User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 6/30/2022 7:20:46 PM EDT
[#1]
I dont have much to contribute other than its been tough to find new production m193 that gives you those 3200ish fps velocities.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/30/2022 7:25:45 PM EDT
[#2]
Not trying to be an ass, but it sounds like a pointless question. At any distance where it's a concern you're never going to be able to justify it in court. If your job description involves lethality at extended ranges you'll be issued ammo. If you're talking about a hunting situation you need better ammo than fmj. I fail to see the point of the question ?????
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/30/2022 7:26:05 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: ... its been tough to find new production m193 that gives you those 3200ish fps velocities.  https://www.ar15.com/forums/general/Return-of-the-M193-Clones/5-2515258/ ... |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/30/2022 7:28:06 PM EDT
[#4]
I’d say the maximum is around 500 yards.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/30/2022 7:28:44 PM EDT
[#5]
300 yards. maybe 500 with a magnified optic.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/30/2022 7:30:39 PM EDT
[#6]
I surely hope I never have to defend myself with a firearm or in any case for that matter, but some of us are somewhat mindful of crisis/SHTF scenarios. Better to know your capabilities even if the odds of that scenario is (thankfully) very small.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/30/2022 7:37:04 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Not trying to be an ass, but it sounds like a pointless question. At any distance where it's a concern you're never going to be able to justify it in court. If your job description involves lethality at extended ranges you'll be issued ammo. If you're talking about a hunting situation you need better ammo than fmj. I fail to see the point of the question ????? Forgot to quote the first time. Oops. I surely hope I never have to defend myself with a firearm or in any case for that matter, but some of us are somewhat mindful of crisis/SHTF scenarios. Better to know your capabilities even if the odds of that scenario is (thankfully) very small. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/30/2022 7:58:35 PM EDT
[#8]
I use Aimpoints and irons and generally can't see shit past 300 yards anyway so its fine for me.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/30/2022 8:02:46 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryI’ve read and subscribed to that posting. I have 2019 winchester that cycles in a sensitive gun, and new production stuff that doesn't. Other factors to consider yes, but Im likely getting lower velocities from 2022 stuff is what Ive narrowed it down to. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/30/2022 8:06:48 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I surely hope I never have to defend myself with a firearm or in any case for that matter, but some of us are somewhat mindful of crisis/SHTF scenarios. Better to know your capabilities even if the odds of that scenario is (thankfully) very small. Good approach! Grab your rifle and start shooting and let us know what your Max effective range is............ Because I cant answer that question, only you can. And yes, this has been beat to death and back. Google the endless threads about this. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/30/2022 8:15:38 PM EDT
[#11]
To maintain fragmentation it all depends on the bullet design. so whatever range that velocity falls at.
As far as actually hitting the target, I can with my 16inch AR-15 hit repeatedly at 500yds a 10inch plate. That said that's cherry picking the m193 or 223 variant that performs in my rifle |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/30/2022 8:30:07 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Good approach! Grab your rifle and start shooting and let us know what your Max effective range is............ Because I cant answer that question, only you can. And yes, this has been beat to death and back. Google the endless threads about this. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I surely hope I never have to defend myself with a firearm or in any case for that matter, but some of us are somewhat mindful of crisis/SHTF scenarios. Better to know your capabilities even if the odds of that scenario is (thankfully) very small. Good approach! Grab your rifle and start shooting and let us know what your Max effective range is............ Because I cant answer that question, only you can. And yes, this has been beat to death and back. Google the endless threads about this. That is assuming that if a marksman can hit a target at 1000 yards, it still has that higher level of lethal potential. I’m talking ballistically at what range does the round lose that potential. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/30/2022 8:40:55 PM EDT
[#13]
Hits on center mass using a 1-6 are easy to 400.
