PDA

View Full Version : Pros and Cons for the 223 vs 308


threegun
August 25, 2008, 03:54 PM
I periodically rethink my self defense weaponry from the ground up. My handgun and shotgun are good to go however I'm questioning (in my head) my AR-15's in 223/5.56MM. Not the platform, as I'm very satisfied with the weapon itself, but the caliber.

I'm seriously thinking of adding the AR in 308 to my stable with intentions that it replace the 223 as my primary go to rifle. I would like your opinions pro and con on why I should or shouldn't switch.

Thanks

jmorris
August 25, 2008, 04:23 PM
What are you defending yourself against? How Many? Where at? For how long? At what range?

jmorris
August 25, 2008, 04:25 PM
If you don't know the answers to the above just get one (or more) of each.

Creature
August 25, 2008, 04:26 PM
I would say that for self-defense, an AR chambered for .223 is a better choice for CQB (ala "self-defense") than one chambered for the .308. The 308 to me is more of a "reach out an touch someone" kind of cartridge, whereas the 223 is an "in your face" kind of round. I may be the last of the Mohicans for thinking and saying this, but I consider the 223 to be just fine for CQB and short-medium range engagements. I consider the .308 better suited for medium to long range engagements, which in my opinion are NOT self-defense distances.

dalegribble
August 25, 2008, 04:39 PM
I agree with creature. Adding a 308 won't replace your 223. They are 2 different cartridges for 2 different purposes. Look to the military and see the number of guns deployed in each caliber, the 223 far outweighes any other caliber in the number of guns issued.

If you feel the need for a 308 (as I do) then add it to your system, I'm sure you will be glad you did. Only you will be able to determin if it will replace the 223 as your goto caliber.

overkill556x45
August 25, 2008, 04:41 PM
I would lean toward the .223 because ammo and magazines are cheaper than .308 ammo and AR-10 mags. The AR10 will get expensive fast, as mags go for $30-$50. In addition, cheap 7.62nato surplus is drying up fast (all surplus is drying up fast). If you're going to reload (which is fun in and of itself), both can be affordable, but the .223 will be pretty cheap in comparison.

As far as application of force, your follow-ups can be faster with the .223. The .308 will obviously open up a bigger hole in your foe, and do it at longer ranges. However, on the civilian side (meaning not stuck with M855 ball ammo), the .223 can be loaded up with bullets like the Vmax and others that expand faster and should cause more catastrophic wounds than a standard ball round. Also, a .308, if used in a home defense situation, stands more of a chance of WAY over-penetrating (though more frangible rounds are available) and going through the BG, the wall, the exterior, down the street, etc. The .223 shouldn't over-penetrate as much.

Really, it comes down to the intended use. Short-med range, I'd go with .223. Med-long, .308 win. Another consideration is how much money you want to spend. Either round is pretty versatile.

kraigwy
August 25, 2008, 04:54 PM
Ask me a few years ago I'd said the 308, having shot my M1A and have gone through and tought snipers schools using the M21.

However of late, I'd have to vote for the 223. Its beat all the 308 highpower records, even beating the 308 in Service Rifle 1000 yard matches.

The 223 is cheaper to shoot, both in factory and reloaded ammo. A good match AR is about a third the cost of a Heavy Match M1A and easier to shoot.

The 223 has allowed younger shooters and ladies to compete with us old folks.

At a small additional cost you can get an extra upper for shooting Mulit and3 gun matches without burning out your Match rifle.

If you want it for home defence you can get the shorter barrel of the M4 configeration.

You want a varment gun you can get 50 grn bullets, you want a long range gun you can get 80 grn bullets. You dont have that versatility with the M1A.

Thats why its called AMERICA'S RIFLE.

And this is from a fan of the M1A/M14

Creature
August 25, 2008, 05:27 PM
Seems there are more Mohicans still around than I thought!

sargenv
August 25, 2008, 06:53 PM
And if the bullet prices continue to rise, eventually the Bullet swager that allows you to make .224 cal bullets from 22 lr brass and lead wire may eventually make sense.. Ya can't do that with a .308 ;)

Dwight55
August 25, 2008, 06:56 PM
In an urban setting, . . . or close suburbia, . . . I'd go .223 and never look back for many of the reasons mentioned above.

In my setting or similar: nearest inhabited dwellings, 4, nearest 2 at 800 ft, others at 2000 ft, . . . complete free fire zone from ESE all the way around West to full straight north (the most likely zone for shooting also), . . . and LEO on a 15 to 45 minute ride here, only after leaving our county, trespassing in another county, to get where I live, . . . I would opt for the M1A instead of the AR in .308.

My need would be against looters (in a civilization breakdown) or home invaders.

Just my $.02, . . .

May God bless,
Dwight

New_Pollution1086
August 25, 2008, 08:14 PM
The area you need to defend is a big factor -500 yrds .308 +500 yrds .223.

but then again I'm a relatively young city boy. the smallest place I've ever lived is 85,000 people.

T

Threefeathers
August 25, 2008, 09:42 PM
Good thread and many of us have both, so which do we grab?
I have an M-1 Carbine wifht soft point bullets ready.
An M-4 carbine with Aimpoint and Winchester Silvertip's in my Den.
A SOCOM16 in a Tactical bag loaded and ready with a quick zip.

It doesn't matter what we want to use unless we have early warning, dog, lights, etc.
My plan and we've worked on this is , Dog going nuts, hidden motion lights on, I grab my Det Spec and get oriented which includes putting pants on. Then Carbine to me, Hand Det Spec to wife. We don't use flashlights until we determine where the noise is from, at the same time dialling 911.
If time allows I will decide what the threat is and decide if I will switch rifles.

tony pasley
August 25, 2008, 10:20 PM
I have both .308 and 5.56, but if you want real stopping power close range get a level action in .444. Each caliber has strong and weak points in 7.62x51 I perfer a fnfal instead of an a-10 2nd would be a g-3.

2transams
August 25, 2008, 10:23 PM
Here's my zero cents (it's the internet,my opinion is not worth two cents:)) :

.223/5.56 is an extremely versatile round,and can be loaded with any and all types of bullets. Low recoil in a lightweight weapon make it excellent for CQB situations. Based on my observations of the layout of the town where I live and tales from friends and family who have seen combat in the Middle East,in any type of urban situation you will very likely not be making shots past 200 yards,where the 5.56 round is plenty 'nuff. But that's already been discussed,moving on...

