Author Topic: .223 vs. .308 (Read 812 times)

Halo · « **on:** July 08, 2007, 04:28:14 PM »

What do you think of the enduring debate between .308 caliber vs. .223? At the outdoor range the other day, I was admiring the M-4 of a soldier back from the Middle East. He said he really likes the M-4 but is looking forward to eventually getting a .308 Springfield SOCUM (not sure whether the 16 or II). More oomph, he said.

Researching the detailed chuckhawks.com site, I found an item where Hawks comes up with his own Killing Power List. It shows 10.1 for .223 WSSM (I'm guessing that is same or similar to the usual .223/5.56 mm NATO round) and 34.7 to 46.2 for .308 Winchester.

Several here have advocated the .357 and .44 Magnum handgun cartridges in carbines. Hawks' list shows 12.7 for the .357 and .26.4 for the .44. The .30 Carbine in my favorite M-1 is only 7.4! That surprised me since various other charts seem to show the .30 Carbine as equal or better than the .357 Magnum.

The 10.1 for .223 seems so light it must be for something other than the military cartridge. Hawks prefaces his Killing Power List by saying he has "little faith in killing power formulas in general." He came up with a formula using velocity, energy, bullet weight, sectional density, and bullet cross-sectional area.

Check Hawks' list at http://www.chuckhawks.com/rifle_killing_power_list.htm

The SOCUM based on the M-14 or M-1 is quite a bit more expensive than, for example, an RRA .308 based on the M-16. Definitely interesting possibilities, either one.

What's your preference, .223 or .308?

hyena426 · « **Reply #1 on:** July 08, 2007, 04:40:03 PM »

i prefur a little more poop my self...nothing wrong with 223..i own a colt ar 15..and a m1 garand 30.06 and my cousin has the 308 ar 15 and a 308 m-14 norinco<~~good gun for the price...if you wanna just rock and roll..the 223 is the way to go..lol..the m14 wants to clime when you get wild on the trigger..but boy is it fun!! hehe my m1 garand is heavy anuff to keep the muzzle clime down. i have to say i enjoy both flavors. but if i had only one to keep it would be my m1 garand.

Viking · « **Reply #2 on:** July 08, 2007, 04:54:17 PM »

SOCUM? United States Special Operations Cummand? Is that like a wordplay from the porn industry or something?

lasersailor184 · « **Reply #3 on:** July 08, 2007, 05:17:51 PM »

SOCOM. It's a key word to indicate modularity of weapon in attaching items to it. Flashlight, laser sight, red dot...

The entire basis of the .223 round is that it causes an egregious wound. However, the problem many soldiers encounter is that it does not incapacitate in one shot.

I've shot .308 and .30-06 and with no military experience, I don't think it's that big of a round. I've never shot a .223 .

Blooz · « **Reply #4 on:** July 08, 2007, 05:22:26 PM »

You can't kill what you can't hit.

When I shot high power national match the .308's and '06's grouped much better than the .223's at the 600yd line.

Light bullets and long ranges just wastes ammo so you need to recognize the average range you intend to engage your target and use the appropriate tool.

Vulcan · « **Reply #5 on:** July 08, 2007, 05:48:59 PM »

When I was a youngun I shot FN-SLR's (308) and M-16's (223)... SLR go boom - M-16 go pop.

Viking · « **Reply #6 on:** July 08, 2007, 05:53:35 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lasersailor184
SOCOM. It's a key word to indicate modularity of weapon in attaching items to it. Flashlight, laser sight, red dot...

No. SOCOM is an acronym for the United States Special Operations Command. They are the one unified command of all US Special Forces, and they do order some specialized weapons that get the SOCOM tag. Like this particular .308 Springfield rifle.

You must be thinking of the Picatinny rail mount system.

