I read somewhere that this is the most popular rifle cartridge

It's the most popular because AR-15s are the most popular rifle in America and the grand majority of ARs are chambered in 5.56.

>>33668480
Tell us, wise master, what cartridge should we be using and why it's worth our time to convert the millions upon millions of AR's already in 5.56?

>>33668480
This thread again? You just posted this shit yesterday.

>>33668480
A thread died for this

It's mainly used to shoot targets OP, not everyone is a hunter. It's among the cheapest center fire rifle cartridges and it shoots much farther and more accurately than .22

People who do nothing but hunt don't burn through that much ammo, they sight in their rifles and take a few shots at animals during the year, rangefags might burn 100-200 rounds in an hour or two just dicking around


that's why it's the most popular cartridge, the most popular cartridge for hunting is probably .308 but it costs 3x what 5.56 does

>>33668480

I think you are wrong, I think .22 is the most popular rifle and pistol cartridge in the USA by sales volume

prove me wrong

>>33668480
wow, nice thread, OP

>>33668480
>18-23cpr
>expensive

im not a fan of it but i dislike 22r more.

>>33668480
Still better than the Winchester 30

>>33668508
It depends on the purpose of the cartridge. For rifles, you really only need 3 cartridges: 22 LR for plinking, practice, and small game that you are going to eat, 270 Winchester for deer, antelope, hogs, etc., and 375 H&H for the really big, dangerous game. If you want a long range varmint cartridge, 22-250 is good.

>>33668534
>It's mainly used to shoot targets OP
I'm aware. As I said, 22 LR is better suited to that purpose.
>>33668534
>and it shoots much farther and more accurately than .22
22s can shoot very accurately up to 100 meters. That's really all you need for most target shooting. If you are serious about long ranges (500 meters and beyond) then you will need something much flatter shooting than 5.56.

>>33668548
Could be. The figure I read may have been referring only to centerfire rounds. Either way, there's really no need for the 5.56 x 45 to exist.

>>33668550
I said MORE expensive. And yes, the savings will add up.

>>33668585
Why? It's well suited to its purpose.

>>33668596
Do you mean the 30-30 Winchester cartridge?

>>33668604
>>It's mainly used to shoot targets OP
>I'm aware. As I said, 22 LR is better suited to that purpose.

no it's not

checkmate

>>33668548
>I think you are wrong, I think .22 is the most popular rifle and pistol cartridge in the USA by sales volume

this, by far

>>33668604
I'll be sure to remember to hunt ducks with my trusty 270. You fucking faggot.

45/70 would be the best for a bush gun

>>33668692
whereIsDaProofs.jpg

File: el_chapo_raid.jpg (29KB, 306x365px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 306x365px

Apparently it works really well on Mexican drug dealers though. Granted, kind of niche hunting sport.

>>33668718

The .22 Long Rifle rimfire (metric designation: 5.6×15mmR) cartridge is a long-established variety of ammunition, and in terms of units sold is still by far the most common in the world today.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.22_Long_Rifle

File: 4-rounds-chambered-3-men-leave.jpg (36KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 640x360px

>>33668719
I've also heard people have had success hunting wild home invaders, but I understand some states have more strict regulation on this game.

>>33668674
Not an argument.
>>33668708
What part of "for rifles" don't you understand? The point of me saying "for rifles" was to exclude handguns and shotguns from the discussion.
>>33668712
No reason not to use a 270 for a brush gun.
>>33668719
No, it works adequately. There is a difference between adequate and really well.

every center fire cartridge except for maybe cheap 7,62x39 is more expensive, .22 is more popular overall

there is you magic answer op

>>33668708
Ducks have it coming anyway.

>>33668834
You don't need centerfire for punching holes in paper. If you're going to be punching holes in meat, 270 is much better than 223.

>>33668480
Intermediate rounds like 5.56 are best for combat.

>>33668860
>You don't need centerfire for punching holes in paper.
Not an argument.

>>33668860
that's why .22 is more popular overall

are you dense

5.56 is better to hunt the most dangerous game of all

>>33668860
30-06 is better than 270.