For me,even with a sling on the rifle the .308 is much harder to take faster follow-up shots. The recoil is harder unless you go to a heavier weapon,which to me defeats the purpose of a light-'n-handy battle rifle. I really wouldn't want to run around with a full-size M1A,and the SOCOM 16 puts that big ol' thunderboomer pretty close to the face,I didn't care for it,and I didn't shoot well with it.

Now a good, heavy, accurate .308 seems to me would be great from a fairly secure position where you can take good clear shots,and you know you're good for 100 yards on out. In that instance,bigger is better.

Just my zero cents.

Teppo Sensei
August 25, 2008, 11:33 PM
a .308 is a bit much for home defense
it will shoot threw a crook then 2 cinder block walls into your neighbor's home
id stick with a .223 AR15 with frangable ammo or 7.62x39mm
i own a G3 clone but i would use 1 of my AKs or my AR15 for home defense

my dream HD rifle would be a saiga .410 converted .460S&W mag or a
.50 beowulf AR15

Edward429451
August 25, 2008, 11:43 PM
I agree with the crowd that says have both 223 & 308, I have both for all the good reasons already stated. Envisioning your SD scenario, you wont be alone, right?;)

So the guys with the .223's give the guy(s) with the .308's time to work.:D

speakerguy79
August 26, 2008, 12:05 AM
Does no one make a .243 conversion? To me it seems better for killin' people than either 223 (too small) or 308 (overkill).

threegun
August 26, 2008, 06:28 AM
My original reasons for opting for the 223 was faster followups and the quantity of ammo that can be carried for the same weight. These at the sacrifice of penetration.

If the poop ever hits the fan via riot or other civil unrest I don't see myself being as mobile as when I was younger. I also suspect that the bad guys are not going to stand out in the open to be shot so penetration of a vehicle or building material might come in more handy than raw speed.

I can own both but that still doesn't tell me which one to choose at the moment of need. If I grab the 223 and the BG's are using cover. If I grab the 308 and BG's overwhelm me quickly. Dang I hate this torment. I am leaning toward them hiding behind or otherwise using cover.

Creature
August 26, 2008, 07:41 AM
Looks to me like you already had your mind made up...

http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=308036

jmorris
August 26, 2008, 08:23 AM
Does no one make a .243 conversion? To me it seems better for killin' people than either 223 (too small) or 308 (overkill).

Yes they do, however; if you are in a SD situation there is no such thing as “overkill”.

If you are worried about over penetration the shotgun can’t be beat and at CQB ranges it is much more devastating shot for shot, if loaded correctly.

Frankyoz
August 26, 2008, 08:48 AM
6.8 SPC fills the gap nicely between the two. I was torn between the same dilema. This rounds fills both needs nicely and comes in the AR platform.

threegun
August 26, 2008, 09:50 AM
Creature,

Looks to me like you already had your mind made up...


With respect to getting an AR in 308 I have.............as long as reports come in that they are reliable, accurate, and durable. I am undecided on it becoming my go to rifle.......which is currently the AR in 223.

While I try to think of everything in advance it seems I always learn something from you guys.

David Armstrong
August 26, 2008, 11:00 AM
I've used a .308, I've used a .223. Based on that I chose a .223 as my main fighting rifle caliber, not a .308.

threegun
August 26, 2008, 11:23 AM
DA, Based on what?????? What made you choose the 223 over the 308?

speakerguy79
August 26, 2008, 12:48 PM
Yes they do, however; if you are in a SD situation there is no such thing as “overkill”.

My main thoughts were the significant velocity increase you can get with a .243. Factory ammo in some weights can run 3400fps+ in soft points, whereas .308 is more along the lines of 2800fps. I am thinking (in rifles to be specific) a lighter bullet at higher velocity would result in less penetration but a better permanent cavity in a human adversary?

Also 1/2 the recoil with the .243, but that's not got anything to do with wounding ability.

threegun
August 26, 2008, 01:22 PM
The 243 is a fine cartridge however I limited my choices to 223 and 308 because they both are more readily available. If it ever became necessary to buy ammo on the black market both the 223 and 308 would be much easier to find etc.

edrice
August 26, 2008, 01:34 PM
I disagree with everybody. For close quarters HD, neither the 308 nor 223 will beat the shotgun. Whatever happened to that concept? And if for some unlikely reason I had to engage in longer-distance, farther-outside-the-home defense, it would be the 223. If the threat was far enough away, the liklihood of shooting 308 is nil. I doubt you could call it "home" defense.

Norman Schwartzkof kept a shotgun propped against the wall next to his bunk during the Gulf War and he had could have anything he wanted. There's a lesson in that.

Ed

Stevie-Ray
August 26, 2008, 01:57 PM
Chalk me up as another Mohican. I love my FAL, but am realistic enough not to use it as a HD weapon, especially due to it's length and weight. Actually my HD weapon is generally a pistol, but in times of real trouble, I would go for my Colt Tactical Carbine.

threegun
August 26, 2008, 02:56 PM
Ed, I have shotguns. If I knew that precision wasn't going to be needed or that ranges wouldn't become extended I would grab the shotgun for sure. The rifle can do it all albeit not as good up close as the shotty.


BTW guys I'm not suggesting using the 308 for home defense.

David Armstrong
August 26, 2008, 07:14 PM
DA, Based on what?????? What made you choose the 223 over the 308?
Based on just general experience. If I'm having to hump gun and ammo, I prefer the lighter stuff. If I have to shoot a lot, I prefer the lighter rounds (ever tried firing 500 out of an M1 Garand at a rifle seminar? It ain't fun!). If I need to shoot somebody, the .223 gives me all the range I can effectively use or worry about. If I need to penetrate stuff I can switch to heavy .223 rounds designed for penetration for most needs. there's a reason why virtually every military of any note has changed ammo is going to lighter, smaller rounds for general purpose use and nobody is going up to the .308.

chrisp0410
August 27, 2008, 01:41 PM
I saw someone mentioned the 6.8SPC already. Why not the 6.5mm Grendel? First, I am not going to debate the 6.8 vs the 6.5, I only wish to say that if you want an AR platformed weapon with more punch than a 5.56mm but with the same size factor, weight, controls, and close range capabilities, either of these mid-sized calibers would be an excellant choice.

