5.56x45mm NATO For a Battle Rifle?

Is the 5.56x45 NATO an effective cartridge for our military battle rifles? What about civilian use?
Follow me on:
/ doctacdad
Google+ plus.google.co...
Twitter / doctacdad
Instagram @DocTacDad

[@joshketum1046]

100% agree with what you said.. people constantly underestimate 5.56, I think its the best round ever made for self defense.

[@staffordvenema9296]

AR platform M16 barrel length designed and chambered to fire 762 modified to have the same capacity with 762 rounds that are capable of spalling and fragmenting as well as putting bigger holes in the bad guy. And maintaining the accuracy that is lost with the m4 carbine. To me personally that equals a perfect battle rifle. Because those crappy AK so called AKs and Iraq and Afghanistan are not the AKs that the Russians have and the Chinese have you could barely even tell that they are of the same platform there that different.

[@jarrettmartin4143]

@joesmith3661 5.56s are are literally 12 dollars a box for 20 m855 and the ballistic tips were like 16 for 20. Lol yall shopping at the wrong places

[@utubetommy]

As a Second Amendment supporter, millions of American citizens having access to a 5.56 caliber semi-automatic weapon that doesn't cost a fortune is a big advantage. First off, no one, unless they are in a war zone, is going to be shooting much beyond 200 yards. Second, the rounds are very affordable and accessible. Third, the average person can afford to stockpile them, therefore be able to go to the range more often and become more proficient. Fourth, many more rounds can be carried in a given situation. The only down side I have observed is that people tend to treat their semi-automatic AR-15 style weapons as if there was a never ending supply of ammo. Wasting valuable ammunition might give one an adrenaline rush, but at the cost of depleting your ammunition supply. Not a smart move since a rifle without ammunition is nothing more than an expensive club. Semper Fi

[@benchops2004]

Last I checked, .308 rounds are cheaper than the .223 equivalents.

[@thedodob1rd]

@@benchops2004 link those rounds. I see cheap 5.56 come in at about 6$ a box. Cheap 7.62 I see at about 8-9$ a box

[@benchops2004]

@@thedodob1rd bud, two problems. First I'm not talking NATO rounds, second, I'm not talking cheap milsurp crap ball ammo. Go online, do it, go online right now in the US and search any big box stores and average priced boxes. .308 is cheaper than .223 rounds. I can walk into any sporting goods store and find the SAME type of ammo, example some common "white box" ammo from a manufacturer that you know what I'm talking about, and the .308 is cheaper. From a cost perspective it makes no sense, but the army put up a large bid to phase out 5.56 battle rifles in favor of 7.62. Ammo manufacturers watched this closely and move efforts to produce civilian equivalents in anticipation of rifles that will be purchased.

[@jam3sh3n13y]

How cheap is it now ? Lol? Try 30 + for a box of 20, 5.56 green tip

[@1timerod]

Facts

[@therichie9916]

I have killed 200-250lb deer out to 200 yards with a .223 62gr SP. They always get enough penetration to make it to the off side hide. Now, I have hunted deer with .308, .270, 7mm08, 7mm mag, 30-30 and .303 British. Out to 200 yards my .223 puts them down just a well as the others. Before anyone says " a deer isn't a human" crap I'll say this... I've seen well hit deer run a couple hundred yards after a good hit with several of the "normal" hunting calibers. Tough critters in their own right. After saying that I still must say...when you have to shoot through stuff the .308 is "generally" better.

[@Nobody-dm2ol]

Prick.

[@mr.nobody68]

The deer is dead. Cleanly. That's what counts. Shoot on, my dude

[@WorthNineDigits]

How long was your barrel on the .223?

[@timothyprice9064]

Ok , well said I agree.

[@imdisturbeddd1625]

James Bradley Fuck off.

[@Robert-qm7yi]

I love how everyone that says they have seen someone or have shot someone multiple times and saw no effect forgets that people miss. How cool is it that when you don't hit people they don't react? What a wild concept

[@timothyprice9064]

Get a firearm and train, then train some more. They still might miss, but they will decrease the odds of missing. Not to mention it might be easy to miss if someone is running at you while firing an ak47.

[@1timerod]

@@timothyprice9064 who in the world are shooting AK for self defense? Thugs maybe I’m shooting my A R 15 hella Accuracy

[@timothyprice9064]

@@1timerod Read my statement again, just a little slower this time. I said nothing about defending your home with an AK.

[@timothyprice9064]

@@1timerod While I did not say anything about using an AK for home defense, it has plenty of accuracy for the task, unless you have 100-yard halls. If you think an AK is not accurate enough to defend your home you might need more trigger time. And yes I know ARs tend to be a little more accurate, The AK hits harder and until now the ammo was less than half the price of AR ammo.

[@TheLateBoyScout]

Great discussion. I'm glad you brought this up and discussed it in detail. I'll be posting a vid of the quick little discussion you and I had on this subject, and this video will be excellent to reference.

[@DocTacDad]

***** Awesome...

[@popojoeexplode]

thats why my go to war rifle has an 18" barrel. spr is 20". love the 5.56mm if used correctly, good vid.

[@falkonform1]

Doctacdad I think you've got this all backwards. 556 is well suited for its role in military use because of its larger carrying capacity and lighter rifle weight, not because of its lethality. It is also less expensive to manufacture. The majority of ammo expenditure in military engagements generally takes the form of "suppressive fire", which is not exactly meant to kill but rather to control enemy movement. 556 serves very well in this intended role because one can expend a lot of it as well as carry a lot. You must also remember the military makes use of support weapons such as SAWs and often a designated marksman with 762 cal rifle to make up for the weaknesses of the 556 cartridge. You cannot deny the 556 has had a history of less than stellar performance, or else the military wouldn't continue trying to improve the round. On the other hand, the average civilian is not likely to face a situation where laying down "suppressive fire" will be warranted or even desirable, from the standpoint of ammo conservation, in a home defense WROL situation. If the intended purpose is to stop a threat in a WROL situation, 762 is clearly more capable in this role, as weight and ammo carrying capacity is not nearly as important a factor if you're bugging in. Just because the military uses 556 doesn't mean it is necessarily appropriate for the individual. You must first understand the role or tactic for which the weapon is utilized before making a determination whether it will be effective for your intended purpose.

