Ammunition > Rifle

The .223 Remington

The .223 Rem. is a very versatile round with loading options for everything from varmints up to whitetails and even self-defense.

8/17/2011

If I could only have a rifle chambered for one cartridge it would be the .223 Remington. With it, I could shoot varmints and deer, I could participate in several forms of competition and just shoot for fun. It has minimal recoil, is affordable to shoot and easy to load for. In addition, it is a cartridge kids take to easily.

The .223 Remington cartridge is the commercial equivalent of the 5.56 X 45 NATO. Some don't understand that from a physical dimension standpoint these cartridges are indeed one in the same. Externally, there is no measurable difference between them. There are, however, two differences in other areas. The first deals with pressure.

Manufacturers load .223 Rem. to 55,000 psi, as established by SAAMI (Sporting Arms & Ammunition Institute). The maximum average pressure for the 5.56 NATO is about 61,600 psi, as established by the U.S. Military. This is 11 percent more than .223 Rem. pressures. Because the 5.56 NATO is a military cartridge, SAAMI hasn’t set pressure limits for it. This is why all handloading data published conforms to SAAMI .223 Rem. pressure limits.

The second difference deals with the way the chamber—more precisely the throat—is cut into the barrel. A barrel chambered for the 5.56 NATO has a longer lead than one chambered for the .223 Rem. This means the distance the rifling begins from the end of the case mouth in a 5.56 chamber is longer than it is in a .223 Rem. chamber. Erring on the side of safety, you can always shoot .223 Rem. ammo in a 5.56 NATO chambered rifle, but should only shoot 5.56 NATO ammo in modern, bolt-action .223 Rem. rifles—never in .223 semi-autos.

The .223 Rem. was actually an experimental cartridge adapted by the U.S. Military in 1964. It was first offered commercially chambered in a Remington model 760 pump-action rifle and announced to the public in December of 1963. It has since become a go-to cartridge for varmint hunters and 3-gun competitors as well as many deer hunters and AR rifle enthusiasts. There is without question more .223 Rem. ammunition fired every year than any other centerfire cartridge.

With 40- to 50-grain varmint bullets, the .223 Rem. is deadly on prairie dogs, ground squirrels and gophers out past 400 yards. For larger vermin like ground hogs and rock chucks, shooting them inside 300 yards provides a lot more bullet upset due to the higher impact velocities. Though some are quick to point out it's not legal everywhere, deer can cleanly and legally be taken with the .223 Rem. in most states. For deer, it’s best to keep shots inside 150 yards so impact velocities are high enough to cause the tough bullets to open wide.

Both my sons and I have taken many deer with the .223 Rem. using bullets like the Nosler 60-grain Partition, the 55-grain Barnes TSX and the 62-grain Fusion. Just last year I participated in a cull hunt where several other writers and I used Dynamic Research Technology's (DRT) 60-grain, powdered-metal bullet to take 22 whitetails with ARs chambered for the .223 Remington. Shots stretched out to 180 yards. We did not lose a single deer, and several of the bucks were near 200 pounds live weight.

On my second trip to Africa I took two rifles; a .300 Win. Mag. and a .223 Remington. I used the .223 to take my favorite African animal, the bushbuck. My PH's 7-year-old son collected a mature warthog with the same rifle. Both of these so called "tough" African animals were put down with a 60-grain Nosler Partition.

Early on, the .223 Rem. was considered a varmint cartridge. Accordingly, most barrels had a slow rifling twist rate of one turn in 12 inches (1 in 12). This worked fine with most common bullets weighing 55 grains or less. As new bullets emerged for the .223 Rem., shooters found the 1 in 12 twist was lacking in its ability to stabilize heavier bullets for good accuracy. In turn, faster twisted barrels for the .223 Rem. became more popular.

Obviously, heavier bullets are longer but the new breed of mono-metal (all copper) bullets are longer still because copper—by volume—weighs less than lead. Then there are the heavy for caliber match bullets, which can be really long. Berger's 75-grain VLD Target bullet is 1.066 inches long compared to Nosler's 40-grain Ballistic Tip bullet, which is almost a half-inch shorter. The Berger requires a minimum twist rate of 1 in 8 while the Nosler will work with twist rates as slow as 1 in 14.

With sporter-style, bolt-action rifles chambered for the .223 Rem., the most common twist rate is 1 in 12. Tactical style bolt action rifles generally have a twist rate of 1 in 9. Some ARs and other .223 Rem. rifles specially designed for target and long range applications have twist rates as fast as 1 in 7. This is very important because the last thing you want to do is find out your new .223 Rem. rifle will not accurately shoot the bullet you want to use.

