@FighterDragonAllStar No it doesn't; the 7.62x39 is moving much slower than the 5.56; though the 7.62x39 might have a couple of hundred ft/lbs of additional energy, the 5.56 yields much more hydrostatic shock, a vastly superior ballistic coefficient, and it is an inherently more accurate cartridge.
@FighterDragonAllStar dude 5.56 is just the metric conversion for the .223 there are some differences that make it bad to use a 5.56 in a .223 gun but 5.56 is better than .223
@mattmonster93 The myth of the 5.56 tumbling was due to an incorrect twist rate for the high speed of the 5.56 in the early Vietnam era AR's, it would cause rounds to keyhole at range, and tumble . Unfortunately, this actually REDUCES damage; when a round keyholes it loses significant amounts of velocity due to air resistance, and takes away from hydrostatic shock, which is the most significant source of damage from the 5.56 round. Some bullet yaw occurs upon entry into the body cavity however.
@RebelWrestler45 All spitzer shaped rounds tumble because they are not balanced. Yes, lighter rifling rates with make rounds yaw sooner. Hydrostatic shock is almost never the kill factor, and tumbling increases damage like hell. I think you've watched 'Shooter' too many times or something. Also, 5.56 rounds don't key hole in air unless your shooting with a 1:11 twist rate at 500+ yards...
@dysqsarhut I've put enough .22-250 rounds through a myriad of small to large skulls and body cavities to appreciate the potency of hydrostatic shock. Have you used ballistic gelatin before? You will not notice a significant amount of increased yaw in the body cavity with a spitzer, than you would with a boat tail, not to mention any tumbling. With 5.56 ammo, its velocity is its kill factor, yielding tissue damage greater than that of wound channel size due to hydrostatic shock.
@RebelWrestler45 You have confused hydrostatic shock with a stretch cavity. I've used B gel a lot, and since it doesn't have blood or any loose liquid, hydrostatic shock cannot be observed. I think you've been spreading the wrong words around...
@dysqsarhut Ballistic gelatin is a solid, therefore no true hydrostatic shock occurs, but the stretch cavity observed in ballistic gelatin is analogous to hydrostatic shock, in that it provides a visual representation of the relative force and scope of the displacement of matter. This is where ballistic gelatin fails; it is homogeneous, the body cavity is not.
@RebelWrestler45 Read real closely, Hydrostatic shock is the liquids of an organism being displaced harshly enough to cause damage to fragile internal structures like the brain or liver. The stretch cavity is tissue being displaced by the force of a projectile. They are not the same thing. What you observe in an organism shot with a high powered rifle is 'minced' tissue caused by the crushing force. If you observe the brain you would notice lacerations along any liquid containing vessels.
@dysqsarhut Ballistic gelatin isn't an accurate simulation of human tissue, it only mimics the density and resistance of the human body cavity. There is no real 'stretch cavity' in human tissue when it comes in contact with a high velocity projectile, because it has very limited elasticity, the tissue simply ruptures creating a larger wound channel. Being a solid, however, human tissue cannot compress to the degree that an aqueous mass can, thus reducing transfer of energy.
@RebelWrestler45 Uhh, not really. Human flesh is hella elastic. Which actually leaves a stretch cavity next to useless in quite a few scenarios. But when you hit tissue like liver, it tears like sin. issue does compress, but not like gel. It get's crushed, and is deemed 'dead'. There's no reviving that flesh afterwards, it has to be cut out to effectively treat it.
well because it is rather powerful no matter what video games say it produces 1300 pounds of energy when fired from an m16 and 1100 pounds when fired from an m4 the ak47 produces 1500 pounds meaning there isn't too much of a power difference
@tubevideoguy762 ok well now it make sense but i dont even think video games put the pounds of energy and the 223 was designed to cause shock not to kill thats the reason its only .003 times bigger than a 22 and i just went shooting with an ar-10 and an ar-15 and the bullet hole for the ar-10 was twice the size and they werent 308 lapua rounds
@austin4497 You have no idea what you're talking about; hydrostatic shock is incredibly lethal; it causes organ and soft tissue damage, far in excess of the size of the round's wound channel. The .223 was designed to kill, make no mistake about it; the reason for its size is portability; simple as that. I can carry more than twice as much .223 ammo as I can 308, though admittedly I'd rather be armed with a compact M-14 variant, than a short action AR.
@MaxAC40 Max, I hunt, I know what you mean, just referring to stopping power is all. Better to have your target on its ass for its last 1-2 min of existence.
@james257wby no problem, wasn't sure what you meant. and was putting it out there just as a heads up for people who might get their experience from hollywood.
It's just that the way people talk about the .223, it would make you think the guy would actually feel better after getting shot by it.
if they think a 223 is to small for deer, why the hell does our military use 223 for the enemy. 223 can kill walrus for christ sakes, maybe bad shooters should not be hind the a rifle, if they can't apply proper shot placement
ppl just think 223 aint shit, cause its a "223" they dont realize the velocity and makeup of the bullet, they just think its a little better than a 22.... fooooolllssss
Seems a tad exaggerated, could be cheaply constructed gel. My tests were less dramatic, but a 223 is no laughing matter. Hundreds of people have been killed by it and tons of deer have fallen from it. If someone out there still thinks it doesn't have the goods to deliver, then go tell those families with dead relatives due to it. Or search '5.56 wound profile' on google images. Not for the feint of heart. I prefer 6.8 spc though. =3
doesnt matter whats more or less powerfulll, im pretty sure o dont wanna get hit by this bullet, if you think you could easely survive a 5.56 shot in your chest, well i wish you luck
You also have to look at the fact that the muzzle is about 2 inches from the gel. Personally I think this round is good for what it's meant to do. That's KILL I'm pretty sure anyone in a war type situation like our G.I.s aren't just going to shoot a person once and assume that their dead.
