Ryno_the_wyno and Q-gunner2, you need to do more research before typing as many of your statements are in error.  On the other hand, most of what HeavyMetal is stating is correct.  For example, I personally spoke with the senior DOD JAG officer about this subject in the last week and I have the DOD JAG authorization for unrestricted land warfare use of the Mk262 on my desk next to me as I type.  

Quoted: Ryno_the_wyno and Q-gunner2, you need to do more research before typing as many of your statements are in error.  On the other hand, most of what HeavyMetal is stating is correct.  For example, I personally spoke with the senior DOD JAG officer about this subject in the last week and I have the DOD JAG authorization for unrestricted land warfare use of the Mk262 on my desk next to me as I type.

Don't confuse these two with facts.  They will only become emotional and present more inane arguments.  As it is said:  a little knowledge is worse than none.

Ryno_the_wyno, I am sorry but your post about terminal ballistics has a couple of fallacies.  

1.  5.45 IS NOT more lethal than M193 or M855.  Even if the aforementioned rounds do not fragment they still do "tumble" as do ALL Spitzer shaped projectiles.  It is a matter of physics; the heavy end (rear) wants to continue forward after the bullets loses its gyroscopic stability (created via rifling) when it enters the much more dense (compared to air) medium of tissue.

2.  The heavy 75 and 77 OTMs ARE legal for use in warfare, it has been determined by JAG.  The reason they are considered legal is because the "hollow tip" is designed with accuracy in mind not lethality, the fact that these rounds fragment so well is kind of a nice fluke.  But since they are not "designed" to expand or cause "inhumane" wounds, they are in accordance with the Hague Accords.


ETA:  I read the whole thread after I posted, so I see my above points have all ready been made.

I have read the JAG report about HP and OTM bullets. I must have been unclear about whether or not a ruling had been made about its use outside the war on terror. Years back, JAG ruled that HP rounds could be used against terror groups, as they were outside the provisions of the commonly understood rules of land warefare. If you have the document that proves thier legality, I submit.
My point is still valid. JAG will rule in favor of American troops every time*usually* to give them the most effective tools for the job, as is thier duty. My point was more of a macro view about a possible future conflict. OTM, HP its all semantics. While JAG can skirt the issue and camoflauge the facts, MK262 is significatnly more lethal than standard ball ammo, and bullet design plays a huge role in this fact. I sincerely doubt DPRK and Iran will buy into the semantics and agree that Mk262 isn't a HP. Against terrorists, I don't see an issue. Against an orgnaized, state's military this could be a conumdrum as if we are "bending" rules, why shouldn't they. Irreguardless of MK262's legalites, I am still concerned about the potential for circumventing the laws of war, just because you have a JAG decree. Perhaps I was operating off old information, never the less, thank you for not being an Ass. I appreciate a good discussion where all can learn, even if someone is wrong and not have to have the thread locked because of immaturity.

Your assertion that 5.45 has inferior lethality to M193 and M855 is falise. From your statements, I am gathering that you belive 5.56 is more lethal because it fragments in addition to yawing, as opposed to just yawing like 5.45. If this isn't your point, please correct me. Even though 5.45 doesn't fragment, the wounds caused by its yawing are more extensive than wounds caused by some 5.56 ball rounds which fragment. It yaws very early after impact and can make several rotations while in the torso or even make abrupt turns, greatly enhancing wounding ability.On paper, fragmentation seems like a great wounding method. In reality, its unpredictible and unreliable. There is variation in lot to lot of ammunition and reduced velocity and a thicker jacket can minmize the effectivenss of the round. 5.56's fragmentation range is limited, and beyond that its wounding ability is compromised. 5.45 doesn't have this envelope and thus its more effective, especially out of short barreld weapons.

Quoted: MK2623 is absolutely land warfare legal, IM DocGKR or Brouhaha if you don't believe me.  JAG has ruled it an OTM, not an HP.  People on this forum have attempted to explain this to you in regards to this subject in the past. You seem to be unique in your stedfast opinion that MK262 is not land warefare legal.

Not that I really want to jump into this hornets nest.... but I thought that what they had ruled was that since the fight was not against a legitimate army of a recognized nation that this round could be used. Meaning that while it can be used in the war on terror, it could not have been used against the Warsaw Pact if things had gotten squirly.
Just looking for some clarification.
Thanks.

No sir, your assertion that the 5.45 is more lethal than M193 or M855 is false.

READ

READ II

Ask Broah and Tat form Ammolabs and they will tell you the same.  They have done testing, as have others, and those in the know will tell you same as me.

Again, even if 5.56 rounds DO NOT FRAG, they still tumble...just like the 5.45.

You are asserting that a non-fragmenting M193 and M855 will yaw to such an extent that it will surpass the lethality of the 7N6 or M74 5.45x39 round? I like 5.56 too, but I don't see how a round that was primarily designed to wound by fragmentation can yaw better and wound more than a round designed to violently yaw in the first place. I am not convinced any of the information you have provided categoricaly proves that 5.56 ball rounds are more lethal 5.45x39 ball rounds.
While ballistic gel is a good indicator of a bullets performance in living tissue, I have conducted and been a party to living tissue tests of 5.45 bullets, and every time, 5.45 7N6 was more lethal and caused significantly more damage. You can find fault in everyone's testing methods/practices, however I trust my results and colleagues and I stand by my assertions.

Until you have actually participated in living tissue tests, don't give me your pro-5.56 propaganda. I just don't see how the secondary wounding effects of 5.56 ball can be more effective than the devastating primary wounding effect of 5.45x39. I am sure you read alot of gun magazines, but I have seen the devastation and descive lethality of 5.45 7N6 and I don't feel this is fully demonstrated by gel testing alone. Ballistic gelatin testing is a great way to guesstimate what a round will do in living tissue, but there is no substitute for the real thing. I will post my 5.45vs5.56 against Coyotes, so people who have never contributed more than smart allecky remarks and links can rip apart my credentials and testing methods, when I have the time to present everything in a clear/concise package. While all FMJ bullets will yaw to an extent, few can mimic the violence of the 5.45x39, a round specifically designed to yaw radically. A non-fragmenting 5.56 Ball round can't possibly be expected to outperform 5.45 on the merits of its secondary or tertiary effects. Compare a 55 or 62 grain bullet in shape and size to a 5.45 60 grn FMJ, which happens to be a long and slender bullet. its possible for a 5.45 FMJ to make up to 3 complete revolutions, or more while in the torso. Provided there is no yawing,improbable, but just suppose and there is a minimal amount of tissue disruption. The longer bullet traveling end over end is going to make a larger wound, unless you have a link or some name dropping that will

disprove this? While I appreciate the work of the site staff, I don't take everything they or anyone says as gospel truth, and neither should you. I would reccomend you do your own testing, as I have done and make your own conclusion. I appreciate a good discussion, and I mean this with respect and not an attack on you or your credentials, but you sound like a biased, 5.56 elitist.
And please don't tell me how much better Mk262 or TAP is than 5.45...why people inist on comparing a OTM or HP to FMJ bullets is beyond me.

Quoted: Quoted: Ohhh! Jello tests! I love Jello tests! And I always bet my life on the results! When you come up with a documented, better, repeatable methodology that can be conducted under controlled conditions, please let us know.   Untill then, you can bet your life on non-repeatable, anecdotal evidence. You know I love wind tunnel tests with models!  I always bet my life on the results when I fly! If you perfer anecdote, then read this: www.gunsandammomag.com/ammunition/mk262_080105/ When a five-man Special Forces team looking for Scuds in Iraq ran into a reinforced Iraqi infantry company, the future looked grim for the Americans. Facing overwhelming odds, it was quickly decided that three men armed with sniper rifles would cover a hasty retreat back to the LZ. With these odds death--or worse--seemed certain. Yet the ensuing firefight did not go as the Iraqis had planned. Rather than being overwhelmed, the three Americans instead put down a hail of highly accurate rifle fire. Advancing against this murderous wall, entire sections of Iraqi infantry were simply cut down. Screaming and rattling away with their Kalashnikovs on full auto, they were knocked from their feet by carefully aimed shots. When staggering losses finally broke their spirit, the surviving Iraqis either threw down their weapons or simply ran away. Scattered about lay the bodies of 167 of their comrades. The Iraqi dead lay in mute testimony to the Americans' tenacity and marksmanship skill. With the criticism of poor terminal performance leveled by many on the 5.56x45, you would think those 167 Iraqis were cut down by 7.62mm M14s. Such was not the case. They fell to 5.56 Mk 12 sniper rifles firing 77-grain Mk 262 Open Tip Match ammunition. Developed to offer increased accuracy, range and improved terminal performance over the standard 62-grain M855 load, the Mk 262 has performed quite well in actual combat. This impressive combat record has stimulated a great deal of interest among civilian shooters, so we thought we'd take a look at this load and its Russian and Chinese counterparts.

