.45 vs 5.7 vs 5.56

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

themalicious0ne

New member
Hey guys and gals, so this is something that has been tugging at me a while. I am going to put it like this which is a little different. I am doing this so we try not to get the people who back their round no matter what. My question is: if you were staring down the barrel of an assailant let's say at 25yrds which round would you least favor getting shot by and why. Now for those who say I would not like to get shot by any... I know, neither would I. I am trying to compare these rounds mostly leaving beside platforms and at close range... And only these rounds please. They are all very different and interesting in their own way. Now for the sake of argument, all these rounds are out of a 16" barrel and this is a state that only allows 10 rounds in the magazine so people can't say well this gun has 50 rounds and this has only 10. Please refrain from bullet placement as well. Our assainlant is not a very good shot. Opinions and statistics are welcome but please have reason behind.

Now here is my personal oppinion with research and no quoted statistics: I have read the 5.56 is an all around good round capable of most everything but no real expert in any. That being said it gets the job done in every situation but at times other rounds can be frefered by some but not by all. For instance I have read that the yaw period of the round is within 100 yards that the round has such force and velocity that it can simply punch a .223 size hole through someone without tumbling or fragmenting which could be a problem at close range.

The 5.7 by contrast is a smaller round but since its lower velocities does not fail to tumble or fragment upon impact in a close range. This seems to be similar to the performance of the 5.56 at close range but not as affective in the same aspect at a farther range.

Now the .45 is also known by many to be a man stopper at close range, is this only comparable to other hangrun rounds are can it be similarily as effective of a rifle round at close range. How much of a man stopper is this round.

Personally I believe all to be suitable and have done so through research but have little experience in being able to justify one or the other. So in your oppinion which would you least favor to be in the chamber of your assailant.
 
I'd say my first choice not to be shot by would be the 556. Even the FMJs make a large wound cavity. But a close second would be the 45, especially at 25 yards. The 45 was made for close range use and it has been doing the job just fine for 100 years. I don't have any first hand experience with the 5.7, so don't have any opinion on that one.
 
I shot a goat at around 30yrds with a soft point 223, made an absolute messy of its insides, turned it to mush, and there was no exit hole.
I wouldn't want that happening to me thats for sure
 
disclaimer(this poster did not read the whole thread prior to posting)

assuming you are talking about 45 ACP and not long colt and since we are in a rifle forum I will put all of these rounds in a blowback/direct impingement rifle with a 16 inch barrel.

at 25 yards I would least like to get hit with the 45.

out of a rifle 45ACP has a pretty good amount of velocity compared to a standard 4 inch pistol. I think the rule of thumb is an additional 20 FPS per inch of barrel(giving a 230 grain bullet an additional 240 FPS muzzle velocity) 45 is already double the diameter of a 556 before mushroom and if you use a hollowpoint, the damage would be catastrophic, especially if you got a through and through(which out of a rifle at 25 yards is pretty good odds)

at 5.56 and 5.7x28 are about even in my don't get hit list.
nearly identical bullet diameter, with the 5.56 weighing just a little more and going a lot faster is surprisingly last on my list. why, you ask?

the only commercially available ammo for 5.7 right now is all ballistic tip, the velocity of 5.7 at 25 yards is still more than enough to push a FMJ through and through, couple that with a bullet that is designed to basically explode upon penetration. it may make a tiny hole but internal damage would be horrendous and an almost certain death sentence.
 
It's not even close and I really like the 45 acp. But come on. A hand gun round compared to a high powered rifle that is 3 TIMES more powerful.
Click to expand...

actually 223/556 is classified as a light carbine round rather than highpowered rifle. also you are comparing a 55 grain bullet traveling at 3200 feet per second to a 230 grain bullet traveling about 1000 feet per second(assuming they are both fired from a 16 inch barrel.


they're both going to do a ton of damage but the 45 already makes an entry wound over double the diameter of the 223.
 
tahunua001 id have to say I completely agree with everything you said. The .45(yes ACP, my mistake) and 5.7 are designed for a closer range type of situation. And that was my whole point and debate, the .45 huge hole, the 5.7 massive fragmentation, the 5.56 very high velocity and muzzle energy but is it too much in the fact that it might not suffiently do its job at such a close range, at least better than the other two? Will it fragment? will it tumble? If so is it more effective at this distance than the 5.7 or if not is it less effective?

thanks for the responses so far, I like to get our brains working.
 
