Firearms you own, and their uses.

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Spacemanvic**

Frazzled wrote:
Spacemanvic wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
Without violating laws, and you had a bee in your bonnet, wouldn't a nice bullpup perform similarly, but more accurately?

I'll be honest these just scream tacticool mall ninja to me.

Which arm are you talking about? The conversion kit?

The sig AR pistol types with the "wrist supports." Was that not being discussed? (youtubes are blocked for me)

Actually, a couple of things were being discussed.

I find the Glock conversion kit more if a mall ninja tacticool thing, wasnt sure which you were referring to.

The AR as a pistol is pretty damn sweet. Less over penetration, decent capacity, easy to manipulate and works well logistically (provided you have other ARs). The bull pup is a great rifle, but way over priced in comparison to an AR pistol or assembling you own AR pistol.

**Frazzled**

Really?

I'll be honest. I'm not really an AR fan. They're fine, just way expensive for any use I can think of. Frazzled's eyesight means he needs good glass, well just to get out of bed (unless a wiener dog is barking). So I need heavy optics on anything other than a shotgun or beyond 25 yards. At that point I'd rather a .30-06 / .308 with glass I can see Pluto with.

Your mileage may differ and more power to you.

**Spacemanvic**

Frazzled wrote:
Really?

I'll be honest. I'm not really an AR fan. They're fine, just way expensive for any use I can think of. Frazzled's eyesight means he needs good glass, well just to get out of bed (unless a wiener dog is barking). So I need heavy optics on anything other than a shotgun or beyond 25 yards. At that point I'd rather a .30-06 / .308 with glass I can see Pluto with.

Your mileage may differ and more power to you.

Ah.

Well then in your case, may I respectfully suggest you use a bat for home defense?

Seriously though, price of your basic AR is down to $499, whereas a Tavor is well over $1200.

Funny about the shotgun, not my first choice for HD.

**Frazzled**

Well then in your case, may I respectfully suggest you use a bat for home defense?

Son have you seen what a full auto wiener dog can do to a man? (shudders)
Houston house: Wingmaster. So long I don't actually have to shoot. I can just poleaxe at them from the other side of the house. Or one of the pistols laying about.
Austin house: lots of things, some of which could be considered...unnatural.

Seriously though, price of your basic AR is down to $499, whereas a Tavor is well over $1200.

What basic AR is that? S&W, Ruger, Fulton, are all over $1K but a bit. The closest I saw to that was a Bushmaster I think? This is not a criticism, this is a question.

Funny about the shotgun, not my first choice for HD.

See thats why wiener dogs will rule the universe. We go big bore.

Like I said if others want them cool by me. I've shot AR-15s, M-16s, and a couple of M4 civiie clone wannabees. They're fine, they just don't do anything for me. At my age, if I am going to get a rifle, its going to go click clack click clack between shots.

**Ouze**

Frazzled wrote:

What basic AR is that? S&W, Ruger, Fulton, are all over $1K but a bit. The closest I saw to that was a Bushmaster I think? This is not a criticism, this is a question. .

Bushmaster, yes, and DPMS pretty reliably. Some guys called "Bear Creek" for $440 after a coupon code. These American Tactical Imports guys for $439 and free shipping.

Not endorsing any of those, just answering the question.

I too am uninterested in AR15s - I was sort of interested in a really short AR pistol with the SIG brace, and may again consider that when the legal question is answered, but the AR15 for some reason just really doesn't appeal to me. I like the AK.

**Frazzled**

Me too. Of course mine's genetic. Get me around a Nagant and the urge to storm the Reichstag is quite overwhelming.

**easysauce**

Frazzled wrote:
Really?

I'll be honest. I'm not really an AR fan. They're fine, just way expensive for any use I can think of. Frazzled's eyesight means he needs good glass, well just to get out of bed (unless a wiener dog is barking). So I need heavy optics on anything other than a shotgun or beyond 25 yards. At that point I'd rather a .30-06 / .308 with glass I can see Pluto with.

