a military commanders take on the .223 platform..

[Larry Gibson]

Having actually used both 5.56 and 7.62 NATO along with the 30 Carbine and 45 ACP in hotly contested adversarial situations I know which one I would rather have regardless of the engagement distance. I have also seen the immediate end use results of the 30-06, 7.62x39, 9mm and 7.62x54R cartridges on friend and foe alike. All were with FMJ ammunition.

In my last deployment they kept trying to give me an M4A1 because it was easier to carry and get in and out of vehicles with. I told them I would take an M14......that got me a "deer in the headlight look" so I just kept my M16A2. I did not feel undergunned with it but I was not in an offensive posture.

In a non combative environment I have shot numerous critters with all the afore mentioned cartridges using soft and hollow pointed ammo.

While I have 3 ARs in 5.56 and a 9mm CZ75 in a SHTF scenario it is my M1A in 7.62 NATO and M1911 45 ACP that will go out the door with me.

"7.62 NATO.....better than Master Card of VISA......accepted worldwide.....never leave home without it......"

"What is cover to 5.56 is only concealment to 7.62 NATO...."

[458mag]

The 5.56 kills a lot more than poodles.

Yeah but you only have to shoot the poodle once with it. Ussually.

[Mauser 98K]

"7.62 NATO.....better than Master Card of VISA......accepted worldwide.....never leave home without it......"

lol. exactly.. i like to call my .308 rifle AT&T. "reach out and touch someone. reach out and just say die"..

but for accuracy with the 7.62x39mm.. it can be done with the SKS out to 400m-500m. you will not do it with undersized .308-.309 cheap ammo or one of the dust cover scope rails.. that is a lot of the problems with secondary sights or scopes that i have seen put on the SKS, they were 99% of the time the dust cover mounts that shift with every shot. those rails are mediocre at 100m, much less 200m and beyond.. i have the only SKS receiver scope rail i have seen, although i see them for sale online..


it is a little rough as i finished machining it, tested it, sprayed a little rattle can on it, and never finished the final coating of the thing.. and that was 10yr ago. i might sit down and finish it being i got the thing out.

but as to the 5.56 killing. i never said it would not kill. a .25Auto will kill. a 22CB Cap will kill. a .177cal pellet gun will kill if it hits the right spot. a spear or a bow and arrow will kill. even a well placed rock will kill. i wouldn't want to get hit by the thing either way. does that make it the ideal weapon? no. it just means that it will work for within the design parameters it was intended for, and those parameters being close range jungle warfare. it is the same with the 7.62x39. it was never intended to be a long range sniper round, it was designed to be very reliable at ranges upward of 300m. for anything longer get a bigger gun..

[Walkingwolf]

I am baffled, if 5.56nato is the be all of all long range calibers~why is the M24 chambered in 7.62nato?

[Loudenboomer]

"What is cover to 5.56 is only concealment to 7.62 NATO...." Well said.
The M 16 seemed fine when plenty of M 60's we around. The little 5.56 bullets from a 1-14 twist were barley stable. I didn't realize how much so until I went to a night fire all tracer range. Those 5.56 bullets turned and bounced every direction. It's what makes it a high causality producing round. It's weak on hardened targets and extended ranges. That's where the 7.62 shines and every squad needs one. Just my 2 cents.

[kens]

Nearly ALL the AR platforms at the local gun range are little more than Hornet rifles, .22 Hornet that is. And I chronographed that.
Just about everybody with a AR-5.56 has the shortest barrel with the compensator/flash hider that gives 2 more inches to be BATF legal. Whats that leave you, an effective barrel of what? 14 inches???
I was at the range with my chrono and the guy next to me had one of the AR that I am describing. I was having a hard time understanding why my muzzleloader was chronographing at 2400fps. After several shots and misunderstanding, I figured out that my chrono was picking up the shots of the AR next to me. All 2400fps of it. Do the math.
If you lose 100fps per inch of barrel, and if .223 is good for 3000fps on a 24inch barrel, and most guys have a mere 14" barrel, then yeah, a proper .22 Hornet with a sporter barrel will throw 55gr at higher speed.
Nowadays I call them things Hornet rifles.

[TCLouis]

Wonder what SPC stands for and why/where it originated?

[derek45]

Wonder what SPC stands for and why/where it originated?

Special Purpose Cartridge

6.8SPC and 6.5Grendel are a lot of fun

but I seriously doubt either will ever replace 5.56NATO for standard use.
.

[Love Life]

I am baffled, if 5.56nato is the be all of all long range calibers~why is the M24 chambered in 7.62nato?

I don’t recall the 5.56 being called the end all, be all of long range calibers.

