Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 8/14/2005 3:56:48 AM EDT
I hope this is not a dupe if it is please delete

15 June 2004

The Last “Big Lie” of Vietnam Kills U. S. Soldiers in Iraq

By: Maj. Anthony F. Milavic, USMC (Ret.)
2118 Green Watch Way #200
Reston, VA 20191-2426
703-620-1117
MAJUSMCRET@aol.com

=========================================

At a Vietnam Special Forces base during 1964, I watched a U. S. soldier fire 15 rounds of .223 caliber ammunition into a tethered goat from an AR-15 rifle; moments after the last round hit, the goat fell over. Looking at the dead goat, I saw many little bullet entry-holes on one side; and when we turned him over, I saw many little bullet exit-holes on the other side. Over time, those observations were confirmed and reconfirmed revealing that the stories we were told on the lethality of the .223 caliber cartridge were fabrications. Those false reports drove the adoption of the .223 caliber cartridge as the 5.56mm NATO cartridge and, ever since, Americans have been sent to war with a cartridge deficient in combat lethality; a deficiency that has recently caused the deaths of U.S. soldiers in Iraq.

What is efficient combat lethality? The book Black Hawk Down quotes SFC Paul Howe’s description of SFC Randy Shughart, a soldier who elected to carry the 7.62mm M-14 into the urban battlefield of Somalia in 1993 rather than the 5.56mm CAR-15 (M-16-variant):

“His rifle may have been heavier and comparatively awkward and delivered a mean recoil, but it damn sure knocked a man down with one bullet, and in combat, one shot was all you got. You shoot a guy, you want to see him go down; you don't want to be guessing for the next five hours whether you hit him, or whether he's still waiting for you in the weeds.”

With the wisdom of a combat veteran, Howe describes the lethality necessary for a cartridge in combat—one-round knockdown power.



How did we get from military cartridges with proven one-round knockdown power such as the 30-06 and 7.62mm to the 5.56mm? The journey starts with the term “tumbling.” This term has been associated with the .223 cal./5.56mm cartridge since early in its marketing as a potential military cartridge to this day. The very word, tumbling, prompts images of a bullet traveling end over end through the human body in 360-degree loops: In reality, it does not. Dr. Martin L. Fackler, COL., USA (Ret.) served as a surgeon in Vietnam during 1968 and, subsequently, pursued the research of terminal ballistics by observing the effects of bullets fired into blocks of ballistic gelatin. In “Wounding patterns for military rifle bullets,” he reports the observation that “all” non-deforming pointed bullets—this included the 30-06 and 7.62mm military full-metal jacket bullets-- “yawed” 180 degrees while passing through the gelatin to exit base-forward; i.e., heaviest end forward. The 5.56mm projectile acted in the same manner with a very precise exception: These rounds “yawed” to 90-degrees, and then fragmented at their weakened serrated band (cannelure) into two or more pieces when fired into ballistic gelatin. However, the 5.56mm projectile does NOT always yaw or fragment. Under field conditions, the probability of these effects is reduced by the following factors:

--The round strikes the target at less than 2700 feet per second. That
velocity is reduced by: the farther the range to the target, the greater
reduction in velocity; shortened weapon barrel length as is the case with
the shorter M-4 carbine; and/or, manufacturing variances in the
cartridge.

--Variances in human body thickness and flesh density and consistency.

In those cases, the bullet neither yaws nor fragments and causes only a pencil size hole through the body; i.e., small hole in, small hole out. Neither Dr. Fackler nor anyone else has provided any empirical data or estimate on the incidence of the 5.56mm yaw/fragment effect on enemy soldiers. Conversely, since first used by Americans in combat there has been a consistent observation from the field—enemy soldiers continue to fire their weapons after being hit by multiple 5.56mm bullets; evidently, no yaw/fragment effect. Nevertheless, the term “tumble” was apparently derived from idealized yaw action and, as suggested by the following, was chosen in lieu of the word yaw because it would “sell” better.

