View Full Version : Are MG prices dropping?
I've always wanted to purchase some sort of belt fed machine gun. I'm wondering if, in this economy, are prices on MGs dropping? Is now a good time to think about picking one up?
Thoughts/speculations?
Business_Casual
07-07-09, 12:11
Any time you introduce an artificial condition to a market, prices will not reflect rational market conditions.
To speculate that prices will drop while demand increases, would be foolish, in my opinion.
M_P
Obviously there is a fixed stock of them so they should go up in value in the long run.
I have no hard data, but just eyeballing subguns.com and other common MG sales boards over the last year or so, it "seems" like prices have at least flattened out and maybe even dropped a small amount, presumably due to the economy and MG owners losing their jobs, losing money on other investments, etc. and having to liquidate them.
i've sort of been looking at M16s recently, and it does seem like prices have dropped a little. demand for these things will never die, so they likely to stay prohibitively expensive for as long as they're legal.. however, just like ALL things gun related- people did a lot of buying they couldn't afford in the last year, and are trying to sell. gun broker is flooded with all the stuff you couldnt find in the last year, and nobody is buying at inflated prices. this means prices are going to fall- on everything. the people that bought m16s and mp5s and so forth are in no better shape than anyone else, and those prices will fall, too, as people desperately try to avoid forclosure. in fact, as i type this, seems to me machineguns just might go down substantially- people who could afford a $15k m16 a few months ago aren't elligeable for the Obamanation's forclosure prevention program, most likely.
just might be gettin me a m16 sometime soon... :)
20k for an mp5 and mp5k...... :( I'd settle for a good semi version.
I've never quite understood why those guns command such prices. There seem to be tons of them for sale all the time, they've been around as long as the M16 so there ought to be plenty of them around, and they are basically overgrown pistols.
I've never quite understood why those guns command such prices. There seem to be tons of them for sale all the time, they've been around as long as the M16 so there ought to be plenty of them around, and they are basically overgrown pistols.
i'm not really into the MP5 either.. i put a few magazines through one a few months ago and wasn't really impressed. in fairness, a few magazines sure as shit isn't enough to conclude anything, but i don't have any complaints about an FA M4... so why pay more for something that may or may not give me jollies?
i found muzzle control to be a pain in the ass, and kept mentally/reflexively reaching for a VFG that wasn't there.. didn't care for the LOP, and, naturally, the controls were alien to me. altogether, i'd much rather pay half as much for an M4/M16. ammo sure is cheaper, though.
Sex appeal?
there's that- but a full auto commando is plenty sexy for me.
TheGreenRanger24
07-07-09, 16:53
I've never quite understood why those guns command such prices. There seem to be tons of them for sale all the time, they've been around as long as the M16 so there ought to be plenty of them around, and they are basically overgrown pistols.
Cheaper ammo? Maybe it's just the whole appeal of having a SWAT/Operator weapon. WooHoo! Wannabe mall-ninjas and their toys! :D
If I could afford a good full-auto lower I'd be all over it. I can't be a true Mall Ninja until I have one to go with the rest of my kit.
TheGreenRanger24
07-07-09, 17:22
Well, let's be honest here. Who here, that isn't issued one, has a need for a full auto weapon.
We could follow that swat operator wannabe mall ninja logic down to body armor, pistols, ar 15s, oakleys, and crew cuts.
I want it cause I want it. I find them enjoyable to shoot and generally cheap to feed. I don't believe mall-ninja wannabe fits the description of my desire. :confused:
There's absolutely nothing wrong with wanting an mg of one type or another "just because." If you can afford it and want it, buy one. I just meant that someone might want an MP5 because the "cool special ops guys" have 'em, so I want one too. Nothing wrong with that either. :o
There's absolutely nothing wrong with wanting an mg of one type or another "just because." If you can afford it and want it, buy one. I just meant that someone might want an MP5 because the "cool special ops guys" have 'em, so I want one too. Nothing wrong with that either. :o
i think the fact of the matter is this applies to absolutely everyone, to some degree or another. even the "cool special ops guys" themselves.
we all love HSLD gear.. it's damn fun.
i think i'm a pretty well-grounded and level-headed guy. i don't tell war-stories, i don't know what color the boathouse is at Hereford. but you should see me hunting- might as well be heading up the Nung to pay a visit to Col. Kurtz. why? it's fun. camo'd up, ammo'd up, enough food to last a week, 20 miles from the nearest road... with the intent to kill.
a buck.
would i take a FA M4 if i had one? sheeeit... would there be any other option, at that point?