Other than executions, shooting situations are by nature not controlled, and none are repeatable. However, enough people have been shot using the 7.62 x 39 that jello tests are unnecessary. In case you haven't noticed the human body is not made up of a homogenous substance, which is the fatal flaw of all such tests.

OK, you'all MADE me DO IT..............

The 5.45 was developed as part of Moscows' vaunted ABM System...in advent of incoming US Warheads, the "Magical" 5.45 was to be fired by massed troops (or whoever didn't rate a space in the shelter) at the incoming warheads.

No kidding. Campybob told me, in Tent 52.........a long time ago.....

Ryno :"I will post my 5.45vs5.56 against Coyotes..."

Great.  However, I fail to see how a 30-40 lb quadruped provides an accurate medium for a terminal ballistics comparison; especially when trying to correlate the results to a 200 lb human being...

A 45 Gr. Blitzking from a .223 is devastating to a yote, but that does that mean its use for personal defense should be advocated?  

I am hoping you are shaking your head no.

BTW:  It is news to me that Fackler is a 5.56 propagandist...maybe you should research more of his and other experts work in the field.  In fact, because you are apparently so well schooled in ballistics research, take me through your methodology.



Provied me something thats supports your opinion please.  A link from a credable source would be great.

Quoted: Other than executions, shooting situations are by nature not controlled, and none are repeatable. However, enough people have been shot using the 7.62 x 39 that jello tests are unnecessary. In case you haven't noticed the human body is not made up of a homogenous substance, which is the fatal flaw of all such tests. Rolled Homegenous Armor is no longer used in US Tanks but is is used a a method to compare Anti tank rounds to each other and it has proven a valid mathod even in this age of Chobam armor. One could easily the further testing of the 5.56 is unnecessary as there have been tens of thousands shot with it as well. The problem is your premis is flawed.  Ballistic gellatin design has been modified through the years by feedback from actual live shootings.  It is the best non-living test medium we have and the results obtained match up pretty closely to the results from living tissue.  To say such tests are not necessary is patently absurd. This allows us to not only test one caliber against another but one load against another You would be remiss to think that no live tissue tests are conducted by the US military as these are conducted as a check and feedback on gelatin tests. Ask DcoGKR, he is the guy who runs these tests for the US Military.

No one in their right mind thinks that the U.S. Government would ever admit to running live tests of cartridges on human beings. What planet are you posting from?

ETA: Big news! Homogenous armor and the human body have NOTHING in common. Get a Grip!
ETA: You're right. no further testing of 5.56 is necessary. We know it's a dud. Unless of course you're trying to sell the military another wonder round. Then you rig up some new jello tests to convince the Pentagon Procurers that you have found the latest panacea, and then make millions from the government.

So, you are saying that Jello is closer to tissue than a 30-40lb quadraped, composed entirely of living tissue? If you don't think my living tissue results are applicable, then you must not put much stock in gel testing. Its been a while since I have seen anyone shot in the gel, but I am still fairly young.
45 and 55grn ballistic tip bullets are certainly effective for defensive use. In fact, many SWAT entry teams prefer the use of these rounds as they have suitible performance with a minimized risk of collateral damage. Exchanging automatic weapons fire with a barricaded suspect with Mk262 or 75grn TAP in a trailer park is a bad idea. In confined spaces like an apartment, these rounds are a very reasonable choice. Granted, they aren't likely going to have the penetration to make it through thick clothes to make mortal wounds, employing multiple shots and practicing failure drills would cancel this problem out. Its lack of penetration is a blessing and a curse, and while I believe there are better choices, they are valid defensive rounds and many agencies use them for just that purpose.
Its news to me that Fackler is a 5.56 propagandist....that remark was leveled at you, not Dr.Fackler. You should spend less time linking and regurgitating the opinions of so-called experts and more time doing for your self. In case you didnt know, there are droves of people who think Fackler is a moron. I am not necessarily one of those people, just pointing out that for every expert that has a webpage, there are five more bashing said experts credentials and tests.
As far as my methodology, what questions do you have? IM me and I would be happy to take you through my experiment step by step.

