If .223 Wylde is supposed to be safe for 5.56mm while preserving

>>34410158
because you touch yourself at night

They're the same thing though.

Because reasons.

>>34410158
Because .223 Wylde is a fucking meme.

>>34410158
Because most ARfag's want "milspec" even though they don't understand the reasons behind it.
>gov profile M4barrels
>1/7

>>34413514
Enlighten me

>>34414578
On what?

Reasons behind mil spec

>>34410158
Same reason you wouldn't want a multipurpose rifle with a target chamber.

>>34414610
1/7" twist is to stabilize the very long M856 tracer (tallest bullet here).

The government profile barrels are just stupid government fuckery caused by dumbass military armors who thought build up at the gas port was a bend in the barrel.

File: rounds3.jpg (17KB, 653x383px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 653x383px

>>34414627
Of course I forget the picture.

Best all around twist?

>>34414687
1/8

>>34414687
1/7".

No reason to use anything else.

>>34413514
So, you don't lose any chamber advantage shooting 5.56 out of Wylde?

>>34414979
No, but don't bother with Wylde shit.

>>34414687
1/12

>>34414979
No you don't, .223 Wylde is the ideal chambering, just most ARfag's are retarded like >>34415072

>>34415254
>pluralizes with an apostrophe
>calling me retarded
OK buddy, enjoy your gimmick spec.

>>34415072
But why not? I already have a Wylde complete upper, but am waiting to build a lower. Gimmick or not, what's wrong with Wylde?

>>34415444
Nothing is wrong with it, it's just pointless.

>>34415456
Armalite website:
"What is 223 Wylde? 223 Wylde is a specific chamber size originally designed for precision shooting to make the best use of case pressure. 223 Wylde incorporates a longer throat. A longer throat in the chamber allows the shooter to utilize longer length bullets such as the 80 grain HPBT Sierra MatchKing.

What does that mean for 223 Rem and 5.56 Nato (5.56X45)? Your Eagle CAN fire any 223 Rem or 5.56 NATO rounds. The difference between those two rounds is the case pressure, with the 5.56 having the greater of the two. The 223 Wylde chamber was developed to shoot both and achieve optimal accuracy with either."

Seems to be that if you shoot both 5.56 and .223 regularly (which I do), then Wylde is the way to go. If true, it is far from pointless.

>>34416718
Aaaaand we're back to OP's question.

>>34410158
Normies in the gun culture don't adapt to new ideas very easily.

>>34416718
The actual performance difference between the two chamber cuts is almost immeasurable.

The only reason to pick one over the other is marketing. What you posted is marketing.

>>34416718
>Seems to be that if you shoot both 5.56 and .223 regularly (which I do), then Wylde is the way to go.
Maybe if you've got a benchrest gun you want to use 5.56 load with for some reason. Otherwise, it's marketing. The chamber specifications for both SAAMI .223 and 5.56 are ranges. These ranges overlap. Almost any gun will be just fine firing both. I don't know anything about 80gr SMKs, they won't fit in AR magazines.

>>34413514
1/7 twist makes sense, m4 profile barrels do not.

>>34414687
1/9

>>34418850
No.

1/7.

>>34414581
1/7

>>34418877

I answered that in this post.
>>34414627

>>34418863
No.

1/8

>>34418894
No reason for anything less than 1/7" other than historical accuracy.

>>34410158
5.56 chamber is looser allowing it to chamber rounds more easily with or without fouling. If you're going accuracy though, wylde is a good choice.

They don't bother chambering more rifles/barrels in it because the AR market is honestly retarded. It's clones of the same shit over and over again mostly. Everyone wants the same retarded specs, 16" barrels with horrible twist rates and fucking carbine length gas systems. Why this is such an agreed upon set up is beyond me. They also don't melonite treat a lot of barrels when literally every barrel should be melonited. I was only able to find one ideal barrel set-up and it only existed because some top competition shooter makes them in his garage because he came to the same conclusion I did. Fucker never shipped me my barrel though so I gave up on building a POS AR. You're likely going to have to settle for mediocre specs if you're trying to autistically build the perfect AR.

>>34418612
>1/7 twist makes sense
Only if you plan on shooting a fuckload of M856 tracers.

1:8 is the ideal twist for the heaviest non-tracer bullets that can be loaded to mag length (the 77gr SMK). 1:9 will stabilize all the heavy match bullets that can be loaded to mag length, although it might be marginal with the 2 75gr VLD's on the market that can be loaded to mag length.

Literally the only bullet in existence that can be safely loaded to mag length that does not do better with a 1:8 than a 1:7 is the M856 tracer bullet. And civilians have very little reason to use a tracer to start with, and can always use the M196 tracer in the rare circumstances they do need one. There is ABSOLUTELY no reason a civilian should ever fire an M856.

>>34419055
>Only if you plan on shooting a fuckload of M856 tracers.
There is no bullet, especially that can be loaded to magazine length, in .223 that 1/7" twist won't stabilize. So, then, what's the point of having anything else?

>>34418913
How about it performs better with all bullets that will fit in an AR mag?

1:7 won't produce acceptable accuracy with the ultralight varmint bullets. 1:8 will, while still stabilizing (and in most cases being more accurate with) the heavy match bullets.

>>34419080
>1:7 won't produce acceptable accuracy with the ultralight varmint bullets.
Sure it would, why wouldn't it?
>1:8 will, while still stabilizing (and in most cases being more accurate with) the heavy match bullets.
I want to hear your reasoning behind this.

>>34419077
It produces shit tier accuracy with anything lighter than 60gr while not being any more accurate with bullets over 60 grains. You also lose velocity across the board.

1:8 will shoot literally everything that fits in an AR well, and will still stabilize the 80gr VLD's or the 90gr SMK if you feel like single-loading or building a boltgun.

>>34419090
>why wouldn't it?
The bullets are so light that centrifugal force makes them start to fragment before they even leave the barrel. This is why 1:12 is recommended for a purpose built varmint rifle.

1:8 does better with varmint rounds but it will still stabilize the heaviest AR loads.

>>34419090
It is possible, although extremely difficult, to "over stabilize" bullets.

This results in a loss of velocity (sometimes significant) and either poor accuracy or the bullet literally coming apart mid flight from centripetal force in the case of thin-jacketed varmint bullets.

With .224" bullets available down to 32gr, this is possible to do with a 1:7 barrel, and you start noticing a slight decline in accuracy below 55gr. 6mmbr.com did a test with 52gr SMK's shot through 10 different 1:7 barrels and 10 different 1:8 barrels from the same high-end precision company and found the 1:8's were appreciably more accurate across the board. The best 1:7 barrel shot worse than the worst 1:8 barrel and the best 1:8 barrel shot over twice as tight as the best 1:7 barrel.

>>34410158
dumb frogposter