Smith & Wesson Forum

Go Back   Smith & Wesson Forum > General Topics > The Lounge
Forum Register Expert Commentary Members List


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-22-2009, 05:28 PM
roundgunner's Avatar
US Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Rural, CT
Posts: 1,522
Likes: 300
Liked 725 Times in 195 Posts
Default

Below is an interesting post from the Insights Training Center email
list regarding the perennial 5.56 vs .308 debate.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Refs:
http://www.thegunzone.com/
http://www.strategypage.com/mi...ryforums/1-3983.aspx
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=229005
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread142560/pg1
http://www.insightstraining.com/

====================================================
xxxxx posted (<03/08/2009)

I was reading an article written by Paul Howe (can't find the article now, though)
where he said that the 5.56 round does not have the necessary stopping power,
and cited real-world experiences where the BG's did not stop fighting fast enough
after being shot with a 5.56 round(s). He felt that the 7.62 round was superior,
and therefore recommended the FAL as a general-purpose fighting/defensive rifle.

Which leads to my questions:
Is this view common amongst his peer group?
Why does Insights prefer the AR-15/M-4 over the FAL?

I haven't discussed this with Paul in depth but will next time I talk with him. I'll let
you know his response.

I did attend Paul's" High Risk Operator Instructor Course" a couple of months ago
(the shooting was about 80% rifle.) Paul shot his own AR (5.56) during the class.
In our equipment discussions during the course he did not have anything negative
to say about either the 5.56 cartridge or the AR platform.

I have also heard Paul give his talk on the "Black Hawk Down" mission in Mogadishu.
He did mention dissatisfaction with a situation(s?) where he shot someone and they
ran away (or had to be shot again). IIRC he was shooting M855, out of a short barrel-
ed rifle at targets a couple of blocks away and they didn't appear to react.

This doesn't surprise me because M855 out of a 14.5" barrel only has enough velocity
to reliably fragment out to about 100yds. Once the bullet is moving slow enough that
it doesn't fragment, it tends to simply drill a 5.56mm (0.4688"or 15/32") hole through
the tissue. If that hole isn't in brain, spine or significant bone there is no reason the
man will have to react immediately to being shot.

Which brings us to the time element of the equation. How quickly can we expect
a bullet to terminate hostile activity; 1-3 seconds, 3-5 seconds, 5-10 seconds?
How fast is fast enough?

If the BG continues his violent assault for 5-10 seconds after being shot by his intend-
ed victim I expect the defensive shooter will quite likely feel his shot was "ineffective."
Even a period of only 3-5 seconds can seem to be an eternity in a fight, and of course
the BG can do a lot of damage (or run out of sight) in that time. The fact is however
that no matter how much tissue damage is done to the heart, lungs, or most other
bodily structures; wounds to those structures will not reliably shut a person down in
less than 3-5 seconds (and often much longer.) This is regardless of the caliber of
the projectile causing the wounds. Hits to the brain or spinal cord are the exception
and often, but not always, produce more immediate results.

A couple of years ago I reviewed an LE shooting where a BG was hit 12 times with
an AR at a range of 9-12 yds. 10 rounds struck his torso producing fatal damage to
his liver, spleen, heart and both lungs.1 round struck his right femur fracturing same
(and starting his fall toward the ground.) 1 round entered through his left eye and
destroyed a significant portion of his brain (this was the last shot according to
forensics but they noted the BG was already falling at the time this round hit him.)

The shooting was captured on both video and (separate) audio recordings. The
elapsed time from the LEO's first shot to his 15th shot (total rounds fired) was just
under 5 seconds. During those 5 seconds the BG continued to fight, firing 6 rounds
from a .357 revolver. Having viewed the autopsy photos of the BG's heart, lungs,
liver and spleen I can tell you that the contents of his torso were pretty much trashed.
I just don't' believe that some other caliber would have made a significant difference
in the amount of damage. Trashed is trashed.