Your mileage may differ and more power to you.

I hear you on the ought six, my favorite go to rifle.

good glass costs more then an AR though, in the states I know its cheaper, but even up here you can build a whole AR from parts for about 500 CAD $ ( or ever cheaper if you mill out a 80% lower) or buy a decent new AR for 600-700$CAD

I always felt like ARs were cheap rifles, but then again, maybe in the states there are cheaper mag fed semi autos. Up here I can get a AR cheaper then say a ruger or similar 5.56 semi auto, but thats more because things like AR's require special licenses, and you cannot hunt with them, so that drives the price down, while things that are functionally identical like rugers but didnt make the liberal "we wet our pants when we saw this gun, so no hunting with it." list drives the price wayyyyy up.

I can buy a tavor south of the border for about 1500 CAD< north of the border its 2700-3000 CAD... because tavors are non restricted up here, but AR's are still cheap because they are restricted and there isnt much of a market for them (think class 3 firearms or SBR, thats basically how we treat them)

I always feel like Im cheating with scopes though, so I have commited to only competing in iron sight competitions, saving the glass for hunting.

its hilarious, you can take antique pistols from the USA, that are worth a couple hundred bucks, and because they are antiques (IE not classified as firearms, despite being able to shoot) they dont even require the most basic licencse up here...

so they sell for thousands, if not tens of thousands (basically the equiv of pre ban drop in auto sears)

**Jihadin**

Frazzled wrote:
Me too. Of course mine's genetic. Get me around a Nagant and the urge to storm the Reichstag is quite overwhelming.

I wouldn't go clear a building with that weapon...unless there's a rampaging elephant in there....then I would demo the building

**Dreadclaw69**

Ouze wrote:
Going back to that pistol conversion previously; I don't see the point of pistol caliber carbines. It seems like all the drawbacks of both types of gun, without really providing any benefits of either.

- You have the ability to standardize your ammunition between your rifle and your handgun
- More accurate than a handgun while using a handgun caliber round
- Less likely to over penetrate than a rifle round
- Hollow points are easily obtained
- Larger magazine capacity than a handgun
- Longer sight radius than a handgun

There are many advantages to a pistol caliber rifle

**djones520**

Dreadclaw69 wrote:
Ouze wrote:
Going back to that pistol conversion previously; I don't see the point of pistol caliber carbines. It seems like all the drawbacks of both types of gun, without really providing any benefits of either.

- You have the ability to standardize your ammunition between your rifle and your handgun
- More accurate than a handgun while using a handgun caliber round
- Less likely to over penetrate than a rifle round
- Hollow points are easily obtained
- Larger magazine capacity than a handgun
- Longer sight radius than a handgun

There are many advantages to a pistol caliber rifle

Pretty much what he said.

I know a lot of guys who are more comfortable shooting a rifle then a handgun. This gives them options.

**Frazzled**

Jihadin wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
Me too. Of course mine's genetic. Get me around a Nagant and the urge to storm the Reichstag is quite overwhelming.

I wouldn't go clear a building with that weapon...unless there's a rampaging elephant in there....then I would demo the building

Exactly. Thats what the Nagant is for, to protect yourself until the T-34s show up...

**Spacemanvic**

Dreadclaw69 wrote:
Ouze wrote:
Going back to that pistol conversion previously; I don't see the point of pistol caliber carbines. It seems like all the drawbacks of both types of gun, without really providing any benefits of either.

- You have the ability to standardize your ammunition between your rifle and your handgun
- More accurate than a handgun while using a handgun caliber round
- Less likely to over penetrate than a rifle round
- Hollow points are easily obtained
- Larger magazine capacity than a handgun
- Longer sight radius than a handgun

There are many advantages to a pistol caliber rifle

Well, there's frangible ammo in 223 which works really well. Then there is this:

Real World .223 Testing

.223 / 5.56 Penetration Tests vs.

