Faulty M-16 ammo?

Is Faulty Ammo Failing Troops?
Field Report, Government Tests Raise Questions About Bullet For M-16 Rifle

June 7, 2006



"I saw the tests that clearly showed how miserable the bullets really were in performance."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bruce Jones, mechanical engineer


Shortly after the U.N. headquarters was bombed in Baghdad in August 2003, a Special Forces unit went to Ramadi to capture those responsible.

In a fierce exchange of gunfire, one insurgent was hit seven times by 5.56 mm bullets, reports CBS News chief investigative correspondent Armen Keteyian. It took a shot to the head with a pistol to finally bring him down. But before he died, he killed two U.S. soldiers and wounded seven more.

"The lack of the lethality of that bullet has caused United States soldiers to die," says Maj. Anthony Milavic.

Milavic is a retired Marine major who saw three tours of duty in Vietnam. He says the small-caliber 5.56, essentially a .22-caliber civilian bullet, is far better suited for shooting squirrels than the enemy, and contends that urban warfare in Iraq demands a bigger bullet. "A bullet that knocks the man down with one shot," he says. "And keeps him down."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Read Armen Keteyian's Reporter's Notebook

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Milavic is not alone. In a confidential report to Congress last year, active Marine commanders complained that: "5.56 was the most worthless round," "we were shooting them five times or so," and "torso shots were not lethal."

In last week's Marine Corps Times, a squad leader said his Marines carried and used "found" enemy AK-47s because that weapon's 7.62 mm bullets packed "more stopping power."

Bruce Jones is a mechanical engineer who helped design artillery, rifles and pistols for the Marines.

"I saw the tests that clearly showed how miserable the bullets really were in performance," he says. "But that's what we're arming our troops with. It's horrible, you know, it's unconscionable."

To demonstrate to CBS News, Jones fired the larger-caliber 7.62 bullet fired by AK-47s used by insurgents in Iraq into a block of glycerin. The hole cavity is 50 percent or more larger than that of the 5.56.

"You can't just go out and, you know, rig up a little block of Jello and shoot at it and prove anything," says Pierre Sprey, a former Pentagon weapons expert.

Since the early days of the Vietnam War, Sprey has been a champion of the 5.56, and believes it both lethal and light.

"The brilliant thing about that bullet is that it allowed the infantrymen to easily carry 300 rounds," Sprey says. "Whereas the old sharpshooter's heavy, slow round — he could only carry 100."

In the chaos of war, the more bullets the better, he says, because bursts of automatic fire beat one big bullet at a time.

"There is no such thing as a well-aimed shot in combat, because combat is fought by scared 18-year-olds who haven't been trained enough and are in a place they've never seen before," Sprey says.

Here at the Picatinny Arsenal in New Jersey, the government's own engineers have done the most extensive testing on the 5.56 since 1990 and issued two draft reports.

In the first, dated 2004, the 5.56 ranked last in lethality out of three bullets tested.

A second draft, dated last month, confirmed that rating, ranking the 5.56 dead last in close-quarter combat.

The army issued a final report last week that concludes in essence that those test results are wrong and misleading. It argues the 5.56 has the "same potential effectiveness" of the 7.62 during the heat of battle.

Either way, there's no questions that if the Pentagon did have any questions about this bullet, it would face some very expensive modifications to the M-16.


I'm guessing that the Americans should really look into using the 7.62 round after hearing these reports. If the 5.56 can't perform against regular humans, imagine what it can't do against body armor.

"The brilliant thing about that bullet is that it allowed the infantrymen to easily carry 300 rounds," Sprey says. "Whereas the old sharpshooter's heavy, slow round — he could only carry 100."

Click to expand...

hmm nice way to use this as excuse. When there was evidence that a accurate shot does nothing at all. This guy really need a better arument to support him.

Now this lingers me a little bit, how does the 5.8mm perform in stopping power, and is 5.56 really that bad in stopping power?

The 5.56 isn't exactly known for it's stopping power. When compared with it's rival round, the Russian 7.62x39, the 5.56 has less stopping power, but more killing/wounding potential because the smaller supersonic .223 round fragments when it strikes it's target. Unlike the AK round, which is subsonic and a haevier round and therefor it retains most of it's weight and just tumbles and leaves a much less traumatic internal wound than the American round. Also the AR-15 in 5.56NATO is alot more accurate than the standard AK-47. I can confirm this because my uncles' Romanian AK-47 is alot less accurate than my Ruger Mini-14 which shoots 5.56NATO.

