Is there really any difference in effectiveness between 556

>>33291204
>Is there really any difference in effectiveness between 556 and 9mm shooting a target not behind cover?
Yes

File: Black Hills 5.56mm 77 Grain Tipped MatchKing Ammunition.jpg (60KB, 750x366px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 750x366px

>>33291204
Depends on grain. For short range with short barrels, use heavy grain ammo.

In general, 9mm is a heavier grain round (sometimes 2-3x that of a .223). Course it also lacks velocity, which is where the .223 wins out. That said, you should use heavier bullets for shorter barrels. Hot-loads combined with heavy, decent lengthened barrels, can be devastating.

Also bullet design, packing hollow tip .223 or soft tips would perform just as well as a 9mm hollow point if not better. Thou 77 grain will frag pretty close, so that might be a mute point.

>>33291308
But even in your pic, there's only a small amount of damage beyond 10 inches. Going by the FBIs theory that stopping power doesn't exist, you need as many chunks of lead hitting beyond 12 inches as possible, and from what I've seen only a few fragmenting 556 loads, and buckshot can manage this.

>>33291204
High-velocity 556 can punch through a chest plate, so there's that.

File: Apache mast.jpg (91KB, 931x642px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 931x642px

>>33291204

Both rounds pictured are 5.56mm; top is out of an 8" barrel and bottom is out of a 20" barrel.

https://www.ar15.com/ammo/project/Self_Defense_Ammo_FAQ/DocGKRData/223%20Barrier%20Rounds.htm

File: 1235345345.jpg (136KB, 978x760px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 978x760px

>>33291204
>>33291623
>and it seems to deliver a smaller bullet past 12 inches
>you need as many chunks of lead hitting beyond 12 inches as possible

>>33291204
Speed.
But seriously though, stop smoking it.

>>33291799
So basically they want 5.45x39mm 7n6 but can't admit the Russians ripoff of 5.56 NATO is better than the original?

That's hilarious.

>>33291823
7n6 has no 1'' inch neck, and as tumbling bullet it may be susceptible to fleeting yaw inconsistency effect. Though i am not aware of such studies in public domain.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZu5pMD9Eds
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fX4ODh1g4eM

>>33291776
>>33291799
>>33291836
So the idea is, ideally you would have a bullet that annihilates everything up to and beyond 12 inches, but in this case the best you can get is a bullet that still goes deep, but only does massive damage sooner, rather than risk over penetration.

File: AR-15barreltwist.png (420KB, 501x404px) Image search: [Google]

420KB, 501x404px

If we're going to talk about 5.56 and whine about how it allegedly doesn't reliably stop threats, I got something to contribute.

>>33291204

> 50gr monolithic bullet made for windshields and tough game doesn't expand very much

Use heavier JSPs or OTM bullets for better terminal performance.

File: AR-15barreltwist3.png (232KB, 506x230px) Image search: [Google]

232KB, 506x230px

Sorry that these are cut up so much
3/?

File: AR-15barreltwist4.png (417KB, 522x398px) Image search: [Google]

417KB, 522x398px

4/6

File: AR-15barreltwist5.png (452KB, 532x550px) Image search: [Google]

452KB, 532x550px

5/6

Penetration in gel does not equate penetration in humans, it's used as a testing benchmark, nothing else.
For real world performance also look at hunting. If it does well in deer, it will most likely do well in people as well.

File: AR-15barreltwist6.png (172KB, 502x163px) Image search: [Google]

172KB, 502x163px

6/6

>>33291986
>Penetration in gel does not equate penetration in humans
http://www.ar15.com/ammo/project/Fackler_Articles/winchester_9mm.pdf

>>33291920
Yes. That's really the beauty of 6-7mm cartridges, go just a little bigger and all of a sudden you're obliterating 12 inches deep.

>>33291623

> There's only a small amount of damage beyond 10 inches.

That's fine. You want to dig a nice wide channel with two holes at both ends for maximum blood loss. Wide all the way through is nice, but that means your bullet is going to exit with considerable speed.

>>33292877
So if it's going too fast it'd do a lot of damage, but overpenetrate. Makes sense, but it's also a small price to pay for that much damage.

>>33292910

Hunting game, you actually want that over penetration. Exit wounds always seem to bleed heavier than entrance wounds, so a bigger hole on the far end of a deer makes for a nicer blood trail.

>>33293002
So is overpenetration really the reason 556 doesn't blow a big hole that deep? It seems more like a lack of power to me.

>>33292750
Seen videos of that shit on gel.

Damn man, shit like 6.5 Grendel hit hard. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cf4_5S_J6gU