>>33668480
You tried this thread before. OP confrimed as a faggot.

>>33668889
Maybe for the military. Not for civilians.
>>33668894
It is an argument for replacing 223 with 22 LR for that purpose.
>>33668900
>that's why .22 is more popular overall
I'm arguing that it should be. I'm arguing that there is no purpose for 5.56 with 22 LR for paper and 270 for meat.
>>33668910
No, it's actually fairly weak for that.
>>33668915
Maybe so.

>>33668604
>.270

That shit was cool maybe 20 years ago gramps but it doesn't do anything better than .308/.243/6.5. And please tell me how 5.56 is only effective against coyotes? People hunt pig and deer with them all the time.

>>33668480
Well good thing your opinions don't drive the market or we would all have <10 calibers to choose from. You probably think we should have only <10 types of cars and eat only the food that's good for us too. What a sad life.

>>33668955
Better, not the best. Better than the .22lr you illiterate

File: 54656313.jpg (43KB, 490x354px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 490x354px

>>33668480
>There's no good reason for this. It's far too small to be really effective against anything bigger than a coyote.
Here you go, a few moments on google would have saved you the embarrassment of make this shit thread.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HRbAfdoU9vY

>>33668955

Honestly, do you have autism?

not joking or making fun

>>33668955
>It is an argument for replacing 223 with 22 LR for that purpose.
What did he mean by this?

>>33668959
>That shit was cool maybe 20 years ago gramps but it doesn't do anything better than .308/.243/6.5. And please tell me how 5.56 is only effective against coyotes? People hunt pig and deer with them all the time.

It's illegal to hunt deer in my state with 5.56/.223

25cal and up only

>>33668955
Why don't you want to use 5.56 for coyotes or hogs? It's a good intermediate rifle round with low recoil for follow up shots in case of an emergency and a decent magazine capacity. Some people shoot for fun. When it comes to fun 5.56 BTFO 22 lr. 22 is also shit in autoloaders and jams all the time. 5.56 is also better for home defense than any of the bullshit large game cartridges you mentioned.

>>33668959
>it doesn't do anything better than .308/.243/6.5.
Yes, it does. 270 is faster at 200 yards than 308 is at the muzzle. The published ballistics for 308 are exaggerated. 270 is more powerful than 6mm or 6.5 mm, though 6.5mm is good too.
>>33668959
>People hunt pig and deer with them all the time.
The fact that people do it doesn't make it a good idea. People hunt deer with 22 LR, but that's not a good idea either.
>>33668973
Not for the price. Within 100 meters, you're paying more for no benefit.
>>33668980
>Ballistic gel
Opinion discarded. Ballistic gel isn't like the real world.

>>33668955
>Maybe for the military. Not for civilians.
Does it matter? There are obviously better cartridges for punching holes in paper and hunting. The AR-15 is a popular civilian rifle and a big propenent of the 2nd amendment is standing up to the government(not necessarily the military) when the need arises.

>>33668480

The only fallacy of a 7.62x54R cartridge is the rim.

Or if you want something smaller, my go-to in a .308

>>33668813
> No, it works adequately. There is a difference between adequate and really well.

Trouble is, really terminal performance comes with significant recoil. Double tapping with a .308 is a bitch. Not so much 5.56

>>33669023
Not an argument.

File: 1276366424939.jpg (34KB, 350x401px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 350x401px

>>33669023
>Opinion discarded. Ballistic gel isn't like the real world.
Oh I see, you're just trolling then. Go research the fucking death toll of the 5.56 in combat the last 53 years and tell me if it's a fucking effective round.

>>33668997
No.
>>33669008
>It's illegal to hunt deer in my state with 5.56/.223
Glad to see your state has sensible caliber laws.
>>33669019
>Why don't you want to use 5.56 for coyotes or hogs
Coyotes are OK, but I would want more stopping power for hogs. Hogs can get pretty big.
>>33669019
>5.56 is also better for home defense than any of the bullshit large game cartridges you mentioned
False. Large game cartridges will do a lot more damage than 5.56.
>>33669033
>The AR-15 is a popular civilian rifle and a big propenent of the 2nd amendment is standing up to the government(not necessarily the military) when the need arises
Never going to happen. Gun owners don't have the balls to do it.
>>33669046
You don't need to double tap with a full size rifle round.

