Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
4/22/2019 5:32:20 PM
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 4
Posted: 4/27/2015 4:15:05 PM EDT
"The absolute nastiest round to get hit with. It can hit you in the hip and exit out your foot. That's what it's designed to do."

Now I'm not a military guy but from most books I've read a common theme is that it's not so dynamic and, more often than not needs multiple hits to put a man down.

B.S.?
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 4:17:07 PM EDT
Ask him how many people were killed when a .50 BMG bullet went past their head.

Link Posted: 4/27/2015 4:17:31 PM EDT
I know a guy who carried a .30-06 in the very, very early days of Vietnam. He was skeptical about the M16 and 5.56 until he saw a guy get hit by one and it turned his skull 180 degrees inside his skin. He said that later in the war he carried an M16 without reservation.
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 4:18:49 PM EDT
Someone needs to Photoshop up one of those "Aw geez, not this shit again!" pictures using Eugene Stoner or Robert McNamara.
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 4:20:03 PM EDT
Seems pretty legit. Has he ever told you about how .50 BMG can only be aimed at the enemy's equipment? Was he issued a M-16 made by Mattel in basic? Does he know that the AK is better because it can use Soviet ammo or ours, but the M-16 can only use ours? Has he ever shown you a video of a sniper using a .50 caliber to blow up small, fur-covered Taliban?
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 4:20:19 PM EDT
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 4:20:39 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/27/2015 4:20:55 PM EDT by CyberIntel]
Yes it's BS. It is adequate for the task when combined with adequate weapons handling and skill.
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 4:21:10 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/27/2015 4:27:10 PM EDT by _DR]
The 5.56x45mm, and indeed the 5.45x39mm also, both can do some very nasty business when a major bone structure is encountered.

Warning, Graphic:

Click To View Spoiler


(that was a normal sized leg before the GSW.)
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 4:21:27 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By NOVA1234:
Seems pretty legit. Has he ever told you about how .50 BMG can only be aimed at the enemy's equipment? Was he issued a M-16 made by Mattel in basic? Does he know that the AK is better because it can use Soviet ammo or ours, but the M-16 can only use ours? Has he ever shown you a video of a sniper using a .50 caliber to blow up small, fur-covered Taliban?
View Quote


LOL - yeah.
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 4:22:51 PM EDT
Seems highly unlikely but bullets can do some weird shit.
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 4:24:40 PM EDT
Saw some wound pics of 55gr hits. They were pretty damned nasty. Hydrostatic shock is a bitch.

One was a forearm. For a section of about 4 inches, all that was there was the ulna and radius.

What screwed up the 5.56 nato was shorter barrels and 62 grain bullets.

As I understand it, the 77gr SMKs are formidable. Not seen any actual results, though. Only rumor/second hand info.

Link Posted: 4/27/2015 4:24:51 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By c7aea15:
Seems highly unlikely but bullets can do some weird shit.
View Quote


Fuck yeah they can.
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 4:25:17 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By bennnn:
I've heard many dumbasses back in the day say this same stupid shit about .22lr.
View Quote


This but .22 has killed more people than anything else.
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 4:26:29 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Ridgerunner9876:
Saw some wound pics of 55gr hits. They were pretty damned nasty. Hydrostatic shock is a bitch.

One was a forearm. For a section of about 4 inches, all that was there was the ulna and radius.

What screwed up the 5.56 nato was shorter barrels and 62 grain bullets.

As I understand it, the 77gr SMKs are formidable. Not seen any actual results, though. Only rumor/second hand info.

View Quote

Dead coyote bastards shot with 20" barrels look nastier than SBRs
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 4:28:28 PM EDT
I've hit a deer in the shoulder and it come out her ass. Ruined a lot of good meat.
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 4:28:29 PM EDT
Originally Posted By explodingvarmints:
"The absolute nastiest round to get hit with. It can hit you in the hip and exit out your foot. That's what it's designed to do."

