Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Weapons of the World Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: The truth about the 5.56mm round
TriggaFingaz    1/24/2004 1:51:19 PM
To all infantrymen and gunusers out there , tell me this: is the 5.56x45mm round an effective round or is it so weak that you need more than one shot to drop a man? Some books say that it is absolutely lethal, able to stop one's heart owing to sheer velocity. Other accounts claim that enemy soldiers hit with this round continue charging. Some books claim it will tumble and dig multiple wound channels in the body, detractors claim it drills straight though people but yet has poor anti-material penetration. Which is more accurate? Please specify whether you used M193 or M855 'green tips'.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22   NEXT
TriggaFingaz    Bodyguard choices in Iraq   7/13/2004 3:39:46 PM
If the M4 and the 5.56mm round were so unreliable or ineffective as some columns have suggested, then why do private security guards in Iraq (who have more latitude over regular troops in choosing weapons) prefer the M4 to the AK47/AKM???? The AK's advantages in Iraq are many- plentiful ammunition from weapon hand-ins and insurgent caches, more reliable, no shortage of spare parts. Although this writer prefers the M4 to the AK, objectively speaking, the M4 is disadvantaged becoz the bullets have to be imported, it's maintanance heavy compared to the AK and less reliable in sandy conditions. Only advantages the M4 has over AK is better accuracy and the wonderful accessories that can be fitted.
 
Quote    Reply

Ehran    RE:Bodyguard choices in Iraq   7/13/2004 7:43:56 PM
training and indoctrination can be pretty powerful factors. if you have used M16 for years in uniform it's most likely what you reach for from habbit.
 
Quote    Reply

DrillSergeant    RE:Protective thickness of materials.   9/1/2004 6:52:47 PM
I'm a drill sergeant at an Infantry post in GA and I can say after spending many hours on fire and manuver ranges with soldiers who are issued M-16 A-4s, I'm not all that impressed with the SS109 round. I have shot all different types of barrier material, from sandbags, 2x4s and 4x4s at various ranges. After seeing the lack of penatration on these materials, I have questioned the round. My brother in law and good friend who have both served in Afganistan and Iraq with the 82nd ABN DIV dont have much good to say about the round. For instance, our company was on a live fire range and there was this simulated mortar pit about 100m to our front. The simulated mortar tube was a old artillary case maybe 1/16 of an inch thick, supported by a 2x4 in the center. I fired about 10 round at it and less than 5 of the rounds went though. The remaining rounds just dented the back side of the case but yet not penatrating all of the way through. These rounds were the SS109s. Was dissapointed. Yeah it might be accurate, but heres the way I look at it, If the 223/5.56 is not adaquate for deer, which is doscile animal, what makes it good enough for killing people who are mad and who are trying to kill you? Just food for thought.
 
Quote    Reply

boneyfreak    RE:The truth about the 5.56mm round   9/2/2004 7:33:47 PM
I've been using the 5.56 for deer hunting in California for the past 25 years and it works fine for that purpose.(65grn SP boattail w/imr4190) My brother in law is a guard at Folsom prison and I have seen pics of inmates hit by the 5.56 and in one particulary disturbing shot it took a mans buttock off. The entry wound was tiny but the exit sure was nasty. This same thing happens to deer I've bagged on occasion. Granted I use a shotgun or my 30/30 for hvy brush hunting. I've even used my m4 for hunting , granted with only one bullet at a time since since the ejector screws up the softpts if you arent careful in ejecting them.(ejector also screws up the brass necks of the casings once fired).
 
Quote    Reply

boneyfreak    RE:The truth about the 5.56mm round   9/2/2004 7:35:52 PM
PS also like the fact that you dont lose the sight picture with the light recoil of the 5.56 unlike my 30/30 or 300mag.
 
Quote    Reply

wagner95696    RE:Protective thickness of materials.   9/2/2004 7:49:02 PM
I use a .222 Remington [the malnourished predecessor of the .223] for deer hunting loaded with a Sierra 63 grain semi-spitzer. No deer has lived to complain yet. I suspect that if you had shot the tube with a 7.62 the results would not have been very different. Curved surfaces, including cylinders, are naturally difficult to penetrate because of their shape.
 
Quote    Reply

DrillSergeant    RE:Protective thickness of materials.   9/2/2004 8:14:49 PM
I guess that I could go with the fact of the tube being round causing some difficulty with the penatration, but after being in the infantry for 11 years and shooting thousands of rounds of the 5.56, it still really doenst impress me too much. I'm sure if you were presented with a good head or spine shot, yeah it would drop a deer like a rock, but a body shot would have to be fairly close and placement has to critical. Those little bullets just dont penatrate very deep or expand very much. Like I said before, I personaly have talked to friends who have been to Afganistan and Iraq and arent impressed with how the round perfomed. My brother in law was wanting to buy a M-4 prior to going to Iraq, and after returning he bought a M-14 instead. He personaly witnessed on more than one occasion in which Iraqis took several well placed shots in the upper torso before being convinced to stop fighting. He said that they looked like someone had pinched them really hard as to their reactions on being hit. There has been a lot of controversy about the round since the military adopted the round, and from what I have personaly seen and from what friends have told me, I just dont have too much faith in it especially when shot from a 14 inch barreled M-4. I think that instead of spending millions of dollars on a new weapon,(the XM-8)that they ought to just put new upper recievers on the M-16/M-4 series and have them rechamberd for the 6.8 SPC. Just my opinion.
 
Quote    Reply

rangers911    RE:Protective thickness of materials.   9/3/2004 12:17:05 PM
people are right about the velocity being a major problem and there are many times where one shot will not bring someone down but the 5.56 many times fails to bring them down after many repeated shots. and many saying oh it's shot placement in the heat of battle your aiming at center mass not at the head you hope to hit the spine but you are wanting to hit a vital in general. the 7.62 will do alot more damage center mass than the 7.62 could hope for. i've used both and when given the option i had the 7.62. i hit what i aim for but when i am actively enguaging 5 or more targets at once i aim center mass and move on once they are hit next target. with the 5.56 i have to make sure they go down and stay i have little faith after having some get up or not go down with a few shots. the 7.62 1 or 2 taps and they usually go down. i do feel alot of the problems are from wrong expectations but there is a problem with the round just being too small or too lite in general to do the job in CQB it may kill someone but the downside is the fact they can usually keep fighting on for a few more taking time away from other targets. where as a larger heavier round will usually knock the fight out of most.
 
Quote    Reply

DrillSergeant    RE:Protective thickness of materials.   9/3/2004 7:51:13 PM
I have heard many of the same problems about the 5.56 in Iraq and Afganistan. My father in law who was in Vietnam, always perfered and M-14 or and AK if he could get his hands on one. I have even read reports about U.S. soldiers in Iraq wanting AKs over our own M-4s and M-16s.
 
Quote    Reply

FelixA9    RE:Protective thickness of materials.   9/3/2004 9:00:31 PM
I'm kind of surprised that nobody in this thread has brought up the "died of an ass-shot" incident. There are rounds that they are playing with that stay hard to punch through metal or armor but blow to pieces when they hit something soft like flesh. Any thoughts?
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics