I'm not asking this because I'm considering a long range .223 rifle. I have AR 15's that I love and tommorow I'm buying a 700P in .300WM. I'm just curious. I saw on the military channel that the US military, not sure if it was Army or Marines, were starting to use 18" and 24" barrel M16/AR15 platform rifles in .223 for medium distance sniping(500-650 yards). Now I know shot placement is everything, and that the military probably knows best about "stopping power", but how far out is the .223 effective on the body? I know animals are different, but maybe you guys that hunt with the .223 could have an input on this. I'm sure our military and LEO members might have some info here. Not sure why I'm so curios about this, I guess just because I never thought the military would do that. Thanks
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Military using the .223 long distances?
- Thread starter tanda10506
- Start date
Re: Military using the .223 long distances?
Look up the Mk12, using the 77gr bullet.
I have seen it shot to 800 yards <span style="font-style: italic">(sea level)</span> with decent success, in the mountains it will do it even better than at sea level.
Look up the Mk12, using the 77gr bullet.
I have seen it shot to 800 yards <span style="font-style: italic">(sea level)</span> with decent success, in the mountains it will do it even better than at sea level.
Re: Military using the .223 long distances?
What you're talking about are DMR guns- designated marksmen rifle. They aren't designed really for "sniping" but for accurate engagement at short-medium ranges (out to 600m). Army Marksmanship Unit (AMU) has build and contracted for build DMR guns for some units, but it is not standardized.
The idea, as I recall was to keep ammunition commonality for the squad- while the DMR guns are built to run Mk262 77gr ammunition, they can used standard M855 when the Mk262 runs out.
Don't confuse an SDM (squad designated marksmen) with a sniper. Depending on the training and the weapon/optic they receive, SDM typically are trained to deliver more accurate fire at ranges beyond what the normal soldier is trained. The training however more often than not, does not include dial on dope, use of dope or in depth discussion/instruction on mil/moa. For instance, the Army's "standard" would be for an SDM to have an ACOG mounted on either a DMR gun, or M4/M16A4. So you learn the BDC and wind hold estimation, they instruct on bullet drop and external ballistics, correct firing positions, spotting, things of that nature. They correct all of the stupidity placed in soldier's heads in basic training in regards to shooting.
Also, some special ops guys run accurized M4's/M16's for the same reason- more accurate fire and the ability to use the most commonly available ammunition carried by a us soldier. It is not out of some sort of outstanding performance never before seen in 5.56mm. It's just making the best out of it. Don't read too deep into it. We do not have any 5.56mm "sniper rifle's" type classified. At least not in the army.
What you're talking about are DMR guns- designated marksmen rifle. They aren't designed really for "sniping" but for accurate engagement at short-medium ranges (out to 600m). Army Marksmanship Unit (AMU) has build and contracted for build DMR guns for some units, but it is not standardized.
The idea, as I recall was to keep ammunition commonality for the squad- while the DMR guns are built to run Mk262 77gr ammunition, they can used standard M855 when the Mk262 runs out.
Don't confuse an SDM (squad designated marksmen) with a sniper. Depending on the training and the weapon/optic they receive, SDM typically are trained to deliver more accurate fire at ranges beyond what the normal soldier is trained. The training however more often than not, does not include dial on dope, use of dope or in depth discussion/instruction on mil/moa. For instance, the Army's "standard" would be for an SDM to have an ACOG mounted on either a DMR gun, or M4/M16A4. So you learn the BDC and wind hold estimation, they instruct on bullet drop and external ballistics, correct firing positions, spotting, things of that nature. They correct all of the stupidity placed in soldier's heads in basic training in regards to shooting.
Also, some special ops guys run accurized M4's/M16's for the same reason- more accurate fire and the ability to use the most commonly available ammunition carried by a us soldier. It is not out of some sort of outstanding performance never before seen in 5.56mm. It's just making the best out of it. Don't read too deep into it. We do not have any 5.56mm "sniper rifle's" type classified. At least not in the army.
Re: Military using the .223 long distances?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DP425</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What you're talking about are DMR guns- designated marksmen rifle. They aren't designed really for "sniping" but for accurate engagement at short-medium ranges (out to 600m). Army Marksmanship Unit (AMU) has build and contracted for build DMR guns for some units, but it is not standardized.
The idea, as I recall was to keep ammunition commonality for the squad- while the DMR guns are built to run Mk262 77gr ammunition, they can used standard M855 when the Mk262 runs out.
