AR15.Com Archives
 Is the AK round 7.62x39 more powerful than .223?
gunsforever  [Member]
4/6/2008 11:23:01 AM EST
Simple question
Paid Advertisement
--
BB  [Member]
4/6/2008 11:27:26 AM EST
Yes
Brett_Bass  [Member]
4/6/2008 11:28:50 AM EST
Powerful as in...? The .223 Rem. has a higher muzzle velocity than the 7.62x39mm Soviet round, but the latter bullet weighs about twice as much. You'll need to be more specific, methinks.
Combat_Jack  [Team Member]
4/6/2008 11:45:00 AM EST
Less effective on people, more effective on game animals.
GaryM  [Member]
4/6/2008 12:49:39 PM EST
Hits poppers a lot harder but I wouldn't want to be hit with either.
As a matter of fact I prefer hunting with the .223 over 7.62x39. (Deer that is)
mrnuke7175  [Member]
4/6/2008 5:09:36 PM EST
Better penetration on barriers, yes. Better terminal performance, possibly.
AngeredKabar  [Member]
4/6/2008 5:45:19 PM EST
They are both capable of dropping someone where they stand if you hit them in the right place, as is the same with any ammunition.

Pulling up some tables, the 5.56 has 200 less Joules of energy than the 7.62x39.

Caliber: Bullet wieght (grams): Muzzle velocity (m/s): Joules

5,56x45: 3,56 (3,95 SS109): 1005: 1798

7,62x39: 7,9: 710: 1991
briansmithwins  [Team Member]
4/6/2008 6:18:55 PM EST
Power as in putting bad peeps down: depends.

Most 7.62x39 ball will tend to punch holes thru pepeole. If it hits bone or vital organs people tend to go down. If it doesn't, they may or may not drop. M67 ball was designed to transfer more energy and MAY be more effective than M43 ball.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.62x39

M193 and M855 tend to fragment at close range when the velocities are higher. This leads to total energy transfer and a greater chance that the fragments will hit bones or vital organs. Past the fragmentation velocity, 5.56 NATO also tends to make thru-and-thru holes, just like 7.62x39.
www.ammo-oracle.com/

BSW
Schulze  [Team Member]
4/6/2008 7:13:33 PM EST

Originally Posted By gunsforever:
Simple question


Yes. And 7.62 is much more fun as a "plinking" round.
Stumps  [Team Member]
4/6/2008 9:00:50 PM EST
7.62 is more powerful
Hoppy  [Team Member]
4/6/2008 11:46:11 PM EST
Define "powerful".
brasidas  [Member]
4/7/2008 7:29:21 AM EST
The 7.62x39 has about 1550 ft/lbs of energy; the .223 has about 1300. So the Russian round has a little more power when it hits. That does not necessarily indicate that one is more effective than the other.
rigger7  [Member]
4/7/2008 7:41:32 AM EST
Hey you are Fuc*^D either way! and all you have to do is aim center of mass.
Sorry simple answer
SpacemanSpiff  [Member]
4/7/2008 7:48:29 AM EST
it has more energy and momentum, but the 5.56mm produces far more damaging wounds in flesh.
so, yes and no.

M43 7.62x39 in particular has poor performance, while M193 5.56mm produces very nasty wounds.

Anthony346  [Member]
4/7/2008 9:19:51 AM EST

it has more energy and momentum, but the 5.56mm produces far more damaging wounds in flesh.
so, yes and no.

M43 7.62x39 in particular has poor performance, while M193 5.56mm produces very nasty wounds.


Hmm, I've seen gel pictures that show various 7.62x39 rounds all doing fairly well.

