YaGunT: a .223 that doesnt frag is just an expensive .22?

[JEDI]

.223 is designed to fragment causing multiple wound paths when entering the body.

But what if it didnt frag? will it be like being hit with an expensive (and faster) .22 round?

 

[highland145]

Fragment link, please.

 

[SlitheryDee]

I thought the only real difference was the amount of propellant behind it. Surely there are .223 rounds that are designed to not fragment.

 

[Texashiker]

The 223 is supposed to tumble, causing large wounds. I do not know where you got this "fragment" idea. Once a bullet breaks apart, it loses its mass and energy.

The majority of the rounds you see for 223 are either ball ammo, or soft points. Neither of which are specifically designed to "fragment".

 

[Scotteq]

Firstly, the 223 is designed to tumble, not fragment.

Secondly: Hollow Point, fragmentary, and other forms of exotic ammunition are prohibited for military usage by the Geneva Convention.

As far as terminal ballistics:

.22 Long Rifle: 40 Grain .22 Long Rifle


.223: 50 Grain .223 Remingtion


..the difference is quite clear.

1. "The Wound Profile: A Visual Method for Quantifying Gunshot Wound Components." Martin L. Fackler, M.D., and John A. Malinowski, B.S., JTrauma, 25(6): 522-529, 1985.​
2. "The Wound Profile: Illustration of the Missile-tissue Interaction." Martin L. Fackler, M.D., Ronald F. Bellamy, M.D., and John A. Malinowski, B.S., JTrauma, 28(1) Suppl: S21-S29, 1988.​

 

[Paladin3]

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2011/05/03/guest-post-22-lr-vs-223-rem/

 

[highland145]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MJsuu_wE-Wo
I'm ready for the zombies. Mini 14 and 2K+ rounds.

 

[Specop 007]

It tumbles which then does cause it to fragment if the velocities are high enough.

If the velocity is too low for proper tumbling/fragmenting then yes, its similar to a .22LR except going a hell of a lot faster. It suffers from an "ice pick" effect rather than performing the way it should.

 

[brblx]

does someone think caliber = length or something?

small, basically sub-pistol round (imo anything less than .38 is 'varmint' ammo) versus long, pointy boat tail round that (ideally) kills a full-grown man in one shot to the vitals?

the ballistics are completely different.

and yes yes, we can get into 5.56 efficacy arguments, but since 7.62x39 is about the most powerful thing in common use anymore (as far as assault and/or battle rifles are concerned), that doesn't have too much place here.

only exception i can think of (in normal armed forces) might be some countries in eastern europe using G3's or FAL's or something in 7.62x51 (edit: surprise, it's more powerful than the ruskie ammo even though they both say '7.62'...)

 

[jessieqwert]

There are also the shockwaves created by the high velocity, causing disruption to organs nearby.

 

[brblx]

It tumbles which then does cause it to fragment if the velocities are high enough.

If the velocity is too low for proper tumbling/fragmenting then yes, its similar to a .22LR except going a hell of a lot faster. It suffers from an "ice pick" effect rather than performing the way it should.

i thought it was the other way around? i.e. close range shots going right through people and leaving them, at least temporarily, still in the fight. is it actually long range shots that cause that scenario?

my thought was that if close range was a problem, eff it- you're gonna double tap him anyway. i thought the tumbling effect was more pronounced at a distance.

if i was indeed previously wrong, that certainly dings 5.56/.223 a lot more for me.

do the differing charges in the military and civilian rounds cause any difference in the 'tumble'?

 

[Scarpozzi]

There are a bunch of .22 versus .223 videos on Youtube. I remember one, in particular, where they were shooting cinder blocks. The .223 caused the cinder blocks to break up, where the .22LR rounds only made a puff of cinder block dust at the point of impact.

Muzzle velocity is everything with those rounds. The size of the projectile is also a slight advantage when smaller, but only because it allows a better cost balance when compared to bigger rounds like 7.62 or .308.

 

[Specop 007]

i thought it was the other way around? i.e. close range shots going right through people and leaving them, at least temporarily, still in the fight. is it actually long range shots that cause that scenario?

my thought was that if close range was a problem, eff it- you're gonna double tap him anyway. i thought the tumbling effect was more pronounced at a distance.

if i was indeed previously wrong, that certainly dings 5.56/.223 a lot more for me.

do the differing charges in the military and civilian rounds cause any difference in the 'tumble'?

The primary wounding effects from 223/556 are accomplished through fragmentation of the bullet assuming you use FMJ (milspec/milsurp) bullets.

The bullet fragments by having a high velocity which causes a yaw AND fragment. The velocity is critical to the fragment process as you must put enough stress on the bullet as it yaws sideways to cause it to fragment. If the velocity is too low you will yaw and not fragment or not yaw at all.

The 223/556 are terribly effective IF you use it at a range where velocity is high enough to cause the yaw/fragment. In other words, it is a close range weapon with terrible long range performance both ballistically and in regards to terminal ballistics. No, i do not want to get shot with one at 800 yards.

