Bullet penetration power experiment of 5.56 and 5.45 Video

[Seraphim]

Thought it would get more attention in this section.

Anyone want to translate this?

[winchester_down]

An interesting video there. nice post.

I do, however, have a few problems with the design of the experiment.
Its only a short video, but you need to do multiple tests of each round, test various ranges and other materials.

The range tested here doesnt allow the projectile to get into its proper "torpedo" position so they just tumble through the material. this creates error from the rounds hitting the target from different angles each time.

I'm sure they deal with this in the commentary, but anyway i just thought i'd say.

it'll probably be revealed when the translation comes out , but i think the bit at the end compares tracer to normal ball rounds(the bit where the petrol/oil drum is shot into flames)

[KillerBD]

So the 5.45x39mm bullet is better than the 5.56x45mm???

Or was it a bad comparison. Like the 5.45 bullet was AP and the 5.56 was just FMJ...???

[sergey31]

So the 5.45x39mm bullet is better than the 5.56x45mm???

Or was it a bad comparison. Like the 5.45 bullet was AP and the 5.56 was just FMJ...???

5.4 does not fragment but tumbles WAY more than 5.6 which fragments. They are both equal in their designed performances. Both do job well in an open terrain, Not striking grass or foliage.

[mohica]

%.45x39 has a void or hollow tip that causes the core of the bullet to slam forward upon impact thus resulting in the tumbling you mention. Technically that could be considered a "dum dum" bullet according to the Geneva Conventions. Under the GC "dum dum" bullet is translated into hollow point, considered inhumane on the field of battle. The Russians just disguised what it acutally is.

The M193 55gr out of a 1/12 twist is a much more effective round than a M855 62gr out of a 1/7 twist at typical combat ranges of say 300m or less. The M193 tends to fragment and dump it's energy in the target while the M855 or SS109 tend to go thru the target. So if you are using the 62gr out of a 1/7, go for the head shot!

[jkdo]

%.45x39 has a void or hollow tip that causes the core of the bullet to slam forward upon impact thus resulting in the tumbling you mention. Technically that could be considered a "dum dum" bullet according to the Geneva Conventions. Under the GC "dum dum" bullet is translated into hollow point, considered inhumane on the field of battle. The Russians just disguised what it acutally is.

The M193 55gr out of a 1/12 twist is a much more effective round than a M855 62gr out of a 1/7 twist at typical combat ranges of say 300m or less. The M193 tends to fragment and dump it's energy in the target while the M855 or SS109 tend to go thru the target. So if you are using the 62gr out of a 1/7, go for the head shot!

Why would a 1-7 twist not be enough to stabilize a 62 gr bullet.That kind of twist is able to stabilize even 70 and 80 grainers.For "heavy for caliber bullets"a 1-7 or 1-8 is about the optimum.
Dum Dum was a Weapons Arsenal in Calcutta-India in the 1850,that produced bullets that were softer,hence more willing to deform on impact,but it was in no way a Soft point or Deformation Projectile.It was not something the Russions came up with.

[Kaapeli]

I hate opening Russian canned ammo boxes with those crappy can openers... takes forever.

[22.5degrees]

I shoot 62 gr out of my 1 in 9 14.5" with zero problems. This includes sub freezing temps. The 55gr M193 generally will fragment at velocities above 2500 fps. below that the projectile will still tumble to a minimum velocity of around 2200 fps. Below this the projectile becomes an expensive hole punch. As was mentioned the 5.45.x39 was designed to tumble and does so very well. Not exactly a fair or similar comparison. 5.45 for penetration, 5.56 for terminal effects.

22.5

[mohica]

Why would a 1-7 twist not be enough to stabilize a 62 gr bullet.That kind of twist is able to stabilize even 70 and 80 grainers.For "heavy for caliber bullets"a 1-7 or 1-8 is about the optimum.
Dum Dum was a Weapons Arsenal in Calcutta-India in the 1850,that produced bullets that were softer,hence more willing to deform on impact,but it was in no way a Soft point or Deformation Projectile.It was not something the Russions came up with.

Ok, READ my post again. The 1/7 twist stabalizes the M855 well, I never said it didn't. How did you get that? Colt recommended a 1/9 twist as being optimum for the ability to shoot both 55gr and 62gr bullets. The 1/7 was adopted because anything less woulnd't stabalize the new (at the time) tracer round which was a long projectile. That is it in a nutshell.

Dum-Dum was the venacular used when describing anything but FMJ type ammunition. It was dertermined to cause too severe of wounds and was "outlawed" by the Geneva Conventions.

Again, READ my post. I stated the Russian bullet circumvents the GC restrictions, nothing more.

[Jippo]

%.45x39 has a void or hollow tip that causes the core of the bullet to slam forward upon impact thus resulting in the tumbling you mention. Technically that could be considered a "dum dum" bullet according to the Geneva Conventions. Under the GC "dum dum" bullet is translated into hollow point, considered inhumane on the field of battle. The Russians just disguised what it acutally is.

The last sentence is quite funny as M193 is by far worse of the two rounds if it fragments. It can also be argued that M193 designed to fragment as it is inherently too weak to withstand the stresses caused by the velocity it is driven to in .223. 5.45x39 was a direct response in .223 success to penetrate body armor and maim people. Also it can be argued(and it quite successfully is!) that the airspace in the tip of the round is merely a result of the manufacturing process and not all intentional.

Such slender long bullets do tumble very easily with or without air in the tip anyway.

Convention is Hague, not Geneve.


-jippo

[Jippo]

Dum Dum was a Weapons Arsenal in Calcutta-India in the 1850,that produced bullets that were softer,hence more willing to deform on impact,but it was in no way a Soft point or Deformation Projectile.It was not something the Russions came up with.

