Defensive 5.56/223 Question

[Crosshair]

I think you are generalizing too much here. This is true of the 77gr SMK; but the Hornady 75gr TAP typically yaws and upsets in less than an inch of ballistics gel. The larger mass of these rounds not only means a lbigger maximum cavity; but keeping the cavity bigger over more of the path of the bullet.

You're right, I was focusing on the SMK and forgot about the Hornady load. My bad.

Actually, the newer hollowpoints like the 55gr and 62gr Trophy Bonded Bear Claw (LE223T1 and LE223T3 above), the 62gr SOST, and the 70gr Barnes TSX all outperform OTMs through windshield and other intermediate barriers.

Interesting. This area of ammo market keeps changing so fast it is hard to keep up sometimes.

However, something like the Hornady 75gr TAP looks to me about perfect for a home defense round. You have a large cavity that starts at 0.5" and continues to about 7" while the core of the round penetrates to about 13". It isn't the best round through barriers or say a chest rig of AK mags; but for home defense it seems to do a nice job of combining big cavity and adequate penetration without being too aggressive on penetrating barriers.

Yea, the TAP does seem to fragment well, of course that's because it doesn't have to comply with the Hauge rules like the SMK does. The only think I wish they would do is drop the gimmick of the nickel cases or at least offer it in regular brass cases. Most of us aren't storing our ammo in an irrigation ditch and don't need the additional cost of nickel cases.

[WhyteP38]

The Urban TAP in the orange boxes (it looks orange on my computer screen but more reddish in my storage bin) comes in polished brass casings. I think the stuff in the black boxes is the nickel-plated stuff.

The Urban TAP and the black-box TAP are supposedly different, but I'm not clear what those differences are. Their informational materials that I've read seem like legalistic dances around what they are really trying to tell you.

[Crosshair]

I don't see that stuff listed on the Hornady website. All I see is the nickel stuff.

[WhyteP38]

Try the links that I posted on page 1 of this thread.

Also, since I can't speak with knowledge to the differences between the two types of TAP, I can't tell you which type performs better. All I can really say is that the Urban TAP is brass-cased, and the other TAP is nickel-cased. Could be the the nickel-cased TAP really is better .. or vice versa ... or about the same.

[Brasky]

This topic comes up a lot. It always seems to involve people whose answers are opinions without any supporting data, followed by people who provide data, and then followed by more opinions without any supporting data and which actually go against the data.

Laughable. I never questioned the legitimacy of his statement and I never offered an opinion on said statement outside of thinking his point was "interesting." Furthermore, I did not present any information as fact. It was a simple comment, Sir.

I have no problem being proven wrong. I do, however, have a problem with being wrongfully accused simply b/c some folks lack reading comprehension skills and/or have an axe to grind.

[WhyteP38]

Laughable. I never questioned the legitimacy of his statement and I never offered an opinion on said statement outside of thinking his point was "interesting." Furthermore, I did not present any information as fact. It was a simple comment, Sir.

I have no problem being proven wrong. I do, however, have a problem with being wrongfully accused simply b/c some folks lack reading comprehension skills and/or have an axe to grind.

Ahem ... if you read through the ENTIRE thread, you'll discover at least 2 things: 1) What I was referring to:

Statements such as "rifles should not be used for self-defense" are illogical. Why not use a rifle for self-defense? If you say, "For me, I prefer a shotgun" without providing some hard data in support, that's okay, there's nothing wrong with having a preference, but it doesn't answer the question because you are giving a mere preference.

and 2) I obviously wasn't referring to you because you made none of the comments that I referred to.

I hope you take those two facts into consideration.

[Kmar40]

RT, interesting image.

Do you have the link to the original page still available?

[WhyteP38]

I recall seeing those images on the Federal ammo page, but I don't have a link.

[Brasky]

Ahem ... if you read through the ENTIRE thread, you'll discover at least 2 things:..."

If this is indeed the case, I sincerely apologize.

In my defense, however, the post immediately following mine cast a bad light on my response and the first paragraph of your reply, immediately following said reply and lacking a preceding quote to define or qualify it beyond the preceding post (whereas other quotes were sunsequently present in the body of text), led me to believe you were echoing his sentiments.

Again, if I was wrong to jump the gun, I own it and I am sorry.

[WhyteP38]

No worries.

Communications are rarely precise, and Internet forums and e-mail are relatively poor communication tools. Understanding should be the rule when people are honest about their intentions, such as yourself.

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Yea, the TAP does seem to fragment well, of course that's because it doesn't have to comply with the Hauge rules like the SMK does.

The 5.56mm TAP uses the 75gr T2 bullet, which is a 75gr open-tip match round like the Sierra. So it should be Hague compliant. I believe the .223 75gr TAP FPD also uses an open tip match round; but a different profile.

[Crosshair]

The 5.56mm TAP uses the 75gr T2 bullet, which is a 75gr open-tip match round like the Sierra. So it should be Hague compliant. I believe the .223 75gr TAP FPD also uses an open tip match round; but a different profile.

Yes but it was designed with a thin jacket that readily fragments IIRC. Much thinner than the SMK IIRC. I once saw a photo comparing the jacket thicknesses but I can't find it anymore. The argument could be made that it was designed from the start to expand.

