223 vs 5.56: Can’t Believe The Difference

On this episode of Ultimate Barrier Testing, we will be comparing the performance of the 223 Rem to the 5.56 (5.56x45 or 5.56 NATO) on 4 different targets. Each target is worth 25 points (winner takes all), for a grand total of 100 points. Whichever cartridge ends up with the highest score will be the winner. Testing was setup at 50 yards. Thanks for watching!
*These tests are meant for entertainment and educational purposes only. Do not try any of these tests at home! Always verify your setup is rated for and can safely fire any ammunition that you intend to use.
5.56 NATO: WIN 55 gr FMJ M193
223 Rem: WIN 55 gr FMJ

[@josephbrian4518]

My biggest takeaway from the videos with sand is that I see why we still use sandbags

[@nomadlight]

lol

[@fabiolean]

100% It compresses when struck, makes a great barrier.

[@MiaogisTeas]

Filling the walls of my compound as we speak! In Minecraft, of course.

[@liberty9348]

It is EXTREMELY effective at stopping all kinds of serious stuff. During the war in Iraq, we would fill "Hesco Bastions" with sand off the ground and put them around our FOB (Forward Operating Base) to create a barrier. It's just a metal cage with this fabric-type material that will hold the sand inside. They can stop mortar rounds, artillery, up to 30mm weapons, massive trucks, high explosives, etc. and it's just sand. Pretty impressive stuff. Saved me a couple times.

[@_Chris_SouthwestDetroit]

Facts bro, still surprised me that sand can hold a lot of builds in a close space. Just imagine a whole all built of sand

[@redline870]

This guys voice was built to be a radio DJ. Sounds like he should be saying “and up next we have some cooool jazz from Miles Davis, right after this quick commercial break”

[@davidc5553]

Aaaannnd, next on stage two is Angela. She's a community college student who is almost done with her nursing degree!

[@45johngalt]

I thought he sounds like Ray Romano

[@impudentdomain]

Yeah he has a golden deep baritone

[@vanim8]

Has resonance and timbre but no professional training. His delivery would not make it on radio without some good training and practice. Reminds me of Ray Romano...

[@toddlaplanteVT85]

​@@45johngaltI was thinking the brother

[@stevenflores5549]

The velocity on the boxes is usually with 20” barrel on 556 and 24” barrel on 223. The 223 is marketed as a bolt gun varmit cartridge.

[@BuffRANGE]

Indeed This is true!

[@juhanivalimaki5418]

I was about to mention the same, although I would take the lengths further down, at least for 5.56. Usually 5.56 barrels are 14"-16". Then the higher pressure/bigger powder load on 5.56 cannot compensate for the lot longer .223 barrel used for the data on the boxes.

[@BuffRANGE]

@@juhanivalimaki5418 I've seen upwards of 3,500 fps from M193 coming out of my 22" bolt gun, so they still do gain velocity. :D

[@terrarecon]

@@juhanivalimaki5418 current popular barrel length trends are are outliers for the original design of these cartridges. I get your point. But, whatever results these tests produce with 18 to 20" barrels, shorter barrels by default are going produce worse not better.

[@hubertET]

As a member of the "disarmed for your own safety" society in the EU, I enjoy the additional info provided by such comments. Sadly - firearms is a "book only" hobby for me :(

[@vic2265]

It matters because the chamber that’s cut inside the barrel of a 223 vs 556 are different. As far as the portion of the chamber that encases the cartridge case, they’re the same; it’s the chamber cut past the case mouth that’s different. A chamber in a 5.56 NATO barrel has a longer throat, which is the segment of the chamber between the case mouth and where the rifling lands taper from nothing to the bore diameter of 0.219-inch/5.56 millimeters. This extra space allows the barrel to withstand the higher pressures of the 5.56 NATO. It’s that simple. What’s not as simple is the interchangeability.It is perfectly safe to shoot 223 Remington ammunition in a 5.56 NATO rifle, but in some cases, precision can be less than stellar. On the other hand, it’s considered unsafe to shoot 5.56 NATO ammunition in a 223 Remington rifle. You see, the 5.56 NATO cartridge will produce about 62,000 psi in a 5.56 NATO chamber, and that’s OK. But in the 223 Remington chamber with the tighter throat, pressures can exceed 70,000. That’s not OK... Certified Gunsmith here and if you dont believe me do the research you will see for yourself.

[@oldschooldude8370]

Absolutely correct. Throat erosion & over pressure is real.

[@nicksmacro]

Totally, it's all in how you're chambered kid...

[@joewoodchuck3824]

Well put.

[@brandonwilson896]

as someone who has worked for a self defense and rifle fighting school and seen millions of rounds go through our loaner rifles i can without a doubt say that it doesnt matter not one bit.

[@lowcountrydawg2525]

Not always true. The Ruger Mini-14 is an exception, going all the way back to the 180-series guns.

[@jondavidmcnabb]

As a former grunt, I can attest to my love of sandbags and a well built fighting position. When shit starts gettin "real" the dirt start to "appeal"!!!!!

[@bryanst.martin7134]

I bet wet sand is even better?

[@petesheppard1709]

Oh, that sweet, sweet earth...

[@TUKByV]

​@@bryanst.martin7134Mass and density. Water filling in the tiny spaces between grains of sand should help.