Of the two types of original Dum-Dum's produced Mark II Special was shortened FMJ making it actually softpoint, and Mark II* was shortened and drilled FMJ i.e. a hollowpoint.

They were infact projectiles designed to deform.


-jippo

[22.5degrees]

I find it comical that there are standards as to what is considered "cruel and unusual" with regards to getting shot. Having only been shot with paint balls, simunition and pellet guns. I can't say anything greater regardless of calibre or bullet style would be a joy. Talk about retarded "rules/laws". The whole Hague is a waste of paper IMO.

22.5

[Jippo]

I find it comical that there are standards as to what is considered "cruel and unusual" with regards to getting shot. Having only been shot with paint balls, simunition and pellet guns. I can't say anything greater regardless of calibre or bullet style would be a joy. Talk about retarded "rules/laws". The whole Hague is a waste of paper IMO.

22.5

I don't think quite so. Of course it is quite easy to also see where you are coming from too, but I think Hague makes sense.

If we talk about the old 7.62x39 vs .223 debate. People always say how great round .223 round is because it fragments, and as thus is a better killer. Not going to the normal good round bad round comparison, I would take position that they are equal enough rounds produce similar incapacitations with similar hits. They aren't mouseguns, nor howitzers.

But there is a difference after you get hit, and allthough there may not ever be a 'clean' gunshot wound the solid slowly tumbling 7.62 than fragmenting and tearing .223. More organs may be affected by the fragments and the shockwave making a very difficult wound to treat which is more easily infected. And as I argue with no real difference in stopping power. And this is just with modern "Hague legal" FMJ rounds.

My grandfather was shot by exploding rifle round in WW2. Wound was actually quite superfluos and in ways less dangerous than a normal round would have given, but required difficult operation and many many months to heal. And of course it never healed properly. I'm very happy that this kind of rounds are outlawed, and hope the treaties would be respected the next time harm comes this way.

Were there no rules like Hague also more hideous weapons would be allowed like poison (poison bullets? making even more difficult wounds?), gas and biological weapons would be used, torture would be common, POW's would be mistreated etc.

It is a good idea to bring civilization and morale also into times of chaos.


-jippo

[22.5degrees]

I see your point Jippo. However, Should I go to war as a nation my goal is to destroy the enemy as quickly and as efficiently as possible. I could care less if it causes suffering outside of what some feel is "acceptable". War is war, you kill people and do horrific things to them. The sooner the war is over the fewer casualties there will be. If bombing my enemies hospitals or schools was required to secure victory than so be it...

22.5

[GazB]

If bombing my enemies hospitals or schools was required to secure victory than so be it...

Suicide bombers agree with you...

.45x39 has a void or hollow tip that causes the core of the bullet to slam forward upon impact thus resulting in the tumbling you mention. Technically that could be considered a "dum dum" bullet according to the Geneva Conventions.

As quoted above... the Geneva conventions are about the treatment of POWs, the Hague convention is about the use of ammo that causes cruel and unnecessary suffering.
Also keep in mind that all bullets tumble... even pistol bullets.

Regarding the two bullets, they are both designed to dump as much of their kinetic energy into the target as they can.
The 5.56mm bullet does this by fragmenting... it is a very short projectile with a long cased cartridge. The projectile has a set if dimples around it that are called a clannure or something that is supposed to ensure the bullet is seated properly and doesn't get pushed in to the case during loading. In reality the clannure is not needed in the 5.56mm round and is only there to weaken the bullet jacket so that as it tumbles it will shatter along this weak point the first time it tumbles and do more damage (though to split reliably it must be travelling above a certain velocity).
The 5.45mm round on the other hand simply has a hollow tip with a rear penetrator made from steel. It obeys the Hague convention because it is a fully jacketed round and does not deform on impact. ie the bullet tip does not crush flat or rupture unless it hits armour plating (like any other normal jacketed bullet). The hollow tip however does move the centre of gravity rearward so that it is ****e to tumble on impact.
There is a lead plug between the rear penetrator and the hollow tip that moves forward on impact. That would normally improve stability rather than make it tumble but because the forward movement is not symmetrical (ie even and balanced) it also aids in making the round tumble.
All this video shows is that the 5.45mm round stays in one piece and therefore can penetrate lots of sheets of wood placed close together. better than a 5.56mm round can. This is predictible because from a full length barrel the 5.56mm bullet probably tumbled and fragmented which means its penetration would be greatly reduced.
As few military targets actually constitute this sort of target this is a relatively meaningless test.
With more realistically spaced wood... for example walls in a house a few metres apart then again the 5.45mm round would hold together while the 5.56mm would probably fragment but as shown in this test the trajectory of the 5.45 is curved after impact and not very predictible. You might hit a valid target, or you might hit a baby in a crib next to the valid target, or, more likely you might hit another wall behind the valid target.
The 7.62 x 39mm is much better at hitting targets through obstacles than either of these two small calibre guns with most 308s (ie 7.62 NATO, 7.62 x 54mm, etc) being even better still at travelling through obstructions and hitting targets beyond.
The point being at some point there is a compromise. Being able to shoot through things means that if you hit your target your bullet will go through with less effect on the target than if it had reacted more to the impact and tumbled or fragmented.

(As I said all bullets tumble but a standard ball round from a 308 will not tumble till it has penetrated 10cm of flesh or more unless it hits something hard it will probably start to tumble as it is leaving the body on a front on hit.)

At the end of the day good shot placement means 90% and that extra bullet power means 5% (with luck the other 5%)