You have to consider how thin the human body is. That bullet wouldn't do much damage (compared to other rounds) to a fit, normal human (the ones in wars) it would barely start doing massive damage just as it starts to exits the body
@xGothimox i have to disagree. i mean fmg sure. but jhp or ballistic tip is gonna do some serious damage. we shoot ferrel cats around here all the time with 55gr hps and trust me they are way thinner than any human and much less dense and those hps sure expand leaving an exit wound the size of a grapefruit.
@junmiguel2007 Where did you get the information on the last statistic?
Russian soldiers have been making a big switch BACK to the 7.62x39 from the 5.45.
" because there is not better alternative" There's plenty of special forces guys carrying M14's and AR 10's because the 5.56 is inadequate. Who cares how much energy you transfer if your target is still standing there shooting at you after you shot him once. Do a ballistics test through a moderate barrier. See how your 5.56 stacks up
@koolaidman007 The 5.45 is a great round. As is the 5.56 they are very similiar. I think the 7.62 is not as good for an automatic weapon. The recoil is VERY managble in a 5.56 making it more accurate and the 5.56 is a more accurate round anyways. the 5.56 is good in combat, it stops pretty much anyone. It is not good for drugged or VERY determend threats, That is where a 7.62 is supior. Most soldiers after being shot with anything are no longer a threat.
@koolaidman007 Really its all about shot placement two rounds to your chest with a 5.56 is devastating and will kill you. There are many Marines with DMR's in 5.56 and it fucks people up bro now the 7.62 is much better at breaking barriers like walls and stuff and yes very good at dropping someone. But there are account of Germans in ww2 hit by a 30-06 and were still fighting because the round penetrated to fare. The 5.56 has a spinning affect and rips up flesh
@Hogkillerm14 Ah yes the old "tumbling" argument. See the 5.56 needs to be going fast enough for the bullet to become unstable and tumble when it hits soft flesh. When fired out of a shorter Carbine such as the M4 this velocity is not achieved and the bullets will be through and through just like a 7.62 and dump very little energy. Small hole in small hole out. The bullets only achieve the velocity they need to tumble out of M16's.
Remember 5.56 may tumble, but 7.62 will never shrink.
@koolaidman007 You have a good point yes its hard to achieve with the M4 thats why I use a m16a4 20 inch barrel to achieve that goal. Don't get me wrong I'd rather use 7.62 any day of the week hence why I use a .300 win mag for hunting I'd much rather see the military go to a bigger bullet like a 6.8 spc for there carbines.
@Hogkillerm14 I do agree. The only rifle I own that is 16 in is my mini 14, and I wil never buy anther 16 barrel again. I love the mini, but I want to make sure my round deliver all the intended killing power they were meant to.
@MrAppleseed88 I shot a doe with my 16 inch AR and the deer jumped like it was hit and that thing ran a long ways and I never got to recover it found very little blood. So now I use my .300 winmag for any game. Yes the mini is very nice my old man owns all are guns I am just seventeen and going in the Marines so I have shot many things in my short lifetime
@SupremeAmerican I don't think its underpowered at all its a nasty bullet out of a 20 inch barrel I just like .30 cal bullets better for their penetration. For your information I have thousands of rounds down range with the .223 or 5.56x45mm out of my two AR15's and mini-14. It's a great round for what it was made for. Semper Fi and have a good day.
@OtherMarch The gel is made to imitate almost perfectly human flesh. The debate has been going on forever about the lethality of the 5.56. The conclusive truth is that below 200 yards, it has travels a ferocious 3000 feet per second and will go off like a small bomb in the body. Sometimes it will leave an exit wound the size of an orange. I've seen an ENTIRE person's brain spill out from one shot. Beyond 200 yards, it is generally weaker than the 7.62 or other heavy rifle rounds.
@Derail07 dude the barrel was right next to the thing any rifle round will do this that damn close. beyond 300 yards it slow down below the speed where it can fragment then it turns into a regular round.
@iceman27406 um nope...bullets at 300yrds have slowed down very little. They drop a bunch but lose very little power. What force is acting on a super aerodynamic bullet besides wind resistance? None
@Jroy9108 do some research before opening your trap. 5.56 Nato M193 rounds will not reliably fragment under 2600 fps here is a ballistics table for that round 0yds =3100fps 100yds =2724fps 200yds =2365fps 300yds =2021fps oh no looks like it is only effective out to under 200 yards ohh NOOOOOO what to look at how many ft/lbs of torque it has as the speed drops it seems like that light ass bullet slow down considerably before 300 yards over a 1000fps in 300 yds. so do research before saying shit.
@iceman27406 Lol...did I hurt your feewings? Thanks for the info. Obviously, I'm going by what I've been taught and now, obviously, I've heard different. In the future don't be such a bitch :)
@Derail07 If you hit too far forward on the shoulder, you risk under-penetration on large deer, but the .223 is plenty big for deer; hydrostatic shock at 3,000 fps is a bitch, no matter how small the projectile. A .22 pistol will penetrate a deer's skull at 50 yards or less; as with any type of hunting, shot placement is key.
@Derail07 It is more a matter of bullet design than the power of the 223. You're correct. With the proper bullet the little 223 can effectively down deer assuming good bullet placement. My little girl killed her first 2 deer at age 10 with a 223 loaded with the old Federal law enforcement load that used the Trophy Bonded 55 grain bullet. Both passed through the chest and left a nickel sized exit wound.
@jarhead2966 Yeah mini 14's are one of the semi autos that can handle the 5.56 all but the original gen 1 mini's that had a 1/12 twist barrels. The case of the 5.56 is only about 1 mm longer in the neck and to my understanding most people only have headspace issues in bolt guns and low end semi autos chambered in .223rem.
This is an XM193 55gr FMJBT it penetrates 5-8" then yaws because of the shape of the bullet "spritzer" the ass end weighs more than the tip so the front slows down faster causing the bullet to yaw, it then exceeds the g force range in which it was designed to stay intact and suffers an integrity failure and breaks apart at the canalure what morons call the "crimp" and inflicts massive damage via hydrostatic shock.
