Robinson Arms M96 Expeditionary Rifle
- Thread starter ifit
- Start date
- Status
NOMI WASP
member
No, you cannot shoot 5.56 out a .223 barrel. The 5.56 has higher pressures and can damage the rifle. Think of it as shooting +p out of a non +p pistol.
I would contact the manufactuer to confirm that is a true .223 only rifle. I'm not familar with that particular firearm so I cannot comment on the removal of the sight.
I looked it up on wiki and it says it fires 5.56 but I'm not sure. That sight looks like it's on there pretty good so it maybe a challange. Good luck
PS (it looks like a very cool rifle) I'd love to take it for a spin. I've never seen one before.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robinson_Armament_M96_Expeditionary
I would contact the manufactuer to confirm that is a true .223 only rifle. I'm not familar with that particular firearm so I cannot comment on the removal of the sight.
I looked it up on wiki and it says it fires 5.56 but I'm not sure. That sight looks like it's on there pretty good so it maybe a challange. Good luck
PS (it looks like a very cool rifle) I'd love to take it for a spin. I've never seen one before.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robinson_Armament_M96_Expeditionary
Double Naught Spy
Sus Venator
Here is the manual. 5.56 should be fine. The barrel may be .223, but it is chambered for 5.56.
http://stevespages.com/pdf/robinson_m96.pdf
http://stevespages.com/pdf/robinson_m96.pdf
Willie Sutton
Member
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2013
- Messages
- 2,025
"No, you cannot shoot 5.56 out a .223 barrel. The 5.56 has higher pressures and can damage the rifle"
Must... resist... temptation..... to..... <sigh>....
:banghead:
Willie
.
Must... resist... temptation..... to..... <sigh>....
:banghead:
Willie
.
Field Tester
Member
I'd love to meet the guy who first perpetuated this myth.
I curse his existence. He owes some serious reparations for walls smashed in by the heads of gun board members.
Willie Sutton
Member
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2013
- Messages
- 2,025
^^ One day the way to say "I'm and old fart" will be to say "Sonny, I remember when 5.56mm and .223 were the same, and I even remember when .308 and 7.62x51 were the same. Your Grandpop remembered when 30-Goverment was the same as .30-06, and he even remembered when both were exactly the same as 7.62x63.....
Kids these days... listening to all of the internet noise and never thinking for themselves. Can you imagine a Stoner clone designed to be marketed to the military and pare-military markets that would be "dangerous" with service ammo?
Hmmm.... not in a million years.
Very nice rifle, BTW. I'd like to add one to my safe as a Stoner-like representation.
Willie
.
Kids these days... listening to all of the internet noise and never thinking for themselves. Can you imagine a Stoner clone designed to be marketed to the military and pare-military markets that would be "dangerous" with service ammo?
Hmmm.... not in a million years.
Very nice rifle, BTW. I'd like to add one to my safe as a Stoner-like representation.
Willie
.
Last edited:
Thanks for the replies, much appreciated...thanks double naught downloaded that already. Also saw that on wiki concerning the 5.56, but just emailed Rob arm again in regards to this thanks, for now gonna shoot .223. Some pics of the rifle
Was surprised when I removed the handguard...was not expecting that
Was surprised when I removed the handguard...was not expecting that
Double Naught Spy
Sus Venator
Wow, is that an original Thermold magazine with it as well? Haven't been seeing those in years.
Pretty rifle.
Pretty rifle.
AlexanderA
Member
I believe 30 Government was the same as .30-40 Krag.
Willie/Field Tester,
Here is a technical bulletin from ATK (Federal/CCI/Blazer) etc which states that 5.56mm typically is loaded to higher velocity and pressure than .223. It also references a SAAMI document stating that it is unsafe to fire 5.56mm ammunition in a .223 chamber.
http://le.atk.com/downloads/technical_bulletins/223VS556.pdf
Additionally, some companies such as Hornady actually offer separate loads in .223 and 5.56mm in their LE TAP lines. Note they are not identical and that the 5.56mm loads offer higher velocities.
http://www.hornadyle.com/products/rifle-ammunition/
Please be careful when making comments like this. You guys are the ones spreading the "myth" that they are identical, and you are encouraging a potentially dangerous practice.
EDIT:
Found the link to the SAAMI doc.
http://www.saami.org/specifications...1-Unsafe_Arms_and_Ammunition_Combinations.pdf
Here is a technical bulletin from ATK (Federal/CCI/Blazer) etc which states that 5.56mm typically is loaded to higher velocity and pressure than .223. It also references a SAAMI document stating that it is unsafe to fire 5.56mm ammunition in a .223 chamber.
http://le.atk.com/downloads/technical_bulletins/223VS556.pdf
Additionally, some companies such as Hornady actually offer separate loads in .223 and 5.56mm in their LE TAP lines. Note they are not identical and that the 5.56mm loads offer higher velocities.
http://www.hornadyle.com/products/rifle-ammunition/
Please be careful when making comments like this. You guys are the ones spreading the "myth" that they are identical, and you are encouraging a potentially dangerous practice.