The book, The Black Rifle, M16 Retrospective by Edward C. Ezell and R. Blake Stevens, “ . . . is, so far as [the authors] could make it so, the truth about the controversial 5.56mm caliber AR-15 (M16)—what it is, what it is not, where it came from, and why.” Edward C. Ezell, Ph.D., now deceased, was the Curator/Supervisor of the Division of Armed Forces History, National Museum of American History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC and the editor of perhaps the world’s most famous gun book, Small Arms of the World. The Black Rifle contains one of the earliest characterizations that the .223 cal. bullet tumbled in a brochure produced by Colt’s Patent Fire Arms Manufacturing Company, Inc. The caption written by the book’s authors reads, “From the first Colt AR-15 brochure, produced in a desperate attempt to interest somebody – anybody - in the merits of the AR-15’s ‘unmatched superiority.’” In one of the three internal brochure illustrations is text reading, in part, “On impact the tumbling action of the .223 caliber ammunition increases effectiveness.”

In 1961, Colt’s did get somebody’s attention. The Advanced Research Project Agency (ARPA) of the Department of Defense (DoD) was enjoined by the Kennedy administration to explore how the United States could support a foreign ally in a “limited” war. In the spring of 1961, ARPA’s Project AGILE was implemented to supply “research and engineering support for the military and paramilitary forces engaged in or threatened by conflict in remote areas of the world.” In October of 1961, ARPA provided ten Colt’s AR-15’s to Vietnamese Forces in Saigon to conduct a limited test. The Black Rifle remarks of this test, “The number of rifles might have been small, but the enthusiastic reaction of the Vietnamese and their American advisors alike who handled and fired the AR-15s was just as [Colt’s marketing agent] had predicted.” Armed with these positive results, ARPA succeeded in expanding the Project AGILE study by procuring 1,000 AR-15s for distribution among select Vietnamese units for field-testing. Ezell & Stevens write that this approval resulted in “ . . . saving Colt’s from almost sure financial disaster and also setting the stage for the most influential yet controversial document so far in the history of the already controversial AR-15.”

The purpose of this test, as set forth in, ARPA, “Report of Task 13A, Test of ArmaLite Rifle, AR-15,” dated 31 July 1962, was “ . . . a comparison between the AR-15 and the M2 Carbine to determine which is a more suitable replacement for shoulder weapons in selected units of the Republic of Vietnam Armed Forces (RVNAF).” The Project AGILE results were summed up, in part, by ARPA as follows: “The suitability of the AR-15 as the basic shoulder weapon for the Vietnamese has been established. For the type of conflict now occurring in Vietnam, the weapon was also found by its users and by MAAG advisors to be superior in virtually all respects to the M1 Rifle, M1 and M2 Carbines, Thompson Sub-Machine Gun, and Browning Automatic Rifle.” NOTE: This study and its recommendations concerned the suitability of the AR-15 for Vietnamese soldiers, who were described by the testers to be of “small stature, body configuration and light weight,” NOT larger stature United States soldiers.

In any case, the report was widely read and some of its components came under serious question, especially those purporting to describe the demonstrated lethality of the .223 caliber cartridge. The following are three such examples from the Project AGILE report:

Example 1. “On 160900 June, one platoon from the 340 Ranger company was on a ground operation . . . and contacted 3 armed VC in heavily forested jungle.. . . At a distance of approximately 15 meters, one Ranger fired an AR-15 full automatic hitting one VC with 3 rounds with the first burst. One round in the head took it completely off. Another in the right arm, took it completely off. One round hit him in the right side, causing a hole about 5 inches in diameter.. . . (Rangers)”

Example 2. “On 9 June a Ranger Platoon from the 40th Infantry Regt. Was given the mission of ambushing an estimated VC Company.. . .

Number of VC killed: 5 [Descriptions of the one-round killing wounds follow.]

1. Back wound, which caused the thoracic cavity to explode.
2. Stomach wound, which caused the abdominal cavity to explode.
3. Buttock wound, which destroyed all tissue of both buttocks.
4. Chest wound from right to left; destroyed the thoracic cavity.
5. Heel wound; the projectile entered the bottom of the right foot causing the leg to split from the foot to the hip.