 

[Kelvrick]

i thought it was the other way around? i.e. close range shots going right through people and leaving them, at least temporarily, still in the fight. is it actually long range shots that cause that scenario?

my thought was that if close range was a problem, eff it- you're gonna double tap him anyway. i thought the tumbling effect was more pronounced at a distance.

if i was indeed previously wrong, that certainly dings 5.56/.223 a lot more for me.

do the differing charges in the military and civilian rounds cause any difference in the 'tumble'?

It is a problem at longer ranges. Once farther out, it won't be going fast enough to tumble/fragment but still fast enough to "lightsaber" through someone. Check the ammo oracle on ar15.com

 

[yottabit]

EDIT:

Muzzle velocity on the .223/5.56mm is far higher than the .22LR, Over 3000 FPS like you'd expect in a real rifle

The weight of the bullet fired (measured in grains) is also much higher than the .22LR

If you think of the total energy of a round (usually measured in ft-lbs) it scales linearly with the mass and squared with the velocity

Obviously combining a much heavier bullet with MUCH higher velocity, yields a round that is capable of depositing MUCH more energy

The question of how much energy is deposited is determined by the surface it strikes, depth of said surface, the way the bullet tumbles etc. Bust rest assured a .223 doesn't need to deposit all of it's energy to far exceed the energy deposited by a .22LR

 

[Genx87]

There are a bunch of .22 versus .223 videos on Youtube. I remember one, in particular, where they were shooting cinder blocks. The .223 caused the cinder blocks to break up, where the .22LR rounds only made a puff of cinder block dust at the point of impact.

Muzzle velocity is everything with those rounds. The size of the projectile is also a slight advantage when smaller, but only because it allows a better cost balance when compared to bigger rounds like 7.62 or .308.

I shot an enterpise class SCSI drive 2 summers ago with a .22 and a .223. The .22 didnt penetrate the case. The .223 went through it like a hot knife through butter. You could see the melted platters inside.

 

[Scarpozzi]

There are also the shockwaves created by the high velocity, causing disruption to organs nearby.

You see that in balistics gelatin when they do demos, but the shockwaves are actually caused by the tearing of flesh as the round rips through its path and not some outside force.

A poor example is a bunch of layers of damp paper towels...as you push a broom handle or other blount object into them, the layers close to intial impact will tighten up until they tear....the hole the handle will make is going to be much larger than the actual diameter of the handle itself.

In balistics, the slower rounds typically cause more damage than the higher velocity rounds because they "tumble" when they hit flesh. This is the main reason .45 cal rounds are considered to be more damaging, but safer in home defense. They are lower velocity than 9mm and .40 cal and have less chance of travelling through walls due to the slower speed and more likelyhood to fragment upon impact. (also due to size)

 

[Scarpozzi]

I shot an enterpise class SCSI drive 2 summers ago with a .22 and a .223. The .22 didnt penetrate the case. The .223 went through it like a hot knife through butter. You could see the melted platters inside.

Haha.....It's a shame it's not under warranty. It'd be fun to call enterprise support on that one and see if they'd replace it in the typical 4-hour window with a few rounds shot in the platters.

 

[Texashiker]

The primary wounding effects from 223/556 are accomplished through fragmentation of the bullet assuming you use FMJ (milspec/milsurp) bullets.

FMJ usually does not fragment.

 

[edro]

I thought 5.56 was a NATO standard because it was less lethal (not as much tumble for fragmentation).

 

[shortylickens]

223 has considerably more powder, which means more energy against ANY target, hard or soft.
On top of which you can buy rounds specifically for hunting, target practice, and armor penetration.

 

[Specop 007]

223 has considerably more powder, which means more energy against ANY target, hard or soft.
On top of which you can buy rounds specifically for hunting, target practice, and armor penetration.

No it doesnt. Its the "same thing". In fact 556 has higher pressure limits than 223. MK 262 when it first came out was fucking hot. I mean HOT hot. The prof rounds were scary hot, as in blow up guns hot.

Now whats interesting is 308/7.62x51 is the opposite. 308 has a higher chamber pressure than 7.62x51 I believe.

 

[Texashiker]

I thought 5.56 was a NATO standard because it was less lethal (not as much tumble for fragmentation).

The 5.56mm was adopted for a lot of reasons, low recoil being one of them, lightweight so more rounds could be carried was another reason.

A well deigned bullet will NOT fragment. When a bullet fragments, it loses its mass and energy.

 

[Specop 007]

The 5.56mm was adopted for a lot of reasons, low recoil being one of them, lightweight so more rounds could be carried was another reason.

A well deigned bullet will NOT fragment. When a bullet fragments, it loses its mass and energy.

Its a WELL documented fact 556 fragments. So much so I wont be bothered to find the links you can easily Google for yourself.

 

[Texashiker]

Its a WELL documented fact 556 fragments. So much so I wont be bothered to find the links you can easily Google for yourself.

And its well documented that when an object loses mass, it loses energy.

I am not even going to bother myself to back that statement up with links, find it yourself in google.

Properly designed bullets should do 1 of 2 things - mushroom, or tumble. Fragment should not be an option.