223 Ammo for Self Defense

Pretty much any 45-60 gr. expanding type hollow point or polymer tipped bullet will do just fine. I use 50 gr. V-Max.

I specify expanding because bullets like the Sierra Matchking or Hornady A-Max, while HP and PT respectively, are not designed for expansion.

The problem with the 55g Vmax type loads is they don't penetrate enough. Only 10" in ballistic gel which is well below the FBI minimum spec

Click to expand...

The FBI spec is for handgun rounds. Rifle rounds have entirely different wounding characteristics. I'll take a 5.56 round with 10" penetration over a .40 S&W with 18" any day for stopping a threat.

Name one? Gladly. Remington home defense 12 gauge with bird shot/trap loads. There's others also.

Click to expand...

One of the most foolish things I've read in awhile.

MachIVshooter said:

The FBI spec is for handgun rounds. Rifle rounds have entirely different wounding characteristics. I'll take a 5.56 round with 10" penetration over a .40 S&W with 18" any day for stopping a threat.

Click to expand...

Why would the FBI spec just be for handgun rounds? Penetration is penetration, failure to reach a vital organ is a failure to reach a vital organ. It won't matter if the temp cavity causes tissue damage due to the hypersonic velocity of the rifle round...if it doesn't reach something vital.

Further, that 10" in bare gel ain't gonna happen in a human, at least not in the chest. 1st of all, even for a perfect front chest shot, the bullet has to pass through tough skin and a rib or the sternum. I've heard some ballistics experts say getting through the skin is like 2-3" of gel penetration (gel just simulates uniform tissue like muscle).

How would the little 50-55g varmint style rounds do in gel if they were shot through a piece of pig skin and 1/2 rack of ribs in front of the gel? This is best-case, not taking into account odd angles and the very common factor of a bullet hitting the hand/arm first.

Go back to the Hornady site and compare the 55g TAP Urban to both of the 62 TAP Barrier in 5.56 and .223. The 62g blows the 55g out of the water in terms of performance both in bare gel and through the most common home barrier; wallboard, and it still isn't going to get through 3 interior walls.

I'll take 12"-14" bare gel penetration over 10 or less any day. Again, you aren't getting that 10" in a human anyway due to skin, bone anything else the bullet encounters. This factor also sets back the large temp cavity damage closer to the surface. After skin and bone, the bonded 62g may only get 8 more inches in a human, but that will reach the heart. The 55g varmint round may only get 4" like the auto glass gel shot and not quite make it...(or it might?)

If we were talking hard to find expensive, exotic rounds vs. common ones I could see making due. But, ~62g bonded soft points are easy to get (Fusion, Gold dot etc.) and do a lot better.

This link has some real-world results of .40 S&W and 55g TAP https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbOxtcjKT7A Warning GRAPHIC

Shot placement sucked for all rounds so there is that factor (the most important), but it is clear from the x-rays the .223s just disintegrated and didn't go deep. The .40s penetrated well and had they been placed better would have had no problem. We'll never know what the 55g TAPs could have done with better placement, but the video notes all .223s rounds were expended w/o putting him down then they went to the .40.

I don't own or even like 40 S&W so I'm not saying it is better, I'll take a 5.56 with a good load any day.

The FBI spec is for handgun rounds.

Click to expand...

False. The human target is the same regardless of firearm type.

Rifle rounds have entirely different wounding characteristics.

Click to expand...

During the 1986 FBI shootout in Miami, Michael Platt fired a shot from a Mini-14 that hit FBI SA Edmundo Mireles in the forearm, as he was carrying an 870 shotgun at port arms. The bullet was on path to penetrate Mireles' upper torso but was stopped by his forearm. Mireles stayed in the fight, firing his shotgun one-handed until he emptied the magazine and ultimately stopped both Platt and William Matix with 38 Spl +P 158gr LSWCHP bullets.

