7.62x39 Better than Pistol Caliber for Home Defense?

[GlorifiedMailman]

Based on data from DocGKR, I'm wondering if my Arsenal SAM7 carbine would be a better choice for home defense than a pistol if using Hornady SST 7.62x39 ammunition. It seems to not penetrate more than most pistol rounds, but is far more effective.

From DocGKR:
Horn 123 gr SST (improperly labeled VMAX)
Bare Gelatin: vel=2242 f/s, pen=15.6", RD=.58", RL=.32", RW=99.6 gr
Unable to recover any auto windshield shots, as all projectiles exited at an angle out of the gel block after 12-13'' pen.

However, if a shot misses, will it be more likely to go through more walls and retain enough energy to cause more danger to innocents than an approved JHP pistol round would? What about compared to a Federal 5.56 Trophy Bonded Bear Claw?

I'd love to hear from DocGKR on this, but I know he's a busy man. I'd appreciate anyone's insight. Thanks. I've been a reader of this forum for many years, but finally made an account to post this question.

[BehindBlueI's]

Pistol bullets keep on trucking through drywall or glancing off a stud. Good hits on studs or a header stops them. In a lot of drive-by shootings you'll find it going through the exterior wall then two rooms before failing to penetrate the drywall. We use a JSP 55gr bullet in our patrol rifles. Works great on meat targets, very quickly breaks up and looks more like sandblasting then a bullet strike very quickly after intermediate barriers. No experience with the 7.62 listed.

My general thought on the matter is, pre-plan your firefight in your own home. Remember it's a 3D world and not every bullet you fire has to be parallel to the ground. Strategically loaded bookcases can make backstops. Know the safe angles to fire along. Some residences are easy. Some, like a middle floor apartment in a large complex, may be significantly more challenging. Remember the absolute best answer is to not miss and to end the bad guy's ability to fire very quickly, as he's unlikely to be concerned with a backstop. What you shoot best first, then what's where on the wall penetration scale second.

[GlorifiedMailman]

Remember the absolute best answer is to not miss and to end the bad guy's ability to fire very quickly, as he's unlikely to be concerned with a backstop. What you shoot best first, then what's where on the wall penetration scale second.

Good mindset to have. Part of what's making me consider switching to my SAM7 carbine for home defense from my G19 is the fact that I have many thousands of more rounds through it than any other long gun, even my AR.

[Chuck Whitlock]

Why does it have to be either/or?

Mas Ayoob has long maintained that the long gun (rifle/shotgun) is best from a fixed position, like the master bedroom toward the point of entry, where the pistol can be on your person at all times, can be at the ready when answering a strange knock at the door. and is more maneuverable when checking out the "bump in the night". Try to think of a layered approach.

[DocGKR]

There are few things better than a 5.56 mm AR15 for home defense use--accurate, ergonomic, reliable, highly "shootable", with limited down range penetration hazard.

7.62x39 mm (and similar .300 BLK or lightweight .30-30) with an expanding projectile is certainly better than most handguns, but likely not as ideal as the 5.56 mm AR15.

[GlorifiedMailman]

There are few things better than a 5.56 mm AR15 for home defense use--accurate, ergonomic, reliable, highly "shootable", with limited down range penetration hazard.

7.62x39 mm (and similar .300 BLK or lightweight .30-30) with an expanding projectile is certainly better than most handguns, but likely not as ideal as the 5.56 mm AR15.

DocGKR, I greatly appreciate your response.

Is the 5.56mm more ideal because of less chance of overpenetration compared to the best-performing 7.62x39mm? Or are there other factors, such as the 5.56mm AR15's endless market support?

[DocGKR]

"Is the 5.56mm more ideal because of less chance of overpenetration compared to the best-performing 7.62x39mm?"

Yes, for non-permissive indoor use (ex. CQB, HR, home defense, etc...).

For outdoor/wilderness defense, vehicle, hunting up to med game, I'd go reverse and prefer well engineered expanding 7.62x39mm, .300 BLK, .30-30.


"Or are there other factors..."

Primarily ergonomic (few long guns are as easy to use as an AR15, as most Nations SOF have demonstrated in countless conflicts) and education, since more Americans have been trained to safely and effectively use the AR15 than any other firearm currently available.

[GlorifiedMailman]

Yes, for non-permissive indoor use (ex. CQB, HR, home defense, etc...).


Primarily ergonomic (few long guns are as easy to use as an AR15, as most Nations SOF have demonstrated in countless conflicts) and education, since more Americans have been trained to safely and effectively use the AR15 than any other firearm currently available.