As a rule of thumb, if the heaviest bullet you will be shooting is 50 grains or less, the 1 in 12 twist should provide good accuracy. If you want to be able to accurately shoot bullets that weigh at least 60 grains, go with the 1 in 9 twist. And finally, if you plan to shoot the really long and heavy bullets, like the Bergers, a twist rate of 1 in 8 or even 1 in 7 is a good idea. For most common use or hunting applications, the 1 in 9 twist is the way to go and will stabilize the light 35- to 40-grain bullets well enough for you to shoot little groups and hit little targets.

As popular as the .223 Rem. is, there are some subtle nuances about the cartridge that not everyone is aware of. Pay attention to twist rate and use robustly constructed bullets if you're after deer-sized game, and if you're handloading, stick with relatively fast powders with burn rates between Alliant's Reloader 7 and Hodgdon's Varget. Alliant also has a new powder called AR Comp, specifically designed for ARs and the .223 Rem.

The .223 Rem. is a great cartridge. If you understand its limitations and versatility it is indeed a great one-gun choice. I know it's what I would choose. If the situation arose where I needed a bigger gun, I'd just borrow one.

Check out the .223 Remington Photo Gallery

Share |

Comments

ADD YOUR COMMENT

Enter your comments below, they will appear within 24 hours


Your Name


Your Email


Your Comment

55 Responses to The .223 Remington

clay wrote:
June 27, 2013

Lung shot a deer with a 50gr vmax and had to throw a whole shoulder away due to blood shot. The military uses fmjs thus clean pass throughs and less threat stopping ability. Had they been using virtually any other bullet design we wouldn't be hearing ignorant military guys complain about the 223. Stop comparing apples to oranges. A 223 with the right 70+gr round is comparable to a 168gr 308 at 1000 yards when it comes to wind and drop

Hal wrote:
March 06, 2013

Erring on the side of safety, you can always shoot .223 Rem. ammo in a 5.56 NATO chambered rifle, but should only shoot 5.56 NATO ammo in modern, bolt-action .223 Rem. rifles—never in .223 semi-autos." What? Is it me or was that a very confusing statement?

Mebadfrog wrote:
March 03, 2013

.223 or 5.56 is used the military around the word as a sniper killing round any where from closes range out to 1000 yards with proper shot placement at long distance your target will be dead

Malik wrote:
February 26, 2013

I have used both(.308 and .223) for very long time. I would go by the argument that both have areas where it outperforms the other. Having said that, I would like to add that I have taken down dozens of deers with .308 and none running fewer than 50-70 yards even if shot placement was not good. With .223 Remington I always have to be careful regarding shot placement. I lost two deers on one night from 250 Yards as I was unable to strike vitals. At 100 or around that .223 is deadly for deers (subj to shot placement, which is easier at such ranges).

msmontee wrote:
February 11, 2013

Bushmaster addresses the shooting of 5.56 NATO in the R15. Follow the link... http://www.bushmaster.com/faqs/afmmain.aspx?faqid=2579

seansean wrote:
December 27, 2012

I have to agree with the few who spoke on behalf of the smaller more efficient loads. Sorry old farts who can't shoot. Inuits hunt polar

District 9 wrote:
December 26, 2012

My Barrett .50 works just fine. I can hit a deer one-half mile away. Shoot! This thing will take down a moose.

beautifuljoe wrote:
December 24, 2012

Wow yet another bunch of people so much more intelligent than than the us army. Maybe that's why your bragging about using a gun because its so much bigger. Where do you plan on shooting the animal and why rodent the department of defense hire you guys because your so smart and know what is perfect for our military. The 22 long is the most confiscated weapon by game wardens. Why?? Because they are quick quiet and can be thrown away if needed but most of all a good hunter who knows how to shoot can easily poach an animal with them. By the way I have had to track a deer shot by a 30-06. So anyway keep sounding like you know it all America. I'm gonna go out and enjoy my ar-15. Oh and this isn't the 80s anymore ! Bullet technology has come a long way. I found copper jacketed bullets that open up to almost an inch and a quarter wound channel!

Bruce wrote:
November 30, 2012

my wife and i have taken a few deer with ruger 77 223. using 55gr bearclaws always exit and only 1 moved (went about 30yds) seems the bearclaws aint around much so i have made switch to 64gr powerpoints. 223 right bullets shoot like your suppose to = dead deer end of story.

