5.56 vs. .45

This is a discussion on 5.56 vs. .45 within the Defensive Ammunition & Ballistics forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Wow! This is more heated than the 9mm vs 45 threads. Who woulda thunk it. Michael...

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 61 to 69 of 69
Like Tree44Likes

Thread: 5.56 vs. .45

  1. #61
    VIP Member Array mlr1m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    okla
    Posts
    4,298
    Wow! This is more heated than the 9mm vs 45 threads. Who woulda thunk it.

    Michael

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #62
    Member Array Wiggity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    206
    Oh jeez, we can definitely agree to disagree.

    When people start resorting to personal attacks, it usually means they don't have any more valid points ;)
    Μολὼν λαβέ

  4. #63
    Member Array sparkykb's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    425
    I'd like to apologize in public to Glockman for the way I went about attacking his point of view earlier in the thread. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and I actually believe we are somewhat in agreement now that I understand what he meant by his initial statement. I now realize he wasn't saying rifles and pistols wound just the same in all situations which is what I initially took from it. A good hit is a good hit with pistol or rifle as long as the round has enough oompf to penetrate and strike a vital area. I'll agree with that.

  5. #64
    Member Array lyodbraun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    307
    Can't we all just get along.... this thread has been beaten way to long....

    Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

  6. #65
    Senior Member Array Devone6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    South of North, North of South
    Posts
    654
    Quote Originally Posted by sparkykb View Post
    Ok, so the car thing was lame but I thought it was funny.....

    Back on topic.

    I'm sure none of this is new to you since you seem to have your mind made up, but I thought I would write it out anyways.

    There are 2 significant mechanisms of injury that occur in high velocity penetrating trauma which is what rifle wounds are classified as. One is the actual crushing of tissue, the other is temporary cavitation. Most pistol rounds are considered medium velocity penetrating trauma and the only significant mechanism of injury is the tissue crushed by the actual round.

    Yes, crushed tissue in either a high velocity or medium velocity penetrating wound is crushed and destroyed. Yes, both pistol and rifle rounds crush the tissue they pass through. When the bullets impact elastic tissue like muscle there isn't much difference in the wound created, I'll give you that. Assuming the rifle round is FMJ and passes straight through without yawing I'll even say that the pistol may cause more tissue damage to straight skeletal muscle because it is larger diameter and crushes more tissue as it penetrates. Injuries to elastic tissue aren't going to incapacitate someone quickly so that crushed tissue is just going to provide a place for blood to exit the body.

    The difference in "killing power" as you called it is when the rounds impact nonelastic organs or bones. A rifle round is going to do a lot more damage than a pistol if the round strikes the heart, liver, brain, bladder, or even full intestines. Those types of tissue don't stand up to cavitation very well. The fragmentation that occurs when a high velocity round encounters something hard like a bone is also very destructive and something to keep in mind when comparing rifle and pistol ballistics. Soft or hollow point rifle rounds don't need to hit bone to fragment and neither do FMJ rounds when impacting at a high enough velocity.

    The way I see it is that both pistol and rifle rounds can crush tissue just the same, especially in extremity wounds. The rifle round has the added bonus of being able to cause extra damage to nonelastic organs or dense tissue such as bones. The rifle is not going to do more damage in all situations. It does have the ability to do more in certain situations though.

    I think "a hole is a hole" is simplifying wound characteristics a wee bit.
    Good post, probably the best post actually explaining/simplifying the actual difference between a rifle and handgun in the thread. I think everyone realizes there is a difference, but on some subjects like this, some read into posts way too much, and just want to argue without ever actually making a point. Nobody gains from that.
    My heroes are Veterans and My Father (who was a veteran).

    I believe prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance should have REMAINED in schools, and the Ten Commandments should have REMAINED in schools, courthouses, and everywhere else it was before the ACLU got involved.

  7. #66
    Senior Member Array Devone6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    South of North, North of South
    Posts
    654
    Quote Originally Posted by Spidey2011 View Post
    I'd argue that the temporary wound cavity is actually quite permanent. It's also much larger because of the amount of air displaced by the bullet. I'm sure you've seen what a 5.56 wound looks like. I hit a prairie dog at 300 yards the other day with a .223 and it was split in half. I also had one that I shot with a .45 at close range. One clean hole. I'm not going to say that a rifle has more killing power, but I will say it has more killing potential.
    Another good post summing it up, good way of saying it in "I'm not going to say that a rifle has more killing power, but I will say it has more killing potential."
    My heroes are Veterans and My Father (who was a veteran).

    I believe prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance should have REMAINED in schools, and the Ten Commandments should have REMAINED in schools, courthouses, and everywhere else it was before the ACLU got involved.

  8. #67
    Senior Member Array Mattmann's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Ar
    Posts
    1,012
    Quote Originally Posted by Wiggity View Post
    Oh jeez, we can definitely agree to disagree.

    When people start resorting to personal attacks, it usually means they don't have any more valid points ;)
    Guess there is no big boy pants to put on then. Sad

    Sent from my DROID RAZR

  9. #68
    Member Array Wiggity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    206
    Quote Originally Posted by Mattmann View Post
    Guess there is no big boy pants to put on then. Sad

    Sent from my DROID RAZR
    I agree that this is getting ridiculous. As the last few posts before yours sum it up quite nicely.


    If you could maybe stop with the personal attacks then that would be great.
    Μολὼν λαβέ

  10. #69
    Senior Moderator
    Array pgrass101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    13,459
    If we cannot play nice then the playground will be closed
    10thmtn and Spidey2011 like this.
    “You can sway a thousand men by appealing to their prejudices quicker than you can convince one man by logic.”

    ― Robert A. Heinlein,

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345

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

.45 acp vs 5.56 nato
,

.45 vs 5.56

,
45 vs 5.56
,
5.56 devastating
,

5.56 vs .45

,
5.56 vs .45 damage
,

5.56 vs 45

,
5.56 vs. .45
,
5.56ammo vs45
,
556 vs 45
,
ammunition for a kp 5.56
,

mexico 5.56 wound

Click on a term to search for related topics.