5.56 in a .223? I did it!!

[ImBIllT]

We

Well, if you go to the links I provided earlier in this post you'll find that the differences between 5.56 and.223 ammo are that they are measured in different ways. Some of the store bought 5.56 needed to be re-seated to chamber properly. I chronographed both and found no real differences. Some brands were on the high side and others were on the low side.
When I make reloads for this rifle I use Quickload under 5.56 ammo. My rifle does just fine with my reloads in both my bolt rifle and my AR.
So, in conclusion, I am convinced that myth of shooting 5.56 ammo in a rifle chambered in .223 is dangerous is just that, a myth.

They’re not “measured” in different ways, but people write stupid articles every day. They have actual different specifications. Other than the throat, the differences are fairly negligible. The specs for 5.56 NATO are such that you could make a load that was within pressure spec when fired in a 5.56 NATO chamber that would greatly exceed that pressure if fired in a 223Rem chamber. Would that be dangerous? I lean toward “no”, but would not be willing to advise internet users to take my word for it. Would all 5.56 NATO ammo result in such a situation? Absolutely not.

If you seated the bullets deeper, then you changed the ammo toward 223 Rem from 5.56 NATO in the very way that has the greatest cause for problems with firing 5.56 NATO ammo in a 223 chamber.

I don’t think you “cheated death”, but there is a difference between 5.56 NATO and 223Rem, and while it’s perfectly fine to shoot 223Rem in a 5.56 NATO chamber, the opposite is potentially problematic, and you yourself had to seat the bullets deeper to chamber them, or at least to chamber them easily.

 

[ImBIllT]

I've said this many times already.
The data that you see in most if not all manuals that provide data for 5.56 in its own section vs 2.23 sections overlap considerably.
If 5.56 and 2.23 ammo were tested in the same manner there is no difference but THEY ARE NOT!
That's why people think 5.56 is a hotter load. IT IS NOT!!!

The load data in the manuals is tested in exactly the same manner.

 

[Skeet69]

So stunning. So brave.

LOL glad you lived to tell the tale.

Mike B

 

[joshb]

 

[snert]

Is that three rings of steel? Tell us more Josh!

 

[Thor357]

They’re not “measured” in different ways, but people write stupid articles every day. They have actual different specifications. Other than the throat, the differences are fairly negligible. The specs for 5.56 NATO are such that you could make a load that was within pressure spec when fired in a 5.56 NATO chamber that would greatly exceed that pressure if fired in a 223Rem chamber. Would that be dangerous? I lean toward “no”, but would not be willing to advise internet users to take my word for it. Would all 5.56 NATO ammo result in such a situation? Absolutely not.

If you seated the bullets deeper, then you changed the ammo toward 223 Rem from 5.56 NATO in the very way that has the greatest cause for problems with firing 5.56 NATO ammo in a 223 chamber.

I don’t think you “cheated death”, but there is a difference between 5.56 NATO and 223Rem, and while it’s perfectly fine to shoot 223Rem in a 5.56 NATO chamber, the opposite is potentially problematic, and you yourself had to seat the bullets deeper to chamber them, or at least to chamber them easily.

Umm...yes they are measured differently! If you have Quickload you easily see that they are. Google the various test methods used to proof test ammo and barrels.
.001-.0015 is barely enough to make any difference in pressure. If that were true then factory ammo would be the most dangerous.

 

[grouse]

 

[ImBIllT]

Umm...yes they are measured differently! If you have Quickload you easily see that they are. Google the various test methods used to proof test ammo and barrels.
.001-.0015 is barely enough to make any difference in pressure. If that were true then factory ammo would be the most dangerous.

Please explain how they are “measured differently”. Different statistical analysis of the measured pressures is not “measured differently”. Case and chamber dimensions aren’t “measured differently”. I may be missing something, but you’re going to have to explain it.

.001-.0015 is barely enough to make any difference in pressure. If that were true then factory ammo would be the most dangerous.

I don’t quite follow what you’re talking about here. Please clarify.

The case dimensions, and chamber dimensions(disregarding the throat), are close enough that the differences are not likely a big deal. The throat is the most problematic difference. Not all 5.56 ammo is likely to cause issue in a 223 Rem. Some ammo could definitely result in higher chamber pressure if fired in a 223Rem chamber than if fired in a 5.56 NATO chamber. Is it enough to be dangerous? That depends on the firearm. I’m not aware of any catastrophic events due to such pairing, but meaningless and “cheating death” are two different things. Shooting a 5.56 round in a 223 Rem is not something that would keep me up at night, but to say that there isn’t actually a difference, or that it can’t increase pressure is just wrong.

 

[Thor357]

Please explain how they are “measured differently”. Different statistical analysis of the measured pressures is not “measured differently”. Case and chamber dimensions aren’t “measured differently”. I may be missing something, but you’re going to have to explain it.



I don’t quite follow what you’re talking about here. Please clarify.

The case dimensions, and chamber dimensions(disregarding the throat), are close enough that the differences are not likely a big deal. The throat is the most problematic difference. Not all 5.56 ammo is likely to cause issue in a 223 Rem. Some ammo could definitely result in higher chamber pressure if fired in a 223Rem chamber than if fired in a 5.56 NATO chamber. Is it enough to be dangerous? That depends on the firearm. I’m not aware of any catastrophic events due to such pairing, but meaningless and “cheating death” are two different things. Shooting a 5.56 round in a 223 Rem is not something that would keep me up at night, but to say that there isn’t actually a difference, or that it can’t increase pressure is just wrong.