Ummm obviously .223, not sure how you guys are even considering the .45. The .223 will hit with around 1300ft lbs energy, while the .45 will hit with only 300-500. Rather not have my insides turned into hamburger meat by the .233 and hope the .45 hits me in a non-vital area.
 
but how does this 1300ft lbs transfer, if you were to have a barrel pressed against your hand would it shoot through, or "turn it to hamburger meat" and explode? muzzle energy makes a difference but it is circumstantial, for instance if a .22lr was fired at 30,000 fps would it blow you up seeing that its muzzle energy would be tramendous? these rifle rounds at a far distance lose velocity and at that point in time lose energy but they are still effective but it does not mean that at the muzzle they are mass amonts of multiples times more powerful, obviously more powerful but not exponetially
 
I get what you're saying... But I imagine if you put a .223 rifle up to your hand and shot it your hand would be pretty mangled.... not only by the bullet but by the 50,000+ psi coming out of the muzzle. I don't think the rd will just zip through you at 25 yards. Most likely its going to hit a rib and completly shatter it causing secondary projectiles, and the bullet its self is probably going to cause quite the permanent and temporary cavities. Just my .2 cents. not trying to argue. :) heres a link to a very cool .223 ballistics test.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZPG...DvjVQa1PpcFPVSbYlMeVtZ0sW-bPzrwwZJAkpJQ7O5w4=
 
20 FPS per inch of barrel(giving a 230 grain bullet an additional 240 FPS muzzle velocity)
Click to expand...

We got an additional 150 fps from my friends Storm 16" over a 5" pistol. We were dancing around 1000 fps/ 850 fps.
 
Of the three, I'd rather take a hit from a hardball .45ACP. I know from "ruint" coyotes and jackrabbits that any 25-yard hit from a .223 makes a serious mess--and that includes GI ammo. The 5.7 FN did Bad Things at Fort Hood.

The low-energy hardball bullet might tumble, but it won't come all unglued and disrupt a double-handful of tissue. I once center-punched a jackrabbit at about ten yards with a max-load. In-and-out, through the rib cage. He sorta humped up and looked sad for over a minute, maybe two, before he finally fell over.
 
Ive been doing some research on the 5.7 round and am pretty sad about the real world velocitys and such from the cartridge. I was enamored by the super velocitys that they were claiming for the round, but when i found out those velocitys were from a rifle length barrel, and the pistol velocitys were only around 1500 fps. Not the 2400 fps everyone shones about. I was disapointed. Id rather take a hit from the 45. exspecially if i were wearing a jacket or something. Clothing really changes how bullets react on impact. the velocitys with the 5.56 just make it devistating. The 5.56 is a very underestimated cartridge.
 
mikegunz very good point, and brian923 this is very true of the clothing being a variable factor.

i think the 5.7 is "interesting" in the handgun. i agree that it doesnt usr full potential of the round but still, great trajectory and quick follow up shots but in the 16" barrel like i said is another story.

as far as the .45 how over rated is it really? does it not do a good job at that distance? obviously doesnt do a rifle rounds job, but at that distance?

And isnt the .223 a little over rated, i have heard mixed things and have mixed feelings AT CLOSE RANGE only. I understand shot placement and if you hit in the same place of vitals would the 5.7 not do the same? as far as hitting a bone or rib, i completely agree. but what if it only hit soft tissue, would it still have the explosive same effect?

i would say that no round is exactly perfect for this range/job but all are extremely effect, just which one is best and worst?
 
well at the ranges described, assuming that both the 556 and 5.7 were shooting ballistic tips in the 40gr area I believe both would do fairly identical amounts of trauma if fired from identical platforms.

move the target back 100 yards and the 556 will greatly surpass the 5.7 and 45 but up close the three are well within the necessary guidelines to take a life
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top