only so much. Too much "splash" and you rupture, tear, and generally screw up important organs. Higher velocity hits also tend to make bones explode, from what I've read.

That's why I chuckle when anyone says that hydrostatic shock is a "myth". It's not a myth; it's simple physics.

Now, how much wounding potential it has is debatable, but it certainly isn't going to help the badguy any. And it's the reason why .30-06 is better than 7.62mm Tokarev, even at point-blank range. It's why .223, even if it doesn't fragment, is better than .22 Magnum. It's why .45-70 +P is better than .45ACP, and it's why .44 Magnum beats .44 Special. Heavier bullet, higher velocity.

 

[WonderNine]

I've never said that I think that fragmentation is necessary to make 5.56 effective. I simply believe that fragmentation makes it much more effective on attackers. I doubt anyone here will disagree.

 

[DMK]

These numbers serve to reinforce my believe that in a 5.56mm rifle, longer barrels are better than shorter ones. Fragmentation or no, it's a velocity-dependent little cartridge, and when you shorten the barrel you handicap it. I think the Marines were wise to stick with the 20" M16, even if it isn't quite as handy as an M4 carbine.

If you need to shoot enemy soldiers at distance, that's true. It seems that even the A2/A4 isn't going to fragment M193 past 200 meters and the military's using M855 which won't even fragment reliably past 150m. (according to the data above)

However, was the CAR-15/M4 or any of those smaller carbines really designed for even that? It seems to me that they are close in weapons for <100yards. Mostly for CQB. From what I've read, these guns are replacements for submachineguns.

This kind of proves that you can't judge a weapon's effective range just by it's sight markings.

 

[444]

DMK: You hit upon an important point and Nightcrawler and I have discussed this before. Everything is a compromise. EVERYTHING. However, if you are trying to argue against something, it makes it very easy to pick out negative things to say. For example: "This or that round is velocity dependent". Ok, name me one that isn't. They seem to just lay there without velocity. And every one of them, doesn't matter pick anything from 700 Nitro Express to 4.5mm Velo Dog performs better the faster you can get it moving up to a certain point. At some point you have to decide: This is what we are building this rifle to do. We are going to choose a caliber that accomplishs this task reasonably well. And in doing so, we realize that for situations that fall out of these guidelines, the weapon or cartridge is not going to be as effective as something else designed to accomplish that specific goal. An example would be that the M4 was designed for CQB. They were designed in part to replace SMGs. Ok, I think they did a hell of a job. IMO it is better than any SMG ever made. But the critics can immediately jump on the fact that it doesn't make a good 800 meter sniper weapon. Ok, neither does a handgun. Neither does a bayonet. Neither does a radiator cap; You know why ? Because it wasn't designed with that in mind. The designers realized that the average GI cant hit someone at 800 meters so they gave him a weapon that works within the range he most likely might see the enemy, a range that he might realistically hit the enemy etc. It isn't designed to replace the 16" naval gun. It isn't designed to replace a hellfire missle. It isn't designed to take the place of a main battle tank. And the fact that it doesn't do these things is not a bad thing.

 

[BigG]

Nightcrawler: HV is all the 5.56 has got. Once you slow it down it loses the MAGIC the M193 became known for in the 20" bbl.

Fragmentation/tumbling whatever you call it is vital to the success of a varmint round on two-legged varmints.

 

[geekWithA.45]

The original question: How important is fragmentation to me?

Yes, it's important to me that I understand the capabilities and limitations of the rounds that fill my ammo locker, and how they interact with my specific launching platform.

In the unlikely event that I must use them for defensive purposes, this will inform how they are deployed.

Bottom line re: my situation: without getting into relatively expensive police/hunting/commercial rounds, it looks like M193 is the best for my 16 inch barrel, and having launched many thousands of rounds through it, I've got a lot of faith that they'll A) go bang and B) go where I point them.

In my mind, the AR is primarily for house defense CQB. For use in broader fields, I'd leave it in the safe and grab the m1a instead, but scenarios calling for that are even more unlikey than scenarios that grant me liesure to haul open the long gun safe, as opposed to the fast access pistol safe.

The simple reality is that when things go crash in the night and start moving quickly, it's down to me, my .45, my spectacles, my armor, my pants, my boots, and a shirt in that order, as time permits. If time doesn't permit, it'll be just a naked geekWithA.45, which should be sufficiently horrifying to frighten off all but the most hardened bad guys.