Survivalist Forum - Reply to Topic
Survivalist Forum

Advertise Here

Go Back   Survivalist Forum > > >
Articles Classifieds Donations Gallery Groups Links Store Survival Files


Notices

Military Weapons Forum AR15, AK47, SKS, H&K, Galil, CETME, FN/FAL, Tanks, Ships, Jets, Helicopters....

Advertise Here
Thread: Barrier Penetration: 5.45 vs. 5.56...and VEHICLES! Reply to Thread
Title:
  
Message:
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:
 

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Survivalist Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:
Gender
Insurance
Please select your insurance company (Optional)

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

Topic Review (Newest First)
08-21-2017 11:06 AM
Camelfilter I'm currently going thru the thought proccess of getting into 5.45x39 as our "standard" mid range defensive carbine cartridge.

Combination of cost, weight, ease of follow-up shots. ... the standard thought proccess.

IF I could find a pistol in that caliber which would accept a brace, now given the ATF's shouldering brace reversal, it would be near on the perfect truck/get Home caliber. Reasonably easy to conceal, decent trajectory, small cartridge allowing enough to be carried with relative ease.

Held a 9" barreled SBR AK74 with a flip to the side stock, and fealt that was the "ultimate" get home weapon. However I have zero interest in getting into NFA type weapons, both the stamp proccess, as well as the extra tin foil hat idea of having that information more readily available to more folk...plus wouldn't feel comfortable leaving that weapon, even locked down, in the truck/SUV.

Our close in / working around homestead (should it come to that point) / walking around home (should it come that point) caliber is the tiny FN 5.7 in both pistol and carbine.
08-10-2017 04:55 PM
NHP1127 Many on here know that 62 grain 5.56 green tips (steel core penetrators) will go thru unarmored steel like butter.... which is why AR 500 steel targets must be used with the round. Will go thru a many types of barriers aswell.
08-10-2017 08:47 AM
DWwolf
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyinID View Post
Big difference between a glass bottle and modern laminated auto glass. I've seen pistol bullets and buckshot both skip off and not penetrate, depending on the angle.
Car body thickness is typically ~ 0.8 mm for normal sized cars.
08-05-2017 01:10 PM
justin22885 obama sanctions didnt effect ammo, the only ammo currently restricted for 5.45 is 7N6 and that was an ATF decision based on a criteria that 7N6 doesnt even match, but even then ive rarely seen the mild steel core (which is almost the entire core) actually penetrate further than the jacket and i find steel jacketed ammo penetrates the same so id attribute better penetration of that round through hard barriers to having a steel jacket and not a steel core

my point about spending more for AP ammo wasnt about M855 though, its about the specialty self defense rounds that are marketed towards better penetration, that someone would actually shoot a bunch of rounds into windshields and try to judge which one deflects less or does more damage after.. personally ive never really noticed deflections through windshields with any rounds so the deflection has to be on the level of a degree or two which just isnt worth consideration in ammo selection

i think 99.99999999999% of shooters would be perfectly well equipped if they followed the "buy it cheap, stock it deep" philosophy but theres nothing wrong with debating hypotheticals for the sake of discussion, theres just nothing that could ever come of it thats going to be significant enough to warrant a change in ammo selection
08-05-2017 06:39 AM
Inazone
Quote:
Originally Posted by justin22885 View Post
the ballistics im more interested in are ones that are going to matter on every single shot.. like 5.56 having a flatter trajector, less TOF and less recoil resulting in faster, more accurate followup shots vs 7.62x39, but even that is mostly unnecessary as youre splitting a matter of INCHES or milliseconds over the course of a 400 yard shot.. so my decisions based mostly on availability, cost, and ammo weight more than any ballistics chart

but how often do you plan to have to shoot into windshields? maybe 0.01% of all shots you ever fire out of your rifle?.. is this enough to warrant a change in ammo selection? not for me, especially not when those same barriers can be penetrated with cheaper, plainer ammo simply by firing a second or third shot behind the first
I guess it's just a matter of interest. When I bought my first couple of guns in .22LR, and being new to shooting, I started reading up on other people's opinions on the caliber for home defense use. While most advised against it, there were definitely proponents of it too, just as scouring SB on any given day will show someone saying .22LR is the ultimate survival caliber. Well, I bought a small supply - very small by most standards - of what I thought would be good all-around ammo. However, it wasn't long before I'd sold those guns and bought my first 9mm, which would end up being my first carry gun. The first thing I read/heard was a lot of chatter about how 9mm was insufficient for defense, and that .40S&W was The Best Thing Ever. "It's what the cops and the feds use, so it must true!" Well, I shot a friend's .40 Glock or USP, and decided I'd stick with my 9mm. I knew that some PDs were using 9mm, and obviously the Army issued the Beretta M9, so I'd start comparing the defensive ammo choices. Not much has changed for me personally since buying my first AR15, then a second, and deciding to stick with 5.56 even as those around me were building ARs in other calibers. For my purposes, there wasn't much an AR in 5.56 couldn't do.