[Love Life]

Having actually used both 5.56 and 7.62 NATO along with the 30 Carbine and 45 ACP in hotly contested adversarial situations I know which one I would rather have regardless of the engagement distance. I have also seen the immediate end use results of the 30-06, 7.62x39, 9mm and 7.62x54R cartridges on friend and foe alike. All were with FMJ ammunition.

In my last deployment they kept trying to give me an M4A1 because it was easier to carry and get in and out of vehicles with. I told them I would take an M14......that got me a "deer in the headlight look" so I just kept my M16A2. I did not feel undergunned with it but I was not in an offensive posture.

In a non combative environment I have shot numerous critters with all the afore mentioned cartridges using soft and hollow pointed ammo.

While I have 3 ARs in 5.56 and a 9mm CZ75 in a SHTF scenario it is my M1A in 7.62 NATO and M1911 45 ACP that will go out the door with me.

"7.62 NATO.....better than Master Card of VISA......accepted worldwide.....never leave home without it......"

"What is cover to 5.56 is only concealment to 7.62 NATO...."

Often times my buddy would turn his SAW in, and draw a pig for missions and patrols. The pig turns cover into concealment in a real hurry, lol.

[Omega]

While 5.56 is not for long range, as I've stated, don't underestimate it's penetration. I still will not depend on a 5.56 to go through all cover, but I wouldn't hesitate to try. As a soldier, my 5.56 M4 was just fine..but now that I'm retired, I hunt with .270 and .308, with some 300 Blackout thrown in.. why you ask? Because I care about my targets now.

http://www.justanothersoldier.com/?p=265

[mcdaniel.mac]

Nearly ALL the AR platforms at the local gun range are little more than Hornet rifles, .22 Hornet that is. And I chronographed that.
Just about everybody with a AR-5.56 has the shortest barrel with the compensator/flash hider that gives 2 more inches to be BATF legal. Whats that leave you, an effective barrel of what? 14 inches???
I was at the range with my chrono and the guy next to me had one of the AR that I am describing. I was having a hard time understanding why my muzzleloader was chronographing at 2400fps. After several shots and misunderstanding, I figured out that my chrono was picking up the shots of the AR next to me. All 2400fps of it. Do the math.
If you lose 100fps per inch of barrel, and if .223 is good for 3000fps on a 24inch barrel, and most guys have a mere 14" barrel, then yeah, a proper .22 Hornet with a sporter barrel will throw 55gr at higher speed.
Nowadays I call them things Hornet rifles.

I get 2300FPS from a 7.5" barrel and 2700 from a 10" barrel with 55gr .223 loads. From an 11.5" I get just under 2700FPS, my 14.7" get to 2900FPS pretty easily with the same, and when I was shooting an 18" I was getting 2900FPS from a 62gr load. Most manufacturers don't pick. 14.5" barrels because they know people want to change muzzle devices. I'm not a chronograph expert but I'd say having two projectiles, one of them flying at a different angle is a recipe for a bad chronograph reading. Also, the .223 doesn't need a 30" barrel to reach 3300FPS any more than a .44 Magnum needs a 30" barrel to reach maximum velocity, and starting from 30" and subtracting 100FPS per inch is just a puzzling abuse of the word estimation. If you move up to a 77gr SMK, a 20" barrel pushes 2800FPS and a 12" barrel about 2400. Maybe your neighbor was shooting heavy-for-caliber from a short barrel?

Now for the rest of the thread, my issued M16 weighed 11lb after the optic, rail, laser/IR/visible light, and sling were attached. My M4 was only a little lighter at 9.5. an AR10 isn't much heavier, 10-14lb with appropriate optics, but recoil is more intense and you're still balancing between barrel length and weight/handling, and with much more muzzle blast to deal with in close quarters. Ammo weighs twice as much, 1lb for a loaded STANAG mag vs 2.2lb for a similar 30rd AR10 magazine. 6.5x39 puts you back in an AR15, but now you have to rearsenal every rifle and optic and change magazines and you're not providing much more lethality at 400 or 600m to begin with. 6.5 Creedmore or similar, you're back to big and heavy and less recoil but also burning through barrels faster.

The new rifle needs to serve as the rifle for everyone from 4' 10" to 6'8" and must be manageable for anyone from 91lb to 285lb. It must be able to fight in house to house combat without blinding and deafening everyone and cannot reduce the ability no the individual to engage in close quarters combat, as well as fighting out to at least 400m, but the USMC will still want to keep at least 500m engagement capability.