File: 1492377756581.jpg (89KB, 1024x576px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 1024x576px

>>33668604
Are you king fudd?

5.56 with a ballistic tip/hollow point is mean ass shit OP

not to be discounted

>>33669074
>tell me if it's a fucking effective round.
It isn't. It's a (barely) adequate round. The fact that armies of the world have killed a lot of people with it is due to the fact that they were issued it. If they'd been issued something else, they would have used that.

>>33668480

>AR fags will defend this

>>33669091
I'm not a fudd. A fudd is someone who believes that sport is legitimate while fighting is not. I accept that fighting is legitimate.

File: 1358609676738.jpg (180KB, 863x740px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 863x740px

>>33669075
>stopping power

>>33669075
> You don't need to double tap with a full size rifle round.

I remember you. You're the guy who gut shot a deer with his .338 on my uncle's ranch last year because he believed velocity makes up for his poor shot placement.

>>33669075
>5.56 is also better for home defense than any of the bullshit large game cartridges you mentioned
>False. Large game cartridges will do a lot more damage than 5.56.

Large game cartridges don't offer the bonuses of high capacity or fast, accurate follow up shots when you inevitably miss. Unless you're going with something like .308, but that's more expensive and still not ideal.

>>33669008
Yeah and plenty of others allow it and it'll kill them just fine. Maybe if you weren't such a pussy and could hold your rifle right you wouldn't have to blow them in half to get a kill shot.

>>33669075
>Never going to happen. Gun owners don't have the balls to do it.
Doesn't matter, it's the idea.

File: 262629.jpg (23KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 480x360px

>>33669098
I bet you jerk off every night covered in 7.62x54R

>>33669023
Really? You have some load data to back that up? and which .270 load are you speaking of?

>>33669114
Yes, stopping power.
>>33669119
Shot placement is necessary but not always sufficient.
>>33669123
>inevitably miss
Why is it inevitable?
>>33669129
>it'll kill them just fine
Sometimes. Sometimes not. Why take that chance?
>>33669131
What good is an idea if you're never going to do it?
>>33669135
I've never actually fired 7.62x54R.
>>33669146
130 grains at 3060 fps at the muzzle compared to 150 grain 308 at 2640 fps at the muzzle. Verified with a chronograph.

>>33668480
>all of this blathering
>all of these anecdotes
>not one single citation
>not one reported statistic

It's like you don't even know how to argue a point.

>>33669023
> Ballistic gel isn't like the real world.

Actually, it kind of is, assuming you don't hit bone. http://www.ar15.com/ammo/project/Fackler_Articles/winchester_9mm.pdf

>>33669075
>False. Large game cartridges will do a lot more damage than 5.56.
I wasn't implying they do less damage dipshit. How are you going to shoot at two or more home invaders rapidly and accurately at close range with your shitty 270 savage axis and bushnell scope? If you have neighbors do you want your full size rifle cartridge to go through your wall and hit them? Stop talking out of your ass.

>>33669168
You can get .243 well over 3,000 fps you fucking dunce. Seriously go take your Winchester 70 and off yourself.

>>33669168
>150 grain 308 at 2640 fps at the muzzle

You don't have to shoot shitty Remington ammo. Try 165gr SST super performance and you'll don't get over 2800fps out of a normal hunting barrel on your chronograph.

File: 1274755618625.jpg (19KB, 240x249px)

19KB, 240x249px

ITT:
pic related

>>33669168

what part of "Cheapest centerfire rifle round" do you not understand?

>why don't people plink with .270 which is 4x more expensive than .223

>>33669209
It's Sunday night. What else am I going to do?

Besides, we aren't really talking with him. We're talking to all the silent lurkers out there who might believe his b.s.

