When To Choose A .308 Over 5.56?

[RONK]

I'd like to know your opinions on when a person,for general shooting,hunting,defense and possibly offense,choose a .308 over 5.56?Also when does 6.8SPC and 300BLK enter into the mix,if they do at all?Thanks.

[Eurodriver]

300 BLK - Subsonic suppressed

308 - big game Hunting

556 - everything else

[Failure2Stop]

I am a big fan of 308, but appreciate the handiness of a well executed 5.56.

5.56- 11.5-12.5; 200 & in, optimized for close work.
300- 9.5; suppressed badassery
308- 14.5-16, General Purpose

[T2C]

5.56mm carbine - 300 meters to contact. Good selection of defensive loads.

5.56mm rifle - 500 meters with a decent selection of loads. 600 meters for punching paper with match ammunition.

.308 - out to 500 meters with ball ammunition. 1000 yards with match ammunition.

I stopped hunting years ago, so I can't comment on the effectiveness of using either caliber on game animals.

[Alpha-17]

I'm a 7.62/.308 fan boy who has recently started to see a lot of advantages when using quality 5.56 rounds. I still would prefer 7.62 NATO over 5.56 if we're talking ball rounds, but that's just me.

5.56--Patrol/CQB work. Light ammo, able to carry alot of it. 0-300m primary effective range (yes, it can be used far further, but effectiveness is very dependent on round type, barrel length, etc)

7.62/.308--Patrol/DMR/hunting/heavy support Heavier ammo/mags with limited capacity lowers how much you'll be able to carry. 0-600m primary effective range, at least with decent glass. Good when used in a supporting role for 5.56 for long range, or a larger, more powerful round for better performance on a hard target.

.300BLK/6.8SPC/6.5Grendel--I'm slowly starting to see the advantages of .300BLK, at least in a companion role to 7.62/.308 for CQB. 6.8 and 6.5, in my opinion, are nearly dead rounds. They tried to do too much, and more effective 5.56 rounds, or quality .308 rounds made this "compromise" round unnecessary

[3ACR_Scout]

Sorry to take this slightly off the original topic, but I was under the impression that .300BLK offers better terminal ballistics when compared to a comparable length 5.56 SBR (e.g. 10.5"). Am I off base, or that an oversimplification? I'm considering an LMT MRP as my first SBR and though the idea of having 10.5" barrels in both 5.56 and .300BLK sounded appealing.

While I certainly appreciate the characteristics of 7.62, I guess I'm just not ready to commit to a whole new platform, magazines, etc.

Dave

[Eurodriver]

I am a big fan of 308, but appreciate the handiness of a well executed 5.56.

5.56- 11.5-12.5; 200 & in, optimized for close work.
300- 9.5; suppressed badassery
308- 14.5-16, General Purpose

Interesting that you choose 308 for GP. Why is that? I understand the caliber does everything except recoil and weight better than 5.56 but given the tendency for most 308s to be setup for long range precision I've never been able to get a good feel for what a 308 GP carbine should look like or be capable of.

[Nightvisionary]

Sorry to take this slightly off the original topic, but I was under the impression that .300BLK offers better terminal ballistics when compared to a comparable length 5.56 SBR (e.g. 10.5"). Am I off base, or that an oversimplification? I'm considering an LMT MRP as my first SBR and though the idea of having 10.5" barrels in both 5.56 and .300BLK sounded appealing.

While I certainly appreciate the characteristics of 7.62, I guess I'm just not ready to commit to a whole new platform, magazines, etc.

Dave

I would say that is a major oversimplification. With the exception of two limited production Barnes bullets a 300 Blackout with a 9-12 inch barrel will be at or near the minimum expansion velocity at the muzzle for every .308 bullet currently in production.

[Failure2Stop]

Interesting that you choose 308 for GP. Why is that? I understand the caliber does everything except recoil and weight better than 5.56 but given the tendency for most 308s to be setup for long range precision I've never been able to get a good feel for what a 308 GP carbine should look like or be capable of.
Because a contemporary lightweight 7.62 (SCAR-H, M110K1, M110K2 types) can be shot as fast, and are as maneuverable as heavier 5.56.
I pretty frequently win 2-gun competitions while shooting a 7.62 with 20 round mags (recently 25s) against 5.56 competition rigs. I most definately spent a lot of cake to get that kind of performance though.
308 is just easier to get to high terminal performance, and if I can get it in a format that I can shoot fast and with precision, well, that's "the one".

[sinister]

Because a contemporary lightweight 7.62 (SCAR-H, M110K1, M110K2 types) can be shot as fast, and are as maneuverable as heavier 5.56.

308 is just easier to get to high terminal performance, and if I can get it in a format that I can shoot fast and with precision, well, that's "the one".

Perhaps for an experienced combat arms infantryman or cavalryman. For someone of the other arms (MPs, Engineers, perhaps artillerymen) the individual proficiency and competency of first-line NCOs (let alone the actual trigger-pullers) and sustainment and development opportunities may mean a 5.56 rifle or carbine might be a better option.

Although many troops are "Gun guys," not all are, and the opportunities for on-duty time development are fairly slim.

Not everyone is assigned to a Ranger company or Special Forces unit.

[bzdog]

I would say that is a major oversimplification. With the exception of two limited production Barnes bullets a 300 Blackout with a 9-12 inch barrel will be at or near the minimum expansion velocity at the muzzle for every .308 bullet currently in production.

I'm not sure saying 300 BLK doesn't perform optimally with bullets not designed for it should be considered an issue.

For defense inside of 100 yards 300 BLK with the 110gr Barnes black tip is going to be hard to beat, even out of a very SBR. Make that 200 yards for a 16". With these combinations, the bullet is traveling fast enough for a rifle wound profile and you get reliable expansion and s barrier blind full copper bullet. I'd call this combo for this application cake and eating it too.

After that it gets a bit more gray as the 300 BLK slows down and drops faster. That said, the Barnes black tip reliably expands to 1300 FPS which ends up around 400 yards out of a 16".

And as for availability, the Barnes black tip has been pretty much the only premium ammo that was available through the BLK ammo shortage.

-john

[C-grunt]

I prefer 5.56 as my general purpose carbine. Low reoil, lots of ammo and pretty flat shooting out to 400 yards or so. The 308 I use as a support and precision round. My only 308s have always been precision bolt guns. Though there is a very good argument on using the 308 as a general purpose gun as well. To me the 300 BLK has finally legitimized the PDW concept (excluding the KAC thats not available). Up until now the PDWs have all been lacking in the terminal performance department especially at range. An eight inch 300 BLK has great close end terminal performance but still has some legs under it if the gunfight moves out to a couple hundred yards.

My personal setups (If I could afford all of them)

300 BLK. 8 inch barrel topped with a good red dot 0-250 yards

5.56. 11.5-16 inch barrel topped with a good red dot or low powered optic 0-400 yards

308. 16-24 inch barrel topped with a good low or high powered optic depending on the mission/terrain. 0-1000 yards

[bzdog]

308. 16-24 inch barrel topped with a good low or high powered optic depending on the mission/terrain. 0-1000 yards

While I don't disagree, why .308 over 300 Win Mag or such?

