This Forum has been archived

Visit the new Forums

Forum Navigation:

Index >> Wiki >> OK, time to make something clear

Ever since I've been here I've noticed that there's a lot of crap on several articles about how the 9mm and the 5.56 NATO rounds are underpowered and don't stop anything. Wherever you guys have been pasting this information from, it is faulty information and whomever wrote it probably has never fired a weapon, much less killed anyone. So, I'm going to put this out there.

Shot placement is most important to stop a threat. Most projectiles more powerful than a .380 do an adequate job, provided you use projectiles that transfer nearly all or all of their energy into the target and fragment and expand effectively, as opposed to something likely to overpenetrate. You will almost never achieve a "one-shot kill" on a person with ANY round, and if you did, you shouldn't be able to tell because you shot the person until they ceased to be a threat.

The AK, while dead-nuts reliable, can, like any man-made machine, malfunction. Generally, it's due to improper assembly, or the fact that someone bought into the hype and never cleaned or performed any maintenance on their weapons - ever. Also, the M43 (like most FMJ rounds) performs rather poorly on flesh.

Believe it or not, the M16/AR-15/M4 rifles are not jam-o-matics, nor do they require constant cleaning and care. I tend to let my own rifle go for around 1000 rounds at a time without a real cleaning; only added lubrication. ARs run extremely well so long as they are not run dry, under ANY circumstances. Any time there is metal-to-metal contact in ANY machine, it will inevitably create an issue. Firearms are no exception. Keep your weapon lubricated. With any AR-type weapon, keeping the bolt carrier group lubed (particularly on the bolt gas rings and the point where the carrier rides the hammer) will ensure reliable function. Of course, dunking the bolt carrier in oil works too, especially if you're running your AR hard.

There is no such thing as "hydrostatic shock". I know it's all the latest rage on Wikipedia. It doesn't exist. You're not going to shoot someone in the chest or the leg with a 9mm and have something in their head explode. Not gonna happen.

That is all. Happy editing, and please don't add crap like what I just described in the articles. Thanks. SmokeSound off! 07:15, December 22, 2010 (UTC)

I second Smoke.'s posting.
Also, I would add, authors need to be more aware of writing and editing their articles form a Neutral Point Of View (NPOV). Enthusiasm of a person's favorite firearm, gun or topic is welcome. Just be mindful to edit out the hype!!! SgtMajGW G. GloverSemper Fi 01:31, December 23, 2010 (UTC)
556 at closer ranges needs to hit bone to help is bounce around in the body a little bit more, otherwise it overpenetrates, just tearing in and out, this is not hype but actually true. This doesn't allow for maximum tear of the tissue (tear factor) which is the real damage causer. It is going too fast for that. It is good to have them around its effective range so the bullet is travelling slower and allows more tear, allows it to expand in the body. On a plus point it should have more of a chance of knocking someone down. The crush factor is what you are looking to cause maximum damage with at closer ranges if you it does not hit bone, you're looking to hit vital organs (chest area) and cause a large exit wound. Just my opinion. Most of the time the enemy are high either on adreneline or actually on some substance, degrading the pain sensitivity and allowing more of a pain limit really doesn't help when trying to put someone down. Haha. In terms of a one shot kill, you are looking at the medulla oblongata, that'll stop them dead. One shot guaranteed. Hehehe. Ryean 01:34, January 5, 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, if you're shooting someone with FMJ rounds. M193, M855, hell, most military ammunition isn't really adequate for flesh; the M855 is geared for helmets and the M193 is a full metal jacket round. Neither of them are optimal for engagement of unarmored hostiles.
There are more modern designs in 5.56 that do far more damage than any ball design; Mk 262, for instance. It is a 77-grain OTM round with flatter trajectory and much better terminal ballistics (particularly at range) than some other 5.56 loadings. There are other loadings as well that bring more improvements over standard M855.
Also, good luck shooting the medulla oblongata when whatever you're shooting at is constantly on the move (and you should be on the move too, otherwise you're as good as dead). You aim center mass. You do not aim for the head. SmokeSound off! 08:37, January 5, 2011 (UTC)
Ah yes the medulla oblongata is more than anything a lucky shot, you're right. But in a CQB environment I think there would be more chance of it happening, especially if the combatant was in-line with you. Through the mouth and through the medulla oblongata - has been done before, just very rare. If it stops the brain sending messages to the trigger finger within one millionth of a second I would class that as a one-shot kill shot.
In terms of other ammunition - you're right - some are not adequate for flesh, depends on a lot of things really to get a clean kill, doubt you'd get many. A doubletap would have more chance of putting them down, like being hit with a sledgehammer. Depends on the combatant as well, never know what they are on these days - not only drugs but religious fanaticism too. :) Ryean 00:55, January 6, 2011 (UTC)
As would I, but I wouldn't be trying to do that, even being that close. If I did, I wouldn't know it. Adrenaline takes over when you're dealing with someone trying to put lead in you. Your point of aim is all over and your trigger finger gets real happy. SmokeSound off! 01:36, January 6, 2011 (UTC)
Haha yup, get as much lead into the largest part of the body you can engage. :D Ryean 03:40, January 6, 2011 (UTC)

Now, my story.