File: 1356430970735.jpg (156KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 800x600px

>>33669096
>5.56 with a ballistic tip/hollow point is mean ass shit OP
>not to be discounted

this

>>33669176
What would you like a citation for?
>>33669178
>it kind of is
Kind of, sometimes. It's a simulation, but not a very good one. For one, flesh has skin over it, while gel doesn't.
>>33669207
Actually, it was Nosler Trophy Grade. Not cheap ammo by a long shot.
>>33669189
Yes, but 270 has more impact area.
>>33669216
I never suggested that they plink with 270. I said they should plink with 22 LR, which is cheapest of all.
>>33669183
>If you have neighbors do you want your full size rifle cartridge to go through your wall and hit them?
Anything that can go through a man can go through drywall.
>>33669228
Why do a half measure when you could go all the way?

>>33668480
Lmao, op starting retarded threads. If I wanted to shoot 22lr, 270 Winchester,6.5 Grendel/creedmooor, or 308 Winchester, or any other Calibre/caliber. I would shoot it. Sometimes I wanna shoot 5.56 nato.

Op is retarded for suggesting that a free market not manufacture something because he believes that something else does it better.

>>33669168
>Shot placement is necessary but not always sufficient.

Failure to stop drill exists exactly for this reason. If the two shots center mass do not stop him, the 3rd to the CNS will. No way in hell you're pulling that off with a .243 let alone a .270.

Honest question, have you ever seen a breaching teams with .308s? I don't think I've seen a single one.

>>33669168
It's inevitable because it happens all the time, why risk having only 5 rounds of a harder to control caliber in a manual action or even semi-auto with more rounds when your life depends on it and you're scared to death? Is 5.56 sufficient to kill? Yes. Is it easy to bring back onto target for even weaker people? Yes. Does it offer higher capacities at lower weights? Yes.

>>33669254
>more impact area

Really dude you're grasping at straws. Stop using Remington core lokt and you can get loads just as fast as the .270 out of .308 and 6.5.

>>33669254
>Anything that can go through a man can go through drywall.
How often does m193 go all the way through a man?

>>33669254
>Kind of, sometimes. It's a simulation, but not a very good one. For one, flesh has skin over it, while gel doesn't.

You could have at least glanced at the abstract. They verified, from autopsies, that bullets penetrated on average the same in shooting victims as ballistics gel, just with greater range on both sides of the curve.

>>33669255
Do you buy ammunition for its own sake or to accomplish a particular purpose? If you buy it for a particular purpose, why not use the right tool for the job?
>>33669275
>It's inevitable because it happens all the time,
People miss all the time because they use small handguns and spray and pray shooting techniques.
>>33669286
>Really dude you're grasping at straws
No, I'm not. Impact area is important.
>>33669286
>Stop using Remington core lokt and you can get loads just as fast as the .270 out of .308 and 6.5.
A 308 Winchester is not going to be as fast as a 270 Winchester. The 270 has a far, far, far greater case capacity to caliber ratio.
>>33669310
Sometimes, gel is accurate. Sometimes, it isn't. It's not a reliable metric.

>>33669254
>Actually, it was Nosler Trophy Grade.

Well that's a bummer. I don't use their ammo but I do love their bullets. Yet more reason to switch to the Hornady if you're going to keep shooting store bought, at least until everybody starts making sure their ammo matches their marketing.

File: 33cd9f70c06b1db2a788c4044ffe6c10.jpg (263KB, 900x601px) Image search: [Google]

263KB, 900x601px

>>33668508
.30-06 for America. Drop the AR15 and get this, or a VEPR if you need an assault weapon

>>33669336
> Sometimes, gel is accurate. Sometimes, it isn't. It's not a reliable metric.

So post your study showing this then. Because all I'm hearing right now is 'uh uh, no it isn't'.

>>33669336
>People miss all the time because they use small handguns and spray and pray shooting techniques.

People miss because they react poorly to strenuous situations where lives are on the line, regardless of the weapon being used. Poor form only worsens these reactions.

>>33669357
Says that skin has more resistance to bullets than flesh. Gel can't account for that unless you put a skin simulant over it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wXwPtP-KDNk

>>33669345
Hornady is accurate, but I have not chronographed it. I have had good success with Sierra as loaded by Federal.
>>33669353
Heavy.

