View Full Version : 12.5 range
Sorry if this has been answered, and if so, where?
I have 12.5 1:8 twist barrel and I am looking for ammo style/weight ect… information. Everything I find is close distance ballistic from a 10.5 inch barrel and I am looking for reliable performance at distance. I am trying to find what ammo selection would give me the best performance at 200 yards (or further?)
I understand shot placement so on an so forth, the question. Is what ammo provides a lethal wound track, expansion or fragmentation and what are max distance of those rounds?
Any help is appreciated
You’ll be fine with any of the major bonded rounds like gold dot, le223t3/trophy bonded bear claw, fusion etc with a 12.5 at 200. No problems. Gold Dots are known to have pretty low threshold for expansion so you can push them out further and still achieve expansion.
You’ll be fine with any of the major bonded rounds like gold dot, le223t3/trophy bonded bear claw, fusion etc with a 12.5 at 200. No problems. Gold Dots are known to have pretty low threshold for expansion so you can push them out further and still achieve expansion.
What weight would be best for this? The le223t3 is 62 gr, a lot of people tout the 77gr mk262, what end of the spectrum is better?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What weight would be best for this? The le223t3 is 62 gr, a lot of people tout the 77gr mk262, what end of the spectrum is better?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What do you want to shoot? Paper or people?
262 is an open tip match round not well suited for barriers or hard objects. Bear claw is bonded and is suited to punch through obstacles.
Yes. 262 has put a lot of people in the ground but rules for war and rules for home are different. You’ll notice not many domestic LE agencies use it for people.
What do you want to shoot? Paper or people?
262 is an open tip match round not well suited for barriers or hard objects. Bear claw is bonded and is suited to punch through obstacles.
Yes. 262 has put a lot of people in the ground but rules for war and rules for home are different. You’ll notice not many domestic LE agencies use it for people.
My department uses federal 55g TRU in 10.5 rock rivers. This works fine in the urban areas but I am trying to gather info for our rural areas in my personal 12.5. As an LEO OTM/hollow point etc. are on the table
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
So people. There is no need for the OTM’s precision orientation for inside 200 yards. It fragments and may not penetrate.
Whether you’re LE or not matters little about what bullet you use. You will be judged by every trigger pulls as a use of force.
The 55 TRU is also a terrible round for any barrier. Shoot a car with a hell block or even a paper target for that matter with it. It disintegrates. For a straight up person to person shoot, it may be fine but the number of barriers LE faces routinely, it’s a set up for undesired results.
So people. There is no need for the OTM’s precision orientation for inside 200 yards. It fragments and may not penetrate.
Whether you’re LE or not matters little about what bullet you use. You will be judged by every trigger pulls as a use of force.
The 55 TRU is also a terrible round for any barrier. Shoot a car with a hell block or even a paper target for that matter with it. It disintegrates. For a straight up person to person shoot, it may be fine but the number of barriers LE faces routinely, it’s a set up for undesired results.
That has been my observation during our vehicle Defence classes. I have seen the rounds stopped by headrest after passing through a barrier (ie glass/door). I thing there is better for distance/barrier and stand off.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
A really good option is Fusion MSR, also. It will absolutely expand at 200 from a 12.5”. It is similar to the Gold Dots Ggammel mentioned.
Diamondback
10-04-21, 10:19
A really good option is Fusion MSR, also. It will absolutely expand at 200 from a 12.5”. It is similar to the Gold Dots Ggammel mentioned.
Isn't the main difference between 62gr GD and Fusion MSR box and headstamp?
Diamondback
10-04-21, 10:19
A really good option is Fusion MSR, also. It will absolutely expand at 200 from a 12.5”. It is similar to the Gold Dots Ggammel mentioned.
Isn't the main difference between 62gr GD and Fusion MSR box and headstamp?
Honestly, it doesn’t matter. Any expanding rounds are about the same. Any AP round is about the same. 193/262 are about the same ballistically.
They all fly about the same at 200. Good luck explaining shooting though something to hit a subject at 200 yards. If you can find an officer willing to throw rounds through a barrier to hit a subject he can’t see at 200 yards he should be fired.
It’s not sexy, but it really is shot placement. I just witnessed a buddy of mine win a 10k run and gun with shots to 550 and 650 using 193 from a 12.5.
Honestly, it doesn’t matter. Any expanding rounds are about the same. Any AP round is about the same. 193/262 are about the same ballistically.
They all fly about the same at 200. Good luck explaining shooting though something to hit a subject at 200 yards. If you can find an officer willing to throw rounds through a barrier to hit a subject he can’t see at 200 yards he should be fired.
It’s not sexy, but it really is shot placement. I just witnessed a buddy of mine win a 10k run and gun with shots to 550 and 650 using 193 from a 12.5.
The question was not so much the concept of taking a shot at 200 yards, it was more for the knowledge of adequate performance at distance. Any ballistic test I have seen are at close range. I have see video of Jerry Miculek use a 9mm and hit target at 1000 yards. Neither answer what the effective range of the 9mm round. I know that with proper shot placement the effectiveness of the round is extended.
For the record I have covers an officers moment across a plowed cornfield from about 125 yards. would the TRU round been as effective at that distance as our CQB distances? My bet is no, but I also don’t have that data either
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The question was not so much the concept of taking a shot at 200 yards, it was more for the knowledge of adequate performance at distance. Any ballistic test I have seen are at close range. I have see video of Jerry Miculek use a 9mm and hit target at 1000 yards. Neither answer what the effective range of the 9mm round. I know that with proper shot placement the effectiveness of the round is extended.
For the record I have covers an officers moment across a plowed cornfield from about 125 yards. would the TRU round been as effective at that distance as our CQB distances? My bet is no, but I also don’t have that data either
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I agree with you on the lack of data. For that range you will need to be looking at military data and not LE.
I agree with you on the lack of data. For that range you will need to be looking at military data and not LE.
Thanks, where would I be able to find that type of data? Would the military have data on civilian ammo since it isn’t allowed or used?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Thanks, where would I be able to find that type of data? Would the military have data on civilian ammo since it isn’t allowed or used?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I asked everyone I know or met that have used them and observed their effects. Most say 50-grain TSX is a heart attack.