The military does not use .223 rem. 5.56x45 is very similar but it is NOT .223 rem. An example is: the maximum chamber pressure a .223 chamber can handle is 55,000psi where as the current NATO M855 5.56x45 round is loaded standard at 62,500psi .223 is shootable in 5.56mm rifles but 5.56mm can not be fired out of a rifle chambered for .223 in my own experience in trashcanistan 5.56 is very lethal. I've never seen it not kill anyone if hit in a vital spot.
@dentonchrisfire i shoot 5.56 out of my mini 14 all the time and the stamp on the rifle is for .223 and have never had a problem, there is just a little bit, well a lot more kick, and a greater muzzle flash.
Look to left where the barrel is. This is a point blank shot. It would be like shooting a shirtless man when you're standing next to him. That's probably why everyone is confused about the amount of damage. This probably wouldn't happen.....The length of the block proves it would have passed through the target before it did the majority of the expansion. I could be wrong, but do you know the length of the block?
@motlencore89 They will not change to the 6.8 To much of a logistics nightmare. The current bullet was the reason it was "lacking" in "manstopping". It was designed to stay solid and pierce soft body armor and kevlar. If you use a bullet that fragments or expands then the "manstopping" power increases.
There isn't a damn thing wrong with 5.56. If 5.56 is soo terrible, why aren't there any sort of complaints about the weaker 5.45 over in Russia? The only thing i've heard from there is that it's unimpressive at penetrating heavy cover.
There's always going to be variations in how effective a bullet wounds when it hits somebody. Gelatin tests are done under perfect conditions. These sort of conditions don't exsist in real life situations.
I hate how ppl say kill humanely, killing is killg whether you put a small hole in them or blow their fuckin head off they are still dead i dont see why the fuck it matters
@NonLethalNinja no, it matters because a good hunter wants the animal to die as fast as possible, by humane I mean like the second it hits the deer drops, I know almost any shotgun or high caliber rifle can, but I was wondering about the .223 and if it could too, instead of just fataly wounding it and making it crawl around bleeding to death
@bobwatters elephant is nothing for a .223 as long as you get a hot round with plenty of penetration. a shot to the eye will do the same as a shot to the forehead with an elephant gun. though I'd never use a .223 as a backup gun, it'd still work for hunting large and dangerous game. for backup though, I'd definately talk to my friend about using one of his dangerous game guns, like his 460 weatherby magnums or his awsome 600 overkill.
@bobwatters I'm not suggesting that someone uses a .223 for dangerous game, I'm just saying that it'd kill it. if I were to use a standard hunting rifle for dangerous game, I'd use at least a 300 win mag. otherwise, I'd much rather use a super magnum like the 600 overkill or the 950jdj
b/c if u shoot someone in the head they dont suffer which is humanely
if u shoot somethin in the stomach and let it bleed for long periods of time or in the mouth and let it starve or in the leg and let it bleed or die of infection it suffers which is not humane at all
@ylism someone was talkin about killing somethin humanly and how its like not possible or some crap idk it was a long time ago but i tried to explain the diffrence between a good kill and a bad kill
@bobwatters Bob, I understand how these videos can get off topic real fast. Before long they have nothing to do with the video that was made.You sound like a good hunter as well. Trying to do the best in the field. Best, yl
@bobwatters The more the better, That is good hunter. This is a good video of a .223 in ballistic gelatin. What a violent shock wave. I wish they would have said if it was FMJ or not.
@tuttoz Your most likely right. I just wanted to know the type , and thought if I asked this way, Just maybe. The one who posted the video would say something more about the type of round used. Thanks, yl
can you hunt deer with a .223/5.56? I know even a .22lr can kill one with good shot placement, but with a good shot will a .223/5.56 kill a deer humanely?
Yes. I have shot 2 deer and 1 antelope with a .223 and all were down within 8 sec. 1 deer I shot in the heart which stumbled for about 3 sec. before collapsing, the 2nd deer I hit in the lungs which ran for about 30yrds before dieing, and the antelope was hit through both shoulders, which dropped instantly but still wasnt dead because I didnt hit any vital organs. Even though the .223 bullet is smaller I swear it has punched bigger holes in a few animals than some of my .30cal bullets
probably the larger wound channel from the higher velocity, but I'm gonna be hunting with a 12-gauge shotgun. I was gonna get a .223 but I just can't handle an animal suffering, I always put safety of the shooters first, and a quick and clean kill second. I always make sure it's a one shot kill and that it's as fast as possible. with my pelletgun I could dispatch a skunk at 10ft instantly with one head shot. but I don't know about what it'd do to a deer.
drewnickel i believe you have a horrible misconception about fire-arms and the way they function,and their projectiles function. Scientifically, the .223 will have 4 times the stopping power of a .45 acp, and 3 times the stopping power of a .50 caliber cartridge fired from a 'handgun'. Not only is this a scientific fact, but the range is fare more expansive. For 'humane deer hunting' people have shot deer with .50 BMG rifles, and deer still run quite a distance. Reality is not a video game.
no, a .223 is powerful, but it's only the wound channel of it that'll kill, the 45 acp round is about half as wide as the wound channel of a .223 but it has less penetration, meaning that almost all of the energy is transfered. and about the 50bmg, it's way more powerful, but most people don't want to destroy the deer so they shoot it in the stomach or spine, a 12-gauge shotgun slug to the heart of a deer is almost always an instant kill
Holy bias. A bonded HP round fired with the muzzle essentially touching the ballistics gel, it doesnt get any more set up in favor of the .223 than this.
thats a close range firing test, at long range the bullet's back end tends to sag. upon impact, it tumbles throughout the target. i've seen reported cases of .223 bullets entering the chest and coming out behind the ear no bullshit.
