For over a half century, these two rifle cartridges have been used in multiple wars and by police, civilians, hunters etc. all over the world, generating an enormous wealth of data and some very strong opinions on which is the better cartridge.
Table of contents
Introduction:
Among the greatest rifle cartridges ever made, the .308 Winchester and the .223 Remington are each legends in their own right. They each have distinguished histories and have been used to great effect for decades. But, for all their excellence, they are very different cartridges- they have different origins, as well as differing strengths, weaknesses and uses. In this article, we will be discussing this in-depth in a way anyone just beginning to get into the debate can understand, as well as making numerous comparisons between the two, and hopefully help you make the choice between the two for your needs.
History of the two cartridges
Let us begin with a brief explanation of the historical origins of these two fine inventions.
.308 Winchester
Like it's nearly identical brother, the 7.62x51 NATO, the .308 Winchester has its origins in the late 1940's, where the U.S military was testing numerous experimental rounds derived from the .300 Savage.
The round was designed to provide similar performance to the then-standard 30-06 Springfield cartridge, and eventually also provided the then newly formed NATO alliance with a standard round that could be readily used by all participants in the event of a future war involving the alliance against another foe (such as the Soviet Union or another rival Warsaw pact state).
It is here that their history diverges, and as the 7.62x51 NATO round went on to become the one of the most popular full-power (or "battle rifle") rounds on earth, the .308 Winchester also enjoyed massive success commercially, after the Winchester firm realized the rich civilian market for the cartridge in 1952- two years before the 7.62x51 NATO was even adopted.
Today, both rounds are still very relevant and effective and offer similar performance against any target, and their great power combined with their widespread availability has ensured that they remain as popular as ever both domestically and abroad.
.223 Remington
The .223 Remington, like the .308 Winchester, was the result of military experimentation being successful and thus subsequently finding success in the civilian market, as well.
While most of its history is complicated enough to warrant its own article (which we'll write sometime), for the sake of simplicity, we'll keep it relatively brief for the sake of time.
In 1957, the U.S Continental Army Command (also called CONARC) initiated a quest to develop a lightweight, high-velocity round for use in a new lightweight service rifle. While initially being an experiment only, the reason for the eventual adoption of the round was due to the U.S military facing enemy combatants armed with the then revolutionary AK-47 (and its newer variant, the AKM) during the Vietnam era, which allowed soldiers to carry far more ammo on them than U.S troops could.
This meant that not only could they easily dump more rounds on anyone in their way and had much higher magazine capacities, but they also had the distinct advantage of having a rifle that was reasonably accurate when firing rapidly and demonstrated controllable automatic fire- something the standard issue M14 at that time could not do, holding 20 rounds and being almost impossible to control in automatic fire vs the AK-47 boasting a magazine capacity of 30 rounds and having only moderate recoil.
By the early 1960's, the prototype cartridge that would become the .223 Remington had gone through enough testing and won over enough military officials that they decided to adopt the cartridge for military service in 1963, although it would not be the mainstay of American forces until years later. The nearly identical and now standard-issue 5.56x45 NATO round would eventually be developed as a result.
Meanwhile, at the same time, Remington submitted the design to SAAMI (Sporting Arms and Manufacturers' Insitute) before beginning to sell it on the civilian market, where it was initially somewhat slow to become financial success, but eventually become extremely popular in the United States along with the rifle chambered for it- the now legendary Armalite AR-15- and, by the 21st century, it was considered one of the best rifle chamberings in history.
Like the .308 Winchester and the 7.62x51 NATO, the .223 Remington and its sister cartridge, the 5.56x45 NATO, are used extensively by the armed forced of all major members of NATO and its allies, as well as civilians, police officers, criminals, terrorists, rebels and freedom fighters alike to this day all over the world, just as they have for decades prior. In the United States, too, its popularity is unmatched by any other rifle chambering, and it probably will remain a national and global favorite for so many for at least the next few decades.
Pros and cons of each
.308 Winchester pros
Undoubtably more powerful than .223 or 5.56- In most cases, it's over twice as physically energetic.
Better for long range shooting- I mean, come on. The much heavier bullets (usually a little under 3 times the weight of your average .223/5.56 round) are much better at resisting the wind and have much more energy downrange, and while it's certainly eclipsed in this regard by numerous other, more modern rounds such as the 6.5 Creedmoor, it still does a very good job.