.40 S&W and 12 ga. Slug

Overview
The research on the penetration of .223 ammunition has been completed. In an effort to make research more meaningful, testing consisted of handgun and shotgun ammunition in the same testing medium. The final results were that the .223 demonstrated less penetration capability than the 12 gauge slug and the .40S&W [handgun round].

Testing Medium
Type 250A Ordnance Gelatin was cast into blocks, 6"x6"x16". The process used is that which is recommended by Col. M. Fackler, Director of the US Army Wound Ballistics Laboratory. This is a 10% mixture, 1Kg of gelatin to 9000ml of H2O. This type of gelatin accurately simulates human body tissue in terms of bullet penetration.

A small piece of wall was constructed to duplicate the standard exterior walls found in [the Pacific Northwest] area. This piece of wall was sheeted with ½" wafer board, covered with a 2nd piece of ½" wafer board to simulate siding. This wall was built using a 2x4 frame and finished on the inside with ½" sheet rock. The interior [of the wall] was lined with fiberglass insulation.

Weapons Used
CAR-15, cal .223 Rem./5.56x45mm with a 16" barrel.
Glock M22, cal .40S&W.
Remington 870, 12 ga.

Ammunition Used
Federal .223 Remington, 55 grain HP.
Winchester .40S&W, 180 grain HP.
Federal 12 ga., 2 ¾", rifled slug.

Procedure
All rounds were fired from a distance of 12 feet. After each round was fired, its penetration was recorded and bullet performance noted. After a bullet was fired into the [bare] gelatin, another bullet of the same type was fired through the section of wall and into the gelatin. This was done in order to determine its penetration potential in the event a stray round were to hit the wall of a building.

Results
Caliber Testing medium Penetration Condition of bullet
.223 Rem. gelatin only 9.5" two pieces
.223 Rem. wall & gelatin 5.5" * fragmented
.40S&W gelatin only 13.5" mushroomed
.40S&W wall & gelatin 22" * no deformation
.40S&W wall & gelatin 22" * no deformation
.40S&W wall & gelatin 19.5" * slight deformation
12 ga. wall & gelatin 27.5" mushroomed
* these measurements do not include penetration of the 6" wall.
CCI Gold Dot.

Summary
The 55 grain HP .223 has less penetration than any of the other ammunition tested. Based on the results of this testing, there appears to be no basis for concern regarding the over penetration of the .223 [HP] round. In fact, it seems even safer in this regard than .40 S&W handgun ammunition.

The hollow point cavity in the .40S&W round filled with material when shot through the wall. This caused [these bullets] to fail to expand when they entered the gelatin. As a result, they penetrated 8.5" farther than when shot directly into the gelatin.

When the .223 [HP] was shot through he wall it began to fragment and as a result penetrated the gelatin only 5.5".

Because the .223 [HP] begins to break up on impact, it has less potential for damage or injury than the 12 ga. in the event of a ricochet. The .223 [HP] is obviously safer in an urban environment than the 12 ga. with slugs or buckshot.

Additional testing conducted proved that the .223 would penetrate a car door or glass. The .223 rounds fired into windshields began to break up after entering the glass and did not retain much energy. In most cases these rounds split in two.

Source:
http://www.olyarms.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=15:223-penetration-testing&catid=13:technical-info

Automatically Appended Next Post:
And if anyone is wondering about frangible ammo, here's a demonstration:

**Dreadclaw69**

Interesting results. Did they conduct the same test using 5.56mm rounds too? I'm interested in seeing what the increased velocity over .223 has on the results.

**NuggzTheNinja**

Dreadclaw69 wrote:
Interesting results. Did they conduct the same test using 5.56mm rounds too? I'm interested in seeing what the increased velocity over .223 has on the results.

If anything the faster rounds should fragment more quickly. I think TBOT has tested M193 and showed less penetration than handgun or shotgun rounds.

**Frazzled**

Wait you're saying a 5.56 has less penetration than a 9mm? Am I reading that correctly?

Er what?

If so whats the damage level? A pattern of OO or #4 buck into gel is impressive to say the least.

