223 vs 5.56: Can’t Believe The Difference
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 28 ก.ย. 2024
- On this episode of Ultimate Barrier Testing, we will be comparing the performance of the 223 Rem to the 5.56 (5.56x45 or 5.56 NATO) on 4 different targets. Each target is worth 25 points (winner takes all), for a grand total of 100 points. Whichever cartridge ends up with the highest score will be the winner. Testing was setup at 50 yards. Thanks for watching!
*These tests are meant for entertainment and educational purposes only. Do not try any of these tests at home! Always verify your setup is rated for and can safely fire any ammunition that you intend to use.
5.56 NATO: WIN 55 gr FMJ M193
223 Rem: WIN 55 gr FMJ
this guys voice doesnt match his face lol
FACTS
I've got a match ! Your face & my ..... 😂
He could be a relation of Ray Romano.
It's because it isn't his real voice.
KGB
My biggest takeaway from the videos with sand is that I see why we still use sandbags
lol
100% It compresses when struck, makes a great barrier.
Filling the walls of my compound as we speak! In Minecraft, of course.
It is EXTREMELY effective at stopping all kinds of serious stuff. During the war in Iraq, we would fill "Hesco Bastions" with sand off the ground and put them around our FOB (Forward Operating Base) to create a barrier. It's just a metal cage with this fabric-type material that will hold the sand inside. They can stop mortar rounds, artillery, up to 30mm weapons, massive trucks, high explosives, etc. and it's just sand. Pretty impressive stuff. Saved me a couple times.
Facts bro, still surprised me that sand can hold a lot of builds in a close space. Just imagine a whole all built of sand
This guys voice was built to be a radio DJ. Sounds like he should be saying “and up next we have some cooool jazz from Miles Davis, right after this quick commercial break”
Aaaannnd, next on stage two is Angela. She's a community college student who is almost done with her nursing degree!
I thought he sounds like Ray Romano
Yeah he has a golden deep baritone
Has resonance and timbre but no professional training. His delivery would not make it on radio without some good training and practice. Reminds me of Ray Romano...
@@45johngaltI was thinking the brother
It matters because the chamber that’s cut inside the barrel of a 223 vs 556 are different. As far as the portion of the chamber that encases the cartridge case, they’re the same; it’s the chamber cut past the case mouth that’s different. A chamber in a 5.56 NATO barrel has a longer throat, which is the segment of the chamber between the case mouth and where the rifling lands taper from nothing to the bore diameter of 0.219-inch/5.56 millimeters. This extra space allows the barrel to withstand the higher pressures of the 5.56 NATO. It’s that simple. What’s not as simple is the interchangeability.It is perfectly safe to shoot 223 Remington ammunition in a 5.56 NATO rifle, but in some cases, precision can be less than stellar. On the other hand, it’s considered unsafe to shoot 5.56 NATO ammunition in a 223 Remington rifle. You see, the 5.56 NATO cartridge will produce about 62,000 psi in a 5.56 NATO chamber, and that’s OK. But in the 223 Remington chamber with the tighter throat, pressures can exceed 70,000. That’s not OK... Certified Gunsmith here and if you dont believe me do the research you will see for yourself.
Absolutely correct. Throat erosion & over pressure is real.
Totally, it's all in how you're chambered kid...
Well put.
as someone who has worked for a self defense and rifle fighting school and seen millions of rounds go through our loaner rifles i can without a doubt say that it doesnt matter not one bit.
Not always true. The Ruger Mini-14 is an exception, going all the way back to the 180-series guns.
The velocity on the boxes is usually with 20” barrel on 556 and 24” barrel on 223. The 223 is marketed as a bolt gun varmit cartridge.
Indeed This is true!
I was about to mention the same, although I would take the lengths further down, at least for 5.56. Usually 5.56 barrels are 14"-16". Then the higher pressure/bigger powder load on 5.56 cannot compensate for the lot longer .223 barrel used for the data on the boxes.
@@juhanivalimaki5418 I've seen upwards of 3,500 fps from M193 coming out of my 22" bolt gun, so they still do gain velocity. :D
@@juhanivalimaki5418 current popular barrel length trends are are outliers for the original design of these cartridges. I get your point. But, whatever results these tests produce with 18 to 20" barrels, shorter barrels by default are going produce worse not better.