You haven't seen reported cases of any such thing. The wound canal is respectivly located 2-3 inches behind the entry would, with the core that could have taveled (give or take) 2 inches off course, but usually is never found.
At close range firing .223 ammo tends to fragment more violently than at longer ranges. .223 at long ranges doesn't fragment reliably.
Just a question. I know someone who shot themselves in the chest with an M4 but the hole ..well crater aover their chest was about as big as my fist. and it didnt go thru the person. How wide is this set up?
The bullet shown in this video is a bonded hollowpoint round. Its not fragmentating ammo. It leaves no fragments behind and the wound canal is perfectly straight. The mushroom effect in the gel is the proof.
Too answer the question on if the .223 three aka 5.56 is lethal. Marine shoots insurgent dies nuff said
Astrorage 3 months ago
Eye Candy.
Nobody has ever effectively questioned the lethality of .223.
It is a badass round.
Only the reliability of the early versions of the M-16 were ever an issue.
After most of the issues were addressed and corrected the M-16 became as lethal a weapon as possible.
.223 is deadly for several reasons.
~Speed.
~Retention of Kinetic energy.
~Number of rounds that can be carried in a manageable magazine.
It's also a great varmint round.
hammerogod 3 months ago
@hammerogod
Also it's damn accurate and has longer range than most intermediate rounds.
If you're lucky, the bullet will fragment as well, ripping tiny exit wounds all over.
Seen an exit wound the size of a football once due to the fragmentation.
weaverguy 2 months ago
i LOVE hydrostatic shock.
Grunt922 5 months ago
is that jelly..mmmmm
tigerjet13 5 months ago
when i saw this, i was like waaaaaaaaaat?
themanwich212 5 months ago
@FighterDragonAllStar No it doesn't; the 7.62x39 is moving much slower than the 5.56; though the 7.62x39 might have a couple of hundred ft/lbs of additional energy, the 5.56 yields much more hydrostatic shock, a vastly superior ballistic coefficient, and it is an inherently more accurate cartridge.
RebelWrestler45 5 months ago
@FighterDragonAllStar an AK round is 7.62x39 and .223 is almost the same as a 5.56 NATO like SgtMustang375 said
xcalico1 5 months ago
@FighterDragonAllStar do u kno reality from video game?
ViolentEncounter 5 months ago
It's all about velocity, 3400+fps with say a 55g projectile, nasty hard hitting little pills
bigalanwgordon 6 months ago
@FighterDragonAllStar dude 5.56 is just the metric conversion for the .223 there are some differences that make it bad to use a 5.56 in a .223 gun but 5.56 is better than .223
SgtMustang375 6 months ago
how does a 223 do that much damage
austin4497 6 months ago
@austin4497 its a fairly small bullet traveling about 2700fps+, when it hits soft tissue the bullet will tumble making a nasty channel wound,
mattmonster93 6 months ago
@mattmonster93 The myth of the 5.56 tumbling was due to an incorrect twist rate for the high speed of the 5.56 in the early Vietnam era AR's, it would cause rounds to keyhole at range, and tumble . Unfortunately, this actually REDUCES damage; when a round keyholes it loses significant amounts of velocity due to air resistance, and takes away from hydrostatic shock, which is the most significant source of damage from the 5.56 round. Some bullet yaw occurs upon entry into the body cavity however.
RebelWrestler45 5 months ago
@RebelWrestler45 pretty sure even at reduced velocities a key hole will still fuck you up
ViolentEncounter 5 months ago
@RebelWrestler45 All spitzer shaped rounds tumble because they are not balanced. Yes, lighter rifling rates with make rounds yaw sooner. Hydrostatic shock is almost never the kill factor, and tumbling increases damage like hell. I think you've watched 'Shooter' too many times or something. Also, 5.56 rounds don't key hole in air unless your shooting with a 1:11 twist rate at 500+ yards...
dysqsarhut 5 months ago
@dysqsarhut I've put enough .22-250 rounds through a myriad of small to large skulls and body cavities to appreciate the potency of hydrostatic shock. Have you used ballistic gelatin before? You will not notice a significant amount of increased yaw in the body cavity with a spitzer, than you would with a boat tail, not to mention any tumbling. With 5.56 ammo, its velocity is its kill factor, yielding tissue damage greater than that of wound channel size due to hydrostatic shock.
RebelWrestler45 5 months ago
@RebelWrestler45 You have confused hydrostatic shock with a stretch cavity. I've used B gel a lot, and since it doesn't have blood or any loose liquid, hydrostatic shock cannot be observed. I think you've been spreading the wrong words around...
dysqsarhut 5 months ago
@dysqsarhut Ballistic gelatin is a solid, therefore no true hydrostatic shock occurs, but the stretch cavity observed in ballistic gelatin is analogous to hydrostatic shock, in that it provides a visual representation of the relative force and scope of the displacement of matter. This is where ballistic gelatin fails; it is homogeneous, the body cavity is not.
RebelWrestler45 5 months ago
@RebelWrestler45 Read real closely, Hydrostatic shock is the liquids of an organism being displaced harshly enough to cause damage to fragile internal structures like the brain or liver. The stretch cavity is tissue being displaced by the force of a projectile. They are not the same thing. What you observe in an organism shot with a high powered rifle is 'minced' tissue caused by the crushing force. If you observe the brain you would notice lacerations along any liquid containing vessels.
dysqsarhut 5 months ago
@dysqsarhut Ballistic gelatin isn't an accurate simulation of human tissue, it only mimics the density and resistance of the human body cavity. There is no real 'stretch cavity' in human tissue when it comes in contact with a high velocity projectile, because it has very limited elasticity, the tissue simply ruptures creating a larger wound channel. Being a solid, however, human tissue cannot compress to the degree that an aqueous mass can, thus reducing transfer of energy.