These deaths were inflicted by the AR-15 and all were instantaneous except the buttock wound. He lived approximately five minutes. (7th Infantry Division)”

Example 3. “On 13 April, a Special Forces team made a raid on a small village. In the raid, seven VC were killed. Two were killed by AR-15 fire. Range was 50 meters. One man was hit in the head; it looked like it exploded. A second man was hit in the chest, his back was one big hole. (VN Special Forces)”

The above “field-reports” are incredulous on their face and some in DoD requested that these results be duplicated scientifically. The Army Wound Ballistics Laboratory at Edgewood Arsenal attempted to do just that. Using .223 caliber Remington ammunition provided by Colt’s representative, they conducted their “standard lethality trials that consisted of measuring the cavitational and other effects of firing at known distances into blocks of ballistic gelatin, and where necessary, anaesthetized goats.” They failed to duplicate the explosive effects reported by Project AGILE. In November 1962, the Army initiated “Worldwide” tactical and technical tests of the AR-15 using U. S. soldiers. Edgewood was tasked to perform further lethality tests using modified .223 caliber ammunition. Ezell and Stevens describe the modifications: “They had modified some 55-grain .223 caliber ball bullets of Remington manufacture by cutting approximately 1/4 inch off the nose and drilling a 3/32-inch-diameter hole about 1/4 inch deep into the lead core of each bullet.” The results? The authors continue, “As it turned out, even the hollow-points failed to duplicate anything like the spectacular effects recorded by the Vietnamese unit commanders and their American advisors, which had subsequently been taken as fact and much used as propaganda.”

The .223 caliber cartridge was morphed into the 5.56mm NATO cartridge and adopted for the United States Service Rifle M-16 (formerly, AR-15) replacing the 7.62mm M-14. How could such propaganda have convinced the Department of Defense to adopt the .223 caliber cartridge? “All this was inspired by the principle -- which is quite true in itself -- that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper stata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily, and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods.”
Adolph Hitler, Mein Kampf

As is usually the case, a judgment based on lies was to adversely affect those at the “pointy end of the spear.” American warriors reported enemy soldiers continuing to close and fire their weapons after sustaining multiple hits by 5.56mm bullets. This happened as early as 9 December 1965 in the official “After Action Report of the Ia Drang Valley Operation . . ..” popularized by the movie and book We Were Soldiers Once . . . and Young. The commanding officer of the battalion engaged there, Col. Harold G. Moore, USA, writes of assaulting enemy soldiers being hit by 5.56mm rounds: "Even after being hit several times in the chest, many continued firing and moving for several more steps before dropping dead." Later in that war, a similar experience is voiced by Col. John Hayworth, USA (Ret.): “In one fire-fight, I saw my RTO place three rounds [of 5.56 mm] in the chest of a charging NVA regular at 50 yards. He kept firing his AK and never slowed down. At 30 yards, I hit him with a blast of double ought buck. It picked him up off his feet and he didn't get up again.”

In the aftermath of the Vietnam War, the DoD increased the weight of the 5.56mm 55-grain bullet (M193) to 62-grains and replaced its lead core with a steel core to make it . . . ecologically friendly; spent bullets with lead cores polluted the earth. Correspondingly, the bullet is painted with a green tip and designated M855. In 1991, the Pentagon sent its warriors to the Gulf War with this new environmentally safe cartridge. Maj. Howard Feldmeier, USMC (Ret.) was there: “ . . . several Marines commented that they had to shoot Iraqi soldiers 2-3 or more times with the 62-grain 5.56mm green tip ammo before they stopped firing back at them . . ..” That report is exemplified by one of an Iraqi officer who was thrown from his vehicle and set afire by an explosion: “Somehow he managed to hold on to his AK-47. He also got up, still on fire, faced the firing line of Marines and charged forward firing his weapon from the hip. He didn't hit anyone but two Marines each nailed him with a three round burst from their M-16A2s. One burst hit him immediately above his heart, the other in his belly button. [He} . . . kept right on charging and firing until his magazine was empty. When he got up to the Marines two of them tackled him and rolled him in the sand to put out the fire. . . . He was quickly carried back to the battalion aid station . . .. The surgeons told me he certainly died of burns, but not necessarily from the six 5.56mm wounds . . ..”

In spite of the above “lesson learned,” the DoD dispatched its warriors to combat in Somalia in 1993 with the same flawed “green tip” cartridge as testified in Mark Bowden’s book Black Hawk Down: “His weapon was the most sophisticated infantry rifle in the world, a customized CAR-15, and he was shooting the army's new 5.56mm green tip round. . . . The bullet made a small, clean hole, and unless it happened to hit the heart or spine, it wasn't enough to stop a man in his tracks. Howe felt he had to hit a guy five or six times just to get his attention.”

