# 5.56mm vs. 7.62mm, gonna buy a Ruger...



## Flying Crane (Dec 7, 2012)

Hi everyone,

So I've decided I'm going to purchase a Ruger, either the Mini-14 or the Mini-30.  The 14 is chambered for the NATO 5.56mm round, the same as is fired in the AR and the M-16 rifles, and the 30 is chambered for the 7.62mm round, the same as is fired in the AK rifles.

What are people's thoughts on these different calibers?  Honestly, I don't have a specific agenda regarding hunting or self defense.  My primary interest is simply in target shooting, but it does occur to me that hunting could come into the picture at some point.  I'm suspecting that for game such as deer, the 5.56 is probably too small and the 7.62 would be a good choice.  

How about the difference in cost between the two?  Easy availability?

Overall, what do people think of these calibers, in whatever way that matters to you?

Thanks.


----------



## clfsean (Dec 7, 2012)

Flying Crane said:


> Hi everyone,
> 
> So I've decided I'm going to purchase a Ruger, either the Mini-14 or the Mini-30.  The 14 is chambered for the NATO 5.56mm round, the same as is fired in the AR and the M-16 rifles, and the 30 is chambered for the 7.62mm round, the same as is fired in the AK rifles.
> 
> ...



I used to own a Mini14. I was a turn in from the NC State Prison system. It was a great little rifle. I made a couple of minor tweaks to get it the way I wanted it. 

The only thing I'll comment about 5.56 v 7.62x39 is 5.56 is cheaper to shoot & easier to shoot all day. 7.62x39 can wear on you after a little bit.


----------



## Flying Crane (Dec 7, 2012)

clfsean said:


> I used to own a Mini14. I was a turn in from the NC State Prison system. It was a great little rifle. I made a couple of minor tweaks to get it the way I wanted it.
> 
> The only thing I'll comment about 5.56 v 7.62x39 is 5.56 is cheaper to shoot & easier to shoot all day. 7.62x39 can wear on you after a little bit.



7.62 kicks a bit?  The only experience I have with 30 caliber is my dad's bolt action Enfield .30-06.  that doesn't kick.  It bucks like a maddened bull.  Oh, I've also shot a friend's .30-30, that doesn't kick as much.  I've read that the 7.62 AK round has similar ballistics to the .30-30 so I'm imagining a similar kick.

Sound right?


----------



## Blindside (Dec 7, 2012)

Flying Crane said:


> 7.62 kicks a bit?  The only experience I have with 30 caliber is my dad's bolt action Enfield .30-06.  that doesn't kick.  It bucks like a maddened bull.  Oh, I've also shot a friend's .30-30, that doesn't kick as much.  I've read that the 7.62 AK round has similar ballistics to the .30-30 so I'm imagining a similar kick.
> 
> Sound right?



I haven't fired a Mini-30, but in an AK the 7.62x39 is easily managable.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Dec 7, 2012)

M1 Garand in 7.62 NATO.


----------



## Flying Crane (Dec 7, 2012)

Bill Mattocks said:


> M1 Garand in 7.62 NATO.



I thought the Garand was .30-06?


----------



## Sukerkin (Dec 7, 2012)

This link talks of the difference between the two:

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=331844

Here is one about the Garand Nato round conversion:  http://www.forgottenweapons.com/m1-garand-development/navy-7-62mm-garand-conversion/


----------



## Takai (Dec 7, 2012)

Flying Crane said:


> I thought the Garand was .30-06?



Early "production" models were 30-06. The 7.62X51 NATO was a later chambering in the Garand. Prototypes included the .256 Bang and the .276 if I remember correctly.

Back to the OP. The 5.56/.223 is a sufficient for deer if you are careful about shot placement. I have taken several over the years with an old Browning A-Bolt. The 7.62X39 has a bit more power and is a very capable round. I would have no concerns about hunting with either. 

Some things to consider. Both of these rifles are a carbine thus they make a whole a lot of noise. As far as ammo cost, the 7.62 used be cheaper. Older military surplus ammo can still be found but the the days of the 800 rounds for $40 are long gone. If you do find a good deal on some old Berdan primed ammo clean your weapon thoroughly (including your internals) after firing or you will regret it.