RebelWrestler45 5 months ago
@RebelWrestler45 Uhh, not really. Human flesh is hella elastic. Which actually leaves a stretch cavity next to useless in quite a few scenarios. But when you hit tissue like liver, it tears like sin. issue does compress, but not like gel. It get's crushed, and is deemed 'dead'. There's no reviving that flesh afterwards, it has to be cut out to effectively treat it.
dysqsarhut 4 months ago
@dysqsarhut well put.. exactly
jdseams 3 months ago
@austin4497
well because it is rather powerful no matter what video games say it produces 1300 pounds of energy when fired from an m16 and 1100 pounds when fired from an m4 the ak47 produces 1500 pounds meaning there isn't too much of a power difference
tubevideoguy762 6 months ago
@tubevideoguy762 ok well now it make sense but i dont even think video games put the pounds of energy and the 223 was designed to cause shock not to kill thats the reason its only .003 times bigger than a 22 and i just went shooting with an ar-10 and an ar-15 and the bullet hole for the ar-10 was twice the size and they werent 308 lapua rounds
austin4497 6 months ago
@austin4497 You have no idea what you're talking about; hydrostatic shock is incredibly lethal; it causes organ and soft tissue damage, far in excess of the size of the round's wound channel. The .223 was designed to kill, make no mistake about it; the reason for its size is portability; simple as that. I can carry more than twice as much .223 ammo as I can 308, though admittedly I'd rather be armed with a compact M-14 variant, than a short action AR.
RebelWrestler45 5 months ago
gotta love hydrostatic shock.
joshkkv 7 months ago
I tried using a bucket full of S E M E N for gel. It splashed all over the place and was fun to clean up with a squeegee afterwards. :-)
waterfordjim 7 months ago
friends dont let friends spend obcene dollars on .22 caliber guns. :-)
waterfordjim 7 months ago
looks like jello to me... big difference.
BlackandChrome 7 months ago
The reason for this video is to show the damage when it enters the body its different from other rounds it's got imense wounds when it hits flesh
bobbyraejohnson 8 months ago
lol at the 4 inch block of gel. A 223/5.56 penetrates about two inches before expanding or yawing. XD
sluginsaddlebuckshot 8 months ago
@MaxAC40 Max, I hunt, I know what you mean, just referring to stopping power is all. Better to have your target on its ass for its last 1-2 min of existence.
james257wby 9 months ago
@james257wby no problem, wasn't sure what you meant. and was putting it out there just as a heads up for people who might get their experience from hollywood.
It's just that the way people talk about the .223, it would make you think the guy would actually feel better after getting shot by it.
MaxAC40 9 months ago
@MaxAC40 Gotta love Hollywood ballistic science, they either miss everything or everything blows up.
james257wby 9 months ago
walk it off pussy
michael7252 9 months ago
if they think a 223 is to small for deer, why the hell does our military use 223 for the enemy. 223 can kill walrus for christ sakes, maybe bad shooters should not be hind the a rifle, if they can't apply proper shot placement
InAKwitmyHK91 9 months ago
make a block of gel 2' tall by 10" wide (proportionate to a torso) and well see what happens.
with any round.
YOWHATTHEHELLUP71 9 months ago
i thinks thats a small block of gel. Shoot it at somthing with the same mass as the human body and it wont do that.
YOWHATTHEHELLUP71 9 months ago
ppl just think 223 aint shit, cause its a "223" they dont realize the velocity and makeup of the bullet, they just think its a little better than a 22.... fooooolllssss
gannman51 9 months ago
Seems a tad exaggerated, could be cheaply constructed gel. My tests were less dramatic, but a 223 is no laughing matter. Hundreds of people have been killed by it and tons of deer have fallen from it. If someone out there still thinks it doesn't have the goods to deliver, then go tell those families with dead relatives due to it. Or search '5.56 wound profile' on google images. Not for the feint of heart. I prefer 6.8 spc though. =3
dysqsarhut 10 months ago
doesnt matter whats more or less powerfulll, im pretty sure o dont wanna get hit by this bullet, if you think you could easely survive a 5.56 shot in your chest, well i wish you luck
curseofa5r5a 11 months ago
All you need is a .223 varmint round. That will blow the guts out of anything it hits.
epluribusunom 1 year ago
You also have to look at the fact that the muzzle is about 2 inches from the gel. Personally I think this round is good for what it's meant to do. That's KILL I'm pretty sure anyone in a war type situation like our G.I.s aren't just going to shoot a person once and assume that their dead.
magicmark1292 1 year ago
You have to consider how thin the human body is. That bullet wouldn't do much damage (compared to other rounds) to a fit, normal human (the ones in wars) it would barely start doing massive damage just as it starts to exits the body
xGothimox 1 year ago
@xGothimox i have to disagree. i mean fmg sure. but jhp or ballistic tip is gonna do some serious damage. we shoot ferrel cats around here all the time with 55gr hps and trust me they are way thinner than any human and much less dense and those hps sure expand leaving an exit wound the size of a grapefruit.
mygreenz71 1 year ago
@junmiguel2007 Where did you get the information on the last statistic?
Russian soldiers have been making a big switch BACK to the 7.62x39 from the 5.45.
" because there is not better alternative" There's plenty of special forces guys carrying M14's and AR 10's because the 5.56 is inadequate. Who cares how much energy you transfer if your target is still standing there shooting at you after you shot him once. Do a ballistics test through a moderate barrier. See how your 5.56 stacks up
koolaidman007 1 year ago
@koolaidman007 The 5.45 is a great round. As is the 5.56 they are very similiar. I think the 7.62 is not as good for an automatic weapon. The recoil is VERY managble in a 5.56 making it more accurate and the 5.56 is a more accurate round anyways. the 5.56 is good in combat, it stops pretty much anyone. It is not good for drugged or VERY determend threats, That is where a 7.62 is supior. Most soldiers after being shot with anything are no longer a threat.
meronmotors 1 year ago
@koolaidman007 Really its all about shot placement two rounds to your chest with a 5.56 is devastating and will kill you. There are many Marines with DMR's in 5.56 and it fucks people up bro now the 7.62 is much better at breaking barriers like walls and stuff and yes very good at dropping someone. But there are account of Germans in ww2 hit by a 30-06 and were still fighting because the round penetrated to fare. The 5.56 has a spinning affect and rips up flesh
Hogkillerm14 10 months ago
@Hogkillerm14 Ah yes the old "tumbling" argument. See the 5.56 needs to be going fast enough for the bullet to become unstable and tumble when it hits soft flesh. When fired out of a shorter Carbine such as the M4 this velocity is not achieved and the bullets will be through and through just like a 7.62 and dump very little energy. Small hole in small hole out. The bullets only achieve the velocity they need to tumble out of M16's.