[@akfanfortyseven8375]

very true, I agree very much..however budgetary constraints restrict my practice to 556..mostly

[@matthewbeaver5026]

Good points tho I agree 5.56 is budget friendly. And will also be more plentiful in a SHTF senerio

[@maccliff2115]

D.I.Y Queen A response to to 2 year old comment. WoW! Well said. You expressly put my thoughts into words about the 5.56 NATO round. I agree 100%

[@ironmonkey1512]

At close range with 16"+ barrel you will stop someone dead in their tracks (pun intended) with 5.56. What could possibly get with 7.62 other than heavier, louder, over-penetration and more recoil in a home defense scenario? The chances of using it at 100+ yards again for 'home defense' are vanishingly small.

[@abettermind]

A poorly placed 7.62 will not stop someone, a well placed one will. A poorly placed 5.56 will not stop someone, while a well placed one will. 100% of the people that deem the 5.56 insufficient ignore that fact. If you're within the effective range of the weapon and you do your job, the weapon will do its job. It's easier to take fast and accurate shots with a more mild cartridge, and for virtually every situation that a civilian will find themselves in, that is what will win the day. By all means, keep a high-powered rifle around for when a foreign army invades, but for anything short of that, the 5.56 will get the job done. Shot placement and speed is king, and the 5.56 excels in that regard.

[@PPISAFETY]

Very well thought out perspective. I own and enjoy shooting both 5.56 and .308 but inside 250 yards I choose my Colt M4. There is also a third perspective, Military, Civilian, and finally LEO. The last one, in which for the patrolman, the carbine becomes a "handgun extender" that can be effectively barrier blind when loaded with tough bonded tactical bullets, in cases where it might be impractical to issue or carry .308 sized rifles opens up another world for the M4 style weapon. I know when I was working alone in a patrol car in a rural area, my department issued M4 loaded with Federal Bonded Tactical riding in the vertical rack next to me gave me a great deal of confidence over my handgun alone. Now that I'm retired, my Colt is loaded with expanding hollow points in my house. My backup mags are loaded with heavier bonded rounds in case the action has to move outside. I sight for the "heavies" at distance, and let the light ones be off by just a bit at hallway distances. It's less than in inch. Thanks for another great video Doc.

[@bernieeod57]

Cover vs concealment. The 5.56 will give you rifle penetration with pistol like terminal ballistics or it will give you rifle terminal ballistics with pistol like penetration. If you want both, you simply need more gun.

[@RazorBrain1]

The 5.56 relys heavily on its velocity to do massive damage. 2700+ is great because it will cause fragmentation of the bullet but really anything over 2200fps will cause the hydraulic effect on soft tissue. Making massive permanent wound channels.

[@smithnwesson990]

6 years later and not many leaps have been made. An AR-12 needs to be made to utilize a cartridge like .264 USA in-between a 5.56 and .308. Need a larger case but also room in the magazines for longer high BC bullets. Imagine if 5.56x45 was 5.56x48 and used 80 and 88 gr bullets.

[@LegendExpressProject]

Great video!! Most vets have only killed insurgents with a small select calibers and platforms. You hit the nail on the head. In late 2021 there are so many versatile platforms and calibers to choose from. THERE WILL NEVER BE A ONE GUN/ CALIBER THATS FITS EVERY SCENARIO. It’s not possible. This video was amazing. Thank you Sir

[@dahoser1eh]

Very informative thanks! Makes me feel better about my investments into the 5.56 caliber

[@Patriot36]

Super interesting topic as always DocTacDad. The term, "battle rifle" itself traditionally denotes a weapon that fires a full-power rifle cartridge, something that would be distinct from the 5.56 and other assault rifle scaled calibers. The title gets attention though! :) I agree with the points mentioned and would suggest that there's even more to the topic than whether a given bullet properly fragments or not, or whether you're shooting at longer ranges or not (the two keys focused on here). The video (carefully edited for time) assumes that range is always known and that there's never cover/objects between a shooter and the target. "Battlefield" variables such as distance, foliage density and type, vehicle skins, and common urban building materials are real considerations, where a certain amount of reserve kinetic energy could be beneficial or crucial. Terminal ballistics obviously come into play otherwise shooting Mule Deer with thinly jacketed varmint projectiles would be the standard approach to hunting medium game. Of course, there is a difference between hunting and the neutralizing of deadly human threats, however the role of the rifle, caliber and projectile type should be assessed with the best science available at the time. A plate carrier full of 50gr V-Max loaded P-mags might seem like a good idea initially but it could be also be the abandonment of overall combat flexibility in order to gain a possible improvement in terminal ballistics alone. For example, would it be ideal for a military force to ambush a vehicle convoy or trade shots in the jungle or eastern woodlands using a thin-skinned, hunting bullet design? It might be that these types of projectiles are better suited to civilian defensive or law enforcement use that they are for war and I think this is evidenced by the common use of steel in standard military ammo today. The 5.56 has proven itself to be viable regardless of bullet make-up and part of that success has undoubtedly been bolstered by a deliberate array of support systems, ascending weapon calibers and specific tactics. Generally speaking, more energy per round provides an engagement advantage but at what cost in terms of weight, bulk, shootability and suppressive capability? The age-old caliber selection dilemma isn't solved by projectile design alone and compromises in capability will always be part of the picture. Thanks for the vid, and for letting me ramble Doc! Thumbs as always!

