Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Posted: 4/4/2006 11:11:18 AM EST
[Last Edit: 4/4/2006 11:16:23 AM EST by Rkbarms2k]
Has anyone ever done or seen any wet newspaper, water-filled milk jug, or "Box-o-truth" type tests performed with a ~7.5 inch bbl?

I know there've been a lot of people who have posted information about 223/5.56's inability to perform effectively at any appreciable distance when fired from such a short barrel, but is there any actual, tested, empirical data available?

I don't pretend to say that anyone who's spoken on the issue in the past on this forum or others is wrong; I would just like to see some actual numbers and pictures of various recovered rounds, fired at various distances. I'd do it myself, but I don't really have an appropriate facility to conduct the test; probably just as well, because I'd need ammo donations from all the members here in order to pull it off his
Thanks.

Rk
Link Posted: 4/4/2006 4:24:01 PM EST
The ballistics are covered HERE.

The bullet selection is up to you. I never understood why people want to argue about fragmentation velocities for ball ammo. Unless you are restricted by the Geneva Convention, why shoot FMJ's? Why depend on a non-expanding bullet to break up?

Use just about any off-the-shelf expanding ammo out of a short 5.56, and you will get good terminal performance. If a 62 grain WW Power Point will tear the shit out of a coyote at 400 yards, it will do the same tissue damage at 200 from an 8 incher...

All you really lose is maximum effective range.


Lem
Link Posted: 4/4/2006 6:16:03 PM EST
Lem,

Good points, all. i think I'm with you.
Thanks for the link.

Rk
Link Posted: 4/5/2006 4:48:18 AM EST
I did some phone book testing on my blog www.anathema-incarnate.blogspot.com

Short answer: from my testing, 55 grain doesn't fragment (big surprise, right?)

70+ grain bullets do.

I have pictures of rounds fired at roughly 25M

http://anathema-incarnate.blogspot.com/2005_06_01_anathema-incarnate_archive.html
Link Posted: 4/13/2006 5:39:41 PM EST
bigcraig,

I can't believe I didn't see this until now.

Thanks for the link to your experiment. Well done.

Have you done any more tests since this one? At different distances, ammo, etc?

Take care,
Rk
Link Posted: 4/13/2006 9:29:56 PM EST
No, I haven't really tested anything else, this answered the main question for me, as far as fragmentation. The only other concern I have is penetration depth. I might have to do another test comparing the two.

Milk Jugs anyone?
Link Posted: 4/14/2006 5:20:57 AM EST
Sounds good.

So, phone books give a rough approximation of expansion and water-filled jugs approximate penetration?

Link Posted: 4/14/2006 8:51:23 AM EST
Tag

Link Posted: 4/14/2006 1:45:58 PM EST
I didn't really pick phone books over jugs to test one thing or another. I just had more phone books laying around...
Link Posted: 4/14/2006 4:35:44 PM EST
I see. I guess I read to far into that one.
Anyway, let us know if you ever get the chance to do more tests.

Thanks again,
Rk
Top Top