M16\M4 Performance in Iraq

[daniel501]

The terminal ballistics of 55gr .223 in FMJ are well documented. I think the case could be made that if you're going to hunt deer with a .223, then FMJ is at least as good as the alternative bullet types, in spite of the fact that it goes against conventional wisdom and hunting regs in some places.

In .308 there are an assortment of better alternatives to FMJ, and no-one would recommend FMJ for hunting.

All that said, no one would dispute that .308 FMJ is better suited for deer hunting than .223 of any variety.

(Anecdotal data point: FWIW, I took one small whitetail with Remington "powerpoint" pointed softpoint 55gr .223 at about 90 yards. It hit the lungs, and the deer moved about 15 yards and collapsed. )

 

[Sgt]

Keith, In order.....

No, I would not.....and besides, it's not legal to use .223 on deer here in the land of fruits and nuts.

And no again on FMJ in .308. Yes if I was starving and that's all I had, but soft points just hit harder and do more damage, thus dropping the animal faster.

And in regards to daniel501's comments: A .22LR will drop a deer if the shot placement is perfect, but that doesn't mean you should do it.

Use enough gun and good ammo, there's nothing worse than wounding an animal and wasting meat because it ran 5 miles before it died and you can't find it.

Semper Fi, Sgt

 

[Mannlicher]

this differs from what I read from more credible sources.

 

[tac17]

this differs from what I read from more credible sources.

Well I wasn't going to say it but I was thinking it.

 

[Keith]

I didn't ask if FMJ was better or worse than soft points for terminal effect on deer.

I asked people to choose between a .223 and .308 FMJ's, on the assumption that this was all you could use.

So, you must use one or the other; which will you choose - and why?


Keith

 

[Keith]

All that said, no one would dispute that .308 FMJ is better suited for deer hunting than .223 of any variety.

Well, I certainly wouldn't dispute that!

Now, you must go into combat against humans who weigh about the same as a deer. Will you choose a .308 or .223 FMJ?

Keith

 

[tac17]

Personally I would take the 5.56 FMJ, the balistics of the 5.56 are more or less equal to the 7.62X51 at the ranges that matter. I don't think the extra weight of the 7.62X51 is justified.

 

[Keith]

the balistics of the 5.56 are more or less equal to the 7.62X51 at the ranges that matter.

Then defend the statement. How many foot pounds of energy, how much penetration, how big a hole is made, etc, by the two rounds.

Keith

 

[seeker_two]

Is there a single person here that would recommend hunters use a FMJ .223 to hunt deer?

I've seen deer fall to .22lr & .22mag rifles. But I wouldn't recommend them for combat...

The big problem is: what does a soldier need to successfully complete a combat mission?

In Vietnam & Central America, the .223 was great b/c the ranges were short. So was the .30 Carbine.

In the Middle East, the .308 does better b/c the ranges are longer.

What we need is a cartridge that is lightweight, accurate, powerful enough to engage at 300+ yards when necessary, but easy to control in full-auto when the ranges are close.

I nominate the .243 Winchester...

 

[tac17]

http://www.steyrscout.org/terminal.htm is the link where a lot of the following is coming from.

This profile is the M855 5.56mm NATO cartridge, with a 62gr steel core FMJ boat tailed bullet @ 3035 f/s. This is a classic fragmenting rifle bullet profile. Penetration is acceptable at 34cm (13.4"). Note the long narrow neck of about 9 cm (4") before the bullet tumbles and fragments. The original M193 55gr round produces a similar profile but it has a longer neck, and slightly smaller temporary and permanent cavities. Both of these bullets fracture at the cannelure at velocities above about 2700 f/s. Below that velocity the bullets simply tumble without producing the extensive permanent cavity much like the 7.62 mm M80 ball round.