Remember 5.56 may tumble, but 7.62 will never shrink.
koolaidman007 10 months ago
@koolaidman007 You have a good point yes its hard to achieve with the M4 thats why I use a m16a4 20 inch barrel to achieve that goal. Don't get me wrong I'd rather use 7.62 any day of the week hence why I use a .300 win mag for hunting I'd much rather see the military go to a bigger bullet like a 6.8 spc for there carbines.
Hogkillerm14 10 months ago
@Hogkillerm14 Well then there's something we can both agree on :D
koolaidman007 10 months ago
@Hogkillerm14 I do agree. The only rifle I own that is 16 in is my mini 14, and I wil never buy anther 16 barrel again. I love the mini, but I want to make sure my round deliver all the intended killing power they were meant to.
MrAppleseed88 10 months ago
@MrAppleseed88 I shot a doe with my 16 inch AR and the deer jumped like it was hit and that thing ran a long ways and I never got to recover it found very little blood. So now I use my .300 winmag for any game. Yes the mini is very nice my old man owns all are guns I am just seventeen and going in the Marines so I have shot many things in my short lifetime
Hogkillerm14 10 months ago
@Hogkillerm14 If you think the .223 is underpowered then u are full of shit and u've never shot one.
SupremeAmerican 10 months ago
@SupremeAmerican I don't think its underpowered at all its a nasty bullet out of a 20 inch barrel I just like .30 cal bullets better for their penetration. For your information I have thousands of rounds down range with the .223 or 5.56x45mm out of my two AR15's and mini-14. It's a great round for what it was made for. Semper Fi and have a good day.
Hogkillerm14 10 months ago
@koolaidman007 Wrong
SupremeAmerican 10 months ago
@SupremeAmerican I love making blanket statements and then not providing any evidence or counter argument. It makes me sound so intelligent!
Maybe next you can call me an idiot or make a guess at my sexual preferences? Or maybe suggest I play call of duty?
koolaidman007 10 months ago
@koolaidman007 ur too easy
SupremeAmerican 10 months ago
u see the tumble at the end
happytardedtoad 1 year ago
Then why are special forces still using it? They have the money and choice
Tuxedo413 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
now look up 7.62x39
MrDarkwolf1995 1 year ago
if 5.56x45 is so bad why are we still using it after 45 years.
Rsanson21 1 year ago
@Rsanson21 well.. after 45 years they gotta be doing something right dont you think?
wasdt0m0ve 1 year ago
@Rsanson21
Well, for one thing, because nobody wants to spend the billions and billions of dollars it would take to replace it.
tonydesapien 1 year ago
And people say .223 is "underpowered " for Deer....
Derail07 1 year ago 32
@Derail07 thats cuss it is. its not great for deer farther north, but its fine for dear in South carolina
goalieslayer 1 year ago
@Derail07 Oh it's entirely capable for deer out to 200 yards with a 62 grain or larger bullet. Very very effective.
SupremeAmerican 10 months ago
@Derail07 it is, it penetrates right through no stopping power so the deer keeps running....
2121gcard 10 months ago
@Derail07 Where do you go hunting for jelly deer?
OtherMarch 9 months ago
@OtherMarch The gel is made to imitate almost perfectly human flesh. The debate has been going on forever about the lethality of the 5.56. The conclusive truth is that below 200 yards, it has travels a ferocious 3000 feet per second and will go off like a small bomb in the body. Sometimes it will leave an exit wound the size of an orange. I've seen an ENTIRE person's brain spill out from one shot. Beyond 200 yards, it is generally weaker than the 7.62 or other heavy rifle rounds.
drchen054 9 months ago
@Derail07 dude the barrel was right next to the thing any rifle round will do this that damn close. beyond 300 yards it slow down below the speed where it can fragment then it turns into a regular round.
iceman27406 6 months ago
@iceman27406 um nope...bullets at 300yrds have slowed down very little. They drop a bunch but lose very little power. What force is acting on a super aerodynamic bullet besides wind resistance? None
Jroy9108 6 months ago
@Jroy9108 do some research before opening your trap. 5.56 Nato M193 rounds will not reliably fragment under 2600 fps here is a ballistics table for that round 0yds =3100fps 100yds =2724fps 200yds =2365fps 300yds =2021fps oh no looks like it is only effective out to under 200 yards ohh NOOOOOO what to look at how many ft/lbs of torque it has as the speed drops it seems like that light ass bullet slow down considerably before 300 yards over a 1000fps in 300 yds. so do research before saying shit.
iceman27406 6 months ago
@iceman27406 Lol...did I hurt your feewings? Thanks for the info. Obviously, I'm going by what I've been taught and now, obviously, I've heard different. In the future don't be such a bitch :)
Jroy9108 6 months ago
@Derail07 thats why the us military doenst use it -_-
ViolentEncounter 6 months ago
@Derail07 If you hit too far forward on the shoulder, you risk under-penetration on large deer, but the .223 is plenty big for deer; hydrostatic shock at 3,000 fps is a bitch, no matter how small the projectile. A .22 pistol will penetrate a deer's skull at 50 yards or less; as with any type of hunting, shot placement is key.
RebelWrestler45 5 months ago
@Derail07 It is more a matter of bullet design than the power of the 223. You're correct. With the proper bullet the little 223 can effectively down deer assuming good bullet placement. My little girl killed her first 2 deer at age 10 with a 223 loaded with the old Federal law enforcement load that used the Trophy Bonded 55 grain bullet. Both passed through the chest and left a nickel sized exit wound.
MultiGuntoter 5 months ago
@jarhead2966 Yeah mini 14's are one of the semi autos that can handle the 5.56 all but the original gen 1 mini's that had a 1/12 twist barrels. The case of the 5.56 is only about 1 mm longer in the neck and to my understanding most people only have headspace issues in bolt guns and low end semi autos chambered in .223rem.
dentonchrisfire 1 year ago
I hope I never get shot with one of those... or any bullet.
onb22 1 year ago 27
This is an XM193 55gr FMJBT it penetrates 5-8" then yaws because of the shape of the bullet "spritzer" the ass end weighs more than the tip so the front slows down faster causing the bullet to yaw, it then exceeds the g force range in which it was designed to stay intact and suffers an integrity failure and breaks apart at the canalure what morons call the "crimp" and inflicts massive damage via hydrostatic shock.
dentonchrisfire 1 year ago
The military does not use .223 rem. 5.56x45 is very similar but it is NOT .223 rem. An example is: the maximum chamber pressure a .223 chamber can handle is 55,000psi where as the current NATO M855 5.56x45 round is loaded standard at 62,500psi .223 is shootable in 5.56mm rifles but 5.56mm can not be fired out of a rifle chambered for .223 in my own experience in trashcanistan 5.56 is very lethal. I've never seen it not kill anyone if hit in a vital spot.
dentonchrisfire 1 year ago
@dentonchrisfire you can in sum rifles but it depends and research shoud b done
crashdummy40 1 year ago
@dentonchrisfire i shoot 5.56 out of my mini 14 all the time and the stamp on the rifle is for .223 and have never had a problem, there is just a little bit, well a lot more kick, and a greater muzzle flash.
jarhead2966 1 year ago
Wow, is the barrel close enough?! 16" block I think.
mikeb1444 1 year ago
jesus....
bearman3212 1 year ago
Look to left where the barrel is. This is a point blank shot. It would be like shooting a shirtless man when you're standing next to him. That's probably why everyone is confused about the amount of damage. This probably wouldn't happen.....The length of the block proves it would have passed through the target before it did the majority of the expansion. I could be wrong, but do you know the length of the block?
subnombulator27 1 year ago
if i had to guess i would say that it is a fmj of some kind, look at the long neck length before it starts to yaw
AnarchAngel1 1 year ago
I see some fragmentation at the end there and some tumbling right before it. Could be FMJ.. Who knows.
fusionstar916 1 year ago
if the 223 is such a manstopper, why is the US thinking about replacing it with the 6.8
motlencore89 1 year ago
@motlencore89 They will not change to the 6.8 To much of a logistics nightmare. The current bullet was the reason it was "lacking" in "manstopping". It was designed to stay solid and pierce soft body armor and kevlar. If you use a bullet that fragments or expands then the "manstopping" power increases.
teletiger7 1 year ago
@motlencore89 Because we are a *sissy voice* humane society now, and 223. rounds cause too much pain!
Flavoade 1 year ago
@motlencore89 I think they do need to replace the 223 remington with something better.
goodlookin41 1 year ago
@goodlookin41
There isn't a damn thing wrong with 5.56. If 5.56 is soo terrible, why aren't there any sort of complaints about the weaker 5.45 over in Russia? The only thing i've heard from there is that it's unimpressive at penetrating heavy cover.
L0ENze1337 1 year ago
...Suck it MW2 logic! 5.56x45 alwase wins over 7.62x(ect.)
YoshiFan100 1 year ago
it imploded
MrDip02 2 years ago
There's always going to be variations in how effective a bullet wounds when it hits somebody. Gelatin tests are done under perfect conditions. These sort of conditions don't exsist in real life situations.
esh325 2 years ago 2
I hate how ppl say kill humanely, killing is killg whether you put a small hole in them or blow their fuckin head off they are still dead i dont see why the fuck it matters
NonLethalNinja 2 years ago
@NonLethalNinja no, it matters because a good hunter wants the animal to die as fast as possible, by humane I mean like the second it hits the deer drops, I know almost any shotgun or high caliber rifle can, but I was wondering about the .223 and if it could too, instead of just fataly wounding it and making it crawl around bleeding to death
drewnickel 2 years ago
u can kill an animal with a 223 no problem it all about shot placement
now i wouldnt go hunt elaphant with the thing but u could kill the majority of animals with one if ur a good enough shot
bobwatters 1 year ago
@bobwatters elephant is nothing for a .223 as long as you get a hot round with plenty of penetration. a shot to the eye will do the same as a shot to the forehead with an elephant gun. though I'd never use a .223 as a backup gun, it'd still work for hunting large and dangerous game. for backup though, I'd definately talk to my friend about using one of his dangerous game guns, like his 460 weatherby magnums or his awsome 600 overkill.
drewnickel 1 year ago
@drewnickel yes b/c real hunters allways wait for that eye shot lol
stfu man if u huntin huge game that can take ur life u dont wait for a fuckin eye shot thats why they have guns of those calibers in the first place
because u have to know thats its going to die without shooting it in the fucking eye
bobwatters 1 year ago
@bobwatters I'm not suggesting that someone uses a .223 for dangerous game, I'm just saying that it'd kill it. if I were to use a standard hunting rifle for dangerous game, I'd use at least a 300 win mag. otherwise, I'd much rather use a super magnum like the 600 overkill or the 950jdj
drewnickel 1 year ago
humaney killing is when they die very quickly if it takes houres for them to die then its not humane.
