why use an intermediate round as a civilian?

[svaz]

Shootability. I have no problem firing 7.62x51 at range, but if I'm just out plinking and sending soda cans or propane tanks to container heaven, I'd rather take along the x39.

 

[iamkris]

You only need one gun, since you can only shoot one at a time.

Art, you tell my wife that and I'll come find you and kick your fanny. I've spent the last 18 years slowly getting her to realize that we NEED more guns. You could kill all that work in 3 seconds if she hears you say that.

 

[Art Eatman]

The thing is, I have a vision of some guy hearing noises in the night and by the time he figures out which go-bang to grab from the rack, his problem has been solved by the Bad Guy.

I have a fair number of guns myownself, but they're for different purposes. So, tell the boss lady that different uses necessitate different guns. And, you just might have to have a loaner or two, if friends show up and don't have something of their own with them.

My attitude is to pick whatever defensive weapon best suits the most-likely scenario and keep it close and handy.

 

[benEzra]

i own an ak in 7.62. but if price per round wern't a factor and you didnt need to worry about over penetration, whats the advantage of the .223 or 7.62? the only one i can think of is weight.

Less recoil; shorter, handier carbine that is more suitable for moving around with inside your home; less risk of rounds exiting your house (if you choose a carbine for defensive purposes); better capacity for a given weight.

i heard some say something like "in a gun fight no man has ever complained that his gun was to heavy, too powerful, or held too many bullets." what do you think?

If you have a CHL and carry a handgun, would you rather carry a 9mm or a full-size Desert Eagle in .50AE? If a revolver, would you carry a .357 or a .500 S&W? Some guns are too big, heavy, and powerful to be all that practical for civilian defensive use.

 

[stubbicatt]

Bullet construction plays a role in all of this as well. If one is limited to the FMJ type rounds issued by the .gov then the desireability of a 223 diminishes vis the 308. If on the other hand one can use TAP rounds then the equation changes quite a bit.

I don't know that there is a "best" choice, but several really good choices. Pick one and practice. A lot. And then a little more. Get to where you can point shoot on pepper poppers at reasonable ranges up to 25 yards, the distance within which you are most likely to encounter an armed intruder.

I prefer a Remington 870 with 4 ought buckshot to a rifle, but then I prefer the 223 with TAP ammo for my suburban dwelling over a 308. If I get one choice only, it would be the 308 even so.

Heck, I remember reading somewhere some time ago that most homicides are committed with the diminutive 22 long rifle...

 

[Quentin]

While I think there are many good choices for civilians I think the military got it right going with the 5.56 for the average rifleman. And that works for me, less weight allows me to carry more ammo and equipment.

Also the following quote is the clincher:

Go take an AR15 and an AR10 to a range...you have 10 seconds to place 10 rounds on target. Not just yanking the trigger but actually hitting the target. I think you'll notice a difference between the 223 and 308 then.

 

[W.E.G.]

I don't think the .223 is a very good sniper round.

But, if I got shot in the head with one, I might change my mind.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

If one is limited to the FMJ type rounds issued by the .gov then the desireability of a 223 diminishes vis the 308.

I don't know if I would agree with that. A typical M855 (5.56x45 ball) wound profile is going to be a significant improvement over the wound profile of M80 (7.62x51 ball) at ranges under 200m.

M855 may not fragment 25% of the time; but M80 almost never fragments.

Either way, if you eliminate cost and overpenetration issues as the OP suggested, then the main advantages of an intermediate caliber are:

1. Weight
2. Faster split times
3. Less recoil
4. Less blast
5. More ammunition per magazine
6. Smaller, handier weapon (due to smaller caliber)

The disadvantages (assuming similar ammunition design) are:

1. Smaller wound profile
2. Less range

Like anything else, you decide what you need most and try to get as much as you can in a single package. I would imagine that training is about 1000 times more important than caliber or weapon though.

 

[Elm Creek Smith]

If I need to shoot charging elk, deer, or bear, I have a Mosin-Nagant M38 with 203 grain soft points. Since in a home defense/personal defense situation, I won't have an infantry squad with me, I prefer a .223 Rem/5.56 NATO carbine. It's lighter, easier to handle, and can fire faster more accurately to neighborhood ranges. If I lived further out in the sticks, my choice might change.

