|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
May 18, 2018, 01:51 PM | #51 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 24, 2012
Location: Parker, CO
Posts: 4,594
|
Statistical relevance is just a numbers game.
Police shoot several thousand people every year. If you are conservative, you can go with a few hundred are shot with a 5.56 rifle. Now you may be able to dig up specific numbers, nut I have niether the time nor the inclination to do so. But a few hundred people over the course of several years is plenty data for relevance. Sheesh, I still haven't seen proper counter data. Claiming someone isn't producing enough evidence for their position, while likewise not providing relevant data and evidence yourself... There is a word for that. Combat is not home defense, is not police use... There is no bullet that the military can legally field with active duty members that can perform as well as ammo available to the civilian market. The military is constrained, so designs have to meet certain criteria, and be designed to work in a variety of situations and ranges... Police and civilians have only one scenario they really need to consider... Terminal performance on unarmored targets inside 50yds. Police may have other scenarios that crop up, but that is the primary focus most of the time. Apple and orange comparisons are invalid. Military combat experience means Jack in civilian HD ammo selection. |
May 18, 2018, 05:22 PM | #52 | |
Junior member
Join Date: October 20, 2012
Posts: 5,854
|
Quote:
Same for shotguns as well. But I recall one video where an officer emptied his shotgun (4 round 870 police) at a barricaded suspect and when empty he threw the shotgun on the ground, reduced to a paperweight. An AR would have had 26 more shots to go. |
|
May 18, 2018, 05:45 PM | #53 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 24, 2012
Location: Parker, CO
Posts: 4,594
|
Plenty of body can footage that shows the effectiveness of proper round selection.
|
May 23, 2018, 11:33 AM | #54 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: January 13, 2018
Posts: 1,321
|
Quote:
Quote:
Yes, it was very tempting to take a much lower road with these statements, LOL!!! Here is some of the results from the Small Arms Conference.... You simply cannot fit all of DoD acquisitions into one mold or generalization. You can say the Tier 1 units are the most focused on the needs of the warfighter and nothing else. As Col. Beckwith once said in reply to Army Bean counters discussing the budget of a new unit, "This isn't General Mills and we are not making Corn Flakes." The lethality studies are on-going and so far no "wonder bullet" has surfaced that can overcome the physics of a varmint round that is illegal in many states to be used for Deer Hunting being asked to produce consistent one round incapacitation of a human being. |
||
May 23, 2018, 12:52 PM | #55 | |
member
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,462
|
You aren’t going to get consistent one round incapacitation on a human being from anything remotely man portable. I’ve seen a shoat run after being shot with a .50 BMG at less than 200yds.
Expecting that level of performance is unrealistic. Also, the yellow highlighted part is horsehockey. COTS 5.56mm ammo isn’t yaw dependent. M855 is. Not only is that a significant difference, , the same PM-MAS presenter (Lt. Col. Woods) even agrees that lack of yaw dependency is a benefit of M855A1 over M855 in the presentation be gives the year after that one. In any case, the takeaway message should be the “shot placement matters” message. Quote:
Last edited by Bartholomew Roberts; May 23, 2018 at 01:56 PM. |
|
May 23, 2018, 01:15 PM | #56 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 24, 2012
Location: Parker, CO
Posts: 4,594
|
"Commercially available 5.56 rounds"
Those are just surplus 5.56 or made using the same components. I have never personally seen a soft point 5.56, or a vmax loaded into a 5.56... Got any data showing exactly what was used in the testing? I have a very hard time believing 855 (not 855A1) is as lethal as a 223 62gr softpoint, at all practical ranges. (0-300yds) In the end, military personnel will always complain about their gear. And they tend to look at the enemies gear with awe or admiration. Maybe not all gear, but certainly the rifles and ammo... Maybe systems like the RPG... As they see them be effective. It's human nature to focus mostly on the negative... Their bullets kill our guys. (forgetting when they don't) Our bullets don't kill them. (Ignoring when they do) If we used 7.62x39, our guys would complain that it suck major at 300yds and beyond, due to poor ballistics... Or they would come up with some other complaint. 7.62x39 isn't magic bullet, niether is 308/7.62... heck or any others available now. All have strengths and weaknesses... Compromises and trade offs. It's the nature of small arms ammo design. Last edited by marine6680; May 23, 2018 at 01:28 PM. |
May 23, 2018, 01:34 PM | #57 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 2, 2013
Posts: 975
|
|
May 23, 2018, 01:42 PM | #58 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 24, 2012
Location: Parker, CO
Posts: 4,594
|
Maybe... But they have horrible max effective range.
