62gr M855 or 55gr M193: Must choose ONE or THE OTHER for 16" bbl 1:7 twist [Archive]

PDA

View Full Version : 62gr M855 or 55gr M193: Must choose ONE or THE OTHER for 16" bbl 1:7 twist

SearchMe

04-12-23, 09:30

Uncas47

04-12-23, 09:35

Try a couple boxes of each first, then order a quantity. None of us knows what the hell your gun likes.

GH41

04-12-23, 09:41

If I could only have a thousand rounds it wouldn't be either of those. Make mine 77gr OTMs. Having said that I am the proud owner of enough 855 to sink a small ship!

MegademiC

04-12-23, 09:48

Whichever is cheaper for actually quality product.

I lean more towards 193.

markm

04-12-23, 10:00

Whichever is cheaper for actually quality product.

I lean more towards 193.

This! Shitty version of either flavor would suck. I don't know where to find REAL M193.. there's a lot of ammo out there using the designation in the description.

The recent WIN M855 commercial ammo is really good stuff. But it's full retail price anywhere I've seen it.

SearchMe

04-12-23, 10:00

Try a couple boxes of each first, then order a quantity. None of us knows what the hell your gun likes.
Feel better now?

For anyone who isn't a jackass, I'm speaking in general terms, about a typical 16" barrel with a typical 1:7 twist.

I'm asking about comparative ballistic performance and accuracy between those two rounds in general. There are other factors beyond "what the hell my gun likes" such as the steel core and overpenetration.

So generally speaking, which one would YOU buy in light of the "modern concerns" listed above?

Renegade04

04-12-23, 10:04

SearchMe

04-12-23, 10:04

Thanks, markm.

I'll probably buy PMC X-TAC in one flavor or the other. Both are available for around $450 per 1000rnds at present.

mack7.62

04-12-23, 10:16

Likely to face targets with body armor then M855, but stay away from PMC, low velocity.

SearchMe

04-12-23, 10:18

For the purposes you mentioned, M193 would be just fine. I would, however, recommend buying a few hundred rounds of the M855 to keep on hand.

Here is something that may help you.

https://www.gunmann.com/learning/m855-vs-m193/

Great article. Thanks for the link. It's a very clear, concise distillation of what I've been learning about this subject (until now my choice has been 7.62x51).

I want the long-range stability of the 62gr and I know the 1:7 prefers a heavier bullet, but the M855 steel core penetration is a concern for home defense. So I turn to the 55gr M193, but body armor is becoming "a fashion statement" for crims and anarchists, so the 55gr lesser penetration (and somewhat reduced bullet stability at distance) is an issue.

And I agree with you; having both cartidges on hand is best. Budget is a factor, but so is timing in terms of ammuntion availability and in terms of the likelihood of serious trouble. So maybe holding 500 of each will have to do for now.

Defaultmp3

04-12-23, 10:22

Feel better now?

For anyone who isn't a jackass, I'm speaking in general terms, about a typical 16" barrel with a typical 1:7 twist.

I'm asking about comparative ballistic performance and accuracy between those two rounds in general. There are other factors beyond "what the hell my gun likes" such as the steel core and overpenetration.

So generally speaking, which one would YOU buy in light of the "modern concerns" listed above?There is no "in general", though. If you're keeping it specifically to stash away for duty use, I would very much see what my gun likes, because accuracy is all that really matters in this context, since the terminal ballistics of both are pretty mediocre. The only real difference I can think of is that M855 can penetrate UHMWPE, while M193 out of a 16" is not going to be defeating steel plates very well. However, accuracy out of my gun would easily trump any body armor defeat, given that there's lots of ceramic armor out there.

All things being equal, I would lean toward M855 for pure duty use, I guess, because of its slightly better ballistic co-efficient and UHMWPE defeat, but I would much rather buy M193 if I was simply stockpiling, so that I could use it for training and use it against steel targets with less concern (assuming proper distance to give the bullet enough distance to be safe with a 55 gr bullet). If this is truly an emergency use only stash, I'd much rather have a smaller stash of quality duty ammo with barrier blind bullets than a bunch of M193 and M855; going through 1000 rounds without any kind of resupply or movement is pretty fantastical.

markm

04-12-23, 10:32

498cm3

04-12-23, 10:33

Go with the 855. Small detail but I believe 855 ballistics are more compatible with the carbine sight radius. Or that was the intent, anyway. And in my experience at 300m is the 855 disperses slightly less and holds the wind just a touch better.
I am talking standard irons here.

SearchMe

04-12-23, 10:35

Likely to face targets with body armor then M855, but stay away from PMC, low velocity.
I appreciate the warning. I've been reading reviews of the X-TAC saying it's top-notch in all respects... It's tough to know which online opinions to trust these days.

But that's not the worst of it; now you can't be 100% sure if your date for the evening is actually a DUDE. Ha! The whole thing is coming unglued, and leftist dimwits can't understand why thinking people are serious about arming up.

I will dig deeper on the PMC velocity issue. Do you have suggestions for PMC alternatives?

Defaultmp3

04-12-23, 10:40

Body armor isn't really a factor in so much as the zip of M193 will defeat the same armor that M855 will in the given distances. Any armor that can stop one, can stop the other. The mythical abilities of M855's penetrator are just that.Uh... no. UHMWPE can easily defeat M193 at the same distance that M855 would absolutely penetrate it. This is a well-known issues with pure UHMWPE plates, and why all level 3+ has become a popular marketing label for plates that use UHMWPE, to indicate that a plate can stop M855 (or other steel core penetrator rounds), typically through the use of a ceramic strike plate. M855's steel penetrator is pretty garbage in general at barrier defeat, but presents a unique threat against pure UHMWPE plates.

https://drmorgear.wordpress.com/2022/12/10/a-potential-mechanism-for-defeat-of-pure-polyethylene-plates-by-m855/

SearchMe

04-12-23, 11:07

There is no "in general", though. If you're keeping it specifically to stash away for duty use, I would very much see what my gun likes, because accuracy is all that really matters in this context, since the terminal ballistics of both are pretty mediocre.

Heh heh. That last line makes me laugh because until now I've put my faith in .30 cal. Per your comments, and the comments of others, I guess I will "buy a box of both" to see if there's any noticable difference for my particular rifle before jumping in with both feet.

The only real difference I can think of is that M855 can penetrate UHMWPE, while M193 out of a 16" is not going to be defeating steel plates very well.

A) I would lean toward M855 for pure duty use, I guess, because of its slightly better ballistic co-efficient and UHMWPE defeat,

B) but I would much rather buy M193 if I was simply stockpiling, so that I could use it for training and use it against steel targets with less concern (assuming proper distance to give the bullet enough distance to be safe with a 55 gr bullet).

So it's not just me then. In A and B above you spell out exactly my connundrum. What I take away from your remarks and from the helpful comments of others here is this:

I need to expand my budget to include BOTH cartridges in order to accommodate doomsday, training and personal defense.

THAT'S THE ANSWER FOR ME.

If this is truly an emergency use only stash, I'd much rather have a smaller stash of quality duty ammo with barrier blind bullets than a bunch of M193 and M855; going through 1000 rounds without any kind of resupply or movement is pretty fantastical.
What cartridge do you recommend for this? A particular bullet weight and shape? A particular manufacturer? Give me a starting point for further research.

Thanks

markm

04-12-23, 11:16

Uh... no. UHMWPE can easily defeat M193 at the same distance that M855 would absolutely penetrate it.

Interesting. I've never shot UHMWPE with anything so I can't debate that point. Unusual to find a medium that has such a penetration spread between the two projectiles.

kerplode

04-12-23, 11:18

193 for lulz and Bonded JSPs for realz

What cartridge do you recommend for this? A particular bullet weight and shape? A particular manufacturer? Give me a starting point for further research.
Thanks

Gold dots if you can find them. If you want it now, Fusion is a good substitute.
62gr Fusion @ SGAmmo (https://www.sgammo.com/product/223-556mm-ammo/20-round-box-223-rem-62-grain-soft-point-federal-fusion-ammo-f223fs1)

Defaultmp3

04-12-23, 11:19

What cartridge do you recommend for this? A particular bullet weight and shape? A particular manufacturer? Give me a starting point for further research.
I personally use Speer Gold Dot 75 gr. Federal MSR Fusion used to be a very popular choice as essentially a clone of Speer Gold Dot 62 gr., but with far wider availability and usually much cheaper. I'm of the opinion that any good bonded round, as often used in hunting, is going to be a much better bet than M193 or M855. The monolithic copper rounds are also viable, but seem to usually be more expensive, although you'll get better ballistic coefficient out of them usually for like-weight bonded rounds without ballistic tips.

From DocGKR, with his formatting preserved:

3/1/17

Only after proper foundational and ongoing repetitive refresher training, cultivating warrior mind-set, and ensuring weapon system reliability do you need to worry about ammunition selection. Most folks would be far better off practicing with what they have, rather than worrying about what is "best". As long as you know your what your weapon and ammo can realistically accomplish, it is all just a matter of training and shot placement. I would much rather go into battle with a guy who practices 15,000 rounds a year using generic 55 gr FMJ out of his old M16A1 than with some guy that has the latest state-of-the-art ammo and rifle, but only shoots 500 rounds a year. If you need to delve into the arcane subject of agency duty ammunition selection, below are the state of the art choices in 5.56 mm/.223:

------------------------------

For LE Patrol use, where there is a high incidence of potential engagements around or involving vehicles, ammunition that is able to effectively penetrate intermediate barriers, particularly vehicle glass is critical. The best LE 5.56 mm/.223 loads for intermediate barrier penetration using 1/9 and faster twist barrels are the 5.56 mm Federal 62 gr Trophy Bonded Bear Claw (TBBC) bonded JSP (XM556FBIT3) and 5.56 mm Winchester 64 gr solid base bonded JSP (Q3313/RA556B) developed for the FBI, along with the outstanding new Black Hills 5.56 mm 50 gr TSX loading. The Hornady 5.56 mm 55 gr GMX is another acceptable option. Note that these are all true 5.56 mm loads that require a real milspec 5.56 mm chamber, not a SAAMI .223 chamber--be sure to check with an appropriate gauge or reamer. Most other acceptable LE barrier blind loadings are at .223 pressures, including the .223 55 & 62 gr Federal bonded JSP Tactical loads (LE223T1 & LE223T3), along with loads using Nosler 60 gr Partition JSP, Remington 62 gr Core-Lokt Ultra Bonded JSP (PRC223R4), .223 Federal 55 gr TSX (T223S), .223 Horn 55 gr GMX, and the .223 Speer 62/64 gr Gold Dot JSP's (and identically constructed Federal 62 gr Fusion JSP and Federal XM223SP1 62gr Bonded JSP). The Speer 75 gr Gold Dot JSP and Swift 75 gr Scirocco bonded PT are also good choices, but usually require a 1/7 twist. Note that the Barnes all copper TSX bullets are great projectiles and offer good penetration through barriers, however, when first hitting a laminated automobile windshield intermediate barrier, most TSX bullets exhibit less expansion than bonded JSP’s, as the Barnes jacket either collapses at the nose, the jacket "petals" fold back against the core, or the "petals" are torn off; this results in a caliber size projectile configured a lot like a full wadcutter, leading to deep penetration. If running 1/12 twist barrels, stick with the BH 50 gr TSX, Fed 55 gr TBBC, Fed 55 gr TSX, Horn 55 gr GMX, or Speer 55 gr Gold Dot. NONE of the fragmenting 5.56 mm OTM bullets, even the heavy 75 - 100 gr loads, offer acceptable performance through automobile windshield glass. Contrary to what many believe, M193 & M855 FMJ are not very good against glass; the best military 5.56 mm load against glass is 52 gr M995 AP, followed by the 62 gr Mk318 Mod0 OTM and 70 gr Optimal "brown tip" OTM.

In those situations where intermediate barrier penetration is not a critical requirement, for example LE urban entries or long range shots in open conditions, then OTM, JHP, and standard JSP loads can offer acceptable performance. For 1/7 twist barrels, the Hornady 75 gr OTM, Nosler 77 gr OTM, and Sierra 77 gr SMK OTM are all good choices. The experimental BH loaded 100 gr OTM exhibits impressive fragmentation, even at relatively low velocities, however while capable of shooting out to 600, it is optimized for 200 and under. If stuck with 1/9 twist barrels, the heavy 70+ gr loads are not universally accurate in all rifles and the 69 gr SMK OTM, the 68 gr Hornady OTM, the Winchester 64 gr JSP (RA223R2), the Federal 64 gr TRU (T223L) JSP, Hornady 60 gr JSP, are likely to run accurately in the majority of 1/9 twist rifles. Again it is critical to keep in mind that the above loads fail to offer adequate penetration through intermediate barriers.

For longer range engagements using precision weapons like the Mk12 SPR or DMR rifles with faster 1/8 or 1/7 twist barrels, one of the combat proven 5.56 mm (ie. 5.56 mm NATO pressure loads, not .223 SAAMI pressure loads which run about 200 f/s slower) heavy OTM loadings are a good choice: the Barnes 70 gr TSX (Optimized "browntip"), Hornady 75 gr TAP (#8126N), Nosler 77 gr, or the Sierra 77 gr Match King (Mk262 Mod1) and 77 gr Tipped Match King.

Short barreled 5.56 mm weapons, such as the Colt Commando, Mk18 CQBR, HK416, HK53, HK G36C, etc… offer advantages in confined spaces. With SBR’s it is best to stick with the barrier blind loads recommended above, although the heavy OTM's suggested for long distance shooting will also work. SBR's can run into rotational velocity issues with some loads, so it is generally best to select faster 1/7 twist barrels whenever possible. Remember, with SBR’s, effective engagement distances are significantly reduced compared to the longer barreled carbines.

Keep in mind, that with non-fragmenting bullet designs, heavier bullet weights are not necessarily better, especially at closer ranges and from shorter barrels. As long as penetration and upset remain adequate, it is possible to use lighter weight non-fragmenting bullets and still have outstanding terminal performance. With fragmenting designs, a heavier bullet is ideal, as it provides more potential fragments and still allows the central core to have enough mass for adequate penetration. In addition, heavier bullets may have an advantage at longer ranges due to better BC and less wind drift.