The question was not so much the concept of taking a shot at 200 yards, it was more for the knowledge of adequate performance at distance. Any ballistic test I have seen are at close range. I have see video of Jerry Miculek use a 9mm and hit target at 1000 yards. Neither answer what the effective range of the 9mm round. I know that with proper shot placement the effectiveness of the round is extended.
For the record I have covers an officers moment across a plowed cornfield from about 125 yards. would the TRU round been as effective at that distance as our CQB distances? My bet is no, but I also don’t have that data either
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
it’ll do damage but it fragments and there’s no telling how and where the the fragments go and how deep they penetrate. That’s really the whole flaw of that projectile.
You guys just aren’t being realistic with the expectation of predicting terminal effects. 5.56 inside of 300 is a damn disaster on a human being, with the exception being 855 to the torso, which is like a needle. You should be more concerned with your ability to hit a moving human being, who doesn’t want to be shot and who might be shooting back at you at those distances.
I’ve seen the same round hit people and do completely different things. Gel tests are a joke. Pick a round with a ballistic tip, aim at the top of the sternum and call it a day.
ViniVidivici
10-05-21, 00:43
And keep putting hits on.
As a wise man has said, "it's not a 30 round magazine, it's 6 kills per mag".
You guys just aren’t being realistic with the expectation of predicting terminal effects. 5.56 inside of 300 is a damn disaster on a human being, with the exception being 855 to the torso, which is like a needle. You should be more concerned with your ability to hit a moving human being, who doesn’t want to be shot and who might be shooting back at you at those distances.
I’ve seen the same round hit people and do completely different things. Gel tests are a joke. Pick a round with a ballistic tip, aim at the top of the sternum and call it a day.
Why do you specifically recommend a round with a ballistic tip?
It offers the most consistent opportunity for expansion and fragmentation. I’m already poking a very small hole in someone, I’d like to make it as messy as possible.
It offers the most consistent opportunity for expansion and fragmentation. I’m already poking a very small hole in someone, I’d like to make it as messy as possible.
Why not an expanding projectile then? E.g. TBBC, fusion, GD, etc.
The question was not so much the concept of taking a shot at 200 yards, it was more for the knowledge of adequate performance at distance. Any ballistic test I have seen are at close range. I have see video of Jerry Miculek use a 9mm and hit target at 1000 yards. Neither answer what the effective range of the 9mm round. I know that with proper shot placement the effectiveness of the round is extended.
For the record I have covers an officers moment across a plowed cornfield from about 125 yards. would the TRU round been as effective at that distance as our CQB distances? My bet is no, but I also don’t have that data either
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
On the other hand, the TRU at 125 yards ‘might’ have slowed enough so that the expansion is more controlled, as opposed to a violent expansion like the varmint bullet it really is, and you might get higher retained weight and better penetration.
I’ve never chrono’d the TRU, and haven’t even used since I took over the armory at my department and relegated it to training to get rid of it. We do the LE223T3 now.
Heavy clothing gel test with 55 grain fmj/ 193, look decent as far as penetration & expansion.
I like to run what I train with. I do like 262 performance. But run 55 mostly.
Heavy clothing gel test with 55 grain fmj/ 193, look decent as far as penetration & expansion.
I like to run what I train with. I do like 262 performance. But run 55 mostly.
Dude, the military doesn’t even use that anymore. It doesn’t expand. It fragments. I don’t know what kind of backyard bubba ballistics you’re referring to but they don’t jive with any testing.
Heavy clothing gel test with 55 grain fmj/ 193, look decent as far as penetration & expansion.
I like to run what I train with. I do like 262 performance. But run 55 mostly.
Dude, the military doesn’t even use that anymore. It doesn’t expand. It fragments. I don’t know what kind of backyard bubba ballistics you’re referring to but they don’t jive with any testing.
Dude, the military doesn’t even use that anymore. It doesn’t expand. It fragments. I don’t know what kind of backyard bubba ballistics you’re referring to but they don’t jive with any testing.
So if the military uses it you think it's good. You use green tip, come on brother. I use what I train with how does that hurt you sensitivity. Shot placement is what counts. I only offered my opinion, I didn't tell anyone to do as I do. You sure you ain't a Democrat, you sure like telling people what they should do. BTW, a gel block test is not a written test, In case you didn't know.
Your welcome.
P.S. Before you say the m855a1 is the new best round. It's not.
You butt hurt cause I use 55 gr fmj or cause I said expansion instead of "fragment" , I guess if I said wound channel, you'd really be upset case it's not a real wound. I think for SD use 55 fmj is ok. Sorry that you didn't agree, but that be what bubba got so bubba run it.
I never mentioned the military. I was replying to the OP, & giving my opinion as to there are other options, & you don't need to spend $2 a round. Options, choice, freedom, what's not to love.
You butt hurt cause I use 55 gr fmj or cause I said expansion instead of "fragment" , I guess if I said wound channel, you'd really be upset case it's not a real wound. I think for SD use 55 fmj is ok. Sorry that you didn't agree, but that be what bubba got so bubba run it.
I never mentioned the military. I was replying to the OP, & giving my opinion as to there are other options, & you don't need to spend $2 a round. Options, choice, freedom, what's not to love.
There’s a thread here about this place going down hill. This is the type of post that goes to that argument. People having a serious discussion and someone wades in with “55gr works for me”.
I am not butthurt about your choice of words. It just shows that you don’t what your talking about. Yes. Shot placement is king. You won’t find a bigger support of that than me. But if the bullet doesn’t do what you need it to do when you place it where you need to place it, what good is it?
I was just giving my honest opinion, I think too many shooters especially new ones get cought up in best defensive round. I am of the thought if you know it's reliable in you gun & you shoot it well your on the right track. A advantage of a rifle over a pistol is that it's not as reliant on bullet choice. Are there better bullets sure, I was just laying that out there.
