View Full Version : Current mil-spec magazine avaible?
Is the current mil-spec USGI magazine available to civilian purchase? (the one with revised feed-lip geometry for M855A1), if so, from who?
Where are you going to get M855A1 ammunition? You know, just because it works better with M855A1 (steel nosed bullets) doesn't mean it works better with anything else . . .
I don't think the Army has completed fielding these magazines, so it will be a while before they show up on the market.
Your only option is magpul
Where are you going to get M855A1 ammunition? You know, just because it works better with M855A1 (steel nosed bullets) doesn't mean it works better with anything else . . .
I don't think the Army has completed fielding these magazines, so it will be a while before they show up on the market.
The OP has done a number of tests with 855a1...
The OP has done a number of tests with 855a1...
Not I. However, M855A1 requires the new geometry because the steel tips can damage things on the way to the chamber. The new feed-lips get them to the chamber with less things damaged. More direct feed. This is GOOD for ANY round.
Have tons of Browntip, it's M855A1 that I can't touch :(
Not I. However, M855A1 requires the new geometry because the steel tips can damage things on the way to the chamber. The new feed-lips get them to the chamber with less things damaged. More direct feed. This is GOOD for ANY round.
Have tons of Browntip, it's M855A1 that I can't touch :(
My bad, i thought you ran the chopping block for some reason
The rounds jumbling up in the mag is a problem that is thought by some, to be exacerbated by the slick feed angle of the Pmags.
The rounds jumbling up in the mag is a problem that is thought by some, to be exacerbated by the slick feed angle of the Pmags.
More food for thought. It may not be wrong thinking either.
The rounds jumbling up in the mag is a problem that is thought by some, to be exacerbated by the slick feed angle of the Pmags.
Specific to M855A1, or just general 5.56?
What drew me to PMAGs when they first came out wasn't the polymer construction but the constant curve internal design as well as the feed angle and non-til follower. I considered these all to be complete and total improvements over the USGI magazine.
I would hate to find out now that this feed angle can cause problems with certain ammunition types.
I didn't even know there were new mags for the new round. Doesn't the 855A1 suck though?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I didn't even know there were new mags for the new round. Doesn't the 855A1 suck though?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
They fixed the overpressure issues. It's still pretty hot though
I didn't even know there were new mags for the new round. Doesn't the 855A1 suck though?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
No. Dr Roberts doesn't like it, and initially it had wear and tear issues. Terminally, it's a beast.
https://www.army.mil/article/48657/evolution-of-the-m855a1-enhanced-performance-round
Military biased perhaps, but some thought went into the article. The article is 6 years old.
More up to date article:
https://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2014/5/21/testing-the-army-s-m855a1-standard-ball-cartridge/
Looks like good ammo. Too bad there won't be any for civilian sales.
Specific to M855A1, or just general 5.56?
What drew me to PMAGs when they first came out wasn't the polymer construction but the constant curve internal design as well as the feed angle and non-til follower. I considered these all to be complete and total improvements over the USGI magazine.
I would hate to find out now that this feed angle can cause problems with certain ammunition types.
Any ammo. I've never had any M855A1. I have had Pmags jumble up the top two rounds in every early Gen M3 I used, but seldom had it happen with the RevM mags. The newest Gen M3s with the bump in the feedlips seem to have much better control over the top round than the earlier ones. I've been using a set of these for about 4 months and have had no issues.
If you look at the rounds in the Pmag, you can see a gap under the front of the top round. It has to tip up to meet the feedlips and it's not very stable in the mag since it's only being pushed on from the very rear of the case. That gap and the ability of the case to wobble up and down creates a gap that the second round can try to get pushed into.
On the g.i. mag, the feed angle is flatter, but the top round is held very securely. No gap or wiggle room.
There's a trade-off here. To achieve the better feed angle, the top round is not held as securely. To have a mag that holds the rounds more securely, the feed angle is steeper. Pick which one works best for you.
http://i851.photobucket.com/albums/ab76/sammuse/IMG_2702_zpse3y8stkk.jpg
http://i851.photobucket.com/albums/ab76/sammuse/IMG_2701_zpslptk6b21.jpg
No. Dr Roberts doesn't like it, and initially it had wear and tear issues. Terminally, it's a beast.
Link to gel tests? I didn't find much on Google and haven't been following it.
Any ammo. I've never had any M855A1. I have had Pmags jumble up the top two rounds in every early Gen M3 I used, but seldom had it happen with the RevM mags. The newest Gen M3s with the bump in the feedlips seem to have much better control over the top round than the earlier ones. I've been using a set of these for about 4 months and have had no issues.
If you look at the rounds in the Pmag, you can see a gap under the front of the top round. It has to tip up to meet the feedlips and it's not very stable in the mag since it's only being pushed on from the very rear of the case. That gap and the ability of the case to wobble up and down creates a gap that the second round can try to get pushed into.
On the g.i. mag, the feed angle is flatter, but the top round is held very securely. No gap or wiggle room.
There's a trade-off here. To achieve the better feed angle, the top round is not held as securely. To have a mag that holds the rounds more securely, the feed angle is steeper. Pick which one works best for you.
I've only recently used M3s and have noticed this. I'm always jamming/slapping the mag back thinking the top round is coming loose. No issues though, haven't seen a double feed or stovepipe yet.
Link to gel tests? I didn't find much on Google and haven't been following it.
My other PC's hard-drive died like a dog, soo....I lost a lot of cool stuff. I used to have copies of Liberty Ammunition's T&E with the round the US military stole, which became M855. They have since been scoured from the internet, and my harddrive is dead as mentioned, and please don't get my dog shot over this.
