what kinda power is 5.45x39 round have?

Just wondering. Saw an assault rifle with this round with 30 round clip.

 

Are you in the military? I was just wandering because fully automatic weapons are heavily regulated. One does not often see them unless he lives in one of the states that allows them and also knows someone willing to let him see them as they are very expensive to boot because of the artificial economic pressure introduced by the various laws pertaining to actual assualt weapons.

Or, did you mean a semi-automatic rifle chambered for the NATO standard round of 5.45mmX39mm? Through sheer force of will and stupidity the mainstream media has convinced a lot of people that a semi-automatic rifle is an assualt weapon. It is not. Magazine capacity has nothing to do with 'power'. Perhaps you could elaborate on what exactly you mean by 'power'. Do you mean energy at the point of impact in ft/lbs.?

I.C.

 

Uh, I.C. 5.45x39 is Rooshin, not NATO.

glockrock. 5.45x39 is about as powerful as 5.56 M193 vietnam M16.

 

Lollol, sorry, COMBLOC, got caught up in the phrasiology......


I.C.

 

I believe it is

just a little weaker than 5.56x45

The bullet yawing thing is kinda debatable. It yaws a little, but not enough to make up for the fact that it is a 21 caliber bullet.

 

Another Internet Guess... wrong.

5.45x39 is not 7.62x39 necked down. It has a different casehead diameter closer to .223 and is a different round altogether. One handloader makes them out of .222 brass.

 

No, the bullet yawing thing is not debatable. I've seen the yawing effect on several wooden boards placed end on end. Bullet flips completely over several times. This was also confirmed by an erratic wound channel I found in a deer I'd shot with that caliber. Also, if you look into Facklers wound ballistics survey, you'd notice that it yaws more then most other bullets, flipping over within the first few inches upon entering the target.

 

Is it understabilized?

 

Fackler

I am not questioning whether it does yaw. Just that it doesn't yaw that much (The bullets are not magic). What's debatable is whether the yawing really causes that much damage. And there's currently a trend back toward the 7.62x39. I think I've read the Fackler stuff. Didn't he comment that the 5.45 really didn't do much? It would require a long torso shot (18" or so) before the yawing really shows up.

Just about all pointy bullets are unstable. As soon as they loose spin, they will yaw.

The nastiness starts when things fragment. 5.56 does this better (at closure ranges anyways). At longer ranges they both suck.

 

From Fackler:
Soviet 5.45x39mm - "This is fired from the AK-74, which is the Soviet contribution to the new generation of smaller-calibre assault rifles and which produces the wound profile seen in Fig. 3. The full metal-jacketed bullet designed for this weapon has a copper-plated steel jacket and a largely steel core, as does the bullet of its predecessor, the AK-47. A unique design feature of the AK-74, however, is an air-space (about 5mm long) inside the jacket at the bullet's tip (Fig 1). The speculation that this air-space would cause bullet deformation and fragmentation on impact proved to be unfounded, but the air-space does serve to shift the builet's centre of mass toward the rear, possibly contributing to its very early yaw. In addition, on bullet impact with tissue, the lead just behind the air-space shifts forward into this space. This shift of lead occurs asymmetrically and may be one reason for the peculiar curvature of this bullet's path in the last half of its path through tissue (Fig 3). Only in a shot with a long tissue path, like an oblique shot through the torso, would this curved path be evident; it doesn't really add anything to wounding capacity, but might cause an occasional confusing path through tissue. This bullet yaws after only about 7cm of tissue penetration, assuring an increased temporary cavity stretch disruption in a higher percentage of extremity hits; other bullets need more tissue depth to yaw and in many cases cause only minimal disruption on extremity hits.


The abdomen and thigh wounds expected from this bullet would be essentially the same as those described above for the Yugoslav variation of the AK-47 bullet.

All pointed bullets that do not deform end their tissue path travelling base first, since this puts their centre of mass forward; this is their stable attitude. The rotation imparted to the bullet by the rifled gun barrel is sufficient to force the bullet to travel point-forward in air (in properly designed weapons), but not in tissue where such factors as bullet shape and the location of centre of mass far outweigh rotation effects. The bi-lobed yaw patterns shown in the profiles of the AK-47 and the AK-74 represent what is seen in most shots. Sometimes the bullet yaws to 180°, or the base-forward position, in one cycle. These variations, along with the curvature in bullet path at or near the end of tissue path, are of far less importance than the distance the bullet travels point-forward before significant yaw begins."