Was this a failure to stop? I spoke with the LEO shooter a couple of days after the
incident and that was certainly his perception. He commented that he got really
tired of seeing the big muzzle flash come out of the BG's gun and just wanted it to
stop. (The shooting took place at night in low light conditions.) Early in our conver-
sation he asked me what round they could use which would incapacitate a BG
quicker. My answer was that I didn't know of any weapon/caliber, that he could
physically carry, which I would expect to do any better.

My point here is that I believe many of the "failure to stop" incidents are based on
unrealistic expectations of what a bullet (any bullet) can do. Somehow we don't
find it surprising when a deer is shot in the heart/lungs with a .308 or 30-06 rifle
and runs 25 yds or more (sometimes much more) before dying, but if a human
doesn't immediately expire in-place when shot we think we need a different
weapon/caliber.

I don't spend much time at all worrying about which caliber or particular load to
use in my defensive weapons. I want to spend the minimum time necessary to
select the cartridge I will use, because I know that developing the skill to deliver
them is a time consuming process. (Time, in life seems to be a zero-sum equation.)

My approach is to do enough research to insure that I have a round which seems
to go deep enough to get to the "good stuff" and expands/fragments reliably. In
most calibers there are numerous loadings which meet this requirement. I don't
really care which one of these I use.

Next I want to insure that particular cartridge is reliable in my gun.

After that it's all about developing the skills necessary to accurately deliver as
many of those rounds as possible in the shortest amount of time.

So what do I shoot in my AR? (14.5" barrel, 1:9 twist)

Mostly Federal 55 gr BTHP (why: because an LE agency I do training for paid me
partially in ammo and it meets the criteria.)

Or

M855 (cause a found a lot of it cheap a while back.)

IF I lived in an apartment or townhouse with neighbors only a few paper thin walls
away, I wouldn't feel too bad with the Black Hills 60gr VMAX. I know it doesn't pene-
trate "deep enough" in the tests but many things in life are a compromise and if
over penetration was a higher priority on my list of criteria..
__________________
Shoot fast & live long
Warren
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 03-22-2009, 05:28 PM
roundgunner's Avatar
US Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Rural, CT
Posts: 1,522
Likes: 300
Liked 725 Times in 195 Posts
Default

Below is an interesting post from the Insights Training Center email
list regarding the perennial 5.56 vs .308 debate.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Refs:
http://www.thegunzone.com/
http://www.strategypage.com/mi...ryforums/1-3983.aspx
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=229005
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread142560/pg1
http://www.insightstraining.com/

====================================================
xxxxx posted (<03/08/2009)

I was reading an article written by Paul Howe (can't find the article now, though)
where he said that the 5.56 round does not have the necessary stopping power,
and cited real-world experiences where the BG's did not stop fighting fast enough
after being shot with a 5.56 round(s). He felt that the 7.62 round was superior,
and therefore recommended the FAL as a general-purpose fighting/defensive rifle.

Which leads to my questions:
Is this view common amongst his peer group?
Why does Insights prefer the AR-15/M-4 over the FAL?

I haven't discussed this with Paul in depth but will next time I talk with him. I'll let
you know his response.

I did attend Paul's" High Risk Operator Instructor Course" a couple of months ago
(the shooting was about 80% rifle.) Paul shot his own AR (5.56) during the class.
In our equipment discussions during the course he did not have anything negative
to say about either the 5.56 cartridge or the AR platform.

I have also heard Paul give his talk on the "Black Hawk Down" mission in Mogadishu.
He did mention dissatisfaction with a situation(s?) where he shot someone and they
ran away (or had to be shot again). IIRC he was shooting M855, out of a short barrel-
ed rifle at targets a couple of blocks away and they didn't appear to react.

This doesn't surprise me because M855 out of a 14.5" barrel only has enough velocity
to reliably fragment out to about 100yds. Once the bullet is moving slow enough that
it doesn't fragment, it tends to simply drill a 5.56mm (0.4688"or 15/32") hole through
the tissue. If that hole isn't in brain, spine or significant bone there is no reason the
man will have to react immediately to being shot.