The Pentagon remained unmoved by that experience of its warriors and continued to send them to war underpowered. On 4 April 2002, I received an e-mail from a trooper in Afghanistan who appeals, in part: “The current-issue 62gr 5.56mm (223) round, especially when fired from the short-barreled, M-4 carbine, is proving itself (once again) to be woefully inadequate as [a] man stopper. Engagements at all ranges are requiring multiple, solid hits to permanently bring down enemy soldiers. Penetration is also sadly deficient. Even light barriers are not perforated by this rifle/cartridge combination.”12

Additional observations of the impotence of the 5.56mm round soon appeared in official and professional publications. In their official briefing “Lessons Learned in Afghanistan” dated April 2002, LTC C. Dean, USA and SFC S. Newland, USA of the U. S. Army Natick Soldier Center reported: “Soldiers asked for a weapon with a larger round. ‘So it will drop a man with one shot.’” In the October 2002 issue of the Marine Corps Gazette magazine, Capt Philip Treglia, USMC reflected on his Afghanistan experience in December 2001 by reporting that, “the 5.56 mm round will not put a man to the ground with two shots to the chest.” Capt Treglia’s men were trained to fire two bullets into an enemy’s chest and if that did not knock him down, they were to shift fire to the head. This is the corrective action implemented for these Marines and many others in the Armed Forces for the impotent 5.56mm cartridge rather than equipping them with a rifle that fired a bullet with one-round knockdown power. And, as Capt Treglia reported, multiple hits with the 5.56mm bullet didn’t work any better in Afghanistan than it did anytime in the past.

In a 3 March 2003 written briefing, LCdr. Gary K. Roberts, USNR recommended to RAdm. Albert M. Calland, Commander, Naval Special Warfare (NSW) Command that he upgrades his command’s 5.56mm weapons to the 6.8mm cartridge. That briefing, entitled, “Enhancement of NSW Carbine & Rifle Capability,” opens by observing:

Recent combat operations have highlighted terminal
performance problems, generally manifested as failures to
rapidly incapacitate opponents, during combat operations
when M855 62gr. “Green Tip” FMJ is fired from 5.56mm rifles
and carbines. Failure to rapidly incapacitate armed opponents
increases the risk of U.S. forces being injured or killed and
jeopardizes mission success.13

That statement was prophetic.

On 12 September 2003, in Ar Ramadi, Iraq elements of the 3rd Battalion, 5th Special Forces Group engaged enemy forces in a firefight. An insurgent was struck in the torso by several rounds of 5.56mm ammunition from their M-4 carbines (this is the current shortened version of the M-16 Service Rifle). He continued to fire his AK-47 and mortally wounded MSgt Kevin N. Morehead, age 33, from Little Rock, Arkansas. The engagement continued with the same insurgent surprising SFC William M. Bennett, age 35, from Seymour, Tennessee from a hiding place and killing him instantly with a three-round burst to the head and neck. SSgt Robert E Springer, threw away his M-4 carbine, drew an obsolete WWI/WWII vintage .45 caliber pistol and killed the insurgent with one shot. A close inspection of the enemy's corpse revealed that he had been hit by seven 5.56 mm rounds in his torso. Also, in this engagement, these soldiers were provided with a commercially produced 5.56mm round of 77-grain weight vice the 62-grain bullets in use by general-purpose forces. Obviously, the larger 5.56mm round was of little consequence. 14

These reports are consistent with my own experience during three tours of duty in Vietnam from the goat incident in 1964 described above to service with the 3rd Marine Division in 1968-69; experience that repeatedly reminded me that this 5.56mm cartridge was nothing more than the full-metal jacket military version of the commercial .223 caliber Remington cartridge. The .223 caliber Remington was and is today commercially advertised and sold as a “varmint cartridge” for hunting groundhogs, prairie dogs and woodchucks. The cartridge is offered with soft point, hollow point, fragmentation, or projectiles incorporating two or more of these attributes to enhance its lethality and assure a “clean kill”: one-round knockdown power on varmints. States such as the Commonwealth of Virginia do not permit it to be used for hunting deer or bear because its lethality—with or without those enhancements--does not assure a “clean kill” on big game.15 Yet, its full metal jacket military counterpart continues to be issued to American warriors in spite of almost 40 years of Lessons Learned that enemy soldiers continue to fire their weapons and have even killed our soldiers after sustaining multiple hits from 5.56mm bullets.