In 1989, an Alexandria SWAT police officer was killed and another wounded after a sniper shot a hostage taker in the upper torso with an expanding .223 bullet. The hit caused the hostage taker to stagger, allowing the hostage to break free and run away. Before either SWAT officer could react, the hostage taker shot the first officer in the face with a 12 gauge shotgun, killing him, and then racked the shotgun and shot the second officer in the legs. See - https://www.washingtonpost.com/arch...xandria/9c499d89-e69c-4907-b65b-e594d9f6871e/

In this (graphic) video a few hogs were shot in the thorax with 5.56 and 7.62 bullets designed to rapidly transfer kinetic energy. Notice how the pigs were neither instantly nor immediately incapacitated by these high energy projectiles and were able to continue to perform willful physical activity after being shot. See - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8eKyKQPgt0

I'll take a 5.56 round with 10" penetration over a .40 S&W with 18" any day for stopping a threat.

Click to expand...

Those of us who learn from the experiences of others will choose ammunition that penetrates deeply enough reliably reach and damage vitals.

Thank you.

Ballistics gel is not the end-all indicator of real life performance.

Vmax rounds are designed for prairie dogs, coyotes at most.

A fight-stopping hit requires penetration of lungs, heart, or central nervous system.

Bodies have bones. Also, the sternum is a very tough piece of cartilaginous tissue that has a remarkable ability to absorb energy. Varmint bullets cause grievous flesh wounds. A lucky shot might pass between ribs and do astounding damage to the lungs. But luck is not the best ally to depend on if your life is in danger.

Why would the FBI spec just be for handgun rounds?

Click to expand...

Because the FBI determined the criteria for handgun rounds by testing handgun rounds because their agents carry handguns chambered in handgun rounds. Got it?


Shawn Dodson-

We could go back and forth with cherry picked anecdotes supporting any argument we want for days, from a single round that penetrated just a few inches and caused instantaneous death on one end to multiple hits from .50 BMG that were survived on the other. Doesn't matter.

What you need to understand is that the different wounding mechanisms and barrier penetration characteristics of rifle rounds put them outside the parameters of the FBI penetration tests and determinations. That same 55 gr. varmint bullet that you think is inadequate because it only penetrates 10" of calibrated geletin will zip through soft body armor and leave a wound cavity behind it that looks like a bomb went off in the flesh. Meanwhile, the 9mm 147 gr JHP that reached 16.5" in geleatin hit that soft armor and left the wearer with a welt and a bad attitude. Take away the body armor, you still end up with a much larger wound cavity from the rifle bullet, despite lower penetration in laboratory tests.

In this (graphic) video a few hogs were shot in the thorax with 5.56 and 7.62 bullets designed to rapidly transfer kinetic energy.

Click to expand...

Entire argument's credibility is toast as soon as you use the terms "knock down power" or "energy transfer". Thanks for coming out, though.

My reading on this topic led me to believe the consensus was that heavy-for-caliber, open-tip, match grade bullets in 5.56 are a very good choice. Match grade only because those type bullets are (presumably) more consistently manufactured. Heavy soft points were also considered an acceptable choice. Light varmint bullets were not.

Because the FBI determined the criteria for handgun rounds by testing handgun rounds because their agents carry handguns chambered in handgun rounds. Got it?

Click to expand...

FBI uses weapons chambered for 5.56x45mm and the same minimum penetration criterion (minimum 12") is applied by FBI because the human body is the same. FBI also advises other law enforcement agencies to choose .223/5.56 ammunition that reliably penetrates 12".

What you need to understand is that the different wounding mechanisms and barrier penetration characteristics of rifle rounds put them outside the parameters of the FBI penetration tests and determinations.

Click to expand...

The wounding mechanisms are identical for both rifle and pistol (and shotgun). They are: 1) Penetration, 2) Permanent Cavity, 3) Temporary Cavity, and 4) Fragmentation.

The major difference is the size of the temporary cavity produced by an expanding centerfire rifle bullet, which many elastic soft tissues cannot tolerate, and which can increase permanent disruption. The larger temporary cavity can also tear open individual wound tracks created by fragments, which again can increase permanent disruption.

If the bullet strikes an arm before it penetrates the torso, as happened when FBI SA Mireles was shot in the forearm, the location of the temporary cavity is in non-vital tissues - i.e., the musculature of the arm.