As a member of the "disarmed for your own safety" society in the EU, I enjoy the additional info provided by such comments.
Sadly - firearms is a "book only" hobby for me :(
As a former grunt, I can attest to my love of sandbags and a well built fighting position. When shit starts gettin "real" the dirt start to "appeal"!!!!!
I bet wet sand is even better?
Oh, that sweet, sweet earth...
@@bryanst.martin7134Mass and density. Water filling in the tiny spaces between grains of sand should help.
@@TUKByV It should also reduce the sand spilling out of the hole. There is another form of barrier, Glycol mixed with Fumed silica. Flexible till struck at high velocity, then it instantly crystalizes.
@@bryanst.martin7134 Oh, yeah. Heard about that some years ago. Did anyone market it?
Most reloading manuals have their test rifles at a 22-24” bolt gun for .223. That’s why it has the higher velocity. 5.56 is USUALLY tested out of 20” M16. I’m sure there are some manuals out there that might test out of a bolt gun. I haven’t read every manual to be 100% sure.
WELL GET TOOO IT SON! lololol jokes aside that's a good point
Great point. Size matters
they are tested out of a testing action, not a gun per say.
Really says something about the quality of your videos that we're here in 2024 watching 5.56 v. .223 videos and enjoying them.
223 is not annealed looks as your 223 is a reload or not a 223.check it out for your self
😮
As a vet and former range officer, I really like the AR- family of weapons. I personally noticed a big difference when shooting the .223 (it seemed to jam way more often) and in alignment with the tumbling you saw in your test, I saw big differences on shots that were anywhere over 100m. I like to fine tune my rifle sights to about 100-300m with no scope, and it was simply impossible to do with those rounds. I switched back to 556 and no problems. Please don't jump on me, its just a personal observation guys, I don't know the science behind it...EDIT: It appears VIC2265 has much of the answer...thank you.
This was my thought. I think the benefits of 556 might show a little out at a distance. But is it enough to really matter?
@@diver0129 SAME. DAMN. CARTRIDGE.
I second the jamming part on the AR platform with the 223 vs 556. Heard you can compensate with adjustments to the recirc gas pressure and buffer weights but I was just thinking- why not just use .556 rounds and eliminate the problem without gun surgery, ya know?
@@CarlSmithers It's NOT. Thus the comparison. The differences are minor, but they are there.
Leaving a message just to say I love how your video just spat out the facts. No superfluous yacking! Great format…interesting and efficient. Thank you
This guy is very entertaining. Hope his channel grows.
He is definitely stepping up the comedy, the waiter bit…
I agree, he has the voice of a radio disc jockey.
Please don't take this the wrong way, I do like the channel and I often learn new things from it. The main problem I see here, is that he fired both rounds from the same rifle, most likely chambered in 5.56. Although the dimensional differences between the two rounds are small, they are different. The main difference is the shape of the cartridge, mostly the length and angles in the bend of the throat. This is why some people will say that a .223 is more accurate when fired from a .223 chamber, or from a Wiley chamber, why arguably is the best of both worlds when it's desired to use both of these rounds interchangeably in the same rifle without barrel changes.
do you think the throat angle would have mattered? dudes shooting at pretty much max velocity while being safe.
I love his videos. It’s nothing but shootings, results and minimum rambling! Great job!!
Can’t believe I’ve never seen this channel before, good stuff brother
Now, I found a channel that I like the presenter,he is not hyped up, or non stop talking.He probably talks to his self like he speaks in tha video. That, is the ultimate compliment. How real can you get? The feeling I get is hey,learned something I wanted to know, but dont have the setup,and also spent time with a really cool guy, and we did all kinds of s.... Thanks next time the ammo is on me!
plugged this data into a ballistic chart. the difference in drop is 4.68 inches at 500 yards.
FINCH from American Pie is testing guns now. That's awesome thanks, Finchie. Tell Stifler's mom we said hello
I load both cartridges and with a little tinkering I got .223 up to 3050 out of a 16" 1/8 twist AR with 68GR BTHP bullets. Heavier bullet weights do well with faster twist.
