redpill me on 5.56x45 NATO

is boolit

>>32764936
It goes shooty shooty

>>32764936
It blows up .223 ayaarrss

it's designed to wound, not kill

>>32764936
Almost every competent military force on the planet uses it.

>>32764936
.22 caliber intermediate rifle cartridge. Kills terrorists.

File: d48889eb-4095-441d-bc24-3564871a624a.gif (443KB, 499x281px) Image search: [Google]

443KB, 499x281px

>>32764946
fpbp

Milfag version of the .22 ultra magnum centerfire cartridge. Adopted for manlets and women.

Its a 22 cal bullet, which means it bounces around inside the skull.

Use it for hunting. It's great. I shoot one of the deers and two of his deer buddies show up to drag him away.

>>32765811
as they should, 223 is a terrible deer round and illegal in many states for deer

A bunch of no gunz faggots and POGs tell you it sucks while everyone else is using it to kill humans and animals.

Good up to Mule Deer. Upgrayyed to 6.8 or 243 for bigger animals

File: REEEEEEEEEEEE.jpg (36KB, 680x680px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 680x680px

>>32764962
Why is this meme still alive?!!

>>32766305

Because they keep shooting it with 5.56.

>>32764936

It's okay. Will probably kill most man sized things with 1-3 shots center mass. Wouldn't trust anything under 70 grains though.

>>32766817
You're full of shit. 55gr M193 is a nasty meat-mincer and it will definitely kill a man reliably.
Now if you're using a puny little 10" pistol/SBR, things change and that's when you would want a big heavy 70gr. projectile, but even so, you're sacrificing a lot of performance. If I had to choose, I'd rather go with a .357/.44 magnum wheelgun if I needed a big punch in a small package for close-range work, and that package is much smaller still.

>>32766771
underrated post.

>>32766771
Kek

>>32764936
It's cheaper than 7.62 NATO and goes bang when you shoot it. Since you'll never use it for more than plinking in the woods, you don't need to know much else.

File: 1477671978063.jpg (48KB, 582x600px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 582x600px

>>32766771

>>32766885
357 and 44 are less lethal SBR .223
Handgun rounds all suck

>>32764946
Cпacибo

.223 bolt guy here
not bad, good for shooting gophers and jack rabbits. 0/10 for anything bigger than 55lbs. Kills slow and ruins the meat even with good body shots.
>fudd hunting
>no headshots

Casually thinking about doing a .308 conversion on my savage 11 when I wear out this barrel in another 4000 rounds.
Or 7.62x39 this 223 business shoots too flat to be interesting inside the effective range.

>>32769698
Nigga, I got a freezer full of deer taken with .223 55 grain Corelokt. Fucking heart and lungs are jellied on every single one.

Shit, I know a OG hunter that has hit his limit every year since the early 70s with a .22 Hornet.

>>32764936
its okay

>>32764936
its not 7.62 NATO

>>32769698
>Kills slow and ruins the meat even with good body shots.
"Good" body shots. Pick the right projectile and put it in the heart or lungs and itll kill effectively.

Hasty and ugly +p wildcat of .222 Remington. Bodgy good-ol-boy hack that shouldn't even be considered a cartridge design.