How effective they would be and taking the target out of the fight for good is debatable. This is why they are going to the 6.5x51. They want the hits to work a longer ranges. Inside 400 the M193 is good to go. For defensive use it is more than adequate for that use. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/30/2022 9:06:16 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: To maintain fragmentation it all depends on the bullet design I believe 1900fps was the m193 mark The velocity threshold for significant fragmentation in M193, as established by actual experts in the field of terminal ballistics, is 2700 FPS. That is, when it actually fragments within the depth of a human being.   Fackler, ML: “Literature Review”. Wound Ballistics Review; 5(2):40, Fall 2001 “In 1980, I treated a soldier shot accidentally with an M16 M193 bullet from a distance of about ten feet. The bullet entered his left thigh and traveled obliquely upward. It exited after passing through about 11 inches of muscle. The man walked in to my clinic with no limp whatsoever: the entrance and exit holes were about 4 mm across, and punctate. X-ray films showed intact bones, no bullet fragments, and no evidence of significant tissue disruption caused by the bullet’s temporary cavity. The bullet path passed well lateral to the femoral vessels. He was back on duty in a few days. Devastating? Hardly. The wound profile of the M193 bullet (page 29 of the Emergency War Surgery—NATO Handbook, GPO, Washington, D.C., 1988) shows that most often the bullet travels about five inches through flesh before beginning significant yaw. But about 15% of the time, it travels much farther than that before yawing — in which case it causes even milder wounds, if it missed bones, guts, lung, and major blood vessels. In my experience and research, at least as many M16 users in Vietnam concluded that it produced unacceptably minimal, rather than “massive”, wounds. After viewing the wound profile, recall that the Vietnamese were small people, and generally very slim. Many M16 bullets passed through their torsos traveling mostly point forward, and caused minimal damage. Most shots piercing an extremity, even in the heavier-built Americans, unless they hit bone, caused no more damage than a 22 caliber rimfire bullet.” ..... |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/30/2022 9:08:20 PM EDT
[#15]
Maximum effective range depends a lot on the Nut behind the Butt...
Optic or Irons? Just a Hit or a big fragmentation Kill shot? BIGGER_HAMMER 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/30/2022 9:38:06 PM EDT
[#16]
Probably 500-600.
Don’t worry about “effective”. Make hits on target. That’s the effective range. .22 caliber holes are deadly |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/30/2022 9:50:36 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The velocity threshold for significant fragmentation in M193, as established by actual experts in the field of terminal ballistics, is 2700 FPS. That is, when it actually fragments within the depth of a human being. ..... I stand corrected I may have been thinking of another bullet like the 62-64gr gold dot and the minimum expansion velocity. I know the 62gr federal fusion still expands at 1900fps. Which is one of the reasons it is my load of choice. It closely matching m855 trajectory is an added benefit when using bdc reticles designed for m855 |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/1/2022 9:23:48 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That is assuming that if a marksman can hit a target at 1000 yards, it still has that higher level of lethal potential. I’m talking ballistically at what range does the round lose that potential. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: I surely hope I never have to defend myself with a firearm or in any case for that matter, but some of us are somewhat mindful of crisis/SHTF scenarios. Better to know your capabilities even if the odds of that scenario is (thankfully) very small. Good approach! Grab your rifle and start shooting and let us know what your Max effective range is............ Because I cant answer that question, only you can. And yes, this has been beat to death and back. Google the endless threads about this. That is assuming that if a marksman can hit a target at 1000 yards, it still has that higher level of lethal potential. I’m talking ballistically at what range does the round lose that potential. Those endless threads I mentioned beat to death: fragmentation vs deforming, penetrating vests or barriers, yaw, jacket construction, presence of a cannelure, velocities of different M193, or even what M193 is or isn't etc etc etc wound channels, necks, permanent vs temporary cavities etc etc Oh, I forgot the best one: Is M193 NATO spec or not???? So if you want to "figure" all this out, read away. But NONE of that matters if you can't make hits. So what ever distance you can make hits, is your "max effective range." After that, a 55grain 224 bullet will make an "owie" to anything you manage to hit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/1/2022 10:59:03 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Those endless threads I mentioned beat to death: fragmentation vs deforming, penetrating vests or barriers, yaw, jacket construction, presence of a cannelure, velocities of different M193, or even what M193 is or isn't etc etc etc wound channels, necks, permanent vs temporary cavities etc etc Oh, I forgot the best one: Is M193 NATO spec or not???? So if you want to "figure" all this out, read away. But NONE of that matters if you can't make hits. So what ever distance you can make hits, is your "max effective range." After that, a 55grain 224 bullet will make an "owie" to anything you manage to hit. Seems to me from what I’ve gathered so far down this rabbit hole: 5.56 is adequate to eliminate in a good portion of cases, and otherwise will very likely make the threat **** off otherwise. Unless someone has a bloodlust for you, or hopped up on extreme zeal and drugs, self preservation will likely do it’s job. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/1/2022 12:27:41 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Seems to me from what I’ve gathered so far down this rabbit hole: 5.56 is adequate to eliminate in a good portion of cases, and otherwise will very likely make the threat **** off otherwise. Unless someone has a bloodlust for you, or hopped up on extreme zeal and drugs, self preservation will likely do it’s job. They’ll rethink their life choices at any distance you can make a hit. I wouldn’t expect good fragmentation and one shot drops past about 100yds. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/1/2022 12:57:14 PM EDT
[#21]
Fragmentation is great and all, but I think people put too much emphasis on it.