TL;DR?

For some people such as myself, the variety in ammunition is almost (but not quite) as interesting as the variety in different guns, and the price of admission is a lot cheaper if you're only buying a few boxes. My only regret is that I sort of jumped on the SMK bandwagon when 1) my guns and my shooting skills are not "match" grade, 2) I don't have access to shoot somewhere of sufficient distance to see for myself what the round is capable of and 3) it isn't suitable for defensive use in any scenario I can see myself in. Fortunately, I bought it deeply discounted. Who knows? Maybe the day will come when points #1 and #2 will change for the better, while #3 remains a non-issue. But now, comparing different options has become a hobby all its own for me.

Quote:
its just a lot of hair splitting to find an excuse to justify higher cost ammo because some marketing ad has convinced some people theyre ill equipped to defend themselves without it
For some people, sure. How many AR owners rushed out to stock up on M855 when it looked like the ATF was going to ban it? Was there a similar effect among AK owners when Obama imposed sanctions on Russia, choking off the influx of cheap 7.62 and 5.45 surplus? It wasn't that there would be no ammo available, but rather there would be a lot less cheap ammo available . . . and at least in the case of the evil "armor-piercing cop-killing" M855, the very people concerned with losing a cheap ammo option started paying decidedly not-very-cheap prices for it. And of course, nothing happened, and there were plenty of people who paid $1/round for American Eagle ammo that is now down to a third of that again.

I get your point, but I think there are a lot of different motivations at play, at least for some of us. If it was strictly about survival/prepping then I wouldn't need to buy anything ever again, and my kids would probably end up inheriting a bunch of ammo some day.
08-05-2017 01:33 AM
justin22885
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inazone View Post
Come on, man. You have posted a lot of threads about ballistics in your time here. Not sure if your interest in it has diminished, and I can understand if it has since there is only so much to be said about one little ball of lead versus another that might be a little heavier or longer but fly faster or flatter. But just as "hope springs eternal" or whatever feel-good BS people will always cook up, likewise, "people on forums endlessly debate guns and ammo."
the ballistics im more interested in are ones that are going to matter on every single shot.. like 5.56 having a flatter trajector, less TOF and less recoil resulting in faster, more accurate followup shots vs 7.62x39, but even that is mostly unnecessary as youre splitting a matter of INCHES or milliseconds over the course of a 400 yard shot.. so my decisions based mostly on availability, cost, and ammo weight more than any ballistics chart

but how often do you plan to have to shoot into windshields? maybe 0.01% of all shots you ever fire out of your rifle?.. is this enough to warrant a change in ammo selection? not for me, especially not when those same barriers can be penetrated with cheaper, plainer ammo simply by firing a second or third shot behind the first

its just a lot of hair splitting to find an excuse to justify higher cost ammo because some marketing ad has convinced some people theyre ill equipped to defend themselves without it
08-05-2017 01:05 AM
Inazone
Quote:
Originally Posted by justin22885 View Post
i think i'll just stick with 55 grain 5.56 as i phase out 7.62x39, not really worth the time or effort in overthinking what will penetrate this barrier or that barrier better.. a round good at penetrating hard targets may not be so good at penetrating soft targets, there is no perfect so pick a good all around cartridge and bullet type and play to its abilities.. its not worth spending 2x as much on ammo to get better penetration through glass if penetration through people suffers for example

i swear, some people have way too much time on their hands and seem to put that time into overthinking some of the most trivial things
Come on, man. You have posted a lot of threads about ballistics in your time here. Not sure if your interest in it has diminished, and I can understand if it has since there is only so much to be said about one little ball of lead versus another that might be a little heavier or longer but fly faster or flatter. But just as "hope springs eternal" or whatever feel-good BS people will always cook up, likewise, "people on forums endlessly debate guns and ammo."
08-04-2017 11:23 PM
justin22885 i think i'll just stick with 55 grain 5.56 as i phase out 7.62x39, not really worth the time or effort in overthinking what will penetrate this barrier or that barrier better.. a round good at penetrating hard targets may not be so good at penetrating soft targets, there is no perfect so pick a good all around cartridge and bullet type and play to its abilities.. its not worth spending 2x as much on ammo to get better penetration through glass if penetration through people suffers for example