My personal preference resides with the 6.5mm Grendel. I own a JP Enterprises CTR-02 in Grendel with a compensated 20" barrel. The rifle is the same size as any of the other AR's I ever owned but has sub-1/2 MOA with facotry 123 gr. Laupa HPs and delivers as much punch past 400 meters than the .308 does as the 6.5mm bullet has a much higher ballistic coefficient.

Check out the 65grendel.com/forum for yourself. Good luck with whatever you decide.

Chrisp0410

Redneckrepairs
August 27, 2008, 02:02 PM
I ranch , and i live in a small town . I use both calibers . My ( dreaded hb 16" ar ) is my vermin and home defense gun . It lives by the bed with a red dot , and occasionally goes out to show the " city folk " how to estimate range with another scope . I also have a couple of .308 rifles among the herd , and right now a savage scout is my " pickup gun " . its light , fast , and the 110 hps i shoot will turn a coyote off right now . I also have a FAL stoked with mil spec 7.62 and a pack of 6 mags because after all i do live in the great wide open .
I really dont understand your question because you did not give details . I will say tho that i have the fal , i have the bolt in .308 , and still the AR in .223 or if you say it that way 5.56 is my bedside gun . Wanna defend your home well get an ar and just shoot em down ( you gots lots of ammo in a mag ) . Wanna defend terrain , well get a good rifle ( bar is too expensive ) , set it on a bipod and make the most of the iron sights . A talented fella could do it with a bolt , but i am not that talented , and besides you gotta move every couple of rounds lol .

So again , just what are your aims , and just what are you defending ? If your serious about SHTF then get a good .22 lr rifle and a couple of bricks of ammo . That will pay you better on both poundage and utility than any centerfire .

threegun
August 28, 2008, 05:06 AM
DA,
there's a reason why virtually every military of any note has changed ammo is going to lighter, smaller rounds for general purpose use and nobody is going up to the .308.

Comparing military needs to civilians needs isn't realistic. The odds of me ever needing 300 plus rounds of rifle ammo is remote to say the least.

All the other stuff you listed were high on my list and the reason the 223 was my choice for so many years. Things are changing now however. I'm not as mobile as a decade ago despite switching to the lightest rifle out there and removing some of my load weight.

As I try to imagine what types of threats I may face, threats like riots, looters (live in hurricane Florida), and gang attacks (gang activity increasing daily in my area), a few things keep popping up. I'm not going to need 300 plus rounds of ammo and I might need to penetrate vehicles and/or building material to eliminate a threat that has taken cover.

If the 308 AR doesn't buck as much as an M1A1 or your M1 Garand I'm thinking that it might fit my needs better. Follow ups won't be as fast and ammo levels as high but hits would be more effective and cover less protective.

threegun
August 28, 2008, 05:09 AM
Redneck,
So again , just what are your aims , and just what are you defending ? If your serious about SHTF then get a good .22 lr rifle and a couple of bricks of ammo . That will pay you better on both poundage and utility than any centerfire .

In my survival plans the 22lr plays a major role. For riots and such I want more power and centerfire reliability.

jmorris
August 28, 2008, 08:33 AM
I disagree with everybody. For close quarters HD, neither the 308 nor 223 will beat the shotgun. Whatever happened to that concept?

Not everybody, post #20

If you are worried about over penetration the shotgun can’t be beat and at CQB ranges it is much more devastating shot for shot, if loaded correctly.

If the threat was far enough away, the liklihood of shooting 308 is nil. I doubt you could call it "home" defense.[/

The op never stated "home" defense and never answered the questions in post #2 go all you are playing is a guessing game. The answer is; there is no "right" answer, without more info.

threegun
August 28, 2008, 09:23 AM
What are you defending yourself against? How Many? Where at? For how long? At what range?
The op never stated "home" defense and never answered the questions in post #2 go all you are playing is a guessing game. The answer is; there is no "right" answer, without more info.

Jmorris, I apologize for not answering your question directly. I didn't even see it for some reason. I did answer the question though in a few posts.


If the poop ever hits the fan via riot or other civil unrest I don't see myself being as mobile as when I was younger.

As I try to imagine what types of threats I may face, threats like riots, looters (live in hurricane Florida), and gang attacks (gang activity increasing daily in my area), a few things keep popping up.

For riots and such I want more power and centerfire reliability.

These (how many, how far, how long) are unknown beforehand. I do expect a city type environment with vehicles and building/homes etc. I also expect that it would come during a riot or other civil unrest situation or possibly a gang thing. Home defense will be a handgun or shotgun or AR in 223 thing.

David Armstrong
August 28, 2008, 09:31 AM
Comparing military needs to civilians needs isn't realistic.
It has nothing to do with comparing needs. It has everything to do with efectiveness of the weapon. Militaries would not be moving from the .308 to the .223 (or similar moves) if it gave up much in the area of practical effectiveness.

threegun
August 28, 2008, 11:36 AM
Militaries would not be moving from the .308 to the .223 (or similar moves) if it gave up much in the area of practical effectiveness.

It certainly has given up some effectiveness in exchange for increased firepower. I don't even think military brass will argue that they are sacrificing caliber effectiveness for firepower even thought the net effectiveness may remain the same or increase under military style maneuvers due to the increased firepower. For someone unlikely to face a large group of attackers, like me, the trade off is less appealing. Especially in the urban environment were cover is everywhere.

One thing is certain if all these militaries could find a way to eliminate the difference in the volume of ammo each soldier could carry the 223 would find itself in trouble. With its only advantage then being controllability.

I own several AR's in 223. I love them dearly. I just think that I may have prioritized the wrong areas. I can picture rioters shooting from behind vehicles or other urban cover. Areas better suited for a hit from a heavier caliber. I can't imagine being bum rushed by 5 guys heck bent on getting me...........a scenario that favors the 223 and its lighting fast followups. If I am bum rushed by 5 guys the 308 can get it done albeit slower. I question whether the same can be said of the 223 trying to penetrate urban cover.

Thats my conundrum.