-john

[3ACR_Scout]

I would say that is a major oversimplification. With the exception of two limited production Barnes bullets a 300 Blackout with a 9-12 inch barrel will be at or near the minimum expansion velocity at the muzzle for every .308 bullet currently in production.
I'm confused - I was only comparing .300BLK to 5.56, not .308 (which I acknowledge is a little off the original topic). I was asking because I see a lot of references to .300BLK being ideal for suppressed sub-10.5" SBRs, but it's my understanding that it still offers ballistic benefits over 5.56 in SBRs even if you're not suppressing it. A lot of people feel that you start to run into reliability and terminal performance issues with 5.56 SBRs under 11.5", so I was just curious why people don't seem to recommend .300BLK even in an unsuppressed SBR:


5.56- 11.5-12.5; 200 & in, optimized for close work.
300- 9.5; suppressed badassery
308- 14.5-16, General Purpose
Is it just because there's no real benefit to a 10.5" .300BLK when you can go shorter and still have good performance?

Dave

[Failure2Stop]

I'm just talking about my personal use.
Agreed that 7.62 is not the answer for everybody, and that a 14.5 5.56 makes for a pretty good general issue individual weapon.

Perhaps for an experienced combat arms infantryman or cavalryman. For someone of the other arms (MPs, Engineers, perhaps artillerymen) the individual proficiency and competency of first-line NCOs (let alone the actual trigger-pullers) and sustainment and development opportunities may mean a 5.56 rifle or carbine might be a better option.

Although many troops are "Gun guys," not all are, and the opportunities for on-duty time development are fairly slim.

Not everyone is assigned to a Ranger company or Special Forces unit.

[Failure2Stop]

Yup.
300 Blk is interesting to me in that subsonic is great from a suppressed 9.5, and going supersonic makes the 9.5 viable.

I'm confused - I was only comparing .300BLK to 5.56, not .308 (which I acknowledge is a little off the original topic). I was asking because I see a lot of references to .300BLK being ideal for suppressed sub-10.5" SBRs, but it's my understanding that it still offers ballistic benefits over 5.56 in SBRs even if you're not suppressing it. A lot of people feel that you start to run into reliability and terminal performance issues with 5.56 SBRs under 11.5", so I was just curious why people don't seem to recommend .300BLK even in an unsuppressed SBR:


Is it just because there's no real benefit to a 10.5" .300BLK when you can go shorter and still have good performance?

Dave

[bzdog]

I'm confused - I was only comparing .300BLK to 5.56, not .308

The reason NV brought up .308 is a number of 300 BLK ammunition is made with bullets designed for .308. And, as he says, those combos aren't typically optimal for performance out of 300 BLK. On the other hand it opens the door for less expensive practice ammunition.



Is it just because there's no real benefit to a 10.5" .300BLK when you can go shorter and still have good performance?

Yah, you can go shorter. Should still get good performance from the 8.2" offerings.

-john

[bzdog]

but it's my understanding that it still offers ballistic benefits over 5.56 in SBRs even if you're not suppressing it.

Yup. 300 BLK doesn't lose much in even very short SBRs.

-john

[3ACR_Scout]

Yup.
300 Blk is interesting to me in that subsonic is great from a suppressed 9.5, and going supersonic makes the 9.5 viable.
Thanks, Jack. If I go the LMT MRP SBR route, I'll probably get the 10.5" .300BLK barrel just because it will be interchangeable with the 5.56 barrel, even if it's more length than needed for that round.

Dave

[bzdog]

To me the 300 BLK has finally legitimized the PDW concept (excluding the KAC thats not available). Up until now the PDWs have all been lacking in the terminal performance department especially at range. An eight inch 300 BLK has great close end terminal performance but still has some legs under it if the gunfight moves out to a couple hundred yards.


Over all a good characterization about the performance of the SBR 300 BLK when using good defensive ammunition IMO.

-john

[3ACR_Scout]

The reason NV brought up .308 is a number of 300 BLK ammunition is made with bullets designed for .308.
Got it, thanks, John. I wasn't aware of that. I obviously need to educate myself a little more before getting into 300 BLK.

Dave

[C-grunt]

While I don't disagree, why .308 over 300 Win Mag or such?

-john

I like 308 for its general ubiquity. Though for a dedicated precision rifle I do believe that there are many better offerings than the 308.

Plus the original post was about the 308.

[bzdog]

Gotcha.

-john

[Koshinn]

Because a contemporary lightweight 7.62 (SCAR-H, M110K1, M110K2 types) can be shot as fast, and are as maneuverable as heavier 5.56.
I pretty frequently win 2-gun competitions while shooting a 7.62 with 20 round mags (recently 25s) against 5.56 competition rigs. I most definately spent a lot of cake to get that kind of performance though.
308 is just easier to get to high terminal performance, and if I can get it in a format that I can shoot fast and with precision, well, that's "the one".

What is your 308 2 gun rifle set up as? SR-25 ACC with Mk8 H27, MAMS, and 45° folding irons?

[Failure2Stop]

What is your 308 2 gun rifle set up as? SR-25 ACC with Mk8 H27, MAMS, and 45° folding irons?
Yup.
http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm174/Fail2Stop/0601141743.jpg

[RONK]

Thank you all for your posts.
C-grunt,sir,I'd like hear your thougts please,on better offerings than the .308?
Failure2Stop,sir,on the post that your beating guys with 5.56 in two gun matches,do you think your a better shot than them or do you think it's the .308 platform your using?

[Failure2Stop]

Thank you all for your posts.
C-grunt,sir,I'd like hear your thougts please,on better offerings than the .308?
Failure2Stop,sir,on the post that your beating guys with 5.56 in two gun matches,do you think your a better shot than them or do you think it's the .308 platform your using?
Apologies, didn't mean my comment to read as a humblebrag.
I'm a good Indian with a good bow and a quiver of good arrows.

My point was not so much about the gun being better than anything else, rather that the performance difference as far as maneuverability is concerned is less than many believe.

[RONK]

Apologies, didn't mean my comment to read as a humblebrag.
I'm a good Indian with a good bow and a quiver of good arrows.

My point was not so much about the gun being better than anything else, rather that the performance difference as far as maneuverability is concerned is less than many believe.

Sir,no apologies needed,I did not take your post as a brag at all,I thought you weren't giving yourself enough credit for being a better shooter that the guys with the 5.56.

[hjmpanzr]

Yup.
http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm174/Fail2Stop/0601141743.jpg

Jack: did you sand your URX 4 rail covers? They certainly appear to be KAC but have a different texture.

[ColtSeavers]

Personally broke it down for my own rifles/uses as:

0-200 yards - 5.56/.223 general purpose

0-400 yards - 6.8 SPC hunting, general purpose

100-600 yards - .308/7.62 longer range shooting, hunting

I have a great fondness for all three calibers (still new to the 6.8 as well), and am in no way trying to imply that these are their only ranges and/or capabilities, just my own personal views and setups for them and their uses for me alone.