All this gerrymandering with being Hauge compliant is one reason why I don't bother too much with those rounds. I go with something that is designed from the start to expand. That and the fact that my .223s are all 1-9" and slower.

I've heard good things about the Speer 70 grain Semi-Spitzer and thought about trying them out.

[stuffaknuckle]

Bartholomew roberts, when I posted:

"Im with mike38 on this. I dont believe that a rifle (other than a 12 guage) is the optimum weapon to use for defense."

I am thinking for home defense. Its alot easier to grab and to move a handgun around in your house in middle of the night than it is for a full sized rifle. Even then, the 12 guage is questionable for easy movement in doorways, or from room to room.

Just so were clear, I wasnt stating that a rifle a ISNT capable of self defense but that a pistol is a better option in a real life situation that most of us would find ourself in.

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Bartholomew roberts, when I posted:

"Im with mike38 on this. I dont believe that a rifle (other than a 12 guage) is the optimum weapon to use for defense."

I am thinking for home defense. Its alot easier to grab and to move a handgun around in your house in middle of the night than it is for a full sized rifle.

I'm not sure who you meant to respond to; but I didn't reply to you or address that subject at all; in part because it doesn't really have anything to do with the original poster's question.

[moshpit]

Bartholomew roberts, when I posted:

"Im with mike38 on this. I dont believe that a rifle (other than a 12 guage) is the optimum weapon to use for defense."

I am thinking for home defense. Its alot easier to grab and to move a handgun around in your house in middle of the night than it is for a full sized rifle. Even then, the 12 guage is questionable for easy movement in doorways, or from room to room.

Just so were clear, I wasnt stating that a rifle a ISNT capable of self defense but that a pistol is a better option in a real life situation that most of us would find ourself in.

Having weapons from all of the groups in question, I'm most comfortable with a carbine in home defense over any shotgun or handgun. CQB drill makes use of a carbine in tight confines almost second nature. A shotgun has too many issues that cancel it out and same with the handgun, at least with my style of defensive movement. This is ALL my personal preferences on the point though, and has already been said, is very subjective to remaining flexible to scenario requirements.

[44 AMP]

Taken at straight face value, the statement is obviously wrong. However, one needs to understand the reasoning behind the very poorly worded advice.

Obviously, when in gravest extreme, one uses what ever one has. But the intent of the advice is that a rifle should not be chosen as a personal defense firearm for most situations. And by most situations, what is meant is the defensive situations that apply to an ordinary civilian.

The rifle's size, power, and range make it better suited to offensive action than a shotgun or handgun. That's why we use them in combat. Pistols, shoguns, submachineguns, and machine guns have a place in combat, each one being better suited for some things than others. But combat is NOT personal defense.

I have a hard time coming up with a situation where a civilian would be justified shooting (defending) themselves at long range. And by long range, I mean 50yds or more. Even those of us who live way out in the country where we might shoot pests at long range would be hard pressed to justify shooting a human at that distance while claiming self defense. Those kinds of situations are so rare in the US as to be virtually non existant.

That is why, for personal defense, for the majority of us, a handgun or shotgun is the recommended choice. Forget Hollywood and the TV, real life means you can only shoot when your life is endangered. And that means close range.

Having a rifle is important. No question. If you ever are in one of the (currently) extremely rare situations where you need it, you will need it badly. However, chosing a rifle as your primary defensive arm (even a short carbine) is not the best choice. Now, if all you have is a rifle, or the local laws prevent you from having a pistol (or shotgun), then, by all means, learn it, so you can use it, at need. But you shouldn't choose the rifle as your sole means of defense if you can help it. There are better tools available, particularly if you are in an urban setting.

There is also one other reason our military uses FMJ, a practical one, seldom mentioned. It has nothing to do with the "wounding take 2-3 guys out of the fight" logic (which is generally flawed, anyway). It is the simple fact that under the worst conditions, FMJ feeds the best. Not so important today as it once was, but still a basic reality. For military use (not even remotely the same thing as civilian personal defense) FMJ works well enough, and functions as reliably as anything man made.

Besides, even though we didn't sign the Hague and Geneva accords, we, being the "good guys" abide by their strictures, by choice. Lately, we have even been considering abiding by their rules even more, as the restictions on ammo type apply only to "uniformed combatants of warring nations which are signatories to the accords". It is perfectly legal under the accords to shoot terrorists with hollowpoints!

[HorseSoldier]

Yes but it was designed with a thin jacket that readily fragments IIRC. Much thinner than the SMK IIRC. I once saw a photo comparing the jacket thicknesses but I can't find it anymore. The argument could be made that it was designed from the start to expand.

The international community seems to mostly be okay with the idea that soft point or real, true hollow point ammunition is against the rules, but anything with a full metal jacket on it -- be it OTM, or deliberately designed to or fragment immediately, or whatever else it's okay.

Which is reasonable, since if you think about it, any spitzer type bullet will tumble in tissue creating a more severe wound channel, so if everyone wanted to be 110% compliant with the true spirit of the Hague agreements we'd all still be shooting round nosed projectiles.