David Armstrong
August 28, 2008, 05:06 PM
It certainly has given up some effectiveness in exchange for increased firepower.
No, it hasn't. That was the impetus for the move to smaller calibers. Within expected fighting distances there was/is no loss of effectiveness.
One thing is certain if all these militaries could find a way to eliminate the difference in the volume of ammo each soldier could carry the 223 would find itself in trouble. With its only advantage then being controllability.
IFAIK, such a claim has nothing behind it to support such a position.
Especially in the urban environment were cover is everywhere.
The .223 will do just fine in the typical urban environment. If heavy cover is a worry that is probably more of a bullet selection issue than a caliber issue.

Stevie-Ray
August 28, 2008, 06:03 PM
With its only advantage then being controllability. That would also be in question, then. For instance, my FAL has far less recoil than my AR. OF course it is a heavy barrel model. Just the same, I'd like to try out one of those shorty Para FALs to check the recoil against an AR. The gas system, when adjusted properly, turns my personal FAL into .22LR, as far as recoil.

MTMilitiaman
August 29, 2008, 04:31 AM
7.62x51...

I want what ya'll are smoking if you think the 5.56 can touch it, at any range. With expanding ammunition, the 7.62x51 offers just the right amount of penetration with nearly the wound cavitation of your standard 12 gauge buckshot load.

Follow up shots? Amount of ammo that can be carried? How is this as much a concern as terminal effect? I realize the 7.62x51 isn't the poodle shooter, but that is kinda the point. With practice, you're arguing over maybe a couple hundredths of a second in your split times for a vast increase in effectiveness.

Yes, when you have to gain fire superiority to cover the advance of your team mates as they flank an enemy position, the amount of ammo you can carry, and the difference in fire rate might make a difference. But this couldn't matter less for the purposes of this discussion.

He's one man! He's not going to be laying down suppressive fire! He lacks the manpower, and the firepower to use modern infantry tactics, so the benefits the military considered when choosing its standard cartridge are irrelevant.

And he's on his property. He doesn't have to consider ammo weight. He can have 2500 rounds loaded in mags and stockpiled in a closet and he doesn't have to worry about how much it weighs.

For these purposes, the 5.56 offers absolutely no advantage over the 7.62. None. Any gain in fire rate by the 5.56 is neutralized by the dramatic increase in terminal effect of the 7.62. This is an advantage that can be appreciated at every range, not just 500+ yards. Plus, suppressive fire, and fire and movement aren't options here. The increase in ammo weight couldn't possibly be less of a concern. This is the equivalent of an entrenched defensive position.

David Armstrong
August 29, 2008, 05:54 PM
With practice, you're arguing over maybe a couple hundredths of a second in your split times for a vast increase in effectiveness.
That is the great debate, whether there actually is any increase in effectiveness and if the difference matters. Currently, most of those that do ballistics work suggest no difference that matters.

Erik
August 29, 2008, 10:43 PM
I'm a 5.56 guy, in so far as I am not in a position to be engaging anyone beyond its capabilities.

On split times and effectiveness:

My splits, along with the rest of the world, are faster. If I need to go even faster, I flip the selector switch to three round burst. My split times are, shall we say, mechanically impressive at that point. And the effectiveness of one round, let alone three? I'm comfortable with it.

Oh, and DA's comment about the difficulties of training with the heavier options shouldn't be under estimated. I've seen guys fatigue and allow bad habits to surface as the day wore on with some of the more traditional main battle rifles.

Don't get me wrong, the heavies have a place, and I like them there.

threegun
August 30, 2008, 08:46 AM
No, it hasn't. That was the impetus for the move to smaller calibers. Within expected fighting distances there was/is no loss of effectiveness.

MTMillitiaman explain perfectly the main reason militaries are moving/have moved to the 5.56.............Yes, when you have to gain fire superiority to cover the advance of your team mates as they flank an enemy position, the amount of ammo you can carry, and the difference in fire rate might make a difference. But this couldn't matter less for the purposes of this discussion. ..............the 5.56 is not as effective as the 7.62x51 sorry.

IFAIK, such a claim has nothing behind it to support such a position.


If we are correct as to why the military switched to the 5.56 and I believe we are correct, that supports my position.

The .223 will do just fine in the typical urban environment. If heavy cover is a worry that is probably more of a bullet selection issue than a caliber issue.

I'm sure it will however I don't want "just fine" I want the best available. I'm sure the 308 will do fine in a wave style attack but if that was expected I would want the 223.

Creature
August 30, 2008, 09:02 AM
I don't see this discussion coming to any conclusion. Its the same as the pickup truck vs compact car argument. It all about how you see yourself, what your needs are, and how much are you willing to sacrifice to achieve your goal. Either will get you from point A to point B, but the psychology of what you NEED vs the drawbacks of what you pick to fulfill that need.

Somehow I really dont see a need to defend against "rioters shooting from behind vehicles or other urban cover. Areas better suited for a hit from a heavier caliber"...I see more of a threat from roving mobs or bands of gangs looking for easy prey...not entrenched snipers or coordinated attacks by militias.

threegun
August 30, 2008, 09:14 AM
What will the roving mob do after you fire the first shot? If the don't run away in fear that is.

stephen426
August 30, 2008, 10:21 AM
Comparing military needs to civilians needs isn't realistic. The odds of me ever needing 300 plus rounds of rifle ammo is remote to say the least.

All the other stuff you listed were high on my list and the reason the 223 was my choice for so many years. Things are changing now however. I'm not as mobile as a decade ago despite switching to the lightest rifle out there and removing some of my load weight.

As I try to imagine what types of threats I may face, threats like riots, looters (live in hurricane Florida), and gang attacks (gang activity increasing daily in my area), a few things keep popping up. I'm not going to need 300 plus rounds of ammo and I might need to penetrate vehicles and/or building material to eliminate a threat that has taken cover.

It certainly has given up some effectiveness in exchange for increased firepower. I don't even think military brass will argue that they are sacrificing caliber effectiveness for firepower even thought the net effectiveness may remain the same or increase under military style maneuvers due to the increased firepower. For someone unlikely to face a large group of attackers, like me, the trade off is less appealing. Especially in the urban environment were cover is everywhere.
One thing is certain if all these militaries could find a way to eliminate the difference in the volume of ammo each soldier could carry the 223 would find itself in trouble. With its only advantage then being controllability.