Here is the web page if you are interested. Some very interesting material. http://www.fen-net.de/norbert.arnoldi/army/wound.html

A few selections:
"Bullet mass and bullet striking velocity establish a bullet's potential; they set the limit on the tissue disruption it can produce. Bullet shape and construction determine how much of this potential is actually used to disrupt tissue; they are the major determinants of bullet effect. Far and away the most disruptive bullet of those described is the West German 7.62 NATO round. Its fragmenting behavior maximises utilisation of its much higher potential (bullet mass well over twice that of any of the 5.56mm bullets and velocity only about ten percent less than theirs) for tissue disruption.

This author has not tested other European 7.62 NATO rounds, but the "NATO standards" apparently allow bullet designers great latitude in the choice of bullet jacket material and thickness. In 1979 a published high-speed x-ray photograph showed the Swedish 7.62 equivalent to the 7.62 NATO bullet breaking in a soap block shot at a range of 100m. Although bullet fragments were not recovered and photographed (the importance of bullet fragmentation in tissue disruption was not well recognised at the time), one must suspect the same very disruptive behaviour from this bullet as from the West German round. This is particularly ironic since the Swedish wound ballistics program was using every means possible to discredit the M16 as "inhumane" while, at the same time, Sweden was producing a 7.62 military bullet that caused far more extensive wounds than the M16."

 

Okay

That's Fackler. I've read that a few times.

5.45 is a good plinking round, but it aint magic.

I'd rather have a big nasty hole than a small erratic hole.

 

Your druthers are a personal thing. The question is, what kind of power does the 5.45x39mm have? The answer is, enough power to reliably kill a human being provided that the bullet lands in the place it needs to go. It also has the power to kill deer and small game animals. The advantage of the round is that it allows fast follow up shots, with greater accuracy and less time then the 7.62x39mm, as well as better ballistics at greater ranges. Also, the tendancy of the 5.45x39mm to quickly yaw upon entering a medium denser then air and expose the flesh to the full profile of the bullet. So, rather then a .22 caliber hole going in and going out, you have a hole passing through the target roughly an inch wide in places. True, the M193 and M855 ball patterns produce larger permanent wound cavities at ranges closer where the bullet is traveling over 2400 fps, but beyond those ranges, they produce a very typical boring pattern right through the target. The advantage of the 5.45 is that since its yaw begins much earlier, and the bullet is so long, that the round isn't AS velocity dependent for its wounding effect. This, while maintaining the advantages of, accuracy, trajectory, and quickness of follow up shots. No, it isnt magic. Its ballistics.

Even a 7.62x51 Nato doesnt guarantee you a "big, nasty hole". It all depends on where and how the bullet strikes and exactly what the bullet is composed of.

 

I feel like this is groundhog day. I keep explaining this again and again.

The 5.45 does not have wounding parity with the 5.56 because of bullet construction, ESPECIALLY military ammo. 5.45 tends to be either thick jacketed lead core or thick jacketed steel core. Neither is a particularly good fragmenter from what I have seen.

We all know the horror stores about rangers and delta force shooting somalis like 10-15 times to incapacitate them with non-fragmenting 5.56 (AP green tip?). The 5.45 based guns obey the same physical laws and shoot the same types of non-frangible projectiles.

It earned the nickname "poison bullet" because people were surviving fights against it and later dying from seemingly insignificant wounds. Remember that these are mujahadeen without extensive medical support, so you should really be asking yourself why so many survived long enough to die of blood poisoning from their insignificant wounds.

7.62 is just more bullet and it is going to cause more trauma when it hits. This is true of every bullet design. Soft tip, hollow point, FMJ, etc. I know people will give me hell for this, but the 7.62x39 nearly has parity with the full power 30 caliber rounds when similar projectile types are used. A SP 7.62x9, 30-30 or 308 will all leave gigantic holes. A FMJ will leave a large temporary stretch cavity, but only moderate size permanent cavity. Etc. The full power rounds just have a lot more reach.

 

An SP 30-30 or .308 will leave "giant" holes if they hit a bone and retain enough velocity to shatter the bone and create large stellate wounds. I myself have shot deer and other animals with .303 British, 7.62x39mm, 5.45x39mm, 5.56x45mm and have seen many shot with .308. The most extensive wounds were caused by the 7.62x39mm (unexpectedly) and the 5.56. The 7.62x39mm FMJ struck the deer right on the spine and blew it to pieces, sending chunks of bone flying out the far side of the neck and leaving a hole big enough to fit your fist through. ANY of the bullets listed above would have been fatal in that scenario. The .303 British, striking a similar sized mule deer in the ribs, punched a clean .31 caliber hole through the deer, with only a slightly larger exit hole. This was a soft point. Now, if FMJ's create such tiny permanent wound cavities, and SP's such massive ones, then why didnt I see that behavior emulated in this last case? Why? Because it is NOT NECESSARILY TRUE. General rules are generally wrong.