----------



## Flying Crane (Dec 8, 2012)

Takai said:


> Back to the OP. The 5.56/.223 is a sufficient for deer if you are careful about shot placement. I have taken several over the years with an old Browning A-Bolt. The 7.62X39 has a bit more power and is a very capable round. I would have no concerns about hunting with either.



I'm guessing there are State laws that govern minimum caliber for hunting various game.  I'm in California, I suppose I ought to just to a quick internet search to see what the laws are.



> Some things to consider. Both of these rifles are a carbine thus they make a whole a lot of noise.



What is the definition of a Carbine, compared to a rifle?  and what is it that makes them more noisy?  I do see that these are available with a couple of barrel lengths, the short one around 16 inches, the longer one around 18 inches.  Is that part of the difference?

I remember shooting my dad's .30-06 Enfield, that's very noisy, and my friends .30-30 lever action was quite loud as well.  Not to mention the 12 gauge shotguns that I used when hunting ducks and geese with my dad.  A good bark came out of those too.


----------



## Flying Crane (Dec 8, 2012)

I should have posted this in the OP, but for anyone not familiar with these rifles, here's Ruger's website link for these rifles.

http://www.ruger.com/products/mini14/index.html

I'm interested in the standard model, the Ranch Rifle.  I don't care for the "tactical" rebuilt stocks and stuff.  I prefer the standard wood stock and the blued barrel.  Still sort of wavering between that and the Stainless model with synthetic stock, but will probably go with the wood.  California law allows 10 round magazines, so the 20 round option that Ruger makes is not available to me.  But that's OK, I don't want to turn it into something that looks more "military".  I don't care for the look, and to be honest I think my wife would be less enthusiastic about this if I was getting "military" looking weapons.  The closer it looks to a civilian sporting rifle, the better.

Interestingly, a week or so ago I was in a sporting goods store looking at these rifles.  I also took a look at an AR rifle.  I found that I really didn't care for it, the whole military look of it.  Just not my thing.  But what I was completely unaware of was a CA state law, that may also exist in other states, that governs "military" style weapons such as the AR and AK rifles.  The law mandates what I believe the fellow called a "bullet button".  This is a release mechanism that requires the use of a separate tool to swap magazines.  So instead of just pushing a lever with your finger, you need to use a separate tool to release the magazine.  This is designed to slow the rate of fire by slowing the ability to swap magazines.  What I found really interesting is that "sporting" weapons like the Ruger Minis are exempt from this law because it only applies to "military" style weapons.  Even tho the Ruger Minis are firing the same ammunition as the military style weapons, they can have the same 10-round capacity, and they are semi-automatic.  So their performance in terms of firing is very similar, but they are exempt from the "bullet button" requirement.

Interesting.


----------



## Blindside (Dec 8, 2012)

Flying Crane said:


> This is designed to slow the rate of fire by slowing the ability to swap magazines.  What I found really interesting is that "sporting" weapons like the Ruger Minis are exempt from this law because it only applies to "military" style weapons.  Even tho the Ruger Minis are firing the same ammunition as the military style weapons, they can have the same 10-round capacity, and they are semi-automatic.  So their performance in terms of firing is very similar, but they are exempt from the "bullet button" requirement.
> 
> Interesting.



For California law it is basically the presence of "scary" assault weapon like features that cause the regular magazine restriction to go into place, scary things like pistol grips and flash-hiders, which shows you just how silly that particular law is.


----------



## Flying Crane (Dec 8, 2012)

Blindside said:


> For California law it is basically the presence of "scary" assault weapon like features that cause the regular magazine restriction to go into place, scary things like pistol grips and flash-hiders, which shows you just how silly that particular law is.



yeah that was my take on it, sort of a "feel good" law that didn't really provide much extra security in the big picture of life.