[@bryanst.martin7134]

@@TUKByV It should also reduce the sand spilling out of the hole. There is another form of barrier, Glycol mixed with Fumed silica. Flexible till struck at high velocity, then it instantly crystalizes.

[@TUKByV]

@@bryanst.martin7134 Oh, yeah. Heard about that some years ago. Did anyone market it?

[@KingOfChaos213]

I love this version of Ray Romano great job.

[@stanleysteamer1816]

Haha I hear a lil Plankton too!

[@purplemonster2239]

😅😂. Yes. Definitely. Lol

[@emacstac]

I'm glad we could help out again my friend! Excellent Video as always! That M855a1 almost made it through that sand ;) | if you need more for testing, just let me know!

[@saltymofo5870]

He won’t shoot it on steel, he will just put it on his only fans page😤

[@emacstac]

@@saltymofo5870 If he wanted a bunch to shoot at different steels etc etc, if be happy to provide them.

[@SeymourPettigrew]

Does that round perform good with a shorter barrel? Let’s say a 7.5” barrel?

[@dkhill27]

​@emacstacticalcom4105 Are those rounds for sale? I would like to test some out on different types of metal and wood

[@chrisgualtieri]

Seriously Emacs thank you SO MUCH for giving him your ammo for the reviews. You all are freaking amazing. The next time I need something, I’ll be checking your website first.

[@macumezahn]

As a vet and former range officer, I really like the AR- family of weapons. I personally noticed a big difference when shooting the .223 (it seemed to jam way more often) and in alignment with the tumbling you saw in your test, I saw big differences on shots that were anywhere over 100m. I like to fine tune my rifle sights to about 100-300m with no scope, and it was simply impossible to do with those rounds. I switched back to 556 and no problems. Please don't jump on me, its just a personal observation guys, I don't know the science behind it...EDIT: It appears VIC2265 has much of the answer...thank you.

[@diver0129]

This was my thought. I think the benefits of 556 might show a little out at a distance. But is it enough to really matter?

[@CarlSmithers]

@@diver0129 SAME. DAMN. CARTRIDGE.

[@MrAlohaWildMan]

I second the jamming part on the AR platform with the 223 vs 556. Heard you can compensate with adjustments to the recirc gas pressure and buffer weights but I was just thinking- why not just use .556 rounds and eliminate the problem without gun surgery, ya know?

[@diver0129]

@@CarlSmithers It's NOT. Thus the comparison. The differences are minor, but they are there.

[@albundy7459]

Most reloading manuals have their test rifles at a 22-24” bolt gun for .223. That’s why it has the higher velocity. 5.56 is USUALLY tested out of 20” M16. I’m sure there are some manuals out there that might test out of a bolt gun. I haven’t read every manual to be 100% sure.

[@wolfofmagdalene92]

WELL GET TOOO IT SON! lololol jokes aside that's a good point

[@mikefarley5358]

Great point. Size matters

[@DieselRamcharger]

they are tested out of a testing action, not a gun per say.

[@ft90702]

Really says something about the quality of your videos that we're here in 2024 watching 5.56 v. .223 videos and enjoying them.

[@martysherwood8853]

223 is not annealed looks as your 223 is a reload or not a 223.check it out for your self 😮

[@teddyperkins3406]

this guys voice doesnt match his face lol

[@Xaero_ZRX-33]

FACTS

[@michaeldanmosley4169]

I've got a match ! Your face & my ..... 😂

[@joshuaaustin3233]

He could be a relation of Ray Romano.

[@raspiankiado]

It's because it isn't his real voice.

[@petrichor649]

KGB

[@ice-xv1hi]

This guy is very entertaining. Hope his channel grows.

[@HWG-wm8ld]

He is definitely stepping up the comedy, the waiter bit…

[@jumpercable20]

I agree, he has the voice of a radio disc jockey.

[@geegaw14]

Thanks so much for the extra half second of screen time on the bullet stats at the beginning of the video. So much easier to read.

[@firstnamerequiredlastnameo3473]

Temporary work around: Download the video and replay it much slower on your computer. It helps sometimes.

[@zachdemand4508]

didn't you hear? KZbin introduced this fantastic feature. Its called pausing. all you have to do i click/tap in the middle of the video and it stops playing.

[@michaelr5606]

@@zachdemand4508😂

[@spoonkahoon]

​@@firstnamerequiredlastnameo3473If you click on the cog thingy on the video you can change the playback speed

[@slayer8actual]

@@zachdemand4508 A pause feature? It's probably an add-on that costs an arm and a leg. No thanks, I'll just learn to read faster.

[@respectfullydecline973]

Leaving a message just to say I love how your video just spat out the facts. No superfluous yacking! Great format…interesting and efficient. Thank you

[@lutherpayne9957]

Unless you sling a lot bigger and higher velocity projectile at that sand box, you are just proving the practice of sand bagging for use in personal protection while in a fighting positions.

[@AniwayasSong]

I've always UNDER-appreciated the finer points of ballistics, even though I've been shooting/hunting from the age of '4', and am also a USMC Vet with two tours under my cover. For myself, accuracy has always been the most important thing, and then choosing the suitable caliber vs whatever target/game/enemy I expected to face. Seeing videos like *THIS* one, that clearly shows the nuances and why they matter, is one of the best things about YT/the Internet, IMHO! Thank you for all your hard work and in sharing it with us/the world! :-D

[@goodbyemr.anderson5065]

Although this channel is ggod, there are a few that are many times better. At this point however, its not the stats that matter and the personality that people want. This is a younger channel, and will grow because the content is good. Once banana becomes more comfortable, and his knowledge expands, as well as funds, there will be no limit to his testing.

