The Rem .223 and the 5.56 are not the same round. The 5.56 was designed as a military ball and has a much greater velocity. It was designed for military, not civilian purposes.

@mmarsh

"Designed for military and not civilian use" is really insignificant.

The 30.06 round you mentioned was designed for military use for example. The .223 round was designed first before the 5.56 M193 NATO.

Both 5.56 M193 and .223 ammunition are availible for civilians. My HS AR-15 is chambered for 5.56 M193 but can shoot .223 fine.

The only difference is one burns "hotter" than the other which means some guns chambered for .223 will be damaged if they shoot M193 ammo.

Originally Posted by Bugfatty

@mmarsh

"Designed for military and not civilian use" is really insignificant.

The 30.06 round you mentioned was designed for military use for example. The .223 round was designed first before the 5.56 M193 NATO.

Both 5.56 M193 and .223 ammunition are availible for civilians. My HS AR-15 is chambered for 5.56 M193 but can shoot .223 fine.

The only difference is one burns "hotter" than the other which means some guns chambered for .223 will be damaged if they shoot M193 ammo.

Not true, M193 is infact safe for any firearm chambered for .223 Remington. The main issue is infact shooting .223 Remington is military arms. Civilian/Commerical ammo is loaded hotter than militray ammo. Hence why you always see warning about firing .308 Winchester in 7.62x51mm NATO chambered firearms.

.223 Remington evloved from .222 Remington. Which was used to create the 5.56x45mm.

As for civilian hunting with military style arms. it does not matter because the 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with hunting. It's all about keeping and bearing arms PERIOD!!!!

Originally Posted by 5.56X45mm

Not true, M193 is infact safe for any firearm chambered for .223 Remington. The main issue is infact shooting .223 Remington is military arms. Civilian/Commerical ammo is loaded hotter than militray ammo.

I'm pretty certain I'm right. Its the reason I bought a 5.56 NATO chambered rifle in the first place.

5.56x45 is hotter than .223 Rem and shouldn't be fired in .223 specified chambers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.223_Remington

The primary difference between .223 Remington and 5.56 x 45 mm is that .223 is loaded to lower pressures and velocities compared to 5.56 mm.

223 Remington ammunition can be safely fired in a 5.56 mm chambered gun, but the reverse can be an unsafe combination.

http://http://www.ammo-oracle.com/body.htm#diff

Though the AR15 design provides an extremely strong action, high pressure signs on the brass and primers, extraction failures and cycling problems may be seen when firing hot 5.56 ammo in .223-chambered rifles.

Sorry, I load my own ammo so I kinda push my .223 Remingotn to the the max.... Most of the military surplus stuff I have is loaded to pretty weak loads compared to my own laoded stuff. But than again that is full production military ball ammo next to home made high power stuff.

I was think the difference Between .308 Winchester and 7.62x51mm NATO. Which in that case the commerical stuff is hotter than the military stuff.

Originally Posted by senojekips

One dissenter from within will bring you down faster than 100 from without.

Jump on this man and keep jumping until he whimpers like a whipped dog.

Having seen what happened here in Australia, believe me, "You don't want to go down that road".

So tell us some more about what happened in Australia old son. Things must be pretty tough down their now. Are you going to vote for John Howard in the upcoming election after what he did to gun laws years ago? Hope you remind people what happened in Port Arthur (1996) and particularly the type of weapons used? Of course you are not the type to overeact after viewing your above statement, are you old son. Are you sure you are the type of person who should be owning a firearm?

Who I vote for is between me and the ballot box. What's this "old son" sh*t, have you been watching too many B Grade movies again. I am certainly not any relation to you, and if I were you'd certainly know about it.

As to your stupid remark about firearms ownership, I have owned firearms for 40 years and never attracted unwelcome attention from anyone, let alone the police.

That does not prevent me from stating the obvious about people who don't think before they say something stupid that will effect the enjoyment of hundreds of thousands of people.

Read the debate in the thread "The effects of the ban on Crime"

Why don't you come clean and admit that you hate to see other people get enjoyment from something that you don't.

If you are truly worried about needless deaths, start agitating for the banning of the non essential use of motor vehicles. You will save many thousands of lives every year and extend the life of our fossil fuel reserves by a factor of ten or more. It will save the government (taxpayers) tens of billions of dollars not to mention the grief caused by motor vehicle accidents.

You need to look a lot closer at your priorities in life before you go making brain dead statements.

In the meantime, here's some recommended reading, the kicker is in the last paragraph of Post 1. Gun Control Statistics to Remember

You did notice the good "Lord"s title eh Spike??

Any Joe Schmoe could make an artillery piece in their backyard with parts from the hardware store our even found around their own home....

So your point is?

Originally Posted by bulldogg

You did notice the good "Lord"s title eh Spike??

Well Bulldogg at least the name suits him, Lord Londonderry was what is known as a "typical upper class twit". These persons are renowned for going through life with no idea of what is going on in the world outside of their own interests.

These wankers who just drop out of the sky to make some stupid statement on a subject that they haven't even bothered to research make me wonder at times.