WOW!!!
Look, I just did a little research and one thing lead to another and I found plenty of data on this topic. I'm not going to take the time to explain this. I would suggest you put forth some effort and learn for yourself but I doubt you'll do so or you will claim you already have. Either way, I know what I know and that's good enough for me.

 

[Laurie]

Please explain how they are “measured differently”.

US SAAMI arms and ammunition companies and Europe's CIP (plus NATO) equivalents use Piezo crystal pressure measuring systems.

However, the position on the case body selected for the measuring thingy differs. IIRC SAAMI measures at the case-neck; CIP/NATO at a specified point around midway along the case-body. The two methods give different results for the same cartridge/load with the CIP/NATO usually higher than SAAMI's, sometimes significantly.

This difference is reflected in specified MAP (Maximum Average Pressure) values, so a US SAAMI max pressure specification is usually lower than for the European CIP equivalent for the same cartridge, and also between commercial US and NATO specs for those cartridges with military and commercial versions.

 

[Thor357]

US SAAMI arms and ammunition companies and Europe's CIP (plus NATO) equivalents use Piezo crystal pressure measuring systems.

However, the position on the case body selected for the measuring thingy differs. IIRC SAAMI measures at the case-neck; CIP/NATO at a specified point around midway along the case-body. The two methods give different results for the same cartridge/load with the CIP/NATO usually higher than SAAMI's, sometimes significantly.

This difference is reflected in specified MAP (Maximum Average Pressure) values, so a US SAAMI max pressure specification is usually lower than for the European CIP equivalent for the same cartridge, and also between commercial US and NATO specs for those cartridges with military and commercial versions.

Thank you!!!
Now, I wonder how many folks will attempt to discredit the info you provided?

 

[ImBIllT]

US SAAMI arms and ammunition companies and Europe's CIP (plus NATO) equivalents use Piezo crystal pressure measuring systems.

However, the position on the case body selected for the measuring thingy differs. IIRC SAAMI measures at the case-neck; CIP/NATO at a specified point around midway along the case-body. The two methods give different results for the same cartridge/load with the CIP/NATO usually higher than SAAMI's, sometimes significantly.

This difference is reflected in specified MAP (Maximum Average Pressure) values, so a US SAAMI max pressure specification is usually lower than for the European CIP equivalent for the same cartridge, and also between commercial US and NATO specs for those cartridges with military and commercial versions.

Because peak pressure usually occurs with the bullet part way down the bore I’m not convinced that measuring at mid case, or at the case mouth makes a significant difference in the results measured by the instrumentation. WHERE the measurement is taken isn’t “measured differently”.

I don’t believe NATO uses MAP, which is a statistical analysis of the shot string over which pressures were measured. NATO uses a different statistical analysis. MAP is not measured. The pressure is measured. The MAP is calculated from a sample of pressure measurements. NATO uses a different analysis. You could analyze a single string of shots and your MAP, and whatever number NATO uses would give you two different numbers. Even so, the two cartridges are not loaded to substantially different pressures.

The issue in question involving firing 5.56 NATO in a 223Rem chamber is not based on the two cartridges being loaded to different pressures. The issue is that if you load a 5.56 NATO cartridge to max pressure, and it was jumping .030” in a 5.56 NATO but it’s jammed hard in your 223Rem chamber, you’re going to have a load that is actually over the 5.56 NATO pressure spec.

 

[ImBIllT]

WOW!!!
Look, I just did a little research and one thing lead to another and I found plenty of data on this topic. I'm not going to take the time to explain this. I would suggest you put forth some effort and learn for yourself but I doubt you'll do so or you will claim you already have. Either way, I know what I know and that's good enough for me.

“They’re measured differently” is a wildly vague statement. What is? The case dimensions, the chamber dimensions, the pressures?

“.001-0015” What is 001”-0015”? What measurement are you referring to? Neck diameter? Datum? Freebore diameter? You just said a number with no reference what you’re talking about, and then tell me to research it?

The NATO pressure specs, and the case dimensions aren’t the potential issue with firing a 5.56 NATO in a 223Rem chamber. They’re both reasonably close. The issue is the throat length. It’s a potential issue that won’t occur with all 5.56 NATO ammo. My guess would be that it wouldn’t do much harm to most bolt action rifles. The harm to the user would depend on what happens in those rifles when you pierce a primer or blow out a primer pocket. I don’t know what it would do to an AR platform. It’s hard to imagine what would split a Remington 700 action three ways like the above picture, but that was certainly a bigger mistake than taking a safe load in a chamber with a long throat and putting it in a chamber with a short throat.

 

[Thor357]

Because peak pressure usually occurs with the bullet part way down the bore I’m not convinced that measuring at mid case, or at the case mouth makes a significant difference in the results measured by the instrumentation. WHERE the measurement is taken isn’t “measured differently”.

I don’t believe NATO uses MAP, which is a statistical analysis of the shot string over which pressures were measured. NATO uses a different statistical analysis. MAP is not measured. The pressure is measured. The MAP is calculated from a sample of pressure measurements. NATO uses a different analysis. You could analyze a single string of shots and your MAP, and whatever number NATO uses would give you two different numbers. Even so, the two cartridges are not loaded to substantially different pressures.

The issue in question involving firing 5.56 NATO in a 223Rem chamber is not based on the two cartridges being loaded to different pressures. The issue is that if you load a 5.56 NATO cartridge to max pressure, and it was jumping .030” in a 5.56 NATO but it’s jammed hard in your 223Rem chamber, you’re going to have a load that is actually over the 5.56 NATO pressure spec.

 

[Thor357]

Well that didn't take long!
Probably should get back on your meds, you're coming across as someone who has trouble letting go and moving on.

Let's see how long it takes me to receive a warning or be permanently banned!!!