[@stopstealingmyname5794]

Thank you for the hard work in losing to farmers!

[@AniwayasSong]

@@stopstealingmyname5794 'Losing to farmers.' Care to explain exactly WTF you meant by that, or is your utter lack of English language and Reading Comprehension insurmountable?

[@petesheppard1709]

The difference may help when the varmints are behind a barrier. The M193 seems just a bit better at converting cover to just concealment.

[@oif3vetk9]

@@AniwayasSong they are a troll. Don't give them any more of your time.

[@davidstjames_]

Please don't take this the wrong way, I do like the channel and I often learn new things from it. The main problem I see here, is that he fired both rounds from the same rifle, most likely chambered in 5.56. Although the dimensional differences between the two rounds are small, they are different. The main difference is the shape of the cartridge, mostly the length and angles in the bend of the throat. This is why some people will say that a .223 is more accurate when fired from a .223 chamber, or from a Wiley chamber, why arguably is the best of both worlds when it's desired to use both of these rounds interchangeably in the same rifle without barrel changes.

[@hambone950]

do you think the throat angle would have mattered? dudes shooting at pretty much max velocity while being safe.

[@randomness72838]

Man, ray romano putting out some good content. Subscribed.

[@garynelson9538]

I love his videos. It’s nothing but shootings, results and minimum rambling! Great job!!

[@WisdomShortsEntertainment]

One of the best voices I've heard on YT in a long time. You could could have an amazing career in voice acting or radio.

[@Nosferatu1022]

I'd really love it if you could keep the chrono data up longer on screen. It's too fast to read averages and ft lbs and not super easy to rewind KZbin to pause it. Thanks for the videos! Love em

[@adamcanterbury]

That was I was thinking and my only critique 😊

[@cometcal2]

I had to go back and freeze the frame

[@Donishaaa]

Can’t believe I’ve never seen this channel before, good stuff brother

[@jaysmith2151]

Just found your channel it's probably the only gun channel I wasn't subscribed to but now I am.

[@cocodojo]

Hmm, and now it looks like you're "good to go" 👍

[@IsaacNelson-h9o]

I wonder if this guy's voice would sound any different if he tried Helium ? Hahaha! Great video

[@waylonmccrae3546]

Or what if he was already on Helium ?? 😳

[@spencerricketts8025]

His voice is just pure bass frequencies without it@@waylonmccrae3546

[@DareToBeDeviant]

He takes a few gulps of Sulfur Hexafluoride between takes. The stuff would make your mother sound like James Earl Jones.@@waylonmccrae3546

[@Stefano_8732]

@@waylonmccrae3546lol

[@bobborlog1677]

Now that's a test he needs to do

[@WelshRabbit]

You have one incredible set of vocal pipes. I could listen to you talk all day.

[@Thebeardedbutt]

Like a second amendment Ray Romano.

[@1990mizo]

He needs a sitcom style bass line. Awesome video 🎉

[@jamesortiz5388]

Weird?

[@VariableRecall]

Watching those fireballs makes me realize just how much work even the most basic of A2 birdcages can do to help the user experience!

[@Mike_858]

I hope you never stop doing the ''lets turn it around''- song. This is a trademark thing now.

[@skidmark316]

That was sorta lifted from the song "Total Eclipse of the Heart" by Bonnie Tyler.

[@Herecomesthethruth]

I used to have a AR with the barrel that could shoot both rounds.i would often buy the .223 because it was cheaper.but was told the .556 had abit more power. This video definitely proves that information accurate

[@gmc1966]

223 Wylde chamber, it makes your AR more versatile

[@xephael3485]

Every AR can shoot both rounds. .223 and 5.56 ar interchangeable! If you disagree find me a gun that doesn't have a custom chamber that can't shoot both rounds all day everyday without any problems...

[@anthonybmwsoldat1530]

fire formed. once the round ignites, it will conform to the chamber. I think the casing on a 556 is not the same as the case on a 223. the volume is different, I have loaded range drops of both and never noticed a dif, but I really wasn't looking; I was too busy plinking and having fun. This was done in the before times when ammo was inexpensive. @@xephael3485

[@Herecomesthethruth]

@xephael3485 thanks,I'm definitely no pro.i really didn't know all ARs shot both rounds

[@xephael3485]

@@Herecomesthethruth It's possible you might run into accuracy issues with a .223 "chambered" firearm firing higher grain 5.56 but unlikely. Chamber the round and remove it... if you don't see any marks on the bullet from the lands, you're 100% fine.

[@skidmark316]

This guy is entertaining af. subbed.

[@phoenixnfa]

plugged this data into a ballistic chart. the difference in drop is 4.68 inches at 500 yards.

[@88e303stanggt]

I let your videos play on repeat when I’m trying to talk sleep.. better than melatonin.

[@frederickhenneke4660]

I load both cartridges and with a little tinkering I got .223 up to 3050 out of a 16" 1/8 twist AR with 68GR BTHP bullets. Heavier bullet weights do well with faster twist.