Shot placement is king and hits on target are more important than terminal performance in my experience. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/1/2022 1:04:43 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Fragmentation is great and all, but I think people put too much emphasis on it. Shot placement is king and hits on target are more important than terminal performance in my experience. No one likes to leak. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/1/2022 1:16:05 PM EDT
[#23]
M193 fragmentation threshold starts at 2700 fps, and by 2500 fps, it is about done.....assuming fragmentation happens at all.
So your effective range depends on what you consider effective. Non fragmenting M193 isn't great terminally (compared to other non fragmenting rifle calibers), but shot placement (or a lucky tumble) can certainly make it work. This is also where you get into the constant mis-statement of hydrostatic shock. Regardless, holes in your body are bad. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/1/2022 5:13:23 PM EDT
[#24]
I should add that because of the generally poor performance of FMJ, I’m a fan of the cheapo soft points. Hornadys are cheap enough, I roll my own. They do pretty well in testing and reports.
This year, if possible, I’ll shoot an already dead deer with some. Can’t use .223 in Ohio, but if I’m lucky I can get it in the truck and back to the house before it truly needs gutted. Can be a half hour or less. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/1/2022 7:10:18 PM EDT
[#25]
Well earlier this week I was shooting my 18" AR out to 500 yards. This is a very accurate AR and I was using 77gr. match ammo. Was able to get very reliable hits on an 10" round steel plate out to 400 and an IPSIC steel plate out to 500. And then the wind picked up. Variable crosswind of between 5 and 15 mph and things went to sh*t.
So it really depends on your equipment, your ammo, your ability and the conditions. But I will say, based on personal experience, that anyone claiming they're hitting 8" steel plates at 5-600 yards with XM193 and a red dot is full of sh*t. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/1/2022 7:23:30 PM EDT
[#26]
Quoted: Realistic being the key term here. I know what the military says, but from combat testimonies it seems to be very optimistic. Could you give us some examples of these “combat testimonies” you’ve heard/read? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/2/2022 12:52:16 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Could you give us some examples of these “combat testimonies” you’ve heard/read? Service members complaining that the enemy takes multiple rounds and walk off or don’t stop fighting. But this is also factoring M855 from a 14.5 barrel, not a superb combination. I also heard that when SOF started using MK262, they had to keep a close eye on it to keep it from being “acquired” by ranger bat guys, because it works much better. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/2/2022 11:50:19 AM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Service members complaining… “Service members”. Far from accurate or factual, but whatever. Do you really think that is a) credible and b) even remotely possible? I will give you this: 5.56 is a terrible “man stopper”…especially if you fail to hit them with it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/2/2022 7:06:25 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Seems to me from what I’ve gathered so far down this rabbit hole: 5.56 is adequate to eliminate in a good portion of cases, and otherwise will very likely make the threat **** off otherwise. Unless someone has a bloodlust for you, or hopped up on extreme zeal and drugs, self preservation will likely do it’s job. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Those endless threads I mentioned beat to death: fragmentation vs deforming, penetrating vests or barriers, yaw, jacket construction, presence of a cannelure, velocities of different M193, or even what M193 is or isn't etc etc etc wound channels, necks, permanent vs temporary cavities etc etc Oh, I forgot the best one: Is M193 NATO spec or not???? So if you want to "figure" all this out, read away. But NONE of that matters if you can't make hits. So what ever distance you can make hits, is your "max effective range." After that, a 55grain 224 bullet will make an "owie" to anything you manage to hit. Seems to me from what I’ve gathered so far down this rabbit hole: 5.56 is adequate to eliminate in a good portion of cases, and otherwise will very likely make the threat **** off otherwise. Unless someone has a bloodlust for you, or hopped up on extreme zeal and drugs, self preservation will likely do it’s job. IMHO, in other words, you can spend alot of time reading all about this subject, ALOT. There are so many variables to consider but in the end does it matter? A good hit is a good hit. WARNING THIS IS GRAPHIC Watch this video. It appears to show an ISIS Fighter die from a center mass hit in about 35 seconds. Where? Don't know. The cameraman is reloading an AK mag with FMJ's so I ASSUME he was shot with something like the same. The Shooter seems far off as you only hear the crack of the bullets and the Shooter is out of view due to the hill. Either his comrade shooter (cameraman) doesn't know or care to give First Aid/ TCCC or realizes it is a waste. Did that bullet tumble, fragment or ice pick? Dunno. What I do know is about 10secs into the video, you hear the crack and he drops .......and judging from the dark blood coming from his mouth, is shot in the lungs. Done. AGAIN GRAPHIC: https://funker530.com/video/nsfw-isis-fighter-uses-dying-friend-as-cover-while-frantically-reloading/ |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/2/2022 11:27:56 PM EDT