BTW this is my 4th post. I'm not into social media. I find it's not very authentic,as far as conversation. It's supposed to be a discussion of ideas, & opinion. Facts & statistics can be looked up on Google. I figure shooters come here to be with like minded Americans.
God Bless
The overwhelming majority of 5.56 rounds will go straight through a human being.
Look up Bob Keller’s K.O. Drill. When you can complete that come back here and argue over what round is best to shoot someone with, which you will never do anyway.
Yeah buddy, All kinds of different opinions on the best round & caliber.
Just good people just having a good conversations & sharing opinions.
Iike minded Americans just opining.
Never done what? Read bob's piece on ballistics or had to shoot at someone. I don't wanna have to do either. Thanks for giving someone else's opinion. You'd be remiss to assume you know what people do, or know.
As an LEO OTM/hollow point etc. are on the table
BTW this is my 4th post. I'm not into social media. I find it's not very authentic,as far as conversation. It's supposed to be a discussion of ideas, & opinion. Facts & statistics can be looked up on Google. I figure shooters come here to be with like minded Americans.
God Bless read more; post less, please. OP said that he is LEO, looking for expanding ammo, so m193 is not relevant. What you keep in your HD rifle is not relevant, nor is your blathering about social media and politics in a thread about ****ing ammo.
There’s a thread here about this place going down hill. This is the type of post that goes to that argument. People having a serious discussion and someone wades in with “55gr works for me”.
The signal to noise ratio here is getting worse than ****ing tos. I find myself using and recommending this site less and less lately. I’m going to have to start blocking people so I don’t have to wade through bullshit to get to something useful or to share my experience.
Back on topic:
The reason I recommended Fusion MSR yesterday is that it is essentially a bonded soft point, with the barrier related and expansion benefits that come with that. It does well in a variety of internet gel tests, and has been shown to expand down to a very low velocity, without falling apart at typical velocities. Its not flashy, and functions perfectly in every gun I’ve tried it in, over the course of a few thousand rounds at this point, and has a sealed primer. Its on the hotter side of .223 (as in not quite 5.56) ammo, and flies straight. Pre-Covid, it was readily available for like 50¢ per round. It is also similar in velocity and zero to other rounds I shoot that are in the 68-70gr weight range.
Velocities:
https://www.ar15.com/media/mediafiles/23126/SD-Ammo-SxS-233178.JPG
Velocities I measured myself:
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?220992-Labradar-5-56-data-1168&highlight=
Normal vs artificially low velocity in gel:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=otou1Fws4cQ
Cleargel:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ol8tgGtoXus
Comparison of MSR to regular Fusion velocities, and shots into Simtest media:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qE5ZnQmKy2o
Through a windshield:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upyDQyr-3Lk
A variety of ammo in gel:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCFfkAZgLwfUIJ1nN4SnsTVw
My agency runs Fed LE223T3 out of issued 13.7” barrels. These are 62gr. Considering your twist rate and length, I wouldn’t go heavier than that.
IMO, FWIW, YMMV, etc…
read more; post less, please. OP said that he is LEO, looking for expanding ammo, so m193 is not relevant. What you keep in your HD rifle is not relevant, nor is your blathering about social media and politics in a thread about ****ing ammo.
The signal to noise ratio here is getting worse than ****ing tos. I find myself using and recommending this site less and less lately. I’m going to have to start blocking people so I don’t have to wade through bullshit to get to something useful or to share my experience.
Back on topic:
The reason I recommended Fusion MSR yesterday is that it is essentially a bonded soft point, with the barrier related and expansion benefits that come with that. It does well in a variety of internet gel tests, and has been shown to expand down to a very low velocity, without falling apart at typical velocities. Its not flashy, and functions perfectly in every gun I’ve tried it in, over the course of a few thousand rounds at this point, and has a sealed primer. Its on the hotter side of .223 (as in not quite 5.56) ammo, and flies straight. Pre-Covid, it was readily available for like 50¢ per round. It is also similar in velocity and zero to other rounds I shoot that are in the 68-70gr weight range.
Velocities:
https://www.ar15.com/media/mediafiles/23126/SD-Ammo-SxS-233178.JPG
Velocities I measured myself:
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?220992-Labradar-5-56-data-1168&highlight=
Normal vs artificially low velocity in gel:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=otou1Fws4cQ
Cleargel:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ol8tgGtoXus
Comparison of MSR to regular Fusion velocities, and shots into Simtest media:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qE5ZnQmKy2o
Through a windshield:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upyDQyr-3Lk
A variety of ammo in gel:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCFfkAZgLwfUIJ1nN4SnsTVw
The fusion rounds are pretty damn accurate too.
I sat back to watch the post spin out of control a bit. My intent was to find someone who has the information or at least knows where to get the information on bullet performance at distance from a sbr. Setting the limit of 200 yards.
As an LEO who is a firearms instructor, range master and armorer I and well aware of legal issues and shot placement. I find it interesting to see people answer a part of the question to imply vast knowledge when the entire question may have been disregarded and not answered.
I want to thank those who have given me valuable information and kept the conversation on task
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Leaveammoforme
10-06-21, 13:42
BTW this is my 4th post. I'm not into social media. I find it's not very authentic,as far as conversation. It's supposed to be a discussion of ideas, & opinion. Facts & statistics can be looked up on Google. I figure shooters come here to be with like minded Americans.
God Bless
That's where you're wrong, bucko. We are an echo chamber of baited posts. We could figure it out for ourselves but then we couldn't pounce on the new guy for joining in.
Bonus points if you allow us an opportunity to mention that we are part of some big city agency, or high speed branch there of, even though we are asking for rudimentary information.
Welcome to the forum. Lots of good info is available in the sticky threads at the top of all sub-forums.
[QUOTE=1168;2982621]read more; post less, please. OP said that he is LEO, looking for expanding ammo, so m193 is not relevant. What you keep in your HD rifle is not relevant, nor is your blathering about social media and politics in a thread about ****ing ammo.
The signal to noise ratio here is getting worse than ****ing tos. I find myself using and recommending this site less and less lately. I’m going to have to start blocking people so I don’t have to wade through bullshit to get to something useful or to share my experience.
Back on topic:
The reason I recommended Fusion MSR yesterday is that it is essentially a bonded soft point, with the barrier related and expansion benefits that come with that. It does well in a variety of internet gel tests, and has been shown to expand down to a very low velocity, without falling apart at typical velocities. Its not flashy, and functions perfectly in every gun I’ve tried it in, over the course of a few thousand rounds at this point, and has a sealed primer. Its on the hotter side of .223 (as in not quite 5.56) ammo, and flies straight. Pre-Covid, it was readily available for like 50¢ per round. It is also similar in velocity and zero to other rounds I shoot that are in the 68-70gr weight range
Wow sorry, I didn't read the rules. I see there it said you can only post what is a direct answer to question of the OP.
BTW I posted my brash opinion, then was scolded by a old crank. Then I stated the fact that this is a chat fourm, not a my facts only fourm. You all seam hurt to hear a opinion out side of your ballistics data anyone can find on a Google search, including gel test. I figure the OP can also. I also figured I could just give a basic option. Most SD scenarios even LE won't be taking shots at 200 yards. You'd be hard pressed to show a need on a night watchman job to do so. Unless someone took his sheep & his sheep boots hostage. Gotta go. Talk to o ya all next time I'm in the john.
ViniVidivici
10-06-21, 13:59
This is not a chat forum, it's a technical forum.
I ‘member when IG finally inboxed me explaining that he kept deleting my ammo posts (for my 12.5, I believe) because they weren’t in the ammo forum.
I felt like an idiot for missing an entire sub forum, but appreciated he took the time to let me know why my posts were disappearing.
Anyway. Carry on.
El Vaquero
10-06-21, 17:13
So people. There is no need for the OTM’s precision orientation for inside 200 yards. It fragments and may not penetrate.
Whether you’re LE or not matters little about what bullet you use. You will be judged by every trigger pulls as a use of force.
The 55 TRU is also a terrible round for any barrier. Shoot a car with a hell block or even a paper target for that matter with it. It disintegrates. For a straight up person to person shoot, it may be fine but the number of barriers LE faces routinely, it’s a set up for undesired results.
So does it matter or not matter which bullet LE uses? You post good info about projectiles and such but seem a little snarky about LE opinions. There are plenty of booger eating cops out there. The one’s on this forum are typically not those.
[/B][/I]
So does it matter or not matter which bullet LE uses? You post good info about projectiles and such but seem a little snarky about LE opinions. There are plenty of booger eating cops out there. The one’s on this forum are typically not those.
The context of that comment was specifically about the use of force, not the projectile efficacy. As far as terminal ballisitics, bullet choice is important.
That's where you're wrong, bucko. We are an echo chamber of baited posts. We could figure it out for ourselves but then we couldn't pounce on the new guy for joining in.
Bonus points if you allow us an opportunity to mention that we are part of some big city agency, or high speed branch there of, even though we are asking for rudimentary information.
Welcome to the forum. Lots of good info is available in the sticky threads at the top of all sub-forums.
Thanks for the friendly welcome. I didn't mind being pounced on for my opinion, it was being jumped on for sharing a opinion. Thanks again.
This is not a chat forum, it's a technical forum.
I believe that statement is a opinion, there for unnecessary.
Please keep all post technical in nature, & refrain from chatter.
I believe that statement is a opinion, there for unnecessary.
Please keep all post technical in nature, & refrain from chatter.
It actually says “AR Technical Discussion” at the top of the page. This site may be a great place to post what you posted but in another category. It may seem like semantics but it’s kind how this place has been kept on the rails over the last decade.
My opinion on shots past 150 yards are, they're more about shot placement than bullet choice.
If you're going to be engaging a target primarily at distance of 200 yards, I'd use a longer barrel in a more effective caliber.
That being said, a AR with a 12.5 barrel is a good all-around SD platform. Even out past 200 if need be.
Then you probably can't go wrong with a heavier weight soft point round or even a poly tip, from a reputable manufacturer.
Sorry if this answer doesn't help.
Should we use a "Sarcasm" disclaimer for the sarcastically challanged
All 5.56 ammo will pass directly through a human inside of 200. The difference in damage will be negligible.
As far as barrier penetration, I don’t know many folks conus who would be comfortable shooting through something they cannot see through— even car doors, where behind them are child seats you can’t see.
If you want to end a gunfight now, not later, you need to make electrical, not hydraulic hits. In that scenario ammo is irrelevant.
My opinion on shots past 150 yards are, they're more about shot placement than bullet choice.
If you're going to be engaging a target primarily at distance of 200 yards, I'd use a longer barrel in a more effective caliber.
That being said, a AR with a 12.5 barrel is a good all-around SD platform. Even out past 200 if need be.
Then you probably can't go wrong with a heavier weight soft point round or even a poly tip, from a reputable manufacturer.
Sorry if this answer doesn't help.
Shot placement trumps bullet choice at fist fight distance, bub.
12.5’s go 600 yards with mediocre LPVO’s with ease.
Thanks, but I gave a opinion, it is opinions based on facts. I factuality think a 55 gr fmj is a option.
And I don't think it's the best but is a option, & don't discount 77 otm which I also said is a ok choice.
I don't see why it chaps people's ass that I didn't answer the question exactly to others preference or even the OP.
Every post on this 12.5 thread is not a technical answer, nor do they have to be. I posted, & you replied to me.
Not because you tried to help but cause you can't stand others opinion. I read your other replies.
Mind your own business or expect others have opinions too. I believe this is a chat form about technical stuff.
Is that a opinion or fact. Only you would know I'm sure.
Hey bub is technically not my user name. We're technical here abouts.
Should we use a "Sarcasm" disclaimer for the sarcastically challanged
Not needed.
Welcome to the site sir. :)
Most of us here understand what you are saying and how you are saying it.
It does stink a little other members not cutting you some slack.
Hoping you do not let it get to you and you stick around.
Would bet money that all the guys screwing with you are cat owners that squat when they go to pee.
https://i.imgur.com/TCPIdoC.jpg
Everybody can put their peepees away, or they can have the choice made for them.