This profile is the M80 7.62mm NATO cartridge, a 149gr FMJ boat tailed bullet at 2730 f/s. This is a classic FMJ military bullet profile for modern non-fragmenting / non-expanding spitzer bullets. The bullet ends up base first at a penetration of 25.6". The permanent cavity is flat in cross-section. Note the long neck before the bullet starts to tumble, but in this case at only 2700 f/s and with its heavy jacket the bullet doesn't fragment. Interestingly, if this bullet is driven at 3000 f/s it fragments and behaves just like the M855 5.56mm bullet. Have you noticed the trend for FMJ spitzer flat base/spitzer BT bullets that do not fragment to end up base first?


My thoughts on the subject are that you do get better penetration from the 7.62x51 round and it is more effective at going through cover, but the wound of the 5.56 is actually more severe when it is still at a velocity to fragment. Generally fragmentation occurs at 150 yards and under but when the 5.56 is loaded with heavier bullets fragmentation can still be seen at upwards of 300 yards. Which was the range that I was initialy refering to. Of course once you are past the point of fragmentation you are left with a .22 caliber wound for the most part. So when I consider that a 7.62 Nato bullet is as heavy as an entire round of 5.56 I just can't really justify the extra weight.

 

[tac17]

I nominate the .243 Winchester

Hasn't there been talk of doing something along those lines recently? It might make a nice rifle.

 

[daniel501]

Well, the answer will always be "it depends."

If I'm in a trench, and I have one shot to make at 200 yards, and sitting there by my side are two rifles of nominally equal accuracy, well sure I'm going to pick up the 7.62x51 every time.

If I've got to carry that rifle many miles through the jungle, and carry all my gear and ammo with me with scant chance of resupply, then 5.56 is the obvious choice.

 

[MLC]

to further muddy the churning waters

Is it possible that some of the 7.62 wounds that this gentleman is seeing are caused by fire from a PKM 7.62x54? Also, Iraquis have access to more firearms than we do so perhaps there are a few G3's(Iran used alot of them against Iraq) and FAL about?

 

[Sir Galahad]

Well, having grad-ee-ated from U.S. Army Ordnance School and seen all the crap on display at Aberdeen Proving Grounds, I'd just like to make this comment: Army Ordnance R&D is like a dirty diaper. They're full of **** and always need changing. These clods could take something that works perfectly and decide it needs to do something stupid and make a design flaw, er, design change that makes a total POS out of the whole thing. Asking THEM to design a new rifle is asking for a rifle that weighs 20 pounds, launches grenades, has a camera (whatzzis for--instant replay video of the guy you shot?), can look around corners, sings lullabyes, but cannot do efficiently one thing: shoot rifle bullets. This is how the army was using crap-in-a-bag for rations for years until decent MREs came out. A sparrow would go hungry on a first-gen NRE. And a dog wouldn't eat those dehydrated pork and beef patties. If I have to have a rifle, it certainly won't be anything those imbeciles have had their sticky little fingers into. Maybe there's something to be said for Soviet motivational techniques: "Yes, the rifle had BETTER work. And be all you said it is. Or we shoot you and find someone else to build it."

 

[BDM]

Thats what they told the guy who designed the T34,and that turned out to be a very good tank the first time it rolled off the assembly line except here in america you have to tell them"well cut off your funding,and with your PHD youll have to work in mcdonalds because you wont work here"and watch how fast they stop dragging their ??? and get it right the first time.

 

[Sgt]

Originally posted by Mannlicher:

this differs from what I read from more credible sources.

What differs?

Originally posted by Keith:

I didn't ask if FMJ was better or worse than soft points for terminal effect on deer.

You asked......"Is there a single person here that would recommend hunters use a FMJ .223 to hunt deer?" And you didn't like my answer?

I asked people to choose between a .223 and .308 FMJ's, on the assumption that this was all you could use.

You never stated that was all we could use, it seemed as if you were asking if FMJ's were a good choice.

So, you must use one or the other; which will you choose - and why?

I gave you my answers, including the "why" and then you cop an attitude? Perhaps you need to spell out exactly what you are thinking and not expect anyone to read your mind. But if it will make you happy....I would use a bleepin' rock to kill a deer, if that's all I had......but since there are so many better choices out there and you didn't present this as a SHTF scenario, I'll just stick to what I know works and save the FMJ for target practice and in case the "S" really does "HTF"...Does this adequately answer your question?

