5.56 nato "wounding" round?

If your talking just deer hunting rounds there are alot better rounds than the 223 JMO.

Sundsvall asked if it was a effectivev hunting round. I say yes with the right bullet and within the right range. Shot placement is critical with anything.
 
5.56 works well at reasonable distances against personnel. Its a bit light for 4legged critters of the hunted variety. Folks forget game animals are quite a bit more resiliant than humans. 7.62 is a much better option for a crossover weapon. YMMV.
 
Erichsen posted a lot of good stuff. This is some of it:


I have 5.56's with 1in 12 rifling. Good for 55 grain rounds. Will not stabilize or fire accurately the 62 grain M855 ammo, or the heavier rounds

1 in 9 : Most barrells currently made have this. It's a great compromise. It does ok with the lighter and heavier bullets.

1 in 7: Used for a while on some Colts, possibly some others. This will over stabilize the rounds causing at times self destruction in flight ( lightly constructed 55 grain ammo) , or, in the case of the 62 grain green tip M855 the overstabilization causes it to shoot well, but it won't tumble on impact. Example: the complaints of not enough stopping power in Somalia. The rounds just "drilled" through not doing enough damage.

This rifling is great with the 72 grain ammo, and commonly used in match rifles.

Personal experience: After several failures to stop using the 12 guage with first #4 buck, then number 1 buck the .223's were brought out. With 55 grain SP ammo we had no more failures to stop. To be honest, I only know of one survivor. He was tore up bad enough to the point he had a colostomy bag for life.

All were within 125 yards or less. Typically within 70 yards on adrenaline fueled men wearing no body armor.

It impressed me enough to the point that I keep a .223 handy for home defense rather than a 12 guage.

Joe

Joe,

Range is a factor. I'm not surprised that the shotgun, assuming a range of 50 yards plus, was less effective.

Most of the miltiary rifles in 5.56, other than perhaps the M16A/3/4 platforms have 1 twist in about 10 inches, or 1 twist in about 9 inches, consistent with the practice in the bulk of civilian sporting rifles. The 1 twist in 7 does appear to have had some detrimental affect on projectile yaw on impact, but is well suited to the 72-77 grain projectiles, though there is no indication that regular troops will be receiving this ammo anytime soon. The compromise for "over stabalizing" twist rates, as I understand it, was to support the new longer range high and low intensity tracers, which as has always been the case, are very long indeed. Without a fast rifling twist, the tracers were totally unstable and as yardage increased, the tracers would veer well off course, providing no meaningful indication of point of aim for night time operations.

One has to wonder about the practical use of tracers given the greater emphasis on aimed fire. If the sole purpose of a few tracer rounds is to alert a battle weary user that the last few rounds are coming, it probably doesn't matter if the tracer strays wildly. Considering that the normal operating mode is semi-auto, probably pointless to worry about tracer performance. Many armies won't even load tracers at the bottom of the mag because it can alert a maneuvering enemy to time their attack.

One can only hope that the longer, heavier projectiles will make up the balance of the ammunition supplied to regular troops sooner rather than later. Even M855A1 is still a 62 grain projectile, a bit too light and short to be well optimized for the fast twist of the M16A4 and M4 rifles. That tiny pin-hole in the point still has Army JAG worried about compliance with the Hague Convention even if it isn't functioning as a hollow point at all.

Cheers,

-E
 
One can only hope that the longer, heavier projectiles will make up the balance of the ammunition supplied to regular troops sooner rather than later. Even M855A1 is still a 62 grain projectile, a bit too light and short to be well optimized for the fast twist of the M16A4 and M4 rifles. That tiny pin-hole in the point still has Army JAG worried about compliance with the Hague Convention even if it isn't functioning as a hollow point at all.

It was just on the news here about two weeks ago that the US is shipping new "green" ammo to Afghanistan. IIRC, It's a no lead projectile, no lead priming compound. I believe this is the M855A1? Is this the one you refer to with the open tip? I've read that the UK, and some other NATO countries are resisting the round in question.

BTW, We had failures to stop as close as 15 yards with the shotgun, Full, and modified choke ( depending on the model) using #1 plated buck. These were 2 and three quarters inch ( mini magnums ) 12 guage.