>>33669415
What rifle should be used for home defense in case three people try to rush us?

>>33669415
An bona fide, freedom loving, death dealing chunk of American steel and walnut ain't meant to be light, it's meant to be effective at killing commies and fascists. Plus it's sexier than a bombshell pinup girl and has power to spare to boot.

>>33669415
> Gel can't account for that unless you put a skin simulant ove

The same guy making a quote about how skin counts for 4" of muscle wrote the same white paper I linked who said gel is accurate. Martin Fackler.

Point is, if skin was regularly stopping bullets, you wouldn't see a right tail on the penetration data for corpses in his whitepaper.

>>33668480
>>33668604

OP, nobody is hunting anything but coyotes, smaller hogs, and southern white tail with a .223.

If it's the most popular round in the US, it's because of self defense purposes. Are you really advocating a hunting rifle for home defense? Or even an autoloading .270? (Does such a thing even exist?)

>>33668550
>>18-23cpr
Maybe I'm not good at doing things but I don't think I've ever seen 5.56 below 30 cents around. I'm talking unfired, brass, not thrice reloaded steel.

>>33669336
>why not use the right tool for the job?

Like shooting a catridge with around 1100ft-lbs of energy at a paper target, or other shit to sate my desire to shoot cheaply?

I shot 200 rounds of decent 5.56 at potatoes I could have shot 100 rounds of 308 at. Should I have bought 270win?

>>33669415
>Sierra as loaded by Federal

I'd damn well hope Gold Medal Match is up to listed velocities for the price.

File: screenshot_799.png (70KB, 2024x1432px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 2024x1432px

>>33668480
>>33668604
>>33668813
>>33668860
>>33668955
>>33669023
>>33669075
>>33669168
>>33669336

noguns forum dweller detected

>>33669336
.308 will be just as fast you fucking idiot.

This is literally the same shitty thread from a couple of days ago

>>33669444
Hard to say, but there are options in better calibers than 5.56 mm. 6.5 mm would be a good place to start.
>>33669570
>If it's the most popular round in the US, it's because of self defense purposes.
That's just a tough guy fantasy. The vast majority of 5.56 mm rifle owners will NEVER defend themselves with them.
>Are you really advocating a hunting rifle for home defense? Or even an autoloading .270? (Does such a thing even exist?)
Not necessarily. There are better options out there for short range defense. 20 gauge shotguns come to mind.
>>33669597
If you're just shooting potatoes, you may as well use 22 LR. Potatoes don't need a lot of stopping power.
>>33669677
Gameking.
>>33669756
I know you are, but what am I?
>>33669908
Should I believe you or the chronograph?

>>33670879
6.5mm what? Of course you don't have a real answer.

File: 1488827056995.png (1MB, 800x1166px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 800x1166px

>>33669576
>reloaded steel
Look man I know steel CAN be reloaded, but no one fucking does it.

File: 1437079509602.png (94KB, 512x512px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 512x512px

>>33670994
>he doesn't defend his domecile with 6.5×50mmSR Arisaka

>>33670879
>That's just a tough guy fantasy. The vast majority of 5.56 mm rifle owners will NEVER defend themselves with them.

The vast majority of all gun owners will never use their guns for self defense. Should we get rid of pistols and CCL too?

Seriously though, what should they have bought instead for the rare case of home invasion? Some 9mm pistol with a 3" sight radius? Pump shotgun with the stock 24-28" barrel that you're going to short stroke under stress anyway?

Nah, man. Just get the AR, get a flashlight, and learn to put 5 rounds in 3" at 25y and under. You've got capacity, you've got nice expanding ammo going 2700-3000fps, and you've got low recoil.

As a nice bonus, you can get the monolithic 55 grainers and pop pigs 2" behind the ear when you get a nice 1-4/6x.

>>33668534
>.308 costs 3x what 5.56 does
Nigga what. If you buy in bulk online,you can get .308 for ~36 c/r. 5.56 is like 23 c/r.

File: ARsHuntToo.jpg (2MB, 1578x2202px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1578x2202px

>>33668480
>There's no good reason for this.

