Does the 223 tumble?

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Magog

Moderator
We all know the 5.56 tumbles and cause horrific wounds. People bleed out in seconds and die, just like this guy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G68UmLMO7CY

But does the 223 tumble?

The 223 has the speed, almost 1 km per second.

The 223 does cause cavatation and Hyperstaic shook.

But, does the 223 tumble, fragment in soft tissue and rip bad guys apart???


If not, I am still happy with the cavation and Hyperstatic shook damage... It will still kill any bad guy alive.
 
5.56 & .223 are the same caliber, with a very wide range of bullet types & weights, and slightly different OALs between the two.

A .223 FMJ may tumble in tissue, an HP probably won't.
Can't make much of a dogmatic statement about either .223 or 5.56 in terms of across the board performance.

Cavation & hyperstatic shook damage?

This is the Halloween Episode, right?
You're not serious....
Denis
 
The 5.56 was never designed to tumble before reaching it's target. It didn't ever tumble before reaching the target. It can tumble after it hits the target but all bullets can. Some say the 5.56 was designed to tumble on impact but it's actually designed to fragment on impact if you're talking military bullets. That's the only thing I've ever heard that ammo was designed to do. It could be it wasn't really designed to do that either.
 
Several questions, several answers:
* A properly stabilized bullet should not tumble, even when it hits its target. Any streamlined projectile has more weight at the rear than at the front, so it will tend to yaw when it hits soft tissue and can tumble if it is short enough or unstable. Physics.
* Yes, there are/were horror stories about bullets entering at one part of the body and traveling along bones, then exiting the body seemingly randomly (5.56mm NATO FMJ particularly), but projectiles still follow the laws of physics.
* There are projectiles designed to fragment, there are some designed for disintegration due to their thin jackets, and there are some that fragment when they hit their target due to high rates of spin in spite of their design. Those that fragment can cause massive soft tissue wounds, almost explosive.
* Any projectile that is traveling approximately 2500 fps or faster can cause hydrostatic shock when it hits soft, moist tissue because the water inside the tissue is non-compressible, and as the shock wave travels through tissue it bursts the cells, causing massive wound channels. More physics.
* And finally, police snipers shoot to kill if the situation dictates, and apparently they felt the man in question presented a grave threat to public safety. No, I did not watch the video.
 
First off you are talking about Full Metal Jacket bullets, hollow points and plastic tiped bullets work differently. Second, you are talking about Nato 5.56 and not commercial 223 rounds, the Nato round is loaded hotter and generally carries more speed on the bullet.

The reason a 5.56 bullet tumbles is due to the fact that the tip of the bullet slows down faster than the heel of the bullet when it hits an object. And it tumbles heel over head till it stops. Modern commercial ammo is more concerned with expansion of the bullet when it hits and rappidly expanding bullets tend to not tummble although they can depending on if they hit bone or other dense material in the target (animal or man).

So the short answer is no to your question, but depending on the ammo you are using it is not impossible for them to tummble but general are not designed to do so.

Jim
 
Magog said:
We all know the 5.56 tumbles and cause horrific wounds. People bleed out in seconds and die, just like this guy
Click to expand...
.

Many uniformed people believe that, but its not the case. These tales date back to the Vietnam conflict and the early 1:12 twist M16 and the 55gr M193 5.56 cartridge.


The M193 55 gr FMJ 5.56 mm can yaw and snap in half at the canneulner, causing fragmentation and increased wounding effect, but it wasn't designed to. This behavior while common, is unpredictable and can't be counted on. The very same projectile could pass right through someone without hitting bone and do no more damage than a .22lr.

On the other hand JSP (jacketed soft point) .223 projectiles make significant and reliable wound channels. However, just being struck with one any where in the body, or even anywhere in the torso, would not cause someone to bleed out and die in seconds. Unless the heart or aorta, or vena cava were struck, then they might.

A a hit to the CNS(central nervous system) might cause an instant incapacitation with either JSP, or FMJ.
 
A distinction needs to be made.

The 5.56 mm Nato bullet didn't tumble in flight. If it tumbled in flight, it wouldn't be accurate at 100 yards or beyond.

Rather, the old 55 grain bullet with the slow 1:12 twist became highly unstable once it penetrated the target. At that point it took the path of least resistance. With the newer 62 grain bullet fired at the faster 1:7 twist, the bullet tend to poke through the opponent. What new bullet gained in long distance hits it lost in ability to damage flesh. If you read BlackHawk Down, there are plenty of accounts of Rangers hitting their opponents numerous times and the victim still fought back or kept running.
 