So, this is the best I can do right now:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8IvDPuVuho
More tax-dollar fun:
http://www.armytimes.com/story/military/2015/01/21/-liberty-ammunition-m855a1-m80a1/22103351/
Liberty Ammunition also will receive royalties of 1.4 cents per round on that ammunition until the patent expires in 2027, according to the U.S. Court of Federal Claims ruling, issued in late December and first reported in the Bradenton (Fla.) Herald.
The civilian-available rough equivalent in performance, is the 77gr TMK round. It 100% lacks the barrier penetration abilities of M855A1, but check out how similar they perform on soft targets:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lihq_U-2BKM
BufordTJustice
07-07-16, 20:23
No. Dr Roberts doesn't like it, and initially it had wear and tear issues. Terminally, it's a beast.
To be fair 855 is a beast if you add almost 300 feet per second to it. ;)
To be fair 855 is a beast if you add almost 300 feet per second to it. ;)
The newer M855A1 is similar velocity to M855. They tweak the heck out of M855A1 every week it seems.
My other PC's hard-drive died like a dog, soo....I lost a lot of cool stuff. I used to have copies of Liberty Ammunition's T&E with the round the US military stole, which became M855. They have since been scoured from the internet, and my harddrive is dead as mentioned, and please don't get my dog shot over this.
So, this is the best I can do right now:
More tax-dollar fun:
http://www.armytimes.com/story/military/2015/01/21/-liberty-ammunition-m855a1-m80a1/22103351/
The civilian-available rough equivalent in performance, is the 77gr TMK round. It 100% lacks the barrier penetration abilities of M855A1, but check out how similar they perform on soft targets:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lihq_U-2BKM
Thanks. That vid didn't look too impressive to me, but, clear gel, sample of 1. I'll save further comment for term ballistic forum.
For the topic on hand, when are the mag changes set to take place?
Thanks. That vid didn't look too impressive to me, but, clear gel, sample of 1. I'll save further comment for term ballistic forum.
For the topic on hand, when are the mag changes set to take place?
Whenever they change the TDP. I think later this year or next year maybe.
What they did here was the same thing they did with the tan follower. They took a Magpul product and made something just like it but different. This time they're getting Center Industries to make an alumium Pmag.
BufordTJustice
07-07-16, 23:10
The newer M855A1 is similar velocity to M855. They tweak the heck out of M855A1 every week it seems.
I saw a while back where they tweaked the propellant to take it down from a proof load. The Wound Channel shot one out of a 20" barrel and they registered from 3250-3260+ fps. That's still substantially faster than std 855.
It's going to be ultra got no matter what.... But it looks like they got smart about pressures.
I saw a while back where they tweaked the propellant to take it down from a proof load. The Wound Channel shot one out of a 20" barrel and they registered from 3250-3260+ fps. That's still substantially faster than std 855.
It's going to be ultra got no matter what.... But it looks like they got smart about pressures.
The Browntip I have moves out at around 2900 from my 16" gun. That's a 70gr TSX bullet. ZERO over-pressure signs. Just a datapoint.
The Browntip I have moves out at around 2900 from my 16" gun. That's a 70gr TSX bullet. ZERO over-pressure signs. Just a datapoint.
Where the heck are you scoring brown tip ammo?
Where the heck are you scoring brown tip ammo?
I don't really believe that I can say, but I can promise that it's not "missing" in any sense of the word.
Forgive my ignorance.. Is the brown tip and SS109 projectile the same?
Forgive my ignorance.. Is the brown tip and SS109 projectile the same?
SS109 is used in green tip "penetrator" rounds. M855.
Brown tip is 70gr tsx solid copper.
RAM Engineer
07-08-16, 09:32
The Browntip I have moves out at around 2900 from my 16" gun. That's a 70gr TSX bullet. ZERO over-pressure signs. Just a datapoint.
Off Topic: Any issues with accuracy with the browntip after extended firing with no bore cleaning?
BufordTJustice
07-08-16, 09:34
The Browntip I have moves out at around 2900 from my 16" gun. That's a 70gr TSX bullet. ZERO over-pressure signs. Just a datapoint.
The Hornady 5.56 TAP GMX 70gr I've got is in that neighborhood as well, if not faster. The TAP primers look good as well with no other pressure signs.
Modern propellants!
Hopefully A1 is scaled back a bit. The stuff that I've seen tested on YouTube recently is still crazy hot.
HelloLarry
07-09-16, 10:01
Hopefully A1 is scaled back a bit. The stuff that I've seen tested on YouTube recently is still crazy hot.
What would happen if it was out in the Sun? Or in 110+ ambient air temps?
turnburglar
07-09-16, 12:23
Leave it to the big Army to completely screw up the stoner rifle.
60+ years later and we are still testing dumb ammo, and spending billions on magazines for the dumb ammo.
BufordTJustice
07-09-16, 15:34
What would happen if it was out in the Sun? Or in 110+ ambient air temps?
Only God knows. [emoji15]
Can someone explain to me why big Army doesn't just use the newer Marine Corp ammo? The all copper mk318.
Mk 318 is not all copper, the front is lead filled.
And, the Army still requires the 3/8 steel plate penetration at 350 yards.
The newest version is all copper with a nickel plating. No lead. Didn't realize the penetration requirement.
'
Mk 318 is not all copper, the front is lead filled.
And, the Army still requires the 3/8 steel plate penetration at 350 yards.
The newest version is all copper with a nickel plating. No lead. Didn't realize the penetration requirement.
'
Interesting...
Technically, the penetration requirement is a STANAG requirement.
Mk 318 is not NATO standardized.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.