i swear, some people have way too much time on their hands and seem to put that time into overthinking some of the most trivial things
08-04-2017 10:31 PM
Inazone
Quote:
Originally Posted by tractorfarmer123 View Post
I agree. Any rifle round should be able to make it through and still have some energy left.
Energy, sure, but possibly in tiny pieces and/or drastically off-target. Military Arms Channel on YouTube (among others) does some video comparisons of various ammo through common barriers as are being discussed in this thread, and some of the results are pretty surprising. My own observation on forums and in conversation, is that a lot of guns and ammo are sold in mass quantities to civilians simply on the basis of being in use by the military, even though the military is subject to restrictions and requirements that civilians are not. In other words, people are limiting themselves to what may not actually be the best for their purposes . . . because they demand mil-spec.

For instance, the 5.56 77gr SMK (Sierra Match King) bullet employed by the US military is proven to be accurate, which makes sense since it is considered a "match" bullet, but its "open-tipped match" design is not the same as an expanding hollow point bullet even if it outwardly resembles one. It will shed its jacket and fragment with relatively little penetration, while a true hollow point of similar weight (let's say Hornady 75gr BTHP) will penetrate some materials further and expand . . . but probably not auto glass or even steel of any appreciable thickness. Better yet would be a 75gr Speer Gold Dot, which has the jacket bonded to the bullet and remains largely intact going through auto glass, among other things. I don't have ballistics gel to compare accuracy after passing through a barrier, but I've compared the aforementioned three bullets (SMK, Hornady, Speer) for penetration and expansion, and sure enough, the SMK fragments almost immediately, the Hornady BTHP penetrates further and expands considerably beyond its initial diameter, and the Speer Gold Dot not only penetrates deeper still and expands even more, but expands with proper "petals" as one would hope for in a law enforcement rifle round. My hope is that, at least when facing "unconventional" forces such as ISIS, our troops are cleared to use ammo that is not only accurate but also terminally effective. As civilians, we have options that are superior to mil-spec.

As a side note, the Hornady Law Enforcement website has a bullet comparison tool - http://www.hornadyle.com/products/rifle-ammunition/ - that, among other things, shows test results of their various LE ammo offerings through common barrier types. For instance, I was surprised to find that there are drastic differences between the many TAP variations, and that some even state "This bullet fragments completely when encountering this barrier." I normally take manufacturer-produced test results with a grain of salt, but it's interesting to check out if you have a few minutes.
08-04-2017 06:05 PM
Inazone
Quote:
Originally Posted by tractorfarmer123 View Post
Most houses are plastic siding, a sheet of plywood, and drywall. A 22lr can pass right through. Most cars are sheet metal (like the thickness of a steel can) with plastic on the inside. Do you think getting a bullet to go into a car would be a challenge? I don't think glass would be any more of a barrier. Try shooting through a piece of dryall, a steel can, and a glass bottle and note the results.
In my most recent post in this thread - https://www.survivalistboards.com/sho...d.php?t=752385 - I compared the results of regular 55gr SP to bonded 62gr SP through 1" pine, out of the same gun at the same distance, into water jugs. The board didn't stop either one, although the bonded performed identical through the board as without it. I wasn't including FMJ as part of my testing, nor have I done the same thing in pistol calibers, but I might get to it eventually. Adding another layer or two might start to have a significant effect on barrier-blind ammo, but I think it would still penetrate with enough velocity to do serious damage, even if it didn't retain most of its weight and/or expand fully. I wouldn't expect much difference with the typical materials found in modern car construction, in the passenger compartment anyway.