The wounding mechanisms for a .223/5.56 bullet that penetrates the torso after passing through an arm are penetration and permanent cavity, i.e., the wound produced in the torso is limited to the tissues directly contacted and crushed by the penetrating bullet (identical to a handgun bullet).

To be reliably effective, any penetrating projectile must penetrate deeply enough to reach and damage vital structures located deep within the human body. Unless the central nervous system is disrupted, blood loss in rate and volume is what determines rapidity of incapacitation (as exemplified by the "cherry picked anecdotes" and pig videos I provided in my earlier post.)

Finally , it's unwise to expect a homicidal adversary to be rational. He/she may be high on drugs, drunk, emotionally enraged, or psychotic and may not react to being shot in the torso, even multiple times. The only way to compel this kind of person to stop is to destroy tissues that are critical to their immediate survival. A bullet that reliably penetrates deeply enough to reach and damage these tissues is more likely to be effective more quickly than a bullet that does not. The location of the temporary cavity produced by an expanding .223/5.56 bullet is too shallow to reliably damage vital tissues.

Bear in mind the initial 1987 FBI workshop said "10-12 inches" and they later settled on 12 to be safe.

"The single most critical factor remains penetration. A handgun bullet MUST reliably penetrate 10-12 inches of soft body tissue at a minimum, regardless of whether it expands or not. Penetration up to 18 inches would be even better. If the bullet does not reliably penetrate to these depths, it is not an effective bullet for law enforcement use."

Also keep in mind the OP wants a round that will minimize overpenetration. I don't think he would be undergunned with 30 lighter V-MAX bullets...

Winchester PDX1 Defender 60-grain Split-Core Hollow Point

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Msci2ciZ4yo

Twenty round mag loaded with ten 55 PPU soft points over ten xm193.

Back-up mags with more xm193.

M

CB900F said:

jmr40 said:

CB900F said:

Why .223? There's much better alternatives out there, and not very expensive either.

Click to expand...

Name one. There is nothing else that offers the balance of soft recoil, terminal effectiveness, cost, and the ability to not over penetrate.

Click to expand...

Name one? Gladly. Remington home defense 12 gauge with bird shot/trap loads. There's others also.

Click to expand...

No, that's way worse than a .223.

There's a reason why most federal, state, and local police departments use some variant of a .223 rifle when they need something more powerful than their pistols. The goal of the police is very similar to the goal of a homeowner when it comes to the choice of weapon; reliability, easy of use, effectiveness, and less chance of collateral damage.

For most people's uses, a .223 AR-15 loaded with proper defensive ammo is a superior home defense weapon than a shotgun, even if the shotgun is loaded with proper defensive ammo and not birdshot. The rifle will be shorter, more reliable, simpler to use, much easier to shoot quickly, much easier to reload, and will have a much greater capacity.

A shotgun isn't a bad choice for home defense as long as you're using something other than birdshot or trap loads, but an AR is a better choice for most people.

I'm not sure why varmint bullets are even being recommended. A 50gr-55gr varmint bullet can be loaded to 3600 fps plus from varmint calibers, blow out both lungs of a coyote, and there are times when the coyote can run a 100 yards or so after being wounded.

Given increasing (penetration depth requirements) engagement angles; frontal, oblique or lateral. ...size of felon and varmint bullets become less than desirable.

One of the bullets that has an excellent track record is Hornady's 75gr BTHP, I load it in 5.56 based upon the recommendation of door entry team members.

FBI uses weapons chambered for 5.56x45mm and the same minimum penetration criterion (minimum 12") is applied by FBI because the human body is the same. FBI also advises other law enforcement agencies to choose .223/5.56 ammunition that reliably penetrates 12".

Click to expand...

Source?

The major difference is the size of the temporary cavity produced by an expanding centerfire rifle bullet, which many elastic soft tissues cannot tolerate, and which can increase permanent disruption. The larger temporary cavity can also tear open individual wound tracks created by fragments, which again can increase permanent disruption.

Click to expand...