The US forces, particularly the SOF have been looking for a replacement for the 5.56. They want more stopping power, but still less weight, so they will most likely comprimise on something in between the 5.56NATO and 7.62NATO. It will most likely be something similar to the 6.8mm Grendel or .270 Remington, both of which are very similar in dimensions, and performance. The 6.8mm is said to have -greater- knock down power and penetration than the standard AK round, and sub-MOA accuracy out to 600+ yards. Sounds like it would be a plus in a close quarters combat situation.

As for the Marines picking up enemy AK's. I don't know about that statement's credebility, but really I wouldn't be surprised. When I go out and shoot my Ruger, and my uncles Bushmaster AR-15 I see the performance of the smaller caliberassault rifle rounds. And to be honest, I would feel more comfortable going into combat with an FN SCAR assault rifle that shoots either the 7.62x39, or the 6.8mm Grendel. Because in my opinion the 5.56mm round doesn't have the penetration that I personally would want if I were to go into a combat zone.

For example: I was shooting my uncle's AR-15 at an old abandoned Lincoln towncar that had been stripped for parts in the middle of the desert not far from where I live. The rounds I was shooting were the standard .223 Remington rounds which are indentical to the rounds the US ARMY and USMC use in their rifles. Anyway, I was shooting at this car, which was an older car and has those old heavy doors on it, and the .223 couldn't even punch through one door because of the thicker steel construction. I had also brought my VEPR AK-47. Just like a regular AK, just alot more accurate because the reciever and barrel are actually that of the RPK, which is the squad automatic weapon version of the AK and was constructed of thicker and more durable stamped sheet metal. I call it my AR-47 because it looks like an AK and shoots like one, but it's as accurate as an AR-15.

Anyway, I brought my bad boy out to see what it could do to this vehicle. I emptied the 30rnd clip in semi-auto in about 13 seconds, and every 7.62x39 round that hit that car penetrated COMPLETELY through it. I was actually surprised, and glad to be on the opposite end of those in coming rounds. It kind of put in perspective, for me anyway, the sort of things that our guys, the US are facing over there in Iraq/Afghanistan everyday. And to be honest, I really wouldn't want to go up against that kind of firepower with the smaller .223 round. Just because I know that even if I hide behind a cinder block wall, the 7.62mm round could still potentially penetrate it and still be lethal, something that's just impossible with the .223.

Yeah, I could go on and on about my guns and shooting them, but I think 5 paragraphs is enough for now.


If you want to know about the rifles I previously mentioned go to these links:

FN SCAR:

My VEPR AK-47(best in the world!):



Ruger Mini-14:

Bushmaster AR's:

If the people in the pentagon with their infinite reason, realise that what the troops have been complaining about is true, will they design and research a new ammo, use other calibres of ammo (7.62, .270 remington). If they decide to use another calibre, will they be modifing the M16 and variants to fire the new ammo or will they purchase existing guns that fire that particular type of ammo, or will they design a new gun just for the ammo.

What most of people don’t understand is that all that fuss about 5.56mm bullets lack of stopping power came from SOCOM experience in Afghan war.
In Afghan war SOCOM operators used M4A1 SOPMOD rifle which was developed to provide light, handy, flexible rifle whit greater firepower compared to SMGs.
But because Afghan geography majority of firefights were conducted at longer ranges and under such conditions SOCOM son discovered that M4, while excellent weapon at shorter distances, joust don’t have enough stopping power beyond 200m (It has shorter barrel, so bullet velocity is lower and bullet can't achieve the velocity to cause fragmentation).

5.56 SS109 bullet was designed to penetrate approximately 15 to 20 inches (380 to 500 mm) into soft tissue in ideal circumstances. As with all spitzer shaped projectiles it is prone to yaw in soft tissue. However, at impact velocities above roughly 2,700 ft/s (820 m/s), it will yaw and then fragment at the cannelure (the groove around the cylinder of the bullet). The fragments disperse through the flesh causing much more internal injury. The effectiveness of fragmentation seems to impart much greater damage to tissue than bullet dimensions and velocities would suggest. It should be noted that this fragmentation effect is highly dependent on velocity, and therefore barrel length: short-barreled rifles generate less muzzle velocity and therefore rounds lose effectiveness at much shorter ranges than longer-barreled rifles.

To solve those problems SOCOM has adopted a 77gr "Match" Mk 262 bullet. The heavy bullet, lightly constructed bullet fragments more violently at short range and also has a longer fragmentation range.

