Why do people shoot 5.56 out of short barrels? The entire point of 5.56 is that it's a high velocity low mass bullet...

Because 99% of ARs are only shooting paper and metal targets

People do it to because it doesn't matter and it makes them feel tacticool.

I'll bet that only a single person at most on this entire site has ever actually used their AR on another human, sans military, which is not what we're talking about.

> their m4 didn't down the hadji even after two hits or whatever.
Git fuggin gud

556 to the T-zone is 100% immediately lethal.

Attached: image.jpg (640x703, 398K)

The short barrel M4's are notorious for not downing people even with multiple shots. That's why they got the nickname ".223 icepick". Basically what said

huh that's a great point user, we've never had this discussion here before so now's a good a time as ever amarite?

Attached: 1518386924184.jpg (854x479, 81K)

holy shit you can actually see the tip of the bullet protruding from the end of the barrel lol

Velocity isn't everything.

Also this is .223 55 grain, not 5.56 77 gr out of 1/7 twist.

Deadly factor? It doesn't matter if you're getting shot with a 55 gr .223 with a 16'' barrel or a 10'' 77 gr 5.56. Either way you're fuckin dead.

77 gr with HP out of a 10'' barrel is still as deadly inside 300m as a 16'' barrel.

Outside of 300m at that point you might as well use an 18'' or a DMR setup.

you go tell 'em that

It does most definitely matter, with the proper velocity 5.56 can leave a hole the size of a childs fist inside you.

Attached: 1506275441343.jpg (964x644, 213K)

dumb post

In the military, you don't have a choice about what ammo you get to shoot. M855 was a poor choice by command, and it performed poorly out of all barrel lengths, but moreso from the shorter ones. Hence the M855A1 development.
SF/SOF guys who were shooting MK262 out of their weapons did not have those issues. It was an ammo issue, not a barrel length issue.
As a civilian, you can pick far better ammo for your weapon, and there are a variety of loads that fragment at much lower velocities with fantastic terminal ballistics.
The idea that an SBR is worthless because M193/M855 loads perform poorly is silly when you can purchase proper defensive ammo at your local sporting goods store.

stop posting this dumb graph, it's quite obvious that there was something flawed in their testing methods, there should be none of those dumb dips in that graph.

But why use 5.56 in the first place if you're just going to use the heaviest load available? Use a round that's heavy to begin with. Ammo will be cheaper and it will still have more energy than the 5.56 at that length.

Also, you're giving up a SIGNIFICANT amount of energy by going with a barrel that short as evidenced by all the charts posted in this thread. Shoot the same round out of a 16 inch inch barrel or even a 14 inch and you'll get much better ballistics.

> 5.56 is like a child’s fist

This is what AR fags actually believe

Attached: image.jpg (620x387, 213K)

You wouldn't want a permanent cavity the size of a child's fist inside your chest now would you?

dumb frogposter without the frog, come up with a reason why noguns faggot.

we're talking about SBR shit like .300 blk and so on and then you come and HURRDURR LOOK AT THIS 9MM VELOCITY CHART, SEE THE 5.56 WONT BE AS SLOW AS IT IS EVEN AT SHORTER BARREL LENGTHS, AREN'T I SMART?
Like what was the fucking point with your post? Can you fuck off back to huffing paint or whatever?

It really is a powerful round at high velocities and will do exactly that.

they do make 556 that's optimized for short barrels

Because
>Muh AR da best
>Mu AR do everything
>Don't ever buy X firearm. Just get an AR BRO!
>AR15 dah best SMG/rifle/shotgun /sniper rifle /DMR/ LMG/ bullpup/ mini fourteen/ anti materiels/ hangun / sbr / pdw evar!

Attached: 1527963778487.jpg (700x700, 49K)

I'm not even arguing against that here (not that i agree with it). Even if you really want to use an AR for everything, you can shoot other rounds than just 5.56 out of it.

Very nice pic, perfectly illustrates the point. There is a reason the round was designed to be fired out of a 20 inch barrel. That fragmentation above 3000fps is brutal

That is the difference between ice picking or blowing a sizable whole on a soft target.

It is called 300 blackout

That pic is garbage, the top half is M193, the bottom is M855, they're different rounds.
A 55/62gr jacketed projectile going 2500fps does not exhibit similar wounding to a lead 40gr projectile going 1100fps, and if you think that, you are a fucking retard. It's not optimal to shoot those rounds that slow, but it is not "like a .22lr".

Wouldn't it be amazing if I could drive to my nearest Walmart/Cabelas/LGS and buy ammo that performs well at lower velocities!? I'm so pissed that all I'm allowed to shoot is M193/M855!!! Oh wait... I'm not in the military...

Attached: 1499762607625.jpg (400x225, 13K)

It literally says they're both m855

The value of a short gun out weighs the value of the higher velocity from a longer barrel in certain situations. Being able to maneuver and get the first hit before they hit you is more important than trying to use a 20 inch through a narrow hallway or a ship because you just found out the velocity helps in terminal performance and suddenly think it's the end all be all.

For CQB shit, where SBRs are intended to be used, 5.56 is still very deadly. At these ranges it still tumbles, it still fragments, it will easily kill you even with military ball ammo. Will it be as terminally effective as a longer barrel? No but when you're this close to an enemy you're putting 3 rounds in them at a minimum, and again, it's more important to get the first hit. So it doesn't matter as much as you're making it out to be. Consider what SBRs were replacing, the MP5.

If you're hoping to drop guys at 300 meters with an SBR, you'll be better off with ammo such as Brown Tip or FBIT3 since you're using it where it wasn't really intended and could really benefit from the improved terminal performance. Would 300 blackout be better? Maybe but only marginally so. And considering how they are used, probably only negligibly so. It's definitely not enough to justify the cost or the burden on the logistics system.

Might well have been compiled by some autisti/k/ person so take the text with a hint of salt.

Attached: calibers.jpg (586x750, 104K)

Dude I was about to post something like this, supreme retards buy a 10" barrel AR pistol, then complain bitch and moan about how shitty the ballistics are with m855.

>Why do people shoot 5.56 out of short barrels?
All because of that damned allergy.

Attached: mcx_rattler_and_the_bullpup_allergy.png (601x573, 78K)

The upper half off the image, not the blue portion. Those are both M855.
And now that I'm looking at it, the lower M855 example that is exhibiting icepicking is at a very low velocity. In fact, if we look at the graph that posted (from sadefense) we can see that out of 10.5/11.5" guns actually do cause fragmentation at close range with M855! You could use this in your house for HD and get reliable fragmentation! lol

I have literally never seen or heard anyone complain about M855 terminal performance after buying a short barrel. They usually buy actual self defense ammo for their guns and practice with 193/855.
Where did you meet these people?

so one of these is prolly not very good then?

Attached: 7-gpar1ss_1.jpg (550x550, 38K)

I don't think the lower one is ice picking since the bullet tumbled. Albeit not as great as fragmenting but still good. It's what 5.45 primarily relies on for damaging tissue.

>the lower M855 example that is exhibiting icepicking is at a very low velocity.
Which is what you get when you shoot out of really short barrels

The upper half of the image doesn't specify what rounds they are, only the chart does which shows them as both m855. The other chart from sadefense shows that with a 10 inch barrel you get about 2500fps which wouldn't be enough for reliable fragmentation. If you actually think it's a good idea to use that for home defense then double lol.

Good point! It's not "like a .22lr", that's for sure hahaha
I feel like this whole thread is bored enlistees phoneposting about rumors they heard from other service members

When you shoot M855/M193 out of short barrels outside of close range, get get icepicking or tumbling.
Again, lets looks at this graph together. I even drew on it sweetie! It almost seems that 10.5/11.5 DOES meet frag velocity within a certain close envelope.
And I use Barnes TSX in my 10.5 :) no worries! I'm not recommending using 193/855 as an HD round, I'm simply pointing out that in that image that gives an example of M855 at 2300fps (which the other user pointed out is tumbling lol), it is ignoring the fact that M855 exits the muzzle at around 2600fps from a short barrel, and thus it will actually fragment within short range, which conflicts directly with your point.

Attached: cantreadshit.jpg (650x433, 42K)

oof

Attached: gay.jpg (4032x3024, 2.41M)

nice samefag

>and thus it will actually fragment within short range
But not reliably
>which the other user pointed out is tumbling lol)
What does it matter? It still produces a minimal wound channel (surely wont stop anyone).

The point you're missing is that you're actively working against the main mechanic the bullet relies on to be lethal, which is high velocities. If you want a short barrel and thus lower velocities go with a round that is actually designed to do that instead of first fucking it's shit up by shooting it at lower velocities then trying to fix that by using hollow points. There is also a good reason why hollow points aren't used for combat and it's not just the geneva convention. It's because they're useless against body armor and don't penetrate cover very well.

What "stops" people is a CNS hit, which can be done with either of the examples.
I think you're trying to talk about hollow tips not hollow points in 5.56, and I don't think you know or understand why that feature exists in rifle rounds. I'm not even going to address ap and cover because you don't understand those things relative to bullet construction.
The point you're missing is that as a civilian I can buy ammo that reliably fragments down to 1800fps and that your bitching is actually mostly about poor ammo selection more than it is about barrel length.

dude you are legit fucking retarded
you don't know shit about ballistics

Attached: 1507859871764.jpg (650x391, 28K)

>What "stops" people is a CNS hit, which can be done with either of the examples.
A CNS hit is only one of the things that stop people, and can be done by practically any round so it's not an argument. Tissue damage and energy dump is what you're aiming for, enough of it will stop people.
>I think you're trying to talk about hollow tips not hollow points in 5.56,
No i'm talking about hollow points, and other expanding ammo at that
> and I don't think you know or understand why that feature exists in rifle rounds. I'm not even going to address ap and cover because you don't understand those things relative to bullet construction.
You don't have to devolve to adhoms now do you?
>The point you're missing is that as a civilian I can buy ammo that reliably fragments down to 1800fps
No i get that. What you're still missing is that you're doing that with a round that wasn't designed to do that. Can you do it? Sure. But if you know that's what you want to do why choose the round that's least suited for it?
>and that your bitching is actually mostly about poor ammo selection more than it is about barrel length.
The point is about using the wrong round for that barrel length. It's not one or the other, it's a combination of both.