Which brings us to the time element of the equation. How quickly can we expect
a bullet to terminate hostile activity; 1-3 seconds, 3-5 seconds, 5-10 seconds?
How fast is fast enough?

If the BG continues his violent assault for 5-10 seconds after being shot by his intend-
ed victim I expect the defensive shooter will quite likely feel his shot was "ineffective."
Even a period of only 3-5 seconds can seem to be an eternity in a fight, and of course
the BG can do a lot of damage (or run out of sight) in that time. The fact is however
that no matter how much tissue damage is done to the heart, lungs, or most other
bodily structures; wounds to those structures will not reliably shut a person down in
less than 3-5 seconds (and often much longer.) This is regardless of the caliber of
the projectile causing the wounds. Hits to the brain or spinal cord are the exception
and often, but not always, produce more immediate results.

A couple of years ago I reviewed an LE shooting where a BG was hit 12 times with
an AR at a range of 9-12 yds. 10 rounds struck his torso producing fatal damage to
his liver, spleen, heart and both lungs.1 round struck his right femur fracturing same
(and starting his fall toward the ground.) 1 round entered through his left eye and
destroyed a significant portion of his brain (this was the last shot according to
forensics but they noted the BG was already falling at the time this round hit him.)

The shooting was captured on both video and (separate) audio recordings. The
elapsed time from the LEO's first shot to his 15th shot (total rounds fired) was just
under 5 seconds. During those 5 seconds the BG continued to fight, firing 6 rounds
from a .357 revolver. Having viewed the autopsy photos of the BG's heart, lungs,
liver and spleen I can tell you that the contents of his torso were pretty much trashed.
I just don't' believe that some other caliber would have made a significant difference
in the amount of damage. Trashed is trashed.

Was this a failure to stop? I spoke with the LEO shooter a couple of days after the
incident and that was certainly his perception. He commented that he got really
tired of seeing the big muzzle flash come out of the BG's gun and just wanted it to
stop. (The shooting took place at night in low light conditions.) Early in our conver-
sation he asked me what round they could use which would incapacitate a BG
quicker. My answer was that I didn't know of any weapon/caliber, that he could
physically carry, which I would expect to do any better.

My point here is that I believe many of the "failure to stop" incidents are based on
unrealistic expectations of what a bullet (any bullet) can do. Somehow we don't
find it surprising when a deer is shot in the heart/lungs with a .308 or 30-06 rifle
and runs 25 yds or more (sometimes much more) before dying, but if a human
doesn't immediately expire in-place when shot we think we need a different
weapon/caliber.

I don't spend much time at all worrying about which caliber or particular load to
use in my defensive weapons. I want to spend the minimum time necessary to
select the cartridge I will use, because I know that developing the skill to deliver
them is a time consuming process. (Time, in life seems to be a zero-sum equation.)

My approach is to do enough research to insure that I have a round which seems
to go deep enough to get to the "good stuff" and expands/fragments reliably. In
most calibers there are numerous loadings which meet this requirement. I don't
really care which one of these I use.

Next I want to insure that particular cartridge is reliable in my gun.

After that it's all about developing the skills necessary to accurately deliver as
many of those rounds as possible in the shortest amount of time.

So what do I shoot in my AR? (14.5" barrel, 1:9 twist)

Mostly Federal 55 gr BTHP (why: because an LE agency I do training for paid me
partially in ammo and it meets the criteria.)

Or

M855 (cause a found a lot of it cheap a while back.)