The lethality of the 5.56mm cartridge, sold on lies, cannot be fixed in truth. It is time the Department of Defense recognizes this “Big Lie” from the Vietnam War and in the names of MSgt Kevin N. Morehead and SFC William M. Bennett replaces this varmint cartridge with one that gives our warriors that critical capability described by SFC Paul Howe above--one-round knockdown power!


END NOTES
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 4:10:56 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/14/2005 4:19:22 AM EDT by vito113]
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 4:11:39 AM EDT
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 4:18:51 AM EDT
Tell the beltway sniper victims that the .223 is not lethal.
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 4:21:01 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/14/2005 4:25:00 AM EDT by Charging_Handle]
Since this guy was a Marine, I respect his opinion. But I disagree with much of what he says.

As this debate always goes, a few examples such as the above mentioned failures are cited as proof the 5.56mm sucks. Then it's backed up by claims that the 30-06 or .308 is the finger of God that knocks em down everytime. That is pure BS.

The truth of the matter is, there's just as many cases I can cite of failures to stop with 30-06 and .308 as I can with 5.56mm. No round capable of being fired in an infantry soldiers service weapon is going to always be 100% effective everytime. It just isn't possible. That said, I'd take a sometimes fragmenting 5.56mm round over a never fragmenting .308 round.

Most of us know the only way to immediately incapitate someone with a gunshot is by striking the CNS. If you put a round into their brain or cut their spinal cord, then you'll get the desired effect you want. But compared to the total size of the body, the brain and spine are very small targets. Therefore all other hits will require the person to bleed so much before they lose consciousness and ability to function. To do this somewhat quickly requires hitting a blood vessel or organ that will cause rapid blood loss. If neither the CNS or a major blood vessel/organ is hit, then there's no way to ensure the person you're shooting stops functioning.

I guarantee you a .223 through the Aorta or brain will stop a person quicker than a .308 flesh wound that doesn't hit any vitals.

And btw, the shortcomings with military ammo isn't a caliber issue, but a bullet issue. As long as we are using FMJ, we're always going to have a problem with less than ideal wounding. That's why hunters use soft point or hollow point ammo. So with FMJ ammo, even the mighty .308 is gonna have some problems from time to time.

That's why we should drop M855 and go with match bullets. Those aren't as velocity dependant when it comes to fragmentation. And the fragmentation they display is more dramatic than M855. With a better fragmenting load, you will increase the wounding effect which will make the odds of damaging something critical go up. But even so, there will still be failures to stop encountered. No ammunition or caliber is 100% effective always. And to say that 5.56mm FMJ sucks while .308 FMJ is great is total horseshit. Both are less than ideal.

If you want my opinion, I think too many people have unrealistic expectations about the effectiveness of small arms. Unlike in the movies, people aren't blown backwards 20 ft by being struck with a bullet. Nor do they always die the second the bullet impacts. This is just reality. So in conclusion, we don't need to go back to the .308, we just need better bullets for the 5.56. And we need to realize that even then, you still aren't going to have a perfect load. Such a load doesn't exist in the world of small arms ammunition.


Link Posted: 8/14/2005 4:23:30 AM EDT
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 4:28:46 AM EDT

Originally Posted By vito113:

Originally Posted By Charging_Handle:

That said, I'd take a sometimes fragmenting 5.56mm round over a never fragmenting .308 round.



"fragmentation' ain't an issue with a 7.62… a hit in the arm? your arm comes off.



A hit to the arm with a .308 FMJ will result in a .30 caliber hole through said arm. The bullet will not even have time to yaw. Unless bone is struck or the brachial artery severed, the guy will be out of the aid station and back on the line before the day is over. It certianly isn't gonna "tear his arm off".

Now, shoot him in the arm with a 155 gr AMAX and I might agree with you (if he has a relatively thick arm).
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 4:29:28 AM EDT
Having hunted deer with FMJ 55 grain 223, I have a different opinion about its lethality.
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 4:33:16 AM EDT

Originally Posted By RikWriter:
Having hunted deer with FMJ 55 grain 223, I have a different opinion about its lethality.



Which is??????
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 4:34:00 AM EDT
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 4:39:31 AM EDT

Originally Posted By CaptSchofield:
I hope this is not a dupe if it is please delete



This topic has only come up a few dozen times here with the same sources as in the article.

Lock by page 7.