I asked an experienced deer hunter about this the other day. He is a bow hunter primarily, but is not alien to rifles. His answer was, and I quote:

>"Anon, I take down deer with a flying stick. If you place your shot right, .223 will take a deer no problem."

Notice he said .223, which is weaker than 5.56. Mind you, we're not talking about extraordinarily long-range here. This guy even said that most deer kills in our area are probably maxed at 80 yards, which is definitely going to be lethal with .223.

>TL;DR you don't know what you're talking about, and the individual with the rifle should be figuring out what works for him on his own you faggot

>>33670994
260 Remington, 6.5 Creed, 6.5 Grendel, or even 6.5 Swede are respectable options.
>>33671221
>Should we get rid of pistols and CCL too?
I never said you should get rid of anything, but if you own a 5.56 because you think you're going to fight off burglars, then you're probably living in a Walter Mitty fantasy.

>>33671221
>Pump shotgun with the stock 24-28" barrel
They make them with 18 inch barrels.

>>33671302
>Some people make do with literal stone age weapons, so I can hunt deer with a varmint cartridge.

>>33671365
>Hello, I am anon and i don't pay attention to the words SHOT PLACEMENT

>what is self defense

sage for shitty thread

>>33670879
You should probably believe your average reloading manual you cuck.

>>33671324

>6.5 Grendel
Gross. If you're going to be stuck with an AR magwell, you could at least try .243WSSM

> You think you're going to fight off burglars, you're living in Walther Mitty fantasy
It's /k/, of course we're all living in our Die Hard fantasies. Here's hoping it stays that way.

> They make them with 18 inch barrels.
You're still short stroking, and now you'll also never use it for anything else besides home defense. No skeet, no water fowl, nada. Dedicated self defense gun, except you can't even CC like a pistol. I guess you could do the Mossberg Flex or something, but I don't know what that will run for 2 barrels.

Meanwhile, Joe Blow out in the country with his boring old 16" AR15, in addition to defending his 2 bed 1 bath and 10 year old TV, also regularly shoots hogs and coyotes, and maybe tries his hand at 3 gun assuming his knees are still good.

I'm still learning the ropes of shooting, so I only own an AR so far, but...

1. Handy short rifle with 30 rounds for home defense

2. Cheap ammo for offhand practice

3. Slightly more expensive ammo for target practice from 100-300 yards

4. Now I hand load with cheap bullets and a lot less powder than .308 would take for that 1-300 yard target practice

I'll have to get something bigger if I ever want to hunt deer or shoot past 300y, but I don't own any land yet and none of my close ranges go past 300y anyway.

Why am I not supposed to like the round or the rifle?

>>33671324
Why would you recommend long range cartridges that come in bolt action rifles for home defense? How much leaded water do you drink on a daily basis?

>>33670879
>I know you are, but what am I?

No, honestly, that's what all these "X THING I DON'T LIKE SUCKS" threads always boil down to - somebody that doesn't shoot, or hasn't been shooting for long. Once you actually get into guns, hunting, etc, you develop preferences but you also learn why others enjoy/use the things they do. I unironically used to share a lot of your opinions when I was inexperienced, now I don't.

t. guy that hunts a lot of big animals with a Model 70 in .30-06

>>33671365

>I don't know anything about bullet design

Empirical evidence suggests that .223 with a proper bullet will consistently kill deer sized game. Empirical evidence suggests that any load of .30-06 delivered to the paunch will consistently fail to kill it.

>>33671392
I do. Every reloading manual I've ever seen says that when using bullets of commensurate sectional density, the 270 is much faster than 308.
>>33671491
>243WSSM
Not a bad choice. Certainly better than 5.56 mm.

>>33671491
>It's /k/, of course we're all living in our Die Hard fantasies. Here's hoping it stays that way.
You're right. There's nothing wrong with that. Just don't confuse fantasy with reality.

>>33671491
>Dedicated self defense gun, except you can't even CC like a pistol.
Use the right tool for the job. If one tool could do every job well, there wouldn't be different tools on the market.

>>33671868
>>33671921
Stopping power.