----------



## Takai (Dec 8, 2012)

Flying Crane said:


> What is the definition of a Carbine, compared to a rifle?  and what is it that makes them more noisy?  I do see that these are available with a couple of barrel lengths, the short one around 16 inches, the longer one around 18 inches.  Is that part of the difference?
> 
> I remember shooting my dad's .30-06 Enfield, that's very noisy, and my friends .30-30 lever action was quite loud as well.  Not to mention the 12 gauge shotguns that I used when hunting ducks and geese with my dad.  A good bark came out of those too.



A carbine is a short rifle. It is a rather subjective term but, generally if the barrel length is less than 20 inches it would qualify as a carbine. That short barrel combined with supersonic rounds makes a much larger "crack" due to expansion of gases from the cartridge.

The 12 gauge is an entirely different animal. They are just plain loud (unless you buy one of the fancy "suppressed" versions). Suppressed they sound about as loud as a .223 unsuppressed.


----------



## PoolMan (Dec 9, 2012)

5.56 NATO rounds are cheaper and easier to get. But if you plan to do any hunting I would go with 7.62. 5.56 was designed more to maim then to kill. 7.62 on the other hand...


----------



## Grenadier (Dec 10, 2012)

Flying Crane said:


> What are people's thoughts on these different calibers?  Honestly, I don't have a specific agenda regarding hunting or self defense.  My primary interest is simply in target shooting, but it does occur to me that hunting could come into the picture at some point.  I'm suspecting that for game such as deer, the 5.56 is probably too small and the 7.62 would be a good choice.



As an anti-personnel round, either does quite nicely, although I have more of a fondness for the thinly jacketed 55 grain Winchester Q3131A FMJ load, since it shoots dead on in my rifles, has very little muzzle flash, and burns exceptionally cleanly.  

While many would say that the 5.56 / .223 uses too light of a bullet, I'd disagree with them, that with the correct load selection, this cartridge can work just fine for deer.  As long as you use the heavier bullets, you should be just fine if your rifle has a faster twist to it (at least a 1 in 9).  

Here's a good read on it:

http://www.americanhunter.org/blogs/223-for-deer-hunting/

I've used a 64 grain soft point, and it did the job quite nicely.  

As always, good shot placement, and choosing the appropriate distances will be the key.


----------



## chinto (Dec 14, 2012)

OK here is my 2 cents worth. I prefer the ballistics of the 7.62mm. more energy and things out to the distance I would engage with a 5.56/.223.  That is my personal take on the cartridges.   but then I prefer the full sized Rifle cartidges over the assault/intermediate cartridges.


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 14, 2012)

I've owned both.  Got rid of the 7.62 its so much cheaper to shoot the 5.56 so I never really took the 7.62 out of the case.

But I don't hunt with them so


----------



## chinto (Dec 17, 2012)

if you want a plinker... get a .22  the .223/5.56mm is a lot more energy but I would not shoot at larger targets then a coyote with that cartridge myself. go with the 7.62X39 if you want some stopping power.. and either caliber if its over about 150M to 200M max get a bigger gun


----------



## Tgace (Dec 17, 2012)

Better buy it soon.....


----------



## Flying Crane (Dec 17, 2012)

Tgace said:


> Better buy it soon.....



yeah, the timing is a bit awkward.


----------



## Blaze Dragon (Jan 8, 2013)

There are some good shooting videos up on youtube. Do you perchance know someone who has one or is there a range that rents them?

Essentially the .223 is a high powered .22 which is by no means a bad thing at all  the 7.62 is gonna do alot more ballistics damage and have a heavier kick to it. For reference 



 it shows the .223 and compares it to other rounds and there effect on cinder blocks. there is also a good one that has a comparison of the two rounds with the M16 and the AK47


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 8, 2013)

I haven't made the purchase yet.  Kinda wondering how the new push for additional gun control laws might play out and I wonder if the Mini's might end up getting grouped in with the assualt weapons.  I don't want to have something that would be problematic to ever take and use, even just for target shooting.

So I'm considering other options.  Perhaps one of Ruger's bolt-action rifles.  what do people think of the .308?  .30-06? .300 magnum Winchester?  What is the cost of this kind of ammunition?  

I've shot the .30-06 when I was younger, my dad has one (very "stout" round, that one is), and I've shot the .30-30, a friend had one, so I'm familiar with the performance of those.  Never shot a .308 or .300 mag win before.  Any thoughts?


