.223 remington versus 5.56 x 45 mm NATO - is it safe to interchange???

I have dutifully read through all 12 pages, thanks to everyone's efforts to clear up this mystery, and I get the general idea, but what a debate. I'm not sure if anyone arrived at a definitive answer.

I'll stick to using .223, period, unless it's down to case of .556 and the zombies are about to get me, then I'll chance it in my civilian AR 15.
 
CanadianReich said:
From what I remember military rifles designated for NATO ammunition can use the NATO ammo and their civilian counterpart but the opposite is NOT true (5.56 VS .223 and 7.62 VS .308).

IE You can fire a .223 in a NATO 5.56 safely, but you can not fire a nato round in a civilian chambered gun (you cant fire a 5.56 in a .223). The nato round is slightly larger, .224 i believe, so the gun could explode.

As the civilian ammo is ever so slightly smaller then the nato ammo there is a small loss of accuracy when firing .223 in a 5.56 Nato chambered gun.
Click to expand...

I have fired both through my savage with no problems.
 
BigBeaverBoomStix said:
I have dutifully read through all 12 pages, thanks to everyone's efforts to clear up this mystery, and I get the general idea, but what a debate. I'm not sure if anyone arrived at a definitive answer.

I'll stick to using .223, period, unless it's down to case of .556 and the zombies are about to get me, then I'll chance it in my civilian AR 15.
Click to expand...

I have been firing 5.56 through both my AR's lately. Norc with a 5.56 chamber and DPMS with 223 Wylde. No issues.
 
CanadianReich said:
From what I remember military rifles designated for NATO ammunition can use the NATO ammo and their civilian counterpart but the opposite is NOT true (5.56 VS .223 and 7.62 VS .308).

IE You can fire a .223 in a NATO 5.56 safely, but you can not fire a nato round in a civilian chambered gun (you cant fire a 5.56 in a .223). The nato round is slightly larger, .224 i believe, so the gun could explode.

As the civilian ammo is ever so slightly smaller then the nato ammo there is a small loss of accuracy when firing .223 in a 5.56 Nato chambered gun.
Click to expand...

Both the 223 Rem and the Service Round 5.56 fire the same bullet diameter, that is .224.
 
Ar180shooter said:
I'll explain it with smiles

:) = good
:( = bad

5.56 round in 5.56 chamber :)
.223 round in 5.56 chamber :)
.223 round in .223 chamber :)
5.56 round in .223 chamber :( - your #### may not fall off, but I wouldn't risk it!
Click to expand...

Brillant! This should be the sticky...right here..this post.
 
Last edited:
5.56 chamber is ok for .223 but if the chamber is specificaly .223 not to use 5.56 is what i heard.
 
Why is this even a debate?

What it all comes down to is, it depends.

5.56 NATO round in a 5.56 NATO spec chamber = OK
.223 REM round in a 5.56 NATO spec chamber = OK
5.56 NATO round in a Wylde spec chamber = OK
.223 REM round in a Wylde spec chamber = OK
.223 REM round in a .223 REM SAAMI spec chamber = OK
5.56 NATO round in a .223 REM SAAMI spec chamber = Potentially Dangerous, depending on the strength of the action.

To the guys who keep saying they've been shooting 5.56 in their .223s with no trouble, my questions are these:

Have you cast and measured your chamber and confirmed it to be truly SAAMI spec, or is there a chance the manufacturer didn't cut it to SAAMI specs so that if someone (like you) fed it the wrong rounds it wouldn't blow up?

and

Might you not feel bad if someone with a true SAAMI spec chamber and a weak action took your advice and got a blast in the face?

Not trying to flame people or come off as self-righteous - what you shoot in your weapons, with your face behind the action, is your business. I'd suggest, however, that telling the Internet not to worry about something that could be a safety issue - however remote a possibility it may be - is not a good practice.
 
So my AR that has "Cal. 223 5.56" stamped on the receiver is good for both right?
I know i'm not much to look at but i like my face the way it is.
 
Vitus said:
So my AR that has "Cal. 223 5.56" stamped on the receiver is good for both right?
I know i'm not much to look at but i like my face the way it is.
Click to expand...

You should be fine. There seems to be a misconception that your rifle would blow up if mismatching chambers but honestly the usual thing to happen is a blown out primer and/or a wedged casing failing to extract. Your face will be fine.
 
Vitus said:
So my AR that has "Cal. 223 5.56" stamped on the receiver is good for both right?
I know i'm not much to look at but i like my face the way it is.
Click to expand...

What is stamped on the barrel? The lowers could all be stamped as multi caliber as they are multi caliber capable. Check your barrel and shoot The proper ammo thru it.
 
The cartridges are identical in measurement, the throat is cut a little longer in the 5.56 chamber to allow for non standard cartridge manufacturing during wartime. 5.56 is loaded to slightly hotter chamber preasure to make sure it functions in rough actions like machineguns.

I can not see any rifle of modern manufacture "Blowing" up when using either cartridges. The Wild chamber is designed to allow for the best accuracy if using either cartridge not because of the preasure difference.

I know this won't end the discussion but it was starting to get a little weird!

Scott
 
Duffk21 said:
i just burned 400rds of 5.56 through my 223 chambered XCR. worked great.
Click to expand...

I believe all XCR's where built as 5.56 NATO. The US state department wont allow the export of military chambered rifles so they all have to be marked as .223 to be classified as a civilian rifle and be legal to export.

The same issue came up with Kel-Tech RFB's. They actually had to have the "7.62 NATO" ground off of the barrels and laser etched ".308 WIN" since they where already made and stamped.

I'm not saying it is or isn't safe to fire one in the other but just that the XCR is actually a 5.56 NATO chamber and not a .223 chamber.
 
.223 will fire in 5.56 but not safe to do 5.56 in a .223

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5.56×45mm_NATO
 
i wish i had the source for my 2 cents but it stated that the rounds/projectiles were not the issue but it was the casing/brass that was the troubled area. argument was that the NATO casings were different than civ brass. primer seating depth was another bit too


Posted from Canadiangunnutz.com App for Android
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom