View Full Version : Crazy M855 Prices!
A sealed 840 round case of Lake City M855 on Gun Broker reached $840.00 bucks and still didnt meet the reserve price. this is nuts!
http://gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=100727809
No doubt!
It's got to be the new shooters who don't realize that M855 isn't a very good round for anything.
I get those OMB police supply emails on their M855. I click on them to see what the price is up to for a good laugh.
Jay Cunningham
06-05-08, 08:39
That is retarded.
To quote Col. Kilgore:
Someday this war is gonna end.
Until then I'm running my AK-105.
I have a few of the sealed cases, I guess its time for me to open a Gun broker account.;)
wait til you see the prices when we invade iran :(
RogerinTPA
06-05-08, 12:37
Not worth the cost to shoot IMHO. I'd rather shoot PRIVI 62gn, which is much more affordable from herehttp://www.wideners.com/itemview.cfm?dir=18|725
No doubt!
It's got to be the new shooters who don't realize that M855 isn't a very good round for anything.
Well, I'd hate to take a hit from one. Kyle Lamb tells his students not to believe everything you hear about M855. He thinks it's a great round. There are a lot of dead Tangos that would agree.
I know Kyle and respect his position.
As I recently stated in my presentation at the NDIA in Dallas last month, 5.56 mm NATO 62 gr SS-109/M855 FMJ was designed over 30 years ago as linked machine gun ammunition to be fired from the FN Minimi/M249 SAW while engaging enemy troops wearing light body armor during conventional infantry combat at distances of several hundred meters--while not a perfect solution, M855 does perform adequately in this role.
Unfortunately, combat operations since late 2001 have again highlighted terminal performance problems, generally manifested as failures to rapidly incapacitate opponents, during combat engagements when M855 62 gr “Green Tip” FMJ is fired from 5.56 mm rifles and carbines. This is not surprising, since M855 was not originally intended for use in carbines or rifles, especially those with short barrels. In addition, most current issue 5.56 mm bullets are generally less effective when intermediate barriers, such as walls, glass, and vehicles shield opponents--this is a significant consideration in urban combat.
As an interim solution to these problems, deployed SOF units have used 5.56 mm Mk262. The Black Hills produced Mk262 uses the 77 gr Sierra Match King (SMK) OTM and is built as premium quality ammunition intended for precise long-range semi-auto rifle shots from the Mk12 rifle. It is great for its intended purpose. Mk262 has demonstrated improved accuracy, greater effective range, and more consistent performance at all distances compared to M855 when fired from current M16, Mk12, M4, HK416, and Mk18 rifles and carbines. However, despite this substantially improved performance, Mk262 still manifests the problems of poor intermediate barrier penetration and somewhat variable terminal performance inherent with the SMK design.
The disturbing failure of 5.56 mm to consistently offer adequate incapacitation has been known for nearly 15 years. Dr. Fackler’s seminal work at the Letterman Army Institute of Research Wound Ballistic Laboratory during the 1980’s illuminated the yaw and fragmentation mechanism by which 5.56 mm FMJ bullets create wounds in tissue. If 5.56 mm bullets fail to upset (yaw, fragment, or deform) within tissue, the results are relatively insignificant wounds, similar to those produced by .22 LR--this is true for ALL 5.56 mm bullets, including military FMJ , OTM, and AP, as well as JHP and JSP designs used in LE. This failure of 5.56 mm bullets to upset can be caused by reduced impact velocities when hitting targets at longer ranges, as well as by the decreased muzzle velocity when using short barrel carbines. Failure to upset can also occur when bullets pass through minimal tissue, such as a limb or the torso of a thin, small statured individual, as the bullet may exit the body before it has a chance to upset. Finally, bullet design and construction plays a major role in reliable bullet upset. Without consistent bullet upset, wounding effects are decreased, rapid incapacitation is unlikely, and enemy combatants may continue to pose a threat to friendly forces and innocent civilians.
Angle-of-Attack (AOA) variations between different projectiles, even within the same lot of ammo, as well as Fleet Yaw variations between different rifles, were recently elucidated by the JSWB-IPT. These yaw issues were most noticeable at close ranges and were more prevalent with certain calibers and bullet styles—the most susceptible being 5.56 mm FMJ ammunition like M855 and M193. What this means is that two shooters firing the same lot of M855 from their M4’s with identical shot placement can have dramatically different terminal performance results: one shooter states that his M855 is working great and is effective at dropping bad guys, while the other complains his opponents are not being incapacitated because M855 is zipping right through the targets without upsetting. Both shooters are telling the truth…
Restricting M855 for what is was designed for--use in the SAW and simply adopting new 5.56 mm barrier blind combat loads that are optimized for carbines with shorter barrels, offer consistent early upset, along with adequate penetration, and minimal AOA/Fleet yaw issues may be the critical answer to many deficiencies noted with currently issued U.S. military 5.56 mm ammunition.
Reply With Quote
I see people are also paying big money for IMI M855. $900/1200. I have about 1000 rds I need to put up on gunbroker. I wonder what that would go for.:cool:
KintlaLake
06-05-08, 19:04
I'm not in the market, but the Win M855 (http://ammunitiontogo.com/catalog1/product_info.php?cPath=24_83_105&products_id=179) is going for $630/1000rd and the LC M855 (http://ammunitiontogo.com/catalog1/product_info.php?cPath=24_83_105&products_id=2210) (strippers, bandoleers) for $80/120rd (equiv $667/1000rd) at ATG.