ECS

 

[jjk308]

The 5.56 round and m16 rifle were selected primarily because the m14 had failed as a light MG, being uncontrollable in full auto, and because it and its ammunition were so heavy that a soldier could carry more than twice as many rounds with an M16.

At the time a poorly designed and thought out study from WWII supported the use of full auto fire. The study ignored the effectiveness of aimed fire and the problems of ammunition supply in favor of a simplified operations research analysis of number of rounds fired vs hits, and concluded that since most hits in WWII were unaimed and accidental then all that counted was the volume of fire.

In Vietnam it was quickly learned that the easiest way to die was to run out of ammunition, either through not being able to carry enough or by using it all up too fast in fully automatic fire. One friend of mine actually used an M2 carbine in the early days because he could carry 3x the rounds he could with an M14 and didn't care if the VC he hit was killed or wounded, just so the attack stopped. In all his tours he only used it on full auto twice, as suppressive fire when exiting an area.

 

[LeonCarr]

With all of the intermediate catridge talk, I am reminded of an article I read about the poaching of African Game. Per this article, guess what cartridge has killed more African Game than any other?

Here is a clue...AK-47. Ya never know when an elephant might escape from a zoo or a game ranch . No such thing as too much gun in a gunfight, military or civilian.

Just my .02,
LeonCarr

 

[SharpsDressedMan]

A .308 will do things that a 7.62x39, .30 carbine, or .223 will not. Does everyone need one? No. I have several AK's (two in 5.45) and two M1 carbines that I can grab for home protection. I have used all kinds of rifles in police service, and I know what most all of them will and wil not do. I responded to a guy getting shot pointblank into his side, through a car door, with a .30-06. Even that round gave up a lot going through outer door, glass, and inner door, and the victim survived. I have been disappointed at what the .223 will not do, and prefer the 7.62x39 to it for penetration. And if it doesn't penetrate TO the target, it isn't much good. That seems to be the problem with all "lesser" rounds, be they pistol or rifle. Use whatever you want, but I know I am working with a handicap if I do not have a big gun in my hand, be it pistol OR rifle.

 

[SharpsDressedMan]

"The 5.56 round and m16 rifle were selected primarily because the m14 had failed as a light MG, being uncontrollable in full auto, and because it and its ammunition were so heavy that a soldier could carry more than twice as many rounds with an M16."

How about this: If I had a company of real snipers, I woudn't need a battalion of troops with full auto M16's.

 

[ganymede]

from a lot of posts you would almost think there is no such thing as a 16 inch barreled .308. the real advantages im hearing are capacity, and controlability. a difference of a half pound or pound between a .308 carbine and .223 carbine is pretty much negligable unless your going on a long march with rifle in hand. noise inside a house isnt going to be a big concern for me if im fighting for my life. But an extra 10 rounds in a similar mag, thats a plus i wasn't thinking of, as well as beter control for rapid follow-ups. good points there. good point about the desert eagle carry option too, i take the 9mm for weight/mag capicity considerations.

I don't think the .223 is a very good sniper round.

But, if I got shot in the head with one, I might change my mind.

+1 to that.

I would imagine that training is about 1000 times more important than caliber or weapon though.

+1 to that as well. but discussing caliber choice on the internet is a lot cheaper than training

barthalemew summarized the pros of .223/7.62 and .308 pretty well, but left out one thing. .308 is going to penetrate beter through cover like car doors/windshields or as is more likely to the case, walls. of course, that could be a disadvantage, depending on where you live if your worried about a stray bullet hitting a neighbor. that could make you hesitate to pull the trigger, which could cost you your life.

 

[jbech123]

How about this: If I had a company of real snipers, I woudn't need a battalion of troops with full auto M16's.

If my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle.

 

[jbech123]

I don't think the .223 is a very good sniper round.

of course it isn't, and the military knows that and doesn't use it for that purpose

 

[SharpsDressedMan]

"If my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle." Not sure how that's related, but my point, since it was missed, is that controlled semi auto, or single fire, is more deadly than full auto. If you have ever seen the average combat soldier on full auto, many rounds are expended, and few of them are hits. A small group of skilled marksmen can level a large contingent of enemy. So it really doesn't matter how many rounds you carry, only how well you use them. Best recorded take for 20 rounds fired? 16 enemy dead. (Chuck Mawhinney, USMC, Viet Nam , per USMC records.) No there's a goal for us all.