I have a 1in 7 and a 1 on 9 and so for anything from 55grn to 75grn shot the same from either 🤔
You can typically load most ammunition WAY hotter and faster than box ammunition because #1 manufacturers skimp on powder to save money #2 manufacturers want to prioritize low chamber pressures fpr safety reasons to avoid potentially damaging somebody's old rifle.
It’s best to reload your own to whatever speed you want and weight of bullets
@philliphall5198 been doing that for 40+ years
When I am lucky enough to have a free day on the farm lol, m+y day consists of scouring the dark web in the morning for reloading supplies lol, IYKYK.. then down to the Dungeon for casing prep... (the most fun you can have with your reloading experience btw), then to the press.... then to bench. Pew pew pew.. then back to the tumbler lol
I already knew what the answers were going to be, but since TH-cam went to the trouble of recommending your video to me, I thought it would be rude not to watch. And to tell you the truth, it was just going to be playing in the background while I cleaned out my desk drawer, but damn, your presentation and comedic flair got me actually watching this shit. Well done, dude, you made a video of which there are hundreds; 5.56 vs .223, interesting and funny!
Subbed.
I believe it's "Time to Grind!" Some of the rust off them wangs my good sir lol
New segment called “it’s time to flap disk” lol
@@bananaballistics Permatex makes a rust converter in a spray can. 🙂
Evaporust works quite well, and is non-toxic, supposedly. Probably best to not drink it. It works faster when a little warmer, but if you have the time, just let them soak for a couple days. I am sure you can find videos explaining it in more depth.
@@andrewb6 Can confirm, not tasty but quite effective!
Came for the ballistics difference, stayed for the voice. Great channel!
First.
Difference is powder load and the chamber they’re fired in more than anything. Barrel length of .223Rem is usually 24” barrel as well. Where as 5.56 is usually 20”.
Jackets for M193 are supposed to also be different as well as the mean average and max spread of velocity.
Right on
Exactly. Velocities are from two different barrel lengths.
Jackets on military grade projectiles are typically thicker than civilian equivalents. It's quite possible the lead alloy in the core is different too. Sometimes, even USGI ammo will have bimetal jackets.
@donwyoming1936 this is all kinds of false
@@unclefreedom213 Please elaborate
Definitely false. Too many cnn reporters on here.
Good testing. I still think the difference is negligible and 223 is cheaper than 556.
To quote some old guntuber, "Is there a difference? Yeah. Is it enough of a difference to MAKE a difference? You be the judge."
It's really not though... if you want for a sale they're essentially the same price.
There is little to no difference between 5.56 and .223 brass. Military brass is made at a slightly higher standard and can be slightly thicker below the neck. It will also have water proofing and a crimped primer. According to several books, one being Cartridges of the world and an old Remington ammunition book I have, the 5.56 in its original loading made for the military, is loaded with a hotter power than the .223. You can shoot .223 for a rifle chambered for the 5.56. But you can't shoot 5.56 ammo in a rifle chambered for .223. However the muzzle velocity of both types of ammo will be close to the same fired from rifles chambered for those rounds. The real difference is in the way they cut the chamber for the 5.56. There is more free bore, a slightly longer length to the throat in 5.56 chambered rifles. This allows some of the gas to pass by the bullet before it engaged the rifling. That keeps the pressure to a safe level. There is no free bore in a rifle that is chambered for the .223. So firing 5.56 ammo in a chamber for the .223 will spike pressures above safe levels.
Most newer rifles are chambered for both .223 & 5.56, meaning that there is some free boring in the throat of those rifles and can vary between manufactures. Some will use the same reamer for the 5.56 chamber. Others will use one somewhere in between, about half of the free bore of the normal 5.56. Rifles chambered for both cartridges can have large velocity differences between rifles firing ammo from the same box. Some manufactures will use a worn chamber reamer longer than they should that can raise pressures and velocities.
The best way to do a test like this would be to use one rifle chambered for the .223 and one chambered for the 5.56 to show the real difference between the two. So I hate to put it this way, but this test, fired from the same rifle chambered for both the 5.53 & .223 is really meaningless. If you were to use another rifle chambered for both cartridges you could get wildly different results.
One last thing, military ammo must follow strict guide lines. They can't be like hunting ammo, soft point, hollow point, made to tumble or explosive type ammo. Using those types of ammo are considered war crimes. The reason for this is to stop mutilating wounds that can't be repaired or could make it so a Soldier would have a long painful death, so military ammo is solid non expanding type. That is so someone wounded has a chance to be removed and repaired. At least that is the way it is suppose to be. Sounds a bit weird, you go to war to kill, but you want the wounded to have a chance.