The Dumb Gun Collector
07-07-09, 17:38
I think there has been a drop in the collectible firearms market in general. If you have money, there probably won't be a better time than now to pick up something NFA.
Mr.Goodtimes
07-07-09, 17:45
Well, let's be honest here. Who here, that isn't issued one, has a need for a full auto weapon.
not trying to derail this thread but....
the people do. the .gov can have em, so we should be able to as well. i believe that not being able to easily procure a full auto weapon is an infringement on my second amendment right.
I should be able to go down to my local gun store, and walk out with a fully automatic, suppressed, short barreled m16 w/ stand alone m203 and HE rounds with nothing more then a background check to make sure im not a felon.
why? because the power should be in the hands of the people.
i guess im a little radical ;)
not trying to derail this thread but....
the people do. the .gov can have em, so we should be able to as well. i believe that not being able to easily procure a full auto weapon is an infringement on my second amendment right.
I should be able to go down to my local gun store, and walk out with a fully automatic, suppressed, short barreled m16 w/ stand alone m203 and HE rounds with nothing more then a background check to make sure im not a felon.
why? because the power should be in the hands of the people.
i guess im a little radical ;)
yea, you are. furthermore, in my opinion, the background check itself is an infringement. that's a condition put upon a RIGHT- you must do this, or you get no guns! bullshit.
i'm not even opposed to "felons" owning guns. call me naive, call me a country boy who doesn't see what the city-streetz is like, but once you do your time, you need to get all your RIGHTS restored. if someone isn't safe enough to buy a gun, they're not safe enough to be on the street. if they're safe enough to be on the street, they're safe enough to own an arsenal of machineguns.
because.... get this.... if you're on the street, you can get a gun, and cant any laws keep that from happening.
rather than derail this mother any more, perhaps the conversation should be taken here: https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=33928
Mr.Goodtimes
07-07-09, 18:53
We are able to have them. Not arguing that at all. I was arguing the actual need. Personal defense against the actual dangers we face today warrant a need for a mg? That is my question. Is it nice to have? yes. Would it be effective against the threats today? Absolutely, in the hands of the trained. But there isn't a need. Get my point?
You can for the most part. Just sign some paperwork and wait for them to get around to you.
It is. They aren't illegal.
edit* This stemmed from another posters assumption that wanting one was mall-ninja territory so lets keep it in perspective. He explained himself. I want a mg to be clear.
i understand you can, i guess what i was getting at is that the process is a little difficult, and you cant own a new manufacture machine gun, which aparently are affordable.
20k for an mp5 and mp5k...... :( I'd settle for a good semi version.
Really??? Wow! I thought we had it bad down here in the Philippines... You can get one here brand new for 8K max.
You can even get a Daewoo K3 (Patterned after the M249) for a bit less...
TheGreenRanger24
07-07-09, 18:59
i understand you can, i guess what i was getting at is that the process is a little difficult, and you cant own a new manufacture machine gun, which aparently are affordable.
I've heard a LEO say that Police agencies can get new mg's for around $1,000. I know I would sure love to have a new Colt M4, HK 416, or MP5 for that price. That kind of price tag is a lot closer to what I can afford than $10-$20k.
Edited to add: For the record, I wasn't trying to stir the pot by my comment. If I could afford to, I would definitely have more tactical gear. Not necessarily because I really need such gear, but it'd be nice to have "just in case." Hopefully, I'll be a LEO by next year, so I technically could use such gear for my career FWIW.
Just curious so if you guys could just humor me one this... I see a lot of A1 type auto lowers and only a few newer ones(A2/A3?).
What are your laws regarding M16s?
From what I understand, older ones can be transferred to civis? So how do some get their hands one the newer ones like a auto Bushy lower, a Noveske or an HK?
Lastly, what are your laws regarding civis and US property marked Colts both old and new?
Gunz, bkb, Goodtimes, ZDL, you have all now been listed as enemies of the state by Eric Holder. Please get ready for a full cavity search.
Just curious so if you guys could just humor me one this... I see a lot of A1 type auto lowers and only a few newer ones(A2/A3?).
What are your laws regarding M16s?
