5.56/.223 Defense Ammo

This is a discussion on 5.56/.223 Defense Ammo within the Defensive Ammunition & Ballistics forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; I'm too new to ARs to comment on THE best self defense round, but that V-MAX bullet sure appears to do the job. That deer ...

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 75
Like Tree3Likes

Thread: 5.56/.223 Defense Ammo

  1. #46
    VIP Member Array PAcanis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    2,462
    I'm too new to ARs to comment on THE best self defense round, but that V-MAX bullet sure appears to do the job. That deer just crumpled. And like I said in another thread, when it comes to shooting woodchucks I'll grab my .17 HMR loaded with V-MAX bullets over my .22 WMR loaded with heavier hollowpoints. I think it's a great bullet design. I'm not saying it is better than those TAP loads, but it certainly seems like a viable option.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #47
    sgb
    sgb is offline
    VIP Member Array sgb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    You don't need to know
    Posts
    2,414
    Quote Originally Posted by PAcanis View Post
    I'm too new to ARs to comment on THE best self defense round, but that V-MAX bullet sure appears to do the job. That deer just crumpled. And like I said in another thread, when it comes to shooting woodchucks I'll grab my .17 HMR loaded with V-MAX bullets over my .22 WMR loaded with heavier hollowpoints. I think it's a great bullet design. I'm not saying it is better than those TAP loads, but it certainly seems like a viable option.
    People aren't deer.

    Best Choices for Self Defense Ammo
    "There is a secret pride in every human heart that revolts at tyranny. You may order and drive an individual, but you cannot make him respect you." William Hazlitt (1778 - 1830)

    Best Choices for Self Defense Ammunition

  4. #48
    VIP Member Array PAcanis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    2,462
    Quote Originally Posted by sgb View Post
    Really? Do you have proof to back that up?
    lol... thanks for the heads up.

    Until the time we can start testing ammo on humans, maybe revert back to execution by firing squad to do so, Shooting a 200 lb animal with a hide that simulates a leather jacket and made up of bone and muscle is a pretty darn good test in my opinion. I did not say that the V-MAX was the best self defense round, but you would have to be an idiot not to see what it can do on large game. And, again IMO, that's a pretty good test for a cartridge's worth. I stand by my statement that it appears to be a viable round for self defense.
    bmcgilvray and RebelSoul like this.

  5. #49
    sgb
    sgb is offline
    VIP Member Array sgb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    You don't need to know
    Posts
    2,414
    Quote Originally Posted by PAcanis View Post
    Really? Do you have proof to back that up?
    lol... thanks for the heads up.

    Until the time we can start testing ammo on humans, maybe revert back to execution by firing squad to do so, Shooting a 200 lb animal with a hide that simulates a leather jacket and made up of bone and muscle is a pretty darn good test in my opinion. I did not say that the V-MAX was the best self defense round, but you would have to be an idiot not to see what it can do on large game. And, again IMO, that's a pretty good test for a cartridge's worth. I stand by my statement that it appears to be a viable round for self defense.
    The credentials associated with that information are the top experts in the field, don't take my word for it, research it yourself.

    While many hunting rounds have the ability to kill humans as easily as they kill game animals that doesn't make them the best (or even a good) choice for self defense use. The choice of what you defend your life with will always be yours, however I caution that it is to every ones benefit to make informed decisions based on facts not supposition or internet bravado.

    http://brassfetcher.com/

    http://www.winchester.com/Products/l...n-testing.aspx

    http://www.firearmstactical.com/

    http://le.atk.com/general/irl/woundballistics.aspx
    "There is a secret pride in every human heart that revolts at tyranny. You may order and drive an individual, but you cannot make him respect you." William Hazlitt (1778 - 1830)

    Best Choices for Self Defense Ammunition

  6. #50
    VIP Member Array PAcanis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    2,462
    You speak of internet bravado, then direct me to view information on four websites? Does this seem ironic to anyone but me? lol ;^)