No. The major difference is the permanent cavity, how much of the stretch cavity beyond direct contact with projectile & fragments becomes permanent. With handgun bullets, there is very little permanent cavity beyond direct contact, save for inelastic tissues like liver & brain. The hydraulic pressure generated by the much faster rifle bullet causes much more disruption, ergo a much larger permanent wound channel relative to bullet size. Hence the difference in lethality between handgun bullets and high velocity rifle bullets.


“In order to cause significant injuries to a structure, a pistol bullet must strike that structure directly.”2 2 DiMaio, V.J.M.: Gunshot Wounds, Elsevier Science Publishing Company, New York, NY, 1987, page 42.

I'm not sure why varmint bullets are even being recommended. A 50gr-55gr varmint bullet can be loaded to 3600 fps plus from varmint calibers, blow out both lungs of a coyote, and there are times when the coyote can run a 100 yards or so after being wounded.

Click to expand...

Are you implying that destruction of vital organs is not sufficient?

I know I'm just a newby here, but I can tell you FOR SURE the following rounds do just fine at putting folks down: 55 grain M193 GI ball (or a clone thereof), 77 grain MK262 (black hills), and my fav- 75 grain Hornady BTHPM. If it was me, in the interest of $, I would go with the 55 grain ball from one of the American companies. The 75 and 77 are great, but they are designed to be precision type rounds, so precision cost. Pretty sure you won't need to be pushing for head shots at 400 meters or beyond. Look at a IPSC target- that 5 zone in the torso? 2 or more there, instant rag doll in my experience. I think I have Federal in my mag.

Are you implying that destruction of vital organs is not sufficient?

Click to expand...

Not if it doesn't reach them. The only "vital" organ in terms of even remotely getting a quick incapacitation is the heart. Even then, the person still has 7-30s of conscious voluntary control left.

If the lightly constructed bullet fails to reach the heart (or large artery like aorta or vein-vena cava etc.), but creates a large wound in the muscle and lung tissue...you have done nothing from a physiological perspective to stop the threat in any time-frame that would matter in a gunfight.

Either you hit the CNS and instantly stop them...or you don't. Either you hit the heart or a MAJOR vessel and they pass out due to brain oxygen deprivation in a few seconds to 30 sec. or so...or they don't stop (unless they choose to for psychological reasons, not physical ones).

It is that simple, all that remains is choosing a caliber and projectile to give you the best chances of those outcomes considering the platform, recoil, over-penetration concerns, intermediate barriers (even if only the subject's own arm) and angles.

There will never be statistically valid real-world sample data to go by pointing to a particular bullet or caliber. All we have is anecdotal real-world data, gel tests, knowledge of human physiology, and our own subjective judgment.

Here is another way of looking at it: The OP is concerned with over-penetration. Well, according to the wallboard tests linked on page 1, the 55g TAP varmint round penetrated into wall #3 and the far superior (terminally) 64g soft point didn't get past wall #2....so why would anyone go with the 50-55g varmint rounds?

Being charitable, let's say they penetrate the same in wallboard. Being that's the case go with the one that gets more penetration in tissue since that is job #1 for any bullet. Seems like an obvious choice to me, you aren't giving anything up with the 62-64g soft points (they have the same temp cavity that is large and destroys tissue, penetrate the same in walls, penetrate further in gel/tissue.)

The conclusions from the wallboard test:

Cartridge Conclusions

The biggest surprise of the entire test was how much differences in bullet construction affected the way .223 rounds behaved when passing through walls. If overpenetration must be minimized over all other concerns, something based around the V-Max bullet would be a good choice; however, both the Winchester and Fiocchi softpoints turned in very similar wall penetration, but published data for the Winchester suggests it does better in gel penetration than the V-Max loads. Given that the softpoint bullets were heavier and therefore more likely to reliably cycle a gas-operated action, some kind of softpoint would seem the ideal balance between terminal ballistics and minimizing overpenetration.

Click to expand...

Makes sense to me

MachIVshooter said:

Source?