From what I understand, older ones can be transferred to civis? So how do some get their hands one the newer ones like a auto Bushy lower, a Noveske or an HK?
Lastly, what are your laws regarding civis and US property marked Colts both old and new?
We can only own "registered, transferable" machinegun receivers built before 1986... anything new- noveske, bushmaster, KAC, etc, is either unobtainable or you have to get certification to have them as demonstration models... under the pretense that they exist to show government agencies your product.
We can only own "registered, transferable" machinegun receivers built before 1986... anything new- noveske, bushmaster, KAC, etc, is either unobtainable or you have to get certification to have them as demonstration models... under the pretense that they exist to show government agencies your product.
Thanks bkb! I guess from "registered, transferable", anything property marked is impossible to own... Pretty crazy to me esp since they just hand these out as aid or support to other countries.
I've always wondered if there is some back door way we could get the registry opened up again. Like attach it to some "gun safety" legislation kind of like how it became legal to buy ammo through the internet.
It would fit the Obama mindset of regerestering firearms since the ATF must approve and register the ownership of FA anyhow.
I've never quite understood why those guns command such prices.
Rule #1 of gun stupidity:
If it says HK on it, double the price.
I've always wondered if there is some back door way we could get the registry opened up again. Like attach it to some "gun safety" legislation kind of like how it became legal to buy ammo through the internet.
Never going to happen. The machinegun moratorium itself got passed as an amendment to the "Firearms Owners Protection Act" in 1986 that give us a safe harbor for transporting guns interstate if we pass through communist states like New Jersey where we would otherwise be breaking state law. It was added as a "compromise."
By the way, when was it ever NOT legal to buy ammo via the internet?
Rule #1 of gun stupidity:
If it says HK on it, double the price.
I've noticed that. It's part of the reason why I have never owned an HK - I'd cry if I dropped a $200 magazine and dented it. Well, that and the horror stories about getting parts and service from them.
HK makes good shit- its expensive, prohibitively, even.. but good.
i carried a USP45 for a couple years, put about 8,000 rounds through it.. LOVED that gun. its basically the only .45 i feel like i shot really well. and i didn't pay too much for it- got it on some distributer special for $600. when i started looking at going full-size again, i wanted another one- i'd pay $600, but not $850... so scratch that.
CarlosDJackal
07-09-09, 20:33
Well, let's be honest here. Who here, that isn't issued one, has a need for a full auto weapon...
The importance of "needing" something is relative to one's situation. Nobody really needs a spare tire until they get a flat.
I want a fully-automatic firearm (it's not a weapon) because I enjoy shooting F/A and I can still obtain one. Besides, waiting to obtain one until you are in a situation when you "need" one may be too late. JM2CW.
ZDL-I am going to need you to speak with my wife. I don't "need" an MG, but I do feel they make excellent investments and should be considered as a percentage of a portfolio. So, I need you to take the heat for me while I eventually enjoy the fun of the gun! Strictly for investment purposes, mind you.:p
ZDL-I am going to need you to speak with my wife. I don't "need" an MG, but I do feel they make excellent investments and should be considered as a percentage of a portfolio. So, I need you to take the heat for me while I eventually enjoy the fun of the gun! Strictly for investment purposes, mind you.:p
I agree! Investment and "insurance"!:D
dookie1481
07-13-09, 23:06
20k for an mp5 and mp5k...... :( I'd settle for a good semi version.
Saw an MP5SD locally for about 16K.
Jay
dookie1481
07-13-09, 23:10
yea, you are. furthermore, in my opinion, the background check itself is an infringement. that's a condition put upon a RIGHT- you must do this, or you get no guns! bullshit.
i'm not even opposed to "felons" owning guns. call me naive, call me a country boy who doesn't see what the city-streetz is like, but once you do your time, you need to get all your RIGHTS restored. if someone isn't safe enough to buy a gun, they're not safe enough to be on the street. if they're safe enough to be on the street, they're safe enough to own an arsenal of machineguns.
because.... get this.... if you're on the street, you can get a gun, and cant any laws keep that from happening.
rather than derail this mother any more, perhaps the conversation should be taken here: https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=33928
Felons get guns for cheaper than we do. Black market, yo.
Jay
I've never quite understood why those guns command such prices. There seem to be tons of them for sale all the time, they've been around as long as the M16 so there ought to be plenty of them around, and they are basically overgrown pistols.