    I was having a hard time getting to any real information on three of those websites. Information that also included a V-MAX type bullet, which is what we are talking about here. I did however find three photos showing what looked like X-Ray type pictures showing three wound channels. And that was an apple to apple comparison. Not in gel, but actual wounds.
    Here is the page I am talking about Wound Ballistics, Ballistic Injury, Stopping Power, Gunshot Wounds If you scroll down to Rifle you can click on three cartridges in .223. I'm guessing the first is as close as I can find to the V-MAX, a 50 gr jacketed soft point. It appears to be every bit as effective as the next two NATO rounds in 55 gr and 62 gr., just without as much penetration. And I believe when Lance mentioned the V-MAX he said 60 gr. Again, it doesn't have the penetration, but as was mentioned earlier here, it only takes 3.5 inches to reach the heart. 13" is what is shown and isn't 13" what the FBI says is good penetration? I was watching a show the other night and they were putting .380 rounds through walls and car doors. How much pentration does one need? There is such a thing as over penetration. Especially for us civilian types.

    Anyway, I still say it looks like a viable SD round and doesn't cost an arm and a leg. You can actually stock up on this round and practice with it. Unless I am missing something here as to why it isn't a good round.

  7. #51
    Moderator
    Array bmcgilvray's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    10,061
    Quote Originally Posted by sgb View Post
    Humans aren't ballistic gel either nor are they other contrived "non-tests" that are so popularly bandied about the internet.

    I happen to think that observations of deer effectively taken, are instructive. Of course that's only my opinion.
    Charter Member of the DC .41 LC Society

    “No possible rapidity of fire can atone for habitual carelessness of aim with the first shot.”

    Theodore Roosevelt, The Wilderness Hunter, 1893

  8. #52
    sgb
    sgb is offline
    VIP Member Array sgb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    You don't need to know
    Posts
    2,414
    Quote Originally Posted by bmcgilvray View Post
    Humans aren't ballistic gel either
    You are absolutely correct however it provides a consistent medium that simulates the consistency of human tissues and allows for accurate comparisons of the bullets performance which can then be evaluated against actual wound ballistics data.

    I happen to think that observations of deer effectively taken, are instructive. Of course that's only my opinion.
    Never heard of a deer high on meth/alcohol or crack participating in a gunfight.
    "There is a secret pride in every human heart that revolts at tyranny. You may order and drive an individual, but you cannot make him respect you." William Hazlitt (1778 - 1830)

    Best Choices for Self Defense Ammunition

  9. #53
    sgb
    sgb is offline
    VIP Member Array sgb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    You don't need to know
    Posts
    2,414
    Quote Originally Posted by PAcanis View Post
    You speak of internet bravado, then direct me to view information on four websites? Does this seem ironic to anyone but me? lol ;^)
    Do you understand what bravado is? Here allow me:

    Definition of BRAVADO
    1
    a : blustering swaggering conduct b : a pretense of bravery
    2
    : the quality or state of being foolhardy

    Everything I've posted I've provided relevant information in support of my opinion.


    I was having a hard time getting to any real information on three of those websites. Information that also included a V-MAX type bullet, which is what we are talking about here.
    You're upset because I didn't link you enough information? Ever heard of Google?

    I did however find three photos showing what looked like X-Ray type pictures showing three wound channels. And that was an apple to apple comparison. Not in gel, but actual wounds.
    Here is the page I am talking about Wound Ballistics, Ballistic Injury, Stopping Power, Gunshot Wounds If you scroll down to Rifle you can click on three cartridges in .223. I'm guessing the first is as close as I can find to the V-MAX, a 50 gr jacketed soft point. It appears to be every bit as effective as the next two NATO rounds in 55 gr and 62 gr., just without as much penetration.
    The VMAX in .223 is a thinly jacketed bullet designed for extreme long range accuracy and explosive expansion/fragmentation for use against varmints. You can't substitute the performance of a .223 50 gr JSP, 5.56 M193 & M855 ball in comparison to any of the .223 VMAX bullets.