And the collateral damage to your home would be horrendous. |
May 23, 2018, 01:48 PM | #59 | |
member
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,462
|
Quote:
|
|
May 23, 2018, 02:30 PM | #60 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 15, 2010
Posts: 8,235
|
Why are we still talking military ammunition? Military ammunition isn’t suitable for home defense or hunting. It will kill, but it’s not ideal.
|
May 23, 2018, 02:35 PM | #61 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 24, 2012
Location: Parker, CO
Posts: 4,594
|
They may run, but they cease to post a direct threat at that point. So pretty much instant incapacitation in that sense.
|
May 23, 2018, 03:46 PM | #62 | |||||
Senior Member
Join Date: January 13, 2018
Posts: 1,321
|
Quote:
You really think that? COTS - Commercial Off The Shelf means just that..... The latest and greatest "most lethal" wonder bullet being produced..... Quote:
Alaska- centerfire Alberta- .23 and up centerfire Arizona- centerfire Arkansas- .22 and up centerfire California- centerfire Colorado- .24 and up, 70grn or larger bullet/ minimum of 1000ft/lbs at 100 yards Connecticut- .243 and up if legal in your area Delaware- shotgun/muzzle loader Florida- centerfire Georgia- .22 and up centerfire Hawaii- Any rifle with at least 1200 ft/lbs of ME. This would start at around .223 I think Idaho- Centerfire (cannot weigh more than 16 lbs?) Illinois- Shotgun/ML/Pistol only Indiana- Rifles with pistol calibers/shotgun/ML/Pistols Iowa- .24 or larger centerfire only for antlerless season in part of the state. Kansas- .23 or larger centerfire (actually says larger than .23 so maybe .24 is the mininum) kentucky- centerfire Louisiana- .22 and up centerfire Maine- .22 magnum rimfire and up! Manitoba- Centerfire, but it says .23 and below not recommended. Does not say illegal though. Maryland- ME of at least 1200 ft/lbs Mass- Shotgun/ML Michigan- centerfire in certain areas Minnesota- .24 and up centerfire Mississippi- No restrictions that I could find Missouri- centerfire Montana- No restrictions Nebraska- Rifles with 900 ft/lbs or more at 100 yards Nevada- .22 centerfire and up New Hampshire- centerfire New Jersey- shotgun only New Mexico- centerfire New York- centerfire North Carolina- No restrictions North Dakota- .22-.49 centerfire Nova Scotia- .23 and up Ohio- Shotgun/ML Oklahoma- centerfire with 55 grn or heavier bullet Ontario- centerfire Oregon- .22 centerfire and up Pennsylvania- centerfire Quebec- 6mm/.243 and up Rhode Island- shotgun/ML Saskatchewan- .24 and up South Carolina- centerfire South Dakota- rifles with 1,000 ft/lbs or more ME Tennessee- centerfire Texas- centerfire Utah- centerfire vermont- No restriction Virginia- .23 centerfire and up Washington- .24 centerfire and up West Virginia- .25 rimfire and up and all centerfire Wisconsin- .22 centerfire and up Wyoming- .23 centerfire and up https://www.huntingnet.com/forum/whi...ers-state.html Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||||
May 23, 2018, 03:49 PM | #63 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 13, 2018
Posts: 1,321
|
Quote:
Yeah but we can do better than an average of 8 rounds required to put them out of the fight. |
|
May 23, 2018, 03:54 PM | #64 |
Junior Member
Join Date: May 21, 2018
Posts: 9
|
|
May 23, 2018, 04:52 PM | #65 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 24, 2012
Location: Parker, CO
Posts: 4,594
|
Ok... Well...