Here is one link to show what I was talking about on the free boring: trajectoryarms.com/2021/02/04/ar-15-common-chamber-issues-neck-and-throat/
This link shows the difference between the three chamber cuts: www.m-guns.com/tool_new.php?product=reamer
This is from the same link above but shows a cut away of the three chamber throats. They should be zoomed to 400% to show detail. If not you can download the picture and enlarge it.
www.m-guns.com/photos//aeq_small.jpg
There are many other links you can find on the throat issues and free boring. Google M-16 or Ar-15 free boring.
The idea behind the adoption of the sub-calibre 5.56mm NATO round is rather less noble than you intimate. The intention (among other motives) was to inflict serious wounds rather than kill outright, the thinking being that the care of a wounded soldier costs your enemy far more in time, resources and manpower than simply burying a corpse and replacing it with a fresh live body. Those are the cynical calculations indulged in my our military leaders. I don't know how it worked out in practice though. It always sounded like the thinking of an accountant rather than a real soldier.
@@bernarddavis1050 This was some of the reasoning back in the 1960s. The way I heard it was that the round was mostly meant to wound. That way it would take 3 combatants off the battle field. The wounded man and two to carry him. I don't know who came up with that and I think it might have been like a selling point. The US Army had adopted the M-14, basically a modified WWII M-1 rifle that fired an intermediate round. A shortened .30-06 that Winchester made. The .308 in civilian caliber and the 7.62 X 51 mm for the military. (The .30-06 would be in metric 7.62 X 63 mm.) This happened back in 1957 and they worked hard to make it the standard NATO round. Being shorter, Soldiers could carry more ammo. Eugene Stoner made the now famous ArmaLite AR-15 (developed into the M-16) as a light rifle in a .22 caliber (.223) he wanted the Army to adopt. But the US Army had just adopted the M-14 and didn't think a .22 caliber was good for combat use. They really didn't want it and tried to fail it in tests. They had a tough time getting the NATO Nations to adpot the 7.62mm round and those countries had to make manufacturing facilities to adapt costing them big money. Money they really didn't have. Remember this was just after WWII and all of Europe was broke and trying to rebuild their bombed and burned out countries. Now in less than 10 years after they all adopted it, they want everyone to stop and addopt this new 5.56 mm costing the NATO Nations a ton of money to retool the newly built amao facilities. This also meant that small arms Companies would have to design and retool to manufacture new rifles for this new NATO round
Add to it that Gen La May USAF Commander wanted the new rifle but with some mods. So you can see the problems and total cluster F---- the US Military was facing.
There were pros and cons to both rifles and ammo. I'll probably get over 1000 replies about how the AR is the best rifle ever made by those that don't know anything about the development and problems with the M-16. However Stoner was in luck with the Kennedy (JFK) /Johnson (LBJ) admin with the bean counter Robert McNamara who was secretary of defense from 1961 to 1968. He basically mandated that the US Army adopt the new rifle and ammo.
But to answer the second part of your question about how that worked out by reducing the manpower on the battle field. In reality it did nothing. We were involved heavily in the Vietnam war and they didn't play like the Europeans. If one of their soldiers got wounded they left them where they lay and if they were still alive when they came back they might care for them. One would have thought the US Military learned that lesson during WWII fighting in the Pacific.
I have books on the development of military arms and served the military, though not in combat. But I also have many older friends that did serve in combat in Korea through Vietnam that have experience with those weapons. Including may friends that were in the the recent wars. But things change and so do people and weapons. There is always someone that tries to come up with the newest, greatest and shinny toy for the Military hoping to make it big. So the quest for the perfect killing weapon or machine will never end. At least for the foreseeable future. The 5.56 used in the current M-4 mod of the M-16 is being replaced, Ironically by a larger caliber, the 6.8 X 51 mm. Almost back to the 7.65 X 51 mm. This will becom the new NATO round.
