[JTJ]

Originally Posted by Vincine

Marksmanship = practice. Practice = ammunition. Ammunition = $$.

5.56x45mm Military Lake City 62 Grain M855 Penetrator 3025 fps
1,000 rounds of 5.56 @ $320 = $.03 per round.

So I looked for a bolt action that could handle 5.56 (and .223). However none are to be found. I looked at .223 Remington Varmint/Target 700s (among others). I emailed Remington, they emailed back:
“Any rifle chambered for .223 Remington cannot safely fire 5.56 NATO ammunition. The brass, case dimensions, and pressures are too high/large in 5.56 NATO ammunition for .223 Remington chamberings to handle.”
Similar results on 5.56 vs. .223 from various websites.

I investigated .223 ammunition (all are 62 gr for apples to apples comparison).

.223 Remington TulAmmo 62 Grain Hollow Point 3025 fps
500 rounds of .223 @ $101 = $.05 per round
However many give this ammunition very poor reviews

.223 Remington Fiocchi Rifle Shooting Dynamics Full Metal Jacket Boat Tail 62 Grain 3000 fps.
50 rounds @ $18.50 = $.37 per round
This is the lowest cost equivalent rounds from the same site as the Lake City. It is twelve times the cost of the M855.

Most of the .223 is much more expensive than the 5.56.

The only rifles that publicly state that either 5.56 & .223 would be fine, are some of the AR 15s. No bolt actions.

This is correct?

Your math is a little off. OK a whole lot off.
$320/1000=.32
$101/500 =.21
CZ may handle both but my 527 does not say so. The varminter may but I am not positive about this.

[Vincine]

Well yes, we’ve wander around a bit from my original post.

Initially it was about the viability of the .223 as a long range round in AR 15s since I understood .308s to be the norm, and the Federal Ballistic charts seemed to indicate that would be the case.

I got to heft some long range AR 15s. I don’t know that long range 5.56 AR 15s are appreciably lighter than the .308s. But I understand the amount of rounds per pound is quite different, which would be a major concern to snipers.

This is also all wound up in my selection of a rifle that I could make the most use of in the spring for marksmanship. I’m looking for a rifle that I could feed most affordably. That got me into the whole 5.56 vs. .223 quagmire.

It is NOT about seeking a magic rifle & caliber combination that would make one a sniper.

It is about seeking a magic rifle & caliber combination that I could make the most use of to develop my marksmanship skills, using the most ubiquitous ammunition and considering the limitation of a 300 yard range.

(What the hell am I going to do with a .306 and a 5-15x60 scope?)

[Vincine]

Originally Posted by JTJ

Your math is a little off. OK a whole lot off.
$320/1000=.32
$101/500 =.21

Okay, this is why I ask. I never remember which is supposed to be the divisor.

So ammunition cost's not a factor. Good to know. Thanks.

[willfully armed]

You want a 1:8 barrel and 69-77 gr sierra match king bullets.

The most important aspect being velocity deviation. You need those bullets going the same speed. This is done by separating brass an bullets by weight, neck run-out, neck/bullet tension and accurate consistent powder measures.



I've pulled 3/8" 3 shot groups at 100 yards out of a 16" stainless bull barreled AR15 with of all things, Wolf 62gr fmj. This was during a precision rifle class. Must've been a great batch from new dies.

I've also run 2"@100 yards with the same ammo/gun.

I prefer the M262 mod 1 77grain SMK from BHA for the SF guys. Sweet shooting, and I don't have to load it.