[@DocTacDad]

Patriot36 Always love you input my friend...Thanks for stopping by!

[@steveanbozek3589]

Agreed, the 5.56 rifles are generally referred to as fighting rifles as they are intermediate cartridges with lower recoil

[@erichaines235]

I don't know if this point was made, as I cannot read all of the comments, but I'll try and keep it short. 5.56 from an M4 isn't designed to kill enemy soldiers. When you kill an enemy, you take one person out of the fight. When you punch holes in an enemy soldier, and make them leak important fluids, but NOT kill them, it takes two other enemy soldiers to take care of that one wounded. Now you've taken three enemy combatants off the field of battle, even though no one has died. Wounded enemy combatants are combat multipliers; the more wounded the enemy has, the less of everything else they have. Less soldiers, less guns pointed towards the good guys, less food and medical resources going forward etc. etc. Anyway, just my 2 cents worth...

[@1BlackHammer]

Awesome video! It's about time someone put this out there! I've been saying this for years.

[@JanYi2023]

The answer is exceptionaly simple, it all depends what your needs are, don't wreck your brains to solve the dilema which is better. As long as we have a choice of different rounds, a variety of bullets and a knowledge of how they behave and as long as we are NOT on the receiving end, we are in good shape.

[@NebulousCat]

The best 5.56 battle round is the best deer hunting round in .223. The 62 gr Barnes TSX is hard to beat. The Speer 70 gr and SMK 77gr are also very good.

[@drmaudio]

I agree, and would take it a step further. Even from a military perspective, the move over the last 70 years has consistently (though not exclusively) been toward smaller faster rounds. The reason is simple: even with the restrictions of the Hague convention, the advantage of full power rifles over intermediate cartridges is practical range. Every other category (firepower, ease of use, speed of follow up shots, etc) the intermediate cartridge comes out on top. This is particularly true as the average ranges in conflicts have been getting shorter, not longer. The big exception has been Afghanistan, which has had longer then normal engagement ranges, which is why you hear a little more squawking about the 5.56 lately. In reality, if 5.56 is replaced, it would more likely be with something even smaller and faster with full power rifle rounds being reserved for the DMR and sniper roles where they excel.

[@armynurseboy]

Gun Sense (drmaudio) if the 5.56mm is replaced, I'd say it gets replaced by something a tad larger, like a 6mm bullet.

[@drmaudio]

armynurseboy Entirely possible, they have been seeking better BC's lately. I would be shocked, however, if they wen't with anything not solid in the intermediate cartridge range.

[@dabadc]

Spec ops, with the shorter carbines use heavier rounds than the 62gr green tips, where the terminal performance is comparable to other intermediate rounds, like the 7.62x39. They don't fragment, but the longer round is able to transfer more energy when it yaws.

[@fred5566]

Thanks makes so much since like you said civilian ammo Market.

[@HumbleAstronaut]

Sense*

[@texas66]

I don't have any military experience, a deep respect for those that do, but I'd think the best battle rifle would be the one that's the most effective with the least amount of training..... recoil, weight, and capacity should also be considered...

[@galamonkey]

A 55gr out of a 14.5" barrel is a great PDW setup. As for longer range, shooting some 77gr OTM out of a 20" barrel, that's a whole new animal.

[@user-gu7yo5yn9g]

You don't even need those 77 grain OTMs if were talking a 20" m855 will do the trick

[@willterry6390]

5.56 is not underpowerd it has more energy then a 44 mag at the muzzle, at 500 yards it still has more energy then a 45 acp. I doubt someone could take 12 5.56 rounds and live those stories are bs. It also def depends on the ammo

[@venomsmoke585]

Will Terry you are comparing a rifle round to a handgun. Secondly, it’s a .22 projectile sure it will kill but not as effective as a .30 caliber

[@venomsmoke585]

william terry yes, much heavier bullets, 65 grain vs 123 grain. More powerful also and penetrates hard barrier better. I wouldn’t want to be shot by either by I would pick 7.62 over 5.56

[@Mkvine]

william terry 5.56 is not more powerful than 45acp, what do you mean?

[@devildawgs2006]

I am a fan boy of the 556 round. I've qualified with this round in the Marines for 4 years consecutively and shot expert every time. But to state that is has more energy than a .45 acp at 500 yards is true, but a "duh" statement. I do not truly know the data on a .45acp at 500 yards but I would believe that a ..45acp at 500 yards.... the ballistics of the round would not be very effective at that distance...

[@devildawgs2006]

Ounces will eventually equal to pounds. Military perspective carrying 180 rounds in your combat load will be lighter than most of your .30 cal rounds at 180 rounds of course... but there are many other weapon platforms with a unit while they are on patrol. The 240G, .50 cal, mark-19, let alone a radio to call in for air support. Basically an average service member carrying their m16 platform... a 556 setup will do just fine. In the civilian world... yes we do not have to adhere to the Geneva convention regulations... that's definitely true... so as a civilian carry what you can handle in regards to the recoil, carry what you can without making yourself so tired that you would be rendered as effective if shtf. Carry what your pocket book can afford. Carry what you are proficient with. Carry what you know in regards to the rounds trajectory...

[@TheLateBoyScout]

You just hit 40K subscribers! Nice work, man.

[@DocTacDad]

***** Thanks man!

[@exposingthedarknesswiththe9190]

. *YOUR COMMENT ON THESE ROUNDS ARE DEAD ON!!* *THERE IS NO POINT IN TRYING TO JUSTIFY SOMETHING OTHER THEN WHAT IS FACTUAL, EVERYTHING MUST BE CONSIDERED!* *WELL SAID DocTacDad!! ;-)*

[@vhs8669]

The FMJ military stuff is what you buy in bulk and train with so most people would want to stick with that round in real life situations too.