Don't get me wrong, we need the military and I loved my 40 year career, Active and Guard. Even at a young age I knew there would always be some idiot that wants to rule the world. Those young men and women in our Military deserve a lot of respect. They are the best in the world. During my time I served with the most talented, creative and smartest people I've ever known. The old Military saying "If it is necessary, it will be accomplished" is shown in the US people and the best are in the military. We just have to stop the woke idiots that want to bring the US into what Europe or the USSR became and stop this wokeness!
Y'all stay safe.
@@EIBBOR2654 Thanks for that information; much appreciated. I wasn't going to specifically mention that cold-blooded accountant McNamara, but you did it for me. The evil that b... did...
Wow ,now I know why mi barrel is stamped 223 and the owner’s manual states do not use 5.56
i bet u can do a killer Hank Hill impression
That green tip should be armor piercing round. It depends on the rifiling of the barrel. I don't know the rifiling on your gun but not enough fitiling can slow gt. That gt on the last sleel will punch through for sure. Great videos keep the good work.
Bravo! Good Show!!
Great commercial for that tape company! I'll be looking for that type of tape the next time I send a package anywhere.
I have found, many occasions, where I'm actually getting higher velocities out of 223 ammo then out of some 556 ammo, depending on the lot or the manufacturer or other influences that cause changes in the way in which this particular round, the 55 grain Full Metal Jacket operates. Drawing the conclusion, where you pick up a 556 round and a 223 round and test only two rounds against each other, you would have to test dozens of different 223 marked ammo and 556 ammo. I'd like to point out to you, that the primary difference between 223 and 556 in their pressure allotments, happens to be because the military takes the pressure reading from a different point on the cartridge case then civilian testing procedures do. There is frequently if you thousand pounds of difference, if you go to the military testing you get over 10 or 12 thousand pounds difference are within each other's differentials from round to round.
That said, now you have to look at what mechanism they tested the rounds in. What length of test Barrel was it does it have the same resistance to the bullet traveling through it?
The difference from one barrel to the very next Barrel in manufacturer can sometimes be a couple of hundred feet per second.
The only thing that you are consistent with in this test is you happen to have two randomly selected 556 / 223 rounds, and you're testing them at least in the same firearm.
Considering the 55 grain Full Metal Jacket was specifically designed to produce Wicked wounding capability within 200 yards of a 20 inch barrel rifle with a 1 to 12, to 1 to 10 twist. And at that it is absolutely superb. I find this test virtually worthless tactical barrier fragment horribly. And are very rarely still able to produce any substantial wounding capability, to the extent that they can actually Force somebody to stop acting in a recalcitrant manner
I always like your test. You always use the ammo I own which it helps for my next ammo purchase or gun
Yep! Information that's practical, not just entertaining.
Great video! Me and My brother in law been going back and forth on this.
Winchester M193 with LC head stamp is the Same stuff as Winchester 556 USA head stamp. I bought 600 rounds of each but didn’t realize that 3 of the box’s were marked M193 and 3 were marked 556. Both were Winchester I got all OCD because the head stamps were different. So I put 10 rounds of each down my 20” AR and the velocities were different by 10 fps. Just a FYI for anyone who possibly did the same thing as me. Tested with the same Chronograph as in this video.
193 is a loading of 556 the two common loadings of 5.56 are m or xm193 and m or xm 855
mincheater runs the Lake City now but federal used to hence the LC head stamp
Thanks for running the test!
10 fps is easily within lot-to-lot variation, so your experiment shows they're basically identical.
@@ComprehensiveContext Or, to quote some elderly gentleman, "well within the variation from one ROUND to the next."
Awesome content as always. Being that I am a huge fan of 5.56 I really enjoyed this content especially see the actual difference of the 5.56 over the 223 there is not allot of content of the two calibers going head to head. however it would be nice to 5.7 vs 9mm and or even 5.7 vs 10mm I would just like to see the more prominent cartridge, before I decide on my next pdw
Paul Harrel did a 5.7 video into a meat target for the price you pay compared to 9mm it's lackluster. Also since I own all 3 I can tell you each has its use but 10mm is king out of the three if you can handle the recoil. Unless of course you wanna get into the merits of 5.7 vs soft armor discussion. But even then that is a very specific type of 5.7 you have to buy and it won't be cheap.
The Miami FBI 1986 bad guy used standard .223 FMJ, and so did Kyle Rittenhouse (he used Aguila 223 FMJ). The reality is that in real life at realistic ranges, there is not much difference between the two. The advantage of 223 is that it has less muzzle blast and flash and it is cheaper to practice with.