Getting into a game of The Last Word with the staff is typically a zero-sum proposal.
Don't be a dumb**** like me, and forget that they have more buttons than we do.
Please bear in mind: at the end of the day, nobody tells the staff ANYthing.
You get told.
This ain't Facebook; when you get zapped for doing a dumbthing, the nature of your dumbery is clearly defined, so you may contemplate it….
https://imgur.com/cnAW0DZ
turnburglar
10-07-21, 03:24
So back to the topic....
OP- For LE; most of the big ammo manufactures will post data for their loads. Hornady LE comes to mind specifically.
When it comes to "ballistics per a specific barrel length", this is when we really quickly jump into "similar barrels will have similar performance". Simply put 10.5-12.5 is same same. 14.5-16... same same.
Since you didn't actually state what velocities you are getting from a 12.5" barrel your indicating that your sig figs are not very high. So for the sake of my next argument lets just roll with guesstimated velocities from a 10.5" barrel.
I have recently started looking into hunting and was wondering what caliber I would need to kill what animal. Very quickly it became obvious in my research that the right bullet construction was number one only behind shot placement. After that hunter's started to fall into two separate camps. One camp said a bullet needs to have X energy on impact. The other camp said that the bullet needs to be traveling between 1800 FPS and 2400 FPS to have a desirable wound channel.
So given proper shot placement and bullet construction; the only other factors to argue about with a 2 legged critter would be energy on impact and FPS on impact. Energy figures can get a little wonky, so I would prefer to omit them from this comparison. What is a constant is that hydrostatic shock IS produced above 1800 FPS.
Putting both a 77gr BTHP at 2300 FPS and a 64gr Gold dot at 2500 FPS (reasonable 10.5" velocities) into strelok Pro it shows that both cartridges are producing hydrostatic shock level velocities even at 250 yards. Beyond this distance even though a sever temporary stretch cavity is reduced; the bullet still has a chance of performing its "trick". Every bullet has a different trick whether its expansion, fragmentation or yaw, or all 3. While the bullet performing its magic at lower velocities becomes more of a gamble; what is known is that lower velocity bullets tend to penetrate DEEPER than the same exact bullet driven at a higher velocity. I would expect a 10.5" barrel to have deeper penetration than a 20" rifle given same bullet.
Lastly; go shoot a gel block at 200 yards, find out and let us know. Shouldn't be too hard.
When it comes to "ballistics per a specific barrel length", this is when we really quickly jump into "similar barrels will have similar performance". Simply put 10.5-12.5 is same same. 14.5-16... same same.
As you’ve pointed out, with anything over 10”, using good ammo, the difference is slim. However, I would disagree that 12.5” is closer to 10.5” than 14.5”. In my previous post, I’ve linked some velocities collected with a variety of defensive and .mil ammo, and different barrel length. These were measured independently by myself and a dude on TOS, and honestly his is better and more organized. It is entirely possible for a fast 10.3” and a slow 12.5” to post similar velocities, because every barrel is different. But from what I’ve seen, 12.3” and 12.5” barrels are very close to 14.5”. Usually 15-50fps, depending on ammo weight. And they are significantly (debateable, I suppose) faster than 10.3” barrels. Usually 100-200fps faster, again ammo weight dependent. Barnes TSX tends to be an outlier, in that the spreads are further between barrel lengths, where a 12.5” can be 250fps faster than a 10.3” and almost 100fps slower than 14.5”.
So, the short version is that, on average, 12.5” velocities are much closer to 14.5” than 10.5”. But you are otherwise spot on.
colt191145lover
10-08-21, 00:57
The federal Fusion MSRs 62gr clock a hair over 2800 fps out of my Centurion Arms 12.5, thats only about 60fps less than most of the 16 inch barrels I've seen. In my example of one barrel with that particular load, it's not giving up hardly anything.
Th throw some more numbers at folks, and hopefully not muddy things up too much…. here are some of my chrono results comparing several loads out of a 12.5 inch Noveske barrel and a 16” Wilson Combat barrel. All shots were with a suppressor. The Noveske has a SiCo Omega on it and the Wilson has a Sig SRD556 on it.
LOAD. 12.5” 16”
Black Hills 50tsx optimized- 2815 3215
Black Hills MK262 Mod1. 2429. 2597
Federal LE223T3- 2575. 2801.
Ranger 64gr Bonded. 2299. 2875
Barnes 5.56 62tsx. 2637. 2992
Black Hills 223 62gr tsx. 2571. 2777
As a disclaimer, not all groups were shot on the same day so there might be temperature differentials thrown in.
Colt191145lover’s 2800 from the MSR loads look intriguing. I might have to find some to launch out of the Noveske.
Th throw some more numbers at folks, and hopefully not muddy things up too much…. here are some of my chrono results comparing several loads out of a 12.5 inch Noveske barrel and a 16” Wilson Combat barrel. All shots were with a suppressor. The Noveske has a SiCo Omega on it and the Wilson has a Sig SRD556 on it.
LOAD. 12.5” 16”
Black Hills 50tsx optimized- 2815 3215
Black Hills MK262 Mod1. 2429. 2597
Federal LE223T3- 2575. 2801.
Ranger 64gr Bonded. 2299. 2875
Barnes 5.56 62tsx. 2637. 2992
Black Hills 223 62gr tsx. 2571. 2777
As a disclaimer, not all groups were shot on the same day so there might be temperature differentials thrown in.
Colt191145lover’s 2800 from the MSR loads look intriguing. I might have to find some to launch out of the Noveske.
I don’t mean to sound snooty, but thats a pretty slow barrel. That 64gr Ranger is AK velocity. Is it stainless or chromed? How many rounds? I ask because my 14.5” SS Noveskes were pretty fast.
No worries 1168, I see your point and agree.
Both barrels are stainless and have a few hundred rounds through them. Looking at the velocities, there is kind of a big gap between the barrels. I’ve never really taken the time to compare before, and I haven’t compared others’ velocities to mine either.