Bill wrote:
November 28, 2012

Iam a true beliver at taking whitetail deer with the 223 round now, after taking one on opening day here in WV,with Wnchesters Razor Back XT round in 64 grain. The 7 point buck was about 150 yards out, with the aide of a rest I able to cleanly take him with one shot to the hart. I was afraid that I didn't have enough gun, becaused I have hunted with a 3006 since the 80's. The gun is a DPMS,that I have worked on the trigger, and installed a free floating hand rail, with a 4X16x40 scope on it. I will never doubt my new found friend again..

Joe wrote:
October 12, 2012

Wow- who lot of stupid in the comment section here... Amazing that when you are faced with untold accounts of .223 deer kills, bullet manufacturers designing bullets for it, major publication articles, hunting shows, on and on- You still argue it doesn't work. Ignorance is bliss. Enjoy hunting with your howitzer... I'll keep putting deer in my freezer with my AR and barnes vortx 55gr. Just sad.

ED wrote:
July 16, 2012

I must admit I haven't held a AR since the late 60's until very recently. With a well constructed bullet like the 60 grain partion it seems deadly. I have taken 4 pigs out 225 yds and up to 200 pounds with one shot behind the shoulder. I must say I was shocked how fast it killed pigs so seems like it would kill deer fine at 250 yds or less. I think the key to the AR platform in a 5.56 is you that you can shoot it very accurately and hit the soft tissue behind the shoulder that even an arrow can penetrate making it deadly in the proper hands.

Michael wrote:
December 10, 2011

I believe if someone handed everyone here a 12 inch ruler some would argue whether it was good to measure with. The average hunter isn't killing people 500 meters out. I've hunted with a .308 for years and it's hard to beat literally. The .223 will do anything I need it to and because of an accident resulting in almost no recoil tolerance the .308 is retired. I'm sure I'll light another fire when I say I chose the mini 14 over the AR simply because it works, and looks a lot less threatening. I like a wooden stock and these 58 year old eyes aren't going to be doing anything at 500 meters except supporting the ammo makers. The old saying goes " There's a place for everything and everything in it's place. The .223 has found a place with me, and at the 150 yard max I would shoot deer under perfect circumstances it's fine. Trust me if the shot is the least bit doubtful as to the outcome I'll pass. There's always next time.

Ryan wrote:
October 21, 2011

they both have their pros and cons, i prefer the .223 cause its a lighter round and i can carry more ammo at one time without wearing on my endurance, its good for close on target shooting, but not so well with extreme stopping power which is why i got my S&W .460 as the secondary. point is it depends on the user and their skill in my opinion, speed vs. power which makes both rounds outweight each other in my opinion.

Jack D wrote:
October 21, 2011

Use the right round for the right application. .223Rem for varmints less then 100lbs. .308WIN for deer or combat. A 62grn ball ammo does not have the BC beyond 300m to be effective especially in high winds in AFG. The M4 muzzle velocity is about 2600fps, % of one shot one kill falls off a cliff past 150-200m. And the bad guys out here are engaging on average about 500m. The 7.62X51NATO (and .50BMG) is seeing a lot more effective use out here (AFG) unless it is SOF. But they are kicking down doors, literally.

Keith wrote:
August 22, 2011

Thanks Richard. I also like the .308 round but as was mentioned, the 5.56 could be used to introduce young folks to shooting without the punishment, so too can the 7.62x39. All that asside, the 7.62x51 is better.

Angelo wrote:
August 20, 2011

The .223 Remington cartridge was designed to be able to carry maxium amount of ammo and have firepower. The cartridge well work successful with proper shot placement. In a survival situation I would rather have 500 rds then 250. I would make my shots count.

Angelo wrote:
August 20, 2011

Its all about shot placement and weight of ammunition. I would rather carry 500 rds then 250 rds. If I only had one weapon it would be ar-15.

