Looks to me like you already had your mind made up...
Yes they do, however; if you are in a SD situation there is no such thing as “overkill”.
Based on just general experience. If I'm having to hump gun and ammo, I prefer the lighter stuff. If I have to shoot a lot, I prefer the lighter rounds (ever tried firing 500 out of an M1 Garand at a rifle seminar? It ain't fun!). If I need to shoot somebody, the .223 gives me all the range I can effectively use or worry about. If I need to penetrate stuff I can switch to heavy .223 rounds designed for penetration for most needs. there's a reason why virtually every military of any note has changed ammo is going to lighter, smaller rounds for general purpose use and nobody is going up to the .308.DA, Based on what?????? What made you choose the 223 over the 308?
there's a reason why virtually every military of any note has changed ammo is going to lighter, smaller rounds for general purpose use and nobody is going up to the .308.
So again , just what are your aims , and just what are you defending ? If your serious about SHTF then get a good .22 lr rifle and a couple of bricks of ammo . That will pay you better on both poundage and utility than any centerfire .
I disagree with everybody. For close quarters HD, neither the 308 nor 223 will beat the shotgun. Whatever happened to that concept?
If you are worried about over penetration the shotgun can’t be beat and at CQB ranges it is much more devastating shot for shot, if loaded correctly.
If the threat was far enough away, the liklihood of shooting 308 is nil. I doubt you could call it "home" defense.[/
What are you defending yourself against? How Many? Where at? For how long? At what range?
The op never stated "home" defense and never answered the questions in post #2 go all you are playing is a guessing game. The answer is; there is no "right" answer, without more info.
If the poop ever hits the fan via riot or other civil unrest I don't see myself being as mobile as when I was younger.
As I try to imagine what types of threats I may face, threats like riots, looters (live in hurricane Florida), and gang attacks (gang activity increasing daily in my area), a few things keep popping up.
For riots and such I want more power and centerfire reliability.
It has nothing to do with comparing needs. It has everything to do with efectiveness of the weapon. Militaries would not be moving from the .308 to the .223 (or similar moves) if it gave up much in the area of practical effectiveness.Comparing military needs to civilians needs isn't realistic.
Militaries would not be moving from the .308 to the .223 (or similar moves) if it gave up much in the area of practical effectiveness.
No, it hasn't. That was the impetus for the move to smaller calibers. Within expected fighting distances there was/is no loss of effectiveness.It certainly has given up some effectiveness in exchange for increased firepower.
IFAIK, such a claim has nothing behind it to support such a position.One thing is certain if all these militaries could find a way to eliminate the difference in the volume of ammo each soldier could carry the 223 would find itself in trouble. With its only advantage then being controllability.
The .223 will do just fine in the typical urban environment. If heavy cover is a worry that is probably more of a bullet selection issue than a caliber issue.Especially in the urban environment were cover is everywhere.
That would also be in question, then. For instance, my FAL has far less recoil than my AR. OF course it is a heavy barrel model. Just the same, I'd like to try out one of those shorty Para FALs to check the recoil against an AR. The gas system, when adjusted properly, turns my personal FAL into .22LR, as far as recoil.With its only advantage then being controllability.