Whatever projectile is used, it is best with a cannelure to prevent bullet set-back in semi-auto/auto weapons. Also, be cautious with the exposed lead on some JSP designs. Often they will run great for up to 200-300 rounds, but then mysterious feeding failures will begin as a result of lead build-up on the feed ramps. I have personally seen this occur with a variety of JSP's including 55 gr, 60 gr, and 64 gr in LE training courses. As soon as FMJ or OTM was substituted, all the feeding failures ceased.

Be sure to watch your ammo storage conditions. Temperatures above 150 deg F will degrade the powder and cause pressure spikes. Hint: Think locked metal conex containers in the mid-east, car trunks in the southern U.S., and storage areas near heaters in the northern U.S. Also be cautions of leaving a round in a very hot chamber; besides the obvious danger of a cook-off, the powder can also be damaged by the heat, leading to dramatically increased pressures when the round is eventually fired.

A large SWAT team in this area had a failure to fire from an M4 with Hornady TAP ammo during an entry--fortunately no officers were hurt and the suspect immediately threw down his weapon when the carbine went click instead of bang. After the incident was concluded, the team went to the range and expended the rest of their carbine ammo and had one additional failure to fire. This same team had 3 Hornady TAP rounds fail to fire in training a couple of years ago. When Pat Rogers was teaching a class at a nearby agency, there were 5 failures to fire using Hornady TAP ammo. In all 10 cases, there appeared to be good primer strikes, but no rounds fired. On analysis, the ammunition had powder and checked out otherwise.

However, despite what appeared to be good primer strikes, two problems were discovered. First, when accurately measured, some of the primer strikes had insufficient firing pin indentations. The failed round from the potential OIS incident had a primer strike of only .013"—the minimum firing pin indent for ignition is .017". In addition, the primers on the other rounds were discovered to have been damaged from repeated chambering. When the same cartridge is repeatedly chambered in the AR15, the floating firing pin lightly taps the primer; with repeated taps, the primer compound gets crushed, resulting in inadequate ignition characteristics--despite what appears to be a normal firing pin impression. Once a round has been chambered, DO NOT RE-CHAMBER IT for duty use. Do NOT re-chamber it again, except for training. This is CRITICAL!!!

------------------------------

Many LE agencies around here used the Hornady 75 gr TAP OTM, Winchester 64 gr JSP (it was on the state contract for very low cost), and similar Fed 64 gr JSP TRU load (223L)--all have worked well in actual officer involved shootings against unobstructed targets. However in the wake of the serious terminal performance failures by non-bonded .223 64 gr JSP's due to inadequate penetration into the criminal's Toyota Tundra truck in the July 2010 CHP OIS incident in Oakland, quite a few agencies here switched to general issue of Barrier Blind loads like the 55 & 64 gr Gold Dot loads, along with the 55 & 62 gr TBBC loads that previously saw more limited use.

Do short barrel 5.56 mm carbines have some limitations? Yes, especially beyond 100 yards, but BFD…learn what they are, train, and drive on. Despite the ballistic compromise, for LE urban work with lots of entries, the 10.5-12.5” BCM, Colt, Centurian, LaRue, LMT Mk18/Commando style weapons w/Aimpoint RDS's are the best weapon types for this mission. For GP LE Patrol use, properly built AR15's like the 14.5-16” BCM, Colt, LMT, LaRue, Centurian carbines with Aimpoint RDS's and 3x magnifiers in quick detach flip mounts like the LaRue LT649 are superb choices (quality variable optics like a S&B 1.1-4x Short Dot, NF 1.1-4x, or Trijicon 1-4x are also good options) -- pick the right tool for the job.

Interesting. I've never shot UHMWPE with anything so I can't debate that point. Unusual to find a medium that has such a penetration spread between the two projectiles.This has been a sore point in the armor business, as unscrupulous salespersons have been known to tout how their Level III pure UHMWPE plates can take hit after hit of M80 and M193, while being very lightweight and positively buoyant (or at least neutral) in water, while neglecting to mention that M855 can easily defeat their plate.

markm

04-12-23, 11:20

I too would like to go all Bonded bullet. But it just is not what we shoot every weekend for longer range stuff, and point of impact can be dramatically different.

Todd.K

04-12-23, 12:18

The idea that there is so much UHMW out there that it should drive ammo selection is pretty questionable. There are far too many ceramic plates out there to think M855 will make a difference if you go up against body armor.

All the barrel twist arguments and longer range stuff is just not relevant for putting up a case of ball ammo.

Buy a case of M193 so you don’t have any training/range limitations. Then work on a couple hundred rounds of something barrier blind, and training. Some training is far more likely to help you survive a gunfight than a basement full of ammo.

Sidneyious

04-12-23, 12:20

I have 10.5-16 inch guns and I use almost exclusively m193.

So far all of it is lake city and igman.

markm

04-12-23, 12:22

mack7.62

04-12-23, 14:02

Appears X-TAC has upped their game, PMC is now showing a MV of 3,100 fps, I likely bought the last bad lot at 2,920.:o

70131

Defaultmp3

04-12-23, 14:49

Appears X-TAC has upped their game, PMC is now showing a MV of 3,100 fps, I likely bought the last bad lot at 2,920.:o

701313100 FPS is from a 20" barrel. 2920 FPS is from a 14.5".

rocsteady

04-12-23, 16:19

Try a couple boxes of each first, then order a quantity. None of us knows what the hell your gun likes.

Heh heh. That last line makes me laugh because until now I've put my faith in .30 cal. Per your comments, and the comments of others, I guess I will "buy a box of both" to see if there's any noticable difference for my particular rifle before jumping in with both feet.

So it's not just me then. In A and B above you spell out exactly my connundrum. What I take away from your remarks and from the helpful comments of others here is this:

I need to expand my budget to include BOTH cartridges in order to accommodate doomsday, training and personal defense.

THAT'S THE ANSWER FOR ME.

What cartridge do you recommend for this? A particular bullet weight and shape? A particular manufacturer? Give me a starting point for further research.

Thanks

So this was good advice after all, maybe just asked a little bluntly for your tastes? I did get a little chuckle out of this though, so thanks for that to all invovled.

rocsteady

04-12-23, 16:20

Try a couple boxes of each first, then order a quantity. None of us knows what the hell your gun likes.

Heh heh. That last line makes me laugh because until now I've put my faith in .30 cal. Per your comments, and the comments of others, I guess I will "buy a box of both" to see if there's any noticable difference for my particular rifle before jumping in with both feet.

So it's not just me then. In A and B above you spell out exactly my connundrum. What I take away from your remarks and from the helpful comments of others here is this:

I need to expand my budget to include BOTH cartridges in order to accommodate doomsday, training and personal defense.

THAT'S THE ANSWER FOR ME.

What cartridge do you recommend for this? A particular bullet weight and shape? A particular manufacturer? Give me a starting point for further research.

Thanks

Feel better now?

For anyone who isn't a jackass, I'm speaking in general terms, about a typical 16" barrel with a typical 1:7 twist.

I'm asking about comparative ballistic performance and accuracy between those two rounds in general. There are other factors beyond "what the hell my gun likes" such as the steel core and overpenetration.

So generally speaking, which one would YOU buy in light of the "modern concerns" listed above?

Sorry, forgot to include this in the quotes above

Inkslinger

04-12-23, 17:22

Appears X-TAC has upped their game, PMC is now showing a MV of 3,100 fps, I likely bought the last bad lot at 2,920.:o

70131

X-TAC has never felt underpowered to me. Bronze on the other hand is noticeably weaker. My stash is the IMI 77gr. Buy a case of either of your choices. Then start buying the 240 round packs of the IMI 77gr from Sgammo.com whenever you can part with $250. You’ll have a good stash of it before our country sinks into total anarchy.

MSW

04-12-23, 17:40

XM193 or IMI M193 or Winchester Q3131, but i can’t vouch for current production. I still have South African battle packs of M193 for a rainy day with zombies.

But, I also don’t have to choose, since I already have that & others. Based on stories about M855 “ice pick wounds” of the listed choices, 55gr as-close-to-real M193.

ETA: back in the 1980s when PMC was $2.99/20 rounds, I shot it & was always amazed at how we found whole, intact projectiles laying near the targets vs the M193 (a friends dad in the National Guard obtained) which we only ever found fragments. I’ve always been biased against PMC since then, but have never chrono’d or done gel tests; I have chrono’d the above M193-ish ammo & they’re consistent.

Molon

04-12-23, 18:04

Winchester Q3131, but i can’t vouch for current production.
Winchester Q3131 is some of the shittiest M193 that I've ever tested.

https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/28568/winchester_q3131_10_shot_group_at_100_ya-2201162.jpg

The bases of Winchester 55 grain FMJ bullets . . .

https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/28568/winchester_55_fmj_bullet_bases_from_colt-2777633.jpg

The current Winchester M193 being manufactured at Lake City is a different animal

Winchester M193

https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/28568/winchester_m183_box_2021-2210446.jpg

This lot of Winchester M193 is loaded in Lake City brass with a 2021 headstamp. The case-head stamp exhibits the octal station identifiers found on Lake City SCAMP machinery. The brass cases have the annealing iris still visible. The rounds are charged with ball powder.

The primer pockets are crimped, but do not have any sealant. The case mouths are also crimped, but also have no sealant.

https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/28568/winchester_m193_headstamp_2021-2210472.jpg

https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/28568/lake_city_scamp_octal__numbering_03_resi-2209035.jpg

The lot number for this lot of Winchester M193 is pictured below. The “WLC21” in the prefix of the lot number indicates that this lot of Winchester M193 was manufactured at Lake City in 2021 under Winchester “management.”

https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/28568/winchester_m193_lot_number_2021-2210503.jpg

“The average of the mean radii of all targets of the sample cartridges, fired at 200 yards, shall not exceed 2.0 inches.”

These averages are from 10-shot groups fired from machine rested, bolt-actioned, heavy test barrels. All things being equal this specification equates to a mean radius of 1 inch at 100 yards (the distance at which I tested this ammunition).

Winchester M193

Three 10-shot groups of the Winchester M193 ammunition fired consecutively from the Lothar Walther barreled AR-15 at a distance of 100 yards had the following extreme spreads:

2.21”

2.65”

2.09”

for a 10-shot group average extreme spread of 2.32”. I over-layed the three 10-shot groups on each other using RSI Shooting Lab to form a 30-shot composite group. The mean radius of the 30-shot composite group was 0.72”.

The smallest 10-shot group . . .

https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/28568/winchester_m193_2021_10_shot_group_at_10-2211704.jpg

The 30-shot composite group . . .

https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/28568/winchester_m193_2021_30_shot_composite_g-2211723.jpg

https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/28568/return_of_the_m193_clones_muzzle_velocit-2210949.jpg

grizzman

04-12-23, 18:10

Neither.

Speer Gold Dots or Federal Fusion are both better options. It's highly unlikely that you'll need mass quantities tomorrow, so buy some of each now to see what your rifle likes. Once that's determined, buy 120 rounds per week until you've got what you deem necessary.

MSW

04-12-23, 18:16

Molon

04-12-23, 18:18

I know the 1:7 prefers a heavier bullet,

No, you don't "know" that.

55 Grain FMJ Ammunition Fired From AR-15s With 1:9” and 1:7” Twist Barrels

The Internet Commando: "55 grain FMJ bullets are unstable/overstabilized/inaccurate/less-lethal when fired from an AR-15 with a 1:7” twist barrel."

Statements such as the one above always seem to be proclaimed by the Internet Commando, without posting any valid, statistically significant data to support that these effects occur, or that if they do occur, that they do so to any degree that has any significant effect on the accuracy/precision spectrum involved with AR-15s firing M193-type ammunition out to distances of 100 yards.

By definition, an “unstable” bullet will have a gyroscopic stability factor of less than 1.0 at the muzzle. A typical 55 grain FMJ bullet loaded in M193-type ammunition will have a gyroscopic stability factor of approximately 4.27 when fired from a 20” barrel with a 1:7” twist.

4.27 is not less than 1.0.

The following demonstration compares the results of firing four, 10-shot groups of the same lot of 55 grain Prvi Partizan M193 ammunition from two different AR-15 barrels; one barrel with a 1:9” twist, the other barrel with a 1:7” twist. When chronographed from a 20” Colt M16A2 barrel, the muzzle velocity of this lot of PPU M193 was 3219 FPS with a standard deviation of 35 FPS.

The accuracy specification for M193 cited in MIL-C-9963F is as follows:
The average of the mean radii of all targets of the sample cartridges, fired at 200 yards, shall not exceed 2.0 inches.
These averages are from 10-shot groups fired from machine rested, bolt-actioned test barrels. All things being equal (which of course they seldom are) this specification equates to a mean radius of 1 inch at 100 yards.

https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/28568/ppu_m193_boxes_01b-1900848.jpg

https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/28568/ppu_m193_bullet_01b-1900849.jpg

The first barrel used in testing was a 16” Colt HBAR with chrome-lining, a NATO chamber and a 1:9” twist. This is the barrel found on the Colt 6721. All of my free-floated Colt 6721 barrels have turned in sub-MOA 10-shot groups at 100 yards when using match-grade hand-loads.

The second barrel used in testing was a 20” Colt HBAR, also with chrome-lining, a NATO chamber and of course a 1:7” twist. I've owned three of these barrels and they have all turned in 10-shot groups at 100 yards that hover just above one MOA when free-floated and shooting match grade handloads. I purposely selected the shorter barrel with a 1:9" twist and the longer barrel with the 1:7" twist in order to exacerbate any possible statistically significant influence that the differing twist rates and intendent muzzle velocities might have on the precision of M193-type ammunition when fired at a distance of 100 yards.

Colt 16” HBAR

https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/28568/colt_6721_barrel_stripped_033-1891065.jpg

Colt 20” HBAR

https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/28568/colt_20_inch_hbar_002-1887683.jpg

Accuracy (technically, precision) testing was conducted from a distance of 100 yards following my usual protocol. The barrels were free-floated during testing. The fore-ends of the weapons rested in a Sinclair Windage Benchrest and the butt-stock rode in a Protektor rear-bag. Sighting was accomplished via a Leupold VARI-X III set at 25X magnification and adjusted to be parallax-free at 100 yards. A mirage shade was used. The wind conditions on the range were continuously monitored using a Wind Probe. The set-up was very similar to that pictured below.

https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/28568/benchrest_setup_003-1900844.jpg

The Wind Probe . . .

https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/28568/wind_probe_2016_01_framedb-1900858.jpg

Four 10-shot groups of the PPU M193 were fired from the 1:9” twist barrel. Those groups were over-layed on each other using RSI Shooting Lab to form a 40-shot composite group. The mean radius of that composite group was 1.08”.
As with the 1:9” twist, four 10-shot groups were fired from the 1:7” twist barrel. Those groups were also over-layed on each other to form a 40-shot composite group; the results were nearly identical to those obtained from the 1:9” twist barrel. The composite group had a mean radius of 1.01”. The two composite groups are shown side by side for comparison.

https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/28568/ppu_m193_barrel_twist_comparison_002-1900873.jpg

The entire test as described above was also conducted using a second 16" chrome-lined, NATO chambered Colt HBAR with a 1:9" twist and a second 20" chrome-lined, NATO chambered Colt HBAR with a 1:7" twist. The ammunition used in this test was all from the same lot of Wolf 55 grain FMJ "Performance Ammunition."