Some guys were later found to be carrying 7 or more pellets in them with decent penetration. One guy had 17. He got away, but later expired.
 
=
Most of the miltiary rifles in 5.56, other than perhaps the M16A/3/4 platforms have 1 twist in about 10 inches, or 1 twist in about 9 inches, consistent with the practice in the bulk of civilian sporting rifles.

-E

Really? The M16A2/3/4, the M4 and the M249 have a 1/7 twist.
 
Really? The M16A2/3/4, the M4 and the M249 have a 1/7 twist.

Isn't that what he said? Other than the M16A2/3/4 and the M4 and M249, how many other military rifles are chambered for 5.56 NATO? How many of them have 1 in 9 or 1 in 10 twist rifling? I'm not up on the poodle shooters, so I really don't know.
 
Isn't that what he said? Other than the M16A2/3/4 and the M4 and M249, how many other military rifles are chambered for 5.56 NATO? How many of them have 1 in 9 or 1 in 10 twist rifling? I'm not up on the poodle shooters, so I really don't know.

His statement was that most military rifles chambered in 5.56 except for the M16A/3/4 feature a 1/10 or 1/9 twist, when in the U.S. arsenal, there is only one rifle chambered in 5.56 that does NOT have a twist of 1/7 and that is the M16A1 which has a twist of 1/12.

And I am not a huge fan of "poodle shooters" either, but until the Department of the Army lets me choose which rifle I take on deployments, it's probably going to be chambered in 5.56, and that is the consensus of most of the soldiers I have met.

I will say this in the defense of the 5.56 (and all rounds people say are "underpowered"): the ability to reliably hit your target is far more important than the size of the projectile that you shoot in your targets general direction.
 
Really? The M16A2/3/4, the M4 and the M249 have a 1/7 twist.

Indeed, FAMAS, Steyr Aug, SA80/L85, Galil, G36, Tavor, SG550, etc all have rate of twist of about 1 twist in 9" or 1 twist in about 10." The rationale appears to be that you only give the minimum stability to rounds up to about 60-70 grain, tracers aren't important enough to tighten up the twist. The US M16A3-A4 and M4 platforms may not be completely unique in the world, but the US is certainly in the minority in it's drill-bit like twist rates. The benefit of the tight "corkscrew" twist rate of modern M16 and M4 platforms may prove useful if 72-77 grain ammo becomes standard issue, which could be a real boon to barrier penetration and overall effectiveness, especially at longer ranges.

It will probably take too long and cost too much to switch calibers at this late stage of the game given budget pressures. Don't hold your breath on a polar shift in calibers anytime soon, even if a 6.5 mm or 6.8 mm caliber would solve most of these problems and create relatively few new ones.

-E
 
Last edited:
It was just on the news here about two weeks ago that the US is shipping new "green" ammo to Afghanistan. IIRC, It's a no lead projectile, no lead priming compound. I believe this is the M855A1? Is this the one you refer to with the open tip? I've read that the UK, and some other NATO countries are resisting the round in question.

BTW, We had failures to stop as close as 15 yards with the shotgun, Full, and modified choke ( depending on the model) using #1 plated buck. These were 2 and three quarters inch ( mini magnums ) 12 guage.

Some guys were later found to be carrying 7 or more pellets in them with decent penetration. One guy had 17. He got away, but later expired.

Mastiff,

Yes, a great bit of PR with questionable value in theatre. The original M855A1 was bismuth/tin alloy behind a steel penetrator, like the current M855, same weight, minus the lead core behind the steel cone (both are the same 62 grains). Bismuth has slightly higher mass than lead, though when alloyed with tin the alloy will have about the same density as lead. Bismuth should be familiar to many waterfowl hunters as the fairly high cost lead-free shotshell pellet payload which are sometimes used as an improvement over non-expanding steel shot. The high heat of a hot chamber was simulated by one of the Army proving labs and certain failures were detected, something to do with separation of core from the jacket. The rounds were pulled before large volumes were supplied. The "improved" M855A1 is a pure copper core, presumably behind a truncated cone steel penetrator and still 62 grains. Given the lower mass, I have to assume this is a longer round than the original, which may actually need that tight 1 twist in 7" twist. I'm waiting to see comparisons when projectiles of both the original and new types are compared against M855 in my favorite ammo write-ups.