[markm]

5.56mm carbine - 300 meters to contact. Good selection of defensive loads.

5.56mm rifle - 500 meters with a decent selection of loads. 600 meters for punching paper with match ammunition.

.308 - out to 500 meters with ball ammunition. 1000 yards with match ammunition.

I stopped hunting years ago, so I can't comment on the effectiveness of using either caliber on game animals.

I agree with this. Ammo can extend the range of the given caliber. And in the case of 5.56... not only in accuracy, but in effectiveness if something like the 77gr OTM is shot.

[caporider]

Personally broke it down for my own rifles/uses as:

0-200 yards - 5.56/.223 general purpose

0-400 yards - 6.8 SPC hunting, general purpose

100-600 yards - .308/7.62 longer range shooting, hunting

I have a great fondness for all three calibers (still new to the 6.8 as well), and am in no way trying to imply that these are their only ranges and/or capabilities, just my own personal views and setups for them and their uses for me alone.

I've gone back and forth on the .308AR thing in a BIG way over the years, having owned and shot everything from a 22" LR308 with bull barrel to a 16" KAC EMC and even a 14.5" AR10C and pretty much everything in between. Overall weight, lack of commonality among manufacturers, and the varied "tuning" from different manufacturers (e.g. EMC only for current milspec M80 or match grade stuff, AR10A4C super overgassed, etc) pushed me off that train. I'm also glad I'm not beta-testing stuff like the Aero Precision 308AR lowers that don't play well with existing mag releases. I'm currently in a "wait and see" mode as the new DPMS G2, MP10, etc, find their way in the marketplace.

These days, I basically use 5.56 for pretty much everything 0-300 yards, 6.5 Grendel for 0-600 yards, and 6.5 Creedmoor in a 22" bolt gun for long range stuff. If hunting it would be a toss-up between 6.5 Grendel and 6.5 Creedmoor, depending on the game and field conditions. But my 5.56 guns are the 90% solution for sure.

ETA: as markm points out, ammo is a big factor for sure when shooting 5.56.

[Failure2Stop]

Jack: did you sand your URX 4 rail covers? They certainly appear to be KAC but have a different texture.

Those are prototype keymod panels, pocketed for grip-tape.
I am 99% happy with them.
The only thing I would change if possible would be to make them more readily adaptable for different lengths, but since the outside border is raised to prevent them from drifting/slipping they don't take to chopping well.

[rcoodyar15]

this is my toy

283072830728307

I have another 5.56 that is my SHTF gun but really is is just another fun gun

My hunting guns are all bolt action. For serious work it is the only way to go.

[markm]

I've gone back and forth on the .308AR thing in a BIG way over the years

The .308 LMT MWS was about the best AR 308 ever... with the only downside being weight. We ran Pappabears without a complaint for quite a while.

But really... It didn't do anything for us that a 5.56 wouldn't. (now if we were shooting at live threats out at long ranges... yeah... I'd want that extra thump... but for regular target shooting... not needed)

The 5.56 is often sold short by shooters I think... When weather permits, I want to do some frag tests at 500 and 1000 yards with 77 gr OTMs.

[ColtSeavers]

I've gone back and forth on the .308AR thing in a BIG way over the years, having owned and shot everything from a 22" LR308 with bull barrel to a 16" KAC EMC and even a 14.5" AR10C and pretty much everything in between. Overall weight, lack of commonality among manufacturers, and the varied "tuning" from different manufacturers (e.g. EMC only for current milspec M80 or match grade stuff, AR10A4C super overgassed, etc) pushed me off that train. I'm also glad I'm not beta-testing stuff like the Aero Precision 308AR lowers that don't play well with existing mag releases. I'm currently in a "wait and see" mode as the new DPMS G2, MP10, etc, find their way in the marketplace.

These days, I basically use 5.56 for pretty much everything 0-300 yards, 6.5 Grendel for 0-600 yards, and 6.5 Creedmoor in a 22" bolt gun for long range stuff. If hunting it would be a toss-up between 6.5 Grendel and 6.5 Creedmoor, depending on the game and field conditions. But my 5.56 guns are the 90% solution for sure.

ETA: as markm points out, ammo is a big factor for sure when shooting 5.56.

I completely agree with you, markm and others that using heavier/better bullets than 62gr ball can and does greatly increase the performance and range (especially in conjunction with a longer barrel) of the 5.56/.223.

For me personally though, once I started looking at building an AR for that end with that ammo use in mind (longer range shooting and hunting), I instead switched to 6.8 SPC for the same reason for better performance for the same price (build and ammo wise).

I also must agree that I am a bit put off by the selection of .308 ARs for the same reasons you are and that I too am keeping an eye on DPMS' s GII. My go to .308/7.62 rifle is a 20" heavy barrel bolt action currently.

Again, I'm not trying to knock any of these calibers, these are just my own personal reasonings.

[markm]

I also must agree that I am a bit put off by the selection of .308 ARs for the same reasons you are and that I too am keeping an eye on DPMS' s GII. My go to .308/7.62 rifle is a 20" heavy barrel bolt action currently.

I was blown away that there was a functional .308 AR (the LMT MWS mentioned above). If I didn't have many weekends witnessing the gun running like a champ, I wouldn't believe it.

[ColtSeavers]

I was blown away that there was a functional .308 AR (the LMT MWS mentioned above). If I didn't have many weekends witnessing the gun running like a champ, I wouldn't believe it.

I will start to look into that one as well. Thank you for the heads up.

[Koshinn]

The .308 LMT MWS was about the best AR 308 ever... with the only downside being weight. We ran Pappabears without a complaint for quite a while.

But really... It didn't do anything for us that a 5.56 wouldn't. (now if we were shooting at live threats out at long ranges... yeah... I'd want that extra thump... but for regular target shooting... not needed)

The 5.56 is often sold short by shooters I think... When weather permits, I want to do some frag tests at 500 and 1000 yards with 77 gr OTMs.

I came to the same conclusion actually... I haven't used my MWS in maybe half a year, if not more.

The MWS also chews and dents brass like crazy. It's a very reliable and accurate, but heavy, AR308. But I just don't need it when 5.56 does everything I want... namely, kill paper and home defense within 100m.

[markm]

I will start to look into that one as well. Thank you for the heads up.

Kind of pricey and pretty heavy were the only downsides. You could hit Pappabear up for more specifics, but it was boringly reliable and shot Sub MOA with Match kings.

[Fox33]

So just back from Govt' sponsored tourism.....

#1 Failure... that is a nice rig... but I must ask the advantage of folding irons vs. a red dot @ 45 (which is how I have been doing it)

#2 Caliber is important, but environments drive your situations, and situations drive your tactics. When I think of tactics I think of who is trying to apply what and where. The who and where I see as the big factors in this discussion. Distances have been the focus of the discussion and I'd agree that they are the #1 factor in caliber selection. Smaller is easier closer IMO.