As before, four 10-shot groups fired from each barrel at 100 yards were over-layed on each other using RSI Shooting Lab and just as before, the mean radii for these 40-shot composite groups showed no statistically significant difference.

https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/28568/wolf_55_fmj_twist_comparison_composite_g-1900879.jpg

Quality, modern lightweight bullets of copper-jacket/lead-core construction can shoot superbly from AR-15s with fast twist barrels. Typical 55 grain FMJ bullets found in M193-type ammunition do not fall into the quality category.

The 10-shot group pictured below was fired at a distance of 100 yards using 55 grain Sierra BlitzKings from one of my Krieger barreled AR-15s. The barrel has a 1:7.7” twist. The group has an extreme spread of 0.439 MOA.

https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/28568/55_grain_blitzkings_10_shot_group_at_100-1353790.jpg

https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/28568/55_blitzking_vs_55_fnj_003-1880929.jpg

……

From Dr. G.K. Roberts . . .

"The U.S. Army Wound Ballistic Research Laboratory conducted terminal performance testing using 5.56 mm 55 gr M193 FMJ ammunition fired in 20” barrels of 1/14, 1/12, 1/9, and 1/7 twist rates. No difference in terminal performance was noted between shots made with the different twists. Similar testing was conducted with 5.56 mm 62 gr M855 FMJ ammunition fired in 1/9 and 1/7 twist barrels. Again, no difference in terminal performance was noted."

.........

An Accuracy Comparison of M855 When Fired From AR-15s With 1:9” Twist and 1:7” Twist Barrels.

https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/28568/M855_21-1900898.jpg

This test will compare the accuracy (technically, precision) of IMI M855 at a distance of 100 yards, when fired from an AR-15 with a chrome-lined, NATO chambered barrel with a 1:9” twist and an AR-15 with a chrome-lined, NATO chambered barrel with a 1:7” twist. The IMI M855 is one of the most accurate and consistent loadings of all the M855 clones that I have tested.

IMI M855 is loaded with a 62 grain FMJ bullet with a cannelure. It also has a steel penetrator seated in the ogive portion of the projectile. This makes the projectile unusually long for its weight, as well as giving it a lower specific gravity. The ammunition is charged with "ball powder". The primers are sealed and crimped in placed. The bullet is also crimped in place and the case mouth is sealed with an asphalt sealant.

https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/28568/IMI_m855_old_and_new_bullets_01-1900900.jpg

Chronograph data for the IMI M855 was obtained using an Oehler 35P with "proof screen" technology. All velocities listed are muzzle velocities as calculated from instrumental velocities using Oehler's Ballistic Explorer software program. All strings of fire consisted of 10 shots each.

https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/28568/IMI_m855_muzzle_velocities-1900899.jpg

This accuracy evaluation used statistically significant shot-group sizes and every single shot in a fired group was included in the measurements. There was absolutely no use of any group reduction techniques (e.g. fliers, target movement, Butterfly Shots).

The shooting set-up will be described in detail below. As many of the significant variables as was practicable were controlled for. All shooting was conducted from a concrete bench-rest from a distance of 100 yards (confirmed with a laser rangefinder.) The barrels used in the evaluation were free-floated. The free-float handguard of the rifle rested in a Sinclair Windage Benchrest with the aid of a Sinclair fore-arm adaptor, while the stock of the rifle rested in a Protektor bunny-ear rear bag. Sighting was accomplished via a Leupold VARI-X III set at 25X magnification and adjusted to be parallax-free at 100 yards. A mirage shade was used. Wind conditions on the shooting range were continuously monitored using a Wind Probe. All rounds were fired from the magazine. Each upper was fired using the same lower.

The barrels used in this evaluation were both Colt HBARs with NATO chambers and chrome lining. The 1:7” twist barrel was 20” in length and the 1:9” twist barrel was 16” in length. I purposely selected the shorter barrel with a 1:9" twist and the longer barrel with the 1:7" twist in order to exacerbate any possible statistically significant influence that the differing twist rates and intendent muzzle velocities might have on the precision of the M855 ammunition.

The first barrel used in testing was 16” Colt HBAR with chrome-lining, a NATO chamber and a 1:9” twist. This is the barrel found on the Colt 6721. All of my free-floated Colt 6721 barrels have turned in sub-MOA 10-shot groups at 100 yards when using match-grade hand-loads.

The second barrel used in testing was a 20” Colt HBAR, also with chrome-lining, a NATO chamber and of course a 1:7” twist. I've owned three of these barrels and they have all turned in 10-shot groups at 100 yards that hover just above one MOA when free-floated and shooting match grade handloads.

Three 10-shot groups were fired from the upper with the 1:9” twist barrel in the manner described above. The extreme spreads for those groups measured:

2.72”
2.19”
2.24”

for a 10-shot group average of 2.38”. The three 10-shot groups were over-layed on each other using RSI Shooting Lab to form a 30-shot composite group. The mean radius for the composite group was 0.76”.

In the same manner as above, three 10-shot groups were fired from the upper with the 1:7” twist barrel. The extreme spreads of those groups measured:

2.14”
3.01”
1.71”

for a 10-shot group average of 2.29”. As before, the three 10-shot groups were over-layed on each other using RSI Shooting Lab to form a 30-shot composite group. The mean radius for this composite group was 0.68”.

...

SearchMe

04-12-23, 18:30

I personally use Speer Gold Dot 75 gr. Federal MSR Fusion used to be a very popular choice as essentially a clone of Speer Gold Dot 62 gr., but with far wider availability and usually much cheaper. I'm of the opinion that any good bonded round, as often used in hunting, is going to be a much better bet than M193 or M855. The monolithic copper rounds are also viable, but seem to usually be more expensive, although you'll get better ballistic coefficient out of them usually for like-weight bonded rounds without ballistic tips.

From DocGKR, with his formatting preserved:

3/1/17

Only after proper foundational and ongoing repetitive refresher training, cultivating warrior mind-set, and ensuring weapon system reliability do you need to worry about ammunition selection. Most folks would be far better off practicing with what they have, rather than worrying about what is "best". As long as you know your what your weapon and ammo can realistically accomplish, it is all just a matter of training and shot placement.

[...] I READ THE WHOLE THING, but pared it down for this quote

Yikes. That's a lot to think about. Thank you for posting. I'll hold onto it for future reference.

My Dad was a combat sergeant in the Marine Corps, and he convinced me long ago to stick with .30 caliber for man stopping. I think that's good advice, but I bought an AR15 recently "just to have something on hand chambered in 5.56" in case .308 is hard to find. It turns out I really like the AR15 platform and will eventually find an AR chambered in .308, as well.

Is it fair to say that effective tactical deployment of an AR15 is very dependent on choice of ammunition, far more so than a 7.62x51 rifle is, or even a 7.62x39 rifle is? 5.56 bullets are just so small (no offense intended). I think 7.62 NATO is much more effective in terms of barrier penetration for several reasons, one of which is simply its heavier, larger-diameter bullet.

As someone with zero AR15 experience yet, it sounds to me as though tactical readiness means having mulitiple magazines at hand, each mag loaded with one of several situation-specific types of ammunition. That is, unless you've figured which (expensive) round will perform well across the board, AND you can afford lots of it.

In my experience, complications and limitations are often by-products of specialization, and not just with regard to firearms. The AR design has improved on many aspects of military rifle design, but in so doing, may have become so specialized that the user has to go to greater lengths (specialized ammuntion in this case) to achieve broad usefulness.

Yes? No?

MSW

04-12-23, 18:47

I’ve operated on scores of people who have been shot.

Not one of them ever complained about the choice of round they were shot with—they usually complained about the belly pain or trouble breathing. Extremity pain, of course, with extremity hits.

Are there good, better & best choices with ammo? Of course.
But the differences in tissue destruction often relate to movement, like breathing & sometimes, sheer dumb luck.
Yes, more consistent tissue damage will more consistently stop someone from doing what they were doing, but there’s no such thing as a “magic bullet.”

Almost everything is a compromise. Either round will be better than none in the SHTF TEOTWAWKI.

I think people get a little too hung up on gear.

Wake27

04-12-23, 21:06

Yikes. That's a lot to think about. Thank you for posting. I'll hold onto it for future reference.

My Dad was a combat sergeant in the Marine Corps, and he convinced me long ago to stick with .30 caliber for man stopping. I think that's good advice, but I bought an AR15 recently "just to have something on hand chambered in 5.56" in case .308 is hard to find. It turns out I really like the AR15 platform and will eventually find an AR chambered in .308, as well.

Is it fair to say that effective tactical deployment of an AR15 is very dependent on choice of ammunition, far more so than a 7.62x51 rifle is, or even a 7.62x39 rifle is? 5.56 bullets are just so small (no offense intended). I think 7.62 NATO is much more effective in terms of barrier penetration for several reasons, one of which is simply its heavier, larger-diameter bullet.

As someone with zero AR15 experience yet, it sounds to me as though tactical readiness means having mulitiple magazines at hand, each mag loaded with one of several situation-specific types of ammunition. That is, unless you've figured which (expensive) round will perform well across the board, AND you can afford lots of it.

In my experience, complications and limitations are often by-products of specialization, and not just with regard to firearms. The AR design has improved on many aspects of military rifle design, but in so doing, may have become so specialized that the user has to go to greater lengths (specialized ammuntion in this case) to achieve broad usefulness.

Yes? No?

You can do that with any round. You probably don’t have to here though, regardless of the size of 5.56 against .308.

Buy the cheapest brass stuff you can get and go from there. I’d take 193 in a decent AR all day over numerous other options. Yes there’s far better for various roles, but I do think you’re over analyzing at this point.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

MegademiC

04-12-23, 21:57

Molon: Winchester Q3131 is some of the shittiest M193 that I've ever tested.

It would hit steel out to 300 yards & velocity was ok, so I had no complaints. I think I have 500 rounds left.

When I need accuracy, I use Black Hills & my own handloads

What sized steel?

Great article. Thanks for the link. It's a very clear, concise distillation of what I've been learning about this subject (until now my choice has been 7.62x51).

I want the long-range stability of the 62gr and I know the 1:7 prefers a heavier bullet, but the M855 steel core penetration is a concern for home defense. So I turn to the 55gr M193, but body armor is becoming "a fashion statement" for crims and anarchists, so the 55gr lesser penetration (and somewhat reduced bullet stability at distance) is an issue.

And I agree with you; having both cartidges on hand is best. Budget is a factor, but so is timing in terms of ammuntion availability and in terms of the likelihood of serious trouble. So maybe holding 500 of each will have to do for now.

Just pick one. Having specialized rounds is dumb. You can't pause a situation for ammo change.

It doesnt matter, hits do.

Fwiw my 1st line is 62gr fusion followed by 69gr handload backups. All good for 2/3 ipsc out to 600+, or 300yd headshots. Anything hd distance doesnt matter, im going COM and if Im not satisfied with the result ill go to the face. Are you trying to predict a home invasion force's plate choice? Better off plating blackjack and hiring guards with your massive profits.

Techniques and skill make or break a situation, ammo wont with modern rifle rounds.

CPM

04-12-23, 22:10

I’m a 193 guy, mainly because I shoot a lot of steel. Also, it just doesn’t matter. No one has ever taken one to the sternum and thought, “Boy, that felt like it had a steel penetrator.”

I’ll tell you what’s more important though- your cardiovascular fitness. How quickly could you run a mile right now?

vicious_cb

04-13-23, 04:19

Not sure why you would limit yourself to two rounds that pretty much suck from a modern standpoint. But if you were going choose a round based on pure terminal performance between the two I would say M193 would suck less due to having less fleet yaw issues that tends to plague M855 projectiles hence the shaky combat history of the round throughout the 90's and GWOT era.

All of this assuming that you can actually source a decent M193 clone that actually fragments of which MANY of the foreign labeled "M193" ammo does not due to jacket thickness variance. Or just avoid this issue entire by buying a small quantity of decently performing ammo. You arent exactly breaking the bank with a few mags of Federal Fusion or Mk318 which are the most cost effective well performing rounds available. Even some match OTM projectiles which arent ideal but still perform pretty decently are very easy to source at a fair price.

bamashooter

04-13-23, 07:17

markm

04-13-23, 09:02

I’m a 193 guy, mainly because I shoot a lot of steel.

That's the reason we NEVER shoot M193. It's too hard on steel. We have several 3/8" AR500 plates with perforations due to M193s velocity. M855 is actually nicer to steel inside of 100 yards or so.... M193 dumps velocity much quicker so as you get to longer distances, it's not too abusive on the steel.

For us, the 100 yard line is as close as we will shoot 55gr FMJs.

CPM

04-13-23, 09:11

That's the reason we NEVER shoot M193. It's too hard on steel. We have several 3/8" AR500 plates with perforations due to M193s velocity. M855 is actually nicer to steel inside of 100 yards or so.... M193 dumps velocity much quicker so as you get to longer distances, it's not too abusive on the steel.

For us, the 100 yard line is as close as we will shoot 55gr FMJs.

Does not compute for me.

Adrenaline_6

04-13-23, 09:36

Velocity is the key on keeping steel in good condition. A good guideline is <2850 fps.

markm

04-13-23, 09:39

Does not compute for me.

Years back I did a bunch of un-scientific experiments on AR 500 and AR 450 abrasion plates. I shot them both with M855 and M193 at various distances. And inside of 80-100 yards, the higher velocity of the M193 pocked the gongs deeper.