**Spacemanvic**

=Dreadclaw69 504193 7544248 a808483c30fbb9dfd4427b3ca04834c3.jpg]Interesting results. Did they conduct the same test using 5.56mm rounds too? I'm interested in seeing what the increased velocity over .223 has on the results.

Anecdotal evidence from use of 556 is that the currently issued ammo has problems penetrating adobe/dirt/mud walls, as well as sheetrock.

But that's like using a hammer to put in a window: use the proper tool for the job.

So say a 556 pistol shooting frangible 223 rounds (which is what the data supports) would be preferable as a HD weapon as opposed to using the same pistol to shoot XM855 or even lead core XM193 556 rounds. For close in or urban areas where you dont want to over-penetrate or have fragments come back at you, frangible 223 is the way to go.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Frazzled wrote:
Wait you're saying a 5.56 has less penetration than a 9mm? Am I reading that correctly?

Er what?

Well.

There is less mass in a 223/556 rifle bullet than say a pistol bullet. So the rifle bullet rips apart quicker as it enters soft tissue, whereas a 9MM bullet retains much of its mass as it enters tissue. SO, the rifle bullet disperses its energy in the target, more so than a 9MM. When 9MM ball was all the rage in the 80-90's, there were many instances where someone would be shot multiple times with 9MM and the rounds driving straight through and the person being able to function longer had the bullet expended its energy in the body. Of course the newer 9MM bullets offer better terminal results.

Now say you use XM855 with a steel core. The jacket disperses in soft tissue, but the steel core can continue unhampered until it hits a solid object or is deflected by bone. You could be shot in the arm and the core could travel along the arm and exit out your back or enter your armpit. But again, this is why you dont use steel core indoors.

This is why it is very important to know your target as well as whats behind your target.

**NuggzTheNinja**

Frazzled wrote:
Wait you're saying a 5.56 has less penetration than a 9mm? Am I reading that correctly?

Er what?

If so whats the damage level? A pattern of OO or #4 buck into gel is impressive to say the least.

Yes. Science supports my position too.

http://www.theboxotruth.com/the-box-o-truth-14-rifles-shotguns-and-walls/

Frangible 5.56 penetrates much less than common handgun rounds. Even the non-frangible stuff was deviating and breaking apart after hitting 4 interior walls. Reports of bullets vs. windows also suggest that pistol rounds penetrate much better (i.e., stay intact better).

See the post here for water penetration at the bottom of the thread:

http://www.ar15.com/archive/topic.html?b=3&f=16&t=620727

Handgun rounds just tend to stay together better than rifle rounds, which accounts for better penetration. The faster the thing breaks apart, the faster it loses velocity and the less it penetrates. If we're talking about a steel helmet then obviously 5.56 does a better job at penetrating.

For a discussion of post-wall wounding potential, see here:

http://www.defensivecarry.com/forum/defensive-rifles-shotgun-discussion/25105-5-56-actually-may-safer-indoor-use.html

Even the relatively heavy 75 grain BTHP loses most of its mass in the first ~ 7" of tissue. The part of the bullet that actually penetrated 12" in that photo is probably 20 grains and would be unlikely to cause a serious injury in the event of overpenetration. Meanwhile, check out the recoverable mass of these handgun rounds:

That's on bare gelatin so you're more likely to get expansion...so best case scenario.

**Grey Templar**

Indeed. There is penetration, can it go through X material, and then there is penetration, how deep does it go.

**Xenomancers**

Own 5 firearms. So glad to be an american.

Sig Sauer p226 9mm - home defense, secondary pistol

Sig Sauer p238 .380 - personal carry

Kimber 1911 .45 - home defense, bad assery

Sig Sauer M400 5.56mm - In case they call up the militia (cheaper ammo than 308)

Sig Sauer 716 patrol .308 - Hunting, zombies, north korea

**Dreadclaw69**

Xenomancers wrote:
Own 5 firearms. So glad to be an american.

