223 round

Does anyone know if the 223 round in an m16 was designed to tumble or if it was just a bonus . sorry if this is a stupid question

Original american 5.56 round was designed to tumble, but it's penetration was not good enough against body armor, so they changed it to SS109 round that doesn't tumble, but has good penetration (and reduced effect on un-armored targets)

Just to clarify, when you refer to tumble, you do mean during penetration, as opposed to tumbling in flight, correct?

the origanal .223 was designed to explode as a holow point the tumbaling was just an effect of the adaption of front heavy FMJ's. i do beleve the 109 did improve it alowing for multaple target penatrations such as through sevral people or a vehical. if a bullet would tumble in flight it would b as worthless as tits on a bore for acuracy.

A projetile's propensity to tumble is a product of it's diameter to long axis length.

A couple of fun sites for terminal ballistics:

www.bobtuley.com...

www.firearmstactical.com...

And check out this thread:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

The 5.56mm gets it's large wound from fragmentation rather then tumbling. Most rifle rounds tumble inside flesh.

Bullets find it hard to stay "pointy end first" in soggy things, the 5.56mm (.223 Rem is almost the same thing) is no exception but as has been stated it relies on fragmentation (usually at the canellure) for its primary wounding effect in FMJ. With a good JHP (which expand not "explode") it is even more devastating.

Some bullet designs (5.45mm for example) promote tumbling by having an air space in the bullet tip under the jacket.

What with all the fuss about 6.5mm Grendel and 6.8mm SPC it's easy to overlook just what a devastating wound 5.56mm can cause when you have a nice long FMJ bullet (it breaks much more easily in Mk 262 Mod 0 and Mod 1 configurations) fired through a 20 inch barrel.

The 5.56mm at decent velocitys tend to break up on penetration. When they are a bit slower they tend to tumble after impact. This is less noticable on the SS109, as it is a bit heavier and less prone to tumble.

An interesting point to note is that short barrels like those on the CAR15/M4 don't allow the round to break up properly after more than about 100m, while a decent barrel like the M16 or SA80 will still allow this at up to about 300m. This goes a long way to explaining the poor combat reports regarding stopping power from US forces in Somalia/Afgan/Iraq, as many of the units fielding these reports use M4s. You tend not to hear these reports from British troops as we don't use any weapons with short barrels. Time will tell when the SA80A2 Carbine comes into circulation. The FN Para Minimi that we use has a 14 inch barrel, but there tend to be more hits on target with this weapon, thereby increasing lethality.

Intresting what you post about the .223 or sometimes known as the 5.56mm NATO round. I own several rifles and one pistol in this round and do alot of reloading for it. While this caliber is ok..I much prefer calibers in the 30 or .308 range. I have always been a admirer of the Belgan FN rifle...used for so long by the British Army and others in .308 caliber.
Economy seems to be the main selling point of the .223 caliber to the militarys. Even here in the States...the .223 has become very popular and economic among varmit and target shooters. Newer bullet varietys and gunpowders have also helped this caliber among reloaders and target shooters/varmiters.

Of intrest to me in Iraq..is that in the citys and towns reports are coming out about house to house fighting where shotguns seem to be the prefered weapon. Rather ironic in a high speed era. However there is little dispute about a shotguns up close lethality especially in properly trained hands.
I was also told an intrersting story by WW2 veterans. These Yanks told me that in the house to house fighting in the smaller French towns after coming ashore after D- day.. the soldiers found their M1 Garands wanting for this type of struggle. Those who could turned them in for the Thompson sub machine gun or these M3 type Grease Guns. THey told me what many of the farm boys and hunters among them wanted was a shotgun for this type of house to house work but the paper cartridges of those days would be questionable in very bad weather. The plastic cases today seems to have solved most of those handicaps.
It is just a bit ironic to me that in this day of high speed, high tech that the shotgun/smoothbore would be coming back or in demand.

Thanks Paddy,

Orangetom

I think you are all wrong on the NATO 5.56mm round, when I was serving in the British Army our Military training instructor (MTI) told us of how the 5.56mm round was developed.
It was developed he told us to replace the old 7.76mm because the 5.56mm had a slightly higher muzzle velocity (in the SA80L1 it was 814 mps), and secondly it was to wound and maim instead of killing outright as the 7.76mm mostly did, as the thinking was if it wounded a man instead of killing him it would take at least one man off the battlefield to evacuate him.
It was a psychological thing,that if a man was wounded and screaming then someone would go and help him but if a man was killed thus being quiet then that extra man would keep going forward.