IF I lived in an apartment or townhouse with neighbors only a few paper thin walls
away, I wouldn't feel too bad with the Black Hills 60gr VMAX. I know it doesn't pene-
trate "deep enough" in the tests but many things in life are a compromise and if
over penetration was a higher priority on my list of criteria..
__________________
Shoot fast & live long
Warren
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-22-2009, 06:10 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 3 Posts
Default

Warren;
A thoughtful piece, I especially liked your recommendation of hollow points. As non-convention covered civilians, I see no reason not to use hollow points which make the 5.56 not only more like to stop a fight quicker, but also less likely to over penetrate.
I would be interested in knowing how Fackler (sp?) etc rate the different 5.56 -.223 rounds?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-22-2009, 06:14 PM
84CJ's Avatar
US Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Upstate SC
Posts: 1,022
Likes: 0
Liked 16 Times in 7 Posts
Default

I was told many years ago by someone that the object was to wound and incopacitate the enemy. Not to kill. So someone would have to tend to the wounded. Not sure if I agree so much with that or if that was the reason for the military using FMJ's and 5.56. I prefer the 7.62 nato. I have never fired a shot in combat and almost always qualify expert(39 or 40 out of 40)Standard army pop up's. Weopon malfunction is to blame for all non expert scores. But the targets at the range dont shoot back. And a well placed shot would be more difficult in combat Im sure. I want all the advantage I can get.The AR 10 seems to be a good platform, At least I like mine.
__________________
SC Army National Guard
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-22-2009, 08:24 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Sheridan, Wyoming
Posts: 3,238
Likes: 18
Liked 385 Times in 161 Posts
Default

There's a generation of heavier JHPs made for fast twist (and often short barreled) ARs these days. Try Black Hills, or even Wolf, Prvi, et al. Everyone makes one.

Or one can try M193 type FMJ rounds.

Of course if someone isn't worried about carrying around a certain weight of ammo, there are 30rd mags to be had for FALs. Even NATO spec 7.62mm rounds are zipping along about like M2 .30-06 ball did. That always seemed to work well enough, at least I don't ever recall reading any complaints about it.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 03-22-2009, 08:32 PM
Horace Smith's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sonoran Desert
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 1 Post
Default

Ahhh...The great caliber debate.

The 62 grain M855 is steel core and therefore built to penetrate.

Can carry more ammo :advantage 5.56
Quicker response time shot to shot :advantage 5.56

Better long range balistics :advantage .308
Better one bullet stopping power :advantage .308

At top end velocities the 5.56 fragments well and this created an odd/nasty wound chanel.

Probably the best compromise is to have a couple of both rifles!
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 03-23-2009, 01:05 AM
ParadiseRoad's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Colorado
Posts: 307
Likes: 8
Liked 84 Times in 43 Posts
Default

...quote from another website...

Quote:
09 Sept 07

Field use of Federal 12ga Flight-Control Buckshot, from a range officer with a large Midwestern PD:

"Last week, one of our patrol officers confronted a single, armed, robbery suspect at a range of ten meters. When the suspect made threatening verbalizations and gestures, the officer fired a single shot from his department-issued Remington 870. The round was Federal Flight-Control 00 Buckshot.

The tight cluster of 00 pellets struck the suspect in the right side of his hip. He went right down, offering no further resistance. At the hospital, attending sturgeons asked if the suspect had been hit with a slug. We assured them that it was a single, buckshot round.

X-rays revealed that several pellets were still in the suspects's body, but that most had transverse-penetrated and subsequently exited. Tissue destruction was copious, so much so that the suspect's right leg had to be amputated at the hip. He is expected to survive, but has obviously sustained permanent, disabling/disfiguring injury.

We are most please with this round's fight-stopping ability. This suspect went from dangerous/threatening to meek/crippled, all in less than a second!"

Comment: It is difficult to imagine a better fight-stopping effect than described in the foregoing. Federal's new wad technology represents a pivotal improvement in shotshell performance, breathing new life into the "old-standby" police shotgun. Something we all need to look at seriously!
__________________
Who's We Sucka?...S&W and ME!
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 03-23-2009, 03:44 AM
LuddhaBuddha's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: KY
Posts: 337
Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times in 6 Posts
Send a message via AIM to LuddhaBuddha Send a message via Yahoo to LuddhaBuddha
Default

I'll just stick with my AK clone, seems like it's a good compromise between the two rounds.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 03-23-2009, 02:16 PM
Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Snow Belt, NY
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