I own several AR's in 223. I love them dearly. I just think that I may have prioritized the wrong areas. I can picture rioters shooting from behind vehicles or other urban cover. Areas better suited for a hit from a heavier caliber. I can't imagine being bum rushed by 5 guys heck bent on getting me...........a scenario that favors the 223 and its lighting fast followups. If I am bum rushed by 5 guys the 308 can get it done albeit slower. I question whether the same can be said of the 223 trying to penetrate urban cover.

Thats my conundrum.

threegun (or should I say Walter Smitty),

If you want to buy a friggin .308 in an AR type platform, just do it. Stop making up ridiculous scenarios to justify your purchase.

You live in Tampa (in an urban setting from your posts) for crying out loud. What are the chances you will really NEED a .308 to defend yourself? You are talking about shooting through cover and what not.

For your threats, you mentioned riots, looters, and gang attacks. When is the last time Tampa had a riot? Do you actually live close to the bad parts of town where riots typically occur? If so, saving your money and moving to a better area would be a much better option. As for the looters, are you really that much of a target? Looting normally occurs in grocery stores where people need essentials and then moves to non-essesntials when civil unrest sets in. I went through hurrican Andrew and I helped out during the recover efforts. I saw all that stuff first hand. Looters rarely go into residential neighrborhoods since that is not where the goods are concentrated. As for your gang attack scenario, have you done something to **** off some gang members? Are you the leader of a rival gang? What do you think your actual chances of being target by a gang attack are?

Like I said, buy whatever the heck you want to buy but don't make up ridiculous scenarios for it. If some antis stumbled across they post, it would read like most people here are gun nuts hell bent on shooting people. There is a difference between self defense and murder. Some of your scenarios blur the lines quite a bit.

David Armstrong
August 30, 2008, 10:22 AM
MTMillitiaman explain perfectly the main reason militaries are moving/have moved to the 5.56
According to some. According to many others, no. If the smaller round will do what you need, there is no reason to use the larger round with all the downside that goes with it.
the 5.56 is not as effective as the 7.62x51 sorry.
Sorry, but that is not an isue. The issue of concern is if there is any difference in effeciveness for the situation. In some ways the 5.56 is more effective than the 7.62x51.
If we are correct as to why the military switched to the 5.56 and I believe we are correct, that supports my position.
As has been siad before, you can base a decision on beliefs or you can base them on facts. I prefer facts.
I'm sure it will however I don't want "just fine" I want the best available.
There is usually no best, just different.

Creature
August 30, 2008, 04:38 PM
What will the roving mob do after you fire the first shot? If the don't run away in fear that is.

More than likely they will do just that. Historically, mobs don't stick around to areas of aimed live fire.

Edward429451
August 30, 2008, 05:30 PM
It's not reallya ridiculous scenario. It's in keeping with the hope for the best prepare for the worst doctrine. Certainly far fetched according to history up to this point at least, but hey, cover them bases too. The fam will be counting on you.

Kinda brings us back to multiple 223's and at least one 308 for the party.;)

Creature
August 30, 2008, 05:50 PM
It's in keeping with the hope for the best prepare for the worst doctrine. Certainly far fetched according to history up to this point at least, but hey, cover them bases too.

That's what my scoped 30-06 bolt gun w/AP is for....

Edward429451
August 30, 2008, 11:03 PM
:DI hear ya:D

...and 2-4 guys on security with .223's

dandydany
August 31, 2008, 12:21 AM
Atually, everybody is right except for the one that's wrong.... heheheheh...Anyway, the way I see it, in my home , I'll use my .45 ACP ( Gock 30 or Webley mk VI ), then if caught outside my 20 ga. AL 48 Franchi. and finally , if having to exchange fire with someone at over 25 yards and more, my Kel-Tec .223. Note that the shotgun has a 20 " barrel and still will score at 50 yards or more with good slugs. I don't really see the usage a .308 would have unless you're sniping or target shooting , besides who wants to carry that heavy babe in the streets when somebody is after you. As for the .243, that's a hell of a nice cartridge , shoot very flat and about 3 -4 " low at 400 yards , something like that. But find ammo in a running battle. You guys are right in my book about foreseeing heavy troubles and thinking about getting ready , I live in a rural area but figure them freaks from the city raiding a small town or a farm or some ranches just to show off back in their turf....heheheh...I got news for those retard turds , we're waiting for you...heheheh... dan

threegun
August 31, 2008, 07:01 AM
In some ways the 5.56 is more effective than the 7.62x51.


And in some ways the 308 is more effective.......thats the dilemma. I want the most effective for whatever I may face.

More than likely they will do just that. Historically, mobs don't stick around to areas of aimed live fire.

I think they will also....just want to be ready with the best possible if they don't.

...and 2-4 guys on security with .223's

My "team" is getting to the right age to be able to help out if something nasty ever happened. My 12 year old has a bushmaster superlite and can run and gun right along with me. Shoots better than most adults already.

David Armstrong
September 1, 2008, 04:41 PM
And in some ways the 308 is more effective.......thats the dilemma. I want the most effective for whatever I may face.
Again, there is no most effective for whatever you may face. There are differences that may or may not be of value in a particular situation. But what is of value in Situation 1 may be disadvantageous is Situation 2.

threegun
September 1, 2008, 05:41 PM
But what is of value in Situation 1 may be disadvantageous is Situation 2.

David, I'm looking for the one that gives the most advantages in most situations. The one with the better average so to speak. For decades I choose the 223 as that caliber. I'm just questioning that decision.

Creature
September 1, 2008, 06:34 PM
I'm just questioning that decision.

Maybe I missed it the first time, but what was it in particular that made you question that decision?

threegun
September 2, 2008, 07:52 AM
Maybe I missed it the first time, but what was it in particular that made you question that decision?

Before talking to you....penetration. I'm thinking that many of the situations I may face will require (at some point) a round that can penetrate vehicles and building material and still remain lethal. Now that I understand what happens after a round is fired (everybody runs for cover or escape) it just seems like it would be advantageous to be able to get behind most cover. To turn cover into concealment as someone posted.

I just cannot imagine the need for stopping a group of charging BG's were the need for fast followups is key.