Don't confuse an SDM (squad designated marksmen) with a sniper. Depending on the training and the weapon/optic they receive, SDM typically are trained to deliver more accurate fire at ranges beyond what the normal soldier is trained. The training however more often than not, does not include dial on dope, use of dope or in depth discussion/instruction on mil/moa. For instance, the Army's "standard" would be for an SDM to have an ACOG mounted on either a DMR gun, or M4/M16A4. So you learn the BDC and wind hold estimation, they instruct on bullet drop and external ballistics, correct firing positions, spotting, things of that nature. They correct all of the stupidity placed in soldier's heads in basic training in regards to shooting.
Also, some special ops guys run accurized M4's/M16's for the same reason- more accurate fire and the ability to use the most commonly available ammunition carried by a us soldier. It is not out of some sort of outstanding performance never before seen in 5.56mm. It's just making the best out of it. Don't read too deep into it. We do not have any 5.56mm "sniper rifle's" type classified. At least not in the army. </div></div>
The show I was watching said it was given to "snipers" that were attatched to certain regiments. Seems like you are pretty knowledgeable on the subject though, and I know the TV is often wrong.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Look up the Mk12, using the 77gr bullet.
I have seen it shot to 800 yards <span style="font-style: italic">(sea level)</span> with decent success, in the mountains it will do it even better than at sea level. </div></div>
Now that you mentioned it I remember one of them being the MK12. And they were talking about the 77grain bullet. I know those rifles are accurate, I was more curious about the terminal effects of the .223 at say 650 yards.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DP425</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What you're talking about are DMR guns- designated marksmen rifle. They aren't designed really for "sniping" but for accurate engagement at short-medium ranges (out to 600m). Army Marksmanship Unit (AMU) has build and contracted for build DMR guns for some units, but it is not standardized.
The idea, as I recall was to keep ammunition commonality for the squad- while the DMR guns are built to run Mk262 77gr ammunition, they can used standard M855 when the Mk262 runs out.
Don't confuse an SDM (squad designated marksmen) with a sniper. Depending on the training and the weapon/optic they receive, SDM typically are trained to deliver more accurate fire at ranges beyond what the normal soldier is trained. The training however more often than not, does not include dial on dope, use of dope or in depth discussion/instruction on mil/moa. For instance, the Army's "standard" would be for an SDM to have an ACOG mounted on either a DMR gun, or M4/M16A4. So you learn the BDC and wind hold estimation, they instruct on bullet drop and external ballistics, correct firing positions, spotting, things of that nature. They correct all of the stupidity placed in soldier's heads in basic training in regards to shooting.
Also, some special ops guys run accurized M4's/M16's for the same reason- more accurate fire and the ability to use the most commonly available ammunition carried by a us soldier. It is not out of some sort of outstanding performance never before seen in 5.56mm. It's just making the best out of it. Don't read too deep into it. We do not have any 5.56mm "sniper rifle's" type classified. At least not in the army. </div></div>
The show I was watching said it was given to "snipers" that were attatched to certain regiments. Seems like you are pretty knowledgeable on the subject though, and I know the TV is often wrong.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Look up the Mk12, using the 77gr bullet.
I have seen it shot to 800 yards <span style="font-style: italic">(sea level)</span> with decent success, in the mountains it will do it even better than at sea level. </div></div>
Now that you mentioned it I remember one of them being the MK12. And they were talking about the 77grain bullet. I know those rifles are accurate, I was more curious about the terminal effects of the .223 at say 650 yards.
Re: Military using the .223 long distances?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: tanda10506</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DP425</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What you're talking about are DMR guns- designated marksmen rifle. They aren't designed really for "sniping" but for accurate engagement at short-medium ranges (out to 600m). Army Marksmanship Unit (AMU) has build and contracted for build DMR guns for some units, but it is not standardized.
The idea, as I recall was to keep ammunition commonality for the squad- while the DMR guns are built to run Mk262 77gr ammunition, they can used standard M855 when the Mk262 runs out.
Don't confuse an SDM (squad designated marksmen) with a sniper. Depending on the training and the weapon/optic they receive, SDM typically are trained to deliver more accurate fire at ranges beyond what the normal soldier is trained. The training however more often than not, does not include dial on dope, use of dope or in depth discussion/instruction on mil/moa. For instance, the Army's "standard" would be for an SDM to have an ACOG mounted on either a DMR gun, or M4/M16A4. So you learn the BDC and wind hold estimation, they instruct on bullet drop and external ballistics, correct firing positions, spotting, things of that nature. They correct all of the stupidity placed in soldier's heads in basic training in regards to shooting.