[#30]
Let me pose a question. The whole point of m193 is fragmentation right? We know it is very reliant on velocity to fragment properly. Let's put price and availability aside and just look at performance. Wouldn't something like hornady vmax be a great option? I know the military can't use it but I'm talking strictly civilian. Strictly looking at performance wouldn't vmax be a great defense round? Accurate and all the fragmentation you could ask for. It does a number on varmints and I don't see anyone hunting with fmj...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/2/2022 11:36:32 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Service members complaining that the enemy takes multiple rounds and walk off or don’t stop fighting. But this is also factoring M855 from a 14.5 barrel, not a superb combination. I also heard that when SOF started using MK262, they had to keep a close eye on it to keep it from being “acquired” by ranger bat guys, because it works much better. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Could you give us some examples of these “combat testimonies” you’ve heard/read? Service members complaining that the enemy takes multiple rounds and walk off or don’t stop fighting. But this is also factoring M855 from a 14.5 barrel, not a superb combination. I also heard that when SOF started using MK262, they had to keep a close eye on it to keep it from being “acquired” by ranger bat guys, because it works much better. MK262's claim to fame is being a more accurate bullet, especially at longer ranges than m855 and m193, not more destructive at longer ranges. Hits > misses. Any ability to yaw/tumble/fragment as well as or better than m855 or m193 is simply icing on the cake and still just as velocity dependant as m855 and m193. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/3/2022 9:00:20 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Wouldn't something like hornady vmax be a great option? . . . Strictly looking at performance wouldn't vmax be a great defense round? The Hornady V-MAX is a poor choice for a self-defense round.  .... |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/3/2022 9:39:31 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Fackler, ML: “Literature Review”. Wound Ballistics Review; 5(2):40, Fall 2001 “In 1980, I treated a soldier shot accidentally with an M16 M193 bullet from a distance of about ten feet. The bullet entered his left thigh and traveled obliquely upward. It exited after passing through about 11 inches of muscle. The man walked in to my clinic with no limp whatsoever: the entrance and exit holes were about 4 mm across, and punctate. X-ray films showed intact bones, no bullet fragments, and no evidence of significant tissue disruption caused by the bullet’s temporary cavity. The bullet path passed well lateral to the femoral vessels. He was back on duty in a few days. Devastating? Hardly. The wound profile of the M193 bullet (page 29 of the Emergency War Surgery—NATO Handbook, GPO, Washington, D.C., 1988) shows that most often the bullet travels about five inches through flesh before beginning significant yaw. But about 15% of the time, it travels much farther than that before yawing — in which case it causes even milder wounds, if it missed bones, guts, lung, and major blood vessels. In my experience and research, at least as many M16 users in Vietnam concluded that it produced unacceptably minimal, rather than “massive”, wounds. After viewing the wound profile, recall that the Vietnamese were small people, and generally very slim. Many M16 bullets passed through their torsos traveling mostly point forward, and caused minimal damage. Most shots piercing an extremity, even in the heavier-built Americans, unless they hit bone, caused no more damage than a 22 caliber rimfire bullet.” "'s up?" "Dude, is that a bullet hole in your side?!" "Yeah, but I had to come in and do a travel voucher and counsel Private Snuffy. Numbnutz lost his helmet and headset in the contact last night." "Ah, OK. Lunch around 1130?" "Sure, I'll drive. Wanna do Korean? I'll just need to change this battle dressing." "Cool. Meet you in front of the orderly room." |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/3/2022 9:59:14 AM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I don't think I've ever been in a unit where a guy came to work with an un-treated bullet hole, just shaking it off so he could do some kind of administrative paperwork. He was treated. There was just very minimal treatment needed due to the very minimal damage caused from the M193 projectile in his case. from the previous post . . . "The man walked in to my clinic with no limp whatsoever: the entrance and exit holes were about 4 mm across, and punctate. X-ray films showed intact bones, no bullet fragments, and no evidence of significant tissue disruption caused by the bullet’s temporary cavity." .... |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/3/2022 3:47:56 PM EDT