You don't have to know anything about ballistics to figure that it's better to use a round that's designed for lower velocity shooting to shoot at lower velocities than using a round that's ment for higher velocity shooting to shoot at lower velocities. It's basic common sense, i'm surprised some people don't get this.

Literally this

Ok, lets stick with a couple of your primary points on this one.
>"It wasn't designed to do that"
I am not going to ignore 60 years of advancement in bullet construction, terminal ballistics research, and combat experience to follow the intended design of the weapon system (actual use of that term btw) to the dot. If the weapon works with a shorter barrel and improved ammo, why the fuck isn't it viable? Are you really going to sit here and tell me that military units and police services the world over should throw their 5.56 SBRs away because it wasn't "designed to do that"? Even though it works better than any other alternative weapon of a similar size for their intended purpose? 5.56 rifles are in common service all over the world and switching over ammo and potentially buying new rifles is costly and time consuming when what they already have does the job with the modern ammo that is readily available!
>"The point is about using the wrong round for that barrel length"
Exactly! When I'm shooting at people with a SBR, I need to use appropriate ammo! That I can buy at almost any sporting goods store! So why the fuss? If I bought a 20" rifle I would be comfortable using 193/855 against people.
However, if I put Sierra TMK in both my long rifle and my short rifle, my short rifle would have reliable terminal effect AND my long rifle would have a greatly increased envelope of effectiveness!
So yes, you do need to buy the proper ammo for a short barrel rifle, but if you buy good ammo period, it improves the performance of both short and long barreled rifles. It is more about ammo than it is about barrel length.

You kinda gave the answer yourself. The reason why it's used is because militaries don't care and would rather make something they already have work then spend money on a good solution. You do realize for example that the Army standard for ARs is 4 MOA, right? That is far higher than what most civilians would consider acceptable for an AR. The military cares mostly about cost, if it technically gets the job done and costs less than the other options that's what the military will do.

It's harder to convert hundreds and thousands of rifles than it is one. You're a civilian as you said so you can actually buy what you need/want beforehand rather than having to deal with entire arsenals of guns that you already own and can't just throw away.

Look, for what it's worth, it's fine. If you use expanding ammo the gun won't be useless. But that doesn't change the fact that it makes little sense in the first place. It's not just a question of x engineer telling you to do y, it's about the way rounds perform in real life. If a round is designed to be light and fast it's going to have properties that allow it to perform best in that configuration. Trying to use it in the opposite way it was designed to be used effectively renders the optimizations made to it useless. It's just a stupid decision that makes no sense if you KNOW that you want a short barreled gun.

NATO ALREADY DID

Attached: NATO small arms study.jpg (1268x3596, 956K)

>pic
I'm fucking dead

Rangers in Mogadisho were bitching about that when they were using m16s.

We either should've just stuck with M193, or standard issued something like MK262 to everyone.

M855 was designed to fulfill one bureaucratic goal (penetrate a Soviet steel helmet at 600 meters, iirc), something that your average infantryman cannot do realistically or repeatably, and in doing so it sacrificed all the either good terminal effects of the 5.56 round.

Attached: 1320385967699.jpg (794x621, 46K)

NATO literally said git gud faggit if you cant accurately engage a target, bitching that "I shot him in he leg and he didnt ded" is a bullshit excuse for poor skill

Attached: 1371786321693.jpg (800x600, 269K)

>It's a rifle AND a concussion grenade.
DoD will be all over this.

Attached: 1406471817512.png (318x307, 119K)

So that's why my 6.8mm is so shit at dropping deer.

Jesus christ

Might as well be a flame thrower

But why

10mm needs to be mainstream in PDWs. This solves everything. Shill it from the rooftops

>replying to a post about using HP in short barrels but still arguing about FMJ and velocity

HURRRR DURRR

Hey now..... I love my car-15 clone made by Olympic Arms in 1988

Yes i have 3 others but its my first and favorite (got it in 1991)

Best ammo out of a 16inch AR? I just have 55gr stuff. I've got 62 green nose too but save that for my 20inch

Attached: 2017-09-08 15.52.49.jpg (2829x1590, 2.59M)

Take a look at M855A1
youtu.be/fX4ODh1g4eM

They look cool

Attached: downloadfile.jpg (2048x2048, 138K)

that ammo sucks if your only getting 3000fps with 55 grain from a 20"

lake city/IMI is like 3200FPS

You can't really source that ammo in market tho. I would suggest Black Hills 50 Grn TSX as the best you can get commercially.

cuz some faggot will always Like and Subscibe.

seems like modern ammunition loads have already made the problem a non issue in the current market?

Yeah unfortunately it's hard to find but sometimes they pop up.
>Black Hills 50 Grn TSX
That's a good too. M193 and MK262 are also good options.

Why the funky grip though

So you can be a pirate.

>5.56
>Velocity isn't everything.
Think about that again, please.

I don't get it, why is it funky?
Because of the novel bolt buffer incline?

Short barrel also the tits for drive bys.