Link Posted: 8/14/2005 4:41:04 AM EDT
Let's settle this once and for all......Barrets for everryone!
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 4:44:24 AM EDT

Originally Posted By vito113:

Originally Posted By Charging_Handle:

Originally Posted By vito113:

Originally Posted By Charging_Handle:

That said, I'd take a sometimes fragmenting 5.56mm round over a never fragmenting .308 round.



"fragmentation' ain't an issue with a 7.62… a hit in the arm? your arm comes off.



A hit to the arm with a .308 FMJ will result in a .30 caliber hole through said arm. The bullet will not even have time to yaw. Unless bone is struck or the brachial artery severed, the guy will be out of the aid station and back on the line before the day is over. It certianly isn't gonna "tear his arm off".

Now, shoot him in the arm with a 155 gr AMAX and I might agree with you (if he has a relatively thick arm).



There are plenty of recorded instances of 5.56 just breaking a bone, even being deflected, when a 7.62 hits an arm bone it's 'game over'… they don't do that 'deflecting' thing.



Which is all a rather moot point anyway, since a hit to the arm, be it a pinprick wound or a bone cruncher, still will not incapacite an enemy. He can still use his good arm to kill your ass if he's that determined. LOL. Which is kind of my point to begin with.....shot placement is far more important than the caliber or bullet itself.
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 4:47:18 AM EDT

Originally Posted By C-4:

Originally Posted By CaptSchofield:
I hope this is not a dupe if it is please delete



This topic has only come up a few dozen times here with the same sources as in the article.

Lock by page 7.



I did search for the title and author on arfcom but nothing came up. It has some things that I have read before but a lot of new stuff too. Like I said above if it been posted before, delete/lock it.
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 4:49:06 AM EDT
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 4:50:00 AM EDT

Originally Posted By gopeterson:

Originally Posted By RikWriter:
Having hunted deer with FMJ 55 grain 223, I have a different opinion about its lethality.



Which is??????



I have killed numerous deer with a single body shot from a 55 grain FMJ .223. I think it is a fine round. Don't know about the current military round, but then, the article is talking about Vietnam and we used the 55 grain round there.
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 4:50:11 AM EDT

Originally Posted By NAM:
Let's settle this once and for all......Barrets for everryone!


Barret .50's or 6.8SPC's?
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 4:52:03 AM EDT

Originally Posted By RikWriter:

Originally Posted By gopeterson:

Originally Posted By RikWriter:
Having hunted deer with FMJ 55 grain 223, I have a different opinion about its lethality.



Which is??????



I have killed numerous deer with a single body shot from a 55 grain FMJ .223. I think it is a fine round. Don't know about the current military round, but then, the article is talking about Vietnam and we used the 55 grain round there.



Is the .223/5.56 legal for hunting Deer in FLA?
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 4:53:15 AM EDT

Originally Posted By CaptSchofield:

Originally Posted By RikWriter:

Originally Posted By gopeterson:

Originally Posted By RikWriter:
Having hunted deer with FMJ 55 grain 223, I have a different opinion about its lethality.



Which is??????



I have killed numerous deer with a single body shot from a 55 grain FMJ .223. I think it is a fine round. Don't know about the current military round, but then, the article is talking about Vietnam and we used the 55 grain round there.



Is the .223/5.56 legal for hunting Deer in FLA?



It is if you're clearing them out of an orange grove with a depredation permit. Friend of mine's family used to own a ranch near here with orange groves on it and he would get permits at least twice a year and we would go in and hunt hogs and deer.
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 4:53:16 AM EDT
God yes, let's debate the 5.56 AGAIN (and some others)! This shit has been done to death.
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 4:54:30 AM EDT

Originally Posted By wetidlerjr:
God yes, let's debate the 5.56 AGAIN (and some others)! This shit has been done to death.



So has evolution, Iraq, 9-11 and various other subjects but that doesn't stop us from debating them over and over and over here.
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 4:54:36 AM EDT

Originally Posted By RikWriter:

Originally Posted By gopeterson:

Originally Posted By RikWriter:
Having hunted deer with FMJ 55 grain 223, I have a different opinion about its lethality.



Which is??????



I have killed numerous deer with a single body shot from a 55 grain FMJ .223. I think it is a fine round. Don't know about the current military round, but then, the article is talking about Vietnam and we used the 55 grain round there.



Try that with 147 gr .308 FMJ sometime and see what happens. As I said, I'll take a 5.56mm round that USUALLY fragments over a .30 cal round that NEVER fragments.