I like the idea of having mags loaded for specific ammo. Steel core penetrators loaded in some mags, and 62-64 grain jacketed softpoints in other mags.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 03-23-2009, 02:21 PM
CelticSire's Avatar
US Veteran
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Texas, USA
Posts: 727
Likes: 1
Liked 113 Times in 34 Posts
Default

Considering the fact that there were survivors at both Hiroshima and Nagasaki, does it still really surprise anyone that there is no single round that is 100% effective every time in every situation?
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 03-23-2009, 03:58 PM
US Veteran
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Central Ohio
Posts: 114
Likes: 1
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

Shot placement is paramount with any caliber.
I wouldn't want to be shot with a rimfire let alone a 5.56 round. In Ohio years ago there were the .22 caliber killers who killed many with a rimfire. Dead is dead.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 03-23-2009, 04:06 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,394
Likes: 59
Liked 411 Times in 213 Posts
Default

IIRC both the Japanese and the Italians found that their 6.5MM cartridges lacked range and long range penetration and in the 1890s the US found the 6MM Lee Navy deficient in those respects. It seems to me the 7MM Mauser is the smallest diameter military round that has that elusive quality of enough versatility to be used as an all purpose round. In Vietnam it often seemed that much if not most of the infantry fighting was done by machine gunners and I recall repeated attempts to build a 5.56 MG have foundered on that round's shortcomings.
I read a book about the 22 killers in Ohio-"Unveiling Claudia" I think it was called. They were shooting people at point blank range.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 03-23-2009, 06:02 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Edmond, OK
Posts: 1,276
Likes: 9
Liked 258 Times in 114 Posts
Default

If a full metal jacketed .22 bullet will penetrate all the way through a person, I never understood why a .30 caliber FMJ would have a much greater effect. You're only talking about 8 hundreths of an inch bigger to reach out and damage more tissue and organs.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 03-23-2009, 06:38 PM
jkc jkc is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 2,837
Likes: 1,259
Liked 600 Times in 339 Posts
Default

Now, if we had some dowels, and some sort of apparatus that could ... Oh, nevermind...

The largest critters I've killed with a .223 are coyotes, generally KO'd instantly with a well-placed heart/lung shot, almost never anchored immediately with poorer placement. On the other hand, I've shot or seen coyotes shot with .308, 7MM Mag, and etc., that were demolished, in some cases appearing more likely dynamited than shot. (Ruins the pelts, by the way...) I think by most measures, there's little question that at any range, the .308's terminal ballistics are superior to the .223, but that the .223/5.56MM is capable of adequate injury to put homo sapiens out of the fight, if not permanently. That acquiesed, the question is appropriately not of caliber but of weapons platform, and here the .223 wins on several counts --- weight (of both rifle and ammo), recoil, recoil recovery speed, reduced potential of collateral damage, etc. If the targets are at reasonable self-defense/law-enforcement ranges, seems to me the .223 is up to the task. If long-range sniping is the order of the day, give me a thirty-something.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 03-23-2009, 06:52 PM
US Veteran
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 2,491
Likes: 20
Liked 948 Times in 432 Posts
Default

The Army Rangers in Mogadishu were shooting SLAP rounds (Saboted Light Armor Piercing) rounds. All of the sanitized reports relate stories from the Rangers of how they saw the rounds penetrate and make through and through wounds in their targets. The snipers with their 7.62mm weapons were the only men making one shot kills with individually served weapons.

Regards.

Dave
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 03-23-2009, 07:07 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: MA
Posts: 3,680
Likes: 847
Liked 700 Times in 433 Posts
Default

Farmer17, CelticSire and Roundgunner make the most sense to me. I never read anyone complaining about the .308, either. I heard it in person from a Marine LDO who had occasion to shoot someone with his M14 in Vietnam. He was rather unimpressed.

After all, the military stuff is almost always FMJ. At least the old 55gr bullets might tumble or do other weird things. I guess the .308 has its advantages, too, but I don't see the evidence that it is a guaranteed manstopper without a hit in the right organ.