EDIT:
Found the link to the SAAMI doc.
http://www.saami.org/specifications...1-Unsafe_Arms_and_Ammunition_Combinations.pdf
Last edited:
D-Spy, yep the mags are thermolds, kinda old considering has the law/govt use only marking, purchased 6 brand new from the last gun panick we had for about $6-7 each.
Just last night took the 96 apart and re configured to the Bren style top feed magazine style.....definately interesting rifle
Just last night took the 96 apart and re configured to the Bren style top feed magazine style.....definately interesting rifle
chicharrones
needs more ammo
That is a beauty, Ifit!
Z-Michigan
Member
They are a really cool rifle, with an absolutely awesome design, in concept at least. Execution was good but not great. Be sure you shoot it only in locations where you can find any parts that fall off, as replacements may not be easy to get. I would still own mine if I had confidence in the ability to get parts and service in the future, but I did not.
As an aside, on mine the gas regulator had little to no effect on function, which is surprising given that its design is basically the same as an FN-FAL regulator, which has a major effect on function as it's adjusted.
As an aside, on mine the gas regulator had little to no effect on function, which is surprising given that its design is basically the same as an FN-FAL regulator, which has a major effect on function as it's adjusted.
Willie Sutton
Member
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2013
- Messages
- 2,025
Please be careful when making comments like this. You guys are the ones spreading the "myth" that they are identical, and you are encouraging a potentially dangerous practice.
Uh Huh.... I've read all of it, and from an engineers viewpoint, it's just legal CYA.
:banghead:
Come back with an actual incident attributable to the "differences" and let me know when you do. I suspect it'll be a long while. If there were a *practical* difference you think there would be thousands of "problems" as likely *millions* of rounds of surplus 5.56mm ammo has been shot in .223 rifles since about, oh... 1956 or so. Truly: Unless you have an ABSOLUTE minimum chamber in a precision .223 bolt action rifle... well... <sigh>... it's really measuring with a micrometer and cutting with a chainsaw.
"The difference between theory and practice is that in theory they are both the same, but in practice they differ".
Or in this case in theory they are different but in practice they are the same.
I believe 30 Government was the same as .30-40 Krag.
Yeah, you're right, and I ought to know, being a Krag shooter. Lovely things.
Willie
.
Uh Huh.... I've read all of it, and from an engineers viewpoint, it's just legal CYA.
:banghead:
Come back with an actual incident attributable to the "differences" and let me know when you do. I suspect it'll be a long while. If there were a *practical* difference you think there would be thousands of "problems" as likely *millions* of rounds of surplus 5.56mm ammo has been shot in .223 rifles since about, oh... 1956 or so. Truly: Unless you have an ABSOLUTE minimum chamber in a precision .223 bolt action rifle... well... <sigh>... it's really measuring with a micrometer and cutting with a chainsaw.
"The difference between theory and practice is that in theory they are both the same, but in practice they differ".
Or in this case in theory they are different but in practice they are the same.
I believe 30 Government was the same as .30-40 Krag.
Yeah, you're right, and I ought to know, being a Krag shooter. Lovely things.
Willie
.
Last edited:
You ain't the only engineer on this forum my friend ;-)
Usually when the governing body of an industry tells you not to do something, it's a good idea not to...even if an anonymous internet engineer tells you it's OK. You stated they are the same thing. Check Hornady's loads, and you'll see about a 200fps difference between their corresponding .223 and 5.56mm loads for a 16" barrel. Likewise, check the specs for true M193 vs commercial .223 55gr FMJ, and you'll find around 200fps difference also. As an engineer, you ought to know that indicates a significant difference in pressure. So neither in theory nor in practice is it the same.
If you want to live in ignorance, have at it, but:
A) don't perpetuate the misinformation that they are equivalent.
B) don't encourage people to follow an unsafe practice.
Usually when the governing body of an industry tells you not to do something, it's a good idea not to...even if an anonymous internet engineer tells you it's OK. You stated they are the same thing. Check Hornady's loads, and you'll see about a 200fps difference between their corresponding .223 and 5.56mm loads for a 16" barrel. Likewise, check the specs for true M193 vs commercial .223 55gr FMJ, and you'll find around 200fps difference also. As an engineer, you ought to know that indicates a significant difference in pressure. So neither in theory nor in practice is it the same.
If you want to live in ignorance, have at it, but:
A) don't perpetuate the misinformation that they are equivalent.
B) don't encourage people to follow an unsafe practice.
as eldon points out, there is often a significant difference in the ammo. And anyone with the reamers can tell you that 223rem is not the same as 5.56.
however, the real source of confusion is that the gun mfg are guilty of marking their chambers wrong in a shockingly high number of cases, and even when they mark them correctly, their worn reamers and sloppy machining often mean undersized or oversized chambers.