>>33671932
>preferences
It's not about personal preference. It's about using the right tool for the job.

>>33671985
>consistently
No. I would be willing to bet there have been plenty of deer wounded because of that thinking. Of course, it's hard to prove because a hunter who wounds a deer with an inadequate cartridge will just write it off as a miss to protect his ego.

>>33668480
>It's far too small to be really effective against anything bigger than a coyote.
People are bigger than coyotes.

>>33672006
>It's about using the right tool for the job

Which is why you're arguing that a bolt action hunting rifle is better for defensive situations at <5m than a semi automatic carbine chambered in a round that is more than capable of destroying both lungs with one round.

You have absolutely no credibility whatsoever.

File: IMG_20170417_010511_01.jpg (2MB, 2998x2933px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2998x2933px

>>33669135
>I bet you jerk off every night covered in 7.62x54R
You don't?

>>33672082
Exactly. It's a marginal manstopper at best.

>>33672122
You keep making assertions without proof.

>>33672082
He's part of the very vocal minority of /k/ that believes the .223 is insufficient for shooting people. The Poodle Shooter Gang, if you will.

File: DkcYQ7GOEJU7iQu9fNuYSTtueNxbLQcBkYIXtLSQqWI.jpg (63KB, 727x411px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 727x411px

Is .30 a blam really that cheap? Why not .20 a round that is more fun to shoot like 9mm or 7.62x39?

>>33672186
You're right. I'm damn proud of it, too.

>>33672157
300 Blackout and 5.56

>>33672023
>I would be willing to bet
So you're just going to cover your ears and yell "NANANANA not the evidence I want."

Post mortem examination of killed game demonstrates that .223 hunting ammunition will easily destroy the lungs of a small/medium deer. You have no credibility whatsoever.

>>33672217
>Post mortem examination of killed game demonstrates that .223 hunting ammunition will easily destroy the lungs of a small/medium deer.
Sometimes, at close range, a 223 will kill a deer, but so will a 22 LR. It's not a good idea. Why do you want to use a round that's just barely adequate? Why not use a round with AMPLE power to get the job done.

>>33672216
I sold my nugget
:(

>>33668480

Are you comparing 5.56 to .22LR?

are those just the only two types of bullets you know about...?

>>33672205
You know how where this road ends, right?

Today it's stopping power, tomorrow it's endlessly posting gel tests in the 9mm/.45 debates. Next day you're linking articles on how we never should have dropped the M14. Final symptoms are endlessly sniffing brown-brown made with Varget and ranting how 276 Petersen would have changed war forever.

File: ImperturbableAgonizingBighorn.webm (729KB, 1440x1080px) Image search: [Google]

729KB, 1440x1080px

>>33672239

you keep comparing .223 / 5.56 to .22lr, while disregarding the difference in velocity. this is low-quality bait, anon.

>>33672239
>Sometimes, at close range, a 223 will kill a deer

No, not sometimes. If you shoot a deer in the lungs with a bonded bullet <150m, that deer is going to die. Quickly, and probably right where you shot it.

https://www.google.ca/search?q=.223+lungs&rlz=1CAHPZQ_enCA729CA730&espv=2&site=webhp&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj9uNDw4KrTAhVK4GMKHcBPBPEQ_AUIBigB&biw=1366&bih=702

Here ya go. If you can't recover a small deer with this sort of damage to it's pulmonary system, it's on you, not the caliber.

File: ComposedSelfishEagle.webm (1020KB, 1440x1080px) Image search: [Google]

1020KB, 1440x1080px

>>33672311
for reference

>>33672347

note that kinetic energy is equal to 1/2 M V^2, so while 5.56 is only moving around 2.3 times as fast, it has almost ten times as much energy.

File: 1468011667056.jpg (881KB, 2442x2918px) Image search: [Google]

881KB, 2442x2918px

>>33672268
you have forgotten the face of your father

say " Saluto Nex Alea Ave Nex Alea " three times while kneeling and facing the direction of the KUBE

you must obtain one nugget and one spam can within the span of three days or your mother will die in her sleep if you do no reply to this post any questions ?

murder cube

>>33668480
>There's no good reason for this

Ok OP, let's take this one step at a time.
Say I look at your household.
You and everyone in your household love sucking dick and cannot stop sucking dick.
And thank fuck god, your household has plenty of dicks.
Would it really be out of place and surprising if I conclude that because of the amount of dick and dicksuckers, I come to say that your house is filled with faggots?