Got it. I'll start practicing more with my LE6920 for the home defense role. I'd also been considering a 6.8mm upper, but it sounds like the 5.56mm is the way to go for home defense.

Thanks again, Doc. That helps a lot!

[Duelist]

Got it. I'll start practicing more with my LE6920 for the home defense role. I'd also been considering a 6.8mm upper, but it sounds like the 5.56mm is the way to go for home defense.

Thanks again, Doc. That helps a lot!

Use the 6.8 for outdoors. They've been used for animals up to elk size.

[DocGKR]

6.8 mm SPC is my favorite AR15 hunting caliber for lower 48 game out to around 300 yds....

[Unobtanium]

Ive had very good results hunting with 5.56 using 70gr gmx, 75gr gold dot, 70gr tsx, and 64gr ra556b. No bullets ever recovered on any deer, all died within 0-75 yards. Shoot, run, dead. 30 seconds maybe until dead.

[DocGKR]

Yup, barrier blind 5.56 mm can kill a deer; 6.8 mm does as well, but will work better on larger critters...

[ssb]

Yes, for non-permissive indoor use (ex. CQB, HR, home defense, etc...).

For outdoor/wilderness defense, vehicle, hunting up to med game, I'd go reverse and prefer well engineered expanding 7.62x39mm, .300 BLK, .30-30.

Is the Barnes 110gr TAC-TX load still your only recommended .300BLK supersonic load, or have other loads -- such as the Hornady 110gr GMX -- come along?

[GlorifiedMailman]

The reason I was considering using something larger than 5.56mm (like 6.8mm or 7.62x39mm SST) was because of some doubts about the 5.56mm's ability to rapidly incapacitate a determined attacker. However, with loads recommended by DocGKR such as the XM556FBIT3, I gather that the concerns raised about the 5.56mm's abilities (that led to the 6.8mm's creation) are a non-issue, especially at home defense distances.

Either way, it seems that the 5.56mm with quality ammunition is leagues better for the intended HD role than the 9x19mm loaded with Critical Duty 135gr +P I keep by my bedside (if I have the opportunity to get to the long gun) and carry for work.

[BehindBlueI's]

The reason I was considering using something larger than 5.56mm (like 6.8mm or 7.62x39mm SST) was because of some doubts about the 5.56mm's ability to rapidly incapacitate a determined attacker.

It's worked well for us over a lot of shootings. I used 55gr JSP in my police action and had zero complaints.

[DocGKR]

Whoa there....6.8 mm SPC development had nothing to do with 5.56 mm barrier blind LE loads, as these work very well for their intended purpose.

Based on 5th SFG(A)'s limited re-supply capabilities in 2001-2002, their CO, then COL Mulholland, signed a CMNS for a weapon system that would offer interchangeable calibers, to allow use of host nation 7.62x39mm ammunition when 5.56 mm ran low—this resulted in the Army SF specific SPR-V Program. COL Mulholland also requested an improved interchangeable caliber to quickly upgrade existing M4 weapons, due to incapacitation deficiencies discovered in combat by ODA's using 5.56 mm M4's firing M855 "green-tip"; this became the SPC effort as developed in early 2002 by the 5th Grp’s Force Mod folks with input from AMU. SPC looked at multiple different calibers before settling on 6.8 mm in the summer of 2002. This was all discussed at the M4 OCONUS SOPMOD Review Conference at Ft. Campbell in late summer 2002.

Note that this issue was addressed by a well known, combat veteran SF warrant officer in statements made in early 2003:

As for those of you who think by saying that green tip is fine, learn to shoot, it's all about marksmanship. You obviously have not done it, or are not privy to the AARs and debriefs on the the failure of green tip in combat. I and those I work with shoot 3-4 days a week, unlimited ammo, our marksmanship is good to say the least. When you shoot a man at 3-10 feet, multiple shots (not just a double tap, you shoot until the job is done) to the chest and the target does not slow down until you put two in the pumpkin, there is a problem. This is not one instance, in one room, on one target, this is a recurring theme. That is the blood splatering truth.