Anyway thats the confusion for me.

alistaire
September 2, 2008, 08:31 AM
50 BMG is the most effective round you can fire from a weapon that one person might actually carry - if they are desperate.

threegun
September 2, 2008, 11:41 AM
My 7 pound AR is getting pretty heavy LOL I can't imagine lugging a 50 around.

Creature
September 2, 2008, 11:45 AM
dangit, threegun...now I want a 6.8 upper.

threegun
September 2, 2008, 12:00 PM
I just had a customer call about the 6.8 DPMS rifle..........I don't want to know anything except the price LOL. I'm thinking 243 also.

You can't change to bigger as you all but talked me out of it LOL.

David Armstrong
September 2, 2008, 02:04 PM
David, I'm looking for the one that gives the most advantages in most situations. The one with the better average so to speak.
Sigh. Time to go back to the ignore list. Bye-bye.

threegun
September 2, 2008, 07:20 PM
Ignore me? You posted in several threads I started. Seems you try very hard not to ignore me. It is for the best though.

Your ignoring me had nothing to do with a moderator warning right LOL? Seems our constant bickering was getting noticed.

You saved me the trouble thanks and good bye.

To the mods..........Thank you. As you know I didn't want to resort to the ignore list but it was for the best. Thanks for the heads up.

threegun
September 2, 2008, 07:21 PM
Creature, What are the ballistics on the 6.8.

Socrates
September 6, 2008, 06:20 PM
I never really figured why the military got rid of .308. You can have double the bullet weight of a 223, a 308 caliber hole, and, a bullet going near 3100-3200 fps, or a 110 grain bullet at 3350 fps. I think those old remington Sabot rounds in .223, using a 30-06 sabot went over 4000 fps.

Anyway, finding a small, handy, .308 rifle is the problem I have. I can't find one in Kali, they are all pretty much illegal, so, I use a Mosin Nagant 44, with 7.62 x 54 R, that runs near 30-06 ballistics, but, at lower pressures...Plus, I get a bayonet, and, they are WAY cheaper...;)

David Armstrong
September 8, 2008, 12:02 PM
I never really figured why the military got rid of .308.
Basically they found, as have most others, that they can get the desired results with a better package. Less expenditure of resources, lower cost, easier to use, etc.

lomaxanderson
September 8, 2008, 04:43 PM
223 is fine for an AR and if i need a 308 its a bolt :)

threegun
September 9, 2008, 06:18 AM
Basically they found, as have most others, that they can get the desired results with a better package. Less expenditure of resources, lower cost, easier to use, etc.

And some in the military will argue that all this was achieved at the cost of GI lives with the less effective caliber. Right or wrong the 5.56mm is less effective than the 7.62x51 at stopping the enemy.

Glenn E. Meyer
September 9, 2008, 09:49 AM
Sources? There is a technical literature on the rounds that doesn't support that conclusion.

JKHolman
September 9, 2008, 12:38 PM
For quite some time, I had .308 and its equivalent [semi and bolt action], but no .223 rifles. While in the military, I did not care for the M-16, although I qualified expert and was diligent in the cleaning of my weapon. At a gun show in Richmond, I picked up a Bushmaster M17S bullpup at a really good cost (450 dollars - Spring '07). From there I bought a second M17S, an XM15-E2S, a Golani Sporter, a Daewoo AR-100, and a Mini-14 in bullpup configuration. Sprinkle in some other calibre purchases among the above listed. Of late I fire the XM15-E2S more than any other firearm. So much for not caring for the .223 round. If things were to get out of hand (yes, it could happen in America), I would grab my .45 pistol and the Daewoo. I would grab these two because they provide me with the greatest confidence to meet a civil threat. It comes down to your familiarity with the tool (in this case a weapon) and the confidence it gives you to use it (hopefully that day will never come). And be sure to practice [handling, loading, shooting and cleaning] otherwise on that day you will probably shoot a friend or yourself.
Stephen mentioned that we must sound like some really paranoid people to visitors on this forum (especially to the non-gun-wielding set). True, but this is our turf (as they have theirs), and the proper place to discuss such matters in an intelligent manner. I am sure Stephen did not mean any insult, but is concerned with our public image. At times we do needlessly hurt that image.

cheers,
JKHolman

Ohio Rusty
September 9, 2008, 02:33 PM
The .308 is a great deer gun, and even a good gun for black bear. Humans though are wimpy after being shot. Bears will attack and try to eat you, where humans just fall down. In most cases, .308 is overkill. In a sniper situation where you need to shut down a hostage taker with one shot, the .308 is extremely accurate, bucks the wind and will go where you put it. .308 is an excellent sniper rifle caliber and wins hands down over the .223. For the average shoot 'em up and knock 'em down, the .223 is a great platform with it's fast flying, trauma creating bullet. You can also carry more ammo with the .223 as it's lighter. For those who are recoil sensitive, the .223 wins hands down.
I prefer the lack of recoil of the .223 rifles. No flinch means increased accuracy. I think I've fired 100,000 rounds thru AR-15's and M-16's. The .308 kicked more than I liked and was alot heavier. The .223 also does extreme trauma to an intended target, incapacatating the receiver of the .223 round. I would definitely take the .223.
Ohio Rusty ><>

nemoaz
September 9, 2008, 04:43 PM
I never really figured why the military got rid of .308.The US military got rid of 308/7.62 NATO rifles for the same reason the combloc got rid of 7.62x54R, because they wanted an assault rifle. Fullpower rifle rounds don't lend themselves to full/burst fire in anything lighter than a BAR or RPK. 5.56/5.45 rounds were chosen (eventually chosen in the case of the 5.45) for lightweight, low recoil, and flat trajectories.

BTW, shooting through heavy cover isn't the job of a battle rifle whether bolt or semi. It is the job of a light, medium or heavy machine gun. Semi auto rife through a block wall or thick wood is not effective. Think your going to punch through medium cover (actually concealment as someone else said)? Not gonna happen. You probably don't even know what part of the wall or whatever the person is behind.

As for civilians, a 308 makes more sense because you aren't carrying a full battle load and aren't likely to have a full auto weapon. The biggest advantage of a 5.56 (or 5.45) weapon for a civilian is the lightweight of the system. For me, another important consideration is familiarity. I've shot almost everything and carried several different rifles, but an AR just feels right in my hands. Lightweight and accuracy are always an advantage. And I have a supply of 5.56 ammo, so my choice is easy.