No. The major difference is the permanent cavity, how much of the stretch cavity beyond direct contact with projectile & fragments becomes permanent. With handgun bullets, there is very little permanent cavity beyond direct contact, save for inelastic tissues like liver & brain. The hydraulic pressure generated by the much faster rifle bullet causes much more disruption, ergo a much larger permanent wound channel relative to bullet size. Hence the difference in lethality between handgun bullets and high velocity rifle bullets.


“In order to cause significant injuries to a structure, a pistol bullet must strike that structure directly.”2 2 DiMaio, V.J.M.: Gunshot Wounds, Elsevier Science Publishing Company, New York, NY, 1987, page 42.




Are you implying that destruction of vital organs is not sufficient?

Click to expand...

Have to reach vital organs before they can be destroyed, how do varmint bullets perform on large felons with lots of mass and large bones?

If a 40lb coyote isn't taken down immediately, what about a double X + felon?

so why would anyone go with the 50-55g varmint rounds?

Click to expand...

The Hornady 55gr load was an outlier; compare the Winchester softpoint. I agree that of those particular loads tested, that particular 64gr (very fragile, not barrier-blind, not bonded-core) would be as good a choice as the Winchester and better than the Hornady, but a tougher 64gr bullet would not be if you needed to limit wall penetration. My own AR is load with Federal 55gr JHP or Winchester 55gr SP depending on which magazine I use, because I mostly shoot 55gr and that's what the rifle is sighted in for.

Being that's the case go with the one that gets more penetration in tissue since that is job #1 for any bullet. Seems like an obvious choice to me, you aren't giving anything up with the 62-64g soft points (they have the same temp cavity that is large and destroys tissue, penetrate the same in walls, penetrate further in gel/tissue.)

Click to expand...

I'd like to see gelatin data on that particular 64gr load, to compare.

Here it is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2uMOv1YSXo

Pretty much textbook, 15.5" penetration, good expansion and weight retention. And it penetrates less wallboard than the under-performing 55g TAP. Lighter varmint style bullets would be even worse.

CB900F said:

JMR40;

Name one? Gladly. Remington home defense 12 gauge with bird shot/trap loads. There's others also.

900F

Click to expand...

Wait a second. You claim that certain 55gr .223 loads under penetrate, but then suggest BIRD SHOT?!

Forgive me, but I'll stick with my 55 and 62 grain bullets from my AR and #2 and 00 buck from my 12 gauge for home defense.

Bird shot is for fragile clay discs and birds. Not home invaders.

FWIW, I used 62gr M855 in Iraq. It's effective, at close range, even from an M4 barrel.

I settled on a 60gr softpoint. M193 is a close second.

I've seen what both of these rounds are capable of, one on animals, the other on the people we're talking about stopping. I'm convinced enough to stock up on both.

I opt for the softpoint first simply hoping for earlier bullet upset.

And let's be honest. I hope I never have an intruder in my home. If there is one, I hope I have other alternatives than shooting someone in my home. But if it comes to that, he's not getting a single round. He's getting a wall of lead until he stops doing whatever I am threatened by.

Bird shot is for fragile clay discs and birds. Not home invaders.

Click to expand...

Agreed.

I like soft points in 223 and Wasn't their a thread a few months ago a guy survived a point blank shot of birdshot his iPhone stopped it so no I'd not use birdshot

Federal Fusion

Driftertank said:

If you can spin it, it seems that field experience (as far as I've been able to research) suggests that heavier bonded, solid, or OTM rounds do a superior job of dropping an assailant in the fewest hits.

Light, explosively expanding bullets do a brilliant job on small animals, but on badguys, it seems they have a tendency to cause a gruesome shallow injury without stopping them from pressing an attack.

As a good rule of thumb, any round that stands a good chance of stopping an attacker will also penetrate a wall and retain dangerous energy. That said, the relative light weight and high speed of the .223/5.56 round does a good job of transferring a lot of energy in a body, while giving up much of that energy through barriers. Much better than, say, a heavy pistol bullet.

Click to expand...

I don't have personal experience, but this is consistent with my research as well. A human body is tougher to penetrate than a typical wall or two. My resulting conclusion is to use my most accurate system with a projectile sure to incapacitate to minimize number of shots and possible misses.