A SMG is not supposed to be an assault rifle and it sure as hell ain't a pistol. Your statement is about like me dismissing the M-16 because I can't put it in my pocket like I can a Glock.
Assault rifles do things no SMG or handgun can do.
SMGs do things no assault rifle or handgun can do.
Handguns do things no assault rifle or SMG can do.
An experienced person knows what those things are and selects the most appropriate tool for the job at hand.
I think prices from private sellers have dipped a bit since people need money for other things. One guy I know of has sold off almost his entire collection of NFA stuff (SBR's, suppressors, and select fire guns). I've also seen some Class III shops actually seek to get a premium in this market especially in the months following the election. There's been a lot of activity with NFA transfers.
I've considered getting a few things but it's really hard for me to justify tying up $20K - $30K in select fire guns. Don't get me wrong, I really enjoy some of the NFA items but the select fire guns are relatively expensive. $12K-$13K for a grease gun (which have a slow rate of fire for a subgun but are fun) just stings. Perhaps if I had Warren Buffett's money I wouldn't care as much, but I don't so I do. -The thing I'm waiting to see is whether inflation will kick in for the regular economy and what it will do to the NFA market.
Mr.Goodtimes
07-21-09, 04:43
i dont know why you guys are so into these over priced so called "nfa" guns, especially when you can just convert your gun you already own :eek:
Steyr,
In your opinion when do you think it would be appropriate to use or employ an HK MP5 rather than an 11.5 or 12.5 inch M4 type weapon?
A pistol is almost always carried for convenience purposes and because walking around the local Walmart, bank, supermarket, whatever with an M4 across the back would be impractical and unwise.
A SMG is not supposed to be an assault rifle and it sure as hell ain't a pistol. Your statement is about like me dismissing the M-16 because I can't put it in my pocket like I can a Glock.
Assault rifles do things no SMG or handgun can do.
SMGs do things no assault rifle or handgun can do.
Handguns do things no assault rifle or SMG can do.
An experienced person knows what those things are and selects the most appropriate tool for the job at hand.
A SMG is not supposed to be an assault rifle and it sure as hell ain't a pistol. Your statement is about like me dismissing the M-16 because I can't put it in my pocket like I can a Glock.
Assault rifles do things no SMG or handgun can do.
SMGs do things no assault rifle or handgun can do.
Handguns do things no assault rifle or SMG can do.
An experienced person knows what those things are and selects the most appropriate tool for the job at hand.
Please enlighten us.
Other than suppressing, what does an MP5 do better than a Mk18 or similar short-barreled, rifle caliber carbine? I can think of a bunch of things that the Mk18 does a lot better than the MP5.
The Dumb Gun Collector
07-21-09, 20:50
Because the MP5 is so handy and is easily suppressed Ken Hackathorn told me he thought it was much more useful in a lot of CQB environments where shorty .223s are now more fashionable. He called it "superbowl syndrome."
Greg,
That may be. However when one looks at the cost of an MP5 to that of a quality M4 and the fact that 9MM overpentrates more than 5.56 (CQB generally is an urban environment) and the fact that an M4 can be suppressed as well, although it's louder the M4 seems to make more sense.
Because the MP5 is so handy and is easily suppressed Ken Hackathorn told me he thought it was much more useful in a lot of CQB environments where shorty .223s are now more fashionable. He called it "superbowl syndrome."
Greg,
That may be. However when one looks at the cost of an MP5 to that of a quality M4 and the fact that 9MM overpentrates more than 5.56 (CQB generally is an urban environment) and the fact that an M4 can be suppressed as well, although it's louder the M4 seems to make more sense.
Not to mention:
1. Superior wound ballistics
2. Ability to penetrate soft armor (which can be a negative as well)
3. Greater effective range if required
4. Better ergonomics/ease of manipulation
Please enlighten us.
Other than suppressing, what does an MP5 do better than a Mk18 or similar short-barreled, rifle caliber carbine? I can think of a bunch of things that the Mk18 does a lot better than the MP5.
Well better suppression is one.
And despite the FBI "materials test" in the real world 5.56 has much greater penetration than 9mm so if you had to pick out the "bad guys" in a room full of friendlies 9mm is less risky to bystanders. Conversely if you 'wanted' better penetration the reverse is true.