I just went and compared the velocity from the Noveske with Hornady 75gr TAP SBR ammo to Hornady’s published test results.
The 12.5 inch Noveske gave me 2218 fps.
Hornady tests resulted in the following’
-11.5 inch Colt M4 yielded 2270
-11.5 inch Superior Arms gave 2264
-11.5 Adams Arms spit them out at 2255
-10.5 inch LMT CQB gave Hornady 2201 fps.
So, my 12.5 inch is slower than all the 11.5s and not much faster than the 10.5. It shoots fairly well, though, so at least I can make hits!
Now I have to wonder about the chrono, but other velocities such as out of my 6ARC are right about at Hornady’s published speeds.
I think I just have a pokey barrel or there was a lot of operator error on my chronoo tests since it was new and is my first one.
colt191145lover
10-08-21, 22:06
Had to dig through my notes for some more velocity data.
12.5 Centurion arms barrel
PMC XTAC M855 average 2746 FPS
Wolf Gold 55 gr average 2865 FPS
Federal Fusion Msr 62gr average 2807 FPS
turnburglar
10-09-21, 14:37
Had to dig through my notes for some more velocity data.
12.5 Centurion arms barrel .....
Federal Fusion Msr 62gr average 2807 FPS
So I put this data into Strelokpro.
Based on my original theory of: "a bonded bullet will do its magic down to 1800 FPS"; then this weapon system is effective to ~325 yards. Thats up from my original estimate of 2500 FPS from a 10.5 making 250 yards.
Either way you look at it, from best case to worst case scenario a bonded bullet from a short barrel AR is still VERY lethal at 200 yards.
I was shooting a buddies 12.5 a few months back on the 500 yard steel range. I remember using the 550 yard hold to make impact on the 500 yard target. I think 12.5 really is the sweet spot for a short gun that can still launch them far.
So I put this data into Strelokpro.
Based on my original theory of: "a bonded bullet will do its magic down to 1800 FPS"; then this weapon system is effective to ~325 yards. Thats up from my original estimate of 2500 FPS from a 10.5 making 250 yards.
Either way you look at it, from best case to worst case scenario a bonded bullet from a short barrel AR is still VERY lethal at 200 yards.
I was shooting a buddies 12.5 a few months back on the 500 yard steel range. I remember using the 550 yard hold to make impact on the 500 yard target. I think 12.5 really is the sweet spot for a short gun that can still launch them far.
Do you mean that that particular projectile should expand as advertised out to ~325y?
If so, that doesn't mean the "weapon system" is ineffective past that distance...
Do you mean that that particular projectile should expand as advertised out to ~325y?
If so, that doesn't mean the "weapon system" is ineffective past that distance...
I read it exactly as it states. Which jives with the experience relayed to me by end users of 12.5. Effective as in you can expect the same thing from 25 to 300ish. Not it falls off a Cliff at 325.
turnburglar
10-09-21, 19:11
Do you mean that that particular projectile should expand as advertised out to ~325y?
If so, that doesn't mean the "weapon system" is ineffective past that distance...
Expand AND also leave a hydrostatic shock. 1800 FPS seems to be the magical low number for hydrostatic shock to occur.
Me personally I have no issue pushing a short barrel longer distances. I regularly shoot my 10.5 300 yards or more. When I stated "effective" I meant in relationship to the OP's original question.
El Vaquero
10-09-21, 23:59
Anyone done or seen any ballistic gel tests out past 300 yards to test expansion?
There’s a 1700fps one posted earlier in this very thread.
I don’t mean to sound snooty, but thats a pretty slow barrel. That 64gr Ranger is AK velocity. Is it stainless or chromed? How many rounds? I ask because my 14.5” SS Noveskes were pretty fast.
Mystery of the slow Noveske has been solved.
In short. I am a dumbass! The Noveske is actually a 10.5 inch gun.
I’ve been building 12.5 inch guns lately (350 Legend, 6mm ARC and soon a Grendel) so I had 12.5 stuck in my brain.
Sorry for any confusion!
I don’t mean to sound snooty, but thats a pretty slow barrel. That 64gr Ranger is AK velocity. Is it stainless or chromed? How many rounds? I ask because my 14.5” SS Noveskes were pretty fast.
Mystery of the slow Noveske has been solved.
In short. I am a dumbass! The Noveske is actually a 10.5 inch gun.
I’ve been building 12.5 inch guns lately (350 Legend, 6mm ARC and soon a Grendel) so I had 12.5 stuck in my brain.
Sorry for any confusion!
Expand AND also leave a hydrostatic shock. 1800 FPS seems to be the magical low number for hydrostatic shock to occur.
What are you defining as “hydrostatic shock”?
Ok so I will ask this question a different way with more information.
INFORMATION : Shooting the 55gr. Federal TRU BTHP (T223E) ammo through my IWI Zion 12.5 1:8 rifle, I am getting an average of 2491 fps. muzzle velocity. Federal website states a BC of .25. I put this through the Hornady Ballistic Calculator and it says I should be above 1800fps out to 200 yards.
QUESTION: what is the max effective range for reliable performance:
DISCLAIMER: this is all of the information I have, and understand there are a myriads of external factors which come into play.
With that round, acceptable performance is simply hitting the target. If you go to the federal website, you can see the gel test results. The bullet frags and separates. The BTHP round is oriented towards precision, hitting where you want to hit, not terminal effects on target. Once it hits something, there’s no telling with reliability, where it’s going to go and in how many pieces it’ll go there.
https://le.vistaoutdoor.com/ammunition/federal/rifle/details.aspx?id=681
dwhitehorne
10-31-21, 19:47
tk390 are you bound to the T223E round through the department? We were issued the Federal V Shock round 55 grain BTHP from 2002 to 2010. Our DRMO M16A1's wouldn't stabalize a 62 grain rounds so we ran 55 grains. We thought is was a good round as it was very accurate. Then we had an OIS where the suspect was pacing back and forth with a handgun and turning while swinging his arms. An officer fired two rounds from 28 yards and hit the suspect in his right forearm as he was turning and swinging his arm in front of his body. It pretty much blew his right forearm in half. It was a nasty looking wound but neither 55 grain round continued through the forearm and hit the suspects torso. Right after I that I pushed for a faster transition away from the 1 in 12 twist rifles and to a better round.
