XM193 Adequate for HD? [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : XM193 Adequate for HD?


Seattle206
01-03-2010, 17:49
My primary HD weapons are my Sig P6 w/ 147gr HST and the Remington Police 970 w/ 00Buck. But for the AR, would the XM193 55gr be adequate for taking down human targets? Probably will never use the AR for HD but if that day ever comes would it be enough to get the job down? Or do I need to have a mag full of hornady 556 75gr?

X-Spec
01-03-2010, 17:53
Yep more than adequate. But I would consider something like Hornady TAP for HD as it will have more fragmentation potential and not have as much tendency to penetrate walls.

reaper8154
01-03-2010, 18:35
Hell yes it is enough. Two or three center mass will make for a bad day.

RMTactical
01-03-2010, 20:30
I am comfortable with XM193 for home defense. I like 68gr OTM by Black Hills better, but I have no problem with XM193.

keninnavarre
01-03-2010, 20:33
I buy and shoot xm193 pretty regularly, so Im accustomed to its characteristics, and its been reliable in my rifles. So, for me yes.

MrMurphy
01-03-2010, 21:23
While there are better options like TAP...... M193 has (and still does) killed many thousands of Vietnamese, Syrians, Iraqis, Panamanians, Lebanese, Columbians, and practically every other country on the planet that has been in contact with troops using NATO caliber weapons. Many countries never "upgraded" to the M855, and the M193, used in it's intended range, will certainly do the job.

lawman800
01-04-2010, 01:44
Lots of bad people in hell who have met their end by the hands of our armed forces will tell you how they got sent there by the XM193.

Glock-it-to-me
01-04-2010, 03:19
If you need more protection than provided by the Sig and Remington, you need to call for the Marines. :couch:

TrooperBrian
01-04-2010, 04:36
You're going to be better off with the TAP. So my answer is no. Unless you want to be responsible for the civil suits after your bullet goes into a neighbor's house, hits his kids, kills his wife, etc.

While you should be aware of what's behind the target, I can't see through walls. And in this sense, NEVER use any kind of FMJ for defense.

Wilson 2008
01-04-2010, 07:30
You're going to be better off with the TAP. So my answer is no. Unless you want to be responsible for the civil suits after your bullet goes into a neighbor's house, hits his kids, kills his wife, etc.

While you should be aware of what's behind the target, I can't see through walls. And in this sense, NEVER use any kind of FMJ for defense.

This comes up a lot, and the answer appears to be counter-intuitive. The following quote is stolen from the Ammo Oracle (http://www.razoreye.net/mirror/ammo-oracle/AR15_com_Ammo_Oracle_Mirror.htm#shtf) (a great read that would prevent many of these threads):

"Q. Isn't 5.56 too dangerous to use indoors? Shouldn't I use a pistol or shotgun instead?

Virtually any kind of ammo, with the exception of light bird shot, will easily penetrate typical wall construction (two layers of wall-board separated by 3 to 4 inches of space). Testing has shown, however, that after penetrating a typical interior wall, a 5.56mm projectile will have less wounding potential than most common handgun or buckshot loads. This is true because the low mass of the bullet sheds velocity quickly, and velocity is its key wounding component. This doesn't mean that 5.56mm ammo isn't still potentially deadly, but that the severity of an injury is likely to be less from a 5.56mm bullet than from a 9mm, .40, .45, or #00 buckshot round. What is important is not the degree to which these rounds penetrate, but their "ex post lethality" or their lethality AFTER encountering wallboard or other cover/concealment.

The difference is so significant that the FBI and other ballistic experts recommend that law enforcement transition to handguns to "dig suspects out" of cover because of the superior penetration and wounding ability of handgun rounds over 5.56 or .223.

This, along with the increasing number of lawsuits from "friendly fire" submachine gun victims and 5.56mm's ability to penetrate ballistic vests, are some of the reasons that many SWAT teams are transitioning away from the 9mm MP5 and selecting 5.56mm carbines instead.

This is understandable given the longer barrel length and therefore higher velocity and consequently higher penetration of handgun rounds in submachine guns.

If our experience on the forums are accurate, most shot gunners and submachine gun fans receive this news poorly. It does seem counterintuitive since 5.56mm is a "high powered round." All we can say to this is that the FBI FTU fired hundreds of rounds through carefully constructed wall sections and then into gel. Ignore these results at your own peril."

Do some searches on this and other forums, you'll likely find that 5.56 is a better indoor round than you thought.

- Wilson

gdvan01
01-04-2010, 07:42
I buy and shoot xm193 pretty regularly, so Im accustomed to its characteristics, and its been reliable in my rifles. So, for me yes.

LOVE the avatar...

:rofl:

TrooperBrian
01-04-2010, 09:41
I've read some interesting articles like that too. However, I find it hard to believe that a tumbling .223 bullet at almost three times the velocity of a similar handgun round is going to cause less damage.

Its not so much the bullet mass, but the idea that high velocities tend to cause cavitation.