    And I believe when Lance mentioned the V-MAX he said 60 gr.
    He did, then he posts video of dear taken with .243 Winchester & .243 Winchester short magnum 75gr VMAX loads. Different calibers with heavier bullets meant for larger animals. Further these rounds where used at the distances they were intended for, at shorter ranges and higher velocities these type of bullets typically exhibit greater explosive expansion and less penetration.

    Again, it doesn't have the penetration, but as was mentioned earlier here, it only takes 3.5 inches to reach the heart. 13" is what is shown and isn't 13" what the FBI says is good penetration?
    It only takes 3-3.5" to reach the heart if it's a straight on level 90 degree shot. How far to reach the heart if you're on the ground and have to angle the round up from the bottom of the rib cage? 9-11" maybe? How about a shot that has to angle through 4-5" inches of the forearm flesh and bone that's holding the gun that's being fired at you before it then has to penetrate that 3.5" of chest to reach the heart? What about the round that has to punch through your sofa that the armed burglar is foolishly using as cover does that add to the level of penetration needed in considering your choice of self defense ammunition?


    I was watching a show the other night and they were putting .380 rounds through walls and car doors. How much pentration does one need? There is such a thing as over penetration. Especially for us civilian types.
    Any ammunition suitable for self defense use is going to present over penetration issues, there are no magic bullets. Penetration is the most important factor, you much reach the vital organs to cause sufficient blood loss to incapacitate an aggressor.


    Anyway, I still say it looks like a viable SD round and doesn't cost an arm and a leg. You can actually stock up on this round and practice with it. Unless I am missing something here as to why it isn't a good round.
    We all live and die by the choices we make. I wish you the best.
    "There is a secret pride in every human heart that revolts at tyranny. You may order and drive an individual, but you cannot make him respect you." William Hazlitt (1778 - 1830)

    Best Choices for Self Defense Ammunition

  10. #54
    VIP Member Array PAcanis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    2,462
    Quote Originally Posted by sgb View Post
    You are absolutely correct however it provides a consistent medium that simulates the consistency of human tissues and allows for accurate comparisons of the bullets performance which can then be evaluated against actual wound ballistics data.



    Never heard of a deer high on meth/alcohol or crack participating in a gunfight.
    I'm pretty sure what bmc was referring to was the same thing Lance and I have alluded to, a live 200 lb animal is probably a more realistic test of bullet performance than a man made gel. I can see you are running with this discussion though and trying to push buttons. Carry on.

  11. #55
    sgb
    sgb is offline
    VIP Member Array sgb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    You don't need to know
    Posts
    2,414
    Quote Originally Posted by PAcanis View Post
    I'm pretty sure what bmc was referring to was the same thing Lance and I have alluded to, a live 200 lb animal is probably a more realistic test of bullet performance than a man made gel. I can see you are running with this discussion though and trying to push buttons. Carry on.
    I'm hardly pushing buttons. I'm doing what you are not, supporting my portion of the discussion with verifiable data.




    "There is a secret pride in every human heart that revolts at tyranny. You may order and drive an individual, but you cannot make him respect you." William Hazlitt (1778 - 1830)

    Best Choices for Self Defense Ammunition

  12. #56
    Distinguished Member Array LanceORYGUN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    ORYGUN
    Posts
    1,517
    Quote Originally Posted by sgb View Post

    Whiskey Tango Foxtrot? ADD acting up?
    There is no good reason whatsoever for you to make insulting personal comments like this, implying that I suffer from ADD.

    You are one sorry, worthless, sorry ass, piece of **** in my opinion.

    .

  13. #57
    Distinguished Member Array LanceORYGUN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    ORYGUN
    Posts
    1,517
    Quote Originally Posted by sgb View Post
    I'm hardly pushing buttons. I'm doing what you are not, supporting my portion of the discussion with verifiable data.


    You are behaving like a moron and an idiot.

    .

  14. #58
    Distinguished Member Array LanceORYGUN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    ORYGUN
    Posts
    1,517
    Quote Originally Posted by PAcanis View Post
    And I believe when Lance mentioned the V-MAX he said 60 gr. Again, it doesn't have the penetration, but as was mentioned earlier here, it only takes 3.5 inches to reach the heart. 13" is what is shown and isn't 13" what the FBI says is good penetration? I was watching a show the other night and they were putting .380 rounds through walls and car doors. How much pentration does one need? There is such a thing as over penetration. Especially for us civilian types.
    Did you look up that deer that had its entire skull blown off and its contents emptied by a 75 gr 6mm VMAX? I really cannot post the photo here, as it is so extremely gross. But the bullet pretty much took most of the animal's head off, literally destroying it. Just do a search on YouTube using the info I that provided earlier, and you should be able to find it.

    Any notion that these VMAX bullets travelling over 3,000 fps are not going to also devastate a human being are nonsense.

    .

  15. #59
    Moderator
    Array bmcgilvray's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    10,061
    Verifiable data? Of what? Of one bullet's performance in "a consistent medium" as compared to another bullet's performance in "a consistent medium?" And we're suppose to accept these tests at face value and deem them as meaningful? It's a given that neither deer nor human assailants will behave in a consistent fashion, even with similar hits and with using bullets that give similar expansion characteristics, so relative stopping power performance predictions based on one's favorite test data are pretty much useless.

    Of course they have to have something in which to test all the bullets. It may as well be "a consistent medium" since civilized societies can't go about shooting large groups of human test subjects in order to ascertain bullet performance.

    On a separate topic:


    "Never heard of a deer high on meth/alcohol or crack participating in a gunfight."


    Here's a couple of personal hunting experiences that illustrates the tenacity of deer. No, deer don't drink and drug up or shoot back, but they can cling to life pretty energetically for fleeting seconds, not going "down for the count" or giving much indication at all of being stopped.

    1. A whitetail buck was taken at a bit over 100 yards with a Winchester Model 1873 .38-40 (actual bullet diameter is .401). Ammunition used was a pre-WWII Winchester factory 180 grain jacketed soft point actually chronographed to give an average velocity of 1345 fps from the rifle used. At 100 yards the bullet likely had no more than 1050-1100 fps remaining velocity. The buck deer was standing angling away so that the bullet struck the back left rib, passed through the center of the heart cutting a simple .40 hole, and exited through the front of the right shoulder again leaving a .40 hole. No observable expansion was indicated by the wound. The deer struggled 30-40 yards to a fence and fell, rolled up underneath it, kicked weakly up at the barbed wire a couple of times and expired.

    2. A whitetail buck facing from 90 steps was struck full in the chest with a handloaded 165 grain Sierra boat tail spitzer fired at 2895 fps from a Winchester Model 70 .30-06. The heart was completely destroyed, the right lung hashed, both the right front shoulder and the right rear leg damaged from the fragmented bullet. Despite the shattering destruction done by the bullet this deer ran a couple hundred yards down into and along a deep ravine to pile up in thick brush, giving a merry old time trailing to locate. Upon finding the deer it was discovered that the left front leg was missing from the knee joint down due to some old injury.

    This is Texas and neither deer probably weighed as much as 100 lbs. on the hoof. Based solely on these two examples the false conclusion could be drawn that the plodding old .38-40 is a superior deer cartridge to the high-powered .30-06. After all, it put the buck down soonest of the two examples. What it does indicate is that if results can vary so wildly when two such dissimilar cartridges are used, even with one being quite a high-powered rifle, then one simply cannot expect to read much at all into ballistics tests that are so bally-hooed.

    By the way. That's a clever cartoon of a man and an ostrich sticking their heads into "a consistent medium."
    Charter Member of the DC .41 LC Society

    “No possible rapidity of fire can atone for habitual carelessness of aim with the first shot.”

    Theodore Roosevelt, The Wilderness Hunter, 1893

  16. #60
    sgb
    sgb is offline
    VIP Member Array sgb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    You don't need to know
    Posts
    2,414
    Quote Originally Posted by bmcgilvray View Post
    Verifiable data? Of what? Of one bullet's performance in "a consistent medium" as compared to another bullet's performance in "a consistent medium?" And we're suppose to accept these tests at face value and deem them as meaningful? It's a given that neither deer nor human assailants will behave in a consistent fashion, even with similar hits and with using bullets that give similar expansion characteristics, so relative stopping power performance predictions based on one's favorite test data are pretty much useless.

    Of course they have to have something in which to test all the bullets. It may as well be "a consistent medium" since civilized societies can't go about shooting large groups of human test subjects in order to ascertain bullet performance.

    On a separate topic:


    "Never heard of a deer high on meth/alcohol or crack participating in a gunfight."


    Here's a couple of personal hunting experiences that illustrates the tenacity of deer. No, deer don't drink and drug up or shoot back, but they can cling to life pretty energetically for fleeting seconds, not going "down for the count" or giving much indication at all of being stopped.

    1. A whitetail buck was taken at a bit over 100 yards with a Winchester Model 1873 .38-40 (actual bullet diameter is .401). Ammunition used was a pre-WWII Winchester factory 180 grain jacketed soft point actually chronographed to give an average velocity of 1345 fps from the rifle used. At 100 yards the bullet likely had no more than 1050-1100 fps remaining velocity. The buck deer was standing angling away so that the bullet struck the back left rib, passed through the center of the heart cutting a simple .40 hole, and exited through the front of the right shoulder again leaving a .40 hole. No observable expansion was indicated by the wound. The deer struggled 30-40 yards to a fence and fell, rolled up underneath it, kicked weakly up at the barbed wire a couple of times and expired.

    2. A whitetail buck facing from 90 steps was struck full in the chest with a handloaded 165 grain Sierra boat tail spitzer fired at 2895 fps from a Winchester Model 70 .30-06. The heart was completely destroyed, the right lung hashed, both the right front shoulder and the right rear leg damaged from the fragmented bullet. Despite the shattering destruction done by the bullet this deer ran a couple hundred yards down into and along a deep ravine to pile up in thick brush, giving a merry old time trailing to locate. Upon finding the deer it was discovered that the left front leg was missing from the knee joint down due to some old injury.

    This is Texas and neither deer probably weighed as much as 100 lbs. on the hoof. Based solely on these two examples the false conclusion could be drawn that the plodding old .38-40 is a superior deer cartridge to the high-powered .30-06. After all, it put the buck down soonest of the two examples. What it does indicate is that if results can vary so wildly when two such dissimilar cartridges are used, even with one being quite a high-powered rifle, then one simply cannot expect to read much at all into ballistics tests that are so bally-hooed.

    By the way. That's a clever cartoon of a man and an ostrich sticking their heads into "a consistent medium."
    Shooting deer and shooting people in self defense are two completely different subjects, one would note that deer don't shoot back. People on drugs which make up a large percentage of offenders involved in violent crime do. Further the topic is about the 5.56/.223 defensive ammunition not your favorite deer load.

    I'd also add that anecdotal evidence is worth zero, anecdotal evidence on the internet is worth less than zero. Ignoring self defense shooting dynamics as well as the ballistic data gathered by the professional community gathered through the collection of ballistic gelatin testing and the study of gunshot wounds is effectively the same as burying your head in the sand. Your head your choice.
    "There is a secret pride in every human heart that revolts at tyranny. You may order and drive an individual, but you cannot make him respect you." William Hazlitt (1778 - 1830)

    Best Choices for Self Defense Ammunition

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

.223 defense ammo

,
223 defense ammo
,
5.56 defense ammo
,

5.56 self defense ammo

,
556 defense ammo
,

best 5.56 ammo

,
best 5.56 ammo for defense
,

best 5.56 ammo for self defense

,

best 5.56 defensive ammo

,

best 5.56 self defense ammo

,
best ammo for m&p 15 sport
,
best self defense 5.56 ammo
Click on a term to search for related topics.