When you miss with your superior 5.7/10mm bs rounds because you can’t afford to practice, you’ll understand that 9mm is more than enough. Shot placement is everything.
Congratulations! Greetings from Brazil.
Man, I wish you had tried the green tip on the 3/8 steel! I was dying to know if it was going to be any, and if so, how much deeper... but thanks once again for an interesting test! ETA: OK you are redeemed... I see you ran the comparison between the penetrators a year ago... :)
Great show on the 223 and 5.56
Now if you want a great show try 22 K Hornet or 22 Honet. They may about 12 grains of powder which is half of 223 caliber, they are also center fires. Been since the 1930's. Give it try, thank you
Good video. I like 5.56 better, but its interesting to see that the .223 is only 85 fps slower. Both are good cartridges. Entertaining video, nonetheless. Subbed.
Why do you like it better?
Terry the torso is a great addition to the family.
Barrel Length and Bullet Construction could change the results... But, Nicely Done...Thanks B2.
There was an 85fps difference. "Is that enough difference to make a difference? You be the judge."
"on the range with Burt"
You gotta sing for us, just a line
But great video, you get straight to the point!! Keep it up, youll grow
Is that really this dudes voice? Is James Earl Jones his dad
0:43 the muzzle velocity inversion may be due to the test barrels used, esp. length.
223 is loaded with different powder. It’s a commercial round made for varmit hunting. It’s designed for 24” barrels to were 556 is loaded with faster powder designed for short 14” barrels.
I love the commentary “if you don’t know what you would do with 8 inches, neither do I” 😂
Bro that’s some deep voice you have!
Try X-Tac vs PMC Bronze, you should see a difference.
Yeah, they are magical. Goes through an Abrams.
The 223R velocity was taken from either a 24 or 26 inch barrel. The 5.56 NATO velocity was taken from a 20 inch barrel.
For penetration you need at least two of these three: solids, speed, sectional density. A 133 grainer solid at 3100 fps from a .264 Win Mag will pass your tests with flying colors.
The biggest advantage 5.56 has over .223 is the availability of more destructive factory loaded ammo. Since you can easily get 5.56 AP black tip ammo.
Easily get AP 5.56 in the usa? What is it called? I thought 5.56 AP was harder to find with the introduction of 5.56 "pistols" and the AP pistol ammo law.
Huh. Black tip 5.56? Even the Army doesn't have that.
Just another rube.
Nice objective analysis, much appreciated.
What was the chamber in the firearm you were shooting at the beginning designed for, .223rem or 5.56 NATO? Or was it a .223 WYLDE chamber? The leade design being for either 5.56 or .223 could make a bit of difference in the chamber pressure which I am guessing would/could affect the FPS differences between the two tested cartridges. (specifically, I believe, if it is a .223REM chamber, as the 5.56NATO pressure would increase to something like 65,000 psi)
The sand box is basically useless because there is no round that would go through it. So it's much better (as another viewer commented) to put a few thinner boxes (or plastic jars) with sand and to count which bullet through how many boxes/jars went through.
So, if I want to bulletproof my house, I'll just stack up sandbags. LOL
WOW!!!!! THIS WAS AN INTERESTING SERIES OF COMPARISON TEST TARGETS!!! GOOD WORK!!!!
You should set up stacked plywood and stacked steel. By using 1/8” mild steel spaced 1” apart, using 4 pieces, you’d get a better idea of penetration.
Something that has occurred to me is target shooting AR500 steel targets. My understanding is you don’t want to hit a steel target with a bullet traveling faster than 3000 ft/s. It is also my understanding that the shorter barrels that AR15 rifles utilize, the 223 muzzle velocity is under the 3000 ft/s limitation. Perhaps most people are shooting out past 100 yards, so it doesn’t really matter, but I’m surprised this isn’t talked about. Even past 100 yards, I’d think the 223 ammo would be a little easier on steel targets. Sometimes faster isn’t better.
Terri the torso... 😂 Love it ❤
I was supprised iether of these rounds went through 6" of wood. Perhaps because it was dry? I've chopped down trees approx 4" diameter with multiple 7.62x39 shots (guessing 6-12 rounds), then attemped with a 5.56, which embedded itself 1/2 way through. Thanks for the great content!