[@xJasterx]

Just to clear up a small point at the beginning of the video the Geneva Convention does not limit the use of exploding or expanding projectiles. The Saint Petersburg Declaration of 1868 and the provisions of which were incorporated into the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907 are what impose a moratorium on the use of such projectiles. It may seem pedantic, but it's an important distinction to make. Great video less that oft-repeated "fact." Keep up the great work!

[@xJasterx]

xJasterx Also, "convetion" ;)

[@DocTacDad]

xJasterx I appreciated the clarification...Thanks a bunch!

[@DocTacDad]

xJasterx LOL...doh! That's what I get for editing video late at night when I'm tired.

[@rbm6184]

Agree about the AR platform. Shorter than a 16 inch barrel the round does not fragment. Any barrel less than a 20 inch barrel will have less muzzle velocity and less downrange penetration. The 5.56/.223 was meant to be fired from a 20 inch barrel, not shorter barrels. Yes bullet type does make a difference. Hollow points including ballistic tips, soft points, and frangible bullets available to the civilian market perform better. When other larger cartridges are used in the AR platform cost, weight, and ammo capacity becomes a problem.

[@jackblack73]

It's the Hague Convention, not the Geneva Convention.

[@DocTacDad]

jackblack73 Thanks for the correction.

[@lovemym16]

DocTacDad It is the Hague convention, however the United States never ratified the Hague conventions and is thus not subject to its rules. This is shown in the adaptation of the new 77gr open tip match rear penetrator round.

[@AutisticVegan]

How do you feel about the SawCon convention?

[@gapster46]

You’re in love with that 6.5 Grendel, aren’t you? Come on, admit it? LOL You know you are. :) For anything under 300 yards, it’s hard to beat the 7.62x39. Actually, it’s hard to pooh pooh any of these cartridges. Each one has their advantages and disadvantages, and I’d hate to get shot with any of them.

[@timothyprice9064]

I own all except the Grendel, they are what I used in the army 5.56, 7.62, and even the 7.62X39, with surplus and modern ammo I have no reason to change.

[@675mustang]

Your answer is pure Excellence gapster46 if everything collapsed atleast the mil spec supply would be easy to maintain with an abundance of mil spec supplies . I was gonna say the caliper i choose is only between me god and my rifle and the poor bastard that tries to kill me to find out 😂😂😂 less people know bout you the better in wrol situation . Telling the world anything useful does fuckall

[@bullheadedgideon1673]

Awesome video. Love the perspective. After listening to the video, I was like "wtf, why didn't I think of that? That makes so much sense" lmao. Totally opened my eyes

[@amaya1000rr]

Any advantage you get from a special projectile in 5.56 (SP, V-Max, GMX, etc.) can be realized and exceeded by loading the same type of projectile in the 7.62x51. In addition, unless your loading your own ammo, this can quickly become cost prohibitive.

[@DocTacDad]

amaya1000rr Good point...

[@Boaters_hub]

Here in 2022 i just got into the AR platform. I did a bunch of research and 5.56 was a weak round from my conclusions. This video makes me feel better about it. My local gun store does have varmint rounds

[@user-gu7yo5yn9g]

People who say 556 is weak have no clue wtf they're talking about. M855 which is arguably the most infamous 556 round will fucking explode at 2700 fps. Keep in mind that a 16" will be pushing that round out at 3000 and a 20" will he pushing it 3100+ don't believe the fake BS 556 is nasty stuff and it will put bad guys 6 feet under easily

[@shockwave6213]

Correction: The Geneva Convention does not ban Expanding bullets in warfare. That is a common misconception. The military prefers FMJ for cover penetration and feed reliability. The Hague Declaration of 1899, which the US did not sign bans expanding bullets in warfare.

[@flyoverkid55]

Agreed. For the " average " social interaction 5.56 is just fine, provided you do your part. Additionally most shooters won't take the time to learn to shoot the larger caliber firearms. That said I have both 5.56 and 7.62 NATO rifles, the 7.62 has punch and reach. " When you care enough to send the very best....".

[@Robin6512]

heck even a .30m1 carbine with a softpoint will do great for civilian use. Still I prefer my AKs74u with 5.45x39 and my trusty FAL as back-up ;).

[@BakeryWizard13]

Of course most of the velocity issues could be solved with a 18 or 20 inch barrel instead of the 16 inch barrel that everyone loves so much.

[@zechnarwilliams8019]

I used to hate this round about 30ish years ago. I have now come to appreciate it, you can carry a lot of it easily. It is way more effective than 22LR, or 22WMR on medium critters. We are a medium critter. This is a round that I appreciate now, I used to think that the 308 was the king of battle rifles. I am not going to shoot more than 300 yards for anything, this is a pretty good round. It is not perfect, but it can get it done with good shot placement. If you were hit in the ear lobe it would not really matter what round was used.

[@gulielmi2002]

when it floods, we get gators (6 ft+) swimming in the yard. 5.56 NATO frangible stops them on the spot with a rib shot. I keep in my mag in an alternating pattern 5.56 FMJ and 5.56 frangible for hogs and gators.

[@bullmeatt]

i have actually noticed that the green tips do well at lower velocities oddly enough. The issue is that they pass through and through at close ranges with 20 inch barrels but at a distance or through an SBR they tumble and cause a very wide wound channel. Look up some ballistics gel tests and you will see that they perform better at lower velocities (maybe the imbalance of weight distribution with it being half steel half lead), the m193 however needs that velocity to fragment.

[@renovatio1257]

The 7.62x39 is an inferior round. The Soviet Union adopted the 5.45x39 after see the devastation caused by NATO 5.56x45 in Vietnam.

