SIG Sauer 556 Arms Forum banner

whats the better defense bullet

6K views 23 replies 11 participants last post by  ardsnarf 
#1 ·
fmj or the v max ? my guess is the v max, i was thinking of selling off my fmj for them but was not sure as i am new to the 223 loading thing
 
#3 ·
FMJ is a poor defensive round, it over penetrates (will go through the target, walls cars... and hit things you can not see like innocent bystanders a few blocks away).

That is why you never use it for hunting. Any good hunting round is also a good defensive round since a deer and human have a similar body and in both cases you want a 1 shot stop.

.223 is also bad since it is a small bullet, any expansion will make the diameter bigger and inflict more damage.

You want maximum energy transfer to the target. If you penetrate the target, any remaining energy is lost on the target, meaning less chance of stopping the target.

Shot placement is critical, but if you do not hit a vital spot, a good bullet will help a lot.
 
#7 ·
The military doesn't use FMJ because its the best option, they use FMJ because of Declaration III of the Hague Convention of 1899 which forbids bullets which may expand or flatten in the body.
 
#8 ·
i did talk to a guy that works for barns and he said some tier one teams did use the barns tsx bullet ( i think its the tsx ) but any way the bullet is a poly tiped bullet like the v max, he was saying they have had good results with it, now i am not here for any hear say but if a vmax will blow a water mellon up... i am pretty sure for defense it will blow a bad guys guts up. to me fmj seems like it would not creat much terminal damage
 
#12 ·
CB3 said:
V is for varmint. Prairie dog, fox, coyote. Are such critters going to be attacking you? Is this a bullet the military is using for CQB? No and no. Should you use such a bullet for home defense? Hmmmmm.
that's a terrible way to make a decision.

you know hunting rounds are designed to be effective on flesh right?

humans arent any more bullet proof than other animals.
 
#13 ·
It's an excellent way to make a decision, unless you don't know what you are talking about.

Humans are a lot more resistant to bullets than small animals. Large animals are more resistant than humans. Would a 500 grain expanding .458 Lott that kills elephants, rhinos and cape buffalo be a good defensive round for humans? Sure, if you subscribe to the theory that a five pound sledge hammer is a good fly swatter.

Bullets are designed for certain types of performance in certain types of "flesh". Varmint bullets are not designed to stop humans, but there are many bullets that are.

Varmint bullets are designed to penetrate thin skinned animals and immediately disintegrate. On prarie dogs, it blows them up. On a fox or coyote, there is usually no exit wound to damage the pelt and only a small caliber entry wound. 3"-5" of penetration is what they are designed for.

These are not the specs that experienced operators use to stop human threats. Twelve inches of penetration is a standard minimum to get through clothing, bone, fat and reach internal organs and ideally the central nervous system at the back of the body or in the skull. 5.56 is a minimum caliber for stopping humans, and the military has been advancing its bullet designs for four decades to try to get it to be more effective. No one kills more humans with 5.56 bullets than the US military. Following their lead is not a bad decision process. They do not use varmint bullets.

There are many hunting bullets available in .223 diameter meant for good expansion and adequate penetration, most desirably making a decent exit wound. After traveling through 12" or more of flesh, an expanded .223 bullet has very little energy left to harm anything beyond it. If you miss your target completely with any .223 and hit something unintended downrange, that thing is going to be hurt. Thinking that a a fast expanding varmint bullet will limit liability in some way is flawed thinking, especially considering that the point of shooting the human attacking you is to kill as quickly as possible.

And BTW, certain elements of our military have been using expanding bullets for almost a decade, with JAG approval. I will guarantee you it was not an FMJ that ended Osama's life. It also wasn't a varmint bullet.
 
#14 ·
Just because the military uses something does not mean that it is the best. They use M855 because it does an acceptable job of barrier/armor penetration, tissue damage, etc. It is not the best at any of the things that bullets may be designed to do, but is good enough at all of those applicable to combat troops that one ammunition type can be relied upon to complete whatever tasks it is called upon to do without the need for the users to switch ammunition types. Are you likely to be defending against armored targets? Probably not so you could probably use a bullet that is not tough enough to penetrate level IIIA but expands a little more to inflict more damage.

You seem to imply that the U.S. military kills more people with 5.56x45mm than anyone else because of the construction of their bullets, which is simply untrue. The reason they do not use varmint bullets is that they will be less effective at penetrating things like vehicle windshields. Do you intend to shoot people through vehicle windshields when defending your home?

You must have been consulted for the making of Zero Dark Thirty too. This is simply worthless speculation on the type of bullet used to kill UBL, as I could just as easily guarantee you that it was an armor piercing incendiary round. We both have no evidence, so neither of these claims are relevant.

Neither FMJ nor V-max are optimal for the job that hawk_550 specified. In fact, it seems like the bullet xMach1x suggested would be the best of those discussed. But since the OP gave a choice between FMJ and V-max and only those 2, I would say V-max is better because he is unlikely to face an individual in body armor or hiding behind a hardened barrier. Inside a house, wearing clothes no heavier than a carhartt or leather jacket, V-max will be fine.
 
#15 ·
Lack of ability to penetrate a windshield is not the primary reason the US military does not use varmint bullets. It is lack of penetration in flesh under all conditions compared to other rounds used. It is as instructive to observe what the military doesn't use, and why, as it is to take note that it uses one particular bullet out of the many that are currently approved. Cost is a major factor. Only the elite get the more expensive, "special" bullets because they have the funds, training and assignments that justify the extra expense. Those same bullets are available to the public. They are hunting bullets.

I was part of the supply chain getting that ammo to those guys. I have personal knowledge from operators as to their effectiveness compared to the other bullets they had available. The operators demanded that kind of performance and got it.

Average troops get average ammo because of cost and generalized performance. Lake City is set up to load billions of rounds of that stuff and it is very expensive to make large scale changes. And it takes time. Smaller loaders that are more nimble, while more expensive, offer more choices for smaller runs--just a few tens of millions of rounds.

It is true that the OP offered only two choices, and Vmax might work differently but as well as FMJ under certain circumstances. However, if we really want to help out a brother who is seeking help on choosing a good self defense bullet, it is helpful to point out that neither of those choices is the better of the many other choices available. If one is going to spend money and time to develop a personal defense load, he should at least start with a bullet specifically designed for his mission. Vmax ain't it.
 
#17 ·
CB3 said:
What the hell. Let's just put common sense, ballistics, field experience, and all that aside. Use Vmax bullets for self defense.

Signed,

Darwin
If I needed a self defense round it would be a vmax and defiantly not FMJ.Over!
Why would you want a bullet that will not expand and just pass through a body when a expanded bullet will become One and a half or twice its size.

Use what you want but I choose a vmax or Amax style bullet.
And I think pighunter summed it up quit well.
 
#18 ·
I believe Hornady actually loads V-max bullets in the polycarbonate tipped .223 versions of the TAP rounds.

Again this is given a choice BETWEEN THE 2 THAT THE OP ASKED ABOUT. But like I said before, neither of these bullets is optimal.
 
#19 ·
CB3 said:
Lack of ability to penetrate a windshield is not the primary reason the US military does not use varmint bullets. It is lack of penetration in flesh under all conditions compared to other rounds used. It is as instructive to observe what the military doesn't use, and why, as it is to take note that it uses one particular bullet out of the many that are currently approved. Cost is a major factor. Only the elite get the more expensive, "special" bullets because they have the funds, training and assignments that justify the extra expense. Those same bullets are available to the public. They are hunting bullets.

I was part of the supply chain getting that ammo to those guys. I have personal knowledge from operators as to their effectiveness compared to the other bullets they had available. The operators demanded that kind of performance and got it.

Average troops get average ammo because of cost and generalized performance. Lake City is set up to load billions of rounds of that stuff and it is very expensive to make large scale changes. And it takes time. Smaller loaders that are more nimble, while more expensive, offer more choices for smaller runs--just a few tens of millions of rounds.

It is true that the OP offered only two choices, and Vmax might work differently but as well as FMJ under certain circumstances. However, if we really want to help out a brother who is seeking help on choosing a good self defense bullet, it is helpful to point out that neither of those choices is the better of the many other choices available. If one is going to spend money and time to develop a personal defense load, he should at least start with a bullet specifically designed for his mission. Vmax ain't it.
there is this pesky little thing called "The Geneva Convention" that is why the military does not use hollow points.or They would because they are so effective.I store up on hornady ballistic tips. VERY EFFECTIVE.trust me. They work on deer and pigs.Period
 
#21 ·
your question is to vague to answer. if this is for home defense i would use m193 if penetration through walls was a concern. the vmax would be more prone to penetrating the walls and striking something beyond. in home defense distances i don't think you need to worry so much about the wound channel created by the bullet. getting shot at a close distance with a rifle is going to be pretty traumatic :wink:

there are alot of people chimming in on rounds that are more offensive than defensive minded :mrgreen:

if your just looking for a good manstopper look at black hills loaded with the 50 grain tsx or the federal 62 grain fbi load. both have excellent blind barrier penetration though so they're not the best rounds for home defense.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top