We can go back and forth all day long, chewing up bandwith...but lets not. You apparently can't fathom anything being better than 5.56. While I appreciate 5.56 and I feel its an excellent/capable round, my experience/research shows 5.45x39 7N6 to be a more effective combat round than 5.56 FMJ rounds.  On a bad day, 5.45 is equal to 5.56 FMJ's....thats about the only concession I am willing to make here. If you doubt the 5.45's dramatic wounding ability, take it up with the Red Cross/UN special commity which was convened to evaluate the alleged brutality of this round....While some European nations protested M193(after this, mind you), the Red Cross did not protest the lethality/brutality of 5.56. The Red Cross was in Vietnam, so M193's wounding ability isn't a mystery to them. However suggested that we test rounds on humans is a trout. The only humans I know of who have tasted .gov lead for no other apparent reason other than testing all died in Waco....Anyways, you are not a complete moron/troll and you have some semblance of whats going on, and I respect that....we are just going to have to disagree on this one.  I just feel like you refuse to accept or even entertain the idea that 5.45x39 can even encroach upon 5.56 lethality. Since you are so into links/websites, find me a link that definitively states that 5.56 FMJ's are a superior combat round that current 5.45x39 7N6. I haven't found one yet, though I probably spend more time in the field then reading internet articles.

P.S. Please don't take anything I have said as a personal attack. I meant no offense. I appreciate a spirited discussion where two people can respectfully disagree. You could have been an infantle dick from the get-go, but you weren't...right or wrong, hopefully someone can learn from our exchange. Thanks for keeping it civil....I just don't think we are going to convince each other.

Quoted: First off, the case is straight walled, not tapered. While theoretically this allows for more accuracy, it also is less reliable in fully automatic weapons. It works well enough in the real world, even in the Kalashnikov.  The Russians have 100 series 5.56 AKs and then there is the Galil. Additionally, the 5.56mm is inferior in wound damage to the 5.45 Good as it is, nothing 5.45 tops the MK262 Mod1 in terrminal effect. Better 5.56 rounds are in constant development.

Isn't the same true about 5.45x39? I remember hearing that the russians developed a 5.45 round that had better penitration...

Quoted: I want to see the 77gr. munitions through a 14.5" barreled rifle, and the drop trajectory for the rifle sighted in at ONE HUNDRED yards. All the 7.62x39mm data I have is for sighted in at 100 yards, so how can I make a fair comparison when the data is misrepresented for the 5.56mm? A 200 or 250m zero is standard.  I zero nothing to 100 nor do I see any purpose in doing so.  Battle sight zeros are commonly 250-300m. You can find an online ballistic calculator like this one and punch the ballistic coefficients for the respective rounds, the muzzle velocities and zero range desired. For a 100M zero with the 77gr SMK with a BC of .362 and a mv of 2650fps, I get 5.56 inches low at 200, and 18.52" low at 300 and 40.58 at 400. For the 7.62x39 with a BC of 0.292 and a mv of 2300fps, I get 8.1 low at 200 and 27.41 low at 300 and 61.49 low at 400.

Just thought I would add.
Russian 7.62x39 boattail weighs 122 grains and develops a muzzle velocity of 2,411 fps in the SKS, and 2,329 fps in the AK.

Trajectory of this cartridge fired from a SKS zeroed in at 300 meters are as follows.

At muzzle=0,
25m=2.2in,
50m=5.1in,
100m=9.3in,
150m=11.7in,
200m=11in,
250m=7.6in,
300m=0.

It is a efficient cartidge for medium ranges with good penetration and I would take it over 5.56x45 or 5.45x39 anyday.

Ryno, I see you have not provided any sources...your ignorance in the subject of terminal ballistics especially that in regard to the 556 is astounding.  Prove me wrong, enlighten me.  Give me some verifiable facts, if I am so wrong.



No offense, but if you are going to espouse rhetoric you should provide some kind of proof to back up your argument; again no offense, but just for future reference.



another source of info with its own links to studies/research/REAL DATA

Heavy, having been there and done that a long, long time ago in a country far, far away I'm not interested in Jello tests or in a bullet's effect on goats, cows, pigs, ducks or hamsters. I've seen, up close, the effectiveness of the 7.62 round. Remember that the 5.56 was imposed on the U.S. military by an accountant (FYI Robert McNamara). If you believe that an accountant is the person best qualified to choose a rifle cartridge for you, so be it. After all you'll never shoot anything more dangerous than an empty pop can anyway and pop cans don't charge when wounded!

ETA: You can always rely on body counts. They are ALWAYS absolutely accurate. Just ask any experienced infantryman. He'll swear that he NEVER inflated a body count.