I still like my FN LAR, but I don't badmouth folks who prefer the Mattel toys.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 03-23-2009, 08:13 PM
US Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: middle Ga.
Posts: 2,108
Likes: 19
Liked 133 Times in 75 Posts
Default

A battle rifle is supposed to kill and break stuff.

The 5.56 is definately lacking in at least one of the requirements.

The guns and combat load of ammo weigh less for a 22 caliber rifle than a 30 caliber, but more hits are required by the 22 for what the 30 will do in one shot.

There is a reason there has never been a 22 caliber machine gun mounted on aircraft.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 03-24-2009, 02:06 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 608
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by m1gunner:
The guns and combat load of ammo weigh less for a 22 caliber rifle than a 30 caliber, but more hits are required by the 22 for what the 30 will do in one shot.
Some say this is a cause of or contributes to the lack of marksmanship, and the spray and pray mentality of shooting.

Perhaps somewhat analogous to police marksmanship after switching from six-shooter revolvers to 15/17 round semi-auto's.
__________________
NRA Life Member
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 03-24-2009, 01:19 PM
Doug M.'s Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Washington State
Posts: 3,101
Likes: 2,558
Liked 1,815 Times in 980 Posts
Default

Gary Roberts has published a list of various 5.56 rounds which meet criteria based on what the shooting need is (barrier or not, etc). There are no magic bullets, including .308 or slugs. Some folks are hard to stop, and placement really matters. One can have non-survivable wounds and continue to function - even a few seconds as described early in the string is too long on the 2 way range, but that sort of outcome will not change in the near future.

I'm comfortable with my AR as a patrol rifle, because at close range I can do an NSR (non-standard response) in short time in a reasonably small space.
__________________
Watch your front sight.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 03-24-2009, 03:09 PM
BE Mike's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Indiana
Posts: 971
Likes: 75
Liked 166 Times in 92 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Doug M.:
Gary Roberts has published a list of various 5.56 rounds which meet criteria based on what the shooting need is (barrier or not, etc). There are no magic bullets, including .308 or slugs. Some folks are hard to stop, and placement really matters. One can have non-survivable wounds and continue to function - even a few seconds as described early in the string is too long on the 2 way range, but that sort of outcome will not change in the near future.

I'm comfortable with my AR as a patrol rifle, because at close range I can do an NSR (non-standard response) in short time in a reasonably small space.
I just read one of Jim Cirillo's books. He had similar observations to yours. Jim thought that nothing was a sure stopper, even a 12 ga. slug. He saw most of it first hand.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 03-24-2009, 07:11 PM
geoff40's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 1,043
Likes: 89
Liked 377 Times in 176 Posts
Default

A lot of VC were killed by the 5.56
Today its killing plenty more in far away places like Iraq and Afghanistan. Seems to me the 5.56 is a pretty good cartridge.
__________________
Geoff. Since 1960.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 03-24-2009, 07:46 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 608
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Default

A hit with a 5.56 is better than a miss with an 11.0.
__________________
NRA Life Member
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 03-24-2009, 07:53 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Sheridan, Wyoming
Posts: 3,238
Likes: 18
Liked 385 Times in 161 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by CelticSire:
Considering the fact that there were survivors at both Hiroshima and Nagasaki, does it still really surprise anyone that there is no single round that is 100% effective every time in every situation?
There was actually a news item today about a guy who survived both Hiroshima and Nagasaki and is currently 93 years old...
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 03-24-2009, 08:01 PM
tom turner's Avatar
US Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Georgia
Posts: 1,717
Likes: 87
Liked 1,222 Times in 183 Posts
Default

How interesting this topic came up now.

We just buried a long time member of our hunting club, a Vietnam veteran. The night before he passed away I was at the hospital with another fine Vietnam veteran who is a very modest guy. He was also an Army recon guy in 'Nam. Later, he went in the Air Force and retired as an E-9.