Another factor has to be looked at that is often overlooked in this discussion. Flexibility

I find 7.62x51 is much more flexible than 5.56 as it has a greater variance in configuration. I see these wars we've been fighting as not winding down, but spinning up. With the Russians and by proxy the Chinese developing new body armor designed to protect against 5.56, the current stop gap is 7.62x51. Handl Defense has been in talks with some people who worked on the last caseless project for HK and I sat in on the conversation. I am convinced that Small Arms has to change and the brass cartridge, impact primer, and copper case bullet is where the change starts.

But for now; if I want to punch steel/plate with a 180gr AP, I want a hollow point boat tail 175gr sub MOA round, 110 or 130 gr defensive round for soft targets, or even API, I can do this all with 7.62x51. These rounds are also available in platforms that can be used in a CQC environment or in a DMR setup. Yes this can be done with 5.56, but not to the same effect. When it comes to terminal ballistics its not even close.

#3 the other part of this discussion is who. I think 5.56 was selected for many reasons like when zeroed @ 25m the POA-POI is very close to the same as 200m. This means without discussing ballistics to draftees, you would have the greatest possible effective hits with the least amount of training. Zero it and point to shoot, for what is considered pretty much max range for a nug to shoot out to.

For the most part the admin chick who weighs a 100lb is not going to wield the SCAR H or HK 417 very effectively. Many of the limp wristed, fat, xbox drones we are going to end up drafting once a city or two gets hit with weaponized bubonic plague ISIS is working on, are not going fair well with it either. So maximize the effects of 5.56 but leave the killers a real option. Right now the only one that can do it all is 7.62x51

[Failure2Stop]

#1 Failure... that is a nice rig... but I must ask the advantage of folding irons vs. a red dot @ 45 (which is how I have been doing it)


Because I run a 1-8x, primarily set on 1x, spun up as needed.
An event that crashes my 1-8 is probably going to crash any other glass aiming device, in which case the irons will work well enough to let me do what needs to be done.
I've had temperature changes fog up lenses, non-transparent liquid occlude shooter-side lenses, and salt spray evaporate away leaving lenses covered. All of these events would effect all glass, none would make an iron unusable (though you might need to blow the aperture out).

I do have to disagree with your #3 point: a 25m POA/POI is more like a 400 yard zero with 5.56 from a 20" barrel.

[Koshinn]

With the Russians and by proxy the Chinese developing new body armor designed to protect against 5.56, the current stop gap is 7.62x51.

Level IV body armor, the kind I'm sure you were issued, is rated to stop 30-06 AP at the muzzle. Body armor isn't some state secret, it's available for civilian use. There is literally no way that both Russia and China haven't had body armor rated against at least M855 for decades, and likely 7.62x51 as well since that has been in NATO usage for more than 50 years.

If we're talking about armor, you're probably not going to see much of a difference between 5.56 and 7.62, if any at all.

[henschman]

5.56 is great for home defense and a general fighting rifle from CQ to mid range. It can certainly deliver hits at longer ranges, like 600-700 yards, especially with heavier OTM ammo, but I don't think anyone would make the claim that it is optimal for this role.

7.62 is basically the opposite... it is in it's element for mid to long range shooting, and is a lot easier to shoot in the wind than 5.56, but can do short range and CQ in a pinch. It also offers much better penetration of hard barriers.

The 5.56 is the better choice for an overall fighting rifle IMO, because most fighting happens at closer distances where it is in it's element, yet it can still get things done out farther if need be; and it is plenty ballistically effective with good ammo choice (and not too bad even with cheap ball, due to fragmentation). Also a full 30 round mag of 5.56 weighs almost 1/3 what a full 20 round mag of 7.62 does, so you can carry a lot more of an ammo loadout.

The 7.62 is a good choice for a DMR type setup, and would be good for running far ambushes and that sort of thing, where you are going to be intentionally engaging from some distance, yet can still take care of business up close when called for. It is also a great hunting round. With hunting, getting a one-shot kill and dropping the animal right where it stands are much bigger concerns than with the fighting role. You are also worried about keeping the meat intact, which fragmenting loads are not conducive to... with hunting you use rounds designed to expand and penetrate, to cause the biggest wound in a vital organ as possible, with the greatest instant drop in blood pressure possible, to put the animal in shock and drop it where it stands. A full power .30 cal just does this better than an intermediate power .22.

FYI with 55 or 62 grain ball, a 14.5" AR carbine zeroed at 25m will have something like a 320m far zero. A 7.62x51 rifle with 147 grain ball and AR-height sights will do about the same. 55/62 grain 5.56 and 147 grain 7.62 have very close to the same trajectory out to 600 yards. A 50 yard zero will give you right at a 200m zero with either one.

[Failure2Stop]

Level IV body armor, the kind I'm sure you were issued, is rated to stop 30-06 AP at the muzzle. Body armor isn't some state secret, it's available for civilian use. There is literally no way that both Russia and China haven't had body armor rated against at least M855 for decades, and likely 7.62x51 as well since that has been in NATO usage for more than 50 years.

If we're talking about armor, you're probably not going to see much of a difference between 5.56 and 7.62, if any at all.

M993 is actually pretty good:

3.5.7 Penetration. For each test below, the projectile of the cartridge shall penetrate 7mm thick High Hardness Armor (HHA) plate, in accordance with MIL-DTL-46100, creating a hole through which daylight can be seen.
3.5.7.1 Penetration at 546.8 yards. The bullet of the cartridge shall be capable of penetrating the HHA plate at 0 degrees obliquity at a minimum range of 546.8 yards (500 meters).
3.5.7.2 Penetration at 716.3 yards. The bullet of the cartridge shall be capable of penetrating the HHA plate at 0 degrees obliquity at a minimum range of 716.3 yards (655 meters) with a success rate of not less than 50%.

Basically twice the performance of M995,

3.5.9 Penetration. When fired at 0 degrees obliquity, the bullet of the cartridge shall be capable of the following penetration requirements:
Material and thickness Range Required penetration
3.5mm NATO plate 656 yds (600 m) 50%
12mm steel armor plate 109 yds (100 m) 100%
1/2 inch aluminum plate 492 yds (450 m) 50%
1/8 inch steel RHA plate 601 yds (550 m) 50%
Hollow concrete block (through both sides) 54.7 yds (50 m) 50%
1/4 inch steel RHA plate 437 yds (400 m) 50%
3/8 inch steel RHA plate 262 yds (240 m) 50%
1/2 inch steel RHA plate 164 yds (150 m) 50%

Which is distinctly better than M855:

3.9 Penetration. The bullet of the sample cartridges shall demonstrate complete penetration of 10 gage (.135 inch) thickness AISI 1010 to 1020 steel plate target with hardness between RB 55 minimum and RB 70 maximum (NATO plate) positioned at O + 5° obliquity and located 656 yards (600 meters) from the weapon.

(All of the above is open-source information)

[Hot Holster]

5.56 for general shooting and coyote's.

300 Blackout 9.5" suppressed for HD/SD, and hog hunting out to 150 yards or so. Barnes black tips for supersonic, Lehigh Defense 174gr controlled fracture or 194 maximum expansion for subsonic use.