Sig Sauer p226 9mm - home defense, secondary pistol

Sig Sauer p238 .380 - personal carry

Kimber 1911 .45 - home defense, bad assery

Sig Sauer M400 5.56mm - In case they call up the militia (cheaper ammo than 308)

Sig Sauer 716 patrol .308 - Hunting, zombies, north korea

No Sig in .45?

**Xenomancers**

Dreadclaw69 wrote:
Xenomancers wrote:
Own 5 firearms. So glad to be an american.

Sig Sauer p226 9mm - home defense, secondary pistol

Sig Sauer p238 .380 - personal carry

Kimber 1911 .45 - home defense, bad assery

Sig Sauer M400 5.56mm - In case they call up the militia (cheaper ammo than 308)

Sig Sauer 716 patrol .308 - Hunting, zombies, north korea

No Sig in .45?

The kimber was an impulse buy and was a little bit cheaper than the sig 1911's. So far I love it. Only about 200 rounds through it but it's a real nice pistol.

**Frazzled**

Xenomancers wrote:
Own 5 firearms. So glad to be an american.

Sig Sauer p226 9mm - home defense, secondary pistol

Sig Sauer p238 .380 - personal carry

Kimber 1911 .45 - home defense, bad assery

Sig Sauer M400 5.56mm - In case they call up the militia (cheaper ammo than 308)

Sig Sauer 716 patrol .308 - Hunting, zombies, north korea

So what you're saying is, you really hate Sigs...

**KalashnikovMarine**

Boy and people accuse me of being a fan boy for two Smith and Wesson revolvers lol

**Frazzled**

NuggzTheNinja wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
Wait you're saying a 5.56 has less penetration than a 9mm? Am I reading that correctly?

Er what?

If so whats the damage level? A pattern of OO or #4 buck into gel is impressive to say the least.

Yes. Science supports my position too.

http://www

Spoiler:

.theboxotruth.com/the-box-o-truth-14-rifles-shotguns-and-walls/

Frangible 5.56 penetrates much less than common handgun rounds. Even the non-frangible stuff was deviating and breaking apart after hitting 4 interior walls. Reports of bullets vs. windows also suggest that pistol rounds penetrate much better (i.e., stay intact better).

See the post here for water penetration at the bottom of the thread:

http://www.ar15.com/archive/topic.html?b=3&f=16&t=620727

Handgun rounds just tend to stay together better than rifle rounds, which accounts for better penetration. The faster the thing breaks apart, the faster it loses velocity and the less it penetrates. If we're talking about a steel helmet then obviously 5.56 does a better job at penetrating.

For a discussion of post-wall wounding potential, see here:

http://www.defensivecarry.com/forum/defensive-rifles-shotgun-discussion/25105-5-56-actually-may-safer-indoor-use.html

Even the relatively heavy 75 grain BTHP loses most of its mass in the first ~ 7" of tissue. The part of the bullet that actually penetrated 12" in that photo is probably 20 grains and would be unlikely to cause a serious injury in the event of overpenetration. Meanwhile, check out the recoverable mass of these handgun rounds:

That's on bare gelatin so you're more likely to get expansion...so best case scenario.

So are we saying then that, in actuality a shotgun or pistol carbine are better for short range fun?

**Xenomancers**

Frazzled wrote:
Xenomancers wrote:
Own 5 firearms. So glad to be an american.

Sig Sauer p226 9mm - home defense, secondary pistol

Sig Sauer p238 .380 - personal carry

Kimber 1911 .45 - home defense, bad assery

Sig Sauer M400 5.56mm - In case they call up the militia (cheaper ammo than 308)

Sig Sauer 716 patrol .308 - Hunting, zombies, north korea

So what you're saying is, you really hate Sigs...

I really don't know how this happend

. I guess at this point you can call me a sig fanboy. Pretty happy about it too - I didn't have to spend colt money and I feel I got colt quality with my rifles.

