>Let's create two almost identical rounds, with a few mm in difference, just to confuse the consumers.
Any reason why one wasn't adopted as the main standard, and have the other discontinued?
Why was this retardation allowed in the first place?
>Let's create two almost identical rounds, with a few mm in difference, just to confuse the consumers.
Any reason why one wasn't adopted as the main standard, and have the other discontinued?
>Any reason why one wasn't adopted as the main standard, and have the other discontinued?
because it doesn't really matter.
You selfish bastard, it obviously matter to op. Stop being the center of your universe and show some empathy you asocial frick! Jesus Christ you fricking unicorn ego maniac, FRICK!
>just to confuse the consumers.
That kind of thing has been standard since metallic cartridges were invented. You have ammo companies and gun companies both trying to upstage each other and their competitors trying to come out with the latest and greatest new thing...but that's all been tried before you so you end up with ever so slight variations which end up not being very important in the long run. A lot of the time the names are even deliberately misleading. For example the .480 Ruger is a magnum handgun cartridge. With the name "480" it sure sounds big and bad. In reality it is a slightly shorter, weaker, version of the .475 Linebaugh, a wildcat that's been around for decades. If you look at one of those "Cartridges of the world" charts it's clear there's a massive amount of overlap between most of the cartridges--and it's even more telling when you think that there's many more cartridges which don't even appear on the chart at all.
>with a few mm in difference
there's zero mm difference you dunce.
it means frick all, almost every barrel has a 5.56 chamber these days, and even if you have a .223 chamber shooting 5.56 ammo through it only has like a 0.000001% chance of causing a problem.
>there's zero mm difference you dunce.
The case length, moron-kun.
There is no difference in case length between .223 and 5.56 you dumb Black person, the only time one appears it's a rounding error from someone converting 1.76" to metric
are you using wikipedia as your source?
type this into a calculator: 1.76*25.4
There's 0 difference dimensionaly.
5.56 just runs hotter.
Dam... This idiot will really be seething when they learn there's a .223 chamber and a 5.56 chamber.
They are identical. If your shartmart rifle thinks otherwise and jams, buy other brand
7.62x53
7.62x54R
Are the same round. If your rifle says otherwise, you remember its soviet. Soviet guns just work. Just close it harder
>with a few mm in difference
>a few mm
So are you talking about .223 and .308 you moron?
There is no difference in size , you are probably thinking of .222 Remington , from which .223 was derived.
The main and only relevant difference is chamber pressures, 5.56 operates at slightly higher pressure, and thats because when .223 was adopted as 5.56 NATO in 80's, barrel lengths were shorter than 20 inch .223 was designed for.
There is also a difference in the chamber, specifically the length of the throat. I've heard that the supposed difference in pressure is due to the different way pressure is measured by nato vs saami but I don't know for sure.
I actually just checked and CIP (European agency) rating for .223 matches 5.56 NATO EPVAT at 4300 bar (430MPa, ~62000 PSI).
Is SAAMI(American agency) which gives .223 low rating of 3800 bar (380 MPa, ~55000PSI).
IMO, just buy 5.56 as it can safely fire both cartridges.
The difference largely is caused by different measurement methods. SAAMI measures from about the center of the cartridge case, military spec tests from the case mouth, and CIP is a different method altogether. The real world pressure differences between .223/5.56 are minimal.
https://www.luckygunner.com/labs/5-56-vs-223/
The danger from loading 5.56 in a .223 chamber is almost non-existent, the notion that your gun will blow up from doing that is extremely overblown.
>and CIP is a different method altogether.
CIP measures from mid-cartridge with piezoelectric sensor exposed to the pressure through a hole drilled into the casing. pic related.
here's an overview: https://www.gunsandammo.com/editorial/ammunition-pressure-testing/458750
>almost non-existent
I feel so much better.
>There is no difference. t. low iq
Post a single instance where it actually caused a problem.
>t. owns .223, .223 Wylde and 5.56 guns and shoots whatever out of all of these
My .223 bolt won't close on a max-tolerance 5.56 round without me ramming it in forcibly, because that's how size works you moron.
>every gun owner says they work interchangeably
>”yeah well my guns fricking BROKEN and won’t chamber! Ha! Bet you guys feel dumb now!”
Thanks anon
Get a real gun holy shit
your rifle has extremely tight chamber, you should frick it
why make such a small difference? what a bunch of c**ts.
.223 was standardized by SAAMI in the early 60s. NATO tweaked the cartridge for the next ~15 years until they standardized it as the 5.56. Once a cartridge is standardized through SAAMI they don't really change the specifications, hence the small differences
Got'em
Learn about freebore + learn about bullet jump = learn about Bullet Accuracy.
This is ocd
>This is ocd
Precision Gunsmithing,
Obsessive Compulsive Yes.... but no Disorder.
you can shoot either in either chamber
please provide evidence of at least one (1) instance where a 5.56 round damaged a 223 only weapon.
>please provide evidence of at least one (1) instance where a 5.56 round damaged a 223 only weapon.
I don't think you will find many instances, because most aren't moronic to try and risk losing their guns, and maybe even their lives.
>because most aren't moronic
People ARE moronic as frick, they're moronic enough to accidentally shoot .300 Blk in fricking 5.56 guns a lot of the time.
The fact that people are this moronic but NOT A SINGLE PERSON has managed to ever blow themselves up by mistaking 5.56 for .223 or vice versa tells you everything you need to know.
moron.
>second of angle
There is no fricking way any cartridge is standardized to 1/3600th of a degree. The variance in case manufacturing machinery can be measured in MOA.
That spec is not for the cartridge case, it's for the chamber. And that pic doesn't mention any tolerance either, that nominal number doesn't really mean anything in terms of manufacturing precision without also knowing that the tolerance is.
>with a few mm in difference
Are you moronic
The US armed forces didn't want fudd chucklefricks stealing government munitions.
This and moronic yuro countries have llaws that civilians aren't allowed to own guns in "military calibers," so gun manufacturers just chamber all their rifles for the consumer market in "223 Remington" to get around this.
no, that's bullshit. almost no country still does this and in those that do, .223 is of course banned.
nope
No. It's because Euro gun ownership operates on CIP standards and CIP doesn't "know" 5.56, only .223
>This and moronic yuro countries have llaws that civilians aren't allowed to own guns in "military calibers,"
Name 1 (one) yuro country that does this
Every gun/ammunition produced for the military is a weapon of law under german law and illegal to own for civilians.
*weapon of war
true for firearms, not true for ammo. the problem with NATO ammo and civilian sales is that all civilian ammo must conform to CIP standards and NATO ammo doesn't, because it's not marked like a CIP cartridge would be. remarked NATO surplus is available for civilians.
It is true for ammo, but your case is the reverse. The surplus ammo that is allowed is the one that was made for civie calibre in the first place and it can't be spicy ammo. FMJ only.
> VIII. Sonstige Munition
>49. Munition für die Waffen der Nummern 31 und 32
>50. Munition für die Waffen der Nummer 29, ausgenommen Patronenmunition mit Vollmantelweichkerngeschoss, sofern
>1. das Geschoss keine Zusätze, insbesondere keinen Lichtspur-, Brand- oder Sprengsatz, enthält und
>2. Patronenmunition gleichen Kalibers für Jagd- oder Sportzwecke verwendet wird
For all militaries. The law regulates by purpose/inherent characteristics. Funnily enough machine guns with water-cooling are exempt as are all machine pistols, fully-automatic and semi-automatic rifles introduced by any military prior to 2nd of September 1945. They are of course still banned for the general public just not as banned as other newer guns.
For the german military of for a military?
Because that doesn't mean that Germans can't own military caliber weapons
By what law
France
proof/source? not to my knowledge.
Italy used to have that law but they recently rescinded it apparently.
That's why the beretta 98 exists, regular beretta 92s in 9x19 were illegal in their home country.
>but they recently rescinded it apparently.
Frick, gotta go buy a 92FS
>few mm
The cartridges are literally identical and completely interchangeable. What you're doing is complaining about the difference between .380 ACP and 9mm Browning short. Literally the same thing.
The only difference is the slightly longer freebore on a 5.56 chamber to accommodate some military specific ammunition.
They are used nowadays as a branding exercise. .223 generally used to market civilian targeted products (hunting, plinking) while 5.56 is generally used to market military (for government sale or larperator) oriented products.
My gun is chambered in .223 wylde but I can't find that ammo anywhere
>I can't find that ammo anywhere
load your own. Its not hard, start slow, buy a progressive machine and just buy the components then reload the spent brass. It is not cost effective for say 9mm, but for many cartridges it is. You try some various loadings to find what works best in your gun, then just load hundreds or thousands of those, or as you need.
Assuming this isn't b8, .223 Wylde isn't a cartridge. It's a chambering. It combines the internal chamber dimensions of both .223 and 556 and, *in theory*, is more accurate than 5.56 but more capable of handling high pressures than .223
my sides.
nice
>223
Who cares, no one's been making .223 barrels for ages anyways
If this confuses you, just think of 5.56 as .223 +P
WRONG
You are an idiot. Educate yourself.