.308 when I need to reach out longer distances and slap something nice and hard.

[markm]

If we're talking about armor, you're probably not going to see much of a difference between 5.56 and 7.62, if any at all.

Yep. 7.62X51 is much easier to stop than M193 or M855 in an armor sense. It's so much slower. I used to get a kick out of guys shooting my gongs with their .308s... They'd often think that it would some how punch through...

[Failure2Stop]

Yep. 7.62X51 is much easier to stop than M193 or M855 in an armor sense. It's so much slower. I used to get a kick out of guys shooting my gongs with their .308s... They'd often think that it would some how punch through...
Let someone with M993 shoot those gongs and you might reconsider.

[Fox33]

Let someone with M993 shoot those gongs and you might reconsider.

exactly, it was I was getting at.

BTW guys I have been trying to find the info about the new russian body armor. There is an open source document that talks about it. It came out around the time of the Russian UW operation to take the Crimea. That it was specifically designed to protect from 5.56 AP. Once I find it I'll post it up.

[TehLlama]

Let someone with M993 shoot those gongs and you might reconsider.

I've seen the half-inch steel targets perforated enough to believe it'll have an effect on the other side of armor - that said even for the anti-personal body armor application, I'd rather have a smaller caliber with more rounds and hope I can connect multiple times instead of relying on one hit to completely incapacitate (it's not as though anybody on the other side of that rifle plate is fighting at 100% effectiveness right after that armor makes itself worth its weight in platinum). AP 308 isn't exactly common in my neck of the woods, the place I really see for that ideally would be in an MMG at a vehicle checkpoint as primary application over running it through a shoulder fired system (nice fallback ability, but for most of those uses a useful barrier blind load is probably so much better across the rest of the performance spectrum that I'd rather run that).

There is a weight/OAL range that .308 general purpose carbines can work in - 16" somewhat light carbines with lithe accessory sets (the ACC looks to be the standard bearer in this regard) and a good variable optic can put a well-sorted GP-308 into the discussion, but it still won't reach that handiness factor of a simple LW 5.56 carbine with red dot/light/sling and little else, so to make sense (having a longer reaching performance envelope plus carrying more impulse) for the tradeoffs (cost, lower magazine capacity, OAL, etc.) : they need fairly high quality barrels in non-pencil profiles, non-boat anchor handguards, and a properly dialed gas system or else it becomes a pricy hot mess of disappointed customers - even the SCAR-17 suffers from a lot of this.

Those bits of information plus the possibilities with a smartly set up 300BLK setup (again, those shine in 8-10" barreled suppressed setups) that there is a zone where .308 setups don't make any sense at all (12-14.5" 308 carbines have been basically universally figured out as dumb with a couple odd exceptions) because at the lower velocities, a BLK setup with a couple more inches of barrel (offset by the receiver length) can net comparable performance with similar projectiles. On the suppressed minimal OAL setups, BLK or 5.56 just makes more sense. On the other extreme, lower drag coefficient calibers (6.5CM excels at this task) through longer barrels (20" and bigger) and the .308 options don't exactly excel when compared to those other options, so this leaves a sweet spot of 16-18" .308 gas operated semi-auto setups for general use carbines being awesome, and everything else tried with those setups are basically outclassed for the money.

For me, the niche I want to fill with a .308 weapon is to have a solid, reasonably light, sorted semi-precise 16" suppressed setup (short 7" Ti can) - for terminal effectiveness and accuracy beyond the optimistic 600m envelope of my SPR/Recce setups when equipped with Mk262 clone ammunition, and hopefully the ability to hit ~2MOA targets with some consistency out to a click.

[El Cid]

OP, if I was restricted to a single rifle it would be 5.56. As mentioned, the ammo is lighter, less expensive, and more available. The rifle is usually lighter, aiding in everything from target to target transitions to just walking around with it all day.

Defoor talks about the rule of 4. I'm paraphrasing but, zero to 400 is 5.56 territory, 400 to 800 is 7.62x51, and beyond that 338 Lapua. The reality of it all Is that we aren't talking about a rifle for use in places like Iraq, Afghanistan, Horn of Africa, etc. Even in a COMIC-CON wet dream of a zombie apocalypse, I can't imagine needing to shoot anything beyond 100-200 yards. Because of this my 7.62 rifle is set up to be practical from contact to 600. It's light enough I can carry it around all day and not be burdened by it.

In my world of not having to realistically worry about shots outside the envelope of 5.56, I have to decide if the weight, recoil, and cost of 7.62 is an appropriate trade off. It does provide better barrier penetration - especially if I can't get my hands on bonded 5.56. In addition, for me I am going to need a recoil mitigating muzzle device to shoot a 7.62 as quickly as 5.56 without one. If I don't have a can to cover that muzzle I'm going to have to tolerate the associated drawbacks that are part of muzzle brakes, or the slower splits of the larger round.

It's going to come down to your environment. If you're not out west or in the plains where long shots are conceivable (I still doubt their tactical necessity as it's easier to avoid a threat that far away), then you probably don't need a 7.62. If you do decide long range engagements are going to be a mission requirement, then you may need glass for such things. I learned where my 1-6 optic bottoms out and why in Jack's class. To take advantage of using my rifle at longer ranges means a more powerful optic which then takes away from its usefulness up close. The stronger long range glass is heavier than my 1-6, and now it needs an offset micro optic (more weight, more batteries) to work close range.

Life is about compromise. We can guide you based on your needs, but it's up to you to make sure you evaluate them realistically. In the end I say get one of each caliber rifle. Because America!!

[Devildawg2531]

OP, if I was restricted to a single rifle it would be 5.56. As mentioned, the ammo is lighter, less expensive, and more available. The rifle is usually lighter, aiding in everything from target to target transitions to just walking around with it all day.

Defoor talks about the rule of 4. I'm paraphrasing but, zero to 400 is 5.56 territory, 400 to 800 is 7.62x51, and beyond that 338 Lapua. The reality of it all Is that we aren't talking about a rifle for use in places like Iraq, Afghanistan, Horn of Africa, etc. Even in a COMIC-CON wet dream of a zombie apocalypse, I can't imagine needing to shoot anything beyond 100-200 yards. Because of this my 7.62 rifle is set up to be practical from contact to 600. It's light enough I can carry it around all day and not be burdened by it.

In my world of not having to realistically worry about shots outside the envelope of 5.56, I have to decide if the weight, recoil, and cost of 7.62 is an appropriate trade off. It does provide better barrier penetration - especially if I can't get my hands on bonded 5.56. In addition, for me I am going to need a recoil mitigating muzzle device to shoot a 7.62 as quickly as 5.56 without one. If I don't have a can to cover that muzzle I'm going to have to tolerate the associated drawbacks that are part of muzzle brakes, or the slower splits of the larger round.