What works for one individual to make good hits at 800m with no incoming fire is no judge of what will be a good service rifle. Infantry squads are already reinforcd by M240 machineguns and marksman rifles like the M110 and M24 (although some of those are moving to 300WM) crewed by experts selected for their ability to handle that weapon system efficiently. The GP service rifle or carbine needs to be suitable for everyone from the clerks and cooks to truck drivers and tankers, because as PFC Jessica Lynch (and he 3 male soldiers in her vehicle who also had their rifles in the cargo area of their vehicle) quickly learned, there's no such thing as a non-combat role on a deployment. Maybe the Army still hasn't learned, but every Marine and Corpsman attached will still be capable of locating, closing with, and destroying the enemy by fire and manuver, or repelling the enemy assault by fire and close combat.

And the M14 is right out of the question. It's time is long passed in the same way that the Willys MB is no longer a serviceable infantry vehicle.

[Walkingwolf]

The reason the m16 was chosen was based on cost to train, not magical myths like many who can't stand others using different calibers. It was a relative cost effective rifle, less labor intensive to build, lower cost materials, and the added benefit of 22lr recoil. Nothing wrong with being an AR fanboy, just stop acting like Glock fanboys. As far as range of a Marlin 336 here is an interesting video.

[reddog81]

Ammo weighs twice as much, 1lb for a loaded STANAG mag vs 2.2lb for a similar 30rd AR10 magazine.

Anyone can easily see the 7.62 offers better ballistics but the fact that you can carry twice as many rounds is what makes 5.56 the caliber of choice for the majority of soldiers. 1 round of .7.62 is better than 1 round of 5.56, but when compared to 2 rounds of 5.56 it changes the outcome. 5.56 is good enough for most situations and most units will various other options available for those other situations. In open areas such as Afghanistan we probably should have utilized 7.62 more, but that doesn't mean 5.56 needs to be replaced.

[Walkingwolf]

Anyone can easily see the 7.62 offers better ballistics but the fact that you can carry twice as many rounds is what makes 5.56 the caliber of choice for the majority of soldiers. 1 round of .7.62 is better than 1 round of 5.56, but when compared to 2 rounds of 5.56 it changes the outcome. 5.56 is good enough for most situations and most units will various other options available for those other situations. In open areas such as Afghanistan we probably should have utilized 7.62 more, but that doesn't mean 5.56 needs to be replaced.

Bingo! That is why the military has choices for different needs/missions. There is not one size that fits all, the 5.56 was intended to be cost effective, probably not so much when a lot more rounds are expended. Same can be said for the 9mm vs the 45acp, 9mm is considerably less expensive. But when one looks at the tendency for soldiers/police officers to fire more rounds of the less expensive ammo it turns out it is not so inexpensive. But the training costs are way lower when the two are compared in side by side training, plus the lower recoil round needs less range time. Put all BS aside government makes decisions on weapons based on cost IIRC the US only paid a couple hundred dollars for each M16, maybe less. It is the same reason that police depts initially went to Glocks, it was the extremely low price of the guns when they were first brought to the LE market.

[Omega]

The reason the m16 was chosen was based on cost to train, not magical myths like many who can't stand others using different calibers. It was a relative cost effective rifle, less labor intensive to build, lower cost materials, and the added benefit of 22lr recoil. Nothing wrong with being an AR fanboy, just stop acting like Glock fanboys. As far as range of a Marlin 336 here is an interesting video.

Was more impressed by the dog, not even a flinch.

[RU shooter]

Was more impressed by the dog, not even a flinch.

Poor ole dogs probably deaf !

[BAGTIC]

The 'designed to wound not kill' is an urban myth.

My first center fire rifle was a.222. I had no problems with jack rabbits out to 400 yards with a non adjustable 2 position peep sight. Of course I never practiced spray & pray as I was paying for my own ammo. Don't see why a man should be harder to hit. It also killed deer, one shot, though with 63 grain soft points .

The 7-08 would actually be a better infantry cartridge than the 7.62x51. Better long range performance because of better bullet BC.

[Larry Gibson]

The article in discussion concerns the military replacement of the 5.56 cartridge. That prohibits the use of SP, HP and other expanding bullets as used in the civilian world. Any valid comparison should be with FMJ bullets.

[Omega]

The article in discussion concerns the military replacement of the 5.56 cartridge. That prohibits the use of SP, HP and other expanding bullets as used in the civilian world. Any valid comparison should be with FMJ bullets.

Not sure how it will all play out but the Sierra Matchking has been adopted for the military. And now they are considering hollow points for the handgun as well.

http://www.sadefensejournal.com/wp/?p=1262
https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-...or-new-pistol/
https://loadoutroom.com/16493/u-s-ar...ow-point-ammo/