I simply don't feel there is any chance I'll ever need a rifle for the long range shots some guys hypothesize needing. If I did somehow think I needed a long range rifle, it wouldn't be a semi. That doesn't mean that I think 308 is a bad choice. It's obviously an excellent round available in some excellent battle proven platforms.

David Armstrong
September 9, 2008, 06:09 PM
It comes down to your familiarity with the tool (in this case a weapon) and the confidence it gives you to use it (hopefully that day will never come).
Exactly. Too many get wrapped up in trying to purchase a haradware solution to what is really a softwareproblem. If people would get proper, effective training (which can't be done by reading a book, watching a video, etc.) they would figure that out. I think it should almost be a mandate that a person can only buy 1 pistol and 1 rifle before getting training. It would cut down a lot on these silly "which is better" kind of threads. :D

jughead2
September 9, 2008, 06:58 PM
i have most of the calibers stated so it doesnt matter to me. will pick up which one is handy and go from there

omkhan
September 9, 2008, 11:28 PM
U guys r lucky to have any caliber u want, even a .50. Here in Pakistan, we, the civilians, r not allowed anything bigger than .22 when it comes to rifles. Anything above it even a .222 is considered a Prohibited bore. Ofcourse anything is possible here in Pk but u have to be big, really big for that. :)

threegun
September 10, 2008, 01:49 PM
threegun (or should I say Walter Smitty),

If you want to buy a friggin .308 in an AR type platform, just do it. Stop making up ridiculous scenarios to justify your purchase.

You live in Tampa (in an urban setting from your posts) for crying out loud. What are the chances you will really NEED a .308 to defend yourself? You are talking about shooting through cover and what not.

For your threats, you mentioned riots, looters, and gang attacks. When is the last time Tampa had a riot? Do you actually live close to the bad parts of town where riots typically occur? If so, saving your money and moving to a better area would be a much better option. As for the looters, are you really that much of a target? Looting normally occurs in grocery stores where people need essentials and then moves to non-essesntials when civil unrest sets in. I went through hurrican Andrew and I helped out during the recover efforts. I saw all that stuff first hand. Looters rarely go into residential neighrborhoods since that is not where the goods are concentrated. As for your gang attack scenario, have you done something to **** off some gang members? Are you the leader of a rival gang? What do you think your actual chances of being target by a gang attack are?

Like I said, buy whatever the heck you want to buy but don't make up ridiculous scenarios for it. If some antis stumbled across they post, it would read like most people here are gun nuts hell bent on shooting people. There is a difference between self defense and murder. Some of your scenarios blur the lines quite a bit.

Stephen, Missed your post sorry. I googled walter smitty thinking that you were poking at me.....but no I don't have alternate names........if the name was a sarcastic comparison to another.....please explain.

To answer some of your questions there have been 2 riots which were very close to home. In 1989 residents of College Hill projects rioted. I was dispatched to protect my grandparents and their printing business (same location). In 1996 St Petersburg was the scene of a riot after a white police officer shot and killed a black thug.

The mixture of minorities in low income housing seems to offer the greatest danger of riots in my area and as history has shown things can happen overnight.

My community is good. However recent changes in public housing have brought riffraff to my neighborhood in the form of government subsidized rent in a couple of apartment complexes in my area. Gangs and the threat of riot are very possible concerns.

Hillsborough county Sheriff David Gee just posted numbers about gang membership in Florida. At around 67,000 and growing every day. They plan a 7 month push to interrupt them but gangs have been growing despite the valiant efforts of LE.

Now that I have answered your questions please ignore my future posts if you are going to attack instead of contributing. My thread is title pros and cons of the 223 vs 308. If you feel it or my scenarios are silly ignore them. I was looking for educated guidance not approval.

There is a difference between self defense and murder. Some of your scenarios blur the lines quite a bit.

Shooting someone who is using cover while trying to kill me is hardly murder.

threegun
September 10, 2008, 05:48 PM
Exactly. Too many get wrapped up in trying to purchase a haradware solution to what is really a softwareproblem.

And you insist this to be my case without having a clue as to what I can or can't do with my rifle. You assume that I'm searching for a rifle to make up for my lack of ability, yet another guess.

Striker071
September 10, 2008, 11:22 PM
First of all I would like to say that some of the reasons the 6.8 round was developed was because of the lack of effectiveness of the .223/5.56 in certain cases. There are units currently in Iraq that are trying to get their hands on M14's because of there effectiveness. Some of the BG's are taking multiple rounds of 5.56 and are still fighting back. yes they may not be 100% combat effective at that point but they are still in the fight. I currently own a FAL 16 inch barrel. I have a load bearing vest loaded with 6 20 round magazines and one in the case for the weapon. so 140 rounds of 308 that can be fired realatively quickly. To me its kind of the reason most Tactical police units are going back to 45 calibers. Knock Down. 9mm just doesnt cut it. I personally saw a incident where a police officer shot a person 6 or 7 times with a 9 mm and local officer that still had a 357 magnum put the guy down with one shot. If the crap hits the proverbial fan well you better have a small stock pile of whatever you use.

Firepower!
September 11, 2008, 04:40 AM
Well I have both calibers in M4A1 (5.56X45) and G3A3 (7.62X51).

They are both useful with unique benefits that are partial to given situation. If your combat zone is mostly within 200 yards then there is really no need for a 308 Win. However, if you are fighting off enemy beyond that rand a 223 Rem. could come up short depending on what you are hitting at.

These two calibers are not replacement for each other. I would really retain both, but if I had to keep one it would be a 308 for its multi purpose usability.

David Armstrong
September 11, 2008, 09:47 AM
To me its kind of the reason most Tactical police units are going back to 45 calibers.
But most tac units ARE NOT going to .45. The .45 is still fairly rare for tactical police units, which is why (in part) it gets lots of attention when one decides to go with it.
I personally saw a incident where a police officer shot a person 6 or 7 times with a 9 mm and local officer that still had a 357 magnum put the guy down with one shot.
And there are numerous examples of BGs taking multiple CoM hits with .45 and still functioning. No handgun caliber can be considered a reliable stopper.