The primary value for lead-free rounds is for use in indoor ranges, not outdoors or in combat (combat is far more dangerous than lead dust wafting from the barrel, so I hear). They also cost more to produce as they use a more expensive metal to displace a cheaper metal and it's not clear what impact this will have on effectiveness given the differences copper has with lead mechanically. I also don't know if the steel penetrator is smaller or larger than in M855, which could change the center of gravity dramatically.

-E
 
Last edited:
It was just on the news here about two weeks ago that the US is shipping new "green" ammo to Afghanistan. IIRC, It's a no lead projectile, no lead priming compound. I believe this is the M855A1? Is this the one you refer to with the open tip? I've read that the UK, and some other NATO countries are resisting the round in question.

BTW, We had failures to stop as close as 15 yards with the shotgun, Full, and modified choke ( depending on the model) using #1 plated buck. These were 2 and three quarters inch ( mini magnums ) 12 guage.

Some guys were later found to be carrying 7 or more pellets in them with decent penetration. One guy had 17. He got away, but later expired.

Mastiff,

Yes, a great bit of PR with questionable value in theatre. The original M855A1 was bismuth/tin alloy behind a steel penetrator, like the current M855, same weight, minus the lead core behind the steel cone (62 grains). Bismuth has slightly higher mass than lead, the same when alloyed with tin and is familiar to most waterfowl hunters as the fairly high cost lead-free shotshell pellets that are an improvement over non-expanding steel shot. The high heat of a hot chamber was simulated and there was supposedly separation from the jacket, so the rounds were pulled before large volumes were supplied. The "improved" M855A1 is a copper core, presumably behind a truncated cone steel penetrator and still 62 grains. Given the lower mass, I have to assume this is a longer round than the original, which may actually need that tight 1 twist in 7" twist. I'm waiting to see comparisons when rounds of both the original and new types are compared against M855 in my favorite ammo write-ups.

The primary value for lead-free rounds is for use in indoor ranges, not outdoors or in combat (combat is far more dangerous than lead dust wafting from the barrel, so I hear). They also cost more to produce as they use a more expensive metal to displace a cheaper metal and it's not clear what impact this will have on effectiveness given the differences copper has with lead mechanically. I also don't know if the steel penetrator is smaller or larger than in M855, which could change the center of gravity dramatically.

-E
 
people always talk about the .223 and other .22 caliber bullets not having the power to kill effectively. While I have never taken down a deer with a .223, I have killed a few deer with a .22 lr, with a bolt action, in one shot. A good head or spine shot is good out to about 75yds with a .22lr.
 
Yeah, take out a .223 rifle and start shooting stuff. You'll get an idea of what kind of "wound" it would create.
 
However, the bullet is expected to tumble upon entry, otherwise it will pass through with the same amount of damage as .22LR.

Is it the reputed "wounding round"? Is 5.56 intended for soldiers only or is effective as a hunting round as well?

A synopsis from a couple of studies...
Exaggerated descriptions of the wounding effects of the M16 rifle bullet flourish as great works of urban lore. One fable describes a bullet that tumbles end-over-end in flight as soon as it exits the muzzle of the rifle. Another legend provides a dramatic account of an unstable, super-high velocity bullet that tumbles and chews its way through flesh like a buzz saw. Although there appears to be a tinge of half-truth behind these entertaining and awe-inspiring mythical tales, these stories do not represent an accurate description of the wounding characteristics of the M16 bullet.

When the M16 cartridge is fired and the bullet is propelled down the bore, the bore’s rifling imparts a gyroscopic spin to the bullet. This gyroscopic rotation is needed to maintain point forward stabilization of the bullet as it flies through the air. This method of bullet stabilization is identical to the rotational spin applied to a football when thrown by a quarterback (American football).

The Earth’s gaseous atmosphere is approximately 400 times less dense than the body's soft tissues. When the M16 bullet strikes and plows into the body, the rotational spin that stabilized its flight through the air is insufficient to maintain its stability as it flies through dense tissue. The bullet typically penetrates point forward for approximately 4-5 inches before it begins to seek a state of stability in the body.

