Trade_Sniper said:
I know that .223/5.56 is the norm, but I see .308, 6.65, 6.68 and 7.62.
I've seen many say that the .223/5.56 doesn't have enough stopping power.
I know the .223/5.56 is fairly cheap ammo, so a person could practice a lot more.
I really like the POF/DSA Z4-GTC (depends on price, haven't seen any yet). I'm trying to select my first AR to go with my .45 and 12g auto-shotty. I do plan to shoot/practice with it a lot, possibly compete in 3 gun matches with it. I just want to make sure that I select the right caliber for when it is actually 'needed'.
The .223/5.56 may be fine, but I want to hear from those of you with experience. I'm sure, like a pistol, that shot placement is key.
I know that ar15.com has lots of info, but I can't post there as I don't have a non-anonymous email address yet. Besides that, I just like you guys.:wave:
What are your thoughts?
I debated this myself. I'm of the school of thought that "real" rifle calibers start with a "3", yet I went with the 5.56 chambering.
You hear all the time that our soldiers don't like their 5.56 chambered rifles, and that .22 diameter bullets will just magically bounce off of enemies.
Yet in the course of my investigation I talked to my good friend who is currently serving in the sandbox again right now, and he expressed nothing but admiration for it. I also happened to have the good fortune to talk to a local veteran who served in Vietnam right after the Tet Offensive in the 82nd Airborne as a mortar sargeant. This man killed his enemies with the M16A1 back when they had to underload the 20 round magazines. He had the unrefined, buggy version of the platform and caliber and forked over an M14 for it gladly. His particular rifle was outfitted with the Starlight scope and a suppressor, and he used it to great effect at night, and when I asked him he said he wishes he still had it because it's the best weapon he's ever had.
So while it's not as widespread, there's some anecdotal evidence that the end users like it as much as they hate it, FWIW.
Now that the second hand testimony is over with, I looked at it objectively and discovered that the terminal ballistics of 5.56 NATO are actually impressive. I count 7.62x39 as a good antipersonnel round, and against a human target 5.56NATO performs similarly, and if you're in fragmentation range, sometimes better.
If you think about it, and really think about it hard, it makes sense even without all the number crunching. The round is a light, easy to carry easy to fire antipersonnel cartridge. It's not meant for hunting moose, it's meant for goblin control.
Other chamberings are perhaps more attractive from a versatility or pure power standpoint, but when I evaluated what I really wanted to do with my AR15 (learn how to use it...), I decided the 5.56 chambering was best for me.
Do your homework. Consider the length of barrel your rifle will have and its rate of twist. Not all 5.56 loads are the same. And remember that as a civilian, you actually are better off in the aspect of getting to choose better ammunition.
And like you said, shot placement shot placement shot placement. I've always been more accurate at any range with a rifle vs. a pistol. The way I look at it, I'm perfectly content to protect myself with 5 rounds of .38 Special coming out of a tiny barrel at times. Thirty rounds of 5.56 coming out of a rifle is worlds, no, galaxies better.