Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: 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?
-
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.
-
SOCUM? United States Special Operations Cummand? Is that like a wordplay from the porn industry or something? :lol
-
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 .
-
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.
-
When I was a youngun I shot FN-SLR's (308) and M-16's (223)... SLR go boom - M-16 go pop.
-
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.
-
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 ; )
(http://img251.imageshack.us/img251/7707/cimg31672fc.jpg)
-
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.
-
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.
-
Oh BTW, that's a good looking gun BiGBMAW.
-
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:
(http://www.cybertorpedo.com/africanhunter/firearms/images/fnslr_p02p32v5no3.jpg)
-
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
-
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).
-
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.
-
the rifle is a SAR48..Springfield Armories Licensed copy of the Belguim original FN-FAL's
It works perfectly..defnlty can reach out and touch
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
It's a nickname for weapons that are highly modular...
Nope. It is the name for the versions of weapons used by SOCOM. Any other use of the term is a misnomer.
-
Well, you better send a nastygram to Springfield Armory and tell them they shouldn't use that name on their rifle.
-
Why? Should I also send a "nastygram" to Husqvarna for using the word “turbo” on my food processor? Buggered if I find a turbine in there.
-
Why? Why are you getting so angry at a language that changes over time?
Surely, you don't think we should keep speaking old english, do you? With no new words that ever enter our dictionary?
-
I'm not angry at all, where did you get that? I just found Halo's misspelling of SOCOM a bit funny.
-
SOCUM stands for Special Operations Command Uber Macho.
I can't even blame that on a typo since the error was repeated.
Chalk it up to a plot to increase thread hits. That's no further astray than a .223/.308 topic evoking memories of 8-inch howitzers and tank guns.
-
Origanally posted by lasersailor184
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).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd like to add to that; Part of the same project drew a conclusion, that the .223 round would have the property of inflicting incapacitating wounds on enemy personell. Even though the round's immediate lethality was substantially less, the theory that ordanance procurement put forth was that more wounded would create a larger manpower drain, and huge burden on enemy logistical and medical facilities. The reasoning was that fewer personnel would be available for front-line use, having to use more for care of wounded.
Unfortanately, with the first-generation of the M-16, mishap's such as using an improper powder, that quickly jammed the gas-return system, added with the idea that the rifle was not issued with a cleaning kit initially, led to American casualties during the Rifles' introduction during Vietnam.
They did remedy the most immediate problems, such as the propellant powder, and adding a bolt-assist, and a cleaning kit with every weapon issued. But, as far as the debate as to which caliber is better for the battlefield...I'd have to say, would depend on locale. Close quarter areas, such as an urban environment, or a jungle, might lend more to the .223, which might see more usage on full-auto, being more controllable than the .308, and at short ranges. But in something like the open desert, or long plains, or mountains, where 400+ meter engagements might happen, the edge might go to the .308.
-
With the full length barrel the M-16 is a lethal weapon with the 5.56mm round doing much the same damage to a human body as the 7.62mm at 400 yards. At shorter ranges the 7.62mm tends to make cleaner and thus less lethal wounds than the tumbling 5.56mm. However I would not prefer the 5.56mm in a jungle environment because of that round's inability to penetrate large trees, and its tendency to veer of course at the slightest disturbance. Even light foliage and underbrush is sometimes enough to foul your shot. One of the AK-47's many advantages over the M-16 in the Vietnam War was its ability to kill soldiers behind natural cover, while the M-16 did not. In a European war I'd prefer the 5.56mm.
-
I guess it just depends on the situation.. I own both an ought six and a 223... I would grab the garand first no matter what tho.
But it really doesn't matter.. if you have one gun and it is wrong you use it to get the one you need.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
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.
Not so much as a "nickname" as a marketing ploy for military and military-like equipment trying to capitalize on both the war and the video game name recognition.
I've never heard those in the military using the term SOCOM to describe modular equipment, such as rail systems, though... and we made a lot of modifications to our stock M16A2's and M4's while in country (handguards with rail systems, various assault slings, scopes and sights, forward pistol grips, Surefire lights,....).
SOCOM outside of the original Spec Ops term usually refers to the Springfield Armory SOCOM M1 16 and M1A SOCOM II , both carbines, mentioned by the original poster. Since their introduction (and the video games I imagine), the term SOCOM has been hung on all sorts of military equipment, but it doesn't necessarily mean it's good equipment to field. It's definitely becoming an overused term --- and losing it's meaning in the process.