Also, some special ops guys run accurized M4's/M16's for the same reason- more accurate fire and the ability to use the most commonly available ammunition carried by a us soldier. It is not out of some sort of outstanding performance never before seen in 5.56mm. It's just making the best out of it. Don't read too deep into it. We do not have any 5.56mm "sniper rifle's" type classified. At least not in the army. </div></div>
The show I was watching said it was given to "snipers" that were attatched to certain regiments. Seems like you are pretty knowledgeable on the subject though, and I know the TV is often wrong.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Look up the Mk12, using the 77gr bullet.
I have seen it shot to 800 yards <span style="font-style: italic">(sea level)</span> with decent success, in the mountains it will do it even better than at sea level. </div></div>
Now that you mentioned it I remember one of them being the MK12. And they were talking about the 77grain bullet. I know those rifles are accurate, I was more curious about the terminal effects of the .223 at say 650 yards. </div></div>
Mk12 is a Navy type-classified (hence the Mk designation) DMR/SDM type rifle employed by SOCOM troops (navy, marines, army). Can serve sniper duty I suppose, but as far as I know they are generally employed in more of an SDM type function rather than conventional sniper. Doesn't sound like much of a difference between the two uses, but they are roles which while having much in common, also have many differences. Users in those career fields will generally be better trained than your run of the mill school house SDM course and the Mk12 usually sports a tactical scope rather than a battle optic
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: tanda10506</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DP425</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What you're talking about are DMR guns- designated marksmen rifle. They aren't designed really for "sniping" but for accurate engagement at short-medium ranges (out to 600m). Army Marksmanship Unit (AMU) has build and contracted for build DMR guns for some units, but it is not standardized.
The idea, as I recall was to keep ammunition commonality for the squad- while the DMR guns are built to run Mk262 77gr ammunition, they can used standard M855 when the Mk262 runs out.
Don't confuse an SDM (squad designated marksmen) with a sniper. Depending on the training and the weapon/optic they receive, SDM typically are trained to deliver more accurate fire at ranges beyond what the normal soldier is trained. The training however more often than not, does not include dial on dope, use of dope or in depth discussion/instruction on mil/moa. For instance, the Army's "standard" would be for an SDM to have an ACOG mounted on either a DMR gun, or M4/M16A4. So you learn the BDC and wind hold estimation, they instruct on bullet drop and external ballistics, correct firing positions, spotting, things of that nature. They correct all of the stupidity placed in soldier's heads in basic training in regards to shooting.
Also, some special ops guys run accurized M4's/M16's for the same reason- more accurate fire and the ability to use the most commonly available ammunition carried by a us soldier. It is not out of some sort of outstanding performance never before seen in 5.56mm. It's just making the best out of it. Don't read too deep into it. We do not have any 5.56mm "sniper rifle's" type classified. At least not in the army. </div></div>
The show I was watching said it was given to "snipers" that were attatched to certain regiments. Seems like you are pretty knowledgeable on the subject though, and I know the TV is often wrong.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Look up the Mk12, using the 77gr bullet.
I have seen it shot to 800 yards <span style="font-style: italic">(sea level)</span> with decent success, in the mountains it will do it even better than at sea level. </div></div>
Now that you mentioned it I remember one of them being the MK12. And they were talking about the 77grain bullet. I know those rifles are accurate, I was more curious about the terminal effects of the .223 at say 650 yards. </div></div>
Mk12 is a Navy type-classified (hence the Mk designation) DMR/SDM type rifle employed by SOCOM troops (navy, marines, army). Can serve sniper duty I suppose, but as far as I know they are generally employed in more of an SDM type function rather than conventional sniper. Doesn't sound like much of a difference between the two uses, but they are roles which while having much in common, also have many differences. Users in those career fields will generally be better trained than your run of the mill school house SDM course and the Mk12 usually sports a tactical scope rather than a battle optic
Re: Military using the .223 long distances?
The AMU puts out a traning DVD for DM available through CMP for under $10.00. It will give you a taste of the program.
The AMU puts out a traning DVD for DM available through CMP for under $10.00. It will give you a taste of the program.
Re: Military using the .223 long distances?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DP425</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What you're talking about are DMR guns- designated marksmen rifle. They aren't designed really for "sniping" but for accurate engagement at short-medium ranges (out to 600m). Army Marksmanship Unit (AMU) has build and contracted for build DMR guns for some units, but it is not standardized.
The idea, as I recall was to keep ammunition commonality for the squad- while the DMR guns are built to run Mk262 77gr ammunition, they can used standard M855 when the Mk262 runs out.
Don't confuse an SDM (squad designated marksmen) with a sniper. Depending on the training and the weapon/optic they receive, SDM typically are trained to deliver more accurate fire at ranges beyond what the normal soldier is trained. The training however more often than not, does not include dial on dope, use of dope or in depth discussion/instruction on mil/moa. For instance, the Army's "standard" would be for an SDM to have an ACOG mounted on either a DMR gun, or M4/M16A4. So you learn the BDC and wind hold estimation, they instruct on bullet drop and external ballistics, correct firing positions, spotting, things of that nature. They correct all of the stupidity placed in soldier's heads in basic training in regards to shooting.
Also, some special ops guys run accurized M4's/M16's for the same reason- more accurate fire and the ability to use the most commonly available ammunition carried by a us soldier. It is not out of some sort of outstanding performance never before seen in 5.56mm. It's just making the best out of it. Don't read too deep into it. We do not have any 5.56mm "sniper rifle's" type classified. At least not in the army. </div></div> On the money. I had MK262 Mod 0 and Mod 1 (if I remember correctly). Great stuff!
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DP425</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What you're talking about are DMR guns- designated marksmen rifle. They aren't designed really for "sniping" but for accurate engagement at short-medium ranges (out to 600m). Army Marksmanship Unit (AMU) has build and contracted for build DMR guns for some units, but it is not standardized.
The idea, as I recall was to keep ammunition commonality for the squad- while the DMR guns are built to run Mk262 77gr ammunition, they can used standard M855 when the Mk262 runs out.
Don't confuse an SDM (squad designated marksmen) with a sniper. Depending on the training and the weapon/optic they receive, SDM typically are trained to deliver more accurate fire at ranges beyond what the normal soldier is trained. The training however more often than not, does not include dial on dope, use of dope or in depth discussion/instruction on mil/moa. For instance, the Army's "standard" would be for an SDM to have an ACOG mounted on either a DMR gun, or M4/M16A4. So you learn the BDC and wind hold estimation, they instruct on bullet drop and external ballistics, correct firing positions, spotting, things of that nature. They correct all of the stupidity placed in soldier's heads in basic training in regards to shooting.
Also, some special ops guys run accurized M4's/M16's for the same reason- more accurate fire and the ability to use the most commonly available ammunition carried by a us soldier. It is not out of some sort of outstanding performance never before seen in 5.56mm. It's just making the best out of it. Don't read too deep into it. We do not have any 5.56mm "sniper rifle's" type classified. At least not in the army. </div></div> On the money. I had MK262 Mod 0 and Mod 1 (if I remember correctly). Great stuff!
Re: Military using the .223 long distances?
I've shoot 1000 yard matches with ARs,using mostly 80 GN SMKs. I have on occasion used my 2-300 yard 77 SMK load at 600 and 1000, though not as good as the 80s, I was supprised how well they did do.
There were occasions where the A1 using M-193 (55 gr ball) were used in SE Asia as a sniper system, getting confirms up to 700 yards.
I've shoot 1000 yard matches with ARs,using mostly 80 GN SMKs. I have on occasion used my 2-300 yard 77 SMK load at 600 and 1000, though not as good as the 80s, I was supprised how well they did do.
There were occasions where the A1 using M-193 (55 gr ball) were used in SE Asia as a sniper system, getting confirms up to 700 yards.
Re: Military using the .223 long distances?
It's correct to shoot a paper target, but for military, the 5.56 is poor in terminal effects.
In case of Afgha, if you shoot at 600-700m a "target" with a wet dress, the 556 do nothing, absolutly nothing.
US SF is studying a short AR in 308 (less than 14.5")with a 22" upper in a bagpack, more versatile!
In Europ, in France, we began to receive the HK417
In my opinion, the 5.56 is out of its limits
It's correct to shoot a paper target, but for military, the 5.56 is poor in terminal effects.
In case of Afgha, if you shoot at 600-700m a "target" with a wet dress, the 556 do nothing, absolutly nothing.
US SF is studying a short AR in 308 (less than 14.5")with a 22" upper in a bagpack, more versatile!
In Europ, in France, we began to receive the HK417
In my opinion, the 5.56 is out of its limits
Re: Military using the .223 long distances?
