AR 15 Home Defense

[CDR]

I would appreciate anyone's thoughts on the recommended type of .223 Rem or 5.56 Nato ammunition to use inside one's home that minimizes the chance of over penetration while providing an effective home defensive round.  I'm thinking frangible type ammunition would probably be best but was wondering if there is a better alternative from both a man stopping perspective as well as a safety perspective. 

I've read that typical jacketed .223 Rem ammunition tends to yaw in flight and break up into fragments upon impact due to its thin jacketed walls and extreme bullet velocity, whether it makes contact with an individual or a wall, but am not really sure this is fact.  I've also read that a .223 round can easily penetrate quite a few walls of sheet rock if a wooden stud doesn't interrupt its flight.  This I would certainly want to avoid at all costs, naturally, and therefore am seriously considering frangible for inside the home.

Any and all recommendations or suggestions on bullet type and weight would be welcomed.

Many thanks.

[Rob Pincus]

CDR,

I highly recommend Hornady 55gr TAP (or the civilian equivalent defensive round).

I have shot this round during several drywall penetration test demonstrations and it has always (without studs) proven to be a better choice in terms of limniting over-penetration worries than any 9mm, .40 or .45 round except Blue Tip Glasers that I have tested.

I first became very interested in this issue when I was a police officer in the 90's and we were not issued patrol carbines because of the traditional, and largely unfounded, thought that a "rifle" was automatically going to be more dangerous downrange to unintended targets than a pistol. Conducting my own tests and studying those of others has lead me to believe that the 55gr .223 is a better choice than any typical defensive pistol round in terms of limiting danger in this area (even with typical .55gr HP or Ball because of the yawing & breaking up phenomenon that you described in your post). Pistol bullets designed to expand in soft tissue but not break up maintain their momentum and pose more of a danger through more layers of sheetrook. Of course, there are many other factors involved in picking the best home defense firearm in general.

In a few days, you'll see the tests that Phil and I conducted a couple of months ago at USSA for The Best Defense during Episode 2.

-RJP

[CDR]

Rob,

Thank you for your thoughtful response.  It was precisely the type of response I was hoping for and confirmed what I had believed to be the case regarding the effectiveness and overall improved safety provided with the .223 carbine round.  I always have next to my nightstand in my GunVault a Nighthawk Custom Government size .45 Auto loaded with CorBon 230 gr.+P as well a 4" S&W 686 loaded with .38 spl Gold Dot 135 gr.+P.  However, the thought of transitioning to the AR was given serious consideration a year or so ago when I began hearing how much safer an AR 15 is inside a house because of the very reasons we are discussing.  The thought of having to fire either the 1911 or revolver inside my house has always given me reason for concern with respect to over-penetraton, despite the use of hollowpoints, as you mentioned.

I will be purchasing the Hornady 55 gr TAP round for my M4, as you suggested, given your personal experiences and successful results.  Is this round considered frangible or is this a phenomenon inherent in all .223 or 5.56 rounds due to the composition and velocity of the bullet?  If not, should frangible be also considered for evaluation or is there a reason the TAP round would be superior?

Many thanks again and I am very much looking forward to next Wednesday's episode and witnessing your test results.  Congratulations on a marvelous and called for series.

[Robin]

I realize being alive is better than the alternative, but what about increased potential for hearing loss as a result of firing a rilfe indoors compared to a pistol?

One agency tested M855 rounds fired out of a SIG 552 rifle. It registered 163dB. That's well beyond the pain threshold and three shots will do permanent hearing damage. Dealing with that level of noise will also reduce your effectiveness.

Using hearing protection is the obvious answer, but may only be obvious once you start thinking about it.

[CDR]

I realize being alive is better than the alternative, but what about increased potential for hearing loss as a result of firing a rilfe indoors compared to a pistol?

One agency tested M855 rounds fired out of a SIG 552 rifle. It registered 163dB. That's well beyond the pain threshold and three shots will do permanent hearing damage. Dealing with that level of noise will also reduce your effectiveness.

Using hearing protection is the obvious answer, but may only be obvious once you start thinking about it.

Agreed.  A 1911 or revolver indoors would also create some level of permanent hearing loss.  That's why I keep 2 sets of electronic muffs right next to my nightstand.  A set of Sordin Supreme Pro Plus and a set of Peltor Comtacs......one set is for my wife.....I hope I will never need to put them on.