-
Originally posted by FrodeMk3
Origanally posted by lasersailor184
I'd like to add to that; Part of the same project drew a conclusion, that the .223 round would have the property of inflicting incapacitating wounds on enemy personell. Even though the round's immediate lethality was substantially less, the theory that ordanance procurement put forth was that more wounded would create a larger manpower drain, and huge burden on enemy logistical and medical facilities. The reasoning was that fewer personnel would be available for front-line use, having to use more for care of wounded.
Unfortanately, with the first-generation of the M-16, mishap's such as using an improper powder, that quickly jammed the gas-return system, added with the idea that the rifle was not issued with a cleaning kit initially, led to American casualties during the Rifles' introduction during Vietnam.
They did remedy the most immediate problems, such as the propellant powder, and adding a bolt-assist, and a cleaning kit with every weapon issued. But, as far as the debate as to which caliber is better for the battlefield...I'd have to say, would depend on locale. Close quarter areas, such as an urban environment, or a jungle, might lend more to the .223, which might see more usage on full-auto, being more controllable than the .308, and at short ranges. But in something like the open desert, or long plains, or mountains, where 400+ meter engagements might happen, the edge might go to the .308.
While the wounded being a drain conclusion MAY apply, we haven't fought an Army since the .223's inception that could prove it. Every single war since .223 was issued has been against fanaticals that would (I believe) only get angrier at seeing a mate being intentionally wounded as opposed to killed.
As to the full auto situation, I'd like to refer to a little story about my Father going through Marine Boot near the beginning of the Vietnam War.
They had been taught how to fire very well, and how to control the weapon. The DI then told the firing line to switch to fully automatic. Everyone did. The command to fire was given, and every single marine trainee was jumped on and kicked and beaten and yelled at.
The Moral of the Story? Never fire fully automatic.
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
While the wounded being a drain conclusion MAY apply, we haven't fought an Army since the .223's inception that could prove it. Every single war since .223 was issued has been against fanaticals that would (I believe) only get angrier at seeing a mate being intentionally wounded as opposed to killed.
As to the full auto situation, I'd like to refer to a little story about my Father going through Marine Boot near the beginning of the Vietnam War.
They had been taught how to fire very well, and how to control the weapon. The DI then told the firing line to switch to fully automatic. Everyone did. The command to fire was given, and every single marine trainee was jumped on and kicked and beaten and yelled at.
The Moral of the Story? Never fire fully automatic.
Full automatic fire is quite effective if used properly.
-
Originally posted by rabbidrabbit
Full automatic fire is quite effective if used properly.
As are singularly fired shots. Guess which one uses more ammo.
-
Care to draw on your professional experience to tell me about it?
-
I have to agree with hynena426 and lazs2. I have a RRA CAR 15 in 5.56 and a M1 Garand in 30-06. In semi-auto mode, I'd definitely pick the Garand (and likewise a M1A1 or M14 in .308) over the AR-15.
-
I have to agree with hynena426 and lazs2. I have a RRA CAR 15 in 5.56 and a M1 Garand
good man:) i enjoy my garand..one of the funnest guns i have owned..semi auto 30.06 garand really lays down the power with out kicking the crap out of you... sure in a close range street fight i mite pick the ar15 just for the size of the clips..but! i would still think twice and wanna grab the garand..that gun is just a joy to shoot...i dont know of any semi auto 30.06 i can shoot all day with out putting a hurt on my shoulder. ya ya ya..im a little bias. hehe..plus its easier to find 30.06 ammo cheap than 308 at the moment..lol
-
The garand is just a great gun in every way.. it is more powerful than either the 223 or the 308 and very accurate... simple to take down and clean. rugged and..
It has got to be one of the most fun rifles ever made to shoot. Other rifles that are more fun to shoot like levers and pumps are not as powerful in most cases or kick way too much for what you get out of em.
Biggest drawback with the garand is that it is heavy. It also likes a relatively narrow band of bullets and powder.. it doesn't like very light or very heavy bullets and it doesn't like fast powders and it likes the cases filled. That is a drawback with all semi autos tho... pistol and rifle. some more than others.
lazs
-
Originally posted by Halo
SOCUM stands for Special Operations Command Uber Macho.
Get it right!
The term is:
Special Operations Command Uber Macho Super Humongous Ohlala Treatment;
or: SOCUMSHOT
-
What do you think of the enduring debate between .308 caliber vs. .223?
====
I didn't even know there was a debate comparing these two vastly different rounds, let alone a enduring debate :rolleyes:
Its like comparing apples to oranges really.
In any event, the 308 will do better at putting a two legged critter down than a 223 will...
I remember seeing a picture of a wounded insurgent in Iraq. He had no less than three different 5.56 (223) holes, one in his arm and two in the torso, and he was sitting down being treated by a medic. I doubt he would have been sitting had he been plugged by a 308.