<object width="425" height="350"> <param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/7B9NkQldeu0"></param> <param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param> <embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/7B9NkQldeu0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"> </embed></object>
I hope this answers your question.
<object width="425" height="350"> <param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/7B9NkQldeu0"></param> <param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param> <embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/7B9NkQldeu0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"> </embed></object>
I hope this answers your question.
Re: Military using the .223 long distances?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Julien</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In case of Afgha, if you shoot at 600-700m a "target" with a wet dress, the 556 do nothing, absolutly nothing.</div></div>
Don't know WTH a wet dress is, but I keep 82gr Bergers supersonic past 1,000yds
and if they find your melon, they WILL do something <span style="font-style: italic">considerably</span> more than nothing!
Sure, more (.308/.338) is better at distance but let's not get carried away here.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Julien</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In case of Afgha, if you shoot at 600-700m a "target" with a wet dress, the 556 do nothing, absolutly nothing.</div></div>
Don't know WTH a wet dress is, but I keep 82gr Bergers supersonic past 1,000yds
and if they find your melon, they WILL do something <span style="font-style: italic">considerably</span> more than nothing!
Sure, more (.308/.338) is better at distance but let's not get carried away here.
Re: Military using the .223 long distances?
I don't know, but judging by the video that CK-32 posted, looks to me like the 223 hit that steel pretty hard.
It would lead me to believe that the 77 grn 223 would discourage bad behavier up to 700 yards, the purpose of the SDM Round.
I don't know, but judging by the video that CK-32 posted, looks to me like the 223 hit that steel pretty hard.
It would lead me to believe that the 77 grn 223 would discourage bad behavier up to 700 yards, the purpose of the SDM Round.
Re: Military using the .223 long distances?
I won't sit here and argue that the 5.56mm is a good substitute for 7.62. But it will still handle business out to 600. The problem is hitting the target- most army trigger pullers are not proficient enough to do that; not for lack of equipment. Vast majority of infantry units are running Elcan's or ACOG's, but unless they have attended SDM or the sniper section has spent a lot of time with them... the ability isn't there.
And I don't even want to think about how many times I've seen guys swear on their life they hit their target... nope... sorry. You didn't.
Would a different caliber perform better? Yes. Is it logical at this time to change calibers? No. The time to do that is between conflicts unless your current caliber is woefully inadequate. And the 5.56mm is doing okay- it still places us out of effective fire range of the enemy while they are still in range of us (barring 7.62x54 presence).
Almost everyone who argue's going back to 7.62/.308 have never carried 200 rounds 7.62 in loaded mags on their kit. It's heavy as hell and and Joe's already carry enough weight as is. Then the argument of "better caliber means less shots to take the enemy down so you can carry less ammo", True on lethality grounds, but when you factor in hit to miss ratio, it really does not matter if it takes 1 round or 4 rounds to kill....
Maybe a 6.5 offering once our conflicts slow down- a nice intermediate cartridge. But honestly I'd be shocked if we move away from 5.56mm- too costly of a transition.
I won't sit here and argue that the 5.56mm is a good substitute for 7.62. But it will still handle business out to 600. The problem is hitting the target- most army trigger pullers are not proficient enough to do that; not for lack of equipment. Vast majority of infantry units are running Elcan's or ACOG's, but unless they have attended SDM or the sniper section has spent a lot of time with them... the ability isn't there.
And I don't even want to think about how many times I've seen guys swear on their life they hit their target... nope... sorry. You didn't.
Would a different caliber perform better? Yes. Is it logical at this time to change calibers? No. The time to do that is between conflicts unless your current caliber is woefully inadequate. And the 5.56mm is doing okay- it still places us out of effective fire range of the enemy while they are still in range of us (barring 7.62x54 presence).
Almost everyone who argue's going back to 7.62/.308 have never carried 200 rounds 7.62 in loaded mags on their kit. It's heavy as hell and and Joe's already carry enough weight as is. Then the argument of "better caliber means less shots to take the enemy down so you can carry less ammo", True on lethality grounds, but when you factor in hit to miss ratio, it really does not matter if it takes 1 round or 4 rounds to kill....
Maybe a 6.5 offering once our conflicts slow down- a nice intermediate cartridge. But honestly I'd be shocked if we move away from 5.56mm- too costly of a transition.
Re: Military using the .223 long distances?