[@samdunlap5365]

I have a 1in 7 and a 1 on 9 and so for anything from 55grn to 75grn shot the same from either 🤔

[@rickterrance4981]

You can typically load most ammunition WAY hotter and faster than box ammunition because #1 manufacturers skimp on powder to save money #2 manufacturers want to prioritize low chamber pressures fpr safety reasons to avoid potentially damaging somebody's old rifle.

[@philliphall5198]

It’s best to reload your own to whatever speed you want and weight of bullets

[@samdunlap5365]

@philliphall5198 been doing that for 40+ years

[@Keelarr]

When I am lucky enough to have a free day on the farm lol, m+y day consists of scouring the dark web in the morning for reloading supplies lol, IYKYK.. then down to the Dungeon for casing prep... (the most fun you can have with your reloading experience btw), then to the press.... then to bench. Pew pew pew.. then back to the tumbler lol

[@rockman469]

Man you got that deep voice, you should work as a News Caster or Radio Sport talk show

[@tristankelsey1746]

I'm far from an expert in ballistics but I am surprised that 223 went thru a pressure treated 6x6. Good video keep up the great content. I learn something new every time

[@jonnylong4110]

Love what you do man! Solid tests.

[@andrew86fl]

Good testing. I still think the difference is negligible and 223 is cheaper than 556.

[@Bubben246]

To quote some old guntuber, "Is there a difference? Yeah. Is it enough of a difference to MAKE a difference? You be the judge."

[@jasono2139]

It's really not though... if you want for a sale they're essentially the same price.

[@frankdardano3182]

Now, I found a channel that I like the presenter,he is not hyped up, or non stop talking.He probably talks to his self like he speaks in tha video. That, is the ultimate compliment. How real can you get? The feeling I get is hey,learned something I wanted to know, but dont have the setup,and also spent time with a really cool guy, and we did all kinds of s.... Thanks next time the ammo is on me!

[@SHadowKillerDj]

I believe it's "Time to Grind!" Some of the rust off them wangs my good sir lol

[@bananaballistics]

New segment called “it’s time to flap disk” lol

[@bryanst.martin7134]

@@bananaballistics Permatex makes a rust converter in a spray can. 🙂

[@andrewb6]

Evaporust works quite well, and is non-toxic, supposedly. Probably best to not drink it. It works faster when a little warmer, but if you have the time, just let them soak for a couple days. I am sure you can find videos explaining it in more depth.

[@abrb1223]

@@andrewb6 Can confirm, not tasty but quite effective!

[@CarlSmithers]

For crying out loud, 5.56 is just a NATO standardized loading of 223 Winchester. THAT IS ALL! I have personally held an early, transitional box from Lake City. Guess what? They had simply crossed out 223 with a marker, and hand-written 5.56. I've also held, in my hands, an original, US Air Force AR-15. Yes, it was marked "AR-15", and "223".

[@anthonyp2003]

The difference in velocity on the boxes is because of how they are measured. For 5.56 the test is done with a 20” barrel, but for .223 a 24” barrel is used. When run through a 16” barrel, it’s typical to see lower velocities from .223 than 5.56.

[@meanman6992]

First. Difference is powder load and the chamber they’re fired in more than anything. Barrel length of .223Rem is usually 24” barrel as well. Where as 5.56 is usually 20”. Jackets for M193 are supposed to also be different as well as the mean average and max spread of velocity.

[@asahearts1]

Right on

[@donwyoming1936]

Exactly. Velocities are from two different barrel lengths. Jackets on military grade projectiles are typically thicker than civilian equivalents. It's quite possible the lead alloy in the core is different too. Sometimes, even USGI ammo will have bimetal jackets.

[@unclefreedom213]

​@donwyoming1936 this is all kinds of false

[@asahearts1]

@@unclefreedom213 Please elaborate

[@HWG-wm8ld]

Definitely false. Too many cnn reporters on here.

[@jasongouffray4202]

Great video! Me and My brother in law been going back and forth on this.

[@ericbergfield6451]

Appreciate this direct comparison

[@charliesierra6919]

Came for the ballistics difference, stayed for the voice. Great channel!

[@reloadnorth7722]

I'm still waiting to see a splat test with that banana that keeps flying around. LOL, another great video. Stay safe and vigilant.

[@wadesafool]

Underrated channel!!

[@justaperson8560]

😂😂 that reduction joke was well done

[@reddune6185]

He probably would have got more penetration with a longer bull barrel but that’s a different topic.

[@Coyotethumper5]

Love your videos one thing to consider about the sandbox is that after you shoot the first round or two rounds and you put a third or fourth one in there what’s not to say that that bullets has not collided with the other one that’s in the box just sitting there which could effect its momentum I know the odds are not real great that they’ll hit that leftover bullet in the sand but it could and it could skew the results

[@HWG-wm8ld]

Look up run on sentence

[@El_Peto]

​@@HWG-wm8ldor even punctuation

[@surevaliance7940]

Would be very interesting to see .22 WMR 40-gr CCI Maxi-Mag FMJ from PMR-30 vs. 5.7x28 40-gr American Eagle FMJ from either Ruger 57, FN Five-seveN, PSA 5.7 Rock or S&W M&P 5.7! Surely, both rounds would not penetrate even 1/4 mild steel, but what about different thickness plywood?