M193's lighter bullets dumps velocity much faster so somewhere in the 100 yard range the plate damage becomes a wash. I've lost the images because this was back in the Photobucket days, but gist of it was that velocity is the enemy of AR500. Pappabear poked several holes in his nice steel back in the day with XM193 type ammo. We never shoot light bullets anymore anyway, but if we do happen to run some 55gr FMJ, we keep it out to 100 yards.

Swstock

04-13-23, 11:29

IF i had to pick 1000 rounds of ball ammo., my first choice is Magtech 62gr non steel core..

Tie for scond and third is PMC Xtac m193 and MEN m193.

In my experience, these shoot the best. Im no scientist and Im no Molon but its what my opinion is.

Swstock

04-13-23, 11:31

X-TAC has never felt underpowered to me. Bronze on the other hand is noticeably weaker. My stash is the IMI 77gr. Buy a case of either of your choices. Then start buying the 240 round packs of the IMI 77gr from Sgammo.com whenever you can part with $250. You’ll have a good stash of it before our country sinks into total anarchy.

Bronze sucks. I like the xtac.

Disciple

04-13-23, 12:26

Purpose 1: Personal defense at around-the-house distances.
Purpose 2: Potential large-scale societal chaos at urban distances out to 100 yards.
Purpose 3: Potential confict in rural areas (as in Ukraine) out to 300 yards.

Out to 300 yards? Gold Dot or Fusion. Barrier blind and better accuracy than other bonded bullets. Use the XM stuff for range blasting, and 77 grain match for longer ranges.

lysander

04-13-23, 12:36

You can't make me choose just one . . .

Uncas47

04-13-23, 12:52

You can't make me choose just one . . .

Delete

sinister

04-14-23, 07:22

Between the two, M193. While there might be some especially notable M855 lots out there somewhere, my experience is it goes bang and isn't anything great.

So many of Molon's tests include the reference group of 52-grain Sierra Tipped Blitzkings poking tiny groups. In the intelligence business, this is called "A clue."

In real-life, I think a Sierra 69-grain standard or Tipped Match King is a great choice to 300 yards / Meters. You can buy it as Federal factory ammunition.

Lethality starts with hits. Only hits count. Firepower isn't bullets fired or flying through the air -- firepower is hitting targets.

sinister

04-14-23, 07:23

If you have to shoot through barriers use the right gun. Chances are it's not a 5.56.

Molon

04-14-23, 16:28

I want the long-range stability of the 62gr

You said that you'll only be shooting out to 300 yards. Do you think that M193 magically becomes unstable at 299 yards?

...

Molon

04-14-23, 16:32

Great article.

“M855A1 . . good for varminting and practice.”

“Check out the trajectory characteristics of the M193 and M855 bullets. There are no variations in bullet weights or other factors because the major factor of differentiation between these cartridges is their bullet weight.”

https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/28568/smiley_freak-2623464.gif

........

markm

04-14-23, 16:41

Reads like a Biden speech.

Molon

04-14-23, 16:52

Reads like a Biden speech.

LOL.

...

202

04-14-23, 18:21

If you are just starting on the AR platform, get any of the two to get you running and also for training. If SHTF happens, you can be ready.
Then little by little, box by box, buy some of the other options mentioned on this thread.

AndyLate

04-15-23, 07:25

If this is ammo to be stashed for SHTF, why not buy 500 rounds of ball and put the money you would spend on the second half towards quality bonded soft point or OTM? If you are buying to shoot plus keep some on hand for SHTF, my money would go towards decent M193 ball unless I found M855 at a better price.

It's unlikely many of us would survive long enough to run through more than a few hundred rounds if society collapsed to the point we have running gun battles in the streets.

Andy

utahjeepr

04-15-23, 08:19

Lake City or IMI 193. Neither are ever a bad choice IMO.

Norman

04-15-23, 08:40

I keep a few thousand rounds on hand. Incase I want to take a class, end of the world or just a heavy range day. Without over thinking it, I went with 193. It’s cheaper, easier on steel targets and slightly more accurate (not that that makes much difference).
To paraphrase something somebody else said, lethality starts with making good hits.

TBAR_94

04-15-23, 09:24

M193 is my stockpile load, though I have a lot of IMI 77 grain and a couple guns set up for that load. For me there is no real advantage to Green Tip. I can shoot M193 at the range with less headache, it performs well out of M4 and longer guns, and is ok in shorties up close. I personally believe it has better terminal performance as well.

For me, I’m less concerned about armor penetration because I am willing to bet if I have to fight someone advanced enough to have plates they’ll probably have LvL4 armor, at which point I better shoot them in the face or in the pelvis. But for the majority of my uses I care more about being able to train effectively, M193 is economical to shoot and fully capable of going to 500 yards.

Disciple

04-15-23, 10:47

If you have to shoot through barriers use the right gun. Chances are it's not a 5.56.

I read this as you are not a fan of bonded 5.56 bullets. Is that correct? My thinking had been that 5.56 being marginal, bonded bullets were all the more important.

C-grunt

04-15-23, 10:48

Either one works fine.

I chose M193 years ago because it's usually cheaper and in my 2 rifles I was shooting at the time, the M193 was slightly more accurate.

I regularly shoot M193 out to 500+ yards with 16 inch rifles and I have shot it out to 750 yards using my precision rifle when I went out with Mark and Pappabear.

1168

04-15-23, 11:18

I know. Beaten to death a thousand times.
But our circumstances are different now and worsening by the day,
so it's worth reconsidering.

I want to buy 1000rnds of either 62gr M855 or 55gr M193
I can buy only one or the other, not both.

Barrel: 16" 1:7

Purpose 1: Personal defense at around-the-house distances.
Purpose 2: Potential large-scale societal chaos at urban distances out to 100 yards.
Purpose 3: Potential confict in rural areas (as in Ukraine) out to 300 yards.

WHICH WOULD YOU BUY?

And what, exactly, has changed?

Doesn’t matter if a rando boots your door or if WWI breaks out…. its all the same CNS and hemodynamics. Physiology and physics laugh at your notion that shit is somehow different today and needs to be re-discussed.

Seriously, though, you seem to be a new face, and I don’t mean that in a derogatory way. What has happened that you made an account to voice your concerns about wherever you are going high-order with your first post, and trannies/crossdressers (which your great grandfather also had to coexist with) with your second? Are you ok?

To answer the question, it doesn’t matter. Both of them have the same redeeming quality….low cost combined with passable performance.

gaijin

04-15-23, 12:16

Call me jaded, but one’s ability to place a shot with reasonable precision trumps 150 FPS additional velocity or even bullet type to a point.

DG23

04-15-23, 12:26

Call me jaded, but one’s ability to place a shot with reasonable precision trumps 150 FPS additional velocity or even bullet type to a point.

Spot on accurate.

SS109 pills are 'minute of milkjug' garbage. Never intended to be precision rounds...

B52U

04-15-23, 19:00

I went with M855 because those damned AI built robots might need more penetration into their flux capacitors to shut them down. [emoji1787]

That and the gov has a hard-on for banning it.

Stickman

05-22-23, 10:35

hotrodder636

05-22-23, 10:42

If I'm out and about on the property, its usually with JSP in the magazine. Whether its coyotes, or for some odd reason something else, I'm not overly worried about being outmatched when I have a carbine at hand.

If your concerns involve distance, and/ or vehicles, others have already talked about wanting a different caliber, and I agree. Windshield glass sucks to shoot through, however, the rest of the windows are easily defeated, and while the first round may deflect a bit, the rest of the rounds won't. Again, we are talking about windows in a vehicle that are not the windshield.

I don't think we ever really got the context of what and why the poster wanted the ammo aside from generic SHTF (if we even decided that was the reason. The difference between a city, the burbs, or out in the country are large. The difference between woods and open country are large. The listing of reasons for different ammo goes on and on.

This is post is written to help out not only this poster, but the one who just posted as well.

I agree that your personal situation would dictate the rounds you choose to keep at the ready. For me, I keep 62 grain Federal Fusions in my gun for HD. My plate carrier and ‘spare mag bag” have IMI MK 262, Mk 318 and IMI 55 gr—2 mags of each and one of each on my plate carrier. Maybe I overthink? Regardless, in most cases it is not plausible in my mind that I will be taking 1k rounds with me anywhere. So 9 spare mags and one in the gun seems pretty reasonable.

Defaultmp3

05-22-23, 11:04

If your concerns involve distance, and/ or vehicles, others have already talked about wanting a different caliber, and I agree. Windshield glass sucks to shoot through, however, the rest of the windows are easily defeated, and while the first round may deflect a bit, the rest of the rounds won't. Again, we are talking about windows in a vehicle that are not the windshield.Many new vehicles use laminated glass for more than the windshield, most often the driver and passenger front door windows, but many have all windows as laminated now.

jstone

05-22-23, 20:54

Many new vehicles use laminated glass for more than the windshield, most often the driver and passenger front door windows, but many have all windows as laminated now.

I used to install auto glass, and I have never seen a single laminate window outside of a windshield. it is done for safety of the occupants. side windows use tempered glass, not laminated. if there were laminated glass on the side doors and windows nobody would be able to escape a car that happens to go into a river or lake. if you were involved in a low speed car accident and you were t boned the laminate glass would possibly kill you. i haven't done glass for a few years but I can pretty much guarantee there are no laminated windows outside of the windshield.

just looked up the new law making this happen. absolutely retarded and makes sense why I never saw it, the law was implemented in 2020. this stupid law will cost more lives than it saves. if your an emergency service worker Default what do you use to get people out of vehicles without maiming them.

Defaultmp3

05-22-23, 21:31

I used to install auto glass, and I have never seen a single laminate window outside of a windshield. it is done for safety of the occupants. side windows use tempered glass, not laminated. if there were laminated glass on the side doors and windows nobody would be able to escape a car that happens to go into a river or lake. if you were involved in a low speed car accident and you were t boned the laminate glass would possibly kill you. i haven't done glass for a few years but I can pretty much guarantee there are no laminated windows outside of the windshield.

just looked up the new law making this happen. absolutely retarded and makes sense why I never saw it, the law was implemented in 2020. this stupid law will cost more lives than it saves. if your an emergency service worker Default what do you use to get people out of vehicles without maiming them.It's been a thing for awhile now, but was mostly restricted to more in the luxury market, and then the ramp up to deal with the new DoT mandate.

I used to be in very large suburban-area VFD, which is how I learned about this issue to begin with, and our approach was basically to use the same method as if we had to breach a windshield, which is basically to use the Sawzall, though we obviously also had the combitool to just straight up pop the door if need be. Whether or not that was going to be viable if dealing with a vehicle fire or whatever, I dunno. We didn't get fires very often combined with a crash, though this is obviously something that does happen, and is the worst-case scenario when paired with laminated windows. I left the VFD before this mandate went into effect (just other life events that took me away, I loved being in the department), but it was definitely something that we had discussed and theorycrafted, given that we were an urban department that covered a fair number of freeways and highways.

jstone

05-22-23, 23:58

Sidneyious

05-24-23, 01:17

thanks for the information anyone who has ever messed with laminated auto glass knows how dangerous it can be. I can't beleive they are starting to use it in side windows. even after you put a whole large enough to extricate a person the chances of severe lacerations is extremely high. I appreciate the insight, I just cant beleive the reasoning behind why they implemented this.

most european cars dont use american law for windshields, thats mostly why we never got a lot of cars they had because they didnt want to redesign the entire front of the car to make a us law piece of glass fit.

tbh I have no idea why we have that stupid law anyway.

AndyLate

05-24-23, 06:37

most european cars dont use american law for windshields, thats mostly why we never got a lot of cars they had because they didnt want to redesign the entire front of the car to make a us law piece of glass fit.

tbh I have no idea why we have that stupid law anyway.

Requiring a laminated windshield or side windows? Laminated windshields make sense, side windows make less sense to me. I personally suspect the insurance companies pushed the side windows for theft deterrence but sold the idea as reducing ejection and rollover protection.

Andy

Sidneyious

05-24-23, 16:41

Requiring a laminated windshield or side windows? Laminated windshields make sense, side windows make less sense to me. I personally suspect the insurance companies pushed the side windows for theft deterrence but sold the idea as reducing ejection and rollover protection.

AndyIve had 3 friends die from ejection with a seat belt.

Its all bullshit, and even more when 3 different friends die because the seat belt is why they couldn't get out of the burning wreck and died a slow agonizing death in a burning car.

Your just asking to die every time you get in your car yet here we are.

Also **** insurance companies that never pay out, it's the largest racket ever.

Stickman

05-24-23, 18:37

Also **** insurance companies that never pay out, it's the largest racket ever.

Truest words outside of the bible.

Slater

05-24-23, 20:42

If you read those old DARPA reports from Vietnam, the most lethal terminal effects were achieved with a 55 grain projectile in a 1:12 (or was it 1:14?) twist barrel. This with the old Model 601's.

LOBO

05-28-23, 18:46

I got my first AR-15 back in 1999. I used 55 gr FMJ since it was easy to get at wallyworld. I still use M193/55 gr FMJ to shoot/practice/stock up on, but I also have 1,000 rounds of 62 gr/64 gr Gold Dot/Fusion stored.

hotbiggun42

06-05-23, 21:19

M193 leaves a hell of a wound channel. Google it

Stickman

06-06-23, 23:15

If you read those old DARPA reports from Vietnam, the most lethal terminal effects were achieved with a 55 grain projectile in a 1:12 (or was it 1:14?) twist barrel. This with the old Model 601's.

For a very short time they were 1:14, but shifted to 1:12 for better stability in overall conditions. The 1:14 did NOT create additional damage unlike all too many internet rumors. 55 grain works as intended, but off the battlefield we encounter things like windshields, shorter barrels and all around MOUT conditions.

vicious_cb

06-07-23, 04:06

If you read those old DARPA reports from Vietnam, the most lethal terminal effects were achieved with a 55 grain projectile in a 1:12 (or was it 1:14?) twist barrel. This with the old Model 601's.

Twist rate has nothing to do with the terminal ballistics of the round. 1/7, 1/9, 1/12, 1/14 are all identical in wounding capability.