We ended up with a FBI contract round which is basically the Winchester RA556B round. That has been a good round for over a decade. Also if you are LE you can contact the FBI Firearms unit on letter head and request their ballistics CD they publish. I used to get one every other year with all ballistics data test they have done over the years. David
tk390 are you bound to the T223E round through the department? We were issued the Federal V Shock round 55 grain BTHP from 2002 to 2010. Our DRMO M16A1's wouldn't stabalize a 62 grain rounds so we ran 55 grains. We thought is was a good round as it was very accurate. Then we had an OIS where the suspect was pacing back and forth with a handgun and turning while swinging his arms. An officer fired two rounds from 28 yards and hit the suspect in his right forearm as he was turning and swinging his arm in front of his body. It pretty much blew his right forearm in half. It was a nasty looking wound but neither 55 grain round continued through the forearm and hit the suspects torso. Right after I that I pushed for a faster transition away from the 1 in 12 twist rifles and to a better round.
We ended up with a FBI contract round which is basically the Winchester RA556B round. That has been a good round for over a decade. Also if you are LE you can contact the FBI Firearms unit on letter head and request their ballistics CD they publish. I used to get one every other year with all ballistics data test they have done over the years. David
So our county is a bit of a quagmire. We have a county police department and a county sheriffs department. The two have different roles. The PD, which is bigger and therefore drives the bus when it comes to equipment specifications, chose the RRA 1:9 twist overs a decade ago. We are still using 870’s And are trying to get patrol rifles. we tend to follow suit, as to not reinvent the wheel, however I believe the weapon chosen,as well as the ammo can be updated, if not at the very least reviewed and vetted to assure it is right for our application.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That BC is rather optimistic. It does not match the projectile manufacturer’s BC, not even close. I wouldn’t be surprised if its a typo, since the pictured round in the LE site shows a completely different, heavier projectile. The BC would be believable for a 60-62gr bullet.
Using your 2491 fps velocity (is there any chance that this might be a typo?) and Sierra’s BC (its their projectile), I get the following velocities:
25 yds 2393 fps
50 2283
75 2176
100 2071
125 1970
150 1872
175 1777
200 1685
I don’t know the minimum velocity for this bullet, but it shows suboptimal performance in the gel tests on Federal’s site. Maybe someone more familiar with that bullet will have something.
That BC is rather optimistic. It does not match the projectile manufacturer’s BC, not even close. I wouldn’t be surprised if its a typo, since the pictured round in the LE site shows a completely different, heavier projectile. The BC would be believable for a 60-62gr bullet.
Using your 2491 fps velocity (is there any chance that this might be a typo?) and Sierra’s BC (its their projectile), I get the following velocities:
25 yds 2393 fps
50 2283
75 2176
100 2071
125 1970
150 1872
175 1777
200 1685
I don’t know the minimum velocity for this bullet, but it shows suboptimal performance in the gel tests on Federal’s site. Maybe someone more familiar with that bullet will have something.
I apologize when I looked at my readings I saw the last thought it was my average. The average was 2538 ft./s. I looked at the box of ammo and it says T223E. https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20211101/d9ff3933818b35d1c0d1d6924ec96583.jpg
When I look at that on the website it shows a ballistic coefficient of .25 and a bullet weight of 55 grains.
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20211101/e263855992c4790f5adcb11daf4e0fd1.jpg
I know when I look up the projectile on Sierra‘s website the ballistic coefficient is much lower. I do not know where the discrepancy comes from but the ammo came out of the box in the above picture. I’m not sure who’s information is more accurate and I am not a guru in this area that is why I need help deciphering all the information any help would be appreciated
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
chamber143
11-12-21, 07:06
clearly the reason one should choose an expanding round instead of 193 or other fmj rounds is that they have almost no shot of stopping in the perp which in turns means that its not dumping even half of its kinetic energy in them. Yes if you hit someone in the heart or brain with a 193 it very well may drop them DRT and then it may not. I like 193 for training because its cheap but I do keep mags full of either tsx or fusion/gold dots. Just saying
clearly the reason one should choose an expanding round instead of 193 or other fmj rounds is that they have almost no shot of stopping in the perp which in turns means that its not dumping even half of its kinetic energy in them. Yes if you hit someone in the heart or brain with a 193 it very well may drop them DRT and then it may not. I like 193 for training because its cheap but I do keep mags full of either tsx or fusion/gold dots. Just saying
If a person is shot twice in the torso with with the same bullets at the same velocity with one projectile coming to rest exactly on the far side skin layer, having perfectly "dumped all its energy" into the target and the second projectile passing straight through the torso and "keeping some of its energy" how are the wound tracks different up to that last point of differentiation (exit or retention at the far side skin layer,and assuming paths of the bullets through bone/tissue are similar)? How does energy kill? If the projectiles pass through similar structures how is the first wound track more lethal because of "energy dump"? What does that look like when observing tissue?
I don't disagree with your conclusion. I'd rather have Fusion in my rifle that 193 for defense. I've just never understood the idea of energy as a wounding mechanism.
In my opinion, M193 is suboptimal because it is unpredictable and "varmint" and target bullets share that unpredictability. Bonded soft points and solid copper bullets are much more reliable. "Urban" ammunution seems a horrible idea to me.
I would expect any 62-ish grain bonded soft point to perform reasonably well from a 12.5" barrel to 200 yards/meters. I would also expect that the odds of an officer engagaging someone at that range is incredibly remote.
Andy
In my opinion, M193 is suboptimal because it is unpredictable and "varmint" and target bullets share that unpredictability. Bonded soft points and solid copper bullets are much more reliable. "Urban" ammunution seems a horrible idea to me.
I would expect any 62-ish grain bonded soft point to perform reasonably well from a 12.5" barrel to 200 yards/meters. I would also expect that the odds of an officer engagaging someone at that range is incredibly remote.