 

[mljdeckard]

Sharps-

Remember the reason we backed off from long-range rifle training in the first place is that they found in combat, most shots are taken at less than 300 yards anyway. The extra weeks spend training and extra pounds in longer-range gear and ammo is wasted. If it were practical to have ALL soldiers be long-range marksmen, the military would send them all to sniper school. No one is saying that this is any less true now. When you have, as you say, a company of snipers, they are dispersed to other units, they don't work as a company anyway.

I train all of my soldiers (we are in a support unit, not likely to see combat) as best I can, but few of them are going to shoot expert. I'm one of the few who had everyone in my platoon qualify. I have soldiers of both genders and all sizes. My solution to make them all better is NOT give them all M-14s, tell them to man up and be riflemen. The rifle and round they have now is the best possible system to take non-shooters from various backgrounds and make them hit the mark most of the time from 0-300 yards. Again, it's the same as my wife. Having a 7.62 isn't going to help her if the rifle is so heavy and the recoil so painful that she can't hit anything with it.

Heavy rounds and rifles are great for the one shooter in 20 that can handle them. What are the rest of them supposed to do?

 

[iamkris]

a difference of a half pound or pound between a .308 carbine and .223 carbine is pretty much negligable unless your going on a long march with rifle in hand

Nope. Not quite...see below.

DSA SA58 Para, 16.25" barrel ~9 lbs
M4-gery, 16" barrel ~6.5 lbs

Would like to see what the SCAR-H or other new 308s come in at...but it is probably more than a pound difference.

Also, don't downplay the controllability and fatigue issue...run a carbine course sometime with a 308 then do it with a 223. I'll guarantee your performance with the "little" gun is WAY better.

 

[alemonkey]

I don't know about intermediate rounds for civilians, I just think iamkris needs to start a thread showing every single gun he owns....

 

[Dr_2_B]

I agree... time to share the love

 

[iamkris]

I don't know about intermediate rounds for civilians, I just think iamkris needs to start a thread showing every single gun he owns....

Would take too long...plus my collection pales compared to some of the others I've seen here. Lookup user "MJ" or "Rembrandt" sometime...

 

[ganymede]

Iamkris, you obviously know more about this then i do. my hat is off to you for the awesome collection you have. you have made me see that a lower power round is probobly beter for most people, especialy those who are untrained like myself. I'm a pretty big guy though, the recoil on .308 doesn't bother me, but i have only fired a friends .308 bolt action and my AK mostly. so i guess the thing for me take from this is it's beter to have a lower power rifle like my AK and a standard power as well. I probobly wont have to do counter sniper work or shoot through walls but you never know. it happened in austin texas in 1966 when local citizens return fire to a sniper in a tower. they were unable to pentrate the snipers cover, but they were able to keep enough supressing fire on him that porboby saved many lives.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Whitman

BTW i looked it up. the scar H with a 13 inch barrel weighs 7.9 pounds while the scar L with a 13.8 inch barrel weighs 7.25 pounds.

 

[iamkris]

After all that...I love my FALs more than any of my other rifles I *heart* 7.62x51mm

 

[Avenger29]

I probobly wont have to do counter sniper work or shoot through walls but you never know. it happened in austin texas in 1966 when local citizens return fire to a sniper in a tower. they were unable to pentrate the snipers cover, but they were able to keep enough supressing fire on him that porboby saved many lives.

Our very own Art Eatman was there. http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=308139&highlight=Whitman

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=272239&highlight=Whitman

And deer rifles, full caliber deer rifles were used.

None of the professor’s offices were occupied except for one whose door was open. As I walked down the hall toward that office the sound of a large caliber rifle thundered from that open doorway followed by two men talking. After all the bizarre events of the last few minutes it didn’t seem strange to me when I peeked around the office doorway to see one professor shooting a deer rifle at the top of tower while the other fed him ammunition. It never entered my mind to question why an English professor would have his deer rifle in his office complete with boxes of ammunition. This was Texas after all. Guns were commonplace. From the office windows, we could see the top of the tower clearly. Small puffs of smoke were coming from the rifle of the sniper on the observation deck. The large glass faced clock above the observation deck was shattered from others shooting back at him. The professor ran through several boxes of shells before running out of rounds. My ears were ringing.

It is important to note that the deer rifles provided suppressing fire but did not neutralize Whitman.