M193 leaves a hell of a wound channel. Google it

Until it doesn't, both M855 and M193 have consistency issues likely due to fleet yaw where they had variable performance, more documentation occurring with M855 green tip but it happened with M193 as well:

“In 1980, I treated a soldier shot accidentally with an M16 M193 bullet from a distance of about ten feet. The bullet entered his left thigh and traveled obliquely upward. It exited after passing through about 11 inches of muscle. The man walked in to my clinic with no limp whatsoever: the entrance and exit holes were about 4 mm across, and punctate. X-ray films showed intact bones, no bullet fragments, and no evidence of significant tissue disruption caused by the bullet’s temporary cavity. The bullet path passed well lateral to the femoral vessels. He was back on duty in a few days. Devastating? Hardly. The wound profile of the M193 bullet (page 29 of the Emergency War Surgery—NATO Handbook, GPO, Washington, D.C., 1988) shows that most often the bullet travels about five inches through flesh before beginning significant yaw. But about 15% of the time, it travels much farther than that before yawing—in which case it causes even milder wounds, if it missed bones, guts, lung, and major blood vessels. In my experience and research, at least as many M16 users in Vietnam concluded that it produced unacceptably minimal, rather than “massive”, wounds. After viewing the wound profile, recall that the Vietnamese were small people, and generally very slim. Many M16 bullets passed through their torsos traveling mostly point forward, and caused minimal damage. Most shots piercing an extremity, even in the heavier-built Americans, unless they hit bone, caused no more damage than a 22 caliber rimfire bullet.”

Fackler, ML: “Literature Review”. Wound Ballistics Review; 5(2):40, Fall 2001

SteyrAUG

06-07-23, 05:35

For me 55gr is range / training ammo and 62 gr is fighting ammo.

I could train with 62 gr, and have, but it's an expensive thing to do.

I could use 55 gr in a defensive situation, and have, but it's not ideal.

The only thing I don't do is 62 gr. down the old 1:12 twist vintage Colts I have.

yoni

06-07-23, 05:42

My old 1 in 12 twist Colt commandos with 55 grain did a very good job. It isn't dropping 120 mm round directly on the guy. But I did not have any real complaints with it.

C-grunt

06-07-23, 09:15

I've seen a lot of people shot with 55 grain ball. The majority is probably even cheap steel cased. I cant recall ever seeing it cause a wound similar to a 22 rimfire. Even through extremities where bones weren't hit, it creates a significant wound.

Wake27

06-07-23, 10:02

I don’t think many people argue that 193 or 855 are truly bad, at the end of the day, they tend to by flying and everyone has seen a few examples of significant damage both have caused.

But it goes back to similar other shooting topics - is it consistent and repeatable? That seems to be debated, if not proven to be a no.

And even easier to answer, is there significantly better that doesn’t have major trade offs? Yes, without a doubt.

Blast 55gr junk all day. But most people on here can probably afford to buy at least 60 rounds of a significantly better performing round for actual defensive use.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

lysander

06-08-23, 06:31

If you read those old DARPA reports from Vietnam, the most lethal terminal effects were achieved with a 55 grain projectile in a 1:12 (or was it 1:14?) twist barrel. This with the old Model 601's.

Some of the best fiction I ever read . . .

"At a distance of . . . 15 meters, one (Vietnamese) Ranger fired an AR-15 full automatic hitting one VC with 3 rounds fired with the first burst. One round in the head-took it completely off . . ."

"Back wound . . . which caused the thoracic cavity to explode . . ."

"Five VC were hit . . . the fifth was essentially a flesh wound. The AR made it a fatal wound." (No further information on this incident is given, like where the actual round hit the VC.)

1000 rifles and half a million rounds of ammunition delivered for field testing, but less than a dozen actual combat reports, and all are anecdotal.

The annoying thing is the initial testing that showed a .22 caliber bullet to be so good was done on a 52 gr, steel core jacketed bullet going 3,956 fps with a 1-in-9.68 twist. The steel core makes the bullet fairly long, about one inch, and the high velocity make the terminal ballistics very different from a 55 gr lead core bullet plodding along at 3250 fps.

lysander

06-08-23, 06:41

M193 leaves a hell of a wound channel. Google it

The earth is flat. Google it.

The moon landings were fake. Google it.

MI5 killed Princess Diana. Google it.

That's not the best form of evidence to prove a fact . . . .

markm

06-08-23, 09:46

You forgot "the elections weren't rigged" Google it!!

Disciple

06-08-23, 11:11

The annoying thing is the initial testing that showed a .22 caliber bullet to be so good was done on a 52 gr, steel core jacketed bullet going 3,956 fps with a 1-in-9.68 twist. The steel core makes the bullet fairly long, about one inch, and the high velocity make the terminal ballistics very different from a 55 gr lead core bullet plodding along at 3250 fps.

What did that cartridge look like?

lysander

06-08-23, 13:50

What did that cartridge look like?

A .243 Winchester necked down to .224.

hotbiggun42

06-08-23, 23:19

The earth is flat. Google it.

The moon landings were fake. Google it.

MI5 killed Princess Diana. Google it.

That's not the best form of evidence to prove a fact . . . .

What you wont find on google is a video of flat Earth, M15 killing Diana or a fake moonlanding. What you will find is 100s of videos of m193 tests.

lysander

06-09-23, 05:48

What you wont find on google is a video of flat Earth, M15 killing Diana or a fake moonlanding. What you will find is 100s of videos of m193 tests.

No, I see a whole lot of people shooting huge blocks of ballistic gel. Ballistic gel is not a living body and does not always accurately correspond to real world wounds.

People forget that ballistic gel was never intended to accurately model wounds in animals or people, but to provide a uniform and repeatable target so different bullets can be compared. When you study gel impacts what you can say is: "Bullet A expands/tumbles/fragments better than Bullet B, and therefore with probably be more effective." What you cannot say is "When Bullet A hits it will make a 2 inch wide wound channel." Too many variables inside a living animal.

Stickman

06-09-23, 08:49

Ballistic gel is not a living body and does not always accurately correspond to real world wounds.

People forget that ballistic gel was never intended to accurately model wounds in animals or people, but to provide a uniform and repeatable target so different bullets can be compared.

It’s a shame that you even need to mention the above, but it is something that probably needs to be brought up on a regular basis. Every clown in the world is out shooting pine, water jugs, gel, beef jerky and elves while trying to talk like a pro about what something means for bullet construction and terminal performance when they have no actual knowledge or foundation in the matter.

markm

06-09-23, 08:54

No, I see a whole lot of people shooting huge blocks of ballistic gel. Ballistic gel is not a living body and does not always accurately correspond to real world wounds.

People live by that shit. I quit looking in the "Terminal Ballistic" forum here because is was full of booger eaters who were beaten for coloring outside the lines. I literally will not click on an interesting thread title if it's in that forum.

kirkland

06-09-23, 09:13

How is this thread still going?

Question was answered in the first page.

It was a dumb question to begin with.

Neither is an ideal round, it would be better to have a couple hundred rounds of good ammo for serious use. For range use who cares? Buy whatever is cheaper.

You can't even buy real M193

Thread went off topic pages ago, let it die.

markm

06-09-23, 10:16

How is this thread still going?

I keep clicking on it to see why a 1993 topic generates so much activity. :p

hotbiggun42

06-09-23, 11:21

Stickman

06-09-23, 12:50

We all know its different than shooting folks. But here its illegal to shoot healthy folks.

Its not illegal to shoot corpses, we've done that before, especially checking how well helmets function when impacted by bullets.

More people need to donate their bodies to "science"!!

vicious_cb

06-09-23, 15:05

It’s a shame that you even need to mention the above, but it is something that probably needs to be brought up on a regular basis. Every clown in the world is out shooting pine, water jugs, gel, beef jerky and elves while trying to talk like a pro about what something means for bullet construction and terminal performance when they have no actual knowledge or foundation in the matter.

Thats why I posted Fackler's physician's documentation of what happens when a live soldier gets accidentally shot with M193 in the leg, 11 inches of muscle is far thicker and more dense than most people's torsos making it the ideal medium for the bullet and it still didnt perform.

There's alot of this full retard posting going on lately on what is supposed to be a technical forum where we still get responses of "durr did you see on the internets that M193 blows limbs off hurr". But I guess the truth goes against people's mythos of the M193 when a soldier basically walks off a M193 hit to the leg. Hmm maybe there was as much BS in the 1960's like all that poison bullet non-sense with 5.45 as it was early 5.56 reports.

markm

06-09-23, 15:45

What about Watermelon shooting by Gen Curtis Lemay on the 4th of July? :cool:

hotbiggun42

06-09-23, 16:21

Thats why I posted Fackler's physician's documentation of what happens when a live soldier gets accidentally shot with M193 in the leg, 11 inches of muscle is far thicker and more dense than most people's torsos making it the ideal medium for the bullet and it still didnt perform.

There's alot of this full retard posting going on lately on what is supposed to be a technical forum where we still get responses of "durr did you see on the internets that M193 blows limbs off hurr". But I guess the truth goes against people's mythos of the M193 when a soldier basically walks off a M193 hit to the leg. Hmm maybe there was as much BS in the 1960's like all that poison bullet non-sense with 5.45 as it was early 5.56 reports.

One story about the leg shot is so tiresome. Do you really believe a hi power round traveling at over 3000fps is non lethal or what ever you guys are trying to say. I just dont get it.
Anyway your technical expertise is cool.

Wake27

06-09-23, 17:06

vicious_cb

06-09-23, 17:20

One story about the leg shot is so tiresome. Do you really believe a hi power round traveling at over 3000fps is non lethal or what ever you guys are trying to say. I just dont get it.
Anyway your technical expertise is cool.

Thats exactly your problem. You don't get what we are trying to tell you.

We keep saying its a consistency issue yet you some how translate that to saying its a non-lethal round.

Why bother posting at all if your processor cant handle the data?

JediGuy

06-09-23, 17:46

Might not kill you, but…

https://i.imgur.com/SiEBPgJ.jpg

vicious_cb

06-09-23, 18:58

Might not kill you, but…

https://i.imgur.com/SiEBPgJ.jpg

You know 36gr varmint grenade or 40gr Vmax will make that exact same wound. Would you suggest people use those rounds for duty/defense?

JediGuy

06-09-23, 21:17

You know 36gr varmint grenade or 40gr Vmax will make that exact same wound. Would you suggest people use those rounds for duty/defense?

I’m not going to make any recommendations. I have a couple mags of whatever Gold Dot I bought seven years ago for HD, and 77gr IMI split between a couple SBR’s and a precision carbine. My point, which your post confirms, is that anything coming out of an AR is going to be a bad day for someone in most situations.

vicious_cb

06-09-23, 22:22

I’m not going to make any recommendations. I have a couple mags of whatever Gold Dot I bought seven years ago for HD, and 77gr IMI split between a couple SBR’s and a precision carbine. My point, which your post confirms, is that anything coming out of an AR is going to be a bad day for someone in most situations.

I don't get it, people make recommendations about getting a BCM or DD over the Bushmaster or Andersen gun all the time on the forum then when it comes to ammo people are all of a sudden taking the equivalent of "all ARs are the same quality". People end up stuffing which is essentially Bushmaster quality ammo into their mags with a 15% chance it won't work as intended. Doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. Call me crazy but the AR is a system, if you are optimizing for a particular use or situation shouldnt ammo be part of the equation?

But hey, when was the last time someone was kilt in da streets because their Bushmaster failed, unlikely to happen right?

georgeib

06-09-23, 22:39

Might not kill you, but…

https://i.imgur.com/SiEBPgJ.jpgviscous_cb has a great point. I mean, if we followed St Kyle's (PBUH) example, we'd all be carrying DPMS rifles loaded with Tula. So yes, ball ammo is miles better than harsh words, but are we seriously debating whether it's as good as proper bonded ammo?

kirkland

06-09-23, 23:30

I keep clicking on it to see why a 1993 topic generates so much activity. :p

LOL! Well, one thing I found interesting was someone posted a thread not too long ago. Last year? Where they compared some of the different XM193 type ammo brands that were available, and none of it was consistent with real M193. Different jacket thicknesses, slightly different bullet construction. Might have been a Molon thread. It definitely can't be counted on to behave like real M193. Prior to reading that, I had thought it was all pretty much the same.

ExplorinInTheWoods

06-10-23, 07:35

M193 then get a 75/77gr otm

DaBigBR

06-10-23, 10:34

193.

Ubiquitous.
Cheaper.
No concerns over shooting steel.

I hope this is more of a thought exercise.

Uncas47

06-10-23, 15:17

A single round of anything is problematic. Multiple wound channels increase probability with any ammo, 9MM or 5.56. The extra rounds in the mag are not there for ballast.

constructor

06-10-23, 19:32

I know. Beaten to death a thousand times.
But our circumstances are different now and worsening by the day,
so it's worth reconsidering.

I want to buy 1000rnds of either 62gr M855 or 55gr M193
I can buy only one or the other, not both.

Barrel: 16" 1:7

Purpose 1: Personal defense at around-the-house distances.
Purpose 2: Potential large-scale societal chaos at urban distances out to 100 yards.
Purpose 3: Potential confict in rural areas (as in Ukraine) out to 300 yards.

WHICH WOULD YOU BUY?
I've been testing a little over the last few weeks, at this point I think S&B M193 is what I would go with between those 2 options. The IMI M193 does not seem to be as accurate. The S&B and IMI 77gr is more accurate than either brand of M193 and the 855 is usually worse than M193 or the 77gr stuff. Forget about poking holes in armor or cars. I'll reload 62gr Gold Dots before paying close to $1 a shot for 77gr.
The other part of the testing was port sizes and velocity between and barrels/rifling.
The (3)13" 5R barrels I'm testing are apx 60fps faster than the BCM CHF 14.5" barrel with several different brands of M193 and 855 and the 16" 3R barrels are apx 150fps faster than the 14.5" BCM barrel.
ETA- The IMI M193 I shot today averaged 3153 out of the 16" 3R barrels, the 12.5" ave 3035.
PMC TACx seems to be about the cheapest thing going now but I haven't tested it.

georgeib

06-10-23, 19:54

I've been testing a little over the last few weeks, at this point I think S&B M193 is what I would go with between those 2 options. The IMI M193 does not seem to be as accurate. The S&B and IMI 77gr is more accurate than either brand of M193 and the 855 is usually worse than M193 or the 77gr stuff. Forget about poking holes in armor or cars. I'll reload 62gr Gold Dots before paying close to $1 a shot for 77gr.
The other part of the testing was port sizes and velocity between and barrels/rifling.
The (3)13" 5R barrels I'm testing are apx 60fps faster than the BCM CHF 14.5" barrel with several different brands of M193 and 855 and the 16" 3R barrels are apx 150fps faster than the 14.5" BCM barrel.
ETA- The IMI M193 I shot today averaged 3153 out of the 16" 3R barrels, the 12.5" ave 3035.
PMC TACx seems to be about the cheapest thing going now but I haven't tested it.What brand are those 5r and 3r barrels?

constructor

06-10-23, 20:18

What brand are those 5r and 3r barrels? AR Performance(ARP), Blackstone Arms in Texas is the dealer now.

georgeib

06-10-23, 20:25

AR Performance(ARP), Blackstone Arms in Texas is the dealer now.Thank you.