The MP5 has BB gun recoil (not the that 5.56 kicks a LOT but there is a difference) so it is better at rapid follow up shots and rapid engagement of multiple targets. Also the MP5 in full auto is far more controllable.
The MP5 is also a lighter platform in terms of weight.
And while it isn't usually a factory, you can carry more ammo in terms of weight. But in nearly every case where you are gonna take a "long walk" you will want a longer distance weapon than the MP5.
I think in terms of hostage rescue (unless they are wearing armor) and most home defense scenarios (which can sometimes turn into hostage rescue) the MP5 or a similar SMG or pistol caliber carbine has distinct advantages over the M4 or a similar 5.56 carbine.
So while a M4 is a better "jack of all trades" tool (which is why our guys aren't issued MP5s as a primary weapon) the MP5 remains a better "mission specific" tool for certain scenarios.
Greg,
That may be. However when one looks at the cost of an MP5 to that of a quality M4 and the fact that 9MM overpentrates more than 5.56 (CQB generally is an urban environment) and the fact that an M4 can be suppressed as well, although it's louder the M4 seems to make more sense.
The MP5 is about the same price as the M4, unless we are talking about "transferables." And the FBI materials test is the ONLY test I've seen where 9mm over penetrates 5.56 and I wonder if the tests were conducted to produce such a result so the FBI could switch from the MP5 to the M4.
In every "real world" example I've seen 5.56 dramatically over penetrates 9mm. Try it yourself.
Mr.Goodtimes
07-22-09, 14:37
im no expert here but, in all the tests ive seen, if your looking for a very low penetrating round, i cant think of a much better option then the 55gr TAP loads. That round appears to pretty much hit a target and then virtually explode at VERY shallow levels of penetration. I dont feel like digging up the thread but, im gonna say it starts to fragment rapidly around 5in of penetration. I dont know of any 9mm rounds that will do this. Perhaps some of the pre fragmented rounds?
im no expert here but, in all the tests ive seen, if your looking for a very low penetrating round, i cant think of a much better option then the 55gr TAP loads. That round appears to pretty much hit a target and then virtually explode at VERY shallow levels of penetration. I dont feel like digging up the thread but, im gonna say it starts to fragment rapidly around 5in of penetration. I dont know of any 9mm rounds that will do this. Perhaps some of the pre fragmented rounds?
I'm talking about regular old 55 gr. LC vs. 115 gr. 9mm Luger.
But don't take my word for it, make a basic rack to hold 10 2x4s and shoot them with both and see what happens.
the_1iviper
07-22-09, 18:26
I'm talking about regular old 55 gr. LC vs. 115 gr. 9mm Luger.
But don't take my word for it, make a basic rack to hold 10 2x4s and shoot them with both and see what happens.
there was a show on a couple of weeks ago,best defense i think,that did exactly that.they built 4 "walls" with a 2x4 frame and 2 pieces of 1/2" drywall per wall,just like in your house,spaced them about 10' apart and then shot through them from about 20ft from the first wall.9mm and .45acp handguns and .223 55grn. and 12 ga. 00 buck.9mm was the worst round for penetration.the .223 fared the best i believe for penetration through the walls.
most walls are just drywall,not 2x4's.the chances of hitting a 2x4 are pretty small actually.penetration into 10 2x4's stacked back to back will be different than penetration through drywall.
YMMV :)
http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot1.htm
We then replaced the sheetrock with something tougher, 3/4 inch Ponderosa Pine boards.
9MM JHP (Federal) - 8 boards, bounced off 9th.
Twelve pine boards will not stop a .223 round.
http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot1.htm
We then replaced the sheetrock with something tougher, 3/4 inch Ponderosa Pine boards.
9MM JHP (Federal) - 8 boards, bounced off 9th.
Twelve pine boards will not stop a .223 round.
How many people have walls made of pine boards?
Also, more importantly, how much wounding ability did each bullet retain after penetrating 1, 2, 3, etc. boards? The important difference between them is how much energy they lose by going through barriers. 5.56mm consistently loses much more energy even after passing through very "weak" barriers like glass, sheetrock, etc.
In other words, if you want to do a valid test you need to put some ballistic gelatin on the other side of the barriers.
How many people have walls made of pine boards?