BiGBMAW · « **Reply #7 on:** July 08, 2007, 06:16:47 PM »

both have there tiem and place....BUT..Id ratrhe rbe over powered then ..under powered..for having to "push " thru..barriers..car doors..brick..ect.. I think you can understand that a heavier/ more power bullet is a key ingredient

THERE IS NO COMPETITION BETWEEN A .223 - .308 Thats like a .22 and a .357...Both can kill....But one can do a WHOLE lot more

my choice..the FAL everytime ; )

FrodeMk3 · « **Reply #8 on:** July 08, 2007, 06:18:20 PM »

Blooz is right, when it comes to range. The light little .223's drift quite a bit out past 300-400 yds., and I couldn't imagine trying to shoot at 600 with one, even in something with a bull barrel and a bipod. The .308, on the other hand, will shoot comfortably out to 600 and beyond, without much unpradictability. One argument I've seen in books and other material on the subject, also mention that ammo weight is one consideration of the .223. It's said that the average infantryman can carry something like 300 rnds. of 5.56mm vs. 100 of 7.62mm. Now, that doesn't mean others might carry more or less, they just claim the average, So a well-built fella might not have too much trouble humping 200 rnds. or more of 7.62mm.

Viking · « **Reply #9 on:** July 08, 2007, 06:26:59 PM »

In the Norwegian army we carried 100 rounds of 7.62N. That’s only 5 mags for the AG-3; I could easily have carried twice that amount and I can’t see anyone not able to do so having any business being in the army.

Viking · « **Reply #10 on:** July 08, 2007, 06:28:07 PM »

Oh BTW, that's a good looking gun BiGBMAW.

Vulcan · « **Reply #11 on:** July 08, 2007, 07:00:15 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by BiGBMAW
both have there tiem and place....BUT..Id ratrhe rbe over powered then ..under powered..for having to "push " thru..barriers..car doors..brick..ect.. I think you can understand that a heavier/ more power bullet is a key ingredient

THERE IS NO COMPETITION BETWEEN A .223 - .308 Thats like a .22 and a .357...Both can kill....But one can do a WHOLE lot more

my choice..the FAL everytime ; )

Is that a more modern varaint of the FN-SLR or the same thing? This is what I used to use:

lasersailor184 · « **Reply #12 on:** July 08, 2007, 07:27:51 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Viking
No. SOCOM is an acronym for the United States Special Operations Command. They are the one unified command of all US Special Forces, and they do order some specialized weapons that get the SOCOM tag. Like this particular .308 Springfield rifle.

You must be thinking of the Picatinny rail mount system.

Yes, that is right. I am right as well. It's a nickname for weapons that are highly modular, probably attributed to the fact that special forces have the freedom to configure their weapons in ways they see fit.

http://www.hkpro.com/socom.htm

lasersailor184 · « **Reply #13 on:** July 08, 2007, 07:30:23 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by FrodeMk3
Blooz is right, when it comes to range. The light little .223's drift quite a bit out past 300-400 yds., and I couldn't imagine trying to shoot at 600 with one, even in something with a bull barrel and a bipod. The .308, on the other hand, will shoot comfortably out to 600 and beyond, without much unpradictability. One argument I've seen in books and other material on the subject, also mention that ammo weight is one consideration of the .223. It's said that the average infantryman can carry something like 300 rnds. of 5.56mm vs. 100 of 7.62mm. Now, that doesn't mean others might carry more or less, they just claim the average, So a well-built fella might not have too much trouble humping 200 rnds. or more of 7.62mm.

The ammo argument stemmed from a 1950's US Army research project. They concluded that the .223 was the equal of the .308 in killing ability, and since it was lighter more rounds could be carried, thus making the standard infantryman more effective.

They were wrong, and many US Soldiers paid with their lives during Vietnam (not even considering the M16 design flaws, just that of the .223).

Dago · « **Reply #14 on:** July 08, 2007, 07:32:23 PM »

My son is serving in Afghanistan right now, his 4th combat deployment. He just switched from M4 to M14 and is pretty happy about it. He welcomes a weapon that has some serious knockdown power, not to mention being able to disable vehicles and shoot through walls.