ViniVidivici

06-11-23, 00:29

193.

Ubiquitous.
Cheaper.
No concerns over shooting steel.

I hope this is more of a thought exercise.

A knowledgeable man once said, don't think of it as a 30 round mag, think: 6 kills per mag.

C-grunt

06-11-23, 13:00

193.

Ubiquitous.
Cheaper.
No concerns over shooting steel.

I hope this is more of a thought exercise.

M193 is what chewed my steel targets up the most.

markm

06-12-23, 10:22

193.

Ubiquitous.
Cheaper.
No concerns over shooting steel.

I hope this is more of a thought exercise.

Agree with C-grunt. M193 type ammo is brutal on steel inside of 100 yards. I'd only run m193 if my maximum shooting distance was 400 yards or so. M193 is too powerful at short range, and too anemic at long range.

w3453l

06-13-23, 10:23

Agree with C-grunt. M193 type ammo is brutal on steel inside of 100 yards. I'd only run m193 if my maximum shooting distance was 400 yards or so. M193 is too powerful at short range, and too anemic at long range.

What would you recommend for shooting steel 200 yds and under? With probably most target ranges at about 50 yds.

I have a few cases of Wold Gold I’ve been using for practice, but I’ve been looking at investing in some quality steel targets.

markm

06-13-23, 10:45

What would you recommend for shooting steel 200 yds and under? With probably most target ranges at about 50 yds.

The heavier the bullet the better, but on the flip side, it's tough to sling nice OTMs at close range. 62 gr or heavier really reduces velocity and damage to the targets.

Hand loading is best because I can to a hornady soft point 55 gr for cheap. For really close steel, Barnes makes a few lead free bullets (Reduced Ricochet) jacketed with frangible cores. Those are really fun, but expensive compared to regular bullets.

Wake27

06-13-23, 10:55

What would you recommend for shooting steel 200 yds and under? With probably most target ranges at about 50 yds.

I have a few cases of Wold Gold I’ve been using for practice, but I’ve been looking at investing in some quality steel targets.

Keep in mind that bulk 55gr .223 is not 193. There can be pretty big velocity differences, especially for the weaker ends of the 55gr stuff. Then if you add in shorter barrels, you’re already dropping more FPS so it may not be that big of a deal.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

markm

06-13-23, 13:38

Keep in mind that bulk 55gr .223 is not 193. There can be pretty big velocity differences, especially for the weaker ends of the 55gr stuff. Then if you add in shorter barrels, you’re already dropping more FPS so it may not be that big of a deal.

Good points. If I'm shooting a shorty, I don't mind running 55 gr FMJ. It's a balance of distance, bullet, and velocity.

202

06-14-23, 19:32

w3453l

06-15-23, 04:12

The heavier the bullet the better, but on the flip side, it's tough to sling nice OTMs at close range. 62 gr or heavier really reduces velocity and damage to the targets.

Hand loading is best because I can to a hornady soft point 55 gr for cheap. For really close steel, Barnes makes a few lead free bullets (Reduced Ricochet) jacketed with frangible cores. Those are really fun, but expensive compared to regular bullets.

Yeah I know I need to get into reloading; I have about 8 jugs of H335 sitting around with close to 10k CCI primers I bought years ago. I don’t have the time for it now, but also don’t want to sell cause I know I’ll eventually want to reload, and I won’t buy those components for the same prices I bought them originally.

For the time being I’m just buying bulk training ammo and hence my question about using the commonly bought .223 “913” knock offs for shooting plates at closer ranges.

I wish the the other stuff was cheaper. I have a case of 62 gr gold dots, but not the income to use that for training.

Keep in mind that bulk 55gr .223 is not 193. There can be pretty big velocity differences, especially for the weaker ends of the 55gr stuff. Then if you add in shorter barrels, you’re already dropping more FPS so it may not be that big of a deal.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Interesting, I’ve never chronographed any of my ammo but I could have sworn I saw Wolf Gold being mentioned as having very comparable velocity to m193? I can’t find any sources to back that up right now, and I really only buy it for training.

Yup, agreed on the shorter barrels. I’m only shooting 11.5” barrels right now, and recently got pretty hooked on 12.5”. I’m debating just settling down on 12.5 and letting go of my 14.5’s. The only thing stopping me there is I know I’ll be moving back to TX and the landscape is definitely more wide open than where I am in NC right now.

lysander

06-15-23, 05:37

Keep in mind that bulk 55gr .223 is not 193. There can be pretty big velocity differences, especially for the weaker ends of the 55gr stuff. Then if you add in shorter barrels, you’re already dropping more FPS so it may not be that big of a deal.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

https://www.ar15.com/forums/General/Return-of-the-M193-Clones/5-2515258/?page=1

According to Molon's testing, that statement is no longer strictly the case. Three of the four types tested met both the accuracy and velocity requirements.

Even based on the 2010 tests, IMI and the Federal met the requirements.

lysander

06-15-23, 05:43

Interesting, I’ve never chronographed any of my ammo but I could have sworn I saw Wolf Gold being mentioned as having very comparable velocity to m193? I can’t find any sources to back that up right now, and I really only buy it for training.

Yup, agreed on the shorter barrels. I’m only shooting 11.5” barrels right now, and recently got pretty hooked on 12.5”. I’m debating just settling down on 12.5 and letting go of my 14.5’s. The only thing stopping me there is I know I’ll be moving back to TX and the landscape is definitely more wide open than where I am in NC right now.

Molon on 01/11/2016 tested WG and "The muzzle velocity for the 10-shot string of the Wolf Gold 55 grain FMJ ammunition was 3213 FPS with a standard deviation of 25 FPS. For comparison, IMI M193 had a muzzle velocity of 3274 FPS when fired from the same barrel, with a standard deviation of 18 FPS."

The Vm for M193 should be around 3250 +/- 40 fps

Wake27

06-15-23, 06:22

https://www.ar15.com/forums/General/Return-of-the-M193-Clones/5-2515258/?page=1

According to Molon's testing, that statement is no longer strictly the case. Three of the four types tested met both the accuracy and velocity requirements.

Even based on the 2010 tests, IMI and the Federal met the requirements.

Yeah but those are marketed as 193 clones. I’m talking more about PMC Bronze, AE .223, and others that are bulk 55gr .223 instead of 5.56 like 193. I thought Wolf Gold fell into that category as well.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Wake27

06-15-23, 06:23

Molon on 01/11/2016 tested WG and "The muzzle velocity for the 10-shot string of the Wolf Gold 55 grain FMJ ammunition was 3213 FPS with a standard deviation of 25 FPS. For comparison, IMI M193 had a muzzle velocity of 3274 FPS when fired from the same barrel, with a standard deviation of 18 FPS."

The Vm for M193 should be around 3250 +/- 40 fps

This is a good find and counter to what I thought I had seen so I appreciate the correction. It’s worth noting though, that his test barrel is a 20” just like most manufacturers, so most of us will be seeing a lot less, especially with SBRs.

I’m still working off assumptions though, I haven’t chrono’d any of the cheap stuff so the few unscientific notes I have from personal experience is mostly around 77gr stuff.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

lysander

06-15-23, 09:01

It’s a shame that you even need to mention the above, but it is something that probably needs to be brought up on a regular basis. Every clown in the world is out shooting pine, water jugs, gel, beef jerky and elves while trying to talk like a pro about what something means for bullet construction and terminal performance when they have no actual knowledge or foundation in the matter.

Another reason YouTube "Ballistic Tests" should be taken with a few ounces of salt . . .

From an Army Wound Ballistics Lab report dealing with bullet behavior in gelatin tissue models:

"Figure 2 shows the effects of temperature on the temporary cavity volume at 2000 microseconds after impact of the 2800 F/S bullet on the face of the 20% gelatin cylinder There were only small increases in the temporary cavity volumes as the temperatures increased from 0.5°C to 20.5°C However at 25°C a change of physical characteristics of the gelatin apparently began to occur so that the cavities were far larger at this temperature and above than at the lower temperatures."

https://i.imgur.com/ubZKmIa.jpg

lysander

06-15-23, 09:13

Yeah but those are marketed as 193 clones. I’m talking more about PMC Bronze, AE .223, and others that are bulk 55gr .223 instead of 5.56 like 193. I thought Wolf Gold fell into that category as well.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Commercial "ball" probably has more variation than military ammunition. But, I'll bet that all 55 grain .223/5.56mm stuff is around 3,100 plus/minus 150 fps on an average 70° day.

constructor

06-15-23, 09:37

This is a good find and counter to what I thought I had seen so I appreciate the correction. It’s worth noting though, that his test barrel is a 20” just like most manufacturers, so most of us will be seeing a lot less, especially with SBRs.

I’m still working off assumptions though, I haven’t chrono’d any of the cheap stuff so the few unscientific notes I have from personal experience is mostly around 77gr stuff.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
How important is velocity and terminal performance? From AA reports I would say it needs to be considered for combat rifles. Some barrels like the 5R and 3R rifled barrels are known to produce more velocity from the same length barrel, some 13" are faster than BCMs 14.5s(enfield/square rifling) and very close to BCMs 16", the 16" 5R/3R are almost as fast as the 20s.
I'm getting 3030fps out of a 13" ARP 5R barrel with IMI M193, my BCM 14.5 gets ave 2956.

C-grunt

06-15-23, 11:49

Does this mean m193 is a good 100 yards, 200 yards, self defense round?

That depends on what your definition of a 'good self defense round" is.

From my experience I have no worries using 223/5.56 ball ammo for self defense. That being said, there are obvious benefits using a purposely designed bullet and my main defensive ammo is such.

markm

06-15-23, 16:19

That depends on what your definition of a 'good self defense round" is.

From my experience I have no worries using 223/5.56 ball ammo for self defense. That being said, there are obvious benefits using a purposely designed bullet and my main defensive ammo is such.

THIS! 62 or 55 gr ball ammo can be HIT or MISS (so to speak) depending on which crock of crap example/test you choose to believe. Why not choose a premium defense ammo? Christ! We almost never even use 55 or 62 ball for slamming steel at short range. I had to dig around my bench for 2 days to find some 55gr FMJ last month so use with a pound of benchmark I grossly overpaid for.

Uncas47

06-16-23, 08:46

When I do use a range with known distances, it's private. The first steel is at 300 and goes out from there, precisely to mitigate damage from FMJ. Everything inside 300 is consumable materials, plywood cardboard etc. Where I mostly shoot, it's dirt clods, rocks, and tree stumps also private, shoot what ya got.

202

06-16-23, 09:18

markm

06-16-23, 09:38

Agreed. I have Speer Gold Dot 62gr and 75gr in my home defense magazines, but if there was a need, I would have no worries using m193 for self defense.

Almost anything coming out of a good .223 rifle will be formidable. But when we have the luxury of picking a nice bonded or OTM, running ball is just cheap or lazy. Even if you just fill one clip with over-bred ammo, and run ball for all else, you're wise.

hotbiggun42

06-16-23, 15:33

Wolf soft point is damn good ammo for self defense unless your rifle malfunctions with steel cased. Check first.

Wake27

06-16-23, 17:24

Wolf soft point is damn good ammo for self defense unless your rifle malfunctions with steel cased. Check first.

And Google it.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Waylander

06-16-23, 18:04

Wolf soft point is damn good ammo for self defense unless your rifle malfunctions with steel cased. Check first.

Define “damn good” then ask yourself if good bonded or OTM ammo isn’t “damn gooder.”

hotbiggun42

06-16-23, 22:20

Define “damn good” then ask yourself if good bonded or OTM ammo isn’t “damn gooder.”

Will Keel!

davidjinks

06-17-23, 16:17

Honestly, with everything you listed as possible uses, I would go with M855.

I know. Beaten to death a thousand times.
But our circumstances are different now and worsening by the day,
so it's worth reconsidering.

I want to buy 1000rnds of either 62gr M855 or 55gr M193
I can buy only one or the other, not both.

Barrel: 16" 1:7

Purpose 1: Personal defense at around-the-house distances.
Purpose 2: Potential large-scale societal chaos at urban distances out to 100 yards.
Purpose 3: Potential confict in rural areas (as in Ukraine) out to 300 yards.

WHICH WOULD YOU BUY?

NQNPIII

06-24-23, 18:36

Get whacked with M193, or Bronze .223 in your AR500 plates think it won't take you out of the fight with internal injuries? At least knock you on your ass?

Just asking.

ViniVidivici

06-25-23, 09:25

I would buy the M855.

Disciple

06-25-23, 13:15

Get whacked with M193, or Bronze .223 in your AR500 plates think it won't take you out of the fight with internal injuries? At least knock you on your ass?

Why would it? There is neither the backface deformation nor the momentum to do that as far as I know.

NQNPIII

06-25-23, 13:55

Why would it? There is neither the backface deformation nor the momentum to do that as far as I know.

5.56 ha 814ftlbs of energy @100yds

7.62x39 1101ftlbs @100yds

That won't knock you down?

GTF425

06-25-23, 14:26

Why would it? There is neither the backface deformation nor the momentum to do that as far as I know.

Taking a round to plates can cause pulmonary/cardiac contusions as well as pneumothorax. It's common to have broken ribs when soft armor or plates are struck.

NQNPIII

06-25-23, 14:45

Taking a round to plates can cause pulmonary/cardiac contusions as well as pneumothorax. It's common to have broken ribs when soft armor or plates are struck.

Thank you! I know one Marine who took a round into whatever was used in Bosnia for body armor. I jellied his innerds for 6 months+. Maybe still has problems today. x39? Don't know.

Disciple

06-25-23, 18:45

Taking a round to plates can cause pulmonary/cardiac contusions as well as pneumothorax. It's common to have broken ribs when soft armor or plates are struck.

I am aware of damage through soft armor, or through plates from something heavy like a 12 gauge. However 55 grain 5.56 doesn't move steel targets very much so I am surprised that unless the plate itself were damaged there would be enough momentum or percussion transferred to cause serious injury. I thought spall was the primary hazard.

