Do you consider the .223/5.56 to be a weak or otherwise ineffective cartridge?

[HiBC]

It probably didn't help that in the movie "The Green Berets" John Wayne used a Mattel (or whatever) as a prop when he got mad and smashed a rifle.

There is sort of a time warp /perception thing going on. Earlier days,"plastic" was associated with cheap junk, just as "Made in Japan" was.....once.

And the USA Gun Crank Curmudgeon would not accept anything but walnut and blued steel.

These days you can buy race engine connecting rods of "plastic" (composite).

I'd just about bet there have been as many walnut M-14 stocks broken as M-16 or M-4.

From value priced Ruger American and Savage rifles to top of the line precision chassis rifles to light and strong hunting rifles, composite serves well.

Historically, derogatory terms like "Mattel" have been applied...

But really? Its rooted in ignorance. Mattel use a lot of commodity polystyrene. Cheap and it glued with toulene.

I don't know what composite is used in the M-16- M-4 stocks. I believe its a carbon filled polycarbonate.

And Yeah,we call Glocks and M+P's etc "Tupperware" guns.

They sure work good. They hold up, and,all things considered, they are affordable.

I get that these are probably "Yuk it up" joking posts. Getting bored?

There just ain't the old growth Missouri Walnut there used to be. The trees are gone. What you going to use for gun handles?

Composite have literally evolve to be space age stuff.

Do we call our stealth aircraft Mattel? Or should we have stayed with wood and silk? I guess the Swordfish/ Stringbag disabled the Bismark...

 

[44 AMP]

I'd just about bet there have been as many walnut M-14 stocks broken as M-16 or M-4.

If you're going to count the handguards for the M16 /M16A1 I'd bet there were way more of those broken than wooden stocks. The little tabs that formed the cooling holes got broken a lot, and 3 broken tabs (counting both top and bottom) made the handguard unserviceable.

I guess the Swordfish/ Stringbag disabled the Bismark...

A lucky torpedo hit did, the "stringbag" just got it there.

Do note that less than a year later, Swordfish failed to inflict any damage at all on the battlecruisers Scharnhorst and Gneisenau, and the heavy cruiser Prinz Eugen as they made their dash through the English Channel in broad daylight. Also, if I remember right, only one Swordfish returned from the battle. Luftwaffe fighters and flak got the rest.

Back on topic, I consider the .223 to be a good varmint cartridge. One has to accept that it has been an effective military round simply because it has worked acceptably well in over all terms, as the military defines them.

I believe there are many superior rounds, in terms of down range effectiveness, and as a civilian, I am free to choose what I feel works best.

 

[rickyrick]

The army is full of myths and soldiers’ versions of urban legends.
There were stories that I heard almost verbatim hundreds of times with hundreds of individual soldiers claiming to be eyewitnesses too.
Seemingly every soldier who trained at Grafenwöhr took down a boar with a cleaning rod shot out of an M16/M4 bore with a blank. (Effective combination apparently)
Seems that the 5.56 mythology is mixed with some reality. Claims range from the bullet bouncing off a field jacket to blowing a 9 inch hole out of the enemy’s back.
I’d say again that it is useful, especially with good ammunition such as hunting/expanding ammunition. With FMJ and penetrating ammunition, the results are less predictable. The priority for the military is penetration.

 

[44 AMP]

Seemingly every soldier who trained at Grafenwöhr took down a boar with a cleaning rod shot out of an M16/M4 bore with a blank.

I never did that!! But then, I didn't train at Graf, I was "permanent party". Guess life with the boonie troops was rough!

 

[Forte S+W]

There was never any truth to the Urban Legend that Mattel was involved in any capacity in the development or production of the AR-15/M-16 or its furniture.

The fact is that for a short time the US Army used the Mattel Marauder — a realistic toy version of the M-16 with a working charging handle, selector switch, and sound effects — for training/decoy purposes because it was cheap and readily available in the early days before they even had enough actual M-16s to issue to troops in the field, much less cadets in boot camp. A lot of veterans didn't like the M-16 because to them it seemed like a toy in comparison to the earlier M1 Garand and the short-term M-14 service weapons, so when those veterans saw cadets running around with Mattel Marauders in basic training, they saw the "Mattel" logo on the receiver, mistook them for the real deal, and were all too happy to use it as justification for their opinion that it was inferior.

Yeah,we call Glocks and M+P's etc "Tupperware" guns.