[Sponsor]

[Michael Bane]

The hearing loss issue is a real one, and one that's going to start weighing on LEOs who issue M-4 type carbines as well as civilians. If you're going to use an AR as a primary home defense weapon (and I agree 100% with Rob on the Hornady TAPS as the round of choice), you must have a set of electronic ear protection for each member of your family and a plan on using them.

An expensive alternative but one that I plan to execute in 2009 is fitting the home defense AR with a suppressor. I'm leaning toward SureFire, but that's not a "for sure." Suppressors solve the noise problem, minimizes flash (which is another seldom-mentioned issue on short-barreled ARs in closed spaces) and reduces even more the 5.56's minimal recoil. Yes, you have to get a tax stamp and pony up the $200, but I believe 35 some-odd states allow civilians to have suppressors, and this situation is an excellent and intelligent use of the technology.

There has been a lot written about the potential dangers of using Class III weaponry for self-defense, but I would feel in a very strong position walking into court with the rationale for a suppressed AR for home use.

1) The 5.56 is proven to be less of a penetrator then the typical home defense pistol rounds (you saw the video on TBD, so you know this for a fact).
2) A rifle is demonstrably easier to shoot than a handgun.
3) The 5.56 when fired in a closed room will result in damage on unprotected ears.
4) Even the best headphones can be knocked off in the heat of an armed encounter, while a suppressor is attached to firmly to the rifle.
5) In my absence, I would much rather my loved ones had at least 30 rounds of 5.56 in one of the easiest guns to fire ever manufactured than 8 rounds of .45 or 17 rounds of 9mm.

Michael B
5)

[Rob Pincus]

Good stuff on the hearing  protection issue.

As for Frangible, there are two different types of ammunition that are sometimes lumped together as "frangible". Rounds like the Glaser, which consist of small shot, particles or even powder inside of a jacket are pre-fragmented. True frangible rounds consist of particles that are compressed together and appear as a solid without any type of case. The latter type of round will NOT break up through typical houshold construction materials. In fact,all of the  .223 frangible that I tested sliced through the 1/4" mild steel backstops we used at Valhalla like butter (PMC, Remington and others). Those rounds are designed to break-up when they hit hardened steel targets.

-RJP

[Rastus]

Supressor is the way to go for noise if you can afford it. 

Speaking of small defensive rounds, I keep the FN Five SeveN pistol handy in the home due to the penetration issue.  I don't want to hurt my wife or boys putting down a threat and I do want the threat to stop. 

Rob, what's your take on the efficacy of the 5.7 x 28 MM? 

Thanks,
Ken

[CDR]

Many thanks Rob and Michael for the information.  Given your findings on penetration, I will certainly be loading Hornady 55 gr TAP .223 in my M4 30 round magazines for home protection.  Question...given that I have a 1:7 barrel twist in my M4 and therefore capable of handling heavier bullets like a 75 gr., would the same penetration advantages exist or are your findings unique to 55 gr. Hornady TAP? 

Michael, with respect to a suppressor I would be delighted to pay the $200 for a tax stamp if I was lucky enough to live in one of the 35 states you mentioned that permits the use/ownership of a suppressor.  Given that I live in New York State, I run the risk of the electric chair and simultaneous lethal injection should I attempt to obtain such an "evil and dastardly" accessory.  Its electronic muffs for my family for the time being.....until I move to Vermont some day......

Great information guys!!  I really do believe an AR, with proper training and practice of course, is one of the safest bets for home protection, assuming the use of electronic muffs or suppressor.

[Rob Pincus]

Ken,

(Who's "Ron" ?  )

I have not done much with the 5.7mm. I do have very reliable information from a BTDT friend who speaks highly of the 4.6mm out of the MP7 which indicates that the round is certainly viable.
Anecdotal stuff and my guess about the 5.7 says that the hollow points are definitely the way to go for defensive shooting. I'm not sure how they would do through sheetrock, I don't think the round is moving fast enough to break apart out of the pistol barrel.

CDR,

I have not done any sheetrock tests with the Heavier TAP, but I would expect that it would pose more danger downrange. It is still a light bullet, but you are increasing the bullets weight by 40% over the 55gr. I have the lighter ones loaded up. I have shot the 110gr .308s into sheetrock and found them to be something I would not be comfortable using inside for home defense in terms of misses. Based on hunting experience with the .308 TAPs however, I would not expect the 110 to carry much energy out of person even at very close range.

When you are talking about a long gun for home defense, keep in mind that there are some serious problems with moving as efficiently as you can with a pistol in the case that you need to.

-RJP