is 5.56/.223 a viable bolt action caliber?

[Creeky73]

And I don't mean for shooting prairie dogs and coyotes.

So I know that in general, most people are probably going to say no, that you need 30-06, .308, etc. But keep in mind a couple of things for sake of my question.

1: I am not really looking for a firearm capable of exploding a man's head at a mile and a half. I will never have the money to buy such a firearm, and certainly not the optic that it would require. I want something more for 300 yards +.

2: I would never consider using this as a primary hunting rifle unless I had no other options. While I may not be a card carrying member of PETA, that doesn't mean that I have no sensitivity to the suffering of the animal and I certainly have no desire to track it for 3 miles after a hit that would have put it down from a larger caliber.

3: In a SHTF scenario, the suffering of whatever I am shooting at is now of little consequence to me. I do understand that the one-shot kill is still highly desirable, especially since now you are talking about shooting at things that can shoot back, which is really the whole point of my question.

4: the main reason I am even asking this is because of ammo redundancy. I have two firearms that use the 5.56, a 12 ga, a 9mm and a .45 acp. I have no desire to start buying up any other caliber of ammo, especially of a large powerful caliber that will certainly not be cheap.

So...can this be an option, when using the right ammo and the right scope, or is anything less than the big boys a waste of time? And let me even go a step further...if it means getting another caliber, I would probably pass on the bolt gun in general, whereas if the .223 is viable, I might consider it.....

As always, thanks in advance for any help or input anyone may have :)

[csmith]

I'd consider that up to personal opinion.

1. Would you be happy with the ballistics offered by a .223? It'd obviously be cheaper to acquire a scope for your AR and switch to it when you wanted to extend the range.

2. You'd have to check your state laws to see if it's even legal to use a .223 to hunt. Here in Colorado anything classified as big game can't be shot with anything less than a .23 caliber round (which you basically have to round up to a .243).

3. Again, would the ballistics of the .223 fit your expectations? It can be done, but for that matter so can a scoped .22.

4. I understand this, and this is the same reason I got rid of my revolver. I now have 5.56, 9mm and .308 and am happy with a minimum of calibers.

I realize your stance is basically .223 or bust, but .308 isn't bad at all.

[Creeky73]

I'd consider that up to personal opinion.

1. Would you be happy with the ballistics offered by a .223? It'd obviously be cheaper to acquire a scope for your AR and switch to it when you wanted to extend the range.

2. You'd have to check your state laws to see if it's even legal to use a .223 to hunt. Here in Colorado anything classified as big game can't be shot with anything less than a .23 caliber round (which you basically have to round up to a .243).

3. Again, would the ballistics of the .223 fit your expectations? It can be done, but for that matter so can a scoped .22.

4. I understand this, and this is the same reason I got rid of my revolver. I now have 5.56, 9mm and .308 and am happy with a minimum of calibers.

I realize your stance is basically .223 or bust, but .308 isn't bad at all.

1. This is basically for 1 and 3. This is kind of my question. I have no idea what to expect as far as knockdown power at the longer ranges. Now, I get that the right shot in the right spot is gonna work every time, but I am not exactly military-trained. I can shoot ok for a civilian but who knows how I would shoot in a bad situation. I also have no idea if a bolt action rifle would offer any significant increase in velocity or energy over a semi auto, or if that is more dependent on barrel length. I have a light 16" carbine for conventional ranges, but I also have a 20" govt barreled rifle as well. Would this basically serve the purpose, with a good scope?

2. again, I have no intention of shooting anything alive with this weapon unless total necessity forces my hand. At that point, the local laws won't matter much.

4. Yeah, I don't think I need yet another rifle. And I really don't like shooting bolt actions anyway, I would be getting one just to check off the box on the old gun list. It would be nice to be able to get away with using ammo I already keep on hand.

[Paulo_Santos]

Assuming that this rifle is primarily for target shooting, it will work very well at a much cheaper price to shoot than a .308. If you already have a 20", then you can also save some cash and convert that into a precision AR with the right barrel.

[Optimus Prime]

I've been wanting a bolt .223 for a while too, just because a bolt usually forces me to slow down and concentrate on what I'm doing, and I don't want to pay for .30-ish caliber ammo. At the same time though, for around $400 I could swap the barrel on one of my ARs and put some glass on top and probably get comparable accuracy. I still kinda want a bolt though.

[Jerry R]

In answer to your question ------- Yes it is.

However, unless you are an expert marksman I honestly feel you will do as well with your current "20 inch govt barreled rifle" if you invest in some good glass.