[@dillonnj45l.18]

In Vietnam the 5.56 was terrible going through brush in the jungle and would tumble the 7.62 39 powers through everything

[@venomsmoke585]

william terry explain how?

[@trevor894]

@william terry Depends on witch fmj your talking about 7.62x39 can be hit or miss but if your talking about m67 yugo ball then it will be more effective then 5.56 fmj (at close range)

[@lastchapter5928]

@william terry if you can hit someone 300m away with iron sights on damn near anything I think accuracy is the least of your problems. Most engagements occur at a fraction of that range.

[@lostsaxon7478]

5.56 in Vietnam was a different round than what is currently issued. M193 ball (old stuff) had a much higher probability to fragment because it was designed to do so, the new stuff (M855 or Green Tip) wasn't designed to do so and does not reliably fragment. Green Tip is being phased out though because of it repeated short comings.

[@matthewhaslam3219]

The M-16 was designed for the NATO 5.56. Anything shorter than a 20" barrel cannot utilize the rounds' full capability. If you want compactness, there needs to be a bullpup design to keep the 20" barrel.

[@pigpig19d]

FYI, it wasn't the Geneva but Hague convention that limited the using of JHP, and the US didn't sign it.

[@tankweeb9425]

I wish some company would create a 6.8x39mm round, designed to be used in the AK variants. So that the cartridge case is tapered for reliable use in the AK, whilst having all the benefits of a 6.8mm caliber.

[@NortheastSurvival911]

I say Carrie whatever you want but remember a couple of things.. the 556 has been tested and proven to be very very battle efficient. It wasn't our military wouldn't have used it for decade after decade after decade. And that particular round comes in many many different variants now regarding what it's designed to do upon impact.. they are cheaper and you can carry a hell of a lot more 556 then you can something in 308.

[@racecarjimmy732]

specialized roles usually have benefits over typical generalized roles. its true. the difference for me would be discerning what situations do I expect myself to be in.

[@MackZero]

I know Iam a little late to the discussion, but just wanted to say wonderfully explained! Simple and concise. Glad Iam a subscriber.

[@user-qv7rw7dq1d]

That's another thing; everyone here should be analyzing the rounds as part of the greater war machine. These rifle rounds don't exist in a vacuum and must be taken into account with the role on the battlefield. For example, what rounds are SAW squad members using? What numbers of the infantry are issued 5.56 in 16"+ barrels? Which ones aren't? All of this data is studied very carefully by people who are very good at what they do, mainly engineers, physicists, statisticians, and military officers who develop the best, most economical use of a firepower, regardless of country or military. That's why usually the opinion that we get from Jimmy John at the range, and his 15 different rifles is at the very best anecdotal evidence.

[@danielcurtis1434]

The entire advantage of 5.56 is that you don’t need an expanding bullet to do serious wounding. I mean you don’t want FMJ in most applications of self defense. However with 5.56 it’s kinda like “why not”??? If the bullet tumbles and you get the bullet length tearing up stuff. I would still try to use a soft point. However it seems like it wouldn’t matter?

[@d-port9020]

Very valid points, different and me likey. Correction though, most military now arent issued green tip, its frangible or just plain fmj. I think your on point about .308 even whst you said about range. I think if your fighting in urban america 5.56 hollowpoints are the way to go and then you can train with cheap .223. I mean I rather fight with hollow point .308 but due to penetration I think In Urban america hollow point .556 is best against the jackboots or foreign invaders.

[@FNG_Star]

I think the issue arises if the targets has body armor and can shoot back. The bullet needs to penetrate body armor and have enough energy to incapacitate. So if you use 5.56 for civilian use there is nothing to say your attack will not have body armor. The mass shooting at the church here in Texas the guy had body armor and the guy who showed up had an ar but not green tip ammo so he had to shoot the sides. Anyways in a fire fight bigger is always better. Soldiers have to balance that for patrols. But our home is our base. We can outfit it with all the fire power we want. If you get overrun and have to bug out just take the ar and some green tip. Lighter, more common ammo type to find more, and its lethal enough for defensive contact.

[@brandonrideordie6684]

Gimmy a .338 for long range and 7.62×39 for close contact assault...

[@mr.nobody68]

Sounds to me like the classic: Whattaya plannin to shoot with it? Long range: 50bmg API. Case closed Battle rifle where you need high ammo count? Quality 556'll do just fine

[@timothyprice9064]

50bmg is fine until you have to move around.

[@suzettespencer]

Funny, I had the same discussion with my friend. 2700 fps is needed for the bullet to tumble. The bullet design makes it fragment.

[@chouyi007]

Those V-Max projectiles expand and fragment too rapidly and can't get nearly enough penetration to reliably and quickly incapacitate an opponent. With the 5.56, the soft-points are better because they hold together and penetrate deep while still expanding. The M193 is also great because it will tumble and fragment down to 2,300 fps, which is a very long range even out of a 14.5" barrel.

[@glock199mm4]

AWESOME VIDEO!! Most informative and interesting information about those two rounds i've seen in any video.. Covered a lot of aspects, and made a lot of sense.. GREAT JOB!!

[@doctim111]

Great analysis - spot on. Thanx for great vids.

[@hindsight2022]

I use the hornady red poly tip vmax ... And OMG what they will do to a cantaloupe. . ....

[@WillMoon]

With the more common use and purchase of body armor these days, I like having a .308 in my arsenal. You never know...

[@mikec8086]

***** I like having a 20x138mm just incase

[@chris.eskimo]

It certainly depends on end use. If you want an all around SHTF rifle, where ammo is plentiful and easier to carry.....5.56/.223 is the winner.

[@JustinOfficer]

With the exception of 6.5 I own all of these rounds and agree with your perspective 100%. I will say the AK hits hard as hell. But that varmint load is being sold by PSA currently for $6/20rnds so the price is certainly right. Especially for my 10.5 inch CA "pistol"

[@shotgunblast101]

Just wanted to correct you on the legality of hollow points in war: the Geneva Convention does not cover that. It covers prisoners of war. It's the Hague Convention that makes the hollow points illegal in war. Fun fact, the US never signed on to the Hague Convention, so technically the military could use ammo besides FMJ.

[@joiseystud]

+shotgunblast101 I think they need to use NATO ammo, which would be compliant with the Hague Convention?

[@shotgunblast101]

+JSquaredZ yes we do use NATO ammo. We comply with the regs even if we didn't sign on. At least most of the time we do.

[@Radvous]

A person taking 12 rounds of XM193F and still standing? I doubt it

[@mateomedina3353]

dude you're hella funny. you never know though, they could be hopped up on that shit. opiates are commonly found in war. 12 rounds is kinda excessive lol

[@blu3flare25]

+Mateo Medina or adrenaline rushes helps keep you alive

[@evanogburn]

Like he mentioned in the video, the soldier who had that story might have been using a shorter barrel (M4) and at a longer range, so the bullets weren't fragmenting. Like the other people have commented before me, drugs and adrenaline can keep people running long after they should have dropped.

[@akfanfortyseven8375]

hajis hopped up on amphetamines in Falluja Iraq 2004 and super skinny combatants in Mogadishu Somalia 1993

[@akfanfortyseven8375]

check out Paul Howe's and Kyle Lamb's recounting of Mogadishu in 93 ( former Delta force) and check out documentaries on Falluja 2004 and or read some Iraq War memoirs such as HOUSE to HOUSE, STRYKER and No True Glory and you'll learn of soldiers first hand account of 5.56 NATO rds against amphetamine junkie fighters.

[@theone031]

Same with the 38 sp when they used it in the War. The rounds and guns have changed since then.

[@georgiabowhunter]

Excellent points. The same issues exist with the 9mm in military applications. I carried and M4 overseas and wish I could have had bonded soft points or some other type of barrier blind load. The MK262 77 grains are better but still not as good as civilian options.

[@DocTacDad]

georgia bowhunter Thanks for watching and commenting...It's good to hear from those with experience.

[@jshphysicistatyahoo]

Please emphasize how important it is for the 5.56 NATO (and other rounds) that the particular cartridge must be paired with the proper barrel TWIST. That is, the M855 62 Grain works best with a 1:8 or 1:9 twist, while the M193 55 Grain would do better with a 1:12 or 1:14 twist barrel.

[@jacobwest7878]

I personally like 7.62x39 alot, plus it's relatively cheap.

[@willterry6390]

Jacob West its a really shitty round as well. 5.56 will beat it out with energy at range

[@ahmetgurkan3679]

After 250 yards

[@B-mang]

It's only cheap for now, may not always be.

[@millimeterpeter7159]

@@willterry6390 do you have any facts to back that up kiddo

[@timothyprice9064]

It is a caliber that is proven to "get er done!!"

[@mrshort2379]

great explanation on the 5.56, but now it is all about availability, and what 5.56 rounds are commonly available. so to change your rounds for short rang penetration or distance, it need to be available that you can get that round anywhere at any given time, and if that is the case, I would just switch to using the 55grn SS109 and the m855 62grn which are commonly available, to nothing but a 77grn 5.56/223 or bigger. but price and availability is the issue there. The 77grn would solve the short range and long range ballistics problem, and provide plenty of penetration either way short or long range

[@joshv06]

Good info you put out. I always had this in mind. I am cheep. So I stock up on a lot of Wolf .223. It chronos at 2950 fps. With a .243 BC, it goes below the fragmenting 2700fps at about 50 yards, Which is really close. Seeing that .223 and 5.56 is the most popular tactical caliber out there, I just stick with it for SHTF reasons. My brother uses an AR is 7.62x39. (Which on a side note, we got subsonic to cycle with it suppressed, video on my channel) he came from an AK. It is a close call between x39 and .223. X39 packs a punch, plus cheap ammo and soft points as well as subsonic capability. But .223/5.56 is just every where (as well as guns/parts) so I stick with it. Same reason why I stick with 9mm.

[@DocTacDad]

joshv06 I think you are right about the prevalence of the .223/5.56. That's a huge factor in determining what to go with.

[@rotadyma]

I don't think a civilian needs a long range gun for protection. If the SHTF, a civilian's best strategy is to be invisible and to be quiet as a church mouse. If there is any kind of conflict or engagement, it would be within 100 yards. That's what I'm preparing for. So, if the conflict is 100, 75 or 50 yards, any rifle round is going to be effective. In fact, I would say that maybe the 7.62x39 would be king under 100 yards.

[@DocTacDad]

***** Good points...

[@kingqp]

I feel this way also, but will still keep a Bolt action .308 for the slim chance I need to reach out further.

[@HK_roller_delayed]

FMJ is the easiest to find and the cheapest to stock up on, so my vote is for 7.62x39 A few 30 round mags of ballistic tip ammo for defense of home, and can after can after can of FMJ for defense of liberty.

[@DocTacDad]

H&Ks until the end of days! Yeah there is no rule that says that you have to stock just one type of round for you gun.

[@Mix_King1]

The 308 was great for sniper rifles, but with today's options it is nolonger applicable. 556 witha longer barrel 18 inch will put people down upto 600 yards +. The problem is most U.S. Troops are not trained well enough to engage targets at that range. It's a training issue, not a bullet issue. 16 Inch should be the minimum on the M4, you can always have a DMR rifle per platoon / squad. For longer ranges call in air support or artillery. I rather my team carry a small portable morter with everyone in the platoon / squad carring two rounds. If you must carry a sniper rifle for long range, go big and use fist shots to estimate the second kill shot bullet drop and windage. Don't spend an hour doing math, just dump rounds on target and have your spotter walk you into to the target. It's faster, it's effective and its a moral killer for the enemy to see 50 cal bullets getting closer. Big hug :P

[@pietervandermerwe4235]

Very informative and well presented Thanks

[@MrRdvs87]

A rifle can't be a battle rifle if it's chambered for an intermediate round. I know this video is a bit old, but I guess I'll pick up some varmint loads for my 5.56 stuff now.