Yes this must be a Halloween thread. However I take issue (politely) with the idea that x12 twist is slow with 55gr projectile. It's not. Not unless you are up in the clouds — 10,000 ft — in winter. An 55gr fmjbt (standard 5.56) is a long projectile for its weight, the boat tail—while developed to make exiting the crown less traumatic—lengthens the bullet making it a little less stable. But it is traveling at over 3kfps and is very stable as rpm is frightening at that speed. The .223 fmjbt is also traveling at 3kfps from a 24 inch barrel (not an M16), it is also very stable. Having the cup of the projectile traveling "open rear" is what makes that round tumble when it meets a denser material than the air it's flying in.

Also a x12 promotes velocity. You'll get more fps from the exact same round from a 24 inch x12 as from a 24 inch x7 or even x9. The faster velocity also equates to faster rpm again contributing to stability. It is the "open rear" design of the cup/core that makes it tumble, not an instability issue.

-SS-
 
All Full Metal Jacket boat tail spitzer bullets will end up base forward in a soft medium (flesh or ballistics gelatin). Caliber has nothing to do with it, it is just how non-deforming projectiles behave in the transfer between air and semi-solid substances.

Jimro
 
Not sure why you linked that video...it has nothing to do with 5.56 ammo.
Click to expand...


no? I am pretty sure it was the dude holding the AR that nailed the SOB.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I am not even going into the tumbling bullet thing.

The video you posted. Doesn't show me anything other than a black guy bleeding out on a sidewalk. How do you know the 1 guys doing crowd control with an AR shot the guy? There were how many other police there with pistols?

According to this article http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/cri...ficer-involved-shooting-called-self-inflicted

The perp was shot in the neck with a 380/9mm/.355 caliber bullet which he had more of in his pocket. So according to police reports not only did the police NOT shoot the man (Because they use glocks chambered in 40 S&W) but it was also NOT an AR in 556 that shot the perp. :eek:

Please view these drawings.

5.56 NATO
http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/cri...ficer-involved-shooting-called-self-inflicted

223 Rem
http://stevespages.com/jpg/cd223remington.jpg

The only Difference in the cases is that the Military uses thicker brass. The major difference is the fact that (Like others have said above) the mil spec 556 ammo is loaded to a slightly higher pressure and velocity.
 
Last edited:
I read that the 223 or 5.56 hit a body so fast it cause hyper static shock which kills tissue on the cellular level.

The cavitation is so powerful it snaps bones and rips people apart form the inside.

Also the force of this cavity forces about a litter of blood into the skull and super f#cks the brain and can cause death just form that.


5.56 is a bad ass human shredding round, but I dont know about the 223...

Unless, 5.56 in metric, and 223 is standard English messuraments....
Click to expand...

if it did all that reliably, we wouldn't train our marines to shoot twice, then three more times if it didn't work. five shots to stop someone with a round that rips somebody apart from the inside? no.

5.56mm is a NATO round, which is why it's in metric. very similar to the .223(metric and standard, like you said), but the 5.56 is loaded to higher pressures than the .223. you can shoot a .223 in a 5.56 weapon, but should not shoot 5.56mm in a .223 weapon.
 
"A properly stabilized bullet should not tumble, even when it hits its target."

That's incorrect, actually.

All bullets will eventually tumble if they go through enough tissue. Some bullets won't tumble inside a target simply because the target isn't thick enough.

Good examples of that are the long, thin 6.5mm military bullets from the beginning of the 20th century. Karamajo Bell favored those for elephant work because they would penetrate several feet into an elephant's skull before they showed any propensity to tumble. Because of their weight to length ratios, they had extremely high sectional densities.

At some point during the bullet's travel through a target stabilization breaks down and the bullet can no longer maintain the lightweight nose-first attitude.

There are pictures on the somewhere of tumble tracks of some common bullets like the 7.62x39 and the stanadard NATO 7.62x51. Both will penetrate something like 20 to 30 inches of ballistic gelatin before they start to tumble.
 
"I read that the 223 or 5.56 hit a body so fast..."


What's that old saying? You can't believe everything that you read?

Well, all that is something that you shouldn't believe.
 
I'll remind everyone right now that bypassing the language filter by using "creative substitution" of symbols for letters is a very good way to get your messages edited and, if it continues, a good way to lose your membership at TFL.

TFL rule 2, folks: "2. Language that would be inappropriate in the polite company of strangers is quite unwelcome here. If it isn't obvious which words are inappropriate, the forum software is equipped with a language filter to assist you. The filter is not there to prompt you to invent creative ways to defeat it. If the filter doesn't like the original word, then find a better way to say what you want to say and edit your post accordingly. Posts containing words caught by the filter or containing "words" creatively skirting the filter will either be edited or deleted."
 