GTF425

06-25-23, 19:08

I am aware of damage through soft armor, or through plates from something heavy like a 12 gauge. However 55 grain 5.56 doesn't move steel targets very much so I am surprised that unless the plate itself were damaged there would be enough momentum or percussion transferred to cause serious injury. I thought spall was the primary hazard.

It's legitimately surprising how easy it is to cause significant internal injuries with blunt trauma. When you think about conservation of energy, all of that energy from the projectile is transferring into the person. It doesn't take a lot to cause a pneumothorax, but more likely people break ribs and bruise deep tissues when shot in soft armor.

For what it's worth- my first pneumo in EMS was someone assaulted with a brick. She did have the shit beaten out of her, but even then, that brick strike transferred much lower energy than a rifle round.

lysander

06-25-23, 20:10

It's legitimately surprising how easy it is to cause significant internal injuries with blunt trauma. When you think about conservation of energy, all of that energy from the projectile is transferring into the person. It doesn't take a lot to cause a pneumothorax, but more likely people break ribs and bruise deep tissues when shot in soft armor.

For what it's worth- my first pneumo in EMS was someone assaulted with a brick. She did have the shit beaten out of her, but even then, that brick strike transferred much lower energy than a rifle round.

That's why there are back plate deformation limits.

GTF425

06-25-23, 20:25

That's why there are back plate deformation limits.

Would you mind sharing some resources regarding this? If it's sensitive or you need my .something email, shoot me a PM.

georgeib

06-25-23, 21:08

Would you mind sharing some resources regarding this? If it's sensitive or you need my .something email, shoot me a PM.I'm not lysander, but from what I read, the "survivable" limit is 44mm or 1.73".

NQNPIII

06-25-23, 21:56

That's why there are back plate deformation limits.

Deformation of the plates is a dimple at the most. The energy transfer is what's happening. I have trauma pads behind my plates. Toilet paper might be just as effective.

WillBrink

06-26-23, 15:09

Deformation of the plates is a dimple at the most. The energy transfer is what's happening. I have trauma pads behind my plates. Toilet paper might be just as effective.

I assume that's due to specific limits being set due to testing and where deformation leads to a serious injury or death vs a bruise.

Stickman

06-26-23, 17:37

I assume that's due to specific limits being set due to testing and where deformation leads to a serious injury or death vs a bruise.

One of the things missed with rear deformation is the armor isn't just moving towards the rear, its also flexing towards the front. One of the armor nerds explained it to me while doing testing. However, this was soft armor we were testing.

Stickman

06-26-23, 17:38

I assume that's due to specific limits being set due to testing and where deformation leads to a serious injury or death vs a bruise.

Yeah, I think of 40mm as the width of a 40mike mike round, and that doesn't sounds like a good thing going that far threw my ribs...

NQNPIII

06-26-23, 19:22

I assume that's due to specific limits being set due to testing and where deformation leads to a serious injury or death vs a bruise.

My original comment was a question. I had knowledge of someone being shot in Bosnia. He said he will never wear body armor again. This is why just because a bullet doesn't enter your body doesn't mean it can't hurt you or cause enough injury to cause you a very painful death from injured organs, and internal bleeding.

I only have 150rds of M855. I have a couple cases of SCHP 62grain ammo. I have a couple cases of Winchester 62gr open tip nickle plated case with purple tint (government training ammo) ballistic testing shows it expands and shreds jello blocks pretty nicely.

C-grunt

06-26-23, 19:56

My original comment was a question. I had knowledge of someone being shot in Bosnia. He said he will never wear body armor again. This is why just because a bullet doesn't enter your body doesn't mean it can't hurt you or cause enough injury to cause you a very painful death from injured organs, and internal bleeding.

That sounds idiotic. The fact that he was able to tell you of his experience shows the body armor worked well. Not wanting to wear armor because of bulk and weight is one thing, but because you are worried about backface deformation is retarded.

Ive seen people shot in the torso while wearing body armor. Most of the time they were minorly injured, sometimes they were uninjured. Ive also seen people shot in the same areas of the torso while not wearing armor. EVERY time they were seriously injured and many times died quickly.

NQNPIII

06-26-23, 20:25

That sounds idiotic. The fact that he was able to tell you of his experience shows the body armor worked well. Not wanting to wear armor because of bulk and weight is one thing, but because you are worried about backface deformation is retarded.

I never was worried about backface deformation. That was another poster not me.

Maybe this guy has been dead so many times, heart stopped beating in the OR, in the hallway of his local hospital, and watched many people die as first responder he just doesn't give a shit? He is agnostic,and just doesn't seem to care. His body is nothing but zipper stitches pins and titanium from his non military life.

Angle of the strike I am guessing would come into play.

WillBrink

06-27-23, 08:04

My original comment was a question. I had knowledge of someone being shot in Bosnia. He said he will never wear body armor again. This is why just because a bullet doesn't enter your body doesn't mean it can't hurt you or cause enough injury to cause you a very painful death from injured organs, and internal bleeding.

I only have 150rds of M855. I have a couple cases of SCHP 62grain ammo. I have a couple cases of Winchester 62gr open tip nickle plated case with purple tint (government training ammo) ballistic testing shows it expands and shreds jello blocks pretty nicely.

That makes no sense at all to me. Had he not had the BA he'd probably be dead. BA is tested and rated on whether it resists deformation within allowed limits. If it performs as designed when hit by what its rating allows, it should prevent serious injury or death. Physics is physics and while the energy disperses on the plate, the effect is like some striking you with a baseball bat if the mass/energy of the projectile is great enough. It's gonna hurt, it's probably going to bruise, it may crack a rib. That's waaaaaaaay better than being shot minus the BA.

T2C

06-27-23, 08:26

That makes no sense at all to me. Had he not had the BA he'd probably be dead. BA is tested and rated on whether it resists deformation within allowed limits. If it performs as designed when hit by what its rating allows, it should prevent serious injury or death. Physics is physics and while the energy disperses on the plate, the effect is like some striking you with a baseball bat if the mass/energy of the projectile is great enough. It's gonna hurt, it's probably going to bruise, it may crack a rib. That's waaaaaaaay better than being shot minus the BA.

I agree. A cracked rib is better than a body bag.

WillBrink

06-27-23, 08:37

I agree. A cracked rib is better than a body bag.

That does not seem a difficult decision/conclusion to make to me.

markm

06-27-23, 08:45

I agree. A cracked rib is better than a body bag.

Not if it means losing a ridiculous debate on the internut! :sarcastic:

Defaultmp3

06-27-23, 09:17

GTF425

06-27-23, 09:58

I'm not lysander, but from what I read, the "survivable" limit is 44mm or 1.73".

Thank you.

NQNPIII

06-27-23, 10:07

lysander

06-27-23, 10:33

Would you mind sharing some resources regarding this? If it's sensitive or you need my .something email, shoot me a PM.

Ballistic Resistance of Body Armor NIJ Standard-0101.06 (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwj1q6GP4uP_AhWLGVkFHa57AY0QFnoECDsQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ojp.gov%2Fpdffiles1%2Fnij%2F223054.pdf&usg=AOvVaw2S846z3nrQKZENxtd7gOBh&opi=89978449)

What is back face deformation?l (https://www.ar500armor.com/knowledge-base/what-is-back-face-deformation.html)

WillBrink

06-27-23, 10:37

Ignore the post above by an EMT. He must know nothing. He backed up what I was saying. Flame me. I don't care it's another gun site on the net.

It's not me saying "I won't wear body armor." Some people have spent time in recovery for months from injuries when buying protective gear. What was used in Bosnia? Old style flack jackets? I have no idea, and don't really care. Want me to put you in touch with him? I can damn sure do that. He's as blunt as a sledgehammer.

If you want to live and survive a shot to the plates, I'm with you. Evidently you haven't lived someone else's life. 55 ball and 62 855? What's the real difference? Little to none I'm sure.

Do I have to do research on people being hospitalized after taking a direct hit with a round? No, go do your own and let the information flow. I don't give a shit.

You're making no sense. Very simple, BA dramatically improves the likelihood you will survive being shot. Hence, why it's used. Not exactly rocket science that one. Details such as what BA, what you're shot with, etc are the variables that will apply, but does not alter that reality. That some dude who was in Bosnia has decided he will not wear BA is of no value at all here.

Defaultmp3

06-27-23, 10:57

55 ball and 62 855? What's the real difference? Little to none I'm sure.M193 out of a long enough barrel is well known to be able to defeat steel armor at close range. M855 can defeat UHMWPE plates at distances and velocities that ball and soft points would never defeat.

GTF425

06-27-23, 11:17

Ballistic Resistance of Body Armor NIJ Standard-0101.06 (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwj1q6GP4uP_AhWLGVkFHa57AY0QFnoECDsQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ojp.gov%2Fpdffiles1%2Fnij%2F223054.pdf&usg=AOvVaw2S846z3nrQKZENxtd7gOBh&opi=89978449)

What is back face deformation?l (https://www.ar500armor.com/knowledge-base/what-is-back-face-deformation.html)

Thank you.

I'm faculty at a public health university and work as both a SWAT medic and flight medic. The conventional wisdom in the tactical medic world is to consider the possibility of a pulmonary contusion/pneumothorax following a gunshot wound that strikes torso armor. Anecdotally, I have only treated two casualties with injuries isolated to their armor: one in Afghanistan in 2009 where a front ESAPI was struck, and the second was an LE officer shot twice in the soft armor from a .40 shooting FMJ. Both had broken ribs, and the Soldier did suffer from a pulmonary contusion. He still has the ESAPI, and I don't recall the backface being too terribly deformed. I'll try to track him down through my social circle and see if he'll send me pics of it.

I appreciate resources that can help expand my understanding of ballistic protection and, consequently, also helps improve the quality of my instruction.

NQNPIII

06-27-23, 11:24

Thank you.

I'm faculty at a public health university and work as both a SWAT medic and flight medic. The conventional wisdom in the tactical medic world is to consider the possibility of a pulmonary contusion/pneumothorax following a gunshot wound that strikes torso armor. Anecdotally, I have only treated two casualties with injuries isolated to their armor: one in Afghanistan in 2009 where a front ESAPI was struck, and the second was an LE officer shot twice in the soft armor from a .40 shooting FMJ. Both had broken ribs, and the Soldier did suffer from a pulmonary contusion. He still has the ESAPI, and I don't recall the backface being too terribly deformed. I'll try to track him down through my social circle and see if he'll send me pics of it.

I appreciate resources that can help expand my understanding of ballistic protection and, consequently, also helps improve the quality of my instruction.

We are chasing red herrings, and going down rabbit holes. Quit trying to confuse us with facts. Internet posters don't like to hear anything else except for themselves. Everyone else is wrong. (sarcasm switch off.)

GTF425

06-27-23, 11:30

We are chasing red herrings, and going down rabbit holes. Quit trying to confuse us with facts. Internet posters don't like to hear anything else except for themselves. Everyone else is wrong. (sarcasm switch off.)

I'll admit that I only have anecdotal, limited experience with patients struck in the armor. It wasn't very common in theater, and is fairly rare in my area. I do appreciate their input, given these guys have much more technical knowledge of armor than I do.

WillBrink

06-27-23, 11:31

Thank you.

I'm faculty at a public health university and work as both a SWAT medic and flight medic. The conventional wisdom in the tactical medic world is to consider the possibility of a pulmonary contusion/pneumothorax following a gunshot wound that strikes torso armor. Anecdotally, I have only treated two casualties with injuries isolated to their armor: one in Afghanistan in 2009 where a front ESAPI was struck, and the second was an LE officer shot twice in the soft armor from a .40 shooting FMJ. Both had broken ribs, and the Soldier did suffer from a pulmonary contusion. He still has the ESAPI, and I don't recall the backface being too terribly deformed. I'll try to track him down through my social circle and see if he'll send me pics of it.

I appreciate resources that can help expand my understanding of ballistic protection and, consequently, also helps improve the quality of my instruction.

Force is force and physics is physics and BA greatly reduces likelihood of serous injury and death, but getting whacked in the sternum with a bat (as plate example) causing BFT or deformation caused by soft armor, can and does cause trauma. One reason soft armor is rated for pistol rnds is that even if the rifle rnd did not penetrate the armor (for sake of argument) the amount of deformation will cause serious injury or death. Conversely, people take pistol rnd to the plate and hardly notice it. Look at the deformation of the soft armor at 55s. That's gonna hurt!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3HM1bhF1R4s

WillBrink

06-27-23, 11:39

With ballistics dummies:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HA4OxqLpHss

Hammer_Man

06-27-23, 21:28

What about 77 gr TMK projectiles? Would these be effective against bad guys with body armor, windshields, and space zombies?

WillBrink

06-28-23, 07:04

What about 77 gr TMK projectiles? Would these be effective against bad guys with body armor, windshields, and space zombies?

I would think it depends on what level of BA they're wearing and where you hit them.

AndyLate

06-28-23, 07:34

WillBrink

06-28-23, 07:48

Ballistic effects with body armor confuses me. If an armor plate doesn't have significant backface deformation, will a shot to the chest with, say a 5.56, cause injury if we ignore "spall" and ricochets? The buttplate on a rifle has far less surface area and you can certainly fire a lightweight 5 56 with the butt on your chest without injury.

Andy

Per vid in #175, 5rnds of 5.56 to the plate and minor backface deformation (with that brand at least), so maybe, mild bruising/BFT, but they should still be in the fight. The mental shock of being shot must be a big factor to how someone responds too, which they discuss also.

That's my non SME take at least.

Hammer_Man

06-28-23, 10:41

I would think it depends on what level of BA they're wearing and where you hit them.

I suppose you’re right. I only ask because PSA has 77 gr TMK, and 77 gr OTM ammo for about $0.60 a round. I was curious if the TMK has any advantage over OTM, particularly regarding barrier penetration.

Defaultmp3

06-28-23, 10:58

I suppose you’re right. I only ask because PSA has 77 gr TMK, and 77 gr OTM ammo for about $0.60 a round. I was curious if the TMK has any advantage over OTM, particularly regarding barrier penetration.I see zero reason why it would. AFAIK, TMK is just SMK with a plastic ballistic tip with the rest of the bullet is exactly the same, so it'll suffer all the same short comings as SMK for terminal ballistics purposes through barriers. TMK might give you a bit of an advantage in terms of effects against bare gel/flesh with a lower fragmentation/expansion velocity threshold, but would not affect how it would interact with intermediate barriers.