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 8, 2013)

BlazeLeeDragon said:


> Essentially the .223 is a high powered .22 which is by no means a bad thing at all



Do you really think that's a fair assessment?  The caliber is very close, but the projectile is longer and so quite a bit heavier and has a much higher velocity.  I think calling it a high powered .22 is understating it quite a bit.

thanks for the video links, I'll check them out at home.


----------



## Tgace (Jan 8, 2013)

Flying Crane said:


> I haven't made the purchase yet.  Kinda wondering how the new push for additional gun control laws might play out and I wonder if the Mini's might end up getting grouped in with the assualt weapons.  I don't want to have something that would be problematic to ever take and use, even just for target shooting.
> 
> So I'm considering other options.  Perhaps one of Ruger's bolt-action rifles.  what do people think of the .308?  .30-06? .300 magnum Winchester?  What is the cost of this kind of ammunition?
> 
> I've shot the .30-06 when I was younger, my dad has one (very "stout" round, that one is), and I've shot the .30-30, a friend had one, so I'm familiar with the performance of those.  Never shot a .308 or .300 mag win before.  Any thoughts?



What will the guns primary purpose be? 

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Blaze Dragon (Jan 8, 2013)

Flying Crane said:


> Do you really think that's a fair assessment?  The caliber is very close, but the projectile is longer and so quite a bit heavier and has a much higher velocity.  I think calling it a high powered .22 is understating it quite a bit.
> 
> thanks for the video links, I'll check them out at home.




I think so  my main point was it's kinda a good thing it makes a small hole and doesn't penetrate as well. which for home defense can be good, also since it's a smaller round I feel from watching videos it seems to be very accurate. I have a .223 rifle, sadly I yet to shoot it, but I made the decision based upon the fact that it's a smaller round and my love for the rifle 

for example 
http://www.k-var.com/shop/images/ammo-size2.jpg


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 8, 2013)

Tgace said:


> What will the guns primary purpose be?
> 
> Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2



honestly, it is mostly an indulgence of my interest in all things weaponry.  And I did grow up with firearms and hunted with my dad when I was younger so it's not something I'm completely inexperienced with.  I had the hunter's safety course and all that and we used to shoot trap and target shoot at our local rock quarries, and we hunted ducks and geese and on occasion small game with my uncle.

At this time I don't intend to hunt, and it's not for a home defense agenda.  It would be target shooting.  I realize a .30 caliber is overkill for that kind of thing, and I know that the best plinker is a .22 LR, but I always wanted something bigger than that, just for personal interest.

I had a Ruger 10/22 when I was younger, and a .50 cal muzzle loader, but I left them with my dad when I moved to California.  I've not felt a need to own a gun since then, but personal interest in weaponry is making me consider it now.  Honestly, I'm surprised my wife has agreed to it, but she has.


----------



## Sukerkin (Jan 8, 2013)

I'm pleased for you my friend - I wish that circumstances were different here in Britain so that I could go shooting again without turning around to see an Armed Response Team breathing down my neck :lol:.  I used to be good - as I say I was on my uni's rifle team and consistently shot high 90's at the short range with the .22LR.  My main claim to fame was that I used to go rabbit hunting with a rifle rather than a shotgun - don't much care for the taste and crunch of lead shot in my dinner :lol:.

These days if I walked down the street with a rifle bag slung over my shoulder ... oh look, there's the police again.  Makes me quietly annoyed I have to admit.


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 8, 2013)

Sukerkin said:


> I'm pleased for you my friend - I wish that circumstances were different here in Britain so that I could go shooting again without turning around to see an Armed Response Team breathing down my neck :lol:. I used to be good - as I say I was on my uni's rifle team and consistently shot high 90's at the short range with the .22LR. My main claim to fame was that I used to go rabbit hunting with a rifle rather than a shotgun - don't much care for the taste and crunch of lead shot in my dinner :lol:.
> 
> These days if I walked down the street with a rifle bag slung over my shoulder ... oh look, there's the police again. Makes me quietly annoyed I have to admit.



ha, squirrels with the .22, but my uncle used a .410 shotgun.  I wouldn't walk down the street with a rifle bag around here either.  I think it does tend to make people uncomfortable and I don't have any interest in doing that.  Straight into the car and off to the shooting range.