It's going to come down to your environment. If you're not out west or in the plains where long shots are conceivable (I still doubt their tactical necessity as it's easier to avoid a threat that far away), then you probably don't need a 7.62. If you do decide long range engagements are going to be a mission requirement, then you may need glass for such things. I learned where my 1-6 optic bottoms out and why in Jack's class. To take advantage of using my rifle at longer ranges means a more powerful optic which then takes away from its usefulness up close. The stronger long range glass is heavier than my 1-6, and now it needs an offset micro optic (more weight, more batteries) to work close range.

Life is about compromise. We can guide you based on your needs, but it's up to you to make sure you evaluate them realistically. In the end I say get one of each caliber rifle. Because America!!

El cid - good realistic feedback. What 7.62 are you using?

[El Cid]

El cid - good realistic feedback. What 7.62 are you using?

Thanks. I have a LaRue PredatAR 762. If I wanted a 7.62 today I'd build my own. The wait for LaRue rifles exceeds a year last I checked.

http://i828.photobucket.com/albums/zz209/El_CidAF_ResQ/IMAG0041_zps598c8a08.jpg

[markm]

Let someone with M993 shoot those gongs and you might reconsider.

I'm talking ball to ball comparison. 7.62 is much easier to defeat from a hard armor perspective.

(rifle gongs being made out of armor... and not just some scrap steel) By far the most abusive ball ammo is M193 inside of 50-100 yards

[Failure2Stop]

I've seen the half-inch steel targets perforated enough to believe it'll have an effect on the other side of armor - that said even for the anti-personal body armor application, I'd rather have a smaller caliber with more rounds and hope I can connect multiple times instead of relying on one hit to completely incapacitate (it's not as though anybody on the other side of that rifle plate is fighting at 100% effectiveness right after that armor makes itself worth its weight in platinum).

In my experience, outside close range, single hits are far more common than multiple hits, especially with partial and running targets. I like putting as much damage into the threat as possible with each opportunity. That doesn't mean that I find no value in 5.56, just that past a certain range and with barriers in play, I find that the performance of 7.62 is worth the weight (to an extent, of course).



AP 308 isn't exactly common in my neck of the woods,

I understand where you are coming from, and I agree that absent specialty armor-piercing ammo, the point is essentially moot.
Different armor types will have different vulnerabilities, but it is rare that common 7.62 will achieve penetration where 5.56 will not.



the place I really see for that ideally would be in an MMG at a vehicle checkpoint as primary application over running it through a shoulder fired system (nice fallback ability, but for most of those uses a useful barrier blind load is probably so much better across the rest of the performance spectrum that I'd rather run that).

The M993 works great on vehicles, but I personally find that I prefer it over any other ammunition in the 240, even in the conventional role, as it gives better performance for MG related tasks. Pretty much completely irrelevant to the conversation, but hey, I like machineguns.



There is a weight/OAL range that .308 general purpose carbines can work in - 16" somewhat light carbines with lithe accessory sets (the ACC looks to be the standard bearer in this regard) and a good variable optic can put a well-sorted GP-308 into the discussion, but it still won't reach that handiness factor of a simple LW 5.56 carbine with red dot/light/sling and little else, so to make sense (having a longer reaching performance envelope plus carrying more impulse) for the tradeoffs (cost, lower magazine capacity, OAL, etc.) : they need fairly high quality barrels in non-pencil profiles, non-boat anchor handguards, and a properly dialed gas system or else it becomes a pricy hot mess of disappointed customers - even the SCAR-17 suffers from a lot of this.

I agree to an extent.
I think that 5.56 most shines in the 11.5-12.5 format, if the expectation is for a "200 meter and in" application.
No 7.62 will be as light, maneuverable, and shootable in that size.
No matter how light you get, you are still shooting 7.62, and for usable performance there is a price.



Those bits of information plus the possibilities with a smartly set up 300BLK setup (again, those shine in 8-10" barreled suppressed setups) that there is a zone where .308 setups don't make any sense at all (12-14.5" 308 carbines have been basically universally figured out as dumb with a couple odd exceptions)


Mostly agreed, with the exception being that a 14.5ish 7.62 with a dedicated can is pretty much the equivalent of a 16" 7.62 out to 500 meters. This is partially due to 7.62 not being as tightly tied to velocity for good terminal performance.



because at the lower velocities, a BLK setup with a couple more inches of barrel (offset by the receiver length) can net comparable performance with similar projectiles. On the suppressed minimal OAL setups, BLK or 5.56 just makes more sense. On the other extreme, lower drag coefficient calibers (6.5CM excels at this task) through longer barrels (20" and bigger) and the .308 options don't exactly excel when compared to those other options, so this leaves a sweet spot of 16-18" .308 gas operated semi-auto setups for general use carbines being awesome, and everything else tried with those setups are basically outclassed for the money.

Agreed (caveat of specific application 14.5 7.62 as above); best size for 7.62 semi-auto is 16-18, favoring 16.
I am looking to do something with .260 in an 18"-20" barrel, but it isn't going to be any time soon.




For me, the niche I want to fill with a .308 weapon is to have a solid, reasonably light, sorted semi-precise 16" suppressed setup (short 7" Ti can) - for terminal effectiveness and accuracy beyond the optimistic 600m envelope of my SPR/Recce setups when equipped with Mk262 clone ammunition, and hopefully the ability to hit ~2MOA targets with some consistency out to a click.

I think that this is a realistic view of what a good semi-auto 7.62 should provide.


I'm talking ball to ball comparison. 7.62 is much easier to defeat from a hard armor perspective.

(rifle gongs being made out of armor... and not just some scrap steel) By far the most abusive ball ammo is M193 inside of 50-100 yards

Gotcha.
Taking specialty ammo out of the equation, the faster 5.56 is more abusive to steel the steel face.
I break steel with 7.62 mostly from tipping the targets over, wrecking resetting and mounting points, and knocking chunks out near the edge.
Most damage happens inside 300 meters.

[Symmetry]

Thanks. I have a LaRue PredatAR 762. If I wanted a 7.62 today I'd build my own. The wait for LaRue rifles exceeds a year last I checked.

http://i828.photobucket.com/albums/zz209/El_CidAF_ResQ/IMAG0041_zps598c8a08.jpg

How does your reloading go with that fluted chamber? I figured it would beat up brass pretty bad.

[El Cid]

How does your reloading go with that fluted chamber? I figured it would beat up brass pretty bad.

I don't reload. One of my friends was collecting brass during the class with Jack a few months back. I'll ask him if he's noticed any issues, but from what we saw there wasn't anything obviously wrong with it. I have a PredatAR 556 also and haven't noticed damaged brass.

[Symmetry]

I don't reload. One of my friends was collecting brass during the class with Jack a few months back. I'll ask him if he's noticed any issues, but from what we saw there wasn't anything obviously wrong with it. I have a PredatAR 556 also and haven't noticed damaged brass.

A major issue that I noticed with G3 brass is that the fluted chamber caused the brass to recoil harder into the bolt face. There is less friction in the chamber, so instead of the expanded brass getting a good grip on the chamber walls and slowing down the impact on the case head, the case head impacts the bolt face hard causing deformities. I've never noticed a problem with the 5.56 versions, probably due to the light recoil of the cartridge.