Which is rather amusing because the actual origin of the term "Tupperware Gun" for Glocks was never a reference to the polymer frame but rather the Tupperware-style cases which First Generation Glocks were shipped in.

So literally everyone who still refers to Glocks let alone other polymer framed pistols as "Tupperware Guns" is only showcasing their ignorance by doing so.

 

[rickyrick]

I never did that!! But then, I didn't train at Graf, I was "permanent party". Guess life with the boonie troops was rough!

I never did it either, it’s just a story I heard multiple times. I don’t know if it is even possible to launch a cleaning rod. All I remember is mud, lots of mud that sucked the soul out with every minute there. I’ll take sunny Ft. Irwin NTC any day over Graf, I can dodge a dirt tornado, can’t escape gloomy mud.

I remember well when I signed out that first M16 in basic training, all worn out and rattling, that also seemed futuristic. I imagine that I had a puzzled look on my face when I fired the first shot and it went “bang!, Sproing!” I don’t know if I said “what the heck?” out loud, but it was certainly in my head, lol.
I’m sure that the sproing sound didn’t boost the earlier user’s’ confidence in the gun. Funny now that it doesn’t even register to me now.

 

[tjmga]

Many gun people follow the trends, or if you are a gun writer you follow the money. Remember the .40 SW, it was the do everything cartridge until they were told the 9mm was improved. Now it's the 10mm and that is the gun to have for the great bears. The .223 was good for everything from mice to buffalo. Now that something new has come along it will be regulated to mice again. Food for thought when the .223 came out it was shooting a 50 (or so)grain bullet, then after awhile it started gaining weight by 40% or more. The war terrain also changed. We now want to shoot thru concrete blocks at longer distance. As some others have said the .223 was designed for a different pruposes than our civilian uses. My answer to the OP's question is I think the .223 is a very good varment cartridge and a good self desfence wepon.

 

[44 AMP]

Food for thought when the .223 came out it was shooting a 50 (or so)grain bullet, then after awhile it started gaining weight by 40% or more.

When the .223/5.56mm first came out, it was a 55gr bullet at 3200fps. This out performed the .222 Rem by about 100fps. It was the same approximate performance as the .222 Rem Mag round, and that performance is handily beaten by the .219 Zipper, the .225 Winchester, the .224 Weatherby, the .22-250 and the .220 Swift.

Military requirements (or desires) led to a heavier bullet (62gr) with a drop in MV down to approximately 2900fps, and later military rifle changes, (the M4 carbine series with even shorter barrels) led to a further loss of velocity.

Match shooters discovered that even heavier (and longer) bullets were very accurate at long ranges (from barrels with fast twist rates) but the even heavier slugs (70-90gr range) go even slower, and since even the carbines these days have twists for the uber heavy slugs, velocity is down in the 2600fps, or less.

Consider this, a max loads in my Hornady manual with a 75gr bullet from a 20 inch service rifle barrel, were in the 2600 fps range, with only 4 loads that cracked 2700fps. SO, you while accurate and light recoiling you have a .22 caliber bullet that weighs half what the standard .30 caliber ball does, moving at approximately the same speed (or slightly less).

"Officially" the 5.56mm is good enough for the military, but since they have been tweaking the round and the rifles for over half a century, it seems that the official "good enough" really wasn't.

 

[radom]

Here it may suck but woods and deer or what ever will still stick with my AR 5.56 guns as they work.

 

[44 AMP]

Growing up and deer hunting in a state where no .22 cal round was legal for big game probably helped shape my opinions a bit.

.22 centerfires, even the really hot ones were for varmints, not deer.

The state I live in now has a .24 caliber minimum for deer, as well. If you live somewhere a .223 is legal for deer, enjoy it. I never had much use for the round, I'm down to just one .223, an older Ruger Mini-14.

I do have a couple .22 Hornets, a .221 Fireball, a .222 Rem bolt gun, the mini, and a .22-250 Winchester 70 varmint. got nothing against the .223 as a cartridge, just have it bracketed above and below, so not much use for it these days.

 

[2damnold4this]

Having seen firsthand the performance on deer, pigs, and other critters of .308 hunting ammunition and .223 hunting ammunition, there is no question the .308 with hunting ammo is far more effective in wounding than the .223 with hunting ammo. With ball ammo, the results may be different. With hunting ammo designed to expand, the .308 puts a lot more energy on target.

Does that make the .223/5.56 weak or ineffective? I don't think so but I'll stick to my larger cartridges for hunting medium game like deer.