As we made small talk I asked something I've wanted to ask him for eight years . . .

"Hey Dan, tell me about that NVA Captain I heard try to take your head off.".

Dan told me he'd had to shoot a lot of guys during missions with the M-16 and most went right down with one shot. The North Vietnamese captain was different though.

Dan emptied three 30 round "banana clips" and part of a fourth as the guy came at him.

He said the guy had to have been on powerful drugs. Most shots were center of chest and he said chunks of the man were flying off but he kept coming . . . finally even getting right to Dan. He only died after Dan had to slit his throat deeply with his knife.

The guy was shot to bits, yet stayed in the fight . . . truly a "dead man walking," but still extremely dangerous who advanced quite a ways to get to Dan's position.

Dan added that he still has the guy's handgun. Dan went through a lot over there, but is probably as fine and stable a man as I've ever met . . . and a heck of a hunter too!
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 03-24-2009, 10:52 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 421
Likes: 5
Liked 73 Times in 32 Posts
Default

So called assault rifles that use a light, low recoiling caliber were developed after the experiences of urban fighting in World War II.

I consider 223 Rem/5.56 NATO and 7.62x39 calibers suitable for indoor use. For outdoors battlefield use we have 308 Win/7.62 NATO.

Modern mechanised troops often have heavier support fire available immediately when requested so their personal weapons do not have to be so powerful. But if you are fighting on foot, you have to carry the firepower yourself: 7.62.

For civilian self defense you probably do not need the power of a heavier caliber. You have to justify shooting a person in self defense and it is has hard to imagine being under such an imminent threat if the target is 100 yards or farther away. Self defense shots would probably be at very close range so a 223 Rem should work fine.
__________________
preshishely thirty charactersh
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 03-24-2009, 11:04 PM
pps's Avatar
pps pps is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Near Fresno, Peoples Repu
Posts: 305
Likes: 6
Liked 24 Times in 15 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by GatorFarmer:
Quote:
Originally posted by CelticSire:
Considering the fact that there were survivors at both Hiroshima and Nagasaki, does it still really surprise anyone that there is no single round that is 100% effective every time in every situation?
There was actually a news item today about a guy who survived both Hiroshima and Nagasaki and is currently 93 years old...
Keith Richards?
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 03-25-2009, 04:13 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: GA
Posts: 605
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by sasu:
For civilian self defense you probably do not need the power of a heavier caliber. You have to justify shooting a person in self defense and it is has hard to imagine being under such an imminent threat if the target is 100 yards or farther away. Self defense shots would probably be at very close range so a 223 Rem should work fine.
If I ever have to fire in self defense I REALLY hope it's with one of my pistols and not my Sig 556. I can see the media circus now about me shooting some poor guy with my "assault rifle". They would forget the part about the guy being a criminal out to do harm and focus on that "Evil Black Gun".
__________________
NRA Endowment Member
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 03-25-2009, 02:10 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 375
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Here's a topic that anyone with an opinion could write a book on - and likely make their case.

I've used this round my entire adult life, one way or another, from several different platforms. I think it is a groundhog cartridge. Results on people reflect that. The old GI 55 grain load works pretty well for some things, the newer greentip is better for others.

Like everything else, blow out the brain, break the neck or spine high up and they will drop. You gotta turn off the electrical generator or major transmission lines to get quick success. Other than that, you are depriving them of oxygen by bleeding them out and that can take a while. It doesn't matter if you are shooting a .22 or 20mm.

The wild cards are extreme anger, drugs or adrenalin. In which case you blow out the brain, break the neck or sever the spine high up etc.