I'll take M193 Ball over M80 Ball anyday for engagements inside 200 yds, where most combat takes place.
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 4:57:17 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Charging_Handle:

Originally Posted By RikWriter:

Originally Posted By gopeterson:

Originally Posted By RikWriter:
Having hunted deer with FMJ 55 grain 223, I have a different opinion about its lethality.



Which is??????



I have killed numerous deer with a single body shot from a 55 grain FMJ .223. I think it is a fine round. Don't know about the current military round, but then, the article is talking about Vietnam and we used the 55 grain round there.



Try that with 147 gr .308 FMJ sometime and see what happens.



Done that too.
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 4:58:35 AM EDT

Originally Posted By martinmayhem:
Tell the beltway sniper victims that the .223 is not lethal.



What round were the beltway snipers using -- FMJ or some type of hollowpoint? Not being nasty; I honestly don't know and would like to know.
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 4:59:17 AM EDT
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 4:59:21 AM EDT
we will never have an end all "'round"'. plain and simple.
you may have one that does one shot stop 9 inch hole wounds DRT ballistics, but it wont pass thru a truck or other cover. Then you may have one that does just that,, goes thru homes, cars ect,, but has very lil DRT shots..
Personally im a 762 guy. The 6.8 would do well, fill in the gap, between the 556 and 762! But then agin im sure folks will bicth about it.
At the distnaces we are fighting these days, a Ar in 762x39( or similar 27-30 cal round) would do well and be the best of both worlds.
But hey,,someones gonna bitch about that to,, LOL
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 4:59:31 AM EDT
now you can see why this kind of thing was invented

Link Posted: 8/14/2005 5:05:19 AM EDT

Originally Posted By RikWriter:

Originally Posted By wetidlerjr:
God yes, let's debate the 5.56 AGAIN (and some others)! This shit has been done to death.



So has evolution, Iraq, 9-11 and various other subjects but that doesn't stop us from debating them over and over and over here.



Damn but you are so insightful ! I don't know what ARFCOM would do without you.
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 5:06:39 AM EDT

Originally Posted By wetidlerjr:

Originally Posted By RikWriter:

Originally Posted By wetidlerjr:
God yes, let's debate the 5.56 AGAIN (and some others)! This shit has been done to death.



So has evolution, Iraq, 9-11 and various other subjects but that doesn't stop us from debating them over and over and over here.



Damn but you are so insightful ! I don't know what ARFCOM would do without you.



And I don't know what we'd do without you, Bill...though I would love to see us try.
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 5:15:52 AM EDT

Originally Posted By CaptSchofield:

Originally Posted By NAM:
Let's settle this once and for all......Barrets for everryone!


Barret .50's or 6.8SPC's?




why.... 50BMG of course

6.8 is smaller than 7.62, and DoD has determined anything smaller as unfeasible.

While we're at it, let's get some plasma rays. ohllsay something in the 40 watt range. WE can mount them on hte bottom of the barrets.
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 5:17:23 AM EDT

Originally Posted By wetidlerjr:

Originally Posted By RikWriter:

Originally Posted By wetidlerjr:
God yes, let's debate the 5.56 AGAIN (and some others)! This shit has been done to death.



So has evolution, Iraq, 9-11 and various other subjects but that doesn't stop us from debating them over and over and over here.



Damn but you are so insightful ! I don't know what ARFCOM would do without you.



come on w.e.t.

the beauty of forums like these is the freedom to move to another topic if you thinks been 'solved'

Unlike you to skewer a healthy exchange of ideas on any topic

Link Posted: 8/14/2005 5:19:26 AM EDT

Originally Posted By CaptSchofield:

Originally Posted By C-4:

Originally Posted By CaptSchofield:
I hope this is not a dupe if it is please delete



This topic has only come up a few dozen times here with the same sources as in the article.

Lock by page 7.



I did search for the title and author on arfcom but nothing came up. It has some things that I have read before but a lot of new stuff too. Like I said above if it been posted before, delete/lock it.