MATTNATTMATT 2 years ago
b/c if u shoot someone in the head they dont suffer which is humanely
if u shoot somethin in the stomach and let it bleed for long periods of time or in the mouth and let it starve or in the leg and let it bleed or die of infection it suffers which is not humane at all
bobwatters 1 year ago
@bobwatters Bob, whats that have to do with this shot into ballistic gelatin ? I understand what your saying. Just not the context. yl
ylism 1 year ago
@ylism someone was talkin about killing somethin humanly and how its like not possible or some crap idk it was a long time ago but i tried to explain the diffrence between a good kill and a bad kill
bobwatters 1 year ago
@bobwatters Bob, I understand how these videos can get off topic real fast. Before long they have nothing to do with the video that was made.You sound like a good hunter as well. Trying to do the best in the field. Best, yl
ylism 1 year ago
@ylism well thank you sir i would like to think that i am a good hunter and yes lol some times these videos get pretty off topic
bobwatters 1 year ago
@bobwatters The more the better, That is good hunter. This is a good video of a .223 in ballistic gelatin. What a violent shock wave. I wish they would have said if it was FMJ or not.
ylism 1 year ago
@ylism hmm i would think that its not becuase of the way the impact was but i could be wrong but i think its some sort of soft nose round atleast
bobwatters 1 year ago
@ylism it probably wasnt FMJ ...
tuttoz 1 year ago
@tuttoz Your most likely right. I just wanted to know the type , and thought if I asked this way, Just maybe. The one who posted the video would say something more about the type of round used. Thanks, yl
ylism 1 year ago
@ylism I would, if I knew it.
Omsbon 1 year ago
@Omsbon Thank you for trying. It must have been a HP bullet going real fast.
ylism 1 year ago
@ylism
yup...
tuttoz 1 year ago
can you hunt deer with a .223/5.56? I know even a .22lr can kill one with good shot placement, but with a good shot will a .223/5.56 kill a deer humanely?
drewnickel 2 years ago
Yes. I have shot 2 deer and 1 antelope with a .223 and all were down within 8 sec. 1 deer I shot in the heart which stumbled for about 3 sec. before collapsing, the 2nd deer I hit in the lungs which ran for about 30yrds before dieing, and the antelope was hit through both shoulders, which dropped instantly but still wasnt dead because I didnt hit any vital organs. Even though the .223 bullet is smaller I swear it has punched bigger holes in a few animals than some of my .30cal bullets
Graywolf177 2 years ago
probably the larger wound channel from the higher velocity, but I'm gonna be hunting with a 12-gauge shotgun. I was gonna get a .223 but I just can't handle an animal suffering, I always put safety of the shooters first, and a quick and clean kill second. I always make sure it's a one shot kill and that it's as fast as possible. with my pelletgun I could dispatch a skunk at 10ft instantly with one head shot. but I don't know about what it'd do to a deer.
drewnickel 2 years ago
drewnickel i believe you have a horrible misconception about fire-arms and the way they function,and their projectiles function. Scientifically, the .223 will have 4 times the stopping power of a .45 acp, and 3 times the stopping power of a .50 caliber cartridge fired from a 'handgun'. Not only is this a scientific fact, but the range is fare more expansive. For 'humane deer hunting' people have shot deer with .50 BMG rifles, and deer still run quite a distance. Reality is not a video game.
MrAmericanAce 2 years ago
no, a .223 is powerful, but it's only the wound channel of it that'll kill, the 45 acp round is about half as wide as the wound channel of a .223 but it has less penetration, meaning that almost all of the energy is transfered. and about the 50bmg, it's way more powerful, but most people don't want to destroy the deer so they shoot it in the stomach or spine, a 12-gauge shotgun slug to the heart of a deer is almost always an instant kill
drewnickel 2 years ago
Holy bias. A bonded HP round fired with the muzzle essentially touching the ballistics gel, it doesnt get any more set up in favor of the .223 than this.
0311Slayer 2 years ago
thats a close range firing test, at long range the bullet's back end tends to sag. upon impact, it tumbles throughout the target. i've seen reported cases of .223 bullets entering the chest and coming out behind the ear no bullshit.
beenohopps 2 years ago 2
You haven't seen reported cases of any such thing. The wound canal is respectivly located 2-3 inches behind the entry would, with the core that could have taveled (give or take) 2 inches off course, but usually is never found.
At close range firing .223 ammo tends to fragment more violently than at longer ranges. .223 at long ranges doesn't fragment reliably.
Southern661 2 years ago
Just a question. I know someone who shot themselves in the chest with an M4 but the hole ..well crater aover their chest was about as big as my fist. and it didnt go thru the person. How wide is this set up?
joshuapg21 2 years ago
The only way their would be a visible crater, would be from the muzzle blast of the carbine. 5.56mm ammo leaves a 5.56mm hole as an entry wound.
Southern661 2 years ago
Wow that .223 made a lot more dommage then i thought.
sylvainh2o 2 years ago
The bullet shown in this video is a bonded hollowpoint round. Its not fragmentating ammo. It leaves no fragments behind and the wound canal is perfectly straight. The mushroom effect in the gel is the proof.
Southern661 2 years ago
Wow, Is all I can say.
ylism 2 years ago
I shure as hell don't wanna get shot by that thing or any bullet for that matter lols
GUNS4MIKE1234 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
a .22 out of a 1-2 inch handgun barrel is just a big ouchie not really lethal unless its a good hit
baconator490 2 years ago
Finally someone show's the effect's of that bullet. Although I would still prefer a high power 7.62 NATO.
PokemonHaloFan 2 years ago 2
yeah for dommage but the accuracy is too much reduced for me.
sylvainh2o 2 years ago
5.56 is good enough. it loses its lethality 250 meters and beyond. below that its all good! :)
GunFreak270 2 years ago
it penetrates a kevlar helmet at 620yds man. It WILL still kill you
ObviouslyBoredKid 2 years ago