Also, more importantly, how much wounding ability did each bullet retain after penetrating 1, 2, 3, etc. boards? The important difference between them is how much energy they lose by going through barriers. 5.56mm consistently loses much more energy even after passing through very "weak" barriers like glass, sheetrock, etc.
In other words, if you want to do a valid test you need to put some ballistic gelatin on the other side of the barriers.
Well after passing through 12 "wood barriers" the 5.56 still had enough energy to continue, the 9mm had lost energy after the 8th.
Some people will argue anything no matter what evidence is provided. I know it conflicts with preferred popular belief. But that is the reality, the .223 RIFLE ROUND has for more energy than the 9mm HANDGUN ROUND.
The Remington Express 55 gr. 5.56 is 939 foot pounds at 100 yards, The Remington Golden Saber 9mm is 287 foot pounds at 100 yards. A 9mm 115 gr. round will have 266 foot pounds at 100 yards.
The 9mm will ALWAYS have significantly lower energy levels than the 5.56 in sheet rock, wood, human bodies and ballistic gelatin.
That is because one is a RIFLE ROUND and the other is a HANDGUN ROUND.
http://billstclair.com/energy.html
Well after passing through 12 "wood barriers" the 5.56 still had enough energy to continue, the 9mm had lost energy after the 8th.
Some people will argue anything no matter what evidence is provided. I know it conflicts with preferred popular belief. But that is the reality, the .223 RIFLE ROUND has for more energy than the 9mm HANDGUN ROUND.
The Remington Express 55 gr. 5.56 is 939 foot pounds at 100 yards, The Remington Golden Saber 9mm is 287 foot pounds at 100 yards. A 9mm 115 gr. round will have 266 foot pounds at 100 yards.
The 9mm will ALWAYS have significantly lower energy levels than the 5.56 in sheet rock, wood, human bodies and ballistic gelatin.
That is because one is a RIFLE ROUND and the other is a HANDGUN ROUND.
Your "evidence" doesn't prove anything other than ability to penetrate a specific barrier material. It tells us nothing about how the bullets behave after passing through. You can set up all sorts of impressive demonstrations where a very high velocity rifle bullet penetrates a steel plate that will stop a pistol bullet, yet that "impressive" rifle bullet lacks the sectional density to reliably penetrate and incapacitate in tissue.
The reason why the "preferred popular belief" is "preferred" and "popular" is because the tests that form the basis for these conclusions actually looked at the wounding ability of the projectile after it passes through the barrier - not just how many barriers it can go through before it stops.
Most 5.56mm rifle rounds have terrible terminal performance after passing through any kind of barrier, even a thin piece of auto glass. They fragment easily, flatten, lose velocity rapidly, and generally exhibit poor penetration after passing through most barriers. 9mm pistol rounds consistently perform better in these tests (unless specific, barrier-blind 5.56mm bullets are used). How can you claim that the 9mm is safer with respect to bystanders on the other side of a house wall when it retains more wounding ability after passing through those barriers?
Your "evidence" doesn't prove anything other than ability to penetrate a specific barrier material. It tells us nothing about how the bullets behave after passing through. You can set up all sorts of impressive demonstrations where a very high velocity rifle bullet penetrates a steel plate that will stop a pistol bullet, yet that "impressive" rifle bullet lacks the sectional density to reliably penetrate and incapacitate in tissue.
The reason why the "preferred popular belief" is "preferred" and "popular" is because the tests that form the basis for these conclusions actually looked at the wounding ability of the projectile after it passes through the barrier - not just how many barriers it can go through before it stops.
Most 5.56mm rifle rounds have terrible terminal performance after passing through any kind of barrier, even a thin piece of auto glass. They fragment easily, flatten, lose velocity rapidly, and generally exhibit poor penetration after passing through most barriers. 9mm pistol rounds consistently perform better in these tests (unless specific, barrier-blind 5.56mm bullets are used). How can you claim that the 9mm is safer with respect to bystanders on the other side of a house wall when it retains more wounding ability after passing through those barriers?
[sigh]
Energy is energy and it doesn't matter what the projectile is passing through. The reality is when the .223 round leaves the firearm is has approximately THREE TIMES as much energy as a 9mm round. So regardless of the medium there is THREE TIMES as much energy to be dissipated. This is true in wood, sheet rock, ballistic gelatin and people.
