.223 best bang for the buck - Page 3

jetinteriorguy · December 8, 2024, 08:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shadow9mm

223 is NOT a "high powered" rifle cartridge, its intermediate at best. Personally I think its a great next step from the 22lr, the rifle itself it fairly light and handy, especially with iron sights, and the 223 has notoriously light recoil, sure its louder, but that's what ear protection is for.

You yourself said start them with a 22. Well they have ALREADY started with a 22, and are already comfortable with a 22. What would you recommend as a step up into the centerfire arena?

For the last 60 years of my life everyone I’ve ever known has understood a high powered rifle to be any cartridge not a rimfire. It’s used as a generic term, not necessarily a comparative term within the general category.

Shadow9mm · December 8, 2024, 10:32 AM

Can't say that anymore. I have never thought of it that way, granted i have only been around for 38 years.

Take a sec and think about the term "high powered rifle cartridge". It implies there are other power levels. To my understanding Intermediate came out around ww2, with the 30 carbine, and 8mm kurtz. Later on the 223 and 7.62x39, designed to be a stand in between the Sub machine gun and full on battle rifle. Thus intermediate rifle cartridge.

**44 AMP** · December 9, 2024, 02:40 AM

The "intermediate" class of military cartridges was developed during WWII. It essentially covered everything that was more powerful than the standard pistol cartridges but less powerful than the standard infantry rifle cartridges of the period.

The US created the .30 Carbine round, much more powerful than the .45acp pistol round and much less powerful than the .30-06. It was not actually originally intended to be a combat round, but something to give non combat troops more firepower and range than a pistol on those rare occasions when they needed it. The rifle was light, had a large magazine capacity, and performed acceptably well in most combat situations, particularly when supported by heavier longer ranged rounds when needed. It became very popular with the troops and was produced in huge numbers because it worked pretty well.

The Germans created the 7.92x33 (aka 8mm Kurz) and its rifles specifically for combat, but were restricted by a Hitler edict (made when they were winning) prohibiting development of new rifles and rounds as a waste of time and resources, so the early guns were only made in small quantities and identified as MaschinenPistole (MP) the German designation for submachine guns. By the time the Nazi govt recognized the advantages of the round and the new rifles and ordered mass production, it was too little, too late to affect the outcome of the war.

The Soviets created the 7.62x39 as a combat round with the full support of their govt, and it entered combat late in the war.

After the war, (and Korea) when the US went to the 7.62x51 NATO it was not an intermediate class round because it duplicated the ballistics of the GI .30-06, so it was considered a "full power" round.

when we created the 5.56mm it went into the intermediate power group because it was less than the full power rifle round and more than a pistol round.

In casual use, the term "high power rifle round" has historically meant centerfire rounds compared to rimfire rounds.

TO today's press everything more than a .22 LR is a "high power round".

For training children, the next step up from .22LR/.22WMR is the .22 Hornet, but its not a very practical choice, unless you reload for it, as the ammo has always been a niche round, is not terribly common and is quite expensive.

The .223 is a better choice, even though it is more powerful, the recoil is still pretty light (compared with larger rounds) and the ammo is everywhere and about as cheap as CF rifle rounds get.

jetinteriorguy · December 9, 2024, 06:08 AM

I think the reason for using the term High Powered rifle was probably more in reference to the difference in the affective range compared to rimfire ammunition. The need to be aware of where your bullet was going to end up from the standpoint of safe shooting is drastically different between center fire rifles and rimfire rifles due to the much longer ranges involved. Thus in comparison all center fire rifles were quite high vs. rimfire. I grew up in wide open fairly flat country and bullets could travel a long way so this concept was hammered into my head constantly from a very early age, safety first or no shooting for me.

December 8, 2024, 10:32 AM	#52
Shadow9mm Senior Member Join Date: March 21, 2012 Location: Indianapolis, IN Posts: 4,343	Can't say that anymore. I have never thought of it that way, granted i have only been around for 38 years. Take a sec and think about the term "high powered rifle cartridge". It implies there are other power levels. To my understanding Intermediate came out around ww2, with the 30 carbine, and 8mm kurtz. Later on the 223 and 7.62x39, designed to be a stand in between the Sub machine gun and full on battle rifle. Thus intermediate rifle cartridge. __________________ I don't believe in "range fodder" that is why I reload.

December 9, 2024, 02:40 AM	#53
44 AMP Staff Join Date: March 11, 2006 Location: Upper US Posts: 29,987	The "intermediate" class of military cartridges was developed during WWII. It essentially covered everything that was more powerful than the standard pistol cartridges but less powerful than the standard infantry rifle cartridges of the period. The US created the .30 Carbine round, much more powerful than the .45acp pistol round and much less powerful than the .30-06. It was not actually originally intended to be a combat round, but something to give non combat troops more firepower and range than a pistol on those rare occasions when they needed it. The rifle was light, had a large magazine capacity, and performed acceptably well in most combat situations, particularly when supported by heavier longer ranged rounds when needed. It became very popular with the troops and was produced in huge numbers because it worked pretty well. The Germans created the 7.92x33 (aka 8mm Kurz) and its rifles specifically for combat, but were restricted by a Hitler edict (made when they were winning) prohibiting development of new rifles and rounds as a waste of time and resources, so the early guns were only made in small quantities and identified as MaschinenPistole (MP) the German designation for submachine guns. By the time the Nazi govt recognized the advantages of the round and the new rifles and ordered mass production, it was too little, too late to affect the outcome of the war. The Soviets created the 7.62x39 as a combat round with the full support of their govt, and it entered combat late in the war. After the war, (and Korea) when the US went to the 7.62x51 NATO it was not an intermediate class round because it duplicated the ballistics of the GI .30-06, so it was considered a "full power" round. when we created the 5.56mm it went into the intermediate power group because it was less than the full power rifle round and more than a pistol round. In casual use, the term "high power rifle round" has historically meant centerfire rounds compared to rimfire rounds. TO today's press everything more than a .22 LR is a "high power round". For training children, the next step up from .22LR/.22WMR is the .22 Hornet, but its not a very practical choice, unless you reload for it, as the ammo has always been a niche round, is not terribly common and is quite expensive. The .223 is a better choice, even though it is more powerful, the recoil is still pretty light (compared with larger rounds) and the ammo is everywhere and about as cheap as CF rifle rounds get. __________________ All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

December 9, 2024, 06:08 AM	#54
jetinteriorguy Senior Member Join Date: April 28, 2013 Posts: 3,389	I think the reason for using the term High Powered rifle was probably more in reference to the difference in the affective range compared to rimfire ammunition. The need to be aware of where your bullet was going to end up from the standpoint of safe shooting is drastically different between center fire rifles and rimfire rifles due to the much longer ranges involved. Thus in comparison all center fire rifles were quite high vs. rimfire. I grew up in wide open fairly flat country and bullets could travel a long way so this concept was hammered into my head constantly from a very early age, safety first or no shooting for me.