Tweet
Now you finally get it. You like pistols. Good. You prefer a pistol round to rifle rounds, good. That's your preference and opinion, and you have all the right to have them.
Just don't confuse your opinion with facts, like "close runner up on the damage scale", or "seen plenty of balistic(sic) tests done" (clearly you haven't, or didn't understand them, otherwise you wouldn't be making these claims), or "223 will go right threw(sic) a person", or ".223 is just a peircing(sic) round", or claiming that .223 is ANYWHERE close to .22WMR.
Instead of taking criticism gracefully and admitting your wrong in obvious facts that's accessible to anyone and 5 minutes of google, you instead decide to call anyone criticizing you trolls. What class.
A .223 at its hypervelocity range (<125yd out of a rifle barrel, <75yd out of a carbine) is designed to cavitate and shred by fragmentation or even complete disintegration, INSIDE thin-skinned, CXP2-class tissue. This applies even to non-HP, military FMJ, along the cannelure. When used on thin-skinned, human-sized animal (pretty much just human, most CXP2 has thicker skin) it has has absolutely no equal in any pistol*, whatsoever. This is not a matter of personal preference, it's a matter of research and facts by countless people in years of terminal ballistics.
*Yes, .223 will work better than .44Mag, .500, or even .460, on humans, especially considering ability for follow-up shots. We are thin-skinned, 200lb bags of water, which makes the fragmentation-based terminal ballistics of .223 especially powerful. On the other hand the magnum pistol calibers work much better than .223 in large game, or even medium game like deer, because .223 will waste too much energy outside of the skin and not achieve the same results. Same applies if said human is hiding behind cover. Terminal ballistics depends on momentum, energy, AND the type of target you are shooting at. Ignore any of them and you run the risk of being ineffective.
Just don't confuse your opinion with facts, like "close runner up on the damage scale", or "seen plenty of balistic(sic) tests done" (clearly you haven't, or didn't understand them, otherwise you wouldn't be making these claims), or "223 will go right threw(sic) a person", or ".223 is just a peircing(sic) round", or claiming that .223 is ANYWHERE close to .22WMR.
Instead of taking criticism gracefully and admitting your wrong in obvious facts that's accessible to anyone and 5 minutes of google, you instead decide to call anyone criticizing you trolls. What class.
A .223 at its hypervelocity range (<125yd out of a rifle barrel, <75yd out of a carbine) is designed to cavitate and shred by fragmentation or even complete disintegration, INSIDE thin-skinned, CXP2-class tissue. This applies even to non-HP, military FMJ, along the cannelure. When used on thin-skinned, human-sized animal (pretty much just human, most CXP2 has thicker skin) it has has absolutely no equal in any pistol*, whatsoever. This is not a matter of personal preference, it's a matter of research and facts by countless people in years of terminal ballistics.
*Yes, .223 will work better than .44Mag, .500, or even .460, on humans, especially considering ability for follow-up shots. We are thin-skinned, 200lb bags of water, which makes the fragmentation-based terminal ballistics of .223 especially powerful. On the other hand the magnum pistol calibers work much better than .223 in large game, or even medium game like deer, because .223 will waste too much energy outside of the skin and not achieve the same results. Same applies if said human is hiding behind cover. Terminal ballistics depends on momentum, energy, AND the type of target you are shooting at. Ignore any of them and you run the risk of being ineffective.
Comment