Something we rarely touch on when debating the .223vs.308 effectiveness

[Jamie Young]

How much recoil I rifleman can take before he loses his ability to shoot straight. I remember when I looked at 3 empty boxes of 30/06 and couldn't believe I made it that far. 60rds of 180gr threw a Model 70 was about all I could take before I started to twitch and yank when I pulled the trigger.

I put about 100rds threw an M1A a few weeks ago and I knew My accuracy wasn't going to hold up much longer. I think the recoil difference between an M1A and an FAL is considerable. I think I could blast away with aimed fire all day with a FAL. An M1A or M1 garand.....I don't think so. I don't think I could fire more than 200rds threw a M1A before My shooting ability corroded. I doubt I would last more than a 100rds after slapping a bandolier in an M1 Garand before My trigger control fell apart.

I could shoot an AR15 all day and never lose control.

How come we never talk about this????

Forget about what bullet does more damage. Your going to have a higher hit ratio if you can control what your shooting.

 

[Vladimir_Berkov]

I have noticed that too. In my case, shooting a SVT-40 with 200 grain bullets on the highest gas setting. After 100 rounds there is no way I will shoot as well. With an M44, it is more like 40 rounds!

I can shoot a case of 5.45x39 through my AK-74 with no ill effects. Same with an AR, or even an AK in 7.62x39. The recoil of the AKM is nothing when compared to a Garand.

 

[DAVID NANCARROW]

I think some of this is going to depend upon how the rifle fits you-stock dimensions and so forth. With the straight line recoil of the AR-15, it makes me wonder what an SR-25/AR-10 is capable of in the comfort zone. All else being equal, you can keep dropping in the power scale and/or raise the rifle weight until you find what works for you, I suppose

 

[Markk9]

I Shoot an AR-15 and M1 Garand in 30-06, in highpower matches. After about 80 to 100 rounds in the M1 I have to fight myself to control the gun. With the AR-15 I can shoot it all day with no problems. I have a friend that shoots a M1A in 308 and has the same problems after 80 to 100 rounds.

Mark

 

[Schmit]

Soda,

Good point. Your talking Military cartridges & Riflemen, Right?

Counter Point Your comparing apples and rocks here.

Your at the range, nice calm day, set up some paper targets, take your time to shoot Xs, have a sip of Coke and a smoke, leasuely load some more magizines while you discuss the upcoming football game with the guy next to you, etc

Your knee deep in a Free Fire Zone, Bombs are bursting and Rockets are glareing red, the guys to the left and right of your are shouting, your hot(or cold), hungry & thirsty, and the "targets" out in front of you (feeling the same way you do) are throwing lead in your direction trying to hit their target (i.e. you).

The body has it own built in "defense" mechinisums during stressfull situations (tunnel vision (complete focus on the threat), auditory exclusion (inability to hear), higher pain tolerance, increased strength, etc.

Trust me, your not even going to notice the recoil difference btwn a .223, .308 or probably a .50 cal for that matter. All your going to be (should be) worrying about is target engagement (target, front sight, press) and how much more ammo you got.

 

[Turk]

Soda

I totally agree with Schmit. In a real world firefight your butt is on the line and if you’re in a Jungle environment you may not even see your target.

Also something else to remember is that firefights do not last all day. The most rounds I ever put through my 16 were 12-14 mags. (18 rds per mag.) in a firefight. During this firefight besides taking small arms auto fire we were getting fragged quite heavily.

Also think about this. During WW 1 men were of smaller stature than today and they fought with the 03 in 06.

But given the choice I take a 5.56 over the 7.62 due to ammo weight.

Have a good day and remember to pray for our service men and women around the world fighting.

Turk

 

[Art Eatman]

Shooting from a benchrest is a whole different world than shooting from the various military positions--regardless of adrenaline. Proper use of a sling reduces felt recoil by spreading the load over the whole upper body instead of concentrating it on one's shoulder.

Art

 

[swatman]

Good point Shmidt

 

[Quartus]

Trust me, your not even going to notice the recoil difference btwn a .223, .308 or probably a .50 cal for that matter. All your going to be (should be) worrying about is target engagement (target, front sight, press) and how much more ammo you got.

True on a conscious level. But even though you are not aware of it, your body is paying a price for taking that recoil, and your marksmanship is going to suffer. And while few firefights last all day, a slower paced engagement is not an unusual situation either. Viet Nam was only one war - not all wars are fought that way.

 

[Dave R]

Deleted.

 

[Kayser]

Interesting thread. I typically go out with 80 rounds of .308 through a bolt action off the bench (though not really "benchrest"). That last box of 20 really takes effort. Not necessarily because of soreness, but the accumulating effect of pounding. I find my vision tends to blur _very_ fast at the end of a session and I lose my sight picture through the scope very quickly. I also find it more difficult to get back into a comfortable position after each reload. Although the more I hit the range, the more this effect diminishes. Don't think it'll ever go away entirely.