It's ok. This topic has come up often and always with the same result which is a degeneration into a 'my caliber is better than your caliber'. But like someone posted, there are a lot of topics that come up over and over.
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 5:19:53 AM EDT
It is better to wound than kill. It takes two soldiers to evacuate a wounded man. Shoot for the balls and stomach
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 5:22:19 AM EDT

Originally Posted By menefreghista:
It is better to wound than kill. It takes two soldiers to evacuate a wounded man. Shoot for the balls and stomach



I think I'd rather aim for the chest and kill the guy, then shoot the two poor, dumb bastards who would be first in line to carry the other fella.
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 5:24:53 AM EDT
The debate goes on and on......and has some very valid points......but my guess is if we would have stuck with a larger round like the 308 we would be reading articles today about how soldiers are dying in Iraq today because they ran out of ammo in critical firefights......a consequence of being able to carry less ammo because of the weight..
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 5:32:38 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Charging_Handle:

Originally Posted By menefreghista:
It is better to wound than kill. It takes two soldiers to evacuate a wounded man. Shoot for the balls and stomach



I think I'd rather aim for the chest and kill the guy, then shoot the two poor, dumb bastards who would be first in line to carry the other fella.



Chest is good, I like your style, wanna guard my flank


Link Posted: 8/14/2005 5:33:24 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/14/2005 5:34:15 AM EDT by vito113]
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 9:07:03 AM EDT
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 9:13:52 AM EDT
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 9:16:13 AM EDT

Originally Posted By RikWriter:
Having hunted deer with FMJ 55 grain 223, I have a different opinion about its lethality.



is that legal?
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 9:23:20 AM EDT
From the purely unscientific observations I have made:

I went rabbit hunting with two friends. One hit a rabbit with a .308. Small entrance hole. Bigger exit hole, but not huge.

The other hit a rabbit with a .223 out of an AR-15. The rabbit was standing facing us reared up on its hind legs when it was hit. As near as we could tell, the bullet hit somewhere around the lower part of the breastbone. We couldn't tell exactly, because most of the rabbit's body had been turned to a thick red soup.

As always, YMMV.
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 9:36:39 AM EDT
Frankly, I wouldnt want to be shot with any of them.

Personally speaking, I like the reach out and touch you ability of a 7.62X51 round. Something with a little more thump than the 5.56 I would definitely prefer
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 9:39:51 AM EDT

Originally Posted By VTwin60:

Originally Posted By RikWriter:
Having hunted deer with FMJ 55 grain 223, I have a different opinion about its lethality.



is that legal?



Perhaps you should try reading the whole thread.
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 9:40:21 AM EDT
from experience, I can say that 5.56 works fine for most human targets(not all for some reason though), the reason you hear so much about it not working is from crappy shots, popping someone through the arm or the calf isnt going to kill them, dropping one through their lungs or heart and or their head will. but what do I know, I only saw it in person.
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 10:28:18 AM EDT

Originally Posted By redfisher:


Unlike you to skewer a healthy exchange of ideas on any topic




I was inspired.
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 10:31:49 AM EDT
I think we're going to need the mythbusters on this one...
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 10:58:18 AM EDT
Damn Terd Fergason, you figured out why we lost in Vietnam and why we can't end the war in Iraq right away.

Fuck, I am going to email Rumsfield and tell him to have them army and Marine guys stop shooting to kill and start wounding the enemy.


Originally Posted By menefreghista:
It is better to wound than kill. It takes two soldiers to evacuate a wounded man. Shoot for the balls and stomach

Link Posted: 8/14/2005 11:42:30 AM EDT

Originally Posted By martinmayhem:
Tell the beltway sniper victims that the .223 is not lethal.



Werent' most of those head shots with non FMJ ammo? I know the one 3 minutes from me at Seven Corners was.
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 3:39:59 PM EDT

Originally Posted By RikWriter:

Originally Posted By VTwin60:

Originally Posted By RikWriter:
Having hunted deer with FMJ 55 grain 223, I have a different opinion about its lethality.



is that legal?



Perhaps you should try reading the whole thread.




actually not to turn this into a hunting thread. BUT check the FWC rules and regs. useing any kind of FMJ( non expanding ammo) for taking deer is illegal.
regs



Link Posted: 8/14/2005 3:50:26 PM EDT
Since the original article brings up BHD, anyone remember the anecdote about the M60 gunner and the guy with the afro?

There is no magic bullet. Some perform better than others, but in the end it comes down to the person behind the trigger.
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 4:03:30 PM EDT
He's misrepresenting Fackler:



In those cases, the bullet neither yaws nor fragments and causes only a pencil size hole through the body



Fackler does not say this. He says the 5.56 no longer fragments if the velocity isn't high enough; that doesn't mean it doesn't yaw. It does.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top