[@BuffRANGE]

Bravo! Good Show!!

[@Chris-of6xm]

FINCH from American Pie is testing guns now. That's awesome thanks, Finchie. Tell Stifler's mom we said hello

[@DieselRamcharger]

it seems like both rounds were fired out of a 5.56 chamber. the difference in 556 and 223 is the throat length. 556 has a nominal pressure of 55,000psi. 556 in a 223 chamber is 65,000psi {unsafe} 223 fired from a 556 chamber is 45,000psi {under performs}

[@guins99]

What are you, a scientist?

[@DieselRamcharger]

@@guins99 Science is for everyone.

[@rebeljamieson3414]

Chambering makes a big difference with these. I can absolutely confirm a difference with running 5.56 chamber along side .223 wylde. The velocity difference shows at point of impact.

[@DieselRamcharger]

@@rebeljamieson3414 yeah i didnt get it for a long time. the 223 chamber is "tighter" and "shorter" so it makes for a more accurate rifle, and the 556 is "looser" for reliability. Thats why 556 is loaded hotter to make up for the big ole chamber.

[@JayDee-kw8oz]

This debate is because of lazy/amateur people. Mostly lazy. And also military complex, thinking everything military must be better, no. The 223 is more tight and thus accurate. The advantage 556 has is that u can shoot both rounds out of 556 rifle but only 223 out of 223 rifle. I understand this is too complex for some.

[@bradenjones2825]

I love the commentary “if you don’t know what you would do with 8 inches, neither do I” 😂

[@CheeksMcGillicutty]

I'm VERY new to firearms and love when i come across a channel that's highly informative as well as entertaining lol definite sub

[@stevenbiddlecom]

Great commercial for that tape company! I'll be looking for that type of tape the next time I send a package anywhere.

[@43beasthogan1]

EVEN THO I AM A AIR GUNNER I STILL ENJOY YOUR CHANNEL😊

[@prebaned]

"If there're somehow able to make it through that", you're adorable.

[@ArmedVeteran1987]

I always like your test. You always use the ammo I own which it helps for my next ammo purchase or gun

[@petesheppard1709]

Yep! Information that's practical, not just entertaining.

[@44hawk28]

I have found, many occasions, where I'm actually getting higher velocities out of 223 ammo then out of some 556 ammo, depending on the lot or the manufacturer or other influences that cause changes in the way in which this particular round, the 55 grain Full Metal Jacket operates. Drawing the conclusion, where you pick up a 556 round and a 223 round and test only two rounds against each other, you would have to test dozens of different 223 marked ammo and 556 ammo. I'd like to point out to you, that the primary difference between 223 and 556 in their pressure allotments, happens to be because the military takes the pressure reading from a different point on the cartridge case then civilian testing procedures do. There is frequently if you thousand pounds of difference, if you go to the military testing you get over 10 or 12 thousand pounds difference are within each other's differentials from round to round. That said, now you have to look at what mechanism they tested the rounds in. What length of test Barrel was it does it have the same resistance to the bullet traveling through it? The difference from one barrel to the very next Barrel in manufacturer can sometimes be a couple of hundred feet per second. The only thing that you are consistent with in this test is you happen to have two randomly selected 556 / 223 rounds, and you're testing them at least in the same firearm. Considering the 55 grain Full Metal Jacket was specifically designed to produce Wicked wounding capability within 200 yards of a 20 inch barrel rifle with a 1 to 12, to 1 to 10 twist. And at that it is absolutely superb. I find this test virtually worthless tactical barrier fragment horribly. And are very rarely still able to produce any substantial wounding capability, to the extent that they can actually Force somebody to stop acting in a recalcitrant manner

[@cdrive5757]

Using Pressure Treated Pine (Southern Yellow Pine) for these tests is iffy at best ! It's a species that's noted for extreme variations in hardness throughout the grain. Sometimes center punching the stuff can be a pain in the ass. If the point falls between the heartwood and sapwood the center punch can easily, and often will, drift off into the softwood and miss the point you want. Drilling the stuff exhibits the same properties. Wakodahatchee Chris

[@ferrontirocia3185]

Congratulations! Greetings from Brazil.

[@RighteousJudging]

So, if I want to bulletproof my house, I'll just stack up sandbags. LOL

[@Kevin-wy8kc]

i bet u can do a killer Hank Hill impression

[@bfrick2338]

Thanks. Great video. Very informative. Nor let's see the 556 VS a 300 blackout.

[@paulshaw8446]

Just found your channel love the energy!

[@raleighsanford5111]

I enjoy these videos!!! It was explained to me that the NATO rounds have a thicker throat to handle the material for the tracer rounds.

[@Johnny-jr2lq]

Winchester M193 with LC head stamp is the Same stuff as Winchester 556 USA head stamp. I bought 600 rounds of each but didn’t realize that 3 of the box’s were marked M193 and 3 were marked 556. Both were Winchester I got all OCD because the head stamps were different. So I put 10 rounds of each down my 20” AR and the velocities were different by 10 fps. Just a FYI for anyone who possibly did the same thing as me. Tested with the same Chronograph as in this video.

[@unclefreedom213]

193 is a loading of 556 the two common loadings of 5.56 are m or xm193 and m or xm 855 mincheater runs the Lake City now but federal used to hence the LC head stamp

[@ComprehensiveContext]

Thanks for running the test! 10 fps is easily within lot-to-lot variation, so your experiment shows they're basically identical.

