This is a discussion on 223 does it...... within the Ammunition forums, part of the M14 M1A Forum category; A 223 shot in the leg it did a job......
HOLY SHITE!!! Whoever says 7.62mm NATO will take a individual down better than 5.56mm NATO needs to take a look at this. Proper bullet placement plus having enough barrel to get the 5.56mm bullet over 3K fps is more than enough.
What's amazing to me, anyhow, is that the guy got to keep his leg.
I've always been told that the 5.56 round will make some pretty ugly wounds, interesting to see it in a real scenario, not just ballistics goo on a Discovery Channel program. Sucks that the dude had to get hit though.
On that note, I have a friend that has said for a long time, that the 223 vs 308 debate is moot if you're shooting soft things, like exposed flesh. Either will bring the desired outcome, if you're hitting what you shoot at. Though I'm sure that range will play a part in that whole equation.
It would also be my vote to just not get shot in the first place, but that's me.
Ive read on other forums were people say the .223 isn`t big enough to do much damage or is a useless round. But after seeing the severe damage it did in the pictures I can say with out a doubt that those people don`t have a clue what there talking about, and I was also quite amazed at the damage my self.
After seeing these pictures I have new found confidence in what my AR 15 is capable of should I need it for SHTF.
I'm sure. The OP's, in the linked thread, first priority was saving the suspect's life. Taking pics of the wounds was secondary. In the linked thread the OP says the suspect was 5-10 meters from the Philippine Police Officer when shot. It does give you an idea what 5.56mm will do.
His leg looks hacked up because the surgeons cut into him more to clean the wound and remove fragments.
True that. Notice how all the blood is cleaned up and all the cuts are incisions, with only a small area of laceration, and there's no obvious bloodclot debris in the wound. He certainly didn't just arrive there.
But why waste a .223 discussion?
5.56 is a brilliant round at close range. As long as the velocity is up there near 3,000, the bullet does those wonderful gymnastics once inside. But as the range increases, say, past 300yds, this stuff disappears right quick-like and it becomes more like the prairiedog round it always was.
Being old, fat, ugly, slow, and cranky, I don't like the idea of close engagement. I'm not 21 any more and I know it. 5.56 is for the high-speed, low-drag crowd. That's not me.
What does the wound look like for a 762 at that range? Maybe the guy will allow us to shoot him in the other leg with the 762 purely for dexterity. Then lets see the comparison, Im speaking purely from a scientific standpoint. How much does the swelling make the wound look worse also? Any way it probably stings a little. Another question, If the 223 is so incredible, why is the military blowing the dust off thousands of 308s and sending them to the sandbox? The 556 is the martial cartridge of the US and NATO, and has been for 40 something years. There are alot less people around due to it, but, it is dependent on velocity to complete the task. And yes, Ive seen it used in combat