**NuggzTheNinja**

Frazzled wrote:
NuggzTheNinja wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
Wait you're saying a 5.56 has less penetration than a 9mm? Am I reading that correctly?

Er what?

If so whats the damage level? A pattern of OO or #4 buck into gel is impressive to say the least.

Yes. Science supports my position too.

http://www

Spoiler:

.theboxotruth.com/the-box-o-truth-14-rifles-shotguns-and-walls/

Frangible 5.56 penetrates much less than common handgun rounds. Even the non-frangible stuff was deviating and breaking apart after hitting 4 interior walls. Reports of bullets vs. windows also suggest that pistol rounds penetrate much better (i.e., stay intact better).

See the post here for water penetration at the bottom of the thread:

http://www.ar15.com/archive/topic.html?b=3&f=16&t=620727

Handgun rounds just tend to stay together better than rifle rounds, which accounts for better penetration. The faster the thing breaks apart, the faster it loses velocity and the less it penetrates. If we're talking about a steel helmet then obviously 5.56 does a better job at penetrating.

For a discussion of post-wall wounding potential, see here:

http://www.defensivecarry.com/forum/defensive-rifles-shotgun-discussion/25105-5-56-actually-may-safer-indoor-use.html

Even the relatively heavy 75 grain BTHP loses most of its mass in the first ~ 7" of tissue. The part of the bullet that actually penetrated 12" in that photo is probably 20 grains and would be unlikely to cause a serious injury in the event of overpenetration. Meanwhile, check out the recoverable mass of these handgun rounds:

That's on bare gelatin so you're more likely to get expansion...so best case scenario.

So are we saying then that, in actuality a shotgun or pistol carbine are better for short range fun?

Quite the opposite actually - 5.56 rifles do more tissue damage at a lower risk of overpenetration. A pistol is about the worst thing you can use, having the highest risk for overpenetration and the weakest permanent cavity. Buckshot is OK in terms of terminal ballistics but the platforms are poor (slow followup shots, very low magazine capacity, typically pump action or less reliable semi autos) and it still overpenetrates. It also lacks precision. Slugs have the worst to offer in terms of overpenetration, and the permanent cavity actually isn't all that impressive considering the absurd recoil.

Rifles > shotguns > handguns for pretty much all purposes. The only factor real tradeoff you should contemplate is for concealment.

**Stonebeard**

Huh, learn some thing new everyday. How's the 5.45 perform relative to the 5.56? Or 7.62x39? Been thinking about possibly picking up the ace once it's been on the market for a bit, but I'm not really sure what I want the thing chambered in.

**Frazzled**

NuggzTheNinja wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
NuggzTheNinja wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
Wait you're saying a 5.56 has less penetration than a 9mm? Am I reading that correctly?

Er what?

If so whats the damage level? A pattern of OO or #4 buck into gel is impressive to say the least.

Yes. Science supports my position too.

http://www

Spoiler:

.theboxotruth.com/the-box-o-truth-14-rifles-shotguns-and-walls/

Frangible 5.56 penetrates much less than common handgun rounds. Even the non-frangible stuff was deviating and breaking apart after hitting 4 interior walls. Reports of bullets vs. windows also suggest that pistol rounds penetrate much better (i.e., stay intact better).

See the post here for water penetration at the bottom of the thread:

http://www.ar15.com/archive/topic.html?b=3&f=16&t=620727

Handgun rounds just tend to stay together better than rifle rounds, which accounts for better penetration. The faster the thing breaks apart, the faster it loses velocity and the less it penetrates. If we're talking about a steel helmet then obviously 5.56 does a better job at penetrating.

For a discussion of post-wall wounding potential, see here:

http://www.defensivecarry.com/forum/defensive-rifles-shotgun-discussion/25105-5-56-actually-may-safer-indoor-use.html

Even the relatively heavy 75 grain BTHP loses most of its mass in the first ~ 7" of tissue. The part of the bullet that actually penetrated 12" in that photo is probably 20 grains and would be unlikely to cause a serious injury in the event of overpenetration. Meanwhile, check out the recoverable mass of these handgun rounds:

That's on bare gelatin so you're more likely to get expansion...so best case scenario.