[@Bubben246]

@@ComprehensiveContext Or, to quote some elderly gentleman, "well within the variation from one ROUND to the next."

[@jefforymerten9613]

They're effectively the same: Hornady has been running the Lake City contract for years... and even sells .223 ammo with LC headstamp brass (this is 5.56x45 NATO brass). Go to a quality barrel maker (FN, Noveske, DD, Faxon, etc.) and see that they don't sell different barrels for the two chamberings because (wait for it...) they're the same. You can buy .223 as low-grade (low velocity, cheap bullet) 'plinking' ammo, and you can buy .223 as 'match' ammo, and you can buy it as 'varmint' ammo - all with different bullet weights, bullet construction, and varying velocities. You can buy 5.56x45 NATO (and non-NATO stuff like from IMI / Israel) with different bullet weights (55 gr. = M193 / 62 gr. 'Green Tip' = M855, etc.), different bullet construction (55 gr. M193 = FMJ bullet / 62 gr. M855 has a 'mild steel' penetrator / Hornady+Frontier load a 75 gr. BTHP bullet in 5.56x45 "NATO"). Penetration against various barriers has nothing to do with ".223 vs. 5.56x45".... it has to do with bullet type and powder charge (velocity) - of which either (or both...) types have lot of variation.

[@robertk8529]

😂

[@PoliticallyInsensitive]

There was an 85fps difference. "Is that enough difference to make a difference? You be the judge."

[@Cool-Lake]

Nice objective analysis, much appreciated.

[@surfstarcc1]

Terry the torso is a great addition to the family.

[@foundmebill9274]

Brother thank you for this video, very informative, and man your vocal folds are WILD. 😂

[@Paladin1873]

The rounds are only compatible in 5.56 chambers. A 223 chamber is cut differently and may or may not safely accept a 5.56 round. Either way, you risk a pressure spike if the projectile is contacting the lands. This is due to the 223 chamber typically having less free bore. Other factors may be at play, such as case wall thickness, bullet seating depth, or powder charge.

[@fiveowaf454]

I'm glad my rifles all ended up having the 5.56 chambering, there has been so much confusion and debate over the various differences and safety that I'd get a headache if I had a 223 chamber. If nothing else I'd have to be careful not to mix the various 223/5.56 ammo I have on hand when shooting.

[@Paladin1873]

@@fiveowaf454 I have a bolt action 223 with a true 223 chamber, so I have to be careful what I feed it. If you aren't sure, have the chamber checked with a set of 5.56 Go/No Go gauges. They are different from 5.56 gauges. Some shooters scoff at the idea, but one only has to do a little internet research to determine the risk is real.

[@fiveowaf454]

@@Paladin1873 Many seem to ignore the warnings and shoot any thing in their 223 chamberings. The thought of doing that would bother me, so as I say I'm glad I only have 5.56 chambers in the rifles I own of that type, because I have acquired quite a mix of 5.56 and 223, based on what ammo I could actually get during the shortages and at "sensible" prices, and it's been beneficial to be able to use both should a deal come up. Then you can get into the argument of the relative accuracy of the two rounds fired from the 5.56 chamber. If that's not enough controversy, then you can always start debating barrel twist rates and bullet weights ;) :)

[@EIBBOR2654]

There is little to no difference between 5.56 and .223 brass. Military brass is made at a slightly higher standard and can be slightly thicker below the neck. It will also have water proofing and a crimped primer. According to several books, one being Cartridges of the world and an old Remington ammunition book I have, the 5.56 in its original loading made for the military, is loaded with a hotter power than the .223. You can shoot .223 for a rifle chambered for the 5.56. But you can't shoot 5.56 ammo in a rifle chambered for .223. However the muzzle velocity of both types of ammo will be close to the same fired from rifles chambered for those rounds. The real difference is in the way they cut the chamber for the 5.56. There is more free bore, a slightly longer length to the throat in 5.56 chambered rifles. This allows some of the gas to pass by the bullet before it engaged the rifling. That keeps the pressure to a safe level. There is no free bore in a rifle that is chambered for the .223. So firing 5.56 ammo in a chamber for the .223 will spike pressures above safe levels. Most newer rifles are chambered for both .223 & 5.56, meaning that there is some free boring in the throat of those rifles and can vary between manufactures. Some will use the same reamer for the 5.56 chamber. Others will use one somewhere in between, about half of the free bore of the normal 5.56. Rifles chambered for both cartridges can have large velocity differences between rifles firing ammo from the same box. Some manufactures will use a worn chamber reamer longer than they should that can raise pressures and velocities. The best way to do a test like this would be to use one rifle chambered for the .223 and one chambered for the 5.56 to show the real difference between the two. So I hate to put it this way, but this test, fired from the same rifle chambered for both the 5.53 & .223 is really meaningless. If you were to use another rifle chambered for both cartridges you could get wildly different results. One last thing, military ammo must follow strict guide lines. They can't be like hunting ammo, soft point, hollow point, made to tumble or explosive type ammo. Using those types of ammo are considered war crimes. The reason for this is to stop mutilating wounds that can't be repaired or could make it so a Soldier would have a long painful death, so military ammo is solid non expanding type. That is so someone wounded has a chance to be removed and repaired. At least that is the way it is suppose to be. Sounds a bit weird, you go to war to kill, but you want the wounded to have a chance. Here is one link to show what I was talking about on the free boring: trajectoryarms.com/2021/02/04/ar-15-common-chamber-issues-neck-and-throat/ This link shows the difference between the three chamber cuts: www.m-guns.com/tool_new.php?product=reamer This is from the same link above but shows a cut away of the three chamber throats. They should be zoomed to 400% to show detail. If not you can download the picture and enlarge it. www.m-guns.com/photos//aeq_small.jpg There are many other links you can find on the throat issues and free boring. Google M-16 or Ar-15 free boring.

