Just curious about this. Using Birchwood Casey Shoot-N-See targets, the .22lr makes a big splash of green where it hits -- the .223 makes the same size hole but it is clean with just a thin line of green around it. I was expecting the reverse of this, since the .223 has so much more power.
-
Forum Update: We've upgraded the software to improve security, performance, and the overall experience.
👉 Read why we made the change | Support the Forum
Impact question .223 vs .22lr
- Thread starter harrym
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
cyphertext
US Veteran
The .223 round is more pointed than the typical .22lr, and it is also moving at a much higher rate.
Yes, they were PMC bronze. The .22lr were mini-mags.
I think this is likely the answer. Good luck!
rojodiablo
Member
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2011
- Messages
- 1,759
- Reaction score
- 1,190
There are 2-wait, no..... 3 reasons why the 223 hole is smaller.
1. 22 is slower by far. It hits the paper with less speed, and far less force. Even a sheet of paper can yaw a 22lr. at 25yds. Seriously.
2. Bullet design. Sharp tip, and spinning a whole bunch faster- the 223 zips thru the paper.
3. Bullet structure. 22lr, soft lead bullet, lead is grabby, and the tip is rounded, so it does yaw almost instantly. 223 is steel or copper cased, and the bullet does not deform when going thru paper.
I was a combat soldier with the 4th ID in Vietnam in 1969 and trust me the 223 55 grain FMJ fired from a M-16 A1 is not only flying much faster than the 22LR they also tumble when they hit a human and touch any bone and they do very serious damage.
My guess the real contributing factor here is velocity. What gives you cleaner tear: holding a piece of paper in the air and tearing it apart or laying part of it overhanging the sharp edge of a counter and quickly ripping it? My guess is the .22LR is, relatively speaking, going through the paper so much more slowly it results in a bigger mark. But the .223 is so fast it doesn't create the opportunity for the "see" portion on the target to get large.