Best of all is never having to go there and all of this stays in the realm of speculation.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 03-25-2009, 05:45 PM
CAJUNLAWYER's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: On da Bayou Teche
Posts: 10,659
Likes: 2,309
Liked 11,630 Times in 2,945 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by pps:
Quote:
Originally posted by GatorFarmer:
Quote:
Originally posted by CelticSire:
Considering the fact that there were survivors at both Hiroshima and Nagasaki, does it still really surprise anyone that there is no single round that is 100% effective every time in every situation?
There was actually a news item today about a guy who survived both Hiroshima and Nagasaki and is currently 93 years old...
Keith Richards?
Now I don't care what anyone says, That's funny
__________________
Forum consigliere
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 03-25-2009, 06:21 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 608
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by CAJUNLAWYER:
Quote:
Originally posted by pps:
Quote:
Originally posted by GatorFarmer:
Quote:
Originally posted by CelticSire:
Considering the fact that there were survivors at both Hiroshima and Nagasaki, does it still really surprise anyone that there is no single round that is 100% effective every time in every situation?
There was actually a news item today about a guy who survived both Hiroshima and Nagasaki and is currently 93 years old...
Keith Richards?
Now I don't care what anyone says, That's funny
Not as funny as your new avatar!
__________________
NRA Life Member
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 03-25-2009, 09:03 PM
Doug M.'s Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Washington State
Posts: 3,101
Likes: 2,558
Liked 1,815 Times in 980 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by BE Mike:
Quote:
Originally posted by Doug M.:
Gary Roberts has published a list of various 5.56 rounds which meet criteria based on what the shooting need is (barrier or not, etc). There are no magic bullets, including .308 or slugs. Some folks are hard to stop, and placement really matters. One can have non-survivable wounds and continue to function - even a few seconds as described early in the string is too long on the 2 way range, but that sort of outcome will not change in the near future.

I'm comfortable with my AR as a patrol rifle, because at close range I can do an NSR (non-standard response) in short time in a reasonably small space.
I just read one of Jim Cirillo's books. He had similar observations to yours. Jim thought that nothing was a sure stopper, even a 12 ga. slug. He saw most of it first hand.
*
Yeah, Cirillo did some important empirical research on the topic while on the stakeout squad, and his writings can teach us a lot. Chuck Taylor has written about his experiences with .45ACP ball. Pat Rogers refers in his classes to his observations from NYPD shootings, including his own shootings, and his experiences in 'Nam (including a .308 failure on Charlie at pretty close range with good hits). Other folks have been out there with guns in combat of various types and reported their experiences.

The shooter's delivery to the target, the target's motivation (FBI 1986 shootout), etc are all variables, just as the ammo is. Get a load that works every time in your gun, which has a decent record/reputation for/match to your needs/conditions; develop good knowledge of where to shoot your adversary (humans or animals, depending on your situation), and keep shooting until they no longer present a threat. Don't expect a "one shot stop" - the one time it matters might be the one time you don't get one!
__________________
Watch your front sight.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 03-25-2009, 10:53 PM
ParadiseRoad's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Colorado
Posts: 307
Likes: 8
Liked 84 Times in 43 Posts
Default

...this might be stopping power...

CLICK HERE



.
__________________
Who's We Sucka?...S&W and ME!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
223, 45acp, cartridge, m14, marksmanship, military, model 14, model 16, remington, rimfire, sig arms

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
The Lounge Thread, 5.56 and Stopping Power... in General Topics; Below is an interesting post from the Insights Training Center email list regarding the perennial 5.56 vs .308 debate. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ...
Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
.38 vs .357 for stopping power... bobsleatherworks S&W Revolvers: 1980 to the Present 104 01-07-2013 12:56 AM
Handgun Stopping Power??? Marshall 357 The Lounge 47 07-06-2011 10:08 PM
.38 Special stopping power Doug.38PR S&W Hand Ejectors: 1896 to 1961 15 05-20-2010 07:00 PM
issues about stopping power yska08 The Lounge 4 01-13-2010 09:14 PM
stopping power is back GLV The Lounge 1 10-16-2009 09:58 PM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3
smith-wessonforum.com tested by Norton Internet Security smith-wessonforum.com tested by McAfee Internet Security

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:17 AM.


S-W Forum, LLC 2000-2015
Smith-WessonForum.com is not affiliated with Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation (NASDAQ Global Select: SWHC)