I guess it's safe to say that sand bags should be good cover for tactical arms fire !
The velocity being higher on the 223 I would assume without researching anything.... is attributed to it being out of a 24" bolt action rifle as opposed to a 5.56 out of a semi auto in somewhere around 18"
That 6x6 pressure treated lumber tells you all you need to know about residential walls stopping rifle rounds, which is.... they might as well not even be there.
556 advertised velocity is from a 20-inch Barrel. 223 velocity is from a 26 inch barrel.
Have you tried firing into wood in the direction of the wood grains? You can catch the bullet pretty much intact.
I would like to see some testing on PSA's AAC Shell Shock 556. See where it stacks up against all the other 223/556.
Thank you 😊
You’re saying the projectiles are the same… So 100 ft./s is the only difference between going through that plate and not going through it? I guess that’s possible… Are you sure the projectiles are the same?
Wow, I am surprised the results were so close. With the 5.56 having a hotter chamber pressure, I was sure the results would be lopsided. Impressed to be sure. But 5.56 still holds the line with affordability for practice and SHTF. My only .223 rounds are several mags of Critical Defense. Designed to open up their energy INSIDE the target, and not penetrate through to cause harm to innocent.
Hey Bananna guy, I would recommend (and would watch) a video on The Best Home Defense rifle cartridge. Emphasis on zero collateral damage.
In determining velocities .223 is fired from a 24" barrel and 5.56 is fired from a 20" barrel. So, if the barrel length is off the velocities are going to be off as well.
The difference is the case is thicker on a 5.56 therefore creating more velocity. Possibly some primer pocket differences in the military 5.56
is that your real voice?
The 5.56 is 0.54 in. longer according to the measurements I made on Federal brand ammo. You can see it when they are laying side by side. Manufactures warn against firing a 5.56 in a .223 chamber because of pressure differences.
Don't you mean 0.0056 inches? It certainly is not over half an inch longer.
@@buggsy5 No, I actually meant .054.
I put the decimal point in the wrong place on my measurement. I should have typed a .054 difference in length.
One ammunition manufacturers site (Hornady) mentions that chamber pressures are different - 5.56 @ 58,000 psi and 223 @ 55,000 psi. The 5.56 throat is also .125" longer, loaded with one extra grain of powder. Fired in a rifle chambered for 223 with longer barrel, this results in an actual chamber pressure of 65,000 psi in a 223 rifle when using 5.56. Obviously this is quite high and could result in damage to the gun or even injury to the shooter. 223 fred from a 5.56 gun tends not to build optimum pressure resulting in a drop in performance. So even though the two rounds are very closely matched in dimensions, calibre and even rated psi, there appears to be quite a difference between them. I think the only safe and sure bet is use factory ammunition designed for the type of gun you are using.
Whoa his voice is seasoned 🔥
This mans voice is not real
I think he is Ray Romano's son.
Are we ready to Rumble😅
He sounds just like Howard Stern....close your eyes and listen carefully!!! I swear, it's actually Stern😅
There was a cashier at our H.E.B. in my town and the guy used to talk like this. I would always get a kick out of it. I think his was that steroid voice though.
Some really torque-y bullets!
223 is measured with the industry standard 24” barrel. 5.56 is measured with the 20” standard barrel of the A1/A2.
They're effectively the same: Hornady has been running the Lake City contract for years... and even sells .223 ammo with LC headstamp brass (this is 5.56x45 NATO brass). Go to a quality barrel maker (FN, Noveske, DD, Faxon, etc.) and see that they don't sell different barrels for the two chamberings because (wait for it...) they're the same.
You can buy .223 as low-grade (low velocity, cheap bullet) 'plinking' ammo, and you can buy .223 as 'match' ammo, and you can buy it as 'varmint' ammo - all with different bullet weights, bullet construction, and varying velocities.
You can buy 5.56x45 NATO (and non-NATO stuff like from IMI / Israel) with different bullet weights (55 gr. = M193 / 62 gr. 'Green Tip' = M855, etc.), different bullet construction (55 gr. M193 = FMJ bullet / 62 gr. M855 has a 'mild steel' penetrator / Hornady+Frontier load a 75 gr. BTHP bullet in 5.56x45 "NATO").
