5.56 VS 7.62x39 for prepping/shtf

[Sergi762]

this one is a two parter but I want to draw on the minds here for a consensus as well as the usual comments, ideas and thoughts. After a mind numbly( so it feels to me) amount of digging I have found that, aside from 22 LR and 9mm, that 7.62X39 and .223/5.56 NATO are , if not the top two, two of the most called on caliber for a rifle in a shtf scenario. With that said , the AK is the go to for 7.62x39. and the AR is the top choice for 5.56. IF we ignore the platform's stated calibers and look at the calibers themselves we lead into the main question I have a question for you all: if you had to choose ONE of the two calibers for a shtf scenario in the US which would it be and why?
NOTE: I very well could have missed a relevant thread that hashes over this. If so I am asking you to link to the thread you think would hep make the above choice.
As Always I thank you and appreciate any comments. remarks and ideas.

[Justin]

As much as I love the 7.62x39, I'm going to have to go with the 5.56 NATO round simply for practical means. NATO uses 5.56, our military uses 5.56, most police agencies in the U.S. use 5.56, and a huge number of civilians use 5.56 nowadays for their newly acquired AR-15s in these past couple of years. I also like the fact that I can convert my AR-15 to use 22lr. With that being said, I have stocked up on both calibers.

[was_peacemaker]

For penetrating thick obstacles, brick, brush, wood etc. I would have to take the 7.62x39mm. As the poster above said...a lot of folks in this country have 5.56mm. If SHTF tomorrow it means a lot of guns and ammo are going to be laying around after the first wave or two of local Rambos meet regulars, arty, and gunships.

[Schuetzenman]

5.56 for general all around reasons.
Weight of ammo is lower than 7.62x39
made domestically by many ammo companies.
Military and Police standard round.
Flatter trajectory, less drop to the target.
Basically a lot more accurate round due to bullet shape and Ballistic Coefficient.

If I was to pick a 30 cal. round I'd go 7.62 NATO / .308. It trumps the x39 in spades except for being even heavier than it is so your loadout will go up in weight.

[was_peacemaker]

5.56 for general all around reasons.
Weight of ammo is lower than 7.62x39
made domestically by many ammo companies.
Military and Police standard round.
Flatter trajectory, less drop to the target.
Basically a lot more accurate round due to bullet shape and Ballistic Coefficient.

If I was to pick a 30 cal. round I'd go 7.62 NATO / .308. It trumps the x39 in spades except for being even heavier than it is so your loadout will go up in weight.

7.62x39 trumps the 5.56 in penetration, and is lighter than .308. I doubt most people are going to carry much very far, if they do it will be a quick point A to point B kind of movement. Also I would not want to be in a firefight with 5.56 in heavy brush, woods, or were the enemy has sand bags, or brick structure to hide behind.

As far as the accuracy issue goes...well...7.62x39mm is accurate enough for a firefight. A firefight isn't standing at the range shooting paper targets. Now that I have quit smoking my 40 yard dash time unloaded is around 4.7 secs. Loaded down with and AK and a 120 rounds, I am probably around 5.5 in a 40 yarder and 11 seconds in a 100 yards. When I use to shoot on my grandfathers farm I had to deal with the bottom gulleys, a steep hill with a nasty drop off and uneven ground. So I would practice running up and down the hill with a full load out, shooting multiple targets open and behind cover, like cinder block, logs, and brush...and when it comes to bullet capabilities with my own abilities to move...then I will take 7.62 x39mm over the 5.56mm.

[Viking350]

7.62x39 trumps the 5.56 in penetration, and is lighter than .308. I doubt most people are going to carry much very far, if they do it will be a quick point A to point B kind of movement. Also I would not want to be in a firefight with 5.56 in heavy brush, woods, or were the enemy has sand bags, or brick structure to hide behind.

As far as the accuracy issue goes...well...7.62x39mm is accurate enough for a firefight. A firefight isn't standing at the range shooting paper targets. Now that I have quit smoking my 40 yard dash time unloaded is around 4.7 secs. Loaded down with and AK and a 120 rounds, I am probably around 5.5 in a 40 yarder and 11 seconds in a 100 yards. When I use to shoot on my grandfathers farm I had to deal with the bottom gulleys, a steep hill with a nasty drop off and uneven ground. So I would practice running up and down the hill with a full load out, shooting multiple targets open and behind cover, like cinder block, logs, and brush...and when it comes to bullet capabilities with my own abilities to move...then I will take 7.62 x39mm over the 5.56mm.

Then why does the AK 74 exist?

[FunkyPertwee]

Then why does the AK 74 exist?

To give Russian soldiers longer range and more ammo.

If your intended range is under 200 yards or so, then 7.62x39 is fine. I prefer using 7.62x39 around the house, but if I had to walk out of here it would be with my M4 simply because of weight and range. But as long as I'm at home or working out of a vehicle then I'm using 7.62x39 with its greater stopping power and barrier penetrating capabilities.

If I had a lot more money and was in better shape I might consider .308.

[TEN-32]

Both. And 30.06.

[Schuetzenman]

7.62x39 trumps the 5.56 in penetration, and is lighter than .308. I doubt most people are going to carry much very far, if they do it will be a quick point A to point B kind of movement. Also I would not want to be in a firefight with 5.56 in heavy brush, woods, or were the enemy has sand bags, or brick structure to hide behind.