Now I'm not a military guy but from most books I've read a common theme is that it's not so dynamic and, more often than not needs multiple hits to put a man down.

B.S.?
View Quote


A highly exagerated statement with some truth at its core. It is designed to yaw when it hits the target. There are far more effective rounds to kill an enemy with. A yaw going from the him and exiting out of the foot is far-fetched, but bullets can do funny things when they hit tissue/bone at high velocities.
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 4:28:38 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By GreenBastard:

Dead coyote bastards shot with 20" barrels look nastier than SBRs
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By GreenBastard:
Originally Posted By Ridgerunner9876:
Saw some wound pics of 55gr hits. They were pretty damned nasty. Hydrostatic shock is a bitch.

One was a forearm. For a section of about 4 inches, all that was there was the ulna and radius.

What screwed up the 5.56 nato was shorter barrels and 62 grain bullets.

As I understand it, the 77gr SMKs are formidable. Not seen any actual results, though. Only rumor/second hand info.


Dead coyote bastards shot with 20" barrels look nastier than SBRs

Link Posted: 4/27/2015 4:28:55 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/27/2015 4:30:04 PM EDT by _DR]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By GreenBastard:

Dead coyote bastards shot with 20" barrels look nastier than SBRs
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By GreenBastard:
Originally Posted By Ridgerunner9876:
Saw some wound pics of 55gr hits. They were pretty damned nasty. Hydrostatic shock is a bitch.

One was a forearm. For a section of about 4 inches, all that was there was the ulna and radius.

What screwed up the 5.56 nato was shorter barrels and 62 grain bullets.

As I understand it, the 77gr SMKs are formidable. Not seen any actual results, though. Only rumor/second hand info.


Dead coyote bastards shot with 20" barrels look nastier than SBRs


More velocity.

ETA beat out by 38 seconds.
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 4:29:04 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/27/2015 4:30:22 PM EDT by RogerBall]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By bteamleader:
I know a guy who carried a .30-06 in the very, very early days of Vietnam. He was skeptical about the M16 and 5.56 until he saw a guy get hit by one and it turned his skull 180 degrees inside his skin. He said that later in the war he carried an M16 without reservation.
View Quote


Not disagreeing or anything, but what gun in 30-06 was still in service in Vietnam?
Garand? 1919? 03-a3?
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 4:30:51 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/27/2015 4:37:04 PM EDT by _DR]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By RogerBall:


Not disagreeing or anything, but what gun in 30-06 was still in service in Vietnam?
Garand? 1919?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By RogerBall:
Originally Posted By bteamleader:
I know a guy who carried a .30-06 in the very, very early days of Vietnam. He was skeptical about the M16 and 5.56 until he saw a guy get hit by one and it turned his skull 180 degrees inside his skin. He said that later in the war he carried an M16 without reservation.


Not disagreeing or anything, but what gun in 30-06 was still in service in Vietnam?
Garand? 1919?



The ARVNs were issued Garands and M1 Carbines, also our snipers still used 30-06.
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 4:31:22 PM EDT
Originally Posted By explodingvarmints:
"The absolute nastiest round to get hit with. It can hit you in the hip and exit out your foot. That's what it's designed to do."

Now I'm not a military guy but from most books I've read a common theme is that it's not so dynamic and, more often than not needs multiple hits to put a man down.

B.S.?
View Quote


Absolutely BS. The 5.56 round is so effective because of hydraulic shock. When the bullet hits soft tissue, it transmits a significant amount of energy to the surrounding tissue. This sudden spike disturbs and upsets the CNS, thus incapacitating the tango...sometimes to the point of death...even when hit on an extremity. There is lots of BS out there but start reading about hydraulic shock.
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 4:32:58 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/27/2015 4:41:46 PM EDT by buck19delta]
SUPPOSEDLY.. from something i read once. when the m16 first appeared, it used a very slow twist rate,( 1/12, or 1/14" ) that was barely able to stabilize the bullet.. and when it hit something, it basically yawed everywhere, causing some truly massive injuries... and later they used a faster rate of twist that resulted in a less impressive wound. but, as i said, i read it once, etc.

the ak 74 is supposedly pretty nasty due to a hollow cavity under the nose, which upsets the balance enough that when it hits something it yaws as well.