Penetration against various barriers has nothing to do with ".223 vs. 5.56x45".... it has to do with bullet type and powder charge (velocity) - of which either (or both...) types have lot of variation.
😂
WOOOOOOOOW I DIDN'T KNOW PATRICK WARBURTON HAD A FIREARMS CHANNEL!!! THIS IS SOOOOOOO FREAKIN COOL!!
Suggestion?
Can you use the volume of steel removed in the mild steel instead of the depth?
I feel it gives a better feel for the power of the round, I do acknowledge that depth is better representative of effectiveness as no penetration is no use.
You should try the same test with a longer barrel
Let’s turn it around….
Absolutely Nothin!
I would have liked to see this comparison using a 223 Wylde chamber. I assume you used a 5.56 chamber which isn't really fair to the .223 Rem. 223 Rem suffers in accuracy out of a 5.56 chamber. I could be wrong, but my understanding is that 223 Rem loses some velocity potential out of a 5.56 chamber as well. Using a firearm with a 223 Wylde chamber for both cartridges would have been fairer to the .223 Rem round.
Highly scientific and comical simultaneously. ❤
Has the sand test ever proven anything?
That sand bags work.
The only thing that comes to mind is that the 300 blackout is somehow the only one to make it through
Which may have been due to variability is the factory loadings. Or there may have a soft spot in that mild steel.
It would be nice if you chronographed every shot. That would help in minimizing loading variations as a variable. You should also measure the OAL of every round before firing. @@bananaballistics
12:06 "...Which can make a pretty big difference..." - Except in any _functional_ terms in any of the tests you showed.
The expression, "Go pound sand." really means something.
Thanks 👍
The 5.56 doesn't have to meet SAMI standards, so the pressure of the 5.56 is somewhat higher than the 2.23. 5.56 ammo can reach pressures of up to 70,000 psi where the 2.23 only achieves 52,000 to 55,000 psi. That can make a difference in velocities.
There are headspace issues when using a .223 cartridge in a 5.56 barrel. this test should have been done in a .223 wylde barrel which shoots both rounds well.
You've got a great radio voice, pal.👍
The .223 ammo I have do not have the heat treated shoulders of the cart case like the 5.56x45. It's all equally shiny from top to bottom.
What this video showed me is, if I want to fortify a position, boxes of sand will work better than steel and wood and be a lot easier to install.
When Herman Munster's voice comes out of Eddie Munster's body !
👍😊 they failed but would the green tip.
One thing 5.56 case typically have crimped ( aka as staked ) primer pockets. My understanding from my time in the military that was done to ensure the primer do not get loosen from while in transport and field conditions.
The 5.56 will always be faster since it has the" potential of more case volume" and rated at a higher pressure.
@00:17 Also not all NATO 5.56 have 5.56 stamp on the case head either. heck most of the 5.56 I fired in the military had no 5.56 stamp on the case head.
What a perfect example of why sand bags are so good
“As center as you can get” with bipod & 6x zoom from 35 yards😂🤣😂😅😂 great vid brother just had give you some shit for that
Not sure if anyone had mentioned, but firing the .223 from a 5.56 barrel creates different chamber pressure, which is relative to the difference in velocity…
(So the .223 should be lower than the 5.56). I’d say a more accurate test wound be same barrel length for the respective chambered barrel for each round OR using the .223 Wylde barrel, which for which the hybrid barrel is supposed to create similar chamber pressure between both rounds
and similar accuracy.
The max chamber pressures are different anyways... they shouldn't be the same.
5.56 according to the specs has a higher max pressure, but .223 Wylde would make for a fair comparison.
You have the voice of Kermit the Frog's dad on steroids! Great vid!
First time viewer here. Who is this man with the voice of an angel?
Very entertaining video; Thanks for sharing. You had me LMFO 🤣😂 talking to your headless, armless, legless torso. Not sure a human Target would notice a difference if you broke the skin with either round and caused blood loss🤔. Passing through multiple clothing layers could be the big IT Factor between 223 vs. 556🤔. Not all powders are created equal and will make a difference. I once had a 300 Blackout round destroy a BCG and deform the Upper receiver. I guess that round was 'hotter' than the previous 25-30 rounds. Powder and payloads matter 100%