Whats the truth about the 5.56 round?

[Nemick]

Hi all,

I've been reading a bunch of stuff on the internet that states that the military are less than happy with the 5.56x45 ammunition they use. I have read many anecdotal reports of dismal stopping power of this NATO round and was wondering whether anyone knows the truth? I have read that the bullet does not always act as anticipated upon impact, frequently just going through and through without too much internal damage.

Again, all of this was read on the internet and I trust this about as much as national media. I figured some of you folks would have direct service experience about the realities of using this ammunition and I would appreciate hearing from you.

Thanks

Neil M.

 

[Lars]

I'd point out that no matter what the topic, at least 40% of the affected population is going to be unhappy with the status quo and want something different.

IE: Police departments issue .40 S&W but half the officers would rather have .45 ACP or 9mm......

The US Supreme Court affirms individual's right to keep and bear arms.... 4 out of 9 justices disagree.... All of the BradyBunch disagree.... Most of Chicago and California's politicians disagree.....


The military chooses and issues rifles chambered in 5.56mm or .223 Rem. Some of the guys would much rather be issued .50 BMG because of it's superior stopping power. Others want .308 win because it works better than 5.56.... Others still want some other new fangled round simply because it's new.

 

[45calibre]

i think the round will do its job if you do yours(hitting vitals)

 

[Indy_Guy_77]

"The military" is rather happy with it.

Know how I know?

Because they still use it. In MASSIVE quantities. And no plans to stop.

[opinion hat] I think that they are indeed realizing some of the shortcomings of the 5.56/.223 round in A) the urban combat situations going on, and B) the distance/uphill stuff going on in A-stan.

-J-

 

[WIZZO499]

It's all about shot placement. You're not going to kill anyone by nipping them in the fat of their arm if you have a 5.56, 7.62, or .50 BMG. It's pretty easy for guys in theater to shoot someone, they don't go down, then they blame the weak little 5.56. Unfortunately, it means they didn't hit anything vital. A bigger round would have most likely done the same.

 

[Agan_08]

It's all about shot placement. You're not going to kill anyone by nipping them in the fat of their arm if you have a 5.56, 7.62, or .50 BMG. It's pretty easy for guys in theater to shoot someone, they don't go down, then they blame the weak little 5.56. Unfortunately, it means they didn't hit anything vital. A bigger round would have most likely done the same.

Couldn't have said it better. From what I've watched on military and firearm shows on TV and from what I've read, most of the damage that a 5.56 round inflicts is due to its tendency to tumble when it impacts. That is, it doesn't just go straight through a body, it rolls through it. Many military people say it causes huge amounts of damage with a center mass shot. That being said, bumping up to a slightly larger round wouldn't hurt anything. I think our military likes being able to place a weapon in a recruit's hand who has never fired a rifle before, and know that the 5.56 round is comfortable to shoot through the M-16.

 

[SKSnut]

its a 55 grain .22 round. whats next, give our guys Red Ryder bb guns. bring back the .308.

 

[dtkw]

5.56 rounds were called the Meat Ax in the History Chanel about the M16. I think it's good enough round for most application on enemy human targets.

 

[herby31]

i personally think the 556 can do the job of putting a guy down. also, while in iraq, a friend shot a terrorist through the brain and we left him lay in the street. 10 or so hours later, he sat up and asked for water. the 556 is maybe not the best round for our troops. but it can still kill somebody deader than a bucket of hammers. the 762 nato (308 win) is a great round in that it can still kill even after penetrating light cover. that's why i wish uncle sam would have given me something in 762 nato instead of 556 nato or 762x39. my two cents.

 

[Fixer]

One of the big drawbacks to the ammo the military uses in any caliber is that it is a FMJ bullet. Talk to anyone who hunts, they will not pick a FMJ over some type of expanding bullet. It is all political. The expanding bullets do too much damage for the politicians. That said, I agree 100% with the shot placement comment. If you are just going to spray bullets, you better carry a mini gun!

 

[wtfd661]

while in iraq, a friend shot a terrorist through the brain and we left him lay in the street. 10 or so hours later, he sat up and asked for water.

WOW, even though you have to grudgingly give some appreciation for his will to live, hopefully in the long run he got to see first hand that it wasn't true about the 77 virgin thing.

 

[kedie]

its a 55 grain .22 round. whats next, give our guys Red Ryder bb guns. bring back the .308.

The standard issue ammo, the M855 round, is actually 62 grains.

I've heard mixed reviews on how it performs in combat but I'll defer to the guys with the CIBs on that 'cause I was never in combat.

I have heard good things about the 77gr MK262 round though.

 

[Fenway]

I would prefer not to be hit with 5.56

 

[Sasquatchhunter]

As some of you already know, I am NOT a fan of the 556 nato round at all, nor the AR/M16 platform. I would love to see something in 308, replacing the current issued weapon. I have also heard several first hand account stories of the round simply not having enough stopping power. here are a lot of 556 and AR platform horror stories floatig around.

 

[phil]

I would prefer not to be hit with 5.56

Or a Red Ryder to be completely honest!

 

[45calibre]

What's the 77 virgin thing ?

 

[Indy_Guy_77]

What's the 77 virgin thing ?

Muslim "paradise" for the men.

 

[deanr]

One of the big drawbacks to the ammo the military uses in any caliber is that it is a FMJ bullet. Talk to anyone who hunts, they will not pick a FMJ over some type of expanding bullet. It is all political. The expanding bullets do too much damage for the politicians. That said, I agree 100% with the shot placement comment. If you are just going to spray bullets, you better carry a mini gun!

Regardless of the caliber if it does not expand it is going to do less damage than something of the same caliber that does expand. Though I do believe the politicians do not want the hollow points, I seem to remember that the Geneva convention said something about not using hollow points.

 

[deanr]

As some of you already know, I am NOT a fan of the 556 nato round at all, nor the AR/M16 platform. I would love to see something in 308, replacing the current issued weapon. I have also heard several first hand account stories of the round simply not having enough stopping power. here are a lot of 556 and AR platform horror stories floatig around.

Does this include the AR-10 which was originally designed for the 7.62 NATO?

 

[lovemywoods]

For the detail-oriented among us, here's a 109 page article on .223 ammo...it's history, ballistics, supporters, and detractors.

http://www.razoreye.net/mirror/ammo-oracle/AR15_com_Ammo_Oracle_Mirror.htm#backyard

Enjoy!