5.56x45 vs. 9mm: Carbine Caliber Conundrum

The 5.56 vs. 9mm debate is a tough one. In most respects, the 5.56 cartridge should outperform the 9mm. It’s a rifle cartridge compared to a pistol cartridge, after all.

But when they’re chambered in carbines, could these cartridges be more similar than they are different?

Let’s find out!

5.56 Compared to 9mm

The 5.56 NATO is a rifle cartridge beloved by many firearm enthusiasts and utilized by militaries worldwide. It is accurate, low recoiling, and chambered in many firearms. It can be used for hunting, home defense, target shooting, and competitive shooting alike.

The 9mm Luger is a pistol cartridge that is similarly widely favored. It is accurate, has low recoil, and is chambered in semi-auto pistols and carbines alike. Its primary uses are home and self-defense, target shooting, and competitive shooting.

So which one should you own?

I own firearms (pistols, carbines, and rifles) chambered in both, and enjoy firing them all. Some of my 9mm and 5.56 firearms would make for a better home defense or hunting gun, while others are ideal for concealed carry. But that’s not what this article is about. It’s about reaching a reasoned conclusion by comparing various aspects of these rounds’ performance, including their recoil energy, trajectory, accuracy, ballistic coefficient, and suitability for self-defense.

At the end of this article, we will tally the results and announce a winner.

Specs Comparison

These two cartridges have some drastic differences, making them easy to distinguish at a glance.

5.56x45 9mm Luger
Parent Case 223 Rem 7.62x21
Bullet Diameter 0.224" 0.355"
Neck Diameter 0.253" 0.380"
Base Diameter 0.377" 0.391"
Case Length 1.760" 0.754"
Overall Length 2.260" 1.169"
Case Capacity 28.5 gr H2O 13.3 gr H2O
Max Pressure 55,114 psi (SCATP 5.56) 35,000 psi (SAAMI)

Now that we know just how different these cartridges appear, let’s see how those differences translate into real-world performance.

What Are the Differences in Recoil Between 5.56 and 9mm Firearms?

Recoil is an important consideration when purchasing a new cartridge. A round with heavy recoil will be more challenging to control and slow the rate of your follow-up shots. Increased recoil also raises the potential for flinching.

Felt recoil varies from shooter to shooter and depends on firearm choice, stance, and ammo. Free recoil, on the other hand, is an objective measure of how hard a cartridge kicks. It is determined by four factors: firearm weight, muzzle velocity, propellant weight, and bullet weight.

Neither cartridge is known for having shoulder-thumping recoil. In fact, shooters often choose both because of their low recoil.

The 9mm has about 4 ft-lbs of free recoil, while the 5.56 NATO has only half a pound more. Consider this in light of the fact that the 5.56x45 generates significantly more recoil energy, although a 5.56 rifle’s greater mass proportionately absorbs that recoil. Most shooters won’t notice any difference.

While the 9mm technically has less recoil, it’s not enough to make a drastic difference. This category is a draw.

Trajectory

Because the 5.56 NATO is a rifle cartridge, it’s designed to be fired over much farther distances. A 100-yard shot with a 5.56 is relatively simple for most shooters to make consistently. The 9mm can cover that distance in the hands of a skilled marksman, but its poor trajectory compared to the 5.56’s would make that shot much more challenging.

When fired from a firearm with a sight height of 1.5", a 55 grain 5.56 NATO bullet can easily be zeroed in at 100 yards and exhibit -2.9" drop at 200 yards.

In contrast, a 124 grain 9mm bullet fired from a handgun with a sight height of 0.5" and zeroed at 25 yards will have a bullet drop of -12.0" at 100 yards.

To be fair, this isn’t an apples-to-apples comparison. The 9mm has two disadvantages. The first is the nature of the handgun’s shorter barrel; the second is its slower and heavier bullet.

Even when we try to make everything as even as possible, such as firing a lighter 9mm projectile and using a carbine for both cartridges, the 5.56 NATO will still have a flatter trajectory.

The 5.56 easily wins this section.

Continue reading 5.56 vs. 9mm: Carbine Caliber Conundrum on Ammo.com!

https://ammo.com/comparison/556-vs-9mm

2 Likes

I was recently reflecting on similar comparisons for compact defensive carry in a more dramatic way than a simple pistol and believe given over penetration and noise a 9mm is likely preferred caliber, but the 5.56 preferred in actual SBR seems to offer control advantages vs large auto pistol or carbine of some sort, seems somehow just better.

