Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
The AR15.Com Ammo Oracle

History and Basic Design of .223 and 5.56 Ammunition.

Performance of .223 and 5.56 Ammunition.

Terminal Performance of .223 and 5.56 Ammunition.

.223 and 5.56 Ammunition Testing

Selection of .223 and 5.56 Ammunition.

Ammunition recommendations from the authors of the AR15.com Ammo-Oracle.

Purchase and Storage of .223 and 5.56 Ammunition.

Legal questions.

Miscellaneous .223, 5.56 and Other Ammunition Questions.

Ammo Oracle

Q. You people are a bunch of (Fackler worshippers/idiots/jello fans/armchair theorists/mindless fools). How in the world can you expect me to believe (insert Ammo-Oracle answer here)? You have all lost touch with the working man shooter with your lofty theories and ivory tower "science." I know for a fact that my super special homemade round will tear up badguys because it tears up potroast like there is no tomorrow. Why should I believe anything on here?

We have a standing rule here at the Ammo Oracle. We have spent hundreds of collective hours bringing together the most up to date knowledge, theory and practical evidence about ballistics we could. If you disagree with a given entry here try to remember that we generally don't put anything on here unless there have been more than a dozen shots, tests, or confirmed incidents to support it.

Most of the theory and or testing you find here has been repeated over and over by the likes of the FBI Firearms Training Unit. Much of this work has been validated PERSONALLY by the Ammunition mods (just in case the FBI got it wrong). If you find an error in anything we have written you need only point it out and provide evidence to support the fact that we made a mistake and we will not only change it, but we will give you credit.

We are only ever, have only ever been, interested in discovering what rounds work best for self defense and how these rounds interact with our rifles and two-legged monsters. We have no interests in any particular brand, company, manufacturer, etc. We hold no shares, gain no benefit from the sale of one round or another. Because ballistics are often counter-intuitive, marketing professionals (and more than a few marketing novices) are apt to take advantage of the widespread ignorance of the public when selling their wares. When assessing the claims of others be sure to ask the same questions of their interests.

Be this as it may, we are constantly amazed at how many people think they are the first person to come up with the idea of making a bullet out of (tungsten, aluminum, uranium, birdshot, RDX or water) and grow upset with us when we point out they aren't as clever as they thought they were. We are often accused of being inflexible or unwilling to accept change. Nothing could be father from the truth. We would LOVE to be presented with a magic bullet that penetrates only the barriers that bad guys hide behind, damages only sinful tissue and turns instantly inert when striking innocents. To date the offerings have been slim, but we are still looking.

By the same token we are highly unlikely to take a random "I heard from my friend, who is a (SEAL, Ranger, Delta guy, snake eater, FBI agent) that..." submission very seriously or be impressed by how many pork roasts or milk jugs filled with banana cream you can explode with this "cool new round." Science takes time, but this is why it is an excellent predictor.

In the end, we can only lead the horses to water, we cannot make them drink.

How thirsty are you?

Top Top