There's tons of AR15 in the US.
5.56/223 is the default cartridge of the AR15.
Our factories also pump out mass amounts of said cartridge for our military, whose primary rifle uses it.

Why is this so foreign to you?

>>33668480
It's for shooting two legged varmits you dumbass.

>>33672273
For plinking, sure. The comparison is valid.
>>33672311
Why does that matter for punching holes in paper and plinking?
>>33672394
Note that there is no proof that kinetic energy is a valid measure of stopping power.
>>33672440
Bandwagon fallacy.
>>33672456
And not very good at that.

>>33672710
>And not very good at that.
sure bud. shoot a fucking coyote with M855 and tell me what it looks like.

>>33668508
.308 is the ideal all purpose cartridge

>>33672710

What is stopping power measured in? Does it have a metric equivalent?

>>33672710
except it is good at killing people you nigger. low weight and high velocity for flat trajectory and AP capabilities, respectable power, and low recoil for fast follow up shots because that's more important in combat than MUH STOPPAN POWUR

>>33672744
It's a good intermediate cartridge?

>>33668480
It is more than enough for most game.

As always OP and his troll threads are cancer

>>33668480
Kys plz OP.

File: op.jpg (314KB, 2500x1741px) Image search: [Google]

314KB, 2500x1741px

>>33668480
OP doesnt understand terminal ballistics.
All it needs is speed so dont cut thte barrel under 16 inches.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HRbAfdoU9vY

>>33672769
No, but it's more versatile than 5.56

>>33672182
you really suggesting that a 5.56 won't seriously injure someone in a close engagement?

It's for shooting niggers

>>33674586
Yes, only marginally better than pistol rounds. Happy to rescind my statement if someone as aggregate data showing otherwise.

Anecdotal data from forensic pathologists and trauma surgeons need not apply, unless linked into a wider study.

>>33672006
>stopping power
>the sheer stopping power will annihilate an intruder even if i miss.

Your stupidity has made this thread great, but please don't come back.

>>33672407
he's right anon, you must repent.

Ave Nex Alea

File: JebGuac.jpg (88KB, 980x854px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 980x854px

>>33668604
>unironically suggesting .375 H&H

>>33672710
>bandwagon fallacy

PACK UP THE ARs GUYS, THE WHOLE AR-15 AFTERMARKET AND ABUNDANT, RELIABLE, AND FUN AMMUNITION IS JUST A FALLACY.

>>33674642
why don't you look for it?

you'll only say stupid shit like "ballistic gelatin, opinion discarded" if we show you stuff.

>>33674771
I have. I have not (yet) found any large sample size analysis of gun shot survivability rates by caliber or velocity, let alone by location of the gun shot.

Gel tests show permanent wound cavity and penetration. I have no idea how am supposed to interpret gel tests showing a .223 and 9mm both with 12"+ penetration and come up with 'Aha, the victim is 400% more likely to die from the rifle round".

The obvious solution is to come at the problem from the other side, trauma surgeons and coroners. They have large sample size data to show how much more fatal a rifle round to the aortic arch will be than a pistol round. They just never seem to compile their data.

>You don't NEED a MILITARY GRADE cartrige to hunt or home defense
>223 is just a glorified 22 has no stopping power
>using an AR for home defense is just fantasy but using a Hunting rifle chambered in 30-06 is not
Jesus this guy is the worst of fudd and gun grabber

>>33668480
ITT: OP is still a silly nigger.

>>33674834
>Gel tests show permanent wound cavity and penetration. I have no idea how am supposed to interpret gel tests showing a .223 and 9mm both with 12"+ penetration and come up with 'Aha, the victim is 400% more likely to die from the rifle round"
>permanant wound cavity

you should also take into account the temporary wound cavity. 12" isn't the same as 12".