Anyway, I wouldn't want to be hit by either. I like the 7.62x39 more because it penetrates a lot better, but realistically they are pretty equal on the "lethality" scale.
SnakeLogan  [Member]
4/7/2008 3:24:59 PM EST
7.62x39 is quite a bit more powerful than 223. That said, it depends on you're target. 223 would work better on a Paris Hilton, 7.62x39 on a Michael Moore.
Balisong5  [Member]
4/7/2008 4:14:24 PM EST
7.62x39 = 45ACP

.223 = 9MM

Nuff said.
Balisong  [Member]
4/7/2008 4:26:31 PM EST

Originally Posted By SnakeLogan:
7.62x39 is quite a bit more powerful than 223. That said, it depends on you're target. 223 would work better on a Paris Hilton, 7.62x39 on a Michael Moore.



I'm not sure even a .50BMG would work on that lardy piece of shit though.
Dawg180  [Member]
4/7/2008 8:13:21 PM EST

Originally Posted By rigger7:
Hey you are Fuc*^D either way! and all you have to do is aim center of mass.
Sorry simple answer


Strangely, this is probably the most concise answer of all. For all the math, a well placed shot from either will drop you like a sack of potatoes. A poorly placed shot from either will not.

The 7.62x39 has more energy, but bullet construction has a lot to do with terminal performance on meat targets.

I do know that 7.62 makes bowling pins jump a lot more than 5.56 or 5.45!
SpacemanSpiff  [Member]
4/8/2008 5:18:20 AM EST

Originally Posted By Anthony346:
Hmm, I've seen gel pictures that show various 7.62x39 rounds all doing fairly well.


Care to share those?
M4DS  [Member]
4/8/2008 3:22:10 PM EST
Fuck 7.62x39, go 7.62x51 NATO. Better yet, 6.5 Grendel.
Gr8Santini  [Member]
4/8/2008 4:08:53 PM EST
I used to work with a former Marine sniper who routinely made head shots at two miles with his .50 that fired rounds that only dropped two inches at two miles. He said the 7.62 X 39 is the most devastating round on the planet. Sad thing is, many of our co-workers believed all his BS.
GunDisaster  [Member]
4/8/2008 4:44:38 PM EST
I like the 5.56mm for shooting indoors because of lack of penatration. However for shooting at cars i like the 7.62x39mm beter since i want penatration. For shooting at body armor i want 5.56mm because it will go through it. For accuracy and range i like 5.56mm. Of course 7.62x51mm beats them both and does it all well except for the lack of penatration part of course.
Ndenway  [Team Member]
4/8/2008 5:06:20 PM EST
check this site out and punch in the numbers:
www.hornady.com/ballistics/hits_calculator.php


basic 55gr .224 @3200fps got 276 hit points;

basic 123gr .310 @2300fps got 518 hit points.
ziarifleman  [Team Member]
4/8/2008 5:17:43 PM EST
Mk262 looks like it does a bit better.

It does waaay better past 300 yards, too.
Combat_Jack  [Team Member]
4/16/2008 11:39:44 PM EST

Originally Posted By Ndenway:
check this site out and punch in the numbers:
www.hornady.com/ballistics/hits_calculator.php


basic 55gr .224 @3200fps got 276 hit points;

basic 123gr .310 @2300fps got 518 hit points.


Hit points? What the fuck?
ARmory04  [Member]
4/17/2008 1:54:45 AM EST

Originally Posted By SpacemanSpiff:

Originally Posted By Anthony346:
Hmm, I've seen gel pictures that show various 7.62x39 rounds all doing fairly well.


Care to share those?





Try www.brassfetcher.com


Nothing but gel tests there. Pretty good info with pics.
the_ak_kid  [Team Member]
4/17/2008 10:17:56 AM EST

Originally Posted By Ndenway:
check this site out and punch in the numbers:
www.hornady.com/ballistics/hits_calculator.php


basic 55gr .224 @3200fps got 276 hit points;

basic 123gr .310 @2300fps got 518 hit points.


165 grains
@ 2850 FPS
.308" diameter


1167 hit points.

FreeManDan  [Member]
4/17/2008 12:59:05 PM EST
Get both
Paid Advertisement
--