Dave wrote:
August 20, 2011

I agree with Bill and some of the other folks. I love my AR-15 but other cartridges are better for deer. I'd go with my .308. Maybe a 7mm-08 from what I've read but I've never shot one. The .223 is not a "great" all around deer cartridge.

ntrudr_800 wrote:
August 20, 2011

Compared to .308, the .223 is 'Cute' and 'easily controlled'. It's deadly but... It seems more like a medium range target round in that a semi-auto or fully-auto rifle or carbine may easily handle it's recoil and put more bullets on target vs the .308. However, these 55-or-so grain bullets are SMALL and LIGHT WEIGHT. This SHOULD always be in the back of our minds! When we need power, we go to the .25+ calibers. I prefer .308 for all-around which includes bad guys. I keep a rimfire for smaller game. .223 is still too powerful for small game. I have been wanting a .223 Bolt Action, but I wisely bought a .308 first. If you read history you'll see that we used to shoot large caliber rifles and muskets. Now we have these wimpy rifles shooting .22 caliber... which fits well in certain environs, but not all. Strange to me.

sean wrote:
August 19, 2011

i wonder if the people with the neg. comments even own a ar15? wonderfull all around rifles

Shainac wrote:
August 19, 2011

As I read this article I already came to the conclusion that there were going to be comments made about the reliability of the .223 Remington (5.56x45) in comparison to the much larger .308 Winchester (7.62x51). First of all, I won't begin to boast as to which caliber is the better round to use as they both have there applications where they will out perform the other. Of course this argument stems from the arena where you have AR15 and AK47 loyalists that have been constantly trying to prove which is the better assault rifle; but this is about the actual ammunition itself so I will leave that part of the out of this. Yes the .308 Winchester is a much bigger round than the .223 Remington therefore it will have more knock down power as an end result. No argument there. The .223 is actually more accurate than the .308 at much longer distances providing you are not shooting in the woods through brush. So here you have one round that has more knock down power and the other better trajectory, which do I use in an application such as hunting deer? Of course I would go with the .308 since most deer hunters are out in the woods shooting through brush and want to maintain accuracy. Now I'm not saying to not use the .223 for deer hunting because a 69 grain + .223 is adequate enough to take down a deer and has been done many times. It just makes more sense to use a heavier round in case you miss vital organs and you don't have a deer running around with a .223 lodged only to die days later. The reason I like the .223 over the .308 is the size and weight of the round when having to carry large quantities on your person. This is one of the major reasons the military and NATO adopted the 5.56x45. Here you have a round that is more accurate at over 300 meters and because of the reduced weight soldiers can carry more magazines loaded with this round when in battle. Plus you can use this round to hunt which is why it iw more versatile than the .308. Both great rounds

David wrote:
August 19, 2011

I love when people draw out all the "what ifs" to tear apart an article about a how a specific round is "generally" a good round. Way to go peanut gallery.

Bill wrote:
August 19, 2011

I enjoy shooting my AR for fun but will stick with the .308 when the chips are down for food and protection .

Scott wrote:
August 19, 2011

I disagree, ask any serviceman who has put multiple rounds into a hostile and they did not go down. Do you have the training he does? do you have the discipline to maintain proper sight alignment while firing at a threat such as a bear, terrorist or zombie? Do you carry several hundred rounds of ammunition on your vest at all times to make up for lack of stopping power? Do you want a weapons platform that requires it to be placed in a trash bag to protect it from harsh environments? Do you want to trust your life to a round our soldiers don't? If it's so great why did the US Millitary dust off a LOT of Vietnam era M14's that had been shelved to be replaced by this round? BTW your giving bad advice "if your going to shoot less than 50 grain stick with 1 in 12" no, no no. If you go with this combo and the temps drop below freezing there is a high probability that the bullet will not spin fast enough to cope with the dense air and tumble (god knows which direction) this is why the military used 1 in 12 and 55 instead of the original lighter round (sorry forgot the weight).You can thank an Air Force General for it's adoption, we all know how much front line combat the AIR Force sees with rifles don't we? Some will preach cavitation and wound channel, it's a product of velocity. Yes the 223 leaves the muzzle faster than a 308 BUT has a lower ballistic coefficient so a little down range the 308 has more velocity (and size) so more cavitation. Not to mention the heavier, higher ballistic coefficient bullet has less wind drift not to mention if some one is firing at you from cover the 223 is near worthless. It really does not matter what round you choose, stay with it, practice often, shot placement is 1000 times more important than the round going down range. A 22 magnum can be more effective than a 300 winmag if the 300 misses. Personally, I'll take my 308 as an only round.