What loads did they test? They specifically said commercial 5.56 ammo... Not commercial 223 ammo. And I still haven't seen any 62gr softpoint 5.56 in the store, let alone ballistic topped vmax in 5.56 spec loadings. |
May 23, 2018, 05:05 PM | #66 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 12, 2009
Location: Athens, Georgia
Posts: 2,525
|
The study didn't find a significant difference between 5.56 rounds in CQB lethality, whether they were COTS, M855, M193 or other. The study also didn't find any difference using 7.62 M80 ball fired from an M14.
link: The specific values of the chart are not meaningful; what is meaningful is the fact that all of the rounds act in the same band of performance. Interestingly, the one 7.62mm round that received the full evaluation, the M80 fired from the M14 rifle, performed in the same band of performance, which would indicate that for M80 ammunition at least there appears to be no benefit to the larger caliber at close quarters range. Your study does emphasize the importance of yaw in bullet performance: Shot placement aside, why is it that some Soldiers report “through and-through” hits while others report no such problems, despite using the same weapons and ammunition? The phenomenon of bullet yaw can explain such differences in performance. Good commercial ammunition isn't yaw dependent. If your study can't find a performance differences between 7.62 ball, various military 5.56 rounds and commercial off the shelf 5.56 rounds but can find a difference between m855 ball that impacts at a high yaw angle and m855 ball that impacts at a low angle, I'd say it isn't a very good study. |
May 23, 2018, 05:34 PM | #67 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 15, 2010
Posts: 8,235
|
I give up lol.
.223 won’t kill anything bigger than a squirrel. Quote:
|
|
May 23, 2018, 06:13 PM | #68 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 3,082
|
Actually mine is a 300 Blackout AR pistol loaded with 110 grain supersonics.
__________________
Retired Law Enforcement U. S. Army Veteran Armorer My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon. |
May 23, 2018, 06:27 PM | #69 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 3,082
|
Quote:
The problem is finding one that works within a wider variety of variables, in that, the 62/64 grain bonded SP is superior.
__________________
Retired Law Enforcement U. S. Army Veteran Armorer My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon. |
|
May 23, 2018, 06:27 PM | #70 |
Staff in Memoriam
Join Date: November 13, 1998
Location: Terlingua, TX; Thomasville, GA
Posts: 24,798
|
The ineffectiveness of the .223 was exemplified by the lack of fatalities in Wash DC and in Las Vegas?
|
May 23, 2018, 06:28 PM | #71 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 31, 2002
Location: Deep in the Heart of the Lone Star State (TX)
Posts: 2,169
|
Quote:
Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk |
|
May 23, 2018, 06:39 PM | #72 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 15, 2010
Posts: 8,235
|
You know Art, some just don’t get it. I’m throwing in the towel on this one.
|
May 23, 2018, 06:46 PM | #73 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 24, 2012
Location: Parker, CO
Posts: 4,594
|
Nanuk...
You are not saying anything that refutes what I said though. Sure, those rounds can work well under good conditions. But even then, they are not going to out perform a quality commercial load. At best they may be equal... When they work. But due to their being more particular for optimum performance, a round that is more forgiving in when it performs well, is superior. It's a choice between works well some of the time, and works well most of the time... You said it yourself when you say that finding something that works under a wider set of conditions is better. Maybe I was being a bit simplistic in my previous statement, but I never meant it as that those rounds were not effective in any conditions. As far as several states... Which seems to be the significant minority... Not thinking 223 is deer hunting worthy... So what... Since when are a bunch of beurocrats ballistic experts... Also, many of these laws have been on the books for a long time, and ammo development has come a long way. Many many hunters every year drop deer and large pigs with single shots from a 223. While deer and pigs are not a perfect human analog, they do tend to be in a similar weight range and chest cavity size of an average adult man... These hunters prove time and time again that a good bullet, placed in the right area, will drop a 150-200lb critter effectively. Last edited by marine6680; May 23, 2018 at 06:57 PM. |
May 23, 2018, 06:53 PM | #74 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 1, 2010
Location: Tampa Bay
Posts: 4,556
|
Compact, semi-auto 12 ga. with 00 buckshot.
People that aren't trained, are more than not likely to miss critical shot placement by a mile under stress. Shotty is much more likely to end the the threat. Size of the hole(s), does matter...
__________________
Remington 700/Savage Rebarreling /Action Blueprinting 07 FFL /Mosin-Nagant Custom Shop/Bent Bolts Genuine Cerakote Applicator www.biggorillagunworks.com |
May 23, 2018, 06:59 PM | #75 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 4, 2013
Location: Western slope of Colorado
Posts: 3,678
|
Quote:
is NOBODY shoots that long a barrel or that slow a twist anymore. 10.5” 1/7’s are the norm now and that bullet does not yaw and fragment like it should at slower velocities and more spin. M855 is WORSE yet. Like has been said a bunch of times....no current Military load will perform as good as a commercial SP/ ballistic tip 223 round in stopping people |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|