You really need to think your post throught alot more carefully. What good is a .223 or 5.56mm round and such high velocity and the capability to cause injury ..and tie up two people ................against a suicide bomber???
Did they explain that one to you in basic training??? Which has the bigger psychological effect a suicide bomber or a wounded man and the man needed to carry them off the field??
Velocity is not everything ..I am sorry to tell you ..even in long range shooting velocity is not everything but it does have a effect on flat trajectorys not necessarily on energy delivered on impact.

My olde fashioned black powder in .50 caliber delivers a very large amount of energy on impact with a simple lead maxiball..in the 300 grain range. New modern bullets are out for this 50 caliber in jacketed sabot rounds...still a large impact and huge energy amounts delivered. This is not a high velocity round.
The modern shotgun ..with lead slugs delivers huge amounts of energy on impact also ..without high velocity.

I hope you get the point. Also accuracy too is not always due to velocity per se..

If you can put down a suicide bomber ...before they detonate you need a bullet which can do the job ..with one shot...accurately. This means stopping power or very accurate bullet placement....or both. I am not sure in most hands...the .223 is suited for this.

.50 Beowulf or such maybe....

Thanks,
Orangetom

Alien DNA

You're correct on the effect of the rounds but not the reason for adoption.

Post WW2 the UK developed the 'ideal' round 7 x 43mm and the ideal gun the EM2

When the decision for NATO standardisation was made the US insisted the standard should be 7.62 x 51mm (308 Win) for economic / political reasons. The EM2 couldn't be rechambered so it was dropped and with no time to develop a new weapon the UK bought the FN FAL (SLR).

Once the US doctrine changed (partly due to Vietnam) they adopted 5.56mm as the standard and NATO had two standard calibres.

world.guns.ru...

(includes interesting ballsitics table showing comparisons between the two NATO rounds and the 7x43)

That ammunition you post the 7mm X 43 round for the British EM2 rifle seems to be similar in design to the 6.8mmx43 round or sometimes called the 6.8spc round.
There is also a 6.5 grendel round being experimented with in certain AR type rifles. This too seems to follow the principle of the 7mm X 43 ammunition of the EM2 rifle. Intresting to me that in these days of high tech the olde lessons seem to be coming back.
Looking this up further on web sites the 6.5mm Grendel seems to be similar in design to this 7mm X 43 round. These new rounds coming out because they find the .223 wanting in certain applications.

Thanks,
Orangetom

Hi

I agree the similarities with the 6.8 are startling.

Perhaps it shows that troops & weapons developer, left alone, will find ideal solutions but politicians & economists will do their best to enforce value solutions?

Cheers

S

Originally posted by Strangerous...
Perhaps it shows that troops & weapons developer, left alone, will find ideal solutions but politicians & economists will do their best to enforce value solutions?...

The best solution solution INCORPORATES the ideals of opeators AND the views of politicians and economists

[edit on 17/2/2006 by Lonestar24]

I got to musing on this topic line about the .223 caliber round. While it has undergone changes over the years to make it more effecient among some people ..it is still lacking in effectivness.

Further proof of this is in that I own a Thompson Contender in .223 caliber with a 14 inch barrel. This handgun with this barrel length makes for a clean powder burn..very little residual burn left in the barrel after each shot unlike the other caliber/barrel have ...35 Remington which leaves unburned powder in the barrel.
Musing further on the .223 caliber in this handgun...many wildcatters like the cartridge at this barrel length but they want more power delivered on target. Many of them have as wildcatters have designed .223 cases necked up to 6mm and 7mm for hunting purposes. For example the 7mmTCU. These new wildcat calibers are able to deliver more power on impact ..than the standard .223.
Designers have taken this further with the 6.8mm and 6.5mm calibers. My opinion is that these would also make great hunting calibers simply for the ability to deliver energy on impact without horrendous recoil of the magnums. Women hunters or those not of large stature would like this caliber in a hunting rifle.

The Thompson Condender or Encore pistols can handle this caliber easily.

Thanks,
Orangetom