Better for hunting medium and large game- Due to its much greater energy, this will undoubtably be the better choice if you're hunting deer, elk etc. It probably won't take down a bear with one shot, but it'll definitely be better at this than 5.56.
.308 Winchester cons
Much more energetic recoil than .223/5.56- For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction, and with more stopping power comes greater recoil. It isn't unbearable, but might be a bit rough for first-time shooters (especially if they're firing a light weapon like an AR-10).
Decreased magazine capacity and increased weight- This is another big one. Due to the larger size and weight of the round, you won't be fitting more than 20 rounds into most commercially available .308 magazines (although magazines holding 25 rounds or more exist, they aren't as common). This also means you will be able to carry less ammo on you, so regardless of what you're doing, make your shots count.
More expensive- Most cheap ball ammo you'll find at just about any gun store is not going to drain your wallet, but it's notably more costly than generic .223 and 5.56 ammo. I've seen rounds go for as low as 75 cents a round, but most are probably in the 0.90-1.50 USD range, with premium options usually costing about 2.50 USD a round and often more (I've even seen rounds selling for nearly 5.00 USD per round, and even more expensive options might exist).
.223 Remington pros
Smaller and lighter- You can fit more of them into a magazine and carry more of them on you. This is probably the main benefit.
Lower recoil- The recoil from .223/5.56 rifles is extremely mild and easily manageable even for novice shooters. This is due to the lighter bullet and decreased power volume, but it still propels the projectile extremely fast and this adds another benefit- it's a very flat shooting cartridge.
Cheaper- There's some seriously cheap .223 (and 5.56) ammo out there, and while most rounds sell for 0.60-1.00 USD, even cheaper options costing less than half a dollar exist. On the other end of the scale, even the really pricey ammo isn't going to break the bank. The most expensive .223/5.56 ammo I've encountered is about 2.75 USD, but I'm sure there's more expensive stuff out there.
.223 Remington cons
Less energetic- But make no mistake, it's still easily powerful enough to quickly kill someone, and while hunting with it pushes the limits of what's ethical, it'll put down a deer easily enough as well. However, there are certainly better options for this, and it might not be legal to hunt certain animals with .223/5.56 where you live. However, for smaller animals like wolves, coyote and foxes, it's more than good enough.
Probably not the best choice for long-range target shooting- While it performs great at less than 300-400 yards or so, the .223 looses energy rapidly even with low-drag match ammo, and indeed, reports from troops in places like Afghanistan have reported that the 5.56 ammo they shoot (basically just higher pressure .223 ammo, and more on that later) lacks lethality at the ranges they typically fought at, which often required infantry to shoot at distances of 600 yards or more.
Further thoughts and conclusion
It appears that it will depend more on the specific user's needs in order to determine which round is better. In other words, the question isn't "which round is better?", the question is "which round is better for YOU?".
For example, if you want a rifle that doesn't really need to shoot far and can quickly and accurate dump rounds on target at short range (say, in a home defense situation), you should probably pick .223, because it's more than strong enough to put down a threat while also not being uncontrollable. If you want a weapon that can reach out and pummel most living things at long range (if you're a hunter, or, perhaps, even a trained sniper) .308 will undoubtably be the better choice, given that .223 projectiles quickly lose energy and are much more susceptible to drifting off target in the wind due to their light weight.
Other areas of comparison are more straightforward. If you need to carry as much ammo as possible, .223 is the clear choice. If you need something with raw power alone, .308 is the way to go.
There are other benefits one or the other has that may not be readily apparent. For example, while 5.56 NATO rounds cannot be safely fired in commercial rifles chambered in .223 Remington due to differences in chamber pressure, the reverse is not true- .223 Remington will fire from rifles chambered in 5.56 NATO readily and may even provide reduced wear on critical parts.
On the other hand, while they could be fired interchangeably in a pinch, SAMMI does not recommend .308 Winchester be fired in weapons chambered in 7.62 NATO due to the higher pressure (even though it is technically "safe"), and there is some controversy whether or not the reverse it true. Basically, while you could do it, it seems like it's playing with fire, although I've never tried it personally so I cannot attest to anything other than what I've read on the subject.
While it's one of those debates that probably won't ever end, it's still worth discussing. Each of these rounds are excellent in their own right, and what one does, the other does better. At the end of the day, it's an apples-to-oranges comparison, but we can still draw one conclusion regardless- whichever one suits your needs is- for you- the better choice.
Comments