[#35]
https://i719.photobucket.com/albums/ww193/ThisDayInHistory14/M16FragmentationbyVelocity.jpg
Hope that link worked. If not google m193 fragmentation chart. Shows pictures of fragmented bullets at what velocities there were. A chrono is your friend. I would say 150-175 yards max for fragmentation from a 16” barrel. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/3/2022 7:24:11 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'd say the maximum is around 500 yards. By my reading (according to the internet  ) to achieve the desired effect, from a military viewpoint, you want somewhere between 220-300 ft-lbs of impact energy on target at a minimum. Assuming no armor and being able to hit the target, the desired effect can be had.According to strelok, the m193 clone I shoot, absolute minimum would be 541 yards in my carbine. This may not kill a target, but it would probably remove them from the fight at least long enough to move your position out of harms way. Again, this for military application, and it would be near impossible to justify to a jury of making this shot defensively. Now, if a Red Dawn scenario happens, I hear the Russian's "armor" just isn't. So if PID is possible, that can be justified. But it would also alert any enemy forces of your location. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/3/2022 7:28:10 PM EDT
[#37]
My brother went through Marine Corps boot camp in the early 80's, I believe he had the M16A1 rifle. He had to qualify out to 500 meters but was instructed the rifle had an effective range of 480 meters or so. This would have been M193, but most likely the 1x12 barrel.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/4/2022 8:37:57 AM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Let me pose a question. The whole point of m193 is fragmentation right? We know it is very reliant on velocity to fragment properly. Let's put price and availability aside and just look at performance. Wouldn't something like hornady vmax be a great option? I know the military can't use it but I'm talking strictly civilian. Strictly looking at performance wouldn't vmax be a great defense round? Accurate and all the fragmentation you could ask for. It does a number on varmints and I don't see anyone hunting with fmj... Vmax is a poor choice because of the thin jacket and light weight in 5.56. However, you are on the right track. Think of 77gr TMK as a super Vmax/tipped MK262. Problem is you can’t find 77gr TMK anywhere, and when you do….$$$$$$. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/4/2022 9:00:59 AM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: M193 in my 14.5 still dumps around a respectable 250 ft-lbs of energy into a target at 500 yards. Decades worth of relevant scientific literature from actual experts in the field of terminal ballistics has shown that "energy transfer" is not a wounding mechanism for small arms fire. WHAT'S WRONG WITH THE WOUND BALLISTICS LITERATURE, AND WHY by M.L. Fackler, M.D. Letterman Army Institute of Research Division of Military Trauma Research Presidio of San Francisco, California 94219 Institute Report No. 239 The “Shock Wave” Myth By Dr. Martin Fackler Wound Ballistics Review, Winter 1991 and the Journal of Trauma, (29[10]: 1455, 1989). Ballistic Injury By Dr. Martin Fackler Annals of Emergency Medicine, December 1986 Bullet Penetration By Duncan MacPherson Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness By Special Agent Urey W. Patrick Firearms Training Unit FBI Academy ..... |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/4/2022 9:04:17 AM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Let me pose a question. The whole point of m193 is fragmentation right? I don't think the Medical Corps was consulted on the 277 Fury, either. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/4/2022 9:39:57 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I should add that because of the generally poor performance of FMJ, I’m a fan of the cheapo soft points. Hornadys are cheap enough, I roll my own. They do pretty well in testing and reports. This year, if possible, I’ll shoot an already dead deer with some. Can’t use .223 in Ohio, but if I’m lucky I can get it in the truck and back to the house before it truly needs gutted. Can be a half hour or less. Bro wtf…. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/4/2022 9:59:56 AM EDT
[#42]
Back when I shot High Power Service Rifle we shot out to 600 yards with iron sights, albeit with heaver bullets.