And that is because one is a high energy rifle round and one is a low energy pistol round. This is also what makes the 5.56 terribly effective at 100 yards and the 9mm not so effective at 100 yards. If the 9mm was the high energy super penetrator some folks are trying to make it out to be we'd be using MP5s as our primary military rifle.
But the desire to use 5.56 in CQB range is so strong it has made some people less intelligent and unable to see things like the basic energy difference between a rifle round and a handgun round.
perhaps wounding potential and penetration dont correlate as much as you think, though- Aug.
with the 556 we're generally talking 55-77gr, and with a 9emem we're generally talking 115-147gr... we're also talking the difference between a big round slug of soft metal versus a light weight spitzer that's rapidly fragmenting... i think i'd rather get slapped with a destabilized and/or fragmenting 55-77gr than get punched with a mostly-intact 115-147 ball of lead.
all speculation on my part, though. i know little about terminal ballistics, and even less about terminal ballistics after intermediate barrier penetration. just seems logical, though.
F=MA; Force=Mass X Acceleration; It does figure into this debate.
Steyr,
We all have some opinions but tone down the pontificating a little. You say "handgun" as if it is a bad thing. Just remember that adding length adds muzzle velocity which means more penetration. As least as much as I am aware.
DocGKR- Would love to hear some of your wisdom on this matter.
perhaps wounding potential and penetration dont correlate as much as you think, though- Aug.
with the 556 we're generally talking 55-77gr, and with a 9emem we're generally talking 115-147gr... we're also talking the difference between a big round slug of soft metal versus a light weight spitzer that's rapidly fragmenting... i think i'd rather get slapped with a destabilized and/or fragmenting 55-77gr than get punched with a mostly-intact 115-147 ball of lead.
all speculation on my part, though. i know little about terminal ballistics, and even less about terminal ballistics after intermediate barrier penetration. just seems logical, though.
I'm pretty sure given the fact that the "little round" zips through 12 boards and keeps going while the big 9mm is stopped at the 8th board. Seems like a practical demonstration of penetration to me.
But we are expected to believe that ballistic gelatin or human tissue dramatically changes the equation. It IS different, but it isn't dramatic enough to reverse things.
Steyr,
We all have some opinions but tone down the pontificating a little. You say "handgun" as if it is a bad thing. Just remember that adding length adds muzzle velocity which means more penetration. As least as much as I am aware.
DocGKR- Would love to hear some of your wisdom on this matter.
Not trying to pontificate, just starting to feel like a TOS debate. And I didn't say handgun as if it was a bad thing, I was pointing out that it is a different thing in terms of energy of the projectile.
I've been shooting stuff a long time (30+ years) with both 9mm and .223 so I'm of the opinion and belief that I am correct. This is based upon the fact that I have NEVER seen 9mm penetrate anything even close to what a .223 will do.
DocGKR- Would love to hear some of your wisdom on this matter.
I'd love to hear what he has to say as well given that much of what I've posted is based on things he's already said, for example:
"In addition, most 5.56 mm bullets are generally less effective when
intermediate barriers, such as walls, glass, and vehicles shield opponents--this is a significant consideration in urban combat."
Not trying to pontificate, just starting to feel like a TOS debate.
People on TOS are the type that rely on invalid backyard tests shooting plywood to make conclusions about wounding ability of bullets after penetrating barriers.
DocGKR had this to say about the "Box o Truth" tests in a recent post here:
"Actually the BOT "test" does not tell us anything about the potential damage a penetrating projectile might cause to a person on the other side of a wall within a house, as the BOT experimental model is incorrect to provide that data. One would have to build an interior wall replica, place tissue simulant material a set distance on the other side of the wall (depending on the expected distance a person might be positioned away from the far side of from the wall--be it 6 inches or 6 feet), then make the shot through the wall and into the tissue simulant. This will give usable data on the potential physiological damage a given projectile might cause after first passing through an intermediate wall barrier."
People on TOS are the type that rely on invalid backyard tests shooting plywood to make conclusions about wounding ability of bullets after penetrating barriers.
Well that was just one of many things I offered. Like I said, been shooting for a lot of years. This includes things like deer with the very same .223 round and small animals with 9mm.
Wanna know what happened every time? Every single time the .223 penetrated far more than 9mm. I have sometimes seen a .223 round exit a deer, in most cases the 9mm handgun round did not (despite the fact that the target animal was much smaller than a deer.)