With all the ammo choices available, there is something for virtually every occasion, although sometimes it comes down to nothing other than price . . . or politics.
08-04-2017 03:18 PM
tractorfarmer123
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyinID View Post
Big difference between a glass bottle and modern laminated auto glass. I've seen pistol bullets and buckshot both skip off and not penetrate, depending on the angle.
I agree. Any rifle round should be able to make it through and still have some energy left.
07-20-2017 06:05 PM
HappyinID
Quote:
Originally Posted by tractorfarmer123 View Post
Most houses are plastic siding, a sheet of plywood, and drywall. A 22lr can pass right through. Most cars are sheet metal (like the thickness of a steel can) with plastic on the inside. Do you think getting a bullet to go into a car would be a challenge? I don't think glass would be any more of a barrier. Try shooting through a piece of dryall, a steel can, and a glass bottle and note the results.
Big difference between a glass bottle and modern laminated auto glass. I've seen pistol bullets and buckshot both skip off and not penetrate, depending on the angle.
07-20-2017 06:00 PM
HappyinID
Quote:
Originally Posted by FirstSergeant View Post
Actually thinking about it for a few moments, when they got rid of the round nose lead and went to a more squared off (wadcutter) lead bullet there was not much of a political problem.

But when they went to a hollow point, they had to pass it off as a safety (overpenetration) problem.

What I really think is that the lead bullets were very old fashioned and the new Speer bullets just stopped bad guys better. But they could not say that out loud.

So the official story about how the new bullets did not go through walls was probably disinformation.
Yup..... Pure baloney
07-20-2017 04:58 PM
tractorfarmer123 Most houses are plastic siding, a sheet of plywood, and drywall. A 22lr can pass right through. Most cars are sheet metal (like the thickness of a steel can) with plastic on the inside. Do you think getting a bullet to go into a car would be a challenge? I don't think glass would be any more of a barrier. Try shooting through a piece of dryall, a steel can, and a glass bottle and note the results.
07-20-2017 04:48 PM
FirstSergeant
Quote:
Originally Posted by justin22885 View Post
if you cant figure it out then i truly feel sorry for you as you clearly criticized those seeking barrier penetration based on where YOU live
I did not criticize anyone, sorry to tell you that all the world's arrows don't point in your direction.

I just said 'I thought that non-wall-penetrating' was supposed to be the desired result of self defense bullet design.

If you read thru the above posts, you would even see where I admitted to learning something today. See post 25.

That non-wall-penetrating was hype to smooth the way to use hollow points in urban (liberal city) police departments.

EDIT: Trees? I really don't want to shoot through trees.
07-20-2017 04:45 PM
justin22885
Quote:
Originally Posted by FirstSergeant View Post
Huh? What?
if you cant figure it out then i truly feel sorry for you as you clearly criticized those seeking barrier penetration based on where YOU live and not everybody lives in the back woods of some blue state, some people have a legitimate usage for barrier penetration.. oh, and since you do live off in the back woods somewhere, knowing what can penetrate trees and the thickest those trees can be would be beneficial information
07-20-2017 04:21 PM
FirstSergeant
Quote:
Originally Posted by justin22885 View Post
you are not everyone and not everyone lives where you do so do not try to compare everyones survival scenarios and preparations as if they did
Huh? What?
07-20-2017 04:18 PM
FirstSergeant
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyinID View Post
Your own department for example, has been using a pistol round for many years, that does very well after going through barriers such as wood, glass and steel. If it were the epic problem posed by people with financial agendas, we both know they wouldn't be using it.

You try and consider what's in the background. But any round with sufficient penetration to be effective, poses a risk behind your target, even through walls.
Actually thinking about it for a few moments, when they got rid of the round nose lead and went to a more squared off (wadcutter) lead bullet there was not much of a political problem.

But when they went to a hollow point, they had to pass it off as a safety (overpenetration) problem.

What I really think is that the lead bullets were very old fashioned and the new Speer bullets just stopped bad guys better. But they could not say that out loud.

So the official story about how the new bullets did not go through walls was probably disinformation.
07-20-2017 03:46 PM
HappyinID
Quote:
Originally Posted by FirstSergeant View Post
OK, thanks.
Your own department for example, has been using a pistol round for many years, that does very well after going through barriers such as wood, glass and steel. If it were the epic problem posed by people with financial agendas, we both know they wouldn't be using it.

You try and consider what's in the background. But any round with sufficient penetration to be effective, poses a risk behind your target, even through walls.
07-20-2017 03:35 PM
justin22885
Quote:
Originally Posted by FirstSergeant View Post
The nearest concrete wall is about 200 miles from me.



Fort Tryon Park, NYC
you are not everyone and not everyone lives where you do so do not try to compare everyones survival scenarios and preparations as if they did
This thread has more than 20 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:08 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright © Kevin Felts 2006 - 2015,
Green theme by http://www.themesbydesign.net