[@theimmortal4718]

@william terry Negative. A battle rifle is a defined catagory. A battle right is a full length, semiautomatic rifle with detachable box magazine, chambered in a full powered rifle round, usually in 7.62x51 or similar caliber.

[@phtevenmolz5030]

@@theimmortal4718 my favorite part about people trying to idiotically categorize this thing is the sheer ignorance behind it. .308Win is considered a full-powered round. Do you know what an intermediate cartridge is? Or any examples? 6.5 Creedmore, .260 Rem, 6.8 Rem SPC, and several other cartridges that have better ballistics all the way around when compared to 7.62x51mm NATO. Trying to define a battle rifle as full-powered only is born out of ignorance.

[@theimmortal4718]

@@phtevenmolz5030 Wrong. It's really easy to define these. In fact, don't take my word for it. Research it. The term Intermediate Cartridge refers to rifle rounds halfway in power between handgun rounds (250-500 ft lbs ME) and full powered rifle rounds (2400-2800 ft lbs ME). Examples are- German 8mm Kurtz 7.62x39 5.46x45 5.45x39 5.8x42 6.8x43 SPC 6.5x39 Grendel Battle rifles are traditionally chambered in full powered machinegun cartridges. They tend to have full length barrels from 20-24" barrels, feed from 20 round magazines, and are at least semi auto, though some are select fire. Examples of full powered rifle cartidges are- 8mm Mauser 7.62x51 7.62x54R 7.5x55 6.5x55 7.62x63 6.5x47 Creedmoor I'm not ignorant of what a battle rifle is, nor the difference between intermediate vs full powered rifle cartridges at all. In fact, I'm pretty well studied on the subject.

[@theimmortal4718]

The FAL, M14, G3, and the AR10 are all battle rifles. The M16 series, AK series, FAMAS, Steyr AUG, G36, L85, Tavor, etc., aren't battle rifles. Both classes are considered military combat rifles, but the term Battle Rifle isn't interchangeable, just as military bolt action rifles aren't termed battle rifles any more than submachine guns are.

[@phtevenmolz5030]

@@theimmortal4718 I love how you added "Creedmore" to the 6.5x47. That's a Lapua cartridge. 😂 You've *clearly* studied your cartridges. Also, the 6.5 Creedmore is within that "full-powered" energy range you've listed with nearly any load. The Army's (both US and UK) testing of the 6.8 SPC and the .260 Rem are carrying enough energy to meet that criteria, too. All have less energy at the muzzle than .308, yet somehow have more once they pass 200 yards on graph. Also, did you suggest the M24 that is built on the bolt-action Remington 700 action for use solely as a sniper rifle, is somehow a battle rifle? 😂🤣 Or that the AR-10, which has only been tested and never officially adopted by any country as a service weapon? The biggest purchaser was Italy and they kept on keepin' on with - get this - 5.56x45 as their service cartridge. Nah, you really don't know what you are talking about, kiddo.

[@cadamsm11]

I’ve had success using the ‘open tip match’ from 69 grain to 77. My understanding is that since the ‘small’ open tip is supposed to be there for accuracy, not for expansion, it can be justified under international (Hague) agreement. However, there is expansion and fragmentation, and I THINK the new 5.56 military ammo is built this way……can anyone else comment on this?

[@Aresfire2]

With the M4, Our forces are using 5.56x45 77gr OTM Ammo. I buy IMI (MADE FOR THE IDF) in 69gr & 77gr to shoot out of my 1 in 8 twist AR556 and they are in a whole other league then the 55gr & 62gr ammo...

[@minicoopertn]

The weight of the 556 round in addition to the velocity determines if the round tumbles in flesh.

[@Tripp426]

One thing you forgot to mention (unless I missed it) that matters in both military and civilian perspectives is that the 5.56 has the advantage of much lower recoil over the 7.62x51 which can mean more rounds on target faster. I'm not a 5.56 fanboy or anything, just wanted to point that out.

[@patrickslevin6424]

Anyone who's seen the damage done to a coyote or other living creatures when hit with a 55 grain V-Max out of a .223 can't help but be impressed. Move that up to a 58 grain v-max out of a .243 and the results are truly brutal. So I agree with the use of the bullets we have available size doesn't matter, but rather what the bullet is designed to do does.

[@TaskForceSixTwoSix]

The .223 V-Max bullets don't penetrate deep enough into ballistic gel and therefore shouldn't be recommended for home defense.

[@johnnylaw3217]

But what a lot of people don't know is the enemy after being shot kept coming because they were jacked up on PCP.

[@sluggak1363]

Johnny Law try 77 grain tmk the bullet head is bigger

[@JackRABBITslim27]

You have to also ask yourself, what is the maximum range for self defense. Rather that be WROL or Home defense. With Zero magnification, id say you can see if a person poses a threat at 150 to 200 yards. Beyond that, your average person is going to need optics to determine the threat level. If you need optics to determine the threat, you might need optics to engage the threat. Unless you are preparing to fight an standing army, I don't think you need an .308 or similar.

[@gonzalezgrant]

You can't go wrong with either.. let's just be glad we can purchase semi auto rifles

[@armynurseboy]

From a military perspective, an individual rifle is NOT the primary battlefield offensive weapon. Those would be your crew served weapons (MGs, mortars, arty, etc). Also, weight is a priority. 5.56mm is better all around because it's lighter and you can carry more ammo, while still being effective at typical engagement ranges. The issue is that when we switched from the M16 to the M4, we didn't take into account the effect of the shorter barrel on terminal ballistics. We expected the 14" carbine to perform the same as a 20" rifle. Not going to happen. the M855 was optimized for 20" barrel. however, when we started running ammo optimized for shorter barrel, the effectiveness of the rifle went back up.