All of this controversy lead to several things, including JSWB-IPT and SCAR, as USSOCOM decided that an entirely new SOF specific rifle was warranted, so the USASOC specific abortive SPR-V stood down and the bloated USSOCOM SCAR began. At the 3 day SOCOM meeting in Coronado in the spring of 2003, the draft JORD for SCAR was reviewed and representatives from the various Commands attending had an opportunity to edit/delete/insert changes as they saw fit. I am sitting here with the draft JORD in hand, along with the minutes of the meeting. One of the biggest supporters for an improved carbine was the Rgr Rgt reps, as they did an entire presentation on the excessive number of M4A1 bolts they were breaking and the difficulties they were having in trying to get adequate maintenance and repair for their weapons. So the Rangers wanted a more reliable/durable rifle system, the NSW and 5th SFG folks were in favor of a system with better incapacitation potential than the current 5.56 mm M4A1 with M855, while other SF units in attendance discussed the desirability for caliber interchangeability, as offered by SPR-V. That’s how I remember it and how the available documents from 2001-2003 read…

[GlorifiedMailman]

Whoa there....6.8 mm SPC development had nothing to do with 5.56 mm barrier blind LE loads, as these work very well for their intended purpose.

Based on 5th SFG(A)'s limited re-supply capabilities in 2001-2002, their CO, then COL Mulholland, signed a CMNS for a weapon system that would offer interchangeable calibers, to allow use of host nation 7.62x39mm ammunition when 5.56 mm ran low—this resulted in the Army SF specific SPR-V Program. COL Mulholland also requested an improved interchangeable caliber to quickly upgrade existing M4 weapons, due to incapacitation deficiencies discovered in combat by ODA's using 5.56 mm M4's firing M855 "green-tip"; this became the SPC effort as developed in early 2002 by the 5th Grp’s Force Mod folks with input from AMU. SPC looked at multiple different calibers before settling on 6.8 mm in the summer of 2002. This was all discussed at the M4 OCONUS SOPMOD Review Conference at Ft. Campbell in late summer 2002.

Note that this issue was addressed by a well known, combat veteran SF warrant officer in statements made in early 2003:
As for those of you who think by saying that green tip is fine, learn to shoot, it's all about marksmanship. You obviously have not done it, or are not privy to the AARs and debriefs on the the failure of green tip in combat. I and those I work with shoot 3-4 days a week, unlimited ammo, our marksmanship is good to say the least. When you shoot a man at 3-10 feet, multiple shots (not just a double tap, you shoot until the job is done) to the chest and the target does not slow down until you put two in the pumpkin, there is a problem. This is not one instance, in one room, on one target, this is a recurring theme. That is the blood splatering truth.

All of this controversy lead to several things, including JSWB-IPT and SCAR, as USSOCOM decided that an entirely new SOF specific rifle was warranted, so the USASOC specific abortive SPR-V stood down and the bloated USSOCOM SCAR began. At the 3 day SOCOM meeting in Coronado in the spring of 2003, the draft JORD for SCAR was reviewed and representatives from the various Commands attending had an opportunity to edit/delete/insert changes as they saw fit. I am sitting here with the draft JORD in hand, along with the minutes of the meeting. One of the biggest supporters for an improved carbine was the Rgr Rgt reps, as they did an entire presentation on the excessive number of M4A1 bolts they were breaking and the difficulties they were having in trying to get adequate maintenance and repair for their weapons. So the Rangers wanted a more reliable/durable rifle system, the NSW and 5th SFG folks were in favor of a system with better incapacitation potential than the current 5.56 mm M4A1 with M855, while other SF units in attendance discussed the desirability for caliber interchangeability, as offered by SPR-V. That’s how I remember it and how the available documents from 2001-2003 read…

So it was never the caliber itself that had performance issues, it was the M855 green tip load, if I'm understanding this correctly.

Has the M855A1 successfully remedied the performance issues with M855 Green Tip for the military?

[Galbraith]

It is good that you are considering liability mitigation when it comes to civilian self defense. In law enforcement and military, we often make the mistake of bringing LE/MIL rules of engagement to the civilian self defense world in terms of training and equipment which might not be the most legally safe course of action as a civilian. 7.62x39 has excellent battle field capabilities for ranges under 300yrds, but in your typical American home it is not the best choice for civilian home defense. The gunfight is the first battle, followed by criminal court, followed by civil court. Loose any of these battles, and your life, along with your families' can be ruined. "Better to be tried by 12, rather than carried by 6." is not the safest attitude these days.

Lighter, low sectional density projectiles like that of 5.56 55gr expanding projectiles, or #1-#4 buckshot would likely be the best blend of reduced penetration and ideal terminal effects. Other legal considerations are your state, county, and city laws and ordinances. Your potential jury pool is also a consideration. For instance, a retired officer that I used to work with lives in Connecticut now after moving from Texas. His home defense weapon of choice is a stock Remington 870 with sidesaddle and camo hunter's pattern. Public perception goes a long way in the civilian defense world. He still shoots 3-gun competitions, and can do wonders with that 870. Regardless of what platform you choose, practice with it, and practice often.