 

[DMK]

You could add weight to lower the effective recoil, but I find the weight of the rifle affects me also.

Even though it's just a .22LR, shooting my Marlin 39A standing gets tiring after a while.

 

[dfaugh]

Yeah, but

with that .22 caliber mouse gun, you need to be able to shoot all day, 'cause you gotta hit the guy a couple dozen times, to do any damage....

Sorry, couldn't resist

Seriously, in any kinda firefight, I'm pretty sure any recoil induced problems are gonna be the LAST thing I'm worried about

 

[Senior_rifleman]

Using a military rifle for it's intended purpose

Schmit is right on here.Shooting at a target when someone is shooting at you makes a huge difference in your motivation and tolerence for pain. It would be valuable to me if a knowledgeable reader would provide some insight in how the 308 bullet can, with increased penetration viv a vis the 223, change the enemies cover into concealment. If it can't, why carry a heavy M60 into combat?

 

[Quartus]

Depends on the cover, of course. A car door doesn't much impress either caliber, for example. Certainly there is a point at which a .308 will penetrate and a .223 will not. A good question is how likely is such cover in the expected battlefield. IOW, if a .308 will penetrate 3/8" steel and a .223 will not, the difference doesn't matter if the heaviest thing you will encounter is a steel door made of 14 gauge sheet metal. OTOH, if 3/8 steel is common in the area, it makes a big difference. It would be interesting to see a controlled test on common urban obstacles to see how much real life difference there is.

If we are talking about brush, there was a controlled test done, IIRC, in the 70s shooting through brush and through a "trap" of simulated brush, using wooden dowels of various diameters. The trap could be made identical for all tests, thus eliminating the variableness of natural brush. Results showed little difference.


Of course the .308 will penetrate more and carry farther than a .223, but the question is, does that outweigh the disadvantages of greater weight (both ammo and rifle) and heavier recoil. I see that some are missing the point that it does not matter that you will be focused on other things than recoil. Your body takes the jolt and is affected even if you are not aware of it. The fatigue and the pain of repeated recoil WILL affect your marksmanship, even if you have not been thinking about it at all. Same for fatigue from having humped a heavier load for 10 miles through the brush. Adrenaline can only take you so far, and is not known for improving fine motor skills.

 

[Dagny]

Here we go again, the old .223 vs .308 debate.
Let's split the difference.
224 + 308 = 532
532 / 2 = .266
That's close enough to a 6.5mm (actually .264)

Anybody up for a Swedish Massage

 

[Bullwinkle]

I run out of mental focus long before I feel the effects of the recoil. It does not matter whether its 308 or 22lr.

Try working harder on divorcing yourself mentally from everything that happens after the trigger pull. Its irrelevent.

Try sholdering your rifle naturally, relaxed, loose, stress free from head to toe, and fire a magazine through the rifle with no care for where the bullet goes except that they make it into the berm. PAY ATTENTION to the ACTUAL FORCE of the recoil. Not the super sonic crack, the muzzle blast, etc. Just how it moves into your sholder. Its actually a very light bump. No biggie. Prepare your self mentally for that. Not all the other flashy stuff. Then just ignore that little bump. The more you focus on it and fear it the more it will wear you down. Really I should say the more YOU will wear you down.

 

[SHIVAN]

(1) 162gr bullet or (3) 55gr bullets

From my quick visual estimation and an quick comparison of bullet weights I'd say I can carry about 3x as many .223 bullets as I could .308 bullets.

SOOOOO......I could feasibly increase my rate of fire by 3x with the .223, and fit the bill for volume of fire standards that are required to hold/win a tactical advantage in any given engagement. Assuming no/or limited resupply the .223 has the advantage all the way around. Except maybe I need one shot to put you on the ground and one to put in your head, which leaves me one to "play" with.......


I hope your "under duress" shooting is good with the .308, because you'd be better served shooting semi, than burst or auto with such few bullets you can carry.

Ed

 

[johnwill]

I hope your "under duress" shooting is good with the .308, because you'd be better served shooting semi, than burst or auto with such few bullets you can carry.

Actually, short of suppression fire, I see very few reasons to go full auto in any battle, unless you have unlimited ammo supplies. You can shoot all the .223 you can carry pretty fast on the rock-n-roll setting too.

 

[Dave3006]

Here is one more thing to think about in this debate. When I go to the gunshop, firing range, or a gun show, the physical condition of the people there is absolutely appalling. The overwhelming majority of shooters are so badly out of shape, I doubt they could go prone and get up 5 times without suffering a mild coronary. Most could use to drop about 30-40 lbs.

Why do I mention this? Because physical conditioning makes a difference in the ability to focus and absorb recoil. If we are honest, the majority of gunowners are sorely lacking here. It is like guns are some sort of lucky rabbits feet that will protect them.

I am 40 years old. I run 5 miles before work and do 100-150 situps every day. My Garand does not bother me in the least bit.