Not me, regardless. :rolleyes:
My dealer does packs of 200 for $99.99. That's half price compared to what these bozo's are charging, and it's still too much. :D
Oh, and it's $449.99 for 1000 rds. in a can.
Well, I'd hate to take a hit from one. Kyle Lamb tells his students not to believe everything you hear about M855. He thinks it's a great round. There are a lot of dead Tangos that would agree.
Don't get me wrong. If I were issued the round, I'd be fine with it. My point is that these Apes that are paying a hefty premium for it are fools.
I'm not in the market, but the Win M855 (http://ammunitiontogo.com/catalog1/product_info.php?cPath=24_83_105&products_id=179) is going for $630/1000rd and the LC M855 (http://ammunitiontogo.com/catalog1/product_info.php?cPath=24_83_105&products_id=2210) (strippers, bandoleers) for $80/120rd (equiv $667/1000rd) at ATG.
Not me, regardless. :rolleyes:
I'm sure I'll keep it but if I had any sense I'd offload it and build a dedicated .22 upper.
My dealer does packs of 200 for $99.99. That's half price compared to what these bozo's are charging, and it's still too much. :D
Oh, and it's $449.99 for 1000 rds. in a can.
The LC stuff on the bandos is 1st quality and the stuff in the 1000rnd can are pull downs. I think the crazy pricing has to do with the seal being intact on the good stuff.
It's got to be the new shooters who don't realize that M855 isn't a very good round for anything.
What!? It is great for shooting at Russians out to 800m. However, that war never happened. Maybe next war?...
Restricting M855 for what is was designed for--use in the SAW and simply adopting new 5.56 mm barrier blind combat loads that are optimized for carbines with shorter barrels, offer consistent early upset, along with adequate penetration, and minimal AOA/Fleet yaw issues may be the critical answer to many deficiencies noted with currently issued U.S. military 5.56 mm ammunition.
Reply With Quote
Thats good info - that said what is the ideal recipe for the carbine? Seems forgoing the distance, the unstable combo of 1/12 twist barrel with 55gr ammo had its benefits?
.... simply adopting new 5.56 mm barrier blind combat loads that are optimized for carbines with shorter barrels, offer consistent early upset, along with adequate penetration, and minimal AOA/Fleet yaw issues may be the critical answer to many deficiencies noted with currently issued U.S. military 5.56 mm ammunition.
Reply With Quote
Are their any current COTs solutions that might fit the bill?
the unstable combo of 1/12 twist barrel with 55gr ammo had its benefits?
This combo was not unstable. 1/12 twist offers the optimal accuracy for M193. That's why the military 16's were 1/12. Someone posted the actual military graph of this on TOS years back. I wish I'd have saved it.
What!? It is great for shooting at Russians out to 800m. However, that war never happened. Maybe next war?...
kinda strange considering the whole "assault rifle" doctrine is sub-300 yard combat.
Seems this thread has moved from the cost of .223/5.56mm to the effectivness of the round.
Over the past couple years the Army has looked at all current COTS (commercial, off the shelf) ammunition and tested it to see if there was anything substantially better than M855. There was a write up done in Infantry magazine, which I'm not sure if it can be accessed by the web, but anyway, it was a very good article on a comparison of the current rounds available.
Bottom line: Of all rounds tested, there where no currently manufactured rounds which beat the performance of M855 by any noticible margin. This included 77gr Siearra and 75gr Amax, as well as lighter varmint bullets. There was even a comparison to M80 ball in 7.62x51mm. All things being considered, shot placement in more important than caliber. Obviously that is over simplifiying things a bit, but a 7.62 in the arm or leg is not as effective as a 5.56 in the heart or brain.
The hard thing to do is to set the parameters for a round and its purpose. What effect are you trying to achieve. Are you looking to just kill a person? I can kill a person, but it takes five minutes for them to die and in the mean time they can still fire back at me. Are you looking at instant incapacitation, defined as no longer being able to effectivly fight? What engagement range to you want? 300m and in or further for light machineguns and DMR weapons. Then, think about the environement it has to exist in. Artic cold to desert heat, high humidity jungle, monsoon season, long storage life, good in short barreled rifles as well as light machineguns, same trajectory as a tracer round. What about the target? Skinny Haji behind a car or north korean wearing heavy clothes behind a log. Is he in the prone and the round is going to have to penetrate his arm before hitting a vital area?
All I'm saying is that there are a lot of dead people who can't argue the effectiveness of the 5.56 round and they have been killed with M855. When you look at the expectation of the round, it really does its job well.
Take this in context when you are comparing the purpose of the round. It is for military application.
If you are a police officer or civilian intersted in home defense, there are better options available to you because the round doesn't need to meet as many performance standards.
Anyway, just thought I would put that out there for condsideration.
Robb Jensen
06-13-08, 05:42
Seems this thread has moved from the cost of .223/5.56mm to the effectivness of the round.
Exactly. And it's run it's course and it's why I'm locking it.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.