The bullet’s pointed shape makes it heavier at its base than its nose, producing a center of gravity that is located aft of its longitudinal centerline. When the bullet hits the body and penetrates, the bullet attempts to rotate 180 degrees around its center of gravity to achieve a base forward orientation. This backwards orientation is the bullet’s stable position in tissue because it places the center of gravity forward.

As the bullet yaws through 90 degrees and is traveling sideways through flesh, the stress of tissue resistance to bullet passage can overpower the physical integrity of the bullet. The bullet has a groove around its midsection called a cannelure. The purpose of the cannelure is to permit the mouth of the cartridge case to be crimped tightly against the bullet shank to hold it firmly to the case. The cannelure weakens the structural integrity of the bullet's copper jacket.

At distances of 100 yards and under, when the bullet hits the body and yaws through 90 degrees, the stresses on the bullet cause the leading edge to flatten, extruding lead core out the open base, just before it breaks apart at the cannelure. The portion of the bullet forward of the cannelure, the nose, usually remains in one piece and retains about 60 percent of the bullet's original weight. The portion of the bullet aft of the cannelure, the base, violently disintegrates into multiple lead core and copper jacket fragments, which penetrate up to 3-inches radially outward from the wound track. The fragments perforate and weaken the surrounding tissues allowing the subsequent temporary cavity to forcibly stretch and rip open the multiple small wound tracks produced by the fragments. The resulting wound is similar to one produced by a commercial expanding bullet used for varmint hunting, however the maximum tissue damage produced by the military bullet is located at a greater penetration depth.

(The increased wounding effects produced by bullet fragmentation were not well understood until the mid-1980’s. Therefore the wounding effects of the original M16 rifle bullet were not an intentional U.S. military design characteristic.)

At distances between 100-200 yards the bullet commonly breaks in half at the cannelure forming two large penetrating fragments, the nose and base.

At distances beyond 200 yards the bullet usually remains intact due to velocity decay. It simply yaws 180 degrees to penetrate backwards through the body.

http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs13.htm
 
I know hide hunters who consider the .223 to be heavy artillery, preferring the .17 mach IV instead. I'm guessing that most of you guys aren't worried about sewing up the pelts of your potential targets... I guess my point is that you have to choose your cartridge based on what you want to happen when the bullet strikes the target. Here's my preference of rifles

.22 LR > plinking and small game
.223 > long distance varmint hunting
.243 > small deer
.270 > large deer and elk

I don't know much about 2-legged targets, and I would be just as happy to never find out, but I live in an apartment so hollow-point handgun rounds and a shotgun loaded with bird-shot provide my LAST line of defense (I'd hate a high powered round to go though an intruder, a wall, another wall, and a neighbor).
 
Re: Australia. .243 is accepted as the 'big enough' round here. We have friends shoo Roo's here (to feed the dogs) with the little .17 magnums. These average out to about 20kgs (44lbs) of usable meat.
 
5.56 works well at reasonable distances against personnel. Its a bit light for 4legged critters of the hunted variety. Folks forget game animals are quite a bit more resiliant than humans. 7.62 is a much better option for a crossover weapon. YMMV.

Eh you forget....a headshot.....is a headshot....A .223 will kill almost whatever you need to as good as any other round as long as you put it in the right place.
 
so will a .22 long rifle, its a long ways from being a good choice for that kinda stuff though.

the trick is to hit the head, thats not always easy to do, for me anyway, especially at dusk(for some reason lite is always an issue when i hunt), from 75-80 yards, with the animal moving, with adrenaline flowing, i've always thought a .30-'06 was a bit more forgiving, ya no longer need the head shot with an '06.
 
I've always told her that precise shot placement is critical, no matter the game. We don't take sloppy shots.

Well said.

That's the answer right there that everyone is seeking.

No matter what your shooting and or what your shooting it's where you aim at or shoot at on your target be it an animal or a person really is what counts.

Unles of course your shotting a 50cal. you will of course destroy whatever you hit wherever you hit it. :D
 
Back
Top