That said, 300 yards should be a piece of cake with just a little bit of practice. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/4/2022 10:00:20 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Decades worth of relevant scientific literature from actual experts in the field of terminal ballistics has shown that "energy transfer" is not a wounding mechanism for small arms fire. WHAT'S WRONG WITH THE WOUND BALLISTICS LITERATURE, AND WHY by M.L. Fackler, M.D. Letterman Army Institute of Research Division of Military Trauma Research Presidio of San Francisco, California 94219 Institute Report No. 239 The “Shock Wave” Myth By Dr. Martin Fackler Wound Ballistics Review, Winter 1991 and the Journal of Trauma, (29[10]: 1455, 1989). Ballistic Injury By Dr. Martin Fackler Annals of Emergency Medicine, December 1986 Bullet Penetration By Duncan MacPherson Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness By Special Agent Urey W. Patrick Firearms Training Unit FBI Academy ..... Don't forget: The Idolatry of Velocity, or Lies, Damn Lies, and Ballistics - D. Lindsey |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/4/2022 1:29:01 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Decades worth of relevant scientific literature from actual experts in the field of terminal ballistics has shown that "energy transfer" is not a wounding mechanism for small arms fire. WHAT'S WRONG WITH THE WOUND BALLISTICS LITERATURE, AND WHY by M.L. Fackler, M.D. Letterman Army Institute of Research Division of Military Trauma Research Presidio of San Francisco, California 94219 Institute Report No. 239 The "Shock Wave" Myth By Dr. Martin Fackler Wound Ballistics Review, Winter 1991 and the Journal of Trauma, (29[10]: 1455, 1989). Ballistic Injury By Dr. Martin Fackler Annals of Emergency Medicine, December 1986 Bullet Penetration By Duncan MacPherson Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness By Special Agent Urey W. Patrick Firearms Training Unit FBI Academy ..... Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: M193 in my 14.5 still dumps around a respectable 250 ft-lbs of energy into a target at 500 yards. Decades worth of relevant scientific literature from actual experts in the field of terminal ballistics has shown that "energy transfer" is not a wounding mechanism for small arms fire. WHAT'S WRONG WITH THE WOUND BALLISTICS LITERATURE, AND WHY by M.L. Fackler, M.D. Letterman Army Institute of Research Division of Military Trauma Research Presidio of San Francisco, California 94219 Institute Report No. 239 The "Shock Wave" Myth By Dr. Martin Fackler Wound Ballistics Review, Winter 1991 and the Journal of Trauma, (29[10]: 1455, 1989). Ballistic Injury By Dr. Martin Fackler Annals of Emergency Medicine, December 1986 Bullet Penetration By Duncan MacPherson Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness By Special Agent Urey W. Patrick Firearms Training Unit FBI Academy ..... Though at that distance, I am more concerned about just making a hole reliably and making sure it hurts  I am far from an expert. I will find those and read up! |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/4/2022 4:51:42 PM EDT
[#45]
I guess ultimately it depends on what you consider "effective". If it's at what range does XM193 no longer fragment/tumble - that's not really a matter of opinion. Off the top of my head I believe its at about 150 yards ... although I'm sure someone will be along in a minute to correct me.