[TehLlama]

In my experience, outside close range, single hits are far more common than multiple hits, especially with partial and running targets. I like putting as much damage into the threat as possible with each opportunity. That doesn't mean that I find no value in 5.56, just that past a certain range and with barriers in play, I find that the performance of 7.62 is worth the weight (to an extent, of course).

Here in this case I suspect you're far more correct. I came from such a super-pogue job description that in firefights I was still glued to the radio as job A, and the rest of the time took shit from the grunts we were attached to that I was a waste of a good shot. This partially pervades my mindset, along with the idea that I'd rather be moving and have more equipment oriented towards nighttime capability and gear set up for preventing and patching holes and give up a bit of that barrier/single hit performance potential to have a platform with more rounds and something I can afford to train on more. The biggest difference there is limited training opportunities and being able to afford enough ammo to drill and stockpile, whereas you have enough trigger time to probably skunk me running some ghetto 338RSAUM platform to my running a dialed 556 setup in an apples to apples shoot.

Different armor types will have different vulnerabilities, but it is rare that common 7.62 will achieve penetration where 5.56 will not.
The M993 works great on vehicles, but I personally find that I prefer it over any other ammunition in the 240, even in the conventional role, as it gives better performance for MG related tasks. Pretty much completely irrelevant to the conversation, but hey, I like machineguns.

Concur completely, but there is definitely enough application for me of a barrier blind (Mk317 clone type) round to run either match or barrier blind as go-to loads and whatever cheap FMJ for training. Again, lacking the depth/budget to work out better answers to ammo, I'm basically pigeonholing myself into simple options on the 308 front

I agree to an extent.
I think that 5.56 most shines in the 11.5-12.5 format, if the expectation is for a "200 meter and in" application.
No 7.62 will be as light, maneuverable, and shootable in that size.
No matter how light you get, you are still shooting 7.62, and for usable performance there is a price.
Mostly agreed, with the exception being that a 14.5ish 7.62 with a dedicated can is pretty much the equivalent of a 16" 7.62 out to 500 meters. This is partially due to 7.62 not being as tightly tied to velocity for good terminal performance.
Agreed (caveat of specific application 14.5 7.62 as above); best size for 7.62 semi-auto is 16-18, favoring 16.

Handloading/quality ammunition and top quality barrels probably do bring 14.5" into the picture, especially with a suppressed setup even past that range, but for a true general purpose carbine (and more practical lighter optics) I can absolutely see an application for a 14.5" .308 setup. Aside from some of the reported accuracy gains in SCAR-17's when shortening barrels, the SBR'd 308 setups are mostly impractical; the point I was looking to make is that a 12.5" .308 is equivalent in OAL/weight/feel to a pinned 14.5" 300BLK setup and eerily similar in terms of terminal performance.

I am looking to do something with .260 in an 18"-20" barrel, but it isn't going to be any time soon.

This is the one thing that has me constantly re-evaluating if the LMT MWS offering is still the answer I should be looking at - being able to swap a 20" 6.5CM batch barrel onto the same platform as my kitted out 16" setup is so appealing, I'm not sure if I can keep looking past that setup


Gotcha.
Taking specialty ammo out of the equation, the faster 5.56 is more abusive to steel the steel face.
I break steel with 7.62 mostly from tipping the targets over, wrecking resetting and mounting points, and knocking chunks out near the edge.
Most damage happens inside 300 meters.

It's a bit of a net energy per unit of surface area problem, but the above comment that any armor able to defeat one is liable to defeat the other absolutely applies, and that for most application this aspect of it is basically moot.



Reply is the Bold/Italicized portion in the quote

[Markk9]

How effective is the 223 M855A1 on a no body armor target at 600 meters vs the 7.62 x 51 M118LR?

[TehLlama]

How effective is the 223 M855A1 on a no body armor target at 600 meters vs the 7.62 x 51 M118LR?

At that particular range and those particular loads, that's an apples to watermelons comparison - smaller caliber semi-penetrating projectile against a 30 caliber reverse drawn open tip match projectile that deforms across an impressive range of velocities? In the cartridges in question one is already down to the sub- 1.5 Mach region where some bullets don't seem to want to deform or yaw, while the larger projectile is already traveling at a higher speed [almost exactly Mach1.5 @sea level ~625yd] and in a design that is more likely to either deform or yaw after encountering soft tissue.

Comparing more similar setups (Mk318 62gr 5.56x45 to Mk319 130gr 7.62x51) [Mk262Mod1 77gr to M118LR 175gr] would yield less divergent results.

At the rate this discussion is going, I'm really going to want to figure out what realistic soft target testing has been done with these projectiles in velocity equivalent analogs to longer range terminal effect - this information alone may sway me towards wanting to run a battle rifle (read 16" 7.62 gas gun) for basically everything between 400-800 meters unless I'm hunting exclusively paper and other inert targets).

[Markk9]

As a follow up post... In a SHTF situation what ammo are you most likely, to easily find? I would have to say 9mm, 40 s&w, .223, 308, and 22 rimfire in my local area. The most likely scenario for a large mass SHTF situation, in my opinion, is an EMP attack on the US or part of the US. Given that, I would plan to shelter in my home, with my AR-15 in 223 as my primary weapon. Next question, what ammo is National Guard going to be issued to deal with civilian control? What ammo are the local LEO's going to have? This is going to be the major ammo source for resupply. This situation is going to be different for everyone, it's really going to depend on the environment around you.

[MistWolf]

The only ammo, firearms and spares you're going to find when the "SHTF" is what you have on hand. There is something strange in picking a firearm based on what you're most likely going to be able to loot off the dead. Or do people think the apocalypse is going to be a video game where they just have to go to a spawning point to pick up gear?

[Markk9]

It's not going to be like a video game! I have about 2K of 223, about 3K of 9mm loaded on the shelf, have enough powder, primers, and bullets for another 5K of each. I have over 10K of 22 rimfire on the shelf. In a long term SHTF like my EMP theory, you are going to be "looting" food, water, and ammo at some point. I don't think the law enforcement and national guard will be able to keep the peace in a long term crises. I keep about 3 weeks of canned food, and bottled water for the family on hand at all times, for a short term crises.

[MorphCross]

The only ammo, firearms and spares you're going to find when the "SHTF" is what you have on hand. There is something strange in picking a firearm based on what you're most likely going to be able to loot off the dead. Or do people think the apocalypse is going to be a video game where they just have to go to a spawning point to pick up gear?

I blame Battlefield and Call of Duty for this viewpoint. National Guard and Local PD is not going to hand over their ammo to anyone. It would be naive to believe that the Military's Small arms ammunition manufacturing is hardened in any way against aerial assault or an EMP. It's remoteness is its biggest advantage against human pilots. An EMP detonated high in the atmosphere over the US using an ICBM system doesn't have to worry about that.

Once the military's small arms ammunition manufacturing grinds to a halt, the ammunition anyone has in America will be the extent of what they have to use.

[Markk9]

There is going to be a lot on commercial ammo that is in just plain old warehouses waiting to be shipped. I don't expect LEO and National Guard to hand over ammo, but after a long term SHTF, do you really expect there to still be order in society?

