Lethality in 5.56 and 5.45

[Limey46]

I'm trying to decide between the 5.56/.223 round and the 5.45x39 round on the basis of combat effectiveness out to 300 yards, and I've ended up with some questions to which I don't know the answers. Perhaps someone here does.

First, does anyone know if the Silver Bear 60-grain full-metal-jacket ammo commercially available in the US is loaded to the same velocity with the same projectile as Russian military ammo?

Second, does anyone know how American commercial heavy-bullet hollowpoint .223 ammo, such as Hornady's 69-grainers, perform as anti-personnel rounds? Specifically, do they mushroom, fragment, or tumble on impact when fired from relatively short barrels (16 inches max), and what are their typical penetration characteristics?

With both questions, what I'm really looking for is real-life terminal ballistics: effect on human targets. I'm not really seeking input on issues of accuracy and trajectory, comparisons with other rounds, or the relative merits and faults of AKs, ARs, etc.

Nasty subject, but important on occasion. Thanks in advance for your help.

 

[Correia]

I don't know, but I work with somebody who is kind of an expert on the topic, and I'll ask him to take a look at this thread and respond.

 

[Zak Smith]

Your answers are found on http://www.ammo-oracle.com

Summary: The 75, and 77gr 223/556 rounds (and less so the 68/69gr) have better terminal effects than M193, M855 (556), or 7.62x39 or 5.45.

-z

 

[Gary G23]

Silver Bear 5.45 is the same velocity as mil-spec but uses a lead core bullet as opposed to the steel core the military uses.

 

[jobu07]

Getting shot with either would probably prove lethal if the rifleman did his part

 

[Limey46]

Thanks, gentlemen. Just what I needed. I could still use more info on the terminal ballistics of available 5.45x39 ammo, if anyone can enlighten me.

 

[clange]

http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=141122

 

[3rdpig]

I think the weapons they're chambered for is more important than the round themselves. I own AK's and AR's, and for almost any kind of work I'd chose the AR, it's ergonomics, accuracy, ability to accept needed accessories are all far above that of the AK, and a properly built AR is more than reliable enough for all but the most extreme conditions. Also, while they're are AK's that fire 5.56 and AR's that fire 5.45, both rifles perform better chambered in their native cartridge.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that the two rounds are close enough in performance that the cartridge shouldn't be the deciding factor, rather the rifle that fires it and which you're most comfortable with and shoot the best.

Edited to add: The last thing I want to do is start an "AK vs. AR" thread, but do think that's where your decision lies.

 

[Zak Smith]

Please everyone do their research first.

From the FirearmsTactical web site:

5.45x39

7.62x39

M193

M855

M80 7.62NATO ball

 

[Zak Smith]

The following from the ammo-oracle.com

5.56mm 77gr SMK OTM

5.56mm 100gr SP

5.56mm 75gr Hornady OTM

(note similarity to 77gr except the much shorter neck)


As you can see, 5.45x39 and 7.62x39 are inferior to basically all the 223/556 rounds, including M193, M855, 75 OTM, 77 OTM, and 100gr SP.

 

[Limey46]

Thanks again, Mr. Smith. My questions are now answered definitively.

 

[KaceCoyote]

Problem

Russian milspec is not 120grain, its 155 grain.

 

[The Grand Inquisitor]

My vote is with the Poison bullet.

 

[KaceCoyote]

Assuming I go smallbore, gimmie the 5.45 any day of the week.

 

[KriegHund]

I have heard battle reports that the 5.45 fragments better than the 5.56, at least in the m-16 A2

 

[444]

And who did the autopsy to find this out ?

 

[KriegHund]

Dunno, i wish i had some ballistic jelly to look at like with the other rounds.

 

[Bwana John]

Hmm, I thought that part of the modern combat doctrine behind these little bullets was to severly wound, and incapacate the other guy, and force two of his friends to help him, thereby taking 3 people off the battlefield, not strait "Lethality" which only removes one.
Ive shot deer with .30-06, and .223, and let me tell you there is no compairson, however my "informal" compairson might be less valid with FMJ.

 

[Warbow]

Hmm, I thought that part of the modern combat doctrine behind these little bullets was to severly wound, and incapacate the other guy, and force two of his friends to help him, thereby taking 3 people off the battlefield, not strait "Lethality" which only removes one.

Sounds like a Gun Shop Myth to me...

 

[Bwana John]

Sounds like a Gun Shop Myth to me...

Could be, Ive been known to hang out in gunshops

 

[The Grand Inquisitor]

I would say the "wound not Kill" story probably has its origin in fact - as something that military brass EVERYWHERE would love, but any civilized government that actually undertook such a project would be shredded. With that said, I would vote that it is a myth, but I a sure a few generals wet themselves over the idea, the psychopaths.

Back to 5.45 vs. 5.56: one thing that may be important to consider in this discussion and in these tests is that the the 5.56 round was designed in the United States, for an American gun, and has continued to be used since the late 50's and early 60's. The 5.45 round, on the other hand, was not introduced until the middle 70's (as far as I know) and was designed in the Soviet Union and has never been fielded in an American (or even NATO) rifle. This familiarity with the round definately brings with it quite a bit of bias, and also, and even more importantly, quite a bit more impartial understanding (you know VERY much about the 5.56 and its tendancies before the test even starts which gives an unfair advantage to one side). And lastly, there was ONE 5.45 test done, while there were at least 3 5.56 tests done on different 5.56 loads, M855, M193, ect... and this is just another example of the familairty we have with 5.56 over 5.45 which makes these tests very inaccurate.