Andy
193 and 855 are also the most inaccurate rounds I think I’ve ever grouped with. Sure, we’re still talking about 3ish MOA but 262, Gold Dot, Fusion, and others all group significantly better IME.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
193 and 855 are also the most inaccurate rounds I think I’ve ever grouped with. Sure, we’re still talking about 3ish MOA but 262, Gold Dot, Fusion, and others all group significantly better IME.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
No doubt. 855 especially. I’ve shot it in barrels where it somehow does kinda OK-ish, but more often than not its pretty bad, by the standards you can derive from most commercial target and self defense ammo. M193 is mediocre, at best, but seems to do a little better IME, though I really don’t shoot much of it, so that could be from the small sample size.
I may regret posting this….but pretty sure m193 was the ammo used in Kenosha….I don’t think there was any pass through accept for ole lefty.
No doubt. 855 especially. I’ve shot it in barrels where it somehow does kinda OK-ish, but more often than not its pretty bad, by the standards you can derive from most commercial target and self defense ammo. M193 is mediocre, at best, but seems to do a little better IME, though I really don’t shoot much of it, so that could be from the small sample size.
I’m the opposite so I can’t remember which is worse. I never pay the upcharge for 855 over 193 since it’s at least no better and maybe worse. Never understood why people buy it. I’d probably buy 855A1 for blasting ammo if it was about the same as 855, that stuff groups very well and I’d probably accept the terminal ballistics for a cheap, stockpile ammo if I could.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I may regret posting this….but pretty sure m193 was the ammo used in Kenosha….I don’t think there was any pass through accept for ole lefty.
Farthest shot was maybe 10 feet away from a 16" barrel without intermediate barriers. Rounds were Federal .223 FMJ, so not technically M193.
Andy
One of the officers or detectives testified that it was Aguila.
One of the officers or detectives testified that it was Aguila.
I misremembered.
Andy
chamber143
11-17-21, 17:04
If a person is shot twice in the torso with with the same bullets at the same velocity with one projectile coming to rest exactly on the far side skin layer, having perfectly "dumped all its energy" into the target and the second projectile passing straight through the torso and "keeping some of its energy" how are the wound tracks different up to that last point of differentiation (exit or retention at the far side skin layer,and assuming paths of the bullets through bone/tissue are similar)? How does energy kill? If the projectiles pass through similar structures how is the first wound track more lethal because of "energy dump"? What does that look like when observing tissue?
I don't disagree with your conclusion. I'd rather have Fusion in my rifle that 193 for defense. I've just never understood the idea of energy as a wounding mechanism.
Good question. I had a lengthy conversation years ago with a top DOD contractor who was in charge of fire arms training and he relayed to me that while yes wound tracks are massively important, the initial "shock" that the body receives from a projectile in a lot of cases will kill them. Same way you can get hit in the chest with a baseball and the kinetic energy from the ball can stop the heart and you can die. He expanded that although one of the functions of a hollow point round is to increase the size of the wound and thus causing more damage, that the primary reason is to stop the round from exiting the body thus making it dump all its energy in the body and increasing the lethality of the round. There are numerous cases of people dying from internal bleeding after getting hit in their plates. I don't think one is vastly more important that the other, I was just stating what I thought was pretty obvious at this point and that is people survive a lot of through and throughs and something that expands and stays in the body is much more desirable
I've never shot anyone or even shot in their general direction. I'm not any kind of expert on the subject. But I've seen more than a few deer shot. The ones where the bullet passed through killed better than bullets that stayed in the body. Except bullets that exploded in the chest with such violence the heart & lungs were turned to mush.
I do understand the philosophy of not wanting a bullet to exit a human body and hitting a bystander. However, what I've seen first hand has me questioning the validity of "energy dump".
Mysteryman
11-19-21, 00:10
I've never shot anyone or even shot in their general direction. I'm not any kind of expert on the subject. But I've seen more than a few deer shot. The ones where the bullet passed through killed better than bullets that stayed in the body. Except bullets that exploded in the chest with such violence the heart & lungs were turned to mush.
I do understand the philosophy of not wanting a bullet to exit a human body and hitting a bystander. However, what I've seen first hand has me questioning the validity of "energy dump".
There's no validity to question, it's simple physics. If the projectile has sufficient energy to pass through then it clearly did not "use" all it's energy while inside the target. Making it more energy efficient and likely less effective than a round that remains inside the target. If you have a projectile with enough energy then the amount deposited may be more than sufficient to be lethal while also retaining enough for a pass through. Something like 338 Lapua or 50 BMG for example.
There's no doubt a 5.56 round passing through your spine or splitting the ribs and passing through the heart would fall into the same category.
Consider a broadhead that passes through versus a blunt arrow that does not, both arriving on target with the same energy. Energy is potential; the specific work done by it matters.
Consider a broadhead that passes through versus a blunt arrow that does not, both arriving on target with the same energy. Energy is potential; the specific work done by it matters.
This is exactly what I was thinking. While a blunt is good for taking down small game, it's terrible for taking down medium and large game. A broad head doesn't dump it's energy into the body, the blades cut a larger wound channel and kills by bleeding. Broadheads that exit the body does more tissue damage.
My thoughts are a bullet that stays in the body is losing velocity until it comes to rest. The slower the bullet is going, the less tissue stretch it creates. In theory, stretching the tissue all the way through the body causes more damage.
A deep penetrating bullet is at one extreme. At the other is the bullet that blows up on the surface. Complete energy dump but none of it reaches the vitals. Same with using fine birdshot compared to buckshot or slugs. Payload weight and velocity is about the same for all three. Fine birdshot and buckshot both dump all their energy in the body, but the terminal performance of birdshot is terrible because it often doesn't reach the vitals. Buckshot is very effective because it has deeper penetration. I don't know if slugs over penetrate or not, but they're very effectives as well.
The answer is either energy dump isn't really a thing, or there's far more going on than just energy dump.
Again, I'm no expert. But I know (anecdotally only) that when it comes to killing animals, a through and through is more effective. How much more depends on the wound channel created.
Note: This assumes we understand shot placement is key.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.