Funny story, years ago I bought a new bow.  I needed to visit the archery shop for some things, and took it with me.  It was unstrung and in a long bow bag, but was obvious what it was.  Afterward, I took a drive to a nearby beach and took a walk.  I don't have an enclosed trunk in my car and didn't want to leave the bow in open view in the back seat for fear of theft, so I took it with me.  A couple of park rangers approached me and asked if that was a bow in the bag.  I said yes it is, but pointed out that it is unstrung, wrapped up in the bag, and even more obviously that I had no arrows with me (it's a bit difficult to conceal them down your pant leg...).  I also told them about my concerns about leaving it in the back seat of my car.  They shrugged, said OK no problem, and went about their business.


----------



## Tgace (Jan 8, 2013)

Flying Crane said:


> honestly, it is mostly an indulgence of my interest in all things weaponry.  And I did grow up with firearms and hunted with my dad when I was younger so it's not something I'm completely inexperienced with.  I had the hunter's safety course and all that and we used to shoot trap and target shoot at our local rock quarries, and we hunted ducks and geese and on occasion small game with my uncle.
> 
> At this time I don't intend to hunt, and it's not for a home defense agenda.  It would be target shooting.  I realize a .30 caliber is overkill for that kind of thing, and I know that the best plinker is a .22 LR, but I always wanted something bigger than that, just for personal interest.
> 
> I had a Ruger 10/22 when I was younger, and a .50 cal muzzle loader, but I left them with my dad when I moved to California.  I've not felt a need to own a gun since then, but personal interest in weaponry is making me consider it now.  Honestly, I'm surprised my wife has agreed to it, but she has.



What sort of target shooting? Long range? For accuracy....like benchrest shooting? Plan to try out competition? Just to "plink"? Would you like to have an option to hunt? Self defence? Both?

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 8, 2013)

Tgace said:


> What sort of target shooting? Long range? For accuracy....like benchrest shooting? Plan to try out competition? Just to "plink"? Would you like to have an option to hunt? Self defence? Both?
> 
> Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2



I think medium to long range, to whatever distance the rifle is up to.  I guess I don't have a particular range in mind, just an interest in shooting to whatever limits the particular rifle is capable.  I guess that's why I'm kind of open to different options and I'm not married to the idea of one particular type of rifle.  No competition for me, just personal fulfillment.  

By plinking, do you mean going to a quarry or some safe open land and just shooting at old cans and stuff?  I don't think that kind of environment is available out here where I am.  I think I'll be limited to established shooting ranges unless I want to drive out a ways and I doubt I'd be inclinded to do that.

Hunting, well I'm not really interested in it but I suppose anything could be a possibility under the right circumstances.  It's not a motivating factor in buying a gun at this time.  I definitely have hunters in my extended family and I suppose it could be possible to join them someday if I built up the interest.  My wife is a vegetarian and the thought of hunting is kinda frowned upon in my house, unless somehow we were starving and our lives depended on it.  Honestly, I'm a softie when it comes to the fuzzy critters and I doubt I'd have the will to shoot one without really strong reason to.

home defense, well I guess having a weapon in the house makes that a possibility, but my wife definitely wants it well locked up and I doubt it would be quickly accessible for that kind of thing.  So again, that's not a motivating issue for me in making a choice.


----------



## Blaze Dragon (Jan 8, 2013)

Flying Crane said:


> I think medium to long range, to whatever distance the rifle is up to.  I guess I don't have a particular range in mind, just an interest in shooting to whatever limits the particular rifle is capable.  I guess that's why I'm kind of open to different options and I'm not married to the idea of one particular type of rifle.  No competition for me, just personal fulfillment.
> 
> By plinking, do you mean going to a quarry or some safe open land and just shooting at old cans and stuff?  I don't think that kind of environment is available out here where I am.  I think I'll be limited to established shooting ranges unless I want to drive out a ways and I doubt I'd be inclinded to do that.
> 
> ...