In April or May of 1966, I was on a hill in the central Highlands of Viet Nam, with the "Sky Troopers" of the Army's 1st Cav. Div. We had XM-16A1's. The NVA were coming up the hill at us. I fired the last six rounds in the mag into one as he came at me. I saw a puff of dust on his blouse with each round. HE DIDN'T EVEN SLOW DOWN !!! I dropped the rifle, pulled out a 1911A1 and fired ONE round at about 12 - 15 feet. He dropped like a sack of potatos. I picked up the rifle, reloaded, and kept fighting.

The next morning, I went looking for the body. I found him, laying next to his SKS, which had the bolt open and the bayonet extended. I popped open the blouse. There were 6 little holes in his chest and 1 big one just above his belt. I rolled hom over and pulled the blouse up. There were 6 little holes coming out the back and 1 big lump under his shoulder blade. I know he was hit hard, but that 5.56 mm DID NOT STOP him. As a result,I believe that the round is a P.O.S.!!!

As for the 9X19 Parabellem round, it was rejected by the Thompson-Legrade Board in 1904. At the time, the experances of the Moro Rebellon were still fresh in the their mind. It was decided that the US service pistol round would be a mimnun of .40 caliber. Aeroplnut 1/4/11

That's fine, but consider the fact that you were using ball ammunition, and since the 5.56 is very fast and most Vietnamese are skinny, it did not have much time to fragment. As far as the board rejecting the 9mm and making the declaration that it would be a minimum of .40 caliber... once again, FMJ does not really deform in flesh. It penetrates. Thus, bigger is better, even though the holes will only be slightly bigger with something over .40 caliber than it would be with 9mm. There is nothing magical about a .40 caliber projectile designed for pistols that just causes someone shot with it to drop.
Personally, I'm of the opinion that FMJ ammunition is for practice only. My defense loadings consist of hollow-point rounds. SmokeSound off! 08:37, January 5, 2011 (UTC)

I think you all misunderstood the intent of my post. Yes, I understand the cartridges mentioned are not perfect. I think you both missed this part, though.

"Shot placement is most important to stop a threat. Most projectiles more powerful than a .380 do an adequate job, provided you use projectiles that transfer nearly all or all of their energy into the target and fragment and expand effectively, as opposed to something likely to overpenetrate. You will almost never achieve a "one-shot kill" on a person with ANY round, and if you did, you shouldn't be able to tell because you shot the person until they ceased to be a threat."

Pay special attention to the bolded part. If the projectile does not do what the bolded part of my statement says, then of course its terminal performance is going to be inconsistent and less effective. This includes all FMJ rounds and most projectiles less powerful than a 9mm.

What I am saying (while correcting some of those misconceptions, especially regarding the AR rifle) is when you are editing, keep your bias (or what you heard) off the article. If you doubt that what you are about to add is true, go research it (or put it on the article's talk page) and ask questions. SmokeSound off! 08:58, January 5, 2011 (UTC)

I thought the opening of this forum was because you noticed "all this crap" about how the 5.56/9mm are underperforming rounds, and how people how never experanced combat are writing without knowledge of the subject. Bullet placement is critical but, if the bullet is too small or too light, placement is moot as the projectial can not reach into a vital area and provide a killing wound. When I say the 5.56 is a P.O.S it is with the understanding that we are discussing the full metal jacketed rounds. Along with the 9mm, with a soft point or hollow point bullet, the round is superior to the FMJ. As for adopting ther 9mm, that was a political decision, not a pracital one. The US was the only NATO country NOT armed with the smaller round, so the .45ACP was sacrificed to keep the other countries happy. Aeroplnut 1/5/11

Understood. In the opening I was referring to the fact that either people were copying and pasting (usually from Wikipedia or, both of which are filled with inaccurate (or outdated) information, or they would repeat the latest tripe from a video game or something. I also know that for the most part the military is stuck with FMJ rounds. We civvies generally don't have that problem, so we can get more out of cartridges that, in their FMJ incarnation, would have trouble stopping something the size of a human. SmokeSound off! 00:41, January 6, 2011 (UTC)
Yes I agree to not put inaccurate information but to truly research the topic on which you are editing. Wikipedia just doesn't cut it. And not go overkill like me and add every bit of detail - including hype - haha. :) Ryean 01:27, January 6, 2011 (UTC)
Heh, you ought to see the draft I'm working on. Haha. SmokeSound off! 01:36, January 6, 2011 (UTC)
What you working on? I'm still working on the MK211 and SLAP drafts, just ain't added them on GunWiki - don't think I will add onto it hahaha. Ryean 05:45, January 7, 2011 (UTC)
This article. It's intended to combine all the stray AR-15 articles into one. It's still quite a rough draft but it's a compilation of all I've learned from firing, repairing, maintaining, and observing how they operate. SmokeSound off! 01:43, January 8, 2011 (UTC)
Looks awesome man, to be honest I like long-informative articles, ones you have to read time and time again. :) Ryean 07:12, January 8, 2011 (UTC)
Lol I actually didn't mean for it to get that long but there's so much information. I like it actually; learning it is forcing me to learn more about other things as well, and some of it applies to other firearms too. It's definitely interesting to learn and experience. SmokeSound off! 05:26, January 29, 2011 (UTC)

Some of our troops in "South West Asia" have been accused by the media of "executions" because of the number of head wounds delivered on the enemy. Remember, these guy are armed with 5.56mm rifles and 9mm pistols, using FMJ ammo. They learned very quickly that head shots are the only way to take the bad guys out with the underpowered, poor performing rounds they are forced to use.

As far as an "AR-" type of rifle is concerned, I think Gene Stoner did a great job on the design. Unfortunitly, he listened to some of MacNamara's wiz kids and redesigned it down from 7.62 NATO to the .223 varment cartridge. I handled one of the Portgee AR-10 rifles, in 7X57 Mauser and found it easy to shoot and accurite. If I were to get an "AR" type today, it would be the new AR-10, "an AR-15 on steriods", in 7.62 NATO. Aeroplnut 8 Jan 11

I must have missed that memo. Shots to the head are not that common of an occurrence, and even less so deliberately. FMJ may not perform well, it does not fragment reliably, but your best bet is still to put lead center mass, where most of the vital organs are; not to mention it is also the biggest, easiest target on the body. Head shots are far from the only way to take a bad guy out with 5.56, 9mm, or even something like a .380 for that matter. As I said above, if you aim strictly for the head when both you are on the move and the enemy is on the move, you will almost certainly miss. To make your shots count you place them center mass.
As far as ARs go, if you desire something bigger than 5.56, 6.8 SPC works pretty well too. 6.8 AR rifles use the same lower as the 5.56 ARs; only the magazine and a few parts in the upper receiver (as well as the barrel assembly itself) are different. .308/7.62 NATO requires a different lower as well as a different upper, which means less in the way of spare parts, and the quirks in some commercial .308 AR rifles haven't quite been ironed out. For the most part, they are more finicky than the 5.56/6.8. SmokeSound off! 06:54, January 10, 2011 (UTC)
No thanks. I will stay with what I know and trust- A FN-FAL and my Hardballer. Aeroplnut 10 Jan 11
FN Fail hehe, I like the sound of a 6.8 SPC AR =) Ryean 03:45, January 11, 2011 (UTC)
They fire with only slightly more recoil than a 5.56, so it is still really easy to maintain your sight picture when shooting it. Packs more of a punch too. SmokeSound off! 05:21, January 18, 2011 (UTC)
Speaking of stopping power, just finished my article on .50 rounds - 71 pgs so I won't add on Gunwiki hahaha. Ryean 11:32, January 27, 2011 (UTC)
Don't get me wrong now, I plan on picking up an AR in .308. The market for them is steadily improving. I just have to get used to the fact that I can't run a .308 like I run my 5.56 - really hard! At least, until a "standard" is set, like the TDP (technical data package) set forth for 5.56 caliber AR rifles. SmokeSound off! 05:26, January 29, 2011 (UTC)
Well, I just can't help myself. So here is my two cents. Many folks conflate cartridges with bullets and military applications with hunting. None of which belongs here.
  • There are many cartridges that can hold 5.56 mm (.224 in) and 9 mm (.355 in and .357 in also known as a 38 caliber) bullets.
  • The Geneva Convention made “Dum-Dum” bullets illegal. The Dum-Dum bullets is any hollow point bullet. Somehow this was also applied to soft-point bullets. Match bullets are Dum-Dum bullets but the Sierra .308 in (7.82 mm), 190 gr (12.3 g), Matchking held in the .300 Winchester Magnum is employed by the United States Marine Corps, scout sniper. This bullet seems to be exempt.
  • Most if not all the worlds militaries have adopted the Full Metal Jacketed bullet as the standard military round. The reasons are many and diverse, but the Geneva Convention was clear that it did not want to see soldiers/civilians suffer unnecessary.
  • Hunting bullets are designed to humanly kill game animals.

SgtMajGW G. GloverSemper Fi 00:28, January 12, 2011 (UTC)

Check out Sniper: Deadliest Missions, it has a good demonstration of the 30-06 and 7.62 against ballistic geletan with the same consistacy as human flesh. They put a pigs heart and ribcage in there for a bit more effect. Ryean 05:57, January 25, 2011 (UTC)

By the way, the only "real" Dum-Dum bullets were manufactured at the Dum-Dum Arsenal in India in the 1850-1860's for the .455-570 Synder, the forerunner of the Martini-Enfields. What made them infamous was the Tommys cutting a cross in the bullets.

It has become common practice to refer to any soft point projectile as a "Dum-Dum", Aeroplnut 2/11/11

While it is correct that both soft point and hollow-point bullets are considered prohibited in warfare, it was the Hague Convention of 1899 that made such a declaration. Graybass 20x6 08:57, February 18, 2011 (UTC)

I love the intensity people, love it.

Dtlwarrior 07:56, March 6, 2011 (UTC)

Ad blocker interference detected!

Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.