Sgt

 

[Sir Galahad]

Know what I use to kill deer? I run them down, nigh bare-butt in a chamois skin loincloth and tear out their jugulars with my teeth. My teeth, to the best of my knowledge, are non-expanding, but I'd need a mirror to verify that. I understand that some people who eat certain mushrooms (you know, psychedelic portobellos) and look into mirrors claim their teeth expand, but I don't know at what FPS this happens at. My teeth are FEJ---Full Enamel Jacket. They are quite effective on prime rib (you should see the tissue damage when it's a morsel lightly dipped in horseradish and au jus) and even crusty bread dipped in olive oil. Anyway, I just thought I'd share and you can purchase pictures of me with a deer windpipe hanging out of my mouth (I'm actually using it to play a spritely little piece from "Der Zieberflaute", but I don't like to brag) in the lobby.

 

[Sgt]

Dear/Deer Sir Galahad.......

 

[BDM]

To KEITH I say this we should all worry less about what expands,fragments, how big a hole it makes and worry more about being good and proficient with what ever rifle and ammo combo we use and how good we can hit and place those shots maybe .308 is better maybe .223 maybe FMJ maybe softpoint maybe hollow point one thing is for sure from .22 to .30 if you take it in the head or chest, lungs whatever the game is over anyway and in a SHTF scenario without medical attention a non life threatening wound can kill if not treated so Ill practice to hit first and hit true and hope I dont get hurt or killed myself while doing that wich I hope none of us will ever have to do and at the same time worry about loved ones and protecting them to,there is more important things to consider,whatever you have learn to use it well because only hits in vital areas count on animals of the two legged variety 4 legs to but they dont shoot back!!!

 

[Art Eatman]

Lord luv a duk!



M16/M4. Performance. Iraq.

Art

 

[Keith]

I see a lot of specious reasoning here.

The one thing you should ask of a military round is that it instantly kill or incapacitate the individual you shoot with that round.

The .223 has failed again and again. Unless you get a lucky spine or head shot, the individuals shot usually continue to shoot back rather than fall dead (as is the proper thing to do under those circumstances). The .223 will not penetrate even light vehicles, much less cinder block buildings or brush screens. In Iraq, advances were held up again and again just because some knucklehead was hiding in a shack and couldn't be neutralized with rifle fire. They'd have to call in a million dollar air strike to take out someone who could have been cut to pieces with a .308 rounds. The .223 is just not a very effective combat round!

And yes, I'm sure the soldiers like the new M4's for their light weight and handiness, it's just too bad it shoots such an ineffectual round.
There's no reason a .308 battle rifle couldn't be made the same weight and length.

Keith

 

[tac17]

The one thing you should ask of a military round is that it instantly kill or incapacitate the individual you shoot with that round.

Then a .308 is not a very combat effective round, by your specious reasoning. There are very few places where you can hit a human and "instantly kill on incapacitate." A spine shot would only incapacitate a determined human to a degree, it would depend on where the round struck the spine as to how much he would be incapacitated. A brain shot would be grand for an instant kill on incapacitation though I hear it isn't the easiest thing to do when people are shooting at you. Everything else is going to involve them bleeding out, and it could take some time for their blood pressure to drop to a degree where they would be killed or incapacitated, barring a hit on a large artery or the heart itself. If you think that the .308 will "instantly kill or incapacitate the individual" just by the nature of his getting, shot then you are serious misinformed.

If you however can agree with the logic of only good hits count then I suppose that it is pointless for you to be complaining about the .223 isn't it? If you put them where they count, as far as the true and factual data from the field and not this guys letter home, they will do their job. :banghead:

 

[Keith]

Then a .308 is not a very combat effective round, by your specious reasoning. There are very few places where you can hit a human and "instantly kill on incapacitate."

A .308 has a larger diameter and triple the mass of a .223. If an individual is in a light vehicle or behind a cinder block wall (a very common scenario encountered in Iraq), you could NOT score a hit with a .223 simply because it will not penetrete a car door or a few inches of concrete. The .308 will, and that fact was commented on by observers who had soldiers armed with .308 weapons.

