.223 62gr Fusion MSR vs 5.56mm 77gr Black Hills TMK

[MegademiC]

One is "barrier blind" but at a .223 velocity. The other is not and runs at 5.56mm NATO pressures.

I know the usual choice is "get both" but if you had to pick one for slightly-more-than-home-defense purposes, which would it be?

62gr fusion is my first line serious ammo.

Its accurate and terminal performance in tests is great... also has a good rep with hunters.

First round :
- headshots @ 300yds
- czone @ 500yds
- with 11.5"

[MegademiC]

These bullets are all great performers, but very expensive.

How many rounds are you all keeping on hand of these rounds? And do you practice with them at the range?

I might be guessing wrong, but I think many have a couple hundred of these grest rounds but don’t practice with them because they are expensive. And if you’re not practicing with them, how well do you know how they shoot in your rifle?

And if you do stack em deep, I don’t have the pockets to keep up with that


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Can you hit a head on demand at 500yds with your setup?
How often do you practice that or a more demanding scenario?
How often do you practice to less demanding standards?

[1168]

The fly in the ointment of these type of questions: where does the Barnes 70gr 5.56 TSX ("brown tip" clone) fall into the pecking order? It is also expensive but slightly less so than the TMK. It too is barrier blind and *should* do well at longer distances.....maybe the best of both worlds?

It is not quite as barrier blind as Fusion. Its high quality ammo, though. I wouldn’t hesitate to load some up. It kills the shit out of mammals, and flies straight. It does go through barriers intact, which I feel is more important than terminal expansion if I have to choose.

Re Fusion vs TMK, Vicious CB said what I was going to.

Fusion MSR is in my rifle right now.

[HCrum87hc]

As others have said, I also prefer the Fusion as my preferred defense/hunting round. I live in the foothills of Appalachia, so most shots are going to be limited to 300 yards or less due to trees and hills. I do have some 77 gr Razorcore, but haven't zeroed anything for them. The fusions are also usually cheaper, which does play a role in the decision, albeit a small one.

[markm]

I’m completely over chasing velocity and NATO pressure ammo. Running with less safety margin, really needing crimped primers, and “fragmentation range” are not as important when we have lower velocity opening bonded options. My opinion.

Unless you need the precision of heavy OTM, barrier blind is recommended for it’s more consistent terminal performance.

I've trending towards everything you posted. I'm moving from 11.5 to a 14.5 Home D gun and would like to enjoy the reliability of .223 pressure ammo again. (the longer barrel will make up velocity)

My only concern is POI shift. I just have to test/confirm, then dedicate a carbine to a 62gr zero if needed.

[sinister]

Pardon my perspective, but what's the fascination and hard-on for barrier-blind bullets?

How often do you practice shooting through walls, glass, large kitchen appliances, furniture, landscaping, and cars? A lot of folks will never practice shooting past 200 yards, ever -- so why match bullets?

If you think it's a big enough / likely / dangerous threat, why not go with a 6.5 or 308?

Seriously -- not meaning to rustle jimmies, but -- why?

[markm]

Pardon my perspective, but what's the fascination and hard-on for barrier-blind bullets?

How often do you practice shooting through walls, glass, large kitchen appliances, furniture, landscaping, and cars?

For me, just once. That was enough to see how poorly non-bonded bullets do through glass. Shooting through home or auto glass is enough of a possibility for a city dweller to have the better bullet.

A lot of folks will never practice shooting past 200 yards, ever -- so why match bullets?

If you mean the TMK referred to in the title, it fragments gloriously. It's a long range bullet, but happens to be a good CQB projectile in my opinion.

If you think it's a big enough / likely / dangerous threat, why not go with a 6.5 or 308?

Some crazies just might to that. But to me, the AR-10 family in both calibers is too heavy and too unreliable for defensive stuff. You want a few hundred yards of distance between yourself and the enemy to allow for malf clearing.

[ABNAK]

Pardon my perspective, but what's the fascination and hard-on for barrier-blind bullets?

How often do you practice shooting through walls, glass, large kitchen appliances, furniture, landscaping, and cars? A lot of folks will never practice shooting past 200 yards, ever -- so why match bullets?

If you think it's a big enough / likely / dangerous threat, why not go with a 6.5 or 308?

Seriously -- not meaning to rustle jimmies, but -- why?

Because I am heavily invested in 5.56/.223, both weapon-wise as well as ammo. I like to think of things in a "worse case scenario". If it's gonna likely be 5.56/.223 that I'm shooting, what gives the best combination of terminal performance AND barrier penetration. It's not always gonna be home defense; maybe if we have a repeat of the "Summer of Love" I may need to rely on more than a Glock in my vehicle should miscreants block roads (I work in a city, live in the sticks) and I have to hoof it. Again, worse case type of thinking. I'd rather not need that performance but still have it, as opposed to needing it and not having it.


As far as .308 goes, I only have two, both M-14 clones, so I'm not seeing myself packing those long-azz biotches in a vehicle. Maybe a nice addition for a bug-out SHTF scenario, but not really a "throw it in the truck" weapon.


Like some of our other esteemed BTDT members, what's your opinion?

[MegademiC]

Pardon my perspective, but what's the fascination and hard-on for barrier-blind bullets?

How often do you practice shooting through walls, glass, large kitchen appliances, furniture, landscaping, and cars? A lot of folks will never practice shooting past 200 yards, ever -- so why match bullets?

If you think it's a big enough / likely / dangerous threat, why not go with a 6.5 or 308?

Seriously -- not meaning to rustle jimmies, but -- why?

For me, it covers all the bases well, jack of all trades. The fusion specifically is accurate enough for any realistic scenario, performs well through anything 556 can defeat and offers good terminal performance. It covers more bases than anything else in a lightweight gun.

Upping the cartrige requires tradeoffs I dont want, fusions tradeoff is money, which isnt an issue for me.

Backup is match grade handloads, I practice to 700 regularly.

[1168]

Upping the cartrige requires tradeoffs I dont want, fusions tradeoff is money, which isnt an issue for me.

Its really not that expensive, relatively. Fusion might be the least expensive not-ball ammo available commercially from a credible and reputable manufacturer.

Of course, ball is cheaper, should one choose that route.