 

Uh, where do you live that you can hunt with FMJ? And not all SPs behave the same way. Some fragment, some stick together, some dont expand. Just as FMJs vary enormously in their construction and terminal ballistics, so do HPs and SPs.

Also, deer bones are a lot bigger than human bones. A FMJ that you experienced fragmentation with might not fragment on relatively weak human bones.

The 5.45 has no fragmentation envelope. That is the reason it doesnt have wounding parity. That the 5.56 has a 100-150m range where it completely beats the 5.45 is pretty significant. That's like saying 12 guage has wounding parity with 410 gauge when 2/3rds of the pellets miss. Technically true, but obviously a flawed argument.

Just because the russians are still using it, doesnt mean it is any good. And it's not like the AN94 is entering service anytime soon.

 

Here are some interesting threads I found on gunsnet a while back:

http://www.gunsnet.net/forums/showthread.php?t=96609

http://www.gunsnet.net/forums/showthread.php?t=95667&page=2&pp=30

ETA: I should add that the top post was written by Vladimir Makarov, nephew of Nikolai Makarov and a friend of Mikhail Kalashnikov.

 

Indsidious Calm...you gotta watch that stuff...

Luckily I caught it...I have lots of training in namiology.


I would think that it wasn't designed to fragment due to our crunchies having body armor...the bullet would penetrate, deform, and therefore cause a more lethal wound channel than normal penetration...that is a guess of course...but it seems to make sense...

MTCW
D

 

The bullet of the 5.45x39mm is .221" not .21". So resizing any .224" bullet in a $25 special order Lee Lube&Size die is easy. 3-4 years ago I sent 10rds I made from 222 Remington brass loaded with resized Hornady 68gr bullets to a SSG-82(bolt action rifle) owner in CA. He fired a .8" 3 shot 100 yard group so the resizing of the bullets has no effect on the accuracry of the bullets.
Forming 222 Remington brass works very well and only 5%-7% of the cases get splits in them from fireforming. Which is a lot better than the 25%-50% of cases that get splits from reformed 223/5.56mm brass. So far 4 times is the most I have reloaded a case formed from new 222 Remington brass.

 

Correct me if I am wrong, but due to the hollow nose of the 5.45, it doesn't rely on velocity in order to yaw within tissue? The center of mass will always be to the rear on that bullet, and as a result, it will always want to flip over sending the center of mass forward.


I believe bigger is better. This is true, if it weren't the 50BMG would be worthless. However, it's better to use the tools best suited for the expected mission.


If you want to gun down 10-15 rabidly violent looters who are storming down the streets of your neighborhood to rape your women and steal your food after some SHTF scenario..you don't really need to be hitting them with a .308. You'd probably want something with less recoil, so that you can stay on target and deliver more shots. It is better to have more rapid fire, more ammunition and better target acquisition than some big caliber whose wound effects are larger, but in the scope of the whole situation, isn't the key factor. That's the idea behind the 5.45. You just have to decide, how much damage do I need to do?


Folks, let's be real here. You hit anybody with a center of mass shot from a 5.45 and they are out of the fight. Who cares if they die 20 minutes later, after being hit they aren't going to be much of a threat to you.


Use anything, use a 7.62x39, or a .223...it will get the job done.


I think stories of a few people here and there taking multiple hits from all sorts of calibers and surviving and fighting on totally throws the issue out of context. For every dude that gets nailed by multiple 5.56's to the chest and can still wield an AK and fire back at our GI's...the 5.56 probably quickly dropped and burried about 10,000 others.

Hitting a guy once with a 5.56 or 5.45 and having him drop cold in his tracks, there on the ground not moving and bleeding out within seconds doesn't make for news.

 

Velocity doesn't strongly influence yaw in any bullet.

The Russians I quoted above, who actually shot people with 5.45 seem to disagree with you.

 

please guys....

can we have some pics....

 

Judging from first-hand reports I've read from people returning from Iraq, failures to incapacitate promptly happen far more often than that with the 5.56mm. As a result, it seems to be common practice to shoot each man several times, to make sure.

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and discussion forum