But by all means continue with "people aren't made of wood", the "box of truth" proves nothing about penetration characteristics of a given round and feel free to add "animals aren't the same as ballistic gelatin."
I don't know everything but I know a few things, and in addition to the difference between .223 and 9mm I know when I'm wasting my time explaining things to somebody who has already decided what is what.
Roger that, which is why I mentioned it. I would tend to believe him more than the "box of truth".
I'd love to hear what he has to say as well given that much of what I've posted is based on things he's already said, for example:
"In addition, most 5.56 mm bullets are generally less effective when
intermediate barriers, such as walls, glass, and vehicles shield opponents--this is a significant consideration in urban combat."
Roger that, which is why I mentioned it. I would tend to believe him more than the "box of truth".
Not trying to quibble here, but I don't understand why you would accept one "real world" experience but discount another "real world" experience.
While neither is scientific or conducted under laboratory conditions, it's not like the BOT is rigged to produce a specific outcome. It is nothing more than what happens when a given round is fired into a given medium.
And like most rounds, they behave differently according to the medium. And you guys are correct about things like windshield glass influencing rounds, but what I am saying is a 9mm with less energy would ALSO be influenced by the same windshield.
And so we are on the same page, I completely understand that while the 5.56 has greater energy it is also a lighter projectile than the 9mm. Also I fully understand it has a tendency to fragment (the 55 gr. anyway) which of course dramatically changes it's capacity to penetrate a given medium. All I am saying is the round doesn't 'always' fragment and in my experience still is a greater penetrator than 9mm in everything I've seen.
Now I understand that there is special purpose ammo such as TAP which is designed specifically for low penetration, but they also make 9mm TAP and most 9mm JHP still penetrate far less than .223 in most mediums. The only medium that produces great penetration is wood because it tends to fill the JHP cavity and causes it to not expand. But wood also prevents 55 gr. 5.56 from fragmenting and results in dramatic penetration as well.
And this is all I'm trying to get across before somebody makes the conscious decision to use 5.56 as a home defense round. I'm not saying it is a bad HD round, I'm just saying you have to keep in mind that it probably won't stop going through things like 2x4s, sheet rock and bad guys as soon as a 9mm JHP round will.
Now for anything outside, especially when you need to take accurate shots at distances of 50m or more and need to hit with stopping energy the 9mm becomes a far less effective round for that job than the 5.56 round. But for HD or CQB, especially with a house full of friendlies the 9mm (or similar handgun round like .45) is a better tool for the job.
Now does that mean an AR loaded with TAP is a horrible tool for the job? Of course not, you could even use an AR with regular 55 gr. I'm just pointing out why some firearms might do the job better.
I think there has been a drop in the collectible firearms market in general. If you have money, there probably won't be a better time than now to pick up something NFA.
Actually not looking to buy an NFA item but sell one so I thought it time to revive this dead horse. Current thoughts re. NFA prices anyone, still a buyers market etc?
I have seen the MP5's go up around 1k this month. Closer to election the higher the prices go.
I still think it's a "buyers" market. I remember reading recently (I think in Small arms review?) that transfers for MG were dramaticly down over the last 12 months but that less expensive NFA items (SBRs, Supressors) were up 2 or 3 fold. The author suggested people were still interested in NFA but since $ is tight people had shifted to less expensive items.
MG are a luxury item and in this ecomomy there are less available buyers. There are still people out there with money (dealers and individuals) and something priced right will sell.
Yes dealers are snatching up MGs from cash strapped individuals. And will deal them out at higher prices when the economy gets better.
[QUOTE=TheGreenRanger24;405414]I've heard a LEO say that Police agencies can get new mg's for around $1,000. I know I would sure love to have a new Colt M4, HK 416, or MP5 for that price. That kind of price tag is a lot closer to what I can afford than $10-$20k.
QUOTE]
Our PD bought a complete FA lower for $250 last year! Wish it was that easy for the rest of us.
The customers that come into my friend's shop who are Machine gun guys...let's just say the economy doesn't really affect them as much as a regular working joe.
Some good current input, anyone else care to update with their views/observations?
Prices seem to have decreased slightly. Buyers market.
In looking at the upcoming election, it won't really matter whether Obama or Romney wins, they are both anti-gun. As such, I suspect gun prices will head upwards again.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.