[bzdog]

The only ammo, firearms and spares you're going to find when the "SHTF" is what you have on hand.

xactly

[Symmetry]

For a SHTF situation, it is all a question of what the scenario will be. If I am holding up with my family in a single location, then .308 makes a nice choice for defending the castle and shooting game(if there is any left at that point). The .30 cal rounds do a better job of punching through a variety of cover, you have less range limitations, and if you score a hit that hit is more likely to incapacity quickly. In a mobile situation, where you must leave one area and move to the safety of another, carrying around a .308 platform and its ammo becomes a burden. You may be moving on foot due to choked roadways, and you are literally carrying everything you choose to own on your back. In that case, 5.56 all the way. So, if you are in a good rural area where you can likely hold up .308 is good, but if you are in any sort of urban interface I would prefer 5.56.

[Failure2Stop]

Keep it on topic and out of fantasy.
If your post is going to contain reference to a video game or movie, don't even bother posting it, because I'm going to trash it.
This thread was rolling merrily along with good discussion, don't shit all over it now.

[markm]

How effective is the 223 M855A1 on a no body armor target at 600 meters vs the 7.62 x 51 M118LR?

I'd love to get my hands on some of the projectiles out of M855a1. There've been posts here from guys who've seen its effects on torsos and heads and stuff. Supposed to be pretty good at tissue damage.

[El Cid]

I'd love to get my hands on some of the projectiles out of M855a1. There've been posts here from guys who've seen its effects on torsos and heads and stuff. Supposed to be pretty good at tissue damage.

Better than Brown Tip? Or the same? The guys I've trained under talked about how incredibly impressed they were with the Brown Tip overseas. Between their discussions and the results I had shooting through auto glass a couple months ago, I'm planning to keep the 70gr TSX as my go-to 5.56. I'll still have some 77gr SMK for long range fun - though the nearest range where I can shoot beyond 100 yards is a couple hours away.

As for 7.62, in keeping with my earlier comments in this thread, I'm stocking up on 168gr TSX as my standard ammunition. It did well shooting through the vehicles in class, and based on how all the other Barnes X bullets do I'm confident it will meet my needs. I still have some 175gr - but again, shooting longer distances is the exception for me.

[markm]

Better than Brown Tip? Or the same? The guys I've trained under talked about how incredibly impressed they were with the Brown Tip overseas.

The comments I read didn't mention any comparison to brown tip ammo.

[C-grunt]

When any of the rounds perform as they should I doubt you are going to notice a difference. Even the lowly M855 really messes people up when it frags. Ive seen it remove large parts of insurgents heads.

[TehLlama]

The comments I read didn't mention any comparison to brown tip ammo.

I've seen positive mentions of performance for M855A1, and I've seen comparison (which are usually outright damning towards the M855A1 project as a whole), but I've never encountered both positive comments on the 855A1 projectile and a comparison of that projectile against anything else. Even the green tip to A1 doesn't show a favorable comparison that can't be largely explained by the increased case pressure from running the bullet harder.

What I literally spent three hours of last night pondering in lieu of sleeping would still constitute considerable thread drift, so I'll tack up a new thread just for that - you'll probably know which one that is when you see it.

[jerrysimons]

Better than Brown Tip? Or the same? The guys I've trained under talked about how incredibly impressed they were with the Brown Tip overseas. Between their discussions and the results I had shooting through auto glass a couple months ago, I'm planning to keep the 70gr TSX as my go-to 5.56. I'll still have some 77gr SMK for long range fun - though the nearest range where I can shoot beyond 100 yards is a couple hours away.

As for 7.62, in keeping with my earlier comments in this thread, I'm stocking up on 168gr TSX as my standard ammunition. It did well shooting through the vehicles in class, and based on how all the other Barnes X bullets do I'm confident it will meet my needs. I still have some 175gr - but again, shooting longer distances is the exception for me.

Where are you finding 70gr TSX in 5.56? As far as I know SSA were the only ones making factory 5.56 70gr TSX commercially available and they unfortunately discontinued it. I havn't been able to find it anywhere. Ted Nugent Ammo has a .223 70gr TSX load. I have basically settled on Black Hill's special 50gr TSX 5.56 for defense since I don't necessarily need the lower velocity threshold of the 70gr either for long range engagement or because of a short barrel.

What barrier blind 7.62/.308 rounds are you guys using? How does A-max stack up?

[El Cid]

Where are you finding 70gr TSX in 5.56? As far as I know SSA were the only ones making factory 5.56 70gr TSX commercially available and they unfortunately discontinued it. I havn't been able to find it anywhere. Ted Nugent Ammo has a .223 70gr TSX load. I have basically settled on Black Hill's special 50gr TSX 5.56 for defense since I don't necessarily need the lower velocity threshold of the 70gr either for long range engagement or because of a short barrel.

What barrier blind 7.62/.308 rounds are you guys using? How does A-max stack up?
There are still a couple options. Asym offers it and so does Southwest Ammuniton.
http://www.southwestammunition.com/mobile/Product.aspx?id=37589

As for other barrier blind loads, the 62 gr TBBC is good inside 100yards. The exposed lead tip seems to be causing accuracy to significantly drop off beyond that.

[MorphCross]

There are still a couple options. Asym offers it and so does Southwest Ammuniton.

The distinction is .223 pressure vs. 5.56x45 NATO pressure. Asym manufactures a load at .223 Remington pressure and jerrysimons was specifically asking about one loaded to 5.56 pressure.

[El Cid]

The distinction is .223 pressure vs. 5.56x45 NATO pressure. Asym manufactures a load at .223 Remington pressure and jerrysimons was specifically asking about one loaded to 5.56 pressure.

I didn't make that distinction, but if that's the case then he will simply need to click on the link I provided.

[viper3colt]

My take on this is the following-
CQB in a urban environment with engagement under 200 meters. No vehicle threats, wood structures and over penetration a concern then its 5.56. Supply is by foot or patrol without vehicle support.
Open Rural areas, with large wild life (bears/ big cats) or vehicle threats. Operating with vehicles, mounted movement and supply is vehicle born then its .308.
The 6.8 Spc is a general purpose round which falls in between that could do it all, but costs the same as .308 which is why I have focused more with my .308 SCAR then my PRI lately.
I have 5.56/6.8/.308 semi-autos available that I own. In 2004 when I handled the XM8 and there was talk about it being chambered in 6.8 SPC i thought wow the Army is finally getting it. Nope, spent the money on the 855A1 and new barrels instead (twice the cost from my understanding) and ten years later still arguing on a M4 replacement. With that all said, if forced in a corner and had to go with only one it (XM8 in 6.8 not available) it would be a .308 SCAR.
My 2 cents.

[JediGuy]

I am a big fan of 308, but appreciate the handiness of a well executed 5.56.

5.56- 11.5-12.5; 200 & in, optimized for close work.
300- 9.5; suppressed badassery
308- 14.5-16, General Purpose

@Failure2Stop
Ten years later, is this still where you land?