To me "effective" means I have a reasonably good chance of making a center mass shot at whatever I'm shooting at. So if I can hit a round 10" steel plate I figure on a person that will be a heart/lung shot. And as long as I get decent penetration, I assume a single shot will pretty much take anyone not hopped up on drugs out of the fight. It should certainly be enough to discourage them from wanting to close the distance that separates the two of us. For me, with an accurate AR, match ammo (not XM193) and decent conditions (i.e. not a blustery wind coming from multiple directions) that's about 400 yards. A better shooter, shooting hand loads in ideal conditions could probably take that out to 500, particularly if he's willing to accept a lower hit probability. And yes, I know High-power shooters regularly go out to 600 with iron sights, but that's outstanding shooters, shooting custom built AR's, hand loads, wearing shooting coats, who put thousands and thousands of rounds down range each year. And I'm honestly not sure how big the bullseye is when using a 600 yard target. But for me, once you get before 400 yards, an AR is clearly no longer the best tool for the job, since I really don't need to put multiple rounds down range quickly. Give me a decent bolt action rifle, which will generally be more accurate, easier to shoot well, and shoot a larger bullet less affected by the wind (and that will have better ballistics in general). |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/4/2022 5:34:15 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted: “Service members”. Far from accurate or factual, but whatever. Do you really think that is a) credible and b) even remotely possible? I will give you this: 5.56 is a terrible “man stopper”…especially if you fail to hit them with it. I’m just relaying what I’ve heard from multiple individuals during my own time in the Army and afterwards, on forums such as this one. I’m a little unsure what you are trying to get at with your statement. Barring footage of engagements or similar proof I understand there’s no way to prove these accounts, but they have been supplied. At least half from what I am pretty sure were service members, unless they snuck on base to cosplay every morning at 0630. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/24/2022 2:10:12 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I surely hope I never have to defend myself with a firearm or in any case for that matter, but some of us are somewhat mindful of crisis/SHTF scenarios. Better to know your capabilities even if the odds of that scenario is (thankfully) very small. Deterrence resulting from having a capability is also a thing. As long as your sighting method is sufficient to see your target and aim at it, 300 yards is an easy shot for a well-instructed novice - if the target isn't moving and it's size is reasonable for the mechanical accuracy of your M193 + barrel. 400 shouldn't be hard for someone who knows what they're doing. 500-600, the wind will take its toll and you need to be a competent shooter. 700-800 you are out of gas and into "ACOG BDC + hope" territory. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2022 12:01:55 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Bro wtf…. Arrows don’t jelly lungs and leave jacket fragments. That leaves room for a decent test media where you can put a shot in the chest cavity and if you don’t mind the meat loss, could use the neck too. You want realistic test results? You need realistic materials. If .223 was legal to actually hunt with, I’d just use that on the live animal. I’m plenty confident a good chest shot with a Hornady JSP will have them down quick. Plenty of guys take deer every year with similar loads in other states. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2022 12:44:36 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I have no idea whether or not the Medical Corps was consulted when the services bought the M16 and its ammo. I don't think the Medical Corps was consulted on the 277 Fury, either. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Let me pose a question. The whole point of m193 is fragmentation right? I don't think the Medical Corps was consulted on the 277 Fury, either. Back when 193 was developed they had pretty odd metrics to define lethality like, so many foot lbs and ability to penetrate so many pine boards at X range I remember when I was researching one of the lethality metrics that is still cited in some older ORDs it traced its roots back to foot lbs of energy at that given range of a Prussian ball round. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/6/2022 12:21:39 PM EDT
[#50]
I like to think of my 16" ARs with aimpoints as being 300m effective. 16" and 18" with 1-6, 400m. 20" 5-20, 500m.
Mk262, add 100m but RDS remains 300m limited by my ability. This is based only on bc energy charts and my recreational shooting at 66% silhouette @ 650m with 20", 390m with everything, and sub 300m with everything. |
|
|
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