[@bernarddavis1050]

The idea behind the adoption of the sub-calibre 5.56mm NATO round is rather less noble than you intimate. The intention (among other motives) was to inflict serious wounds rather than kill outright, the thinking being that the care of a wounded soldier costs your enemy far more in time, resources and manpower than simply burying a corpse and replacing it with a fresh live body. Those are the cynical calculations indulged in my our military leaders. I don't know how it worked out in practice though. It always sounded like the thinking of an accountant rather than a real soldier.

[@EIBBOR2654]

@@bernarddavis1050 This was some of the reasoning back in the 1960s. The way I heard it was that the round was mostly meant to wound. That way it would take 3 combatants off the battle field. The wounded man and two to carry him. I don't know who came up with that and I think it might have been like a selling point. The US Army had adopted the M-14, basically a modified WWII M-1 rifle that fired an intermediate round. A shortened .30-06 that Winchester made. The .308 in civilian caliber and the 7.62 X 51 mm for the military. (The .30-06 would be in metric 7.62 X 63 mm.) This happened back in 1957 and they worked hard to make it the standard NATO round. Being shorter, Soldiers could carry more ammo. Eugene Stoner made the now famous ArmaLite AR-15 (developed into the M-16) as a light rifle in a .22 caliber (.223) he wanted the Army to adopt. But the US Army had just adopted the M-14 and didn't think a .22 caliber was good for combat use. They really didn't want it and tried to fail it in tests. They had a tough time getting the NATO Nations to adpot the 7.62mm round and those countries had to make manufacturing facilities to adapt costing them big money. Money they really didn't have. Remember this was just after WWII and all of Europe was broke and trying to rebuild their bombed and burned out countries. Now in less than 10 years after they all adopted it, they want everyone to stop and addopt this new 5.56 mm costing the NATO Nations a ton of money to retool the newly built amao facilities. This also meant that small arms Companies would have to design and retool to manufacture new rifles for this new NATO round Add to it that Gen La May USAF Commander wanted the new rifle but with some mods. So you can see the problems and total cluster F---- the US Military was facing. There were pros and cons to both rifles and ammo. I'll probably get over 1000 replies about how the AR is the best rifle ever made by those that don't know anything about the development and problems with the M-16. However Stoner was in luck with the Kennedy (JFK) /Johnson (LBJ) admin with the bean counter Robert McNamara who was secretary of defense from 1961 to 1968. He basically mandated that the US Army adopt the new rifle and ammo. But to answer the second part of your question about how that worked out by reducing the manpower on the battle field. In reality it did nothing. We were involved heavily in the Vietnam war and they didn't play like the Europeans. If one of their soldiers got wounded they left them where they lay and if they were still alive when they came back they might care for them. One would have thought the US Military learned that lesson during WWII fighting in the Pacific. I have books on the development of military arms and served the military, though not in combat. But I also have many older friends that did serve in combat in Korea through Vietnam that have experience with those weapons. Including may friends that were in the the recent wars. But things change and so do people and weapons. There is always someone that tries to come up with the newest, greatest and shinny toy for the Military hoping to make it big. So the quest for the perfect killing weapon or machine will never end. At least for the foreseeable future. The 5.56 used in the current M-4 mod of the M-16 is being replaced, Ironically by a larger caliber, the 6.8 X 51 mm. Almost back to the 7.65 X 51 mm. This will becom the new NATO round. Don't get me wrong, we need the military and I loved my 40 year career, Active and Guard. Even at a young age I knew there would always be some idiot that wants to rule the world. Those young men and women in our Military deserve a lot of respect. They are the best in the world. During my time I served with the most talented, creative and smartest people I've ever known. The old Military saying "If it is necessary, it will be accomplished" is shown in the US people and the best are in the military. We just have to stop the woke idiots that want to bring the US into what Europe or the USSR became and stop this wokeness! Y'all stay safe.

[@bernarddavis1050]

@@EIBBOR2654 Thanks for that information; much appreciated. I wasn't going to specifically mention that cold-blooded accountant McNamara, but you did it for me. The evil that b... did...

[@thomastevelde8547]

Wow ,now I know why mi barrel is stamped 223 and the owner’s manual states do not use 5.56

[@zekesdad562]

Love the video!

[@defcon1526]

That fiberglass on the sandbox was very clever

[@jasono2139]

Fiberglass??... you mean the fiber-reinforced tape??

[@defcon1526]

@jasono2139 Oh yeah, I guess I miss spoke.

[@damienluxford4480]

You've got a good singing voice, mate. You're a natural.