Link Posted: 4/27/2015 4:35:37 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By RogerBall:


Not disagreeing or anything, but what gun in 30-06 was still in service in Vietnam?
Garand? 1919? 03-a3?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By RogerBall:
Originally Posted By bteamleader:
I know a guy who carried a .30-06 in the very, very early days of Vietnam. He was skeptical about the M16 and 5.56 until he saw a guy get hit by one and it turned his skull 180 degrees inside his skin. He said that later in the war he carried an M16 without reservation.


Not disagreeing or anything, but what gun in 30-06 was still in service in Vietnam?
Garand? 1919? 03-a3?


Browning BAR, dad's friend liked them because they would shoot through smaller trees no problem
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 4:36:29 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/27/2015 4:42:39 PM EDT by _DR]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By usnpjs:


Browning BAR, dad's friend liked them because they would shoot through smaller trees no problem
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By usnpjs:
Originally Posted By RogerBall:
Originally Posted By bteamleader:
I know a guy who carried a .30-06 in the very, very early days of Vietnam. He was skeptical about the M16 and 5.56 until he saw a guy get hit by one and it turned his skull 180 degrees inside his skin. He said that later in the war he carried an M16 without reservation.


Not disagreeing or anything, but what gun in 30-06 was still in service in Vietnam?
Garand? 1919? 03-a3?


Browning BAR, dad's friend liked them because they would shoot through smaller trees no problem



Also, don't forget, Carlos was there.


Link Posted: 4/27/2015 4:36:57 PM EDT
if the guy was running I don't see a problem with hip to foot path...
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 4:37:39 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By buck19delta:
SUPPOSEDLY.. from something i read once. when the m16 first appeared, it used a very slow twist rate, that was barely able to stabilize the bullet.. and when it hit something, it basically yawed everywhere... and later they used a faster rate of twist that resulted in a less impressive wound. but, as i said, i read it once, etc.

the ak 74 is supposedly pretty nasty due to a hollow cavity under the nose, which upsets the balance enough that when it hits something it yaws as well.

View Quote


I think a bullet going from air to flesh will do a good job destabilizing it even with the faster spin.

The change came from the longer (heavier) bullets.

But plenty of people know more about ballistics than I do.
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 4:40:20 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By frayedknot:


Absolutely BS. The 5.56 round is so effective because of hydraulic shock. When the bullet hits soft tissue, it transmits a significant amount of energy to the surrounding tissue. This sudden spike disturbs and upsets the CNS, thus incapacitating the tango...sometimes to the point of death...even when hit on an extremity. There is lots of BS out there but start reading about hydraulic shock.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By frayedknot:
Originally Posted By explodingvarmints:
"The absolute nastiest round to get hit with. It can hit you in the hip and exit out your foot. That's what it's designed to do."

Now I'm not a military guy but from most books I've read a common theme is that it's not so dynamic and, more often than not needs multiple hits to put a man down.

B.S.?


Absolutely BS. The 5.56 round is so effective because of hydraulic shock. When the bullet hits soft tissue, it transmits a significant amount of energy to the surrounding tissue. This sudden spike disturbs and upsets the CNS, thus incapacitating the tango...sometimes to the point of death...even when hit on an extremity. There is lots of BS out there but start reading about hydraulic shock.

Hydrostatic?
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 4:41:40 PM EDT
This is most certainly not a tag.
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 4:47:33 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By _DR:



The ARVNs were issued Garands and M1 Carbines, also our snipers still used 30-06.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By _DR:
Originally Posted By RogerBall:
Originally Posted By bteamleader:
I know a guy who carried a .30-06 in the very, very early days of Vietnam. He was skeptical about the M16 and 5.56 until he saw a guy get hit by one and it turned his skull 180 degrees inside his skin. He said that later in the war he carried an M16 without reservation.