[@dbelex]

You are wrong sir. The nylon tip is for ballistic coefficient porpoises, it covers up the hollow point.

[@DocTacDad]

dbelex Yes is increases the aerodynamics of the round...Read up on the V-Max for clarification on how it functions in expansion.

[@craigharrison5406]

Ask anyone who has been shot with a 5.56 round ...i bet they wouldn't describe it as anemic or underpowered.

[@fluff2001]

OK, lets say you are correct on the effectiveness of the 5.56/223 round. NOW, you need to follow this up with recommended rounds like 55 grain vs 64 grain polymer tip vs 77 grain soft point vs 112 grain subsonic etc .......... If the military could use ANY 5.56 round available for Stopping Power which round would they choose ???? . .

[@thatoneguy454c]

If you see the wounds that 5.56 makes vs a 7.62 nato I feel like you might change your mind. Inside of 100 yards the 7.72 nato or even 308 with FMJ ammo has a tendency to carry all the way through the body without tumbling and pokes a nice .30cal hole. On the other hand, 5.56 and .223 FMJs almost always tumble if they don't fragment. You end up with a .22 cal entry wound and a devastating wound opening up almost instantly. Inside of 200 yards I would take a 5.56 over a 308 if I knew I was about to get into a gunfight. I'm also not sure where this 2700 FPS myth comes from. Even out of my 8 inch AR pistol it still performs very well. The 5.56 is still a wonderful cartridge for multiple reasons. Obviously there are rounds that outperform it, but that doesn't change the fact that it is still very effective. I would bet that 100 years from now it will still be a popular cartridge.

[@jayn8392]

.308 is the more lethal round. You can use "expanding rounds" in the .308 as well so I don't really understand that argument. The real advantage to .556 is weight, you can comfortably carry more ammo, and to an extent recoil as well. I love my .556 rifles, however I just don't understand your argument that they are on par with .308 in terms of stopping power.

[@willterry6390]

Jay N yes and no earlie 30 caliber bullets were not that effective when all they would do is punch 30 cal holes in people. We're as 5 56 will fragment and tumble and do more damage then would suggest from a 22 cal bullet in

[@steveholt3089]

Something thats important to think about also is where/when(as a civilian) will you need to make a 300+ yard "defensive" shot? if so,why does it need to be "effective"? The 5.56 might only "wound" at that distance but it'll still be a nasty wound that will need medical attention

[@JackRABBITslim27]

So the biggest issue I see with the 5.56 is this. General Lethality at Range. By that I mean decent barrier penetration plus soft target effectiveness. So FMJ 5.56 has great barrier penetration 300+ yards. However at those ranges, getting the FMJ to tumble is a good amount harder. Especially out of a 16 inch barrel. So it can lack some soft target effectiveness. If you go with a Expanding round, yougey great soft target effect but diminished barrier penetration. My question is, is there a relatively common 5.55 round that can somewhat do both? I loke the 55 or 62grain TSX bullets but they are on the expensive side and not exactly common.

[@JamesMichael333]

Very informative. Thank you.

[@luked2767]

Think the perfect caliber would be a high velocity 6.5 to 7mm projectile, with advanced bullet/case geometry, polymer cases and improved primers and powders we could have hot lightweight ammo that can get some distance. With wounding and AP being ramped up. Then I would have something like a .338 for DMR rifles, sniper rifles and medium GP machine guns. I would also keep the .50 or an improved version of it. As for PDWs and pistols 9mm and something like a high velocity small caliber like the 5.7 but with more power. AP will be very important in future wars and the US was a member of the huge convention prohibiting hollow point or anything apart from FMJ. I think its important the whole world sticks to this rule of war. It supprised me the US is planning a hollow point round for the sig. But I suppose the convention only covers uniformed soldiers things get murkey. What we don't want is wars with people using explosive pjojectiles. Land mines should be completely banned and so should napalm. Weapons that cause awfull and prolonged suffering should be banned. A bullet should kill you or be a relatively clean wound that you can recover from rather than pulling out tiny fragments. Land mines hardly ever kill they just meme. Napalm and white phosphorus is awful and indiscriminate. The US and the West should follow the rules of civilised warfare as if one day we ever have to fight a real country we will not be subjected to cruel weapons.

[@iyn1911]

Ammo that is available, affordable, you can manage recoil and make hits is the best ammo. I'm getting old and recoil sensitive, so .223/5.56 gets my vote.

[@DocTacDad]

iyn1911 Good points...There is just too much to cover in a short video.

[@johnski4709]

The US is not a signer of the Hague Convention but they used to abide by it anyways. No longer. The US military has approved the use of hollow point ammo.

[@QHavoc]

Very informative, thanks Doc

[@arnoldromero8473]

They are all good rounds and been proven for many years but the 7.62x39 is deadly a lot further then 200 yards just like with any rifle you have to have it zeroed and a lot of practice

[@NebulousCat]

Hague Convention of 1899 (IV,3): Declaration concerning the Prohibition of the Use of Bullets which can Easily Expand or Change their Form inside the Human Body such as Bullets with a Hard Covering which does not Completely Cover the Core, or containing Indentations. This declaration states that, in any war between signatory powers, the parties will abstain from using "bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body." Ratified by all major powers, except the United States.[15]

[@jhebert1609]

Winchester razorback xt 64gr are some awesome pig rounds I'm sure they would be exceptional self defense rounds in 223 being that I've used them one pigs I've seen the damage they cause