[@patrickmichael8655]

Is that really this dudes voice? Is James Earl Jones his dad

[@Lumpygrits76]

😂😂😂 It’s the Hoovie’s Garage of Ballistics 👍🏼👍🏼

[@GIJO]

Do 5.7 vs 9 on your test, please?

[@slayer8actual]

I already knew what the answers were going to be, but since KZbin went to the trouble of recommending your video to me, I thought it would be rude not to watch. And to tell you the truth, it was just going to be playing in the background while I cleaned out my desk drawer, but damn, your presentation and comedic flair got me actually watching this shit. Well done, dude, you made a video of which there are hundreds; 5.56 vs .223, interesting and funny! Subbed.

[@avdmustang]

Try X-Tac vs PMC Bronze, you should see a difference.

[@HWG-wm8ld]

Yeah, they are magical. Goes through an Abrams.

[@mrshort2379]

Awesome content as always. Being that I am a huge fan of 5.56 I really enjoyed this content especially see the actual difference of the 5.56 over the 223 there is not allot of content of the two calibers going head to head. however it would be nice to 5.7 vs 9mm and or even 5.7 vs 10mm I would just like to see the more prominent cartridge, before I decide on my next pdw

[@LavitosExodius]

Paul Harrel did a 5.7 video into a meat target for the price you pay compared to 9mm it's lackluster. Also since I own all 3 I can tell you each has its use but 10mm is king out of the three if you can handle the recoil. Unless of course you wanna get into the merits of 5.7 vs soft armor discussion. But even then that is a very specific type of 5.7 you have to buy and it won't be cheap.

[@JohnB-dr8sk]

The Miami FBI 1986 bad guy used standard .223 FMJ, and so did Kyle Rittenhouse (he used Aguila 223 FMJ). The reality is that in real life at realistic ranges, there is not much difference between the two. The advantage of 223 is that it has less muzzle blast and flash and it is cheaper to practice with.

[@HWG-wm8ld]

When you miss with your superior 5.7/10mm bs rounds because you can’t afford to practice, you’ll understand that 9mm is more than enough. Shot placement is everything.

[@Joe___R]

The biggest advantage 5.56 has over .223 is the availability of more destructive factory loaded ammo. Since you can easily get 5.56 AP black tip ammo.

[@connor3288]

Easily get AP 5.56 in the usa? What is it called? I thought 5.56 AP was harder to find with the introduction of 5.56 "pistols" and the AP pistol ammo law.

[@oif3vetk9]

Huh. Black tip 5.56? Even the Army doesn't have that.

[@HWG-wm8ld]

Just another rube.

[@JohnDoe-ud2cc]

223 is loaded with different powder. It’s a commercial round made for varmit hunting. It’s designed for 24” barrels to were 556 is loaded with faster powder designed for short 14” barrels.

[@joeberlin2067]

is that your real voice?

[@robertjackson1407]

Thank you 😊

[@Sun_Downer]

This mans voice is not real

[@GastonJane-wh4dr]

I think he is Ray Romano's son.

[@gregheitland4392]

Are we ready to Rumble😅

[@christianb4053]

He sounds just like Howard Stern....close your eyes and listen carefully!!! I swear, it's actually Stern😅

[@alexolivarez732]

There was a cashier at our H.E.B. in my town and the guy used to talk like this. I would always get a kick out of it. I think his was that steroid voice though.

[@DougMickey]

I think the reason the .223 had a lesser velocity was because you were firing it out of a 5.56 barrel. The 5.56 chamber has more room to fit the slightly larger neck of the 5.56 cartridge while a .223 specific chambered rifle has a tighter chamber. Leading to less pressure build up when firing the .223 out of a 5.56 rated rifle.

[@michaelforrester9963]

You have to look on back of the box to see the barrel length they used for the velocities. 5.56 was design and loaded originally for a 20” barrel

[@legionxviii4337]

You’ve reinvented the Hesco barrier. Congrats.

[@Dim.X]

Bro that’s some deep voice you have!

[@irafowlerjr.7492]

Love these tests, thanks

[@mtman2]

Your custom steel sleds are really how things should be done for consistantly accurate statistical reality = GREAT TO SEE IT DONE RIGHT

[@mynameisntleo]

Up front: I would love to hear this dude try a death metal growl. I agree with the previous poster about radio DJ: seems like a natural fit. But the video about the actual differences between 223 and 5.56 was very welcome and appreciated. I didn't check the video info, but weapon system setup would probably lend more credence to the results. Great video overall, sir.

[@jaredmarcus1992]

I Love That Sand Box Target You Made! Seems Very Tough!

[@zmathis621]

“As center as you can get” with bipod & 6x zoom from 35 yards😂🤣😂😅😂 great vid brother just had give you some shit for that

[@cadamsm11]

Do you think the differences between the two rounds would “make more difference” at longer ranges?

[@bradleysmith9431]

"on the range with Burt" You gotta sing for us, just a line But great video, you get straight to the point!! Keep it up, youll grow

[@avhyh]

That green tip should be armor piercing round. It depends on the rifiling of the barrel. I don't know the rifiling on your gun but not enough fitiling can slow gt. That gt on the last sleel will punch through for sure. Great videos keep the good work.

[@nickknight8065]

That 6x6 pressure treated lumber tells you all you need to know about residential walls stopping rifle rounds, which is.... they might as well not even be there.