>accuracy consideration for short and long bullet
Pretty much it other than saammmiii pressure number
Only case difference is primer pocket. 5.56mm should always have the primer picket swaged. Most military are also sealed. Full auto can vibrate primers loose.
that's not really a case difference it's a different loading procedure, dimensionally the primer pocket is the same on .223 brass and can be crimped just the same as military ammo if the manufacturer wanted to. same thing for the primer/mouth sealant, that can also be done to anything it just usually isn't for commercial ammo because it's unnecessary.
Aren't they basically compatible? What's the issue?
Ancient fuddlore.
>NOOOO YOU CAN'T SHOOT 5.56 OUT OF A GUN THAT SAYS .223 OR IT WILL ASSPLODE
do 223 wylde barrels have any real advantages?
they have no disadvantages because again it's fundamentally the same thing with just a tiny difference in throat design which is a non-issue for normal ammo.
It's the same fricking shit, you dumb Black person gorilla. The difference is in pressure
no, it's not.
think about all the morons who blow their guns up trying to shoot .300 BLACKED out of a 5.56 rifle, yet you never hear about anyone blowing himself up because he shot 5.56 out of a .223 chamber. if the danger actually existed there would be tons of stories about it.
tl;dr:
>a few mm in difference
a few mm result in failure to chamber, asshat.
5.56 NATO is loaded different than it's parent cartridge .223. Iirc the official 5.56 NATO cartridge was actually "developed" by a group in Belgium (could've been FN I don't know). Basically 5.56 is .223 but loaded different and has a higher pressure. Any AR that is marked ".223" can 100% shoot 5.56 though and there's a very very low chance a problem will emerge directly because of the slightly higher pressure of 5.56. They make .223 that is as high pressure as your standard M193 stuff, i don't know how someone can say "Oh yeah that's okay because that's .223" but not accept it's safe to shoot 5.56 that's the exact same case and pressure. Also, the whole .223 vs 5.56 thing is just from stupid fricking old heads in the past having "commercial" and "military" style shit for like no fricking real reason. That's why there's commercial pattern ARs and Mil-spec ARs, stupid fudds carrying on old shit traditions. I fricking hate old people a lot.
>Basically 5.56 is .223 but loaded different and has a higher pressure.
Not really, Euro .223 loads go to 62,000 PSI fine, see
The difference between 5.56 and .223 ammo (not chambers) is entirely academic.
Yeah I mentioned about some .223 being just as high pressure as 5.56. When I said basically I meant without complicating the subject more than needed.
>Well actually in Europe they load it like this
Yea yea yea, there's always something to tack on but I'm just trying to put it simply for all the kids reading the autistic caliber debate.
To put it simply for the kids reading the autistic caliber debate you should've said "they're the same fricking thing and no one ever had a single catastrophic malfunction combining .223 and 5.56 in any way, shape or form".
I guess you're right, I have too much faith in these stupid fricks. I guess I just wanted to believe that they could understand me.
So there's absolutely no reason to care about .223 or 5,56 or Wyldes?
I've spent so much time on reading up about this because fudds peddle that shit, god
>So there's absolutely no reason to care about .223 or 5,56 or Wyldes?
You are THEORETICALLY gonna get better accuracy potential out of a .223 or Wylde chamber due to the shorter and tighter freebore compared to a true 5.56 chambering.
In practice, it all depends on the manufacturer and the ammo.
there is no reason to care because the only possible case where it's even theoretically possible for a problem to arise is if you have a barrel chambered for .223 remington, and almost no one makes those anymore for AR-15s. 5.56 and .223 wylde chambers can shoot anything .223/5.56 just fine with ZERO problem, even theoretically.
Even if your barrel is chambered for .223 Remington specifically it'll run 5.56. They just had a stupid back and forth about case dimensions.
That's it. I'm going to make a 223 upper and shoot m193 through it. Frick this.
that concept used to be the standard, i have a drilling chambered in 9.3x72d, which is .005 inches narrower than the much more common 9.3x72r, which is completely unable to chamber.
the d stood for deutsch, and in similar guns in the early 1900s there were both 9.3x72f for french and 9.3x72e for english, which would later become the standard rimmed version we have today
Could we ask some famous youtuber to shoot 1000 x 5.56 ammo through a .223 firearm and test if anything happens?
There's an ian video that explains it for you which boils down to different standards, sammi was established and couldn't change, then nato wanted slightly different spec.
well, I'm grateful as 556 and 762x51 are banned in my country but I can still shoot them by buying 223 and 308