Sam wrote:
August 19, 2011

223 is a better overall choice? Ballistics don't lie. The 223 is not near as potent for knockdown/stopping power as the 7.62x39 round. Sure the 223/5.56 is by far more accurate over longer distances but there is a reason why the rest of the world use the 7.62 over the 5.56. I personally would never hunt deer with this weak of round. That to me is almost inhumane. I had an AR15 with 1:7 twist. I tried several different grains from 55 to 77 and none of them came close to the 7.62. The 223 is inexpensive but so is the 7.62. I sold my AR that was chambered in 5.56/223 and bought an AK47 hungarian and have taken down 2 bucks with this. Now once the mags become more available and the price goes down, I will be buying an AR that is chambered in 7.62x39 but that is down the road. I still prefer my Remington 308 for deer hunting. Do not get me misunderstand. I do like the 223 round but I would NEVER trust it in self defense if given the choice of something stronger. It would have a hard time stopping a non-drugged out robber and there is NO WAY even multiple shots would stop a coked out robber. Sorry I just do not agree.

Joseph wrote:
August 19, 2011

We were looking at purchasing an AR-15 next month. Thank you for the article, Richard; this helped educate me over the difference between 5.56 NATO and .223 Remington models.

Thomas wrote:
August 18, 2011

Prefer the .44 rifle for all around shooting. good for large game. good for the peeping tom through the wall

Gary wrote:
August 18, 2011

Very good......You've done your research......As I have a Ruger mini-14, with a 1/9 twist, You have offered a very valuable help to me. Thank you

Richard wrote:
August 18, 2011

Keith the 7.62x39 is not a great round. First off is not very accurate at long ranges and has very little stopping power for the size it is. On the other hand my personal fav is the 7.62x51..or the .308...great all around bullet....can be used in close range and also at very long ranges...its not much more expensive then the .223/5.56 currently and offers better acuracy and knockdown power....oh i have shot both in the military....5.56 is too light to shoot at any distance because the wind can blow it off course easly

LL wrote:
August 18, 2011

Personally I prefer the 30.06 for hunting or protection from any predator, human or otherwise

reader wrote:
August 18, 2011

sorry have shot both .223 and nato 5.56 and don't buy what your selling have shot .30-06 for year's and only had to use one round from varmite to white tail's to mule deer and an elk and had no worries

Randy wrote:
August 18, 2011

I am in total disagreement that the .223 is an effective round for taking large game or being a dependable man stopper. I have had that very round fail to stop a hostile threat more than once during my military career. You go into combat with this round and you will quickly see how in affective it is at stopping a hostile threat. To sell the .223 as such a wonderful dependable round is going to get some novice out there a false sense of security that is going to get them injuried or killed. This is highly ierrsponsible of the author.

Jonk wrote:
August 18, 2011

As much as I love the round for targets and varmints under 300 yards, if I had to go with ONE it would have to be the 30-06, as the latter also is more useful on big game and better defense against dangerous animals (bear, etc.) Plus while the 06 can be downloaded to plinking specs easy on women, children, and the recoil sensitive, the .223, even with 90 grain bullets, is still just a medium power cartridge. A .308 or 8X57 Mauser would be close seconds. Still a well written piece though.

armed_partisan wrote:
August 18, 2011

It's a common myth that you "need" a 1:9 twist to stabilize bullets above 55 grains. I have shot 69 grain SMKs at 600m in my 1:12 Pencil Barrel AR with acceptable accuracy, and gotten very good accuracy with 60-65 grain bullets in the same barrel under the same circumstances. I frequently use 60grain LD bullets in that same 1:12 for NRA High Power. The 1:14 twist stabilized 55 grains quite well except in ARCTIC, sub-zero conditions, and if you live in the south, you could probably get away with a 1:14 for bullets upto 60 grain. A 1:9 will stabilize upto a 73 grain projectile, and a 1:7 will stabilize a 90 grain VLD bullet. A slower twist like 1:12 will give you higher velocities at lower pressures than firing the same bullet/load out of a faster twist. Higher Velocities means a higher Ballistic Coefficent with the same bullet, and that means better accuracy. If you don't believe me (and I know I didn't when I heard this) then try it. You'll be surprised.

Bill wrote:
August 18, 2011

So would it be better to buy an AR 5.56 then a .223 AR?

Chris wrote:
August 18, 2011

There's an excellent resource with a large amount of information on the .223 and 5.56 ammo. Do a web search for ammo oracle and you should see results on a popular AR-15 web site.

Torchman310 wrote:
August 18, 2011

I have a CAR-15. I love it. Easy to shoot, clean and store. It really is a "fun gun" for sure. My wepon also uses 5.56 for a bit more "bite" !

Mike Foley wrote:
August 18, 2011

Good information...thanks for this article.