As far as the accuracy issue goes...well...7.62x39mm is accurate enough for a firefight. A firefight isn't standing at the range shooting paper targets. Now that I have quit smoking my 40 yard dash time unloaded is around 4.7 secs. Loaded down with and AK and a 120 rounds, I am probably around 5.5 in a 40 yarder and 11 seconds in a 100 yards. When I use to shoot on my grandfathers farm I had to deal with the bottom gulleys, a steep hill with a nasty drop off and uneven ground. So I would practice running up and down the hill with a full load out, shooting multiple targets open and behind cover, like cinder block, logs, and brush...and when it comes to bullet capabilities with my own abilities to move...then I will take 7.62 x39mm over the 5.56mm.

You aren't factoring in the ability to get more ammo if you run out. 97% of the x39 in country is Russian, maybe 2% other European country in origin. 1% Domestic. You think x39 is super on penetration, maybe and maybe not. Having actually shot a Kevlar helmet at 100 meters I can tell you that one of the X39 rounds went in and exploded. The 5.56 rounds (M855 62 gr.) zipped through both sides. 7.62 Nato will out penetrate the x39 especially at distance. 10" of Oak at 600 meters kind of penetration. Black Tipped .30-06 does even better.

Bottom line no 1 caliber can do all things all the time.

[raxar]

7.62x39 sucks, there is no other way to look at it. The ballistics are pathetic, the wound potential is terrible, its fairly heavy (as are steel AK mags). And I don't buy for one second that it's great at penetration, personal experience showed that it couldn't punch though a 1/4" steel plate at 100 yards.

If you're worried about shooting through stuff you need a main battle rifle at least.

[Viking350]

[was_peacemaker]

You aren't factoring in the ability to get more ammo if you run out. 97% of the x39 in country is Russian, maybe 2% other European country in origin. 1% Domestic. You think x39 is super on penetration, maybe and maybe not. Having actually shot a Kevlar helmet at 100 meters I can tell you that one of the X39 rounds went in and exploded. The 5.56 rounds (M855 62 gr.) zipped through both sides. 7.62 Nato will out penetrate the x39 especially at distance. 10" of Oak at 600 meters kind of penetration. Black Tipped .30-06 does even better.

Bottom line no 1 caliber can do all things all the time.

From my own experience shooting cinder blocks, tree's, and pieces of scrap metal...I didn't see were for structural damage and penetration that the 5.56mm did a whole heck of a lot compared to the 7.62x39. But I will take your word for it on the kevlar helmet.

Here is a good video on the subject. Sealed 55 gallon steel barrels full of water.

[FunkyPertwee]

Here is a good video on the subject. Sealed 55 gallon steel barrels full of water.

That guy sounds like a douche.

The .223 didn't make it out because it explodes in water, which is a good thing BTW.

[Silentkilla01]

Think about it for a second. Would you rather have a clean in and out on your perp. Or something when it hits to shred around in side of the intruder you just shot??? IMHO I damn sure don't want the son of a bitch to get up after I put a couple rounds in him. 223 will jack a nigga up while the 7.62 will to most of the time something with that much valosity will go straight through. Clean at that.

[was_peacemaker]

Think about it for a second. Would you rather have a clean in and out on your perp. Or something when it hits to shred around in side of the intruder you just shot??? IMHO I damn sure don't want the son of a bitch to get up after I put a couple rounds in him. 223 will jack a nigga up while the 7.62 will to most of the time something with that much valosity will go straight through. Clean at that.

But the 7.62x39 carries more energy.

[Silentkilla01]

IMHO I like them both and trust my life to both of the rounds. if they don't work. Nuke the bastids

[raxar]

But the 7.62x20 carries more energy.

true, but the low velocity combined with the size of the bullet results in a relatively minor wound channel. No matter how you slice it a 124 grain 31 caliber bullet moving at 2300 fps is not a good combination. When dealing with "medium power" rounds you are much better off going with light weight/ high velocity.

[was_peacemaker]

true, but the low velocity combined with the size of the bullet results in a relatively minor wound channel. No matter how you slice it a 124 grain 31 caliber bullet moving at 2300 fps is not a good combination. When dealing with "medium power" rounds you are much better off going with light weight/ high velocity.

And I am also an idiot. 7.62x20!?! LOL Fixed that typo. The issue I have with some of these ballistic gel tests is that they don't account for skin resistance and clothing, and I think that in general would play a larger role against the 5.56.

[was_peacemaker]

That guy sounds like a douche.

The .223 didn't make it out because it explodes in water, which is a good thing BTW.

Well if your SHTF enemy was hiding behind sealed 55 gallon drums...what would you rather have to penetrate through it? 5.56 or 7.62x39?

[FunkyPertwee]

Well if your SHTF enemy was hiding behind sealed 55 gallon drums...what would you rather have to penetrate through it? 5.56 or 7.62x39?

How much penetration you want is a personal decision. I keep my AK mags loaded with HP rounds that have been proven to shred within 12 inches of flesh. I imagine they wouldn't penetrate the drums either, but my whole point for using them is so that dangerous shrapnel doesn't come flying out of the backside of a potential home invader, and to ensure that all of the round's energy is left in his torso.

XM193 works great on skinny dudes wearing t-shirts, which just happens to be the most likely threat encountered in my area, so that cartridge works great for me too.