Just my opinion, but most "223" barrels out there are not exactly 223Rem, but are actually using a reamer the mfg custom ordered with slightly different specs similar to the Wylde chamber. This change to the chamber makes it a little safer than a real 223 Rem. As a result, you get the sort of "well, everybody else does it so it must be safe" advice, which despite being mostly true, is still bad advice because somebody somewhere with a real 223Rem chamber and real 5.56 ammo could be at dangerously high pressure, and if you combine a few other environmentals, like ammo laying in the sun, a dirty chamber, etc and they could get hurt.
Better safe than sorry. Call the mfg if there is any doubt and ask. they will probably tell you it's totally safe.
however, the real source of confusion is that the gun mfg are guilty of marking their chambers wrong in a shockingly high number of cases, and even when they mark them correctly, their worn reamers and sloppy machining often mean undersized or oversized chambers.
Just my opinion, but most "223" barrels out there are not exactly 223Rem, but are actually using a reamer the mfg custom ordered with slightly different specs similar to the Wylde chamber. This change to the chamber makes it a little safer than a real 223 Rem. As a result, you get the sort of "well, everybody else does it so it must be safe" advice, which despite being mostly true, is still bad advice because somebody somewhere with a real 223Rem chamber and real 5.56 ammo could be at dangerously high pressure, and if you combine a few other environmentals, like ammo laying in the sun, a dirty chamber, etc and they could get hurt.
Better safe than sorry. Call the mfg if there is any doubt and ask. they will probably tell you it's totally safe.
Willie Sutton
Member
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2013
- Messages
- 2,025
^^ This. There are VERY VERY few actual SAAMI specification minimum chambers actually cut for .223.
If you want to live in ignorance, have at it, but:
A) don't perpetuate the misinformation that they are equivalent.
B) don't encourage people to follow an unsafe practice.
The empirical evidence is convincing in two areas of interest where the theory just isn't validated by practice. One is the power to weight ratio of a bumblebee, which ought not fly, and the other is the large number of .223 rifles that ought to blow up when shot with 5.56mm NATO cartriges. The evidence is convinciong that Bumblebees fly and so-called ".223 Remington" rifles shoot 5.56. Note that I say "so-called .223" because that's exactly what almost every .223 made since the mid 60's is... "so-called" but not really chambered according to the SAAMI drawing. Now *actually* find me a walking bumblebee and an *actually* damaged "so called .223" and come back with the evidence. Until then... <yawn>...
In fact, I'd enjoy seeing *just one* chamber cast of a .223 chamber that is *actually* cut in accordance with the SAAMI .223 spec where the rifle wasn't specially prepared with a special reamer for precision shooting.
Let me know when you find one.
Willie
.
If you want to live in ignorance, have at it, but:
A) don't perpetuate the misinformation that they are equivalent.
B) don't encourage people to follow an unsafe practice.
The empirical evidence is convincing in two areas of interest where the theory just isn't validated by practice. One is the power to weight ratio of a bumblebee, which ought not fly, and the other is the large number of .223 rifles that ought to blow up when shot with 5.56mm NATO cartriges. The evidence is convinciong that Bumblebees fly and so-called ".223 Remington" rifles shoot 5.56. Note that I say "so-called .223" because that's exactly what almost every .223 made since the mid 60's is... "so-called" but not really chambered according to the SAAMI drawing. Now *actually* find me a walking bumblebee and an *actually* damaged "so called .223" and come back with the evidence. Until then... <yawn>...
In fact, I'd enjoy seeing *just one* chamber cast of a .223 chamber that is *actually* cut in accordance with the SAAMI .223 spec where the rifle wasn't specially prepared with a special reamer for precision shooting.
Let me know when you find one.
Willie
.
Last edited:
Actual numbers are fun for this discussion.
Under European testing:
5.56 (EPA test protocol): 62,366 psi max.
.223 (CIA protocol): 62,366 max.
US testing:
5.56 (SCATP 5.56): 55,114 psi max
.223 (SAAMI): 55,000 psi max
Protocols vary a little, but the max pressures are functionally the same. Dimensions are the same down to the third decimal place (inches).
Obviously loadings can vary widely across the same cartridge, much less different ones. However at max loads (where safety comes into play) the 5.56 standard is functionally identical to .223.
Under European testing:
5.56 (EPA test protocol): 62,366 psi max.
.223 (CIA protocol): 62,366 max.
US testing:
5.56 (SCATP 5.56): 55,114 psi max
.223 (SAAMI): 55,000 psi max
Protocols vary a little, but the max pressures are functionally the same. Dimensions are the same down to the third decimal place (inches).
Obviously loadings can vary widely across the same cartridge, much less different ones. However at max loads (where safety comes into play) the 5.56 standard is functionally identical to .223.
Nom de Forum
Member
Willie I can't believe you are using the "Bee Myth" to support your argument! You need to check your math!
VA27
Member
IIRC, 30 US or 30 Army is the 30/40 and 30 Gov't is indeed the 30/06.
- Status