[HCM]

The reason I was considering using something larger than 5.56mm (like 6.8mm or 7.62x39mm SST) was because of some doubts about the 5.56mm's ability to rapidly incapacitate a determined attacker. However, with loads recommended by DocGKR such as the XM556FBIT3, I gather that the concerns raised about the 5.56mm's abilities (that led to the 6.8mm's creation) are a non-issue, especially at home defense distances.

Either way, it seems that the 5.56mm with quality ammunition is leagues better for the intended HD role than the 9x19mm loaded with Critical Duty 135gr +P I keep by my bedside (if I have the opportunity to get to the long gun) and carry for work.

Like BBI I've seen the real workd results of 5.56 on people and have found it plenty effective even with less than optimal ammo.

DocGKR can speak to the terminal balistics but in practice, I've seen nothing to in gun fight results to contradict former professional hunter Finn Aagard's statement that "shot placement is 90% of killing power." Given adequete penetration, shot placement is THE number one facor in incapaciating a determined attacker.

[Unobtanium]

Whoa there....6.8 mm SPC development had nothing to do with 5.56 mm barrier blind LE loads, as these work very well for their intended purpose.

Based on 5th SFG(A)'s limited re-supply capabilities in 2001-2002, their CO, then COL Mulholland, signed a CMNS for a weapon system that would offer interchangeable calibers, to allow use of host nation 7.62x39mm ammunition when 5.56 mm ran low—this resulted in the Army SF specific SPR-V Program. COL Mulholland also requested an improved interchangeable caliber to quickly upgrade existing M4 weapons, due to incapacitation deficiencies discovered in combat by ODA's using 5.56 mm M4's firing M855 "green-tip"; this became the SPC effort as developed in early 2002 by the 5th Grp’s Force Mod folks with input from AMU. SPC looked at multiple different calibers before settling on 6.8 mm in the summer of 2002. This was all discussed at the M4 OCONUS SOPMOD Review Conference at Ft. Campbell in late summer 2002.

Note that this issue was addressed by a well known, combat veteran SF warrant officer in statements made in early 2003:


All of this controversy lead to several things, including JSWB-IPT and SCAR, as USSOCOM decided that an entirely new SOF specific rifle was warranted, so the USASOC specific abortive SPR-V stood down and the bloated USSOCOM SCAR began. At the 3 day SOCOM meeting in Coronado in the spring of 2003, the draft JORD for SCAR was reviewed and representatives from the various Commands attending had an opportunity to edit/delete/insert changes as they saw fit. I am sitting here with the draft JORD in hand, along with the minutes of the meeting. One of the biggest supporters for an improved carbine was the Rgr Rgt reps, as they did an entire presentation on the excessive number of M4A1 bolts they were breaking and the difficulties they were having in trying to get adequate maintenance and repair for their weapons. So the Rangers wanted a more reliable/durable rifle system, the NSW and 5th SFG folks were in favor of a system with better incapacitation potential than the current 5.56 mm M4A1 with M855, while other SF units in attendance discussed the desirability for caliber interchangeability, as offered by SPR-V. That’s how I remember it and how the available documents from 2001-2003 read…

What bothers me about this are all the deer people end up having to track that weigh <180# and were double-lunged and heart shot with a .30 cal ballistic tip.

Some animals just know what they are about and they aren't going to react or stop until physics dictates via CNS disruption or blood volume/pressure elimination and exhaust of oxygenated blood in tissues.


_______________

Better bullets that do more damage, do better. I am not arguing. I am simply saying that if shooting a man 10 feet away who is charging you and having him not stop in his tracks is your criteria, you need to just not. Because the blast-radius of something that will stop him will end you, too.

[Unobtanium]

This deer, I shot with a 70gr 5.56 round at 23m from a 14.5" rifle. He ran 68 yards before being dead. Pictured are him, the entrance, and the exit, and then an external image of the exit.

https://68forums.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=50261&d=1542863820
https://68forums.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=50253&d=1542863643
https://68forums.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=50255&d=1542863680
https://68forums.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=50257&d=1542863717

Personally, I don't have any issues with this performance. I was quite pleased. Using the same round, here is a doe I also shot. Bullet entered top of the frame, tracking diagonally destroying the integrity of the spinal column completely, and exiting the ribs, bottom frame. This was at 78m. The doe simply dropped.

https://68forums.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=50169&d=1542431989