Now while penetration is great in some cases you must understand that penetration and stopping power aren’t same things.
Soviet 7.62x39mm M43 bullet as stable bullet whit great penetration is stable even in tissue and begins to yaw only after traversing nearly 30cm of tissue. This greatly reduces the wounding effectiveness of the projectile.
When I was in service we used ex. Yugoslav M70 rifle (among others guns). Yugoslav and Finish AK versions are probably most quality manufactured AK versions around. We used ex. YU M67 bullet which was developed to improve M43 design flaws.

this issue is well know. the 5.56mm lacks punch but it's even worse in a M4A1 the shorter barrel generates less volosity and range. in the US there is an ongoing debate about replacing the round with a larger one, the current compediters are either the 6.8 SPC a round develeped under SOCOM's supervision or the civilian develuped 6.5 grendal. along with better wound ballistics theses rounds offer better range, both rounds are also desiged to fire from a AR15 style rifle with only modifications to the gas, bolt and barrel

as for the type 95 it's round is better suited to armor penitration. infact the round seems designed just for that as it's core is a steel penitrator.

Kalashnikov says Iraq shows his gun is still best

MOSCOW (Reuters) - Mikhail Kalashnikov, designer of the world's most popular assault rifle, says that U.S. soldiers in Iraq are using his invention in preference to their own weapons, proving that his gun is still the best.

"Even after lying in a swamp you can pick up this rifle, aim it and shoot. That's the best job description there is for a gun. Real soldiers know that and understand it," the 86-year-old gunmaker told a weekend news conference in Moscow.

"In Vietnam, American soldiers threw away their M-16 rifles and used (Kalashnikov) AK-47s from dead Vietnamese soldiers, with bullets they captured. That was because the climate is different to America, where M-16s may work properly," he said.

"Look what's happening now: every day on television we see that the Americans in Iraq have my machine guns and assault rifles in their armored vehicles. Even there American rifles don't work properly."

Some U.S. troops in Iraq have reportedly taken to using AK-47s in preference to the standard-issue M-16. The Cold War-era gun, renowned for its durability and easy handling, is plentiful in Iraq.

Kalashnikov designed his first weapon in 1947 and is still chief constructor at Izhmash arms factory in Izhevsk in the Urals mountains.

The factory's director Vladimir Grodetsky told the news conference that around a billion rifles had been produced around the world using parts of Kalashnikovs or based on the same design, only 10-12 percent of which were made in Russia.

It really dosent suprise me to hear this. Everyone knows that the army is slow to adopt anything new, even if the old thing dosent work at all. This is no new issue, and it apears this article was written for the uninformed layman who knows little or nothing about ammunition or the history of the 5.56 bullet. It's acurate, yes. But being acurate does nothing when your faced with a fanatic armed with an AK-47 hopped up on PCP, Quat or god-knows what else. After all, 5.56MM is (from what I can understand) just a fancier waying of saying .22 Caliber.

I think a famous military quote says it best:

"Remember this when you are in combat. Your equipment was made by the lowest bidder."

If I am right, didn't the .22 use to do more damage, but when a NATO member tested it in the Arctic region, they complained about its loss of accuracy, so the round was modified, so now it can't do as much damage. And it's a fragmentation round, how will the .223 even penetrate anything?

As fro the 5.8, it sounds like it lacks the damage, like the .223, but at least it penetrates like the AK to some degree.(certainly for the heavier steel core rounds) But I doubt much of China's neighboring enemies have armor suits, so I find this silly.

As I noted elsewhere in the forum in another context, there have been grumbles about the stopping power of the 5.56's for years, certainly compared to the NATO 7.62mm. Without getting technical (my memory of UK small arms training from the mid 80s is a bit hazy), if you hit someone with one round of NATO 7.62mm he went down and stayed down, and tended it (as our instructors put it) "to spoil his entire afternoon". Personal range experience with the L1A1 SLR and GPMG from that period, plus various firepower demos I have seen, corroborate what earlier posters, notably Mr Clean and Isthvan have said. Regular soldiers I knew who'd served in Northern Ireland spoke of being able to put 7.62mm rounds from the SLR through a double brick wall, much to the consternation of the IRA guy behind who thought he was safe.

Going off on a slight tangent...what you need in combat is a round that will (always) STOP the bad guy so he becomes disinterested in shooting at you, not (necessarily) kill him. In fact a wounded soldier ties up more resources (medical, transport etc) than a dead one, at least for western armies with the "western liberal democratic" priority on human life.

Anyway...I agree with Mr Clean. I'd take my old L1A1 SLR anytime (especially those lovely real old ones with the wooden butts....)