Striker071
September 11, 2008, 10:55 PM
LAPD SWAT back to 45... FBI HRT 45... or so I have been told. Please dont confuse the issue of well placed shots... they should turn someone off rather quickly no matter what the caliber. It is all about mass... (I wish my physisist buddy was here to give me the right statement). The bigger bullet usually has better stopping effect... again my opinion... wish I had sopme hard data to back it up will try and find some and post it up

threegun
September 12, 2008, 02:21 PM
These two calibers are not replacement for each other. I would really retain both, but if I had to keep one it would be a 308 for its multi purpose usability.

I've decided to add the 308 AR as an addition to my 223's. When I give it a serious personal whirl and if it can hang with my 223's all around, I may change.

David Armstrong
September 12, 2008, 02:25 PM
LAPD SWAT back to 45... FBI HRT 45
Sorry, but 2 units does no tmake a trend, particularly in light of the huge number of units that have not changed, and are getting by just fine with the 9s and 40s and other calibers they use.
It is all about mass
No. Mass is only one part of it, certainly not all. Velocity plays a big role. Design is perhaps the biggest player these days.

AnonymousOne
September 12, 2008, 03:38 PM
Yes I know I'm a noobie here,but has anyone in this thread mentioned the 6.5 Grendel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/6.5_Grendel)?

I know that ammo is a bit scarce for it right now but the round was designed as a compromise between the 5.56 and the 7.62x51. It's still light, so you can carry a decent amount of ammo, but it has a lot more carry and punch at extended ranges.

Just throwing a thought out.

bcarver
September 12, 2008, 05:58 PM
Hey Stryker
FbI Yes they did buy 45. Confirmed purchase of 500 1911 style 45 autos.
Weather or not they were issued I am unsure.
Hey anonomousone
there are two kinds of people 6.5 Grendel and 6.8 spc.
there can be only one.
and yes it has been mentioned.
The biggest self defense situation I foresee is a "Katrina" Type senario.
If you didn't live in the affected are you will not understand.
Either gun would suffice.
Most adversaries would be poorly trained and unexperianced.
Most situations with thugs end when fire is returned.
Most thugs are cowards that feel empowered by weapons
I recently witness three young men run from a parking lot after approach a suv with a gun. The driver pulled his own weapon and started shooting first.
The three ran so fast they ran toward and past two police. The police caught two of them and the third about 10 minutes later when he returned.
the third man did not even see the police(crowded situation).
Any one can pull a gun.
It take a man to stand and shoot back.
It takes a fool or a cop to run towards the shot(sometimes both).

threegun
September 15, 2008, 06:10 AM
Bcarver, I agree that most BG's would likely run as soon as shots are fired. What I am trying to prepare for is the BG who doesn't. Clearly there are advantages and disadvantages to both calibers. I'm looking for the one that offers the greatest advantage to dealing with the BG who won't quit in the scenarios I believe I may face.

If they run anything that goes boom will do.

Tamara
September 15, 2008, 06:30 AM
I thought this was the "tactics & training" sub-forum and not the "gadgets & gear" sub-forum...

Have you considered spending the money you were going to blow on a new rifle and the assorted spare mags and ammo (because you were going to buy at least ten mags and a case or two of ammo, right?) and use it for an Urban Rifle course at TRO, instead?

threegun
September 15, 2008, 10:08 AM
Tamara, Have you considered spending the money you were going to blow on a new rifle and the assorted spare mags and ammo (because you were going to buy at least ten mags and a case or two of ammo, right?) and use it for an Urban Rifle course at TRO, instead?

Nope not now. I considered it years ago but I couldn't quite afford it. Back then I only had enough money to feed my ammunition habit with very little left over. That little bit went to videos and books. In that time however I have absorbed as much information on the tactical use of a rifle as possible including training with folks who have had the "formal" training. Now I don't think I would benefit enough to justify the costs in lost wages, travel expenses, and fee's. (please guys don't confuse my last statement with me thinking I know it all as has happened in other threads). A class will cost me over 2 grand easy. Based on what I've been told about the itinerary of some of these courses by friends......its mostly stuff I already do.

I thought this was the "tactics & training" sub-forum and not the "gadgets & gear" sub-forum...


I apologize if I posted the thread in the wrong place.

Glenn E. Meyer
September 15, 2008, 10:10 AM
Tamara - suggesting training over gear - how dare you?

That violates the secret law of all 'tactics' forums on the Internet!!

:D

.22lr
September 15, 2008, 11:26 AM
Tamara,

I am but a young novice, and would not normally disagree in public with a moderator, but your recent statement is just ridiculous!

Have you considered spending the money you were going to blow on a new rifle and the assorted spare mags and ammo (because you were going to buy at least ten mags and a case or two of ammo, right?) and use it for an Urban Rifle course at TRO, instead?

Training? DUH! that's what different guns and gear are for! who needs to know how to use a tool effectively when you can just own a bunch of them? I own at least 12 hammers, and I believe that makes me a master carpenter!

Now, before I get squished like a bug. I'm obviously being heavily sarcastic. Training by a qualified instructor where class size allows one on one interaction is amazingly effective / beneficial. Cost is a consideration which is why I have only been to one course. It taught basics and that is what I try to practice. BUT If I want to move beyond where I am, it is invaluable for a trained set of eyes (trained not only in the skill I am attempting to get better at, but also trained as a teacher) watch me and identify areas for improvement.

Now I don't think I would benefit enough to justify the costs in lost wages, travel expenses, and fee's.

How much does that new rifle cost?

Glenn E. Meyer
September 15, 2008, 11:39 AM
If we are going to do the great - I'm so special I don't need to train debate - I'm going to eat my lunch now.

Come back after the usual 20 posts arguing against training. :D

pax
September 15, 2008, 12:49 PM
Hmmmmm.

Four pages. Probably should have shoved this over to the rifle forum awhile ago, but everyone was being courteous considering the contentious topic, and I hated to disrupt the conversation.

However, the original conversation appears to be over, for the most part -- and I'm with Glenn. I need to go eat my lunch and get a big bucket o' popcorn going if we're going to do the "do you need training?" discussion again. Which should probably be started in a separate thread, if it needs to be started at all.

Sooooo...

Shutting this one down. Thanks, everyone.

pax