So are we saying then that, in actuality a shotgun or pistol carbine are better for short range fun?

Quite the opposite actually - 5.56 rifles do more tissue damage at a lower risk of overpenetration. A pistol is about the worst thing you can use, having the highest risk for overpenetration and the weakest permanent cavity. Buckshot is OK in terms of terminal ballistics but the platforms are poor (slow followup shots, very low magazine capacity, typically pump action or less reliable semi autos) and it still overpenetrates. It also lacks precision. Slugs have the worst to offer in terms of overpenetration, and the permanent cavity actually isn't all that impressive considering the absurd recoil.

Rifles > shotguns > handguns for pretty much all purposes. The only factor real tradeoff you should contemplate is for concealment.

sorry having difficulty opening things. So what is the permanent cavity of a 5.56 vs. 9mm?

**NuggzTheNinja**

Frazzled wrote:
NuggzTheNinja wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
NuggzTheNinja wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
Wait you're saying a 5.56 has less penetration than a 9mm? Am I reading that correctly?

Er what?

If so whats the damage level? A pattern of OO or #4 buck into gel is impressive to say the least.

Yes. Science supports my position too.

http://www

Spoiler:

.theboxotruth.com/the-box-o-truth-14-rifles-shotguns-and-walls/

Frangible 5.56 penetrates much less than common handgun rounds. Even the non-frangible stuff was deviating and breaking apart after hitting 4 interior walls. Reports of bullets vs. windows also suggest that pistol rounds penetrate much better (i.e., stay intact better).

See the post here for water penetration at the bottom of the thread:

http://www.ar15.com/archive/topic.html?b=3&f=16&t=620727

Handgun rounds just tend to stay together better than rifle rounds, which accounts for better penetration. The faster the thing breaks apart, the faster it loses velocity and the less it penetrates. If we're talking about a steel helmet then obviously 5.56 does a better job at penetrating.

For a discussion of post-wall wounding potential, see here:

http://www.defensivecarry.com/forum/defensive-rifles-shotgun-discussion/25105-5-56-actually-may-safer-indoor-use.html

Even the relatively heavy 75 grain BTHP loses most of its mass in the first ~ 7" of tissue. The part of the bullet that actually penetrated 12" in that photo is probably 20 grains and would be unlikely to cause a serious injury in the event of overpenetration. Meanwhile, check out the recoverable mass of these handgun rounds:

That's on bare gelatin so you're more likely to get expansion...so best case scenario.

So are we saying then that, in actuality a shotgun or pistol carbine are better for short range fun?

Quite the opposite actually - 5.56 rifles do more tissue damage at a lower risk of overpenetration. A pistol is about the worst thing you can use, having the highest risk for overpenetration and the weakest permanent cavity. Buckshot is OK in terms of terminal ballistics but the platforms are poor (slow followup shots, very low magazine capacity, typically pump action or less reliable semi autos) and it still overpenetrates. It also lacks precision. Slugs have the worst to offer in terms of overpenetration, and the permanent cavity actually isn't all that impressive considering the absurd recoil.

Rifles > shotguns > handguns for pretty much all purposes. The only factor real tradeoff you should contemplate is for concealment.

sorry having difficulty opening things. So what is the permanent cavity of a 5.56 vs. 9mm?

9mm gets around .5" diameter in a best case scenario (best ammunition, expansion, etc)

M193 (which is pretty much the run of the mill 5.56) is producing a permanent wound cavity around 2.75" and this cavity is almost 6" long.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Decided to try appendix carry. It's actually pretty good! Holster is a Bladetech, mag pouch is a Blackhawk IWB. Light clips onto the mag pouch perfectly. Obviously my shirt covers this normally to cover it, but it hides very well with a light shirt.

**Frazzled**

Thanks for the info.
How do you like appendix carry to draw from? It seems pretty difficult.