Wilson 2008
01-04-2010, 11:03
I wouldn't want to be on the other side of that wall, but since the rifle bullet is tumbling I wouldn't worry too much about the neighbors unless you live in an apartment, condo, or other very close living conditions. If you live that close, I'd be worried about a service caliber pistol round also.

Don't get me wrong: I hate to think about my AR-15 being paraded in front of a jury after a stray round went somewhere it shouldn't have. All the more reason to train hard and always know what's behind your target...

- Wilson

RMTactical
01-04-2010, 13:23
You're going to be better off with the TAP. So my answer is no. Unless you want to be responsible for the civil suits after your bullet goes into a neighbor's house, hits his kids, kills his wife, etc.

While you should be aware of what's behind the target, I can't see through walls. And in this sense, NEVER use any kind of FMJ for defense.

Anything that is good enough to reliably eliminate the threat will be likely to overpenetrate. You take the good with the bad. Plus, .223 rounds in general usually tend to be more effective in limiting overpenetration through human targets compared to even most handgun rounds.

reaper8154
01-04-2010, 14:48
Back in 99 when I was in the Corps we switched from the MP5 to the M4. One of the reasons, or so I was told, was that the 5.56 will not penetrate as far into the ordinance we were guarding as the 9mm ball.

And if you happen to shoot a 230 +P HST through an apartment wall from the outside from about 60 yards away, it WILL go clean through the wall and lodge about a foot into a mattress on the other side. Don't ask how I know...:whistling:

HogGlocker
01-04-2010, 16:12
M193 55gr FMJ works fine on human targets ... at least on the ones we've fired it at ;)....

XM193 is what the civilian world gets [surplus, reject, contract overruns etc etc.]..depending on who makes it. It may just be called that...

It works fine, honestly.

Winchester Q3131A is a basic equivalent...the XM193 is probably a tad hotter if I recall but the Q3131A is an excellent choice as well.

DScottHewitt
01-04-2010, 19:26
My primary HD weapons are my Sig P6 w/ 147gr HST and the Remington Police 970 w/ 00Buck. But for the AR, would the XM193 55gr be adequate for taking down human targets? Probably will never use the AR for HD but if that day ever comes would it be enough to get the job down? Or do I need to have a mag full of hornady 556 75gr?

More than adequate. And will fragment in walls about as good as it does in soft organic targets.

DScottHewitt
01-04-2010, 19:36
I've read some interesting articles like that too. However, I find it hard to believe that a tumbling .223 bullet at almost three times the velocity of a similar handgun round is going to cause less damage.

Its not so much the bullet mass, but the idea that high velocities tend to cause cavitation.

http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i24/DScottHewitt/woundprofilesafterwallbarrier.jpg

http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i24/DScottHewitt/AmmoWoundChannels.jpg

http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i24/DScottHewitt/M193.jpg

http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i24/DScottHewitt/M855.jpg

http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i24/DScottHewitt/ammo_project_ammoOraclePics_wund5.jpg

glockfanbob
01-04-2010, 19:42
http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i24/DScottHewitt/woundprofilesafterwallbarrier.jpg

http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i24/DScottHewitt/AmmoWoundChannels.jpg

http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i24/DScottHewitt/M193.jpg

http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i24/DScottHewitt/M855.jpg

http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i24/DScottHewitt/ammo_project_ammoOraclePics_wund5.jpg

I'm getting a photobucket "bandwidth exceeded" error when I click on your links. :crying:

DScottHewitt
01-04-2010, 19:44
I'm getting a photobucket "bandwidth exceeded" error when I click on your links. :crying:

Dang it. That's why I did links instead of hot pics. Free upgrade ran out yesterday.



I'll try and get it fixed.

Sierra
01-04-2010, 20:11
M193 would do quite well as a home defense round. Maybe not the best round on the market but it will do just fine.

lawman800
01-04-2010, 20:19
Heck, almost anything will do if you pump a few into the cranium... aim for the head and just empty the mag. Even 22LR or a .177 BB will do some damage.

Andrewsky
01-05-2010, 18:07
Part of the problem with a rifle is that it has a flat trajectory and aerodynamic projectile compared to a pistol or shotgun. An AR-15 is lethal up to three miles away (but only if the muzzle is elevated to a certain angle).

lawman800
01-06-2010, 08:29
So... I can easily cover my whole neighborhood from invaders, eh?

KalashniKEV
01-06-2010, 11:23
would the XM193 55gr be adequate for taking down human targets?

Of course not, that's for little chipmunks and field mice.

Get yourself some A606.

RMTactical
01-06-2010, 13:03
Of course not, that's for little chipmunks and field mice.

Get yourself some A606.

That's what it's "for"?

KalashniKEV
01-06-2010, 13:10
That's what it's "for"?

I was being facetious, of course M193 is adequate for "taking down human targets."

RMTactical
01-06-2010, 13:35
I was being facetious, of course M193 is adequate for "taking down human targets."

Just checking. :)

DScottHewitt
01-06-2010, 13:36
I was being facetious, of course M193 is adequate for "taking down human targets."

Has been for going on five decades, now.

lawman800
01-06-2010, 14:42
You mean... Perfect for varmints... Like viet cong, terrorists, and democrats.... :whistling: