5.56 and .223 compatibility

golferboy426 · Mar 29, 2021

rugerjunkie said:
Nice to be on a forum where people know more than the ammo companies making and testing ammo. There's more than just Hornady saying what they say about the matter too. The old mini could run 5.56 because the chambers were sloppy enough to chamber a 243! Exaggerating , but all the 180 series I had were terrible.

Do whatever you want but remember things are always fine until they aren't. You can shoot 5.56 in a 223 and maybe never have an issue until that one day you load that one round into the gun and all of the sudden things aren't fine anymore.

again read the manual for your specific mini..... I looked at 3 or 4. All said 556 was fine.

The Ruger instruction manual for mini's made after 2004 which I have linked to states on page 14 that only the TARGET model cannot use 556 Thus any other mini model can run either

https://ruger-docs.s3.amazonaws.com/_manuals/mini.pdf

rugerjunkie · Mar 29, 2021

I wasn't picking on you or anyone specifically golferboy just making a general statement. And I gave up on mini-14's years ago when wasting ammo got boring and shooting small groups caught my attention.

The paragraph about the target mini only being able to shoot 223 kind of makes a point doesn't it? It is chambered in 223 , not 5.56 or some variation of the 223 chamber like the wylde chamber.

eric conrad · Apr 3, 2021

One of Flatgate's favorite sayings "RTFM"
Call Ruger they will send you one.

golferboy426 · Apr 3, 2021

rugerjunkie said:
I wasn't picking on you or anyone specifically golferboy just making a general statement. And I gave up on mini-14's years ago when wasting ammo got boring and shooting small groups caught my attention.

The paragraph about the target mini only being able to shoot 223 kind of makes a point doesn't it? It is chambered in 223 , not 5.56 or some variation of the 223 chamber like the wylde chamber.

mini's can be fun..we used to shoot for money..set up 20 clay pigeons at 100 yds ...head to head ...first to break 10 wins.best to have a 30 round mag LOL

wwb · Apr 3, 2021

golferboy426 said:
mini's can be fun..we used to shoot for money..set up 20 clay pigeons at 100 yds ...head to head ...first to break 10 wins.best to have a 30 round mag LOL

My Savage Model 12 would require 10 shots to break 10 birds at 100 yards.... a bolt action might be slower, but it will get the job done.

Snake45 · Apr 3, 2021

wwb said:
golferboy426 said:

mini's can be fun..we used to shoot for money..set up 20 clay pigeons at 100 yds ...head to head ...first to break 10 wins.best to have a 30 round mag LOL

Click to expand...

My Savage Model 12 would require 10 shots to break 10 birds at 100 yards.... a bolt action might be slower, but it will get the job done.

So would any of my ARs, or my M1, or several of my .22s. Could I do it from standing? Probably (almost certainly) not. Can you? :?

wwb · Apr 3, 2021

Snake45 said:
So would any of my ARs, or my M1, or several of my .22s. Could I do it from standing? Probably (almost certainly) not. Can you? :?

A few years ago... no sweat. Ain't quite as steady as I used to be.... might take 11 or 12 shots these days. (That's with a sling).

golferboy426 · Apr 3, 2021

all,our "races" are standing off hand, no sling allowed

Snake45 · Apr 3, 2021

I did my own extensive testing a few years ago, and found that a sling made no difference in my standing shooting. Oh, it feels more secure, it feels steadier, but it's all psychological--the holes in the paper told the story.

From sitting, from prone, oh my yes a sling makes a huge difference. From standing? None at all in my case.

As always, YMMV. :wink:

Dan in MI · Apr 5, 2021

So where does a Colt SP-1 fit in all this? Or a 70's era M-16?

Snake45 · Apr 5, 2021

Dan in MI said:
So where does a Colt SP-1 fit in all this? Or a 70's era M-16?

'70s era M16 would obviously be 5.56.

I've never heard of any compatibility problems with Colt SP-1, so I'd assume they're 5.56 compliant. The SP-1 and M16 barrels were coming off the same lines.

Dan in MI · Apr 6, 2021

See? That's where it gets stupid. 70's era M-16 and my SP-1 are marked .223, but they work fine with 5.56. And no, it's not obvious for a 70's M-16 because "When 5.56×45mm NATO was adopted as standard in 1980, ..."

magpouch · Apr 13, 2021

I am well aware of the differences in chambering from .223 and 5.56. However my opinion is that the risk is very minor. The reason I believe that is because of the huge popularity of .223 chambered firearms and the (up until recently) large volume of 5.56 ammo on the market.

I have looked but never found anyone reporting an actual issue caused by using 5.56 in a .223 chamber. Has anyone ever seen it? I'm not trying to be an a$$, I am honestly looking for info.

Mobuck · Apr 13, 2021

"I have looked but never found anyone reporting an actual issue caused by using 5.56 in a .223 chamber. Has anyone ever seen it? "

Actually, yes I have noticed a problem with 2 completely different .223 rifles. Both of these occurred with military issue M193 ammo but neither are/were at a danger level although it was noted and the "real" military 5.56 ammo is no longer used in these rifles.
First and most notable instance involved an H&R single shot .223. It is hard to open and often will not eject when the 5.56 ammo is used requiring a rod to knock the empty case loose. Does not show this quirk with any other (223) ammo I've tried.
Second is a re-barreled Savage with a tight chamber/neck/throat. It shows hard bolt handle lift on about 75% of the true military 5.56 ammo. This has not occurred on any factory .223 I've used in this rifle. Again, the solution is to discontinue use of 5.56 ammo which is not a problem since mil-spec FMJ ammo is not in the use parameters of this specific rifle.

Snake45 · Apr 13, 2021

Mobuck said:
"I have looked but never found anyone reporting an actual issue caused by using 5.56 in a .223 chamber. Has anyone ever seen it? "

Actually, yes I have noticed a problem with 2 completely different .223 rifles. Both of these occurred with military issue M193 ammo but neither are/were at a danger level although it was noted and the "real" military 5.56 ammo is no longer used in these rifles.
First and most notable instance involved an H&R single shot .223. It is hard to open and often will not eject when the 5.56 ammo is used requiring a rod to knock the empty case loose. Does not show this quirk with any other (223) ammo I've tried.
Second is a re-barreled Savage with a tight chamber/neck/throat. It shows hard bolt handle lift on about 75% of the true military 5.56 ammo. This has not occurred on any factory .223 I've used in this rifle. Again, the solution is to discontinue use of 5.56 ammo which is not a problem since mil-spec FMJ ammo is not in the use parameters of this specific rifle.

Very interesting. Thanks for the specifics.

5.56 and .223 compatibility

Help Support Ruger Forum:

golferboy426

Buckeye

rugerjunkie

Buckeye

eric conrad

Buckeye

golferboy426

Buckeye

wwb

Hunter

Snake45

Hawkeye

wwb

Hunter

golferboy426

Buckeye

Snake45

Hawkeye

Dan in MI

Moderator

Snake45

Hawkeye

Dan in MI

Moderator

magpouch

Single-Sixer

Mobuck

Hawkeye

Snake45

Hawkeye

Similar threads

Latest posts