Not disagreeing or anything, but what gun in 30-06 was still in service in Vietnam?
Garand? 1919?



The ARVNs were issued Garands and M1 Carbines, also our snipers still used 30-06.


I haven't met any ARVNs in Florida. The carbine is just that.

But i stand corrected on the BAR.
Also i said O3-a3 (thinking of the snipers rifles) but forgot the Model 70. Mea culpa.
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 4:47:47 PM EDT
The wounding reputation of the early M-16 was due to its 1:14 barrel which just barely stabilized the 55gr round. That combination was quite devastating as the round immediately yawed upon contact.

The 1:12 barrel was introduced to help accuracy when shooting in cold weather but removed some of the wounding performance.
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 4:49:01 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Assaulter:

Hydrostatic?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Assaulter:
Originally Posted By frayedknot:
Originally Posted By explodingvarmints:
"The absolute nastiest round to get hit with. It can hit you in the hip and exit out your foot. That's what it's designed to do."

Now I'm not a military guy but from most books I've read a common theme is that it's not so dynamic and, more often than not needs multiple hits to put a man down.

B.S.?


Absolutely BS. The 5.56 round is so effective because of hydraulic shock. When the bullet hits soft tissue, it transmits a significant amount of energy to the surrounding tissue. This sudden spike disturbs and upsets the CNS, thus incapacitating the tango...sometimes to the point of death...even when hit on an extremity. There is lots of BS out there but start reading about hydraulic shock.

Hydrostatic?


Nah, Hydramatic! General Motors engineered extra shock into theirs. Everybody knows that!
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 4:54:19 PM EDT
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 4:54:28 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By usnpjs:


Browning BAR, dad's friend liked them because they would shoot through smaller trees no problem
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By usnpjs:
Originally Posted By RogerBall:
Originally Posted By bteamleader:
I know a guy who carried a .30-06 in the very, very early days of Vietnam. He was skeptical about the M16 and 5.56 until he saw a guy get hit by one and it turned his skull 180 degrees inside his skin. He said that later in the war he carried an M16 without reservation.


Not disagreeing or anything, but what gun in 30-06 was still in service in Vietnam?
Garand? 1919? 03-a3?


Browning BAR, dad's friend liked them because they would shoot through smaller trees no problem


"It shoots through schools"
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 4:54:54 PM EDT
This would have been around 1998 or so as the story was told. A live fire training exercise gone array.
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 4:57:44 PM EDT
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 5:00:18 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Assaulter:
Hydrostatic?
View Quote


was going to post this, but even so...
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 5:02:26 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By c7aea15:

I think a bullet going from air to flesh will do a good job destabilizing it even with the faster spin.

The change came from the longer (heavier) bullets.

But plenty of people know more about ballistics than I do.
View Quote


The yaw is more a factor of the length of the bullet relative to the width of the base.

All spitzer type bullets yaw upon impact. It is the rate at which they yaw that makes them interesting....
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 5:03:56 PM EDT
It sounds about as legit as using birdshot for HD.

Tons of loser dipshits are current or ex military.
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 5:06:18 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By c7aea15:
Seems highly unlikely but bullets can do some weird shit.
View Quote
Seems pretty likely for any bullet... If the guy was laying prone, pointing a rifle at you.
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 5:09:28 PM EDT
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 5:14:35 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/27/2015 5:15:39 PM EDT by daa9mm]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Rooster-Cogburn:
It sounds about as legit as using birdshot for HD.

Tons of loser dipshits are current or ex military.
View Quote

Lots of people go on hearsay and have never put a bullet into flesh.
Caliber isn't as important as bullet structure with the right speed and energy.
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 5:16:29 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Rooster-Cogburn:
It sounds about as legit as using birdshot for HD.

Tons of loser dipshits are current or ex military.
View Quote


go watch a video of what birdshot can do to flesh at close range.
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 5:19:50 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Assaulter:

Hydrostatic?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Assaulter:
Originally Posted By frayedknot:
Originally Posted By explodingvarmints:
"The absolute nastiest round to get hit with. It can hit you in the hip and exit out your foot. That's what it's designed to do."

Now I'm not a military guy but from most books I've read a common theme is that it's not so dynamic and, more often than not needs multiple hits to put a man down.

B.S.?


Absolutely BS. The 5.56 round is so effective because of hydraulic shock. When the bullet hits soft tissue, it transmits a significant amount of energy to the surrounding tissue. This sudden spike disturbs and upsets the CNS, thus incapacitating the tango...sometimes to the point of death...even when hit on an extremity. There is lots of BS out there but start reading about hydraulic shock.

Hydrostatic?

That's what he meant, but he's wrong. Shooting someone in the leg will not cause hydrostatic shock that disrupts the CNS.


Link Posted: 4/27/2015 5:22:24 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/27/2015 5:24:10 PM EDT by _DR]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By daa9mm:

Lots of people go on hearsay and have never put a bullet into flesh.
Caliber isn't as important as bullet structure with the right speed and energy.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By daa9mm:
Originally Posted By Rooster-Cogburn:
It sounds about as legit as using birdshot for HD.

Tons of loser dipshits are current or ex military.

Lots of people go on hearsay and have never put a bullet into flesh.
Caliber isn't as important as bullet structure with the right speed and energy.



I have never put a bullet into human flesh, but I have worked with quite a few GSWs in the years I worked trauma, I always inquired as to what caliber/bullet firearm was used. Usually I was able to find out most of the info. My most vivid memory was a .45 ACP GSW to the head, ruled a suicide.

When we got him he was still alive, at least he had a rhythm, but nobody home. Made an unholy mess.
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 5:27:13 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By c7aea15:


go watch a video of what birdshot can do to flesh at close range.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By c7aea15:
Originally Posted By Rooster-Cogburn:
It sounds about as legit as using birdshot for HD.

Tons of loser dipshits are current or ex military.


go watch a video of what birdshot can do to flesh at close range.



Cheney shot a dude in the face with birdshot from 7 yards away. No permanent injuries.
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 5:27:28 PM EDT
LOL
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 5:31:19 PM EDT
oh yea?!? well I shot a Ivan in Basic at 300 meters with my old M16E1 that was made by Hydromatic and knocked him flat on his back, he never got up.

so there! <finger snap>

Link Posted: 4/27/2015 5:32:35 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/27/2015 5:36:42 PM EDT by Rooster-Cogburn]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By c7aea15:


go watch a video of what birdshot can do to flesh at close range.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By c7aea15:
Originally Posted By Rooster-Cogburn:
It sounds about as legit as using birdshot for HD.

Tons of loser dipshits are current or ex military.


go watch a video of what birdshot can do to flesh at close range.


LOL

Like this one?
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 5:34:40 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By djburnett:



Cheney shot a dude in the face with birdshot from 7 yards away. No permanent injuries.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By djburnett:
Originally Posted By c7aea15:
Originally Posted By Rooster-Cogburn:
It sounds about as legit as using birdshot for HD.

Tons of loser dipshits are current or ex military.


go watch a video of what birdshot can do to flesh at close range.



Cheney shot a dude in the face with birdshot from 7 yards away. No permanent injuries.


30-40 yards.

7 yards or HD distances even with bird shot would make for a very bad time. Plus it is less likely to over penetrate or go through your house into your neighbors like buck shot could.
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 5:38:39 PM EDT
I fucking love these threads.
Link Posted: 4/27/2015 5:44:21 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/27/2015 5:46:45 PM EDT by jon7400]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By MMcCall:
Someone needs to Photoshop up one of those "Aw geez, not this shit again!" pictures using Eugene Stoner or Robert McNamara.
View Quote


Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 4
Top Top