I found an article online several months ago about a guy that was shooting .223 a mile out west in the mountains somewhere. I've looked and can't find it anymore so I can't provide the link. In any case, he and his spotter had somehow estimated/calculated the speed/energy at distance and found that even out past 1500 yd or so, the bullet still had significantly more energy than some 40 gr .22 LR bullets at the muzzle. Getting shot in the head point blank with a .22 LR would not be a good time. I doubt anyone would tell you those are anywhere near optimal conditions for a .223 round, but that doesn't mean it isn't still potentially lethal with the right shot.
Edit - I found the link:
http://www.longrangehunting.com/articles/shooting-223-mile-1.php
I found an article online several months ago about a guy that was shooting .223 a mile out west in the mountains somewhere. I've looked and can't find it anymore so I can't provide the link. In any case, he and his spotter had somehow estimated/calculated the speed/energy at distance and found that even out past 1500 yd or so, the bullet still had significantly more energy than some 40 gr .22 LR bullets at the muzzle. Getting shot in the head point blank with a .22 LR would not be a good time. I doubt anyone would tell you those are anywhere near optimal conditions for a .223 round, but that doesn't mean it isn't still potentially lethal with the right shot.
Edit - I found the link:
http://www.longrangehunting.com/articles/shooting-223-mile-1.php
Re: Military using the .223 long distances?
I won't say thats impossible, but a 77gr SMK at 1 mile is good for about 770fps and 101fpe with a 144moa drop.... or 2642" And that is a MV of 2750. That is also just a little less energy than a 40gr .22LR (105-110 ish). Now with the bullets they mentioned, the numbers would be a bit better due to slightly better BC.
As with all things extreme- even though it may be POSSIBLE, it does not mean it is probable. And for use on humans, 5.56mm is generally considered to be running low on effectiveness beyond 600-700m
I won't say thats impossible, but a 77gr SMK at 1 mile is good for about 770fps and 101fpe with a 144moa drop.... or 2642" And that is a MV of 2750. That is also just a little less energy than a 40gr .22LR (105-110 ish). Now with the bullets they mentioned, the numbers would be a bit better due to slightly better BC.
As with all things extreme- even though it may be POSSIBLE, it does not mean it is probable. And for use on humans, 5.56mm is generally considered to be running low on effectiveness beyond 600-700m
Re: Military using the .223 long distances?
Don't get me wrong, I'm in complete agreement with you. I mainly just thought it was an interesting read. Having said that, I wouldn't want to get shot in the head point blank with a BB gun either. I ran some #s as well and came up with about what you did. As you pointed out, I think the real deal breaker is the drop, not necessarily the energy, particularly if you're talking a little closer (in the 800-1000 yd range). I'm guessing at 1500 or better, that's why he had to shim the crap out of his glass, max the elevation at 100 yd with tall board, and shoot down a valley in the mountains, all on a day with little wind (LOL). Kinda puts some limitations on the practical applications, but it's cool to see someone try it just to see if it could be done.
Don't get me wrong, I'm in complete agreement with you. I mainly just thought it was an interesting read. Having said that, I wouldn't want to get shot in the head point blank with a BB gun either. I ran some #s as well and came up with about what you did. As you pointed out, I think the real deal breaker is the drop, not necessarily the energy, particularly if you're talking a little closer (in the 800-1000 yd range). I'm guessing at 1500 or better, that's why he had to shim the crap out of his glass, max the elevation at 100 yd with tall board, and shoot down a valley in the mountains, all on a day with little wind (LOL). Kinda puts some limitations on the practical applications, but it's cool to see someone try it just to see if it could be done.
Re: Military using the .223 long distances?
I think if you start punching, even little tiny, holes in people at great distances you will have quite the physiological effect on the people. Even if you don't kill people outright history has shown that sniper attacks have a debilitating effect on an opposing force.
Just one man's opinion
I think if you start punching, even little tiny, holes in people at great distances you will have quite the physiological effect on the people. Even if you don't kill people outright history has shown that sniper attacks have a debilitating effect on an opposing force.
Just one man's opinion
Re: Military using the .223 long distances?
Ok so it sounds like if you had an accurate rifle and the skills to do so, it would get you by in a pinch, but not a recommended "sniper" round?
Ok so it sounds like if you had an accurate rifle and the skills to do so, it would get you by in a pinch, but not a recommended "sniper" round?
Re: Military using the .223 long distances?
Doctor- very true
Tanda- When you look for a good sniper round, you want lethality and range, consistency and accuracy. Would it work? Of course it would, but it has limitations that make it less than ideal. The Lethality factor drops considerably beyond 600-ish. It lacks good penetration. It does not give you a decisive range advantage over your enemy (there is an advantage but it's not that great). 5.56 comes a little short in lethality and range- and in an actual sniper role those are two area's which are VERY important.
Now, when you start talking law enforcement, some departments do run .223 and that would work just fine for a good number of their employments.
In either case, a choice to run with .223 over .308 in a sniper role is a compromise that IMO, generally is without benefit. Ultimately, for a sniper rifle... there is little if any benefit from stepping down from 7.62 to 5.56- we are running semi-auto guns in 7.62, eliminating a major issue associated with bolt guns (having to carry an M4 or M16 as primary defensive arm, or be stuck with 5+1 internal mag). Different story entirely for a DM role- in that situation, it makes perfect sense for the marksmen to be carrying the same caliber as everyone else.
Doctor- very true
Tanda- When you look for a good sniper round, you want lethality and range, consistency and accuracy. Would it work? Of course it would, but it has limitations that make it less than ideal. The Lethality factor drops considerably beyond 600-ish. It lacks good penetration. It does not give you a decisive range advantage over your enemy (there is an advantage but it's not that great). 5.56 comes a little short in lethality and range- and in an actual sniper role those are two area's which are VERY important.
Now, when you start talking law enforcement, some departments do run .223 and that would work just fine for a good number of their employments.
In either case, a choice to run with .223 over .308 in a sniper role is a compromise that IMO, generally is without benefit. Ultimately, for a sniper rifle... there is little if any benefit from stepping down from 7.62 to 5.56- we are running semi-auto guns in 7.62, eliminating a major issue associated with bolt guns (having to carry an M4 or M16 as primary defensive arm, or be stuck with 5+1 internal mag). Different story entirely for a DM role- in that situation, it makes perfect sense for the marksmen to be carrying the same caliber as everyone else.
Re: Military using the .223 long distances?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DP425</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I won't sit here and argue that the 5.56mm is a good substitute for 7.62. But it will still handle business out to 600. The problem is hitting the target- most army trigger pullers are not proficient enough to do that; not for lack of equipment. Vast majority of infantry units are running Elcan's or ACOG's, but unless they have attended SDM or the sniper section has spent a lot of time with them... the ability isn't there.
And I don't even want to think about how many times I've seen guys swear on their life they hit their target... nope... sorry. You didn't.
Would a different caliber perform better? Yes. Is it logical at this time to change calibers? No. The time to do that is between conflicts unless your current caliber is woefully inadequate. And the 5.56mm is doing okay- it still places us out of effective fire range of the enemy while they are still in range of us (barring 7.62x54 presence).
Almost everyone who argue's going back to 7.62/.308 have never carried 200 rounds 7.62 in loaded mags on their kit. It's heavy as hell and and Joe's already carry enough weight as is. Then the argument of "better caliber means less shots to take the enemy down so you can carry less ammo", True on lethality grounds, but when you factor in hit to miss ratio, it really does not matter if it takes 1 round or 4 rounds to kill....
Maybe a 6.5 offering once our conflicts slow down- a nice intermediate cartridge. But honestly I'd be shocked if we move away from 5.56mm- too costly of a transition. </div></div>
Part of the SDM program is that most of the soldiers with SDM's that I ran across in Iraq did not have Mk262, they only had SS109 and they had not fired many rounds through their system and had recieved minimal training as though it was a complete after thought since it is basically just an accurized M16A4 (that is how it was looked at, some soldiers didnot seem happy to have to drag around that hogs leg). It is like the M60 or M240B, it sucks when you have to carry it but when you need it and use it all that sweat and work was well worth it!
Ounces equal pounds and you are right that we carry enough, too much crap as it is. We still haven't figured out the soldiers load and how to reduce it to a satisfactory level!
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DP425</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I won't sit here and argue that the 5.56mm is a good substitute for 7.62. But it will still handle business out to 600. The problem is hitting the target- most army trigger pullers are not proficient enough to do that; not for lack of equipment. Vast majority of infantry units are running Elcan's or ACOG's, but unless they have attended SDM or the sniper section has spent a lot of time with them... the ability isn't there.
And I don't even want to think about how many times I've seen guys swear on their life they hit their target... nope... sorry. You didn't.
