5.56/.223 vs .357 Magnum Carbine?

[LouisianaGunner12]

I'm either going to get an AR15 carbine or Marlin .357 Magnum levergun for home defense. I'm not asking about the platforms, though, but calibers.

Which round has better terminal performance? Which one is more likely to stop the threat, assuming both are high quality hollow points or ballistic tip?

Over-penetration is not a concern for me.

I know most would recommend a 12 gauge shotgun for home defense, but for reason I don't want to get into I can't use that. This thread is about 5.56/.223 JHP vs .357 out of a carbine.

 

[AK103K]

I have rifles in both calibers. Id go with the 5.56. Power is obvious, and although you dont want to get into it, the platform is important, as the AR's offer so many more options.

 

[LouisianaGunner12]

Id go with the 5.56. Power is obvious

Is the 5.56 more powerful, would it stop someone better than the .357?

 

[AK103K]

From the critters Ive shot with both, the 5.56 is much more dramatic.

Both were DRT though.

 

[WestKentucky]

I would go .357 mag. 5.56 is so fast that it will over penetrate and cause damage if not death where it's not intended. .357 may do the same but those bullets are designed for the purpose more so than any 5.56 ammo. 7-10 shots is likely 6-9 more than you need so the ar would be WAY overkill. For defensive purposes terminal ballistics scream big and slow is the way to go.

 

[HOOfan_1]

Every test I have seen shows that heavy handgun bullets are more of a danger of overpenetration than lighter faster. 223 bullets....especially varmint bullets

 

[Reloadron]

Is the 5.56 more powerful, would it stop someone better than the .357?

Define "more powerful"?

If you mean muzzle energy then I suggest you look at the ballistic charts for each cartridge.

.357 Magnum

.223 Remington

Home defense? You are typically looking at 3 shots inside 5 yards. That considered I don't see where it matters much.

Ron

 

[WestKentucky]

I don't see how. Not doubting that you may have seen something different than I have, but a fully expanded hollowpoint 357 is making a huge hole and slowing down very quickly. A 5.56 is so fast that it can't do much other than poke a hole or be a tiny grenade, especially at 15ft when it's built more for 100yds. Of rifle calibers I would most likely pick .30 carbine but still, a rifle is not the best option for close range work. Shotgun or handgun were built for these purposes. A handgun caliber carbine falls somewhere in between the shotgun and handgun.

Of the two options I would go .357 and shoot heavy, slow hollowpoints...but when I had both they were in the safe and my defense guns were an m9 and a 20ga pump.

The original question is like asking what's a better dump truck? A Ferrari or a suburban. Neither is the optimal choice, but the better choice of the two is .357.

 

[ugaarguy]

5.56 is so fast that it will over penetrate and cause damage if not death where it's not intended.

No. Fast moving light bullets pose far less risk of over penetration than do slow heavy bullets. Here's just one of many comparison tests: http://how-i-did-it.org/drywall/ammunition.html.

For defensive purposes terminal ballistics scream big and slow is the way to go.

Well, sure if we're talking defense from brown bears or bison where very deep penetration is needed slow and heavy (or better yet fast and heavy) is a great idea. But for HD / SD where moderate penetration and great expansion / fragmentation are ideal then a lighter bullet at very high velocities is a better choice.

I think it's pretty clear that from a ballistics standpoint I'm in the 5.56 NATO / .223 Rem camp. I also prefer the round for HD / SD because it has a very low recoil and offers very quick follow up shots if necessary. It is loud though, so a linear compensator that directs the blast forward and away from the shooter is a good idea.

 

[LouisianaGunner12]

Like I said, overpenetration is not an issue. My question pertains to which round is better for stopping an attacker.

 

[jmr40]

I would go .357 mag. 5.56 is so fast that it will over penetrate and cause damage if not death where it's not intended.

False.

A 223 with any bullet, even FMJ penetrates less in building materials than most any round. Far less than 357. On human size targets both are probably equally effective. With heavier bullets the 357 might offer some advantage on game larger than humans. 5.56 will also recoil far less.

With all the other advantages offered in an AR platform the 5.56 wins handily.

 

[ugaarguy]

The better round for stopping an attacker is 5.56 / .223. Sufficient penetration into the target to get a deep wound, coupled with very high expansion and / or fragmentation along with hydrostatic forces which cause the wound cavity to be very large in diameter.

 

[ugaarguy]

Of the two options I would go .357 and shoot heavy, slow hollowpoints...but when I had both they were in the safe and my defense guns were an m9 and a 20ga pump.

The original question is like asking what's a better dump truck? A Ferrari or a suburban. Neither is the optimal choice, but the better choice of the two is .357.

The 5.56 NATO / .223 Remington rounds have been used against human threats in very large numbers since the 1960s. There is now a mountain of empirical evidence showing that a 5.56 / .223 carbine is at least as effective as, if not more effective than, any shotgun when defending against human threats.

 

[WestKentucky]

Since the 5.56 crowd has stolen the show, my last comment here is this. Ammo selection in any caliber is more important than the caliber. You could shoot 5.56 ball ammo and do a little damage or some of the better ammo and do a lot of damage. The point made about noise is a valid point for anything inside a home.

 

[AK103K]

Not that rabbits are the same as people, I just like talking about shooting the rabbits with my .223's

Ive shot rabbits (Im the garden warden) with my 77/357 using my reloads, 158 grain Nosler JHPs and Hornady XTP's running around 1150-1200fps at around 50 yards. The rabbits were dead, and had about a fist size hole on the back side of them.

The rabbits I shot at the same distance with my AR, using 55 grain Nosler BT's running around 2900fps, leave an entrance hole the size of the 357's exit, and there is no exit "hole" on the other side, simply becasue there "IS" no other side, just the back half of the rabbit, and most of its insides, out across the lawn.

 

[AK103K]

Noise can be dealt with.



It'll still be loud indoors, but I shoot that out of the car port without ear plugs, and it doesnt bother me at all. If I shoot a .22 out there without ear plugs, I cant hear for three days.

 

[ugaarguy]

Just to clarify my stance on ballistics, whether it's defense from humans or hunting the smallish whitetails we have here in GA, my preference is intermediate rifle rounds.

However, whether it's a .357 Mag JHP out of a 16" to 18" bbl, or a .223 SP or ballistic tip out of the same length bbl, a human threat isn't going to be any less stopped, nor bambi any less dead from either round if you put one in the chest cavity. So, really buy the rifle that you'll most enjoy shooting and practicing with.

WestKentucky also makes a great point about ammo selection. Find a cartridge loaded with a good JHP, SP, or ballistic tip; and then make sure that ammo feeds and cycles in your gun.

 

[Dr.Rob]

Which rifle are you more comfortable with? Practice close in fast fire drills with either, they will both do the job.

 

[76shuvlinoff]

I own both an AR and a .357 lever. I've never shot a human with either but I assume both would be effective to say the least. I would grab the AR first simply for ease of operation and faster follow ups as needed. Of course if you are extremely well practiced with that lever I doubt it would matter much.

 

[LeonCarr]

If you want the best of both worlds, get a .30 M1 Carbine with a 30 round magazine.

About the same ballistics as a .357 Magnum with the magazine capacity of the AR, and they are big fun to shoot .

Just my .02,
LeonCarr

 

[19-3Ben]

I chose a .357mag for that purpose, and don't regret it at all.
Platform aside, I love the ballistics of the .357mag out of a rifle. it becomes a whole different beast. I load it with 158gr Speer Gold Dots.
Out of a rifle, they are doing in the area of 2000fps, expand very reliably, and very widely, i might add, based on everything I have seen.

 

[ChCx2744]

I also agree that .223/5.56 is a better option for home defense, but I choose to use my shotgun over my AR. The AR stays locked up in the safe, while I keep the shotgun with me. I would rather have the defensive power of the AR, but the shotgun is cheap and I'm not afraid to lose it to the law if it ever gets used and taken as evidence. The AR, I'm not so willing to part with in such a scenario, therefore it is designated as just a weekend shooter. The shotgun and handgun serve social roles.

 

[B!ngo]

I suspect that the marginal difference in effectiveness of either cartridge on a human target at such short range is very small. I'd instead look at a few related items:
If legal in your state, which of the two designs can handle a suppressor? I'd be pretty sure that that favors the AR.
Which gun are you more comfortable with to shoulder and shoot? That may favor the lever.
Which gun is more cost-effective to practice with? The AR
Which gun is more reliable? That's likely a toss-up.
Which gun will allow you to get more rounds on target in a given amount of time? The AR.
Which gun will carry more rounds? The AR.
Assuming each of these questions carry equal weight, the answer is the AR.
But of course they don't. For me, and given that the difference in the cartridges are minimal, I'd make sure you have a plan for hearing protection. If you could get a suppressor on your choice, you'd be waaaay better off.
But would you consider buying a Kriss chambered in .45 with a suppressor and a 33 round Glock magazine? Seems like it might be the best of both. But that's for a different thread I suppose...
B

 

[CoalTrain49]

It's a toss up. Muzzle energy is very close.

I load .357 so that would be my choice. If you load .223 go with that. Otherwise I see no real advantage either way for a defensive carbine.

I split the difference and bought an M1 carbine. I like it so much I'm going to buy another one. Battle tested.

 

[Float Pilot]

Bullet design plays a big part, as do barrel lengths. I have seen humans hit my military 5.56mm rounds from 20 inch barrels and 14.5 inch barrels. While it does work well, the full ball ammo's wound cavity ( M855) from the shorter barrel is less than dramatic 100% of the time.

I have never seen a human hit by a 357 magnum carbine. I have personally shot small arctic caribou with both the 5.56mm and 357 magnum from carbines at fairly close range. With 125 grain Federal HP factory loads, the wound cavity ( exit hole) on a 130 pound caribou was over 4 inches across.
From my old Rossi carbine the Federal 125 grain factory load was going over 2,300 fps. Since they were made to open at pistol velocities, I suspect they were exploding...

My bride of many years is also ex-military so she likes the AR platform. So I load up her 16 inch Israeli style carbine with 52 grain hollow points.