Nicholas Fitzgerald wrote:
August 18, 2011

Keep in mind that there are AR type rifles out there that are specifically chambered for .223 and NOT 5.56. Most ARE chambered in 5.56 so it's not a problem, just be aware of what you are getting when you go to buy your rifle. For instance, the Remington R15 comes in .223, not 5.56.

Abe gravlin wrote:
August 18, 2011

5.56 great as well as the 223 but i find for hunting small and large game and for distence being a retired us army ranger sniper witch means nothing i love them all but give me a 308 remington 700 just an all around weapon good for all things and the most widley used round but can some one tell me more about the i think its 6.56 rounds if i have it wrong sorry

TC wrote:
August 18, 2011

We all have our favorite cartridge. I am not what you's call an AR fan, so I am limited to other platforms. I'm warming on the AR's, but prefer the AUG and FNC, both of which shoot the same .223. I've seen this info before, but you organized it more comprehensively and made it interesting to read again. Thanks!

Greg wrote:
August 18, 2011

@ Keith - I agree. First point being game, the 7.62 x 39 is excellent out to what? 150-200 Yards for deer... but really, most deer are seen under that range. If you need more distance, then a bigger rifle bullet like .30-06. AK-47 is the worlds best known self defense, combat, popular rifle and versions thereof. 7.62 x 39. I have been debating what rifle I want next and have been looking at the Ruger 7.62 ranch type rifle. Medium range. I am ex-army, used the M-16 5.56 Nato round a great deal... I just cannot wrap my brain around it. Love my M1 Garrand and the M-14, so I toy with the idea of owning a M-1A... Anyway, like the .45 pistol, I prefer a rifle bullet with UMPH too. Different tools for different jobs, but if you want to go all around, well... to each his own, but I would take the 7.62x39.

Red wrote:
August 18, 2011

It states it right there in the 3rd paragraph, Can shoot .223 Rem thru a 5.56 NATO chambered rifle but should not shoot 5.56 NATO thru a .223 semi-auto. But should only shoot 5.56 NATO ammo in modern, bolt-action .223 Rem. rifles.

Jonathan wrote:
August 18, 2011

Keith, I agree with you. In a situation where logistics are unimportant, I would take the 6.8 SPC. However, from a practical standpoint, the 7.62x39 is perhaps the most practical, as it's ubiquitous and generally puts down unarmored targets. The 5.56 just doesn't have the best terminal ballistics from a tactical/self-defense standpoint.

Dante wrote:
August 18, 2011

Mordru, just invest in a rifle chambered for 5.56 . My preference is 5.56 over .223

Bill Morgan wrote:
August 18, 2011

Bottom line, it is still the squirrel load young boys have learned to hunt with from childhood. It is not suitable for anything bigger than a Prairie Dog and definitely not a decent military caliber. I'd like to see the Geneva Convention make .303 the smallest legal caliber for warfare. The problem is a couple of generations of sissies who cry about carrying heavier ammunition. The simple answer there is to allow any who complain the privilege of toting a mortar tube, base plate or several rockets IN ADDITION TO their .30 cal.

Glenn wrote:
August 18, 2011

So where do you get the reloading specs. for 5.56 NATO? I have a Bushmaster chambered for 5.56 NATO, and would love to reload for it with 5.56 NATO specs.

reader wrote:
August 18, 2011

Hey Mordru. He's saying you can't shoot 5.56 through a .223 AR. You can shoot .223 through a 5.56 AR. Both are available.

john young wrote:
August 17, 2011

I would go with the .30-06, it's been around for over 100 years and used by the US. Military from 1917 to the 1960s. A true one shot-one kill round capable of taking any land animal on any continent with the correct bullet.

GD wrote:
August 17, 2011

Outstanding article!

Keith wrote:
August 17, 2011

Just not sure about this…I have heard too many stories about the .223 not having enough energy to knock down game (or enemy/perpetrator) despite your testimonies. I prefer the 7.62x39 for an all around cartridge. Of course I guess the 6.8x43 Remington has not gained popularity and that may have both beat.

Joe Baker wrote:
August 17, 2011

I have loved this round for years I long ago settled on a load of 24 gr of AA2230 and 55 gr bulk Remington soft points. I have never seen a need to mess with that combo. great article.

Aaron Spuler wrote:
August 17, 2011

Great article, thanks!

mordru wrote:
August 17, 2011

so if I buy an AR15 or something similar in .223 by what you are saying I should not shoot 5.56mm in it.And I should not buy surplus 5.56