Ergonomics maybe?

Maybe I’ve just not found the right carbine :thinking:

2 Likes

in an SBR my personal sense is that one should be shooting a .300 BlK with a can if possible. 10” barrel, decent can, maybe the Atrius FRT with a Geissele trigger (you have ot buy one that is specifically made for Geissele triggers, and only some of them work - mostly the combat ones). The 5.56 SBR’s are too flamey. You seem to get a HUGE fireball which would give you temporary night vision blindness, and that’s where this combo shines.

?How about the good old .30-30. Darn effective carbine, decent cartridge, easy to shoot, relatively low recoil - the original cowboy assault rifle. ?Who come no one talks about that. Winchester or Marlin - either one, especially if older. Must be *thousands * of them around.

2 Likes

I have 5.56 shorty at 10.5". My regret is that even with the folding stock, it won’t fit in a backpack unless I go to an 8" barrel, turning it into a fireball boomstick with subpar ballistics. I prefer 300 BLK for shorties too. Fuller powder burn in short barrels vs 5.56, sub capability, while keeping light rifle performance with supers.

I don’t understand why the Sig MCX Rattler was a 5.5" barrel rather than 7". Wouldn’t that give up on the “hydrostatic shock” that comes from standard rifle velocities? With such a ridiculously short barrel, it seems to me you might as well go with a PCC. Without sacrificing subsonics, a PCC lets you use bigger diameter bullets (.357 vs .308) of more mature hollow point design (147gr Speer Gold Dot or Federal HST) in their intended 5.5" barrel length, with lighter mags and a lighter gun, while still giving the benefits of a cheek weld and a modular rail. A 5.5" 300 BLK barrel would seem to have lots of downsides without the core benefit of rifle-like terminal effects.

The latest iteration of the 300 BLK Rattler seems to have fixed this shortcoming by upping the barrel to 6.75 inches, while still fitting comfortably in most standard 18" backpacks at 17.1" total folded length. The muzzle velocity (which I’m interpolating from the 6, 7" inch data to ~1900 +/-50 fps) seems more reasonable, although it’s still marginal (I’d prefer 2100+ fps). Still, it’s the only backpack gun in 300 BLK that can shoot while folded.

I don’t think I need a shoot-while-folded design. If I have time to be fishing in a backpack rather than pulling out my handgun, I probably also have time to unfold the SBR. FoldAR’s barrel-folding 9.0" Shepherd is what I have my eye on right now. It can fit in a backpack even with a can attached.

2 Likes

If more people started shootings .300 BLK, there would be more ammo available, so cheaper. About the only reason to shoot a SBR in 5.56 - at any length - is ammo is cheap. That should not be the controlling consideration when choosing a defensive firearm. You get a full, proper powder burn out of 10” barrels in .300 BLK. I believe you need something like a 14-16” barrel for full burn in 5.56.

2 Likes

To some extent, yeah, don’t cheap out. On the other hand, you’ve got to train with it. The more expensive the round, the less people will train. We saw that during COVID.

I’ve read that you actually need 20" to fully burn a 5.56 charge. 14.5 and 16" barrels are a compromise sacrificing some unburned powder for portability, and there’s an extra 125 fps or so left on the table compared to 20. If you go nuts and milk the expanding gases for all they are worth, the maximum velocity is achieved at 24-26" for an extra 250 fps or so compared to a 16.5" barrel, taking some M193 ammo to over 3400 fps.

5.56 is still a lot more effective than 9mm or 45 because of the velocities achieved and flatness past 200yds. I think if 5.56 is eclipsed soon, it will be by some 6.8 caliber rather than 300 BLK, which lacks range needed for typical military field use.

2 Likes

Well, let’s understand. .300 BLK was designed to give more oomph at close distances, to be useful in clearing urban settings with subsonic ammo and a can, which gives you a rifle that is suppressed, shoots a heavy .308, and still will hold pretty well to 300, maybe 400 yds. Long range shots were never in the wheelhouse, and most importantly to be able to use the current AR-16 lower and mags.

1 Like