At the Florida Shoot last spring we did some rather extensive chrono work. This was mostly 6.8, but enough 5.56 to perhaps be of interest to you - barrel lengths from 26" down to 10.5" showing average and total velocity loss. Thread link below:

http://www.weaponevolution.com/forum/showthread.php?3231-Velocity-loss-based-on-barrel-length

Some were bolt rifles, some were not.

I hate crass generalizations, but ........ "Most" modern rifles will shoot better than "Most" shooters regardless of action type. Buy some reasonable glass and practice. When you feel you are shooting up to the potential of the equipment you own now, then think about investing in new equipment.

I love my bolt rifles and would not give them up - but not my first choice in the scenario you describe.

[Creeky73]

In answer to your question ------- Yes it is.

However, unless you are an expert marksman I honestly feel you will do as well with your current "20 inch govt barreled rifle" if you invest in some good glass.

At the Florida Shoot last spring we did some rather extensive chrono work. This was mostly 6.8, but enough 5.56 to perhaps be of interest to you - barrel lengths from 26" down to 10.5" showing average and total velocity loss. Thread link below:

http://www.weaponevolution.com/forum/showthread.php?3231-Velocity-loss-based-on-barrel-length

Some were bolt rifles, some were not.

I hate crass generalizations, but ........ "Most" modern rifles will shoot better than "Most" shooters regardless of action type. Buy some reasonable glass and practice. When you feel you are shooting up to the potential of the equipment you own now, then think about investing in new equipment.

I love my bolt rifles and would not give them up - but not my first choice in the scenario you describe.

Thank you sir, that helped quite a bit. Perhaps I overlooked it, but I didn't see any testing for 20" barrels. Have these things completely turned into fossils? I like mine...the actual gains might be pretty negligible but I do like the longer sight radius on the rifle length setup. Of course, with a scope, that becomes a non-factor as well. And I think I will go that route. I have a pretty basic 3-9 x 40 sitting around doing nothing, so I might get a mount for it and see how I like that setup. Thanks for the info :)

[Jerry R]

Unfortunately, we did not have any 20 inch barreled rifles. That was one of the reasons I put the last calculated fields on the report, "Loss per Inch" and "Total Loss". While an entirely accurate result would not be obtained, you could do a little interpolation of the data and come up with something pretty close to the velocity expected from a 20 inch - at the same altitude, temperature, etc.

We are doing the Spring Shoot in Florida again this year, but also hope to do a Fall Shoot in Tennessee. If we do the fall shoot, I hope to gather additional chrono data at that altitude. Would be some interesting comparisons.

Glad it helped a little.

[tpelle]

I've been wanting a bolt .223 for a while too, just because a bolt usually forces me to slow down and concentrate on what I'm doing, and I don't want to pay for .30-ish caliber ammo. At the same time though, for around $400 I could swap the barrel on one of my ARs and put some glass on top and probably get comparable accuracy. I still kinda want a bolt though.

This reply made me smile! There's an old saying amongst service rifle competitors to the effect that "Bolt gun shooters can shoot as fast as they want, but shooters with gas guns have to wait for the rifle! "

As to the original question about the 223 bolt action rifle, if the OP already has an AR15, I can't imagine what a bolt action rifle will do that the AR can't. I shoot service rifle competition, which means iron sights out to 600 yards. Of course, in real world terms, you can't expect much in the way of terminal effects from the 223 beyond 200 or 300 yards. So again, if you can achieve the hits with the AR15 out to beyond where the cartridge is effective, why bother with the bolt gun?

[markm]

A bolt .223 will get more than you want done. My buddy is running a Rem 700 5R in .223, and that thing is a blast. We shot a little at 1000 yards on Saturday with 69 gr SMKs.

He's running a suppressor on it, and it is so much more quiet than a gas gun from the shooter position. You could sit there and shoot that rifle ALL DAY long. The .308s will fatigue you after a while, but that .223 is a pellet gun.

[Creeky73]

This reply made me smile! There's an old saying amongst service rifle competitors to the effect that "Bolt gun shooters can shoot as fast as they want, but shooters with gas guns have to wait for the rifle! "

As to the original question about the 223 bolt action rifle, if the OP already has an AR15, I can't imagine what a bolt action rifle will do that the AR can't. I shoot service rifle competition, which means iron sights out to 600 yards. Of course, in real world terms, you can't expect much in the way of terminal effects from the 223 beyond 200 or 300 yards. So again, if you can achieve the hits with the AR15 out to beyond where the cartridge is effective, why bother with the bolt gun?

that does seem to make sense. I can assure you, if I feel comfortable with what my AR with a scope can do, I won't be bothering with a bolt gun. At least not any time in the near future. Should be ordering a Bobro mount in about 2 more weeks, and we'll give her a go.