I whole-heartedly agree: even though you may be certain you aren't "intentionally" shooting in an undesireable direction, backstops are indeed a must. Even the .22 rimfire Lightning rounds I use say "2 1/2 mile range" on the box, if only for safety reasons (and if only in "mortar mode"). There is always the chance you could slip, twitch, or get slightly distracted just before trigger pull, or any other number of variables. And most hunting accidents are just that: unanticipated occurrences that happen to even the best and most qualified people. The shooting range where I used to go was owned by a Sportsmen's Club, and we were firing on a downslope into an old strip mine pit. So we had a very high wall of shale, rock, and dirt to trap our rounds... but the occassional ricochets could and did go everywhere you wouldn't expect them to. Safety first..

Just for the record, my friend and I shoot in the other direction now because there was not enough room for the long range shots(400yds+) that we began shooting. We shot there initaly in that direction, but then switched because of the lack of room. So can we get back on the discusion of 5.56 penitration, (I need to make another video so I don't get this every time I use it.) I sopose the highway is another reason to move. We still shoot clay's in that direction because there is no way the pellets are going that far.

If you or anyone else tries some first-hand comparisons of penetration, may I suggest using ball ammunition? M855/SS109 (green tip) for the 5.56mm too, I might add. Then you can start to make meaningful comparisons. I'm thinking that using hollowpoints or even just soft points is a lot different than FMJ for penetration tests, particularly steel cored projectiles or thick jacketed lead cored projectiles, when you're talking trying to shoot through concrete slabs. Also, to be fair if recommendations are being offered based on results, maybe cartridges should be compared to other cartridges that are similarly employeed (rifle v. rifle, MG v. MG). On the other hand, who am I to try to deprive you of some shooting fun? Blast away, and send in the pictures. Displacedjim

"The only way we could get bullets to land there is if we held the rifles at a 40 degree angle and used them like artilary." Not so. Most small arms, including the 7.62, will produce maximum range at elevations below 20 degrees.

Easily issue to settle. Would you want to be shot by a 5.56mm

Very true. But if you were standing behind a block wall would you rather be shot at with a 5.56 or a 7.62?

5.56, let the wall take one for the team.

Of course the 7.62 is a superior round in terms of range and penetration. I am one of those who has fond memories of 7.62 NATO and the M-14. But I realize that the 5.56 and the assault rifle is essentially a compromise between the Battle rifle and the submachine gun. Jack of all trades master of none it is always going to lose out in a comparison of weapons that are more specialized for certain conditions. If doing long range shooting in the mountains of Afghanistan or the sands of the Middle East I would want a Battle Rifle like the M-14 (OK so I am a Dinosaur and bias) on the other hand room to room clearing an MPr5 or a nice shotgun come sin handy. Constantly getting in and out of vehicles or firing from vehicles also makes a submachine gun nice. But submachine guns lack range that you sometimes need even in urban situations. Now you can both train and equip your forces with the ideal weapon that best suits each situation they may encounter. In the case of the United States that means a world wide range of conditions and that have to be prepared for. So you would be training your troops, and have available in the inventory, Battle rifles, submachine guns and assault rifles for all those that may need to use them Or you can have separate units trained and equipped for different conditions. For example the 10th Mountain would be armed with full length battle rifles/full caliber and dedicated for combat in places like Afghanistan and the 25th would be optimized for urban combat with a higher number of submachine guns. Or you can equip them with a weapon/caliber though not the ideal choice is adequate under most conditions you encounter-the assault rifle. You could argue that the Assault rifle could have a full sized 7.62 round, but then you negate some of the advantages of the assault rifle. A final thought on penetration, particularly in an urban environment as (opposed to a hot date) is that too much can be a bad thing, clearing a room you may not want a round that goes through walls if there are friendly forces or non-combatants in the room next door.

This is one of the better posts put forward. First rate ambush!! I have a friend that was with the Marines during GW2. Did a lot of stuff with the British. He did not want anything bigger than a 5.56, they were out by their lonesome and no resupply for days on end and he wanted to carry as much ammo as possible. Another guy that I have had contact with was in Afghanistan, they deployed out of Hilux trucks and he wanted a 7.62 and a .45, said that he wanted them down and out fast. They just had a bunch of ammo boxes in the truck. Over penetration in a house clearing operation is a real big problem. More and more swat units are going back to .45's and that may be a reason. I still like my FAL but I am not going to be humping a lot of hills any more ether. Bb

didn't the FBI HRT change over to 5.56 from 9mm for their smg's because 5.56 was less likely to exit a room than the 9mm was?