Well, Mike Irwin and Jimro hit the two biggest myths already by explaining that all spitzer bullets will yaw in ballistics gel or flesh if there is enough of it. They also explained why (the front slows down faster than the rear). If you look at a .223 bullet, you can see why it has a reputation for yawing. It is a fast bullet; but relatively lightweight compared to other centerfire bullets so it tends to shed momentum quickly and go through this yawing process faster.

To further expand on what Mike Irwin and Scorch said, bullets are spin-stabilized in air. When they hit something that is much denser (like flesh or ballistics gel) they become unstable because you need a much, much, much, faster twist to spin stabilize a bullet in those mediums. And you need an even faster twist still to overcome the shock of the initial transition between those mediums. At the rate of spin required, the difference between a 1:14 twist and a 1:6.5 twist is like the difference between being under a 100 ton rock and a 100 ton rock with a blade of grass on top of it. Technically, the latter is heavier but it makes no practical difference to the person underneath it.

There is also a separate phenomenon called fleet yaw where rifles with the same twist and ammo can show different yaw/fragmentation characteristics. This phenomenon is worth understanding if you are really interested in this.
 
But..... butbutbutbutubtubtubut...

I thought the bullets started to tumble inside the barrel????????

:p

I think most people have heard the stories about the Marine Corps range instructors telling new recruits that the 5.56 is so effective because it starts to tumble immediately upon leaving the barrel.

Someone raises a hand and logically asks why, if it's already tumbling, are all the holes in the targets nice and round.

The RI's brain breaks, and the recruit ends up doing pushups or whatever for questioning the RI.
 
The saying goes. Only believe half of what you see and hear. I will add to that. A wise man knows which half.

The .223 and 5.56 are pretty much the same round except for a few minor differences and the effect on tissue is related more to the bullet construction than this so called hydro-static shock. To get a true hydro-static shock effect the round would have to be moving twice as fast as it does at the muzzle. What happens is that the initial impact causes a temporary cavitation and sometimes blood vessels will be ripped by this if the round hits close enough to a vital organ that the blood vessels are connected to. Note the word sometimes. It is not a dependable variable and should not be counted on to stop the bad guy as some people have tougher internals than others. The tumbling effect happens with all spitzer type bullets given enough room for the bullet to lose it's stabilty in the target medium. When the round tumbles it loses penetration and sometimes, there's that word again, the bullet will fragment and cause more permanent wound cavity damage from the secondary projectiles.

The observed effect of fragmentation in the 55gr FMJ during the Viet Nam Conflict were due to the short ranges usually no more than 200 meters and often less than 100, which plays to the high initial velocity of the round and the potential for fragmantation. After that bullet falls below 2700 fps the fragmentation rarely occurs and when it does it may only break in half. In general it merely "ice picks" through the target. The 55gr bullet in a 5.56 has a much lower ballistic coefficient and sectional density than even a 123 gr FMJ from an 7.62x39mm. The only reason that the old AK round doesn't do as much damage at close range in due to this fact and that higher BC and SD need more room to tumble and the much higher momentum of the bullet smashes through large bones instead of being deflected. This is why the 5.56 has rather poor penetration on the overall scheme and why the police like the round , especially in a HP design as it safer to the general public and they almost never shoot beyond 100 meters in the most extreme of cases.

In an military environment you want as much penetration as possible, this is why they went to the 62 grain projectile, to help defeat body armor better and intermediate barriers. Now that they are shooting guys who rarely if ever have armor on, they are finding the round less desireable and are again trying to get better terminal ballistics while retaining the better penetration by using even heavier bullets with OTM features. The primary goal is to neutralize the enemy units. If wounding them gets that job done and makes them combat ineffective this is acceptable. If they die from that wound that is a bonous, but not always a primary concern.

You can take a 5.56 round and use a FMJ 55gr inside 100 in an M4 and it will do real well. Then compare it to a 7.62x39 in the 123gr FMJ configuration at the same distance. The 7.62 will be less effective here unless it strikes a large bone. Take those same rounds and load them with HP or SP rounds and then the 7.62 is going to make the 5.56 look like the varmint round it was developed from.

The SOCOM guys wouldn't be looking for more in the M16/M4 platform if they thought 5.56 was getting the job done, when they are operating in an environment where they don't have an entire platoon to back them and need the BG to stop post haste.

The 5.56 is not a magic bullet and it still requires the shooter to be precise with it's placement to get the desired effect of a stop on your attacker. In the civillian world you are better off with something bigger, but that isn't to say the 5.56 won't ruin your day. It is to say there are other rounds than will ruin the day a little more than the others.

This thing is just like the 9mm vs .40 vs .45 madness. Bigger is often better and this will require some form of trade off, wether that is in total rounds on tap, recoil, or firearm weight and the abilty to train up to standard on them.

5.56, 6.8/6.5, or 7.62 will get it done if you do what you must on your half of the equation.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top