Would a different caliber perform better? Yes. Is it logical at this time to change calibers? No. The time to do that is between conflicts unless your current caliber is woefully inadequate. And the 5.56mm is doing okay- it still places us out of effective fire range of the enemy while they are still in range of us (barring 7.62x54 presence).
Almost everyone who argue's going back to 7.62/.308 have never carried 200 rounds 7.62 in loaded mags on their kit. It's heavy as hell and and Joe's already carry enough weight as is. Then the argument of "better caliber means less shots to take the enemy down so you can carry less ammo", True on lethality grounds, but when you factor in hit to miss ratio, it really does not matter if it takes 1 round or 4 rounds to kill....
Maybe a 6.5 offering once our conflicts slow down- a nice intermediate cartridge. But honestly I'd be shocked if we move away from 5.56mm- too costly of a transition. </div></div>
Part of the SDM program is that most of the soldiers with SDM's that I ran across in Iraq did not have Mk262, they only had SS109 and they had not fired many rounds through their system and had recieved minimal training as though it was a complete after thought since it is basically just an accurized M16A4 (that is how it was looked at, some soldiers didnot seem happy to have to drag around that hogs leg). It is like the M60 or M240B, it sucks when you have to carry it but when you need it and use it all that sweat and work was well worth it!
Ounces equal pounds and you are right that we carry enough, too much crap as it is. We still haven't figured out the soldiers load and how to reduce it to a satisfactory level!
Re: Military using the .223 long distances?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: The Good Doctor</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I think if you start punching, even little tiny, holes in people at great distances you will have quite the physiological effect on the people. Even if you don't kill people outright history has shown that sniper attacks have a debilitating effect on an opposing force.
Just one man's opinion </div></div>
That entails patience, a trait I am not that great with.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: The Good Doctor</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I think if you start punching, even little tiny, holes in people at great distances you will have quite the physiological effect on the people. Even if you don't kill people outright history has shown that sniper attacks have a debilitating effect on an opposing force.
Just one man's opinion
</div></div>That entails patience, a trait I am not that great with.
Re: Military using the .223 long distances?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I think if you start punching, even little tiny, holes in people at great distances you will have quite the physiological effect on the people. </div></div>
"Nothing like a sucking chest wound to suck 'The Spirit of the Bayonet' right out of an asshole."
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I think if you start punching, even little tiny, holes in people at great distances you will have quite the physiological effect on the people. </div></div>
"Nothing like a sucking chest wound to suck 'The Spirit of the Bayonet' right out of an asshole."
Re: Military using the .223 long distances?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Stefan73</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Part of the SDM program is that most of the soldiers with SDM's that I ran across in Iraq did not have Mk262, they only had SS109 and they had not fired many rounds through their system and had recieved minimal training as though it was a complete after thought since it is basically just an accurized M16A4 (that is how it was looked at, some soldiers didnot seem happy to have to drag around that hogs leg).</div></div>
True- getting a basic load for all of your SDM guys of Mk262 is tough, but those guns will push 2-ish moa out of M855. That's enough to handle man size targets to 600.
As for training, you have to ask, were they sent to the division schools or to the army or national guard COURSE? There is a substantial difference. Most of the division schools are around 3 days and IMO, don't serve much purpose. However, the NGMTC and AMU schools are a different story- two week school for both as I recall. They shoot more at those schools than I would dare say your typical infantryman will fire in a marksmanship training environment in his entire career (I'm not talking spendex, live-fire battle drills or anything of that nature- actual marksmanship training only).
The programs are there- they just have to be utilized.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Stefan73</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Part of the SDM program is that most of the soldiers with SDM's that I ran across in Iraq did not have Mk262, they only had SS109 and they had not fired many rounds through their system and had recieved minimal training as though it was a complete after thought since it is basically just an accurized M16A4 (that is how it was looked at, some soldiers didnot seem happy to have to drag around that hogs leg).</div></div>
True- getting a basic load for all of your SDM guys of Mk262 is tough, but those guns will push 2-ish moa out of M855. That's enough to handle man size targets to 600.
As for training, you have to ask, were they sent to the division schools or to the army or national guard COURSE? There is a substantial difference. Most of the division schools are around 3 days and IMO, don't serve much purpose. However, the NGMTC and AMU schools are a different story- two week school for both as I recall. They shoot more at those schools than I would dare say your typical infantryman will fire in a marksmanship training environment in his entire career (I'm not talking spendex, live-fire battle drills or anything of that nature- actual marksmanship training only).
The programs are there- they just have to be utilized.
Similar threads