When I hear the term plinking it seems to refer to metal knock down targets. Or generically used for target shooting period. So essentially just firing off rounds while standing at a range. I think the term is suppose to come from the "plink" sound from hitting metal targets. (correct me if I'm wrong)

Home defense, well I understand that. Though I could see something like an AR-15 carbine being useable or even a shotgun I personally feel that handguns are best options. If your interested in quick access but still locked up, have you considered the biometric safes such as Barska?


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 8, 2013)

I realize I've forgotten to include a couple of other options: the .243 and .270.  if anyone wants to share some thoughts on those, I'd be willing to hear it.

thx.


----------



## Tgace (Jan 8, 2013)

Personal opinion. From what you are describing I'd go with a bolt gun. You get more "fun" with that style of shooting without blazing through a lot of ammo which isn't getting any cheaper. If you ever get into reloading/accuracy shooting down the road the bolt gun would serve you best there as well.

I'd suggest .308, the ammo is widely available, it's got "reach" and you could easily hunt with it if you ever decided to go that route.


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 8, 2013)

Tgace said:


> Personal opinion. From what you are describing I'd go with a bolt gun. You get more "fun" with that style of shooting without blazing through a lot of ammo which isn't getting any cheaper. If you ever get into reloading/accuracy shooting down the road the bolt gun would serve you best there as well.
> 
> I'd suggest .308, the ammo is widely available, it's got "reach" and you could easily hunt with it if you ever decided to go that route.



Cool, thanks.  Do you have any thoughts on the .243 or .270?

I was doing a little Wikipedia research, looks like the .270 could be a very versatile round.  Good for long distances, 400+ yards out to maybe 1000, and lighter loads for varmint hunting and heavier loads for big game hunting.  I realize I'm probably not really interested in hunting, but that kinda seems like a gage of versatility so I'm just looking at it in those terms.


----------



## Tgace (Jan 8, 2013)

Flying Crane said:


> Cool, thanks.  Do you have any thoughts on the .243 or .270?
> 
> I was doing a little Wikipedia research, looks like the .270 could be a very versatile round.  Good for long distances, 400+ yards out to maybe 1000, and lighter loads for varmint hunting and heavier loads for big game hunting.  I realize I'm probably not really interested in hunting, but that kinda seems like a gage of versatility so I'm just looking at it in those terms.



Eh..in terms of (rnd) vs (rnd) you can get into all sorts of variables. The .243/.270 are flatter shooters but lighter bullets with less terminal impact...blah..blah..

Each had its + and -....For me the .308 has two major factors going for it. Ammo availability and ammo cost. You can even shoot 7.62 NATO through your .308. And there's nothing those other calibers can do that .308 can't.

I recently (as in today) purchased a Marlin 336C 30-30. NY recently allowed rifle for Whitetail hunting and I wanted a 30 caliber round chucker. I went with that platform because of the style of hunting I practice (I walk/stalk), the ranges I typically shoot at (200 yd MAX) and a desire for a lighter recoiling round for close range follow-up shots. The shorter/lighter/quicker lever action was the route I took.


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 8, 2013)

Tgace said:


> Eh..in terms of (rnd) vs (rnd) you can get into all sorts of variables. The .243/.270 are flatter shooters but lighter bullets with less terminal impact...blah..blah..
> 
> Each had its + and -....For me the .308 has two major factors going for it. Ammo availability and ammo cost. You can even shoot 7.62 NATO through your .308. And there's nothing those other calibers can do that .308 can't.
> 
> I recently (as in today) purchased a Marlin 336C 30-30. NY recently allowed rifle for Whitetail hunting and I wanted a 30 caliber round chucker. I went with that platform because of the style of hunting I practice (I walk/stalk), the ranges I typically shoot at (200 yd MAX) and a desire for a lighter recoiling round for close range follow-up shots. The shorter/lighter/quicker lever action was the route I took.



alright, good info.  I've got some things to think about a bit but I'm getting a picture that works.

thanks for the input, I appreciate it.


----------

