Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 6/14/2003 6:38:35 AM EDT
In this month's article, that Troy also gets kudos to, is an article comparing the Rem 870 and Mossberg 500 shotguns. I'm going to quote a paragraph in the article. What do you guys think?

"If your reasons are that you'll be shooting at distance and need to hump a bunch of ammo to deal with dozens of targets, that's fine. But that probably means you're a soldier posted overseas or a police officer involved in an extended firefight from hell-and you'd better have something better than the SOON-TO-BE replaced ineffectual .223 carbine, which is good for only short distance contacts. Let's face it, the .223 may be ideal as a general purpose weapon for law enforcement, but it sucks as a battle rifle except for urban street and house clearing...
Link Posted: 6/14/2003 7:03:07 AM EDT
Heck, Stoner bad-mouthed the round too but at least he did so in private !! If the present trend continues toward shorter-and-shorter barrels some fool is gonna market an AR-15 with a 3" barrel and a sound suppressor shooting sub-sonic bullets and some other fool is gonna buy it and wonder why there's no knock-downs at 400 meters !!
Link Posted: 6/14/2003 7:19:22 AM EDT
This is why the 5.45x39 is a better performer. Its round is designed to give max performance from a 16" barrel. It is also designed for a more realistic 300 yards and in effective range.
Link Posted: 6/14/2003 9:40:31 AM EDT
Originally Posted By shotar: This is why the 5.45x39 is a better performer. Its round is designed to give max performance from a 16" barrel. It is also designed for a more realistic 300 yards and in effective range.
View Quote
And the .223/5.56 was originally designed to be shot from a 20" barrel with an effective range of about 400 yds. (Although by 1963 and the AR-18 ArmaLite had figured out that excellent performance (3100+fps) could be gotten from an 18.25" barrel.)
Link Posted: 6/14/2003 10:16:35 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/14/2003 10:52:53 AM EDT by mrostov]
The 5.56mm cartridge is a LONG way from being replaced, though there are a large number of American gun enthusiasts that still haven't gotten over the fact that the world's armies by and large have quit using .30-06, .303, and 8mm Mauser. The 5.56mm cartridge is rapidly becoming the most widely issued military cartridge in the history of the world. Virtually everyone who can afford to is going to it, with the notable exceptions being Russia (5.45mm) and China (5.8mm). With Third World dung heaps and poor bankrupt Argentina being prominent exceptions, the 7.62x39mm and the .308/7.62mm NATO is rapidly being phased out everywhere as a general issue rifle round for troops. Even the Chinese are moving to eventually replace the 7.62x39mm round with their new 5.8mm cartridge. China has a logistical nightmare ahead of them on that task - the PLA (Chinese army) and their reserves are HUGE (they can field 40 million trained and equipped reservists, mostly infantry, on a 2 week call up). The .308/7.62mm NATO will remain in service for quite come time as a GPMG and sniper round, but the 5.56mm will rule the battlefield for quite a while. Reports from Iraq show that the 5.56mm did quite well with small arms encounters over 100m being rare and over 300m being even rarer still. ------------------
Link Posted: 6/14/2003 10:50:14 AM EDT
If I recall correctly, Louis comes from the "Gawd's-Honest rifle" school of thought and preferes .30 cal rounds....I could be wrong though.
Link Posted: 6/14/2003 11:13:11 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/14/2003 6:45:18 PM EDT by Troy]
Link Posted: 6/14/2003 12:14:03 PM EDT
Ok I give, Who is Louis Awerbuck ? I guess the 5.56 round is such a POS, that is why EVERY country in the world (except a few) are switching to it. I guess some still haven't gotten the memo.
Link Posted: 6/14/2003 12:19:20 PM EDT
Originally Posted By scottfn308: Ok I give, Who is Louis Awerbuck ?
View Quote
[url=http://www.yfainc.com/]Yavapai Firearms Academy[/url] His book "Tactical Reality" was actually quite a fun read. I like his attitude and style of writing.
Link Posted: 6/14/2003 12:33:04 PM EDT
Originally Posted By shotar: This is why the 5.45x39 is a better performer. Its round is designed to give max performance from a 16" barrel. It is also designed for a more realistic 300 yards and in effective range.
View Quote
5.45x39mm ammo in the best of its loadings is inferior to 5.56x45mm ammo in its best loadings at ALL ranges with comparable barrel lengths in terms of both accuracy and terminal efectiveness. Where did you hear such nonsense?
Link Posted: 6/14/2003 1:04:09 PM EDT
Maybe that guy should get shot by one. I'm wondering if he would badmouth it then... : P
Link Posted: 6/16/2003 12:53:26 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/16/2003 12:53:44 AM EDT by desertmoon]
The few prob's there are with the 5.56 can easily be alleviated by going back to a light twist, a light bullet ( M193 ) and the twenty inch barrel. Ever hear of the 5.56 having problem killing VC or ARVN when the bullet hit 'em in the right spot?
Link Posted: 6/16/2003 2:39:59 AM EDT
In the little i used the M855 and M193 i have to say that i actually prefer the M855 in my carbine. When we'd fire them, the increased penetration through material was desirable, especially if you ever have to shoot through glass, light wood, or a frag vest. In my 'home security' i keep M193 and M855 alternating. I zero with the M855 since its my preferred round, but you are correct that the ballistics of the M193 against soft targets is superior at range. Either way, i've had the pleasure of firing many weapons and when it comes to having to use one, i really do like the .223/5.56 round over any other conventional load except for maybe the 120mm on the M1A1 ;)
Link Posted: 6/16/2003 6:21:20 AM EDT
I keep both around... 5.56 for 2 legged critters (especially in close) and varmints and 7.62 for 2 legged critters at distance and larger critters up close. :) Alex
Top Top