That larger diameter and mass also multiplies the effect of a hit on an exposed enemy. People shot with .308's are more prone to falling down and dying than people shot with .223's. To argue otherwise is... well, silly!

And hit probability is no different with a .223 than a .308. I mean, align sights with target and pull trigger - if you do that right, you score a hit no matter what the caliber of your rifle. It's all about what happens at the other end - does the bullet bounce off a car door or penetrate and score a hit? Does the hit on an exposed enemy make him mad or does it kill him?

Keith

 

[EchoSixMike]

And yes, I'm sure the soldiers like the new M4's for their light weight and handiness, it's just too bad it shoots such an ineffectual round.
There's no reason a .308 battle rifle couldn't be made the same weight and length.

Never heard of that thing called recoil, have you stud?

A .308 has a larger diameter and triple the mass of a .223. If an individual is in a light vehicle or behind a cinder block wall (a very common scenario encountered in Iraq), you could NOT score a hit with a .223 simply because it will not penetrete a car door or a few inches of concrete.

Have you ever shot a car door with a 223? I have and it penetrated just fine(M855, and 75gn OTM from 20" barrel, 16" would work just as well IMO) The 7.62x51 M80 works slightly better than 5.56 vs cinder block or concrete block, against cast concrete(6-8" foundations it generally doesn't work very well at all) Trying M80 vs good American reinforced concrete is a waste of time usless you have all day. By the time you dig them out, his buddies have flanked you and killed you.

Mass and energy mean very little without projectile design to utilize it. The M80 has poor projectile design from a terminal ballistics standpoint. No matter what you do, it makes a 7.62 hole that increases to bullet length when it yaws at X depth(usually fairly deep). Whereas the 5.56x45 M855 usually and now Mk262 Mod 1 almost always fragments and makes a nasty wound up close(inside about 200-250m, where 80%+ hits are made) and does more tissue damage causing more rapid incapacitiation than M80 ever does. This is FACT verified by scientific testing. Not anecdotes, not a buddies war story, not internet commando rumor, facts backed by science. If you wish to believe in voodoo internet myth based on hearsay nonsense, feel free. I choose to believe in science. It's gotten us out of the middle ages and this far and I believe it will continue to work.

BTW, what unit are you with or were with. I know where Jeff is, and I'm with Scout-sniper platoon, 2nd Bn, 24th Marines. We have a decidedly personal interest in this sort of thing, how about you? Not that all can't contribute, but we are a little more involved in the outcome. Semper Fidelis...Ken M

 

[Jeff White]

Keith,

If you are so sure the 7.62x51 is such a better killer, I submit this passage from Mark Bowden's book Black Hawk Down. There are numerous other examples in many other books from all conflicts. I chose this one, because the M16s detractors use another passage from the book as proof positive that the M16 and M855 round is too ineffective for combat use.

The 60 gunner knew what the old man was trying to do. DiTomasso had spread the word that Chalk Four was stuck one block northwest of their position. The old man was obviously looking for a better vantage point to shoot at Eversman and his men.

"Shoot him, shoot him," urged his assistant.

"No, watch," Nelson said. "He'll come right to us."

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 Eversman'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, plastic 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 never the less managed to crawl behind the tree. This time he didn't shoot back.

"I think you got him," said the assistant gunner.

But Nelson could still 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 seemed to have at last expired. Nelson was surprised at how hard it was to kill a man.

I'd like to make a suggestion for all you guys who are so concerned about the state of small arms in the US military. I'd like you all to write your congress critters. No, I don't want you to advocate we adopt the M14, G3, G36, Brown Bess Musket, 30-40 Krag.....Demand that they fund ranges and ammunition so that our forces, especially those in the reserve components have adequate training. That one thing will do more to increase our soldiers and Marines effectiveness with their small arms then if we suddenly perfected Star Trek Phaser rifles. In the end, it's not so much the weapon, but the ability to use it well.

Jeff