Correction: The TMK also has a larger opening in general for the jacket (along side the ballistic tip that interfaces with the lead core, leading to more consistent terminal performance against bare gel/flesh). However, as best I can tell, the rest of the bullet construction remains extremely similar, with a thin jacket and no bonding or jacket interlock, so intermediate barrier performance is almost certainly going to be just as poor between the TMK and the SMK:
https://i.imgur.com/7EM7RKDl.jpghttps://i.imgur.com/igSVUj8.jpg

The buttplate on a rifle has far less surface area and you can certainly fire a lightweight 5 56 with the butt on your chest without injury.The rifle also provides weight, muzzle device gas diversion, the use of some of that energy to cycle the bolt, etc., all of which rob the overall energy being transferred to the shooter. Here the thing at play is conservation of momentum; remember that KE is much more heavily weighted towards velocity, so the mass of a firearm would be far, far larger than the mass of the bullet, which in turn means that to conserve momentum, the velocity of the firearm in motion would be much lower, and thus the KE is also much lower.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_recoil

WillBrink

06-28-23, 11:11

I see zero reason why it would. AFAIK, TMK is just SMK with a plastic ballistic tip with the rest of the bullet is exactly the same, so it'll suffer all the same short comings as SMK for terminal ballistics purposes through barriers. TMK might give you a bit of an advantage in terms of effects against bare gel/flesh with a lower fragmentation/expansion velocity threshold, but would not affect how it would interact with intermediate barriers.

I would think if anything, basic M855a1, which is designed to defeat BA via copper-jacketed steel core, is a good choice if defeating BA is the goal. As always, design choices have to be made as to defeating X while perhaps not the best terminal ballistics once it passes through X barrier. I recall the M855a1 requires high velocity to get wounding mechanisms via yaw, so probably not best choice for SBRs. Not formal testing but M855 vs M855al vs Level III+ plate. Guess the results? It's interesting to see the long list of bullets the Level III and Level III+ can stop. M855a1 from at least m4 length barrels? Not so much...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2wipXZygj04

WillBrink

06-28-23, 11:44

Interesting penetration results in hard targets between barrel lengths and m855, m855a1, and m193 informal testing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvXkcafF9Jw

ST911

06-28-23, 16:46

What about 77 gr TMK projectiles? Would these be effective against bad guys with body armor, windshields, and space zombies?

I suppose you’re right. I only ask because PSA has 77 gr TMK, and 77 gr OTM ammo for about $0.60 a round. I was curious if the TMK has any advantage over OTM, particularly regarding barrier penetration.

No. As a general rule the 5.56/.223 77 TMK will upset sooner, penetrate shallower, and be defeated easier than it's SMK counterpart. The TMK does have a higher BC and gives you a slight edge at distance.

Credit: BHA Website

70514

70515

R0331

06-28-23, 18:11

Having been in the OP situation many many years ago I ended up with 62gr m855. This was mainly because it was the same as what I was issued and I had an acog that was calibrated for it.

That being said, I have since added some 75 and 77 gr ammo and have had much better groups. Like many others have already said, I would find what works for your rifle and stick with that.

indianalex01

06-28-23, 20:38

C-grunt

06-28-23, 20:43

I would think if anything, basic M855a1, which is designed to defeat BA via copper-jacketed steel core, is a good choice if defeating BA is the goal. As always, design choices have to be made as to defeating X while perhaps not the best terminal ballistics once it passes through X barrier. I recall the M855a1 requires high velocity to get wounding mechanisms via yaw, so probably not best choice for SBRs. Not formal testing but M855 vs M855al vs Level III+ plate. Guess the results? It's interesting to see the long list of bullets the Level III and Level III+ can stop. M855a1 from at least m4 length barrels? Not so much...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2wipXZygj04

I believe the 855A1 fragments at significantly less velocity than 855 and 193. The design of the bullet having the exposed nose/upper core gives a small gap at the jacket to initiate fragmentation.

Defaultmp3

06-28-23, 20:47

To the poster who said that 77gn TMK and SMK are exactly the same bullet except for the plastic tip, is completely wrong. Please make sure you know what you are talking about before posting disinformation like that. There has already been enough BS slung on this thread. TMK has a wider hollow point to allow the tip to be inserted. The TMK frags at lower velocities and shallower. 2 different bullets. Both very accurate though. TMK is a more reliable at fragging too.Good to know about the wider tip. That being said, it's my understanding that the plastic tip is what allows for the lower velocity threshold for fragmentation and expansion, along with the more consistent terminal effects on bare gel/flesh, as the tip allows for more consistent and controlled terminal effects (making it closer to GameKings in terms of effectiveness on bare gel/flesh), rather than any other changes in bullet construction (pretty sure it still maintains the fairly thin jacket, with no bonding or jacket interlocking, just like the SMK), hence my great confidence that it still sucks through intermediate barriers.

vicious_cb

06-28-23, 23:30

To the poster who said that 77gn TMK and SMK are exactly the same bullet except for the plastic tip, is completely wrong. Please make sure you know what you are talking about before posting disinformation like that. There has already been enough BS slung on this thread. TMK has a wider hollow point to allow the tip to be inserted. The TMK frags at lower velocities and shallower. 2 different bullets. Both very accurate though. TMK is a more reliable at fragging too.

I have seen Marines shot when a 762x39 that hit their trauma plates. There was not little to no injuries.

Bingo, TMK is a completely different design that has enhanced terminal performance as well as increased BC. TMK is the king of .223 projectile terminal performance if barriers are not a concern which is why its become so popular for those that are allowed to hunt with .223.

Look at ST's gel shots, almost zero neck length on the TMK meaning zero reliance on yaw to start fragmentation meaning the bullet will have exceptional consistency.

http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a72/leid/Ammo/77GR.20TMK20VS2077GR.20SMK20OTM_zps9q471eki.jpg

davidjinks

06-30-23, 12:48

This thread took a weird turn.

Eurodriver

06-30-23, 13:43

No. As a general rule the 5.56/.223 77 TMK will upset sooner, penetrate shallower, and be defeated easier than it's SMK counterpart. The TMK does have a higher BC and gives you a slight edge at distance.

Credit: BHA Website

70514

70515

That's a 20" barrel compared to a 14.5" barrel...how is that apples to apples?

My experience shooting white tails and hogs with 69gr SMKs and 77gr TMKs (also not apples to apples, but out of the same rifle) shows immensely better terminal performance with the TMK.

georgeib

06-30-23, 16:14

That's a 20" barrel compared to a 14.5" barrel...how is that apples to apples?

My experience shooting white tails and hogs with 69gr SMKs and 77gr TMKs (also not apples to apples, but out of the same rifle) shows immensely better terminal performance with the TMK.

Certainly not apples to apples, but wouldn't the faster bullet from the longer barrel typically open up sooner? I think this shows even more dramatically how much earlier a TMK will open up compared to an SMK, no?

davidjinks

06-30-23, 19:05

TMKs are superior to the SMK.

That's a 20" barrel compared to a 14.5" barrel...how is that apples to apples?

My experience shooting white tails and hogs with 69gr SMKs and 77gr TMKs (also not apples to apples, but out of the same rifle) shows immensely better terminal performance with the TMK.

ST911

07-01-23, 06:32

That's a 20" barrel compared to a 14.5" barrel...how is that apples to apples?

Not intended as apples to apples but to show the general difference overall (neck, upset, etc), the trend is the same. I couldn't find the comparison photos I was looking for at the time.

My experience shooting white tails and hogs with 69gr SMKs and 77gr TMKs (also not apples to apples, but out of the same rifle) shows immensely better terminal performance with the TMK.

TMKs are superior to the SMK.

What does "superior" mean here. In what way?

davidjinks

07-01-23, 06:54

Superior probably wasn’t the best word to use. TMKs are better than SMKs in regards to BC and the ability to fragment better. TMKs have a shorter neck length when comparing both SMK and TMK.

BC for 77 Gr TMK: .420
BC for 77 Gr SMK: .372

BC for 69 Gr TMK: .375
BC for 69 Gr SMK: .301

What does "superior" mean here. In what way?

WillBrink

07-01-23, 07:56

Certainly not apples to apples, but wouldn't the faster bullet from the longer barrel typically open up sooner? I think this shows even more dramatically how much earlier a TMK will open up compared to an SMK, no?

Strictly depends on the design of the bullet and it's intended velocity range/envelope to perform as intended within that range.

pag23

07-02-23, 18:01

This thread took a weird turn.

But a lot of good info....

33XRAY

07-02-23, 18:35

Is it 1/7 that groups better with green tip? It's a no brainer ipso facto

davidjinks

07-03-23, 10:37

lysander

07-03-23, 12:15

Through .mil testing, it was shown that a 1:9 twist barrel was the most accurate barrel for M193 and M855.

The only thing that screws with the M855 is the steel insert at the tip. They’re not always concentric/straight when they’re made.

Source?

I know of no report where M855 was ever tested in 1-9 twist by the Army.

EDIT:

The only report I know of that even mentions M855 and 1-9 twist rifling is "Analysis of the M16A2 Rifle Characteristics and Recommended Improvements," by the Army Research Institute. The report does not actually test anything, but speculates on all the ways the M16A2 could have been better (for the Army). The claim that 1-9 twist, is just that, and unsupported claim by the authors of that report. And further, the report states that the claim would have to be tested to validate it.

I can find nothing in any report about M193 and 1-9 twist done by the military. All the formal 1-9 twist testing was done with XM287 and XM288 ammunition in the XM207E2.

The 1-9 twist rifling was never considered for M855 weapons because the M856 tracer required a faster twist, and therefore never tested.

NYH1

07-04-23, 13:41

All of our carbines (14.5" and 16") and rifles (20"), all 1 in 7 twist shoot better with 55gr. M193 than 62gr. M855. Unless it's a really good deal, I don't buy 62gr. M855 anymore.

NYH1.

NickySantoro

07-04-23, 13:45

Long ago I had significant experience with M193. It works well.

1168

07-04-23, 15:23

Taking a round to plates can cause pulmonary/cardiac contusions as well as pneumothorax. It's common to have broken ribs when soft armor or plates are struck.

Absolutely. Getting shot sucks. Getting shot in the plate sucks less, and has a greater percentage of positive outcomes.

T2C

07-04-23, 19:34

Source?

I know of no report where M855 was ever tested in 1-9 twist by the Army.

EDIT:

The only report I know of that even mentions M855 and 1-9 twist rifling is "Analysis of the M16A2 Rifle Characteristics and Recommended Improvements," by the Army Research Institute. The report does not actually test anything, but speculates on all the ways the M16A2 could have been better (for the Army). The claim that 1-9 twist, is just that, and unsupported claim by the authors of that report. And further, the report states that the claim would have to be tested to validate it.

I can find nothing in any report about M193 and 1-9 twist done by the military. All the formal 1-9 twist testing was done with XM287 and XM288 ammunition in the XM207E2.

The 1-9 twist rifling was never considered for M855 weapons because the M856 tracer required a faster twist, and therefore never tested.

I don't have any test data, just personal observations. I shot M855 and SS109 in High Power Rifle competition at reduced courses out to 200 yards. The RRA Match upper with a 1:8 twist shot much better groups than the 1:9 twist with M855 and SS109. The 55g M193 shot through the RRA upper did not group as well at 200 yards as the M855 and SS109. The M193 shot much better groups at 200 yards when fired through the 1:9 twist barrel. When Smith & Wesson tried to secure a department contract to sell carbines to my agency, I shot 55g M193 in one of their carbines with 1:7 twist barrel at 100 yards. Accuracy was horrible. I shot 5-1/2" groups at 100 yards discounting flyers that opened the groups up to 8 inches. A 1:9 Armalite carbine shot 2" groups at the same distance. The S&W sales rep was pissed off.

NQNPIII

07-04-23, 20:03

When Smith & Wesson tried to secure a department contract to sell carbines to my agency, I shot 55g M193 in one of their carbines with 1:7 twist barrel at 100 yards. Accuracy was horrible. I s.

Must not be the same model they sell at the LGS. Only one I've held was a 1:9

T2C

07-04-23, 20:39

Must not be the same model they sell at the LGS. Only one I've held was a 1:9

They were touting the 1:7 twist barrel at the time. The sales rep claimed the 1:7 carbine could hold 1 MOA with 55g FMJ ammunition.

NQNPIII

07-04-23, 21:48

They were touting the 1:7 twist barrel at the time. The sales rep claimed the 1:7 carbine could hold 1 MOA with 55g FMJ ammunition.

Oooooops! MY brother is with FHP. He used his personal DPMS Panther for a duty carbine until they got issued piston operated Sigs. He like the Sig, says it's nose heavy.

AFAIK the M&P have MIM parts in their FCG's. It was a really smooth trigger for the price back then. Last I saw was $899 at KYGUNCO. Stupid price.

davidjinks

07-06-23, 18:00

Sorry I didn’t answer you sooner. Give me some time and I’ll pull up some of the testing.

At the end of the day, the 1:7 was chosen due to the tracers that were being used.

Source?

I know of no report where M855 was ever tested in 1-9 twist by the Army.

EDIT:

The only report I know of that even mentions M855 and 1-9 twist rifling is "Analysis of the M16A2 Rifle Characteristics and Recommended Improvements," by the Army Research Institute. The report does not actually test anything, but speculates on all the ways the M16A2 could have been better (for the Army). The claim that 1-9 twist, is just that, and unsupported claim by the authors of that report. And further, the report states that the claim would have to be tested to validate it.

I can find nothing in any report about M193 and 1-9 twist done by the military. All the formal 1-9 twist testing was done with XM287 and XM288 ammunition in the XM207E2.

The 1-9 twist rifling was never considered for M855 weapons because the M856 tracer required a faster twist, and therefore never tested.

T2C

07-07-23, 00:38

Sorry I didn’t answer you sooner. Give me some time and I’ll pull up some of the testing.

At the end of the day, the 1:7 was chosen due to the tracers that were being used.

That was my understanding. The slower twist rate barrels would not stabilize the tracer rounds?

Did shooting in arctic cold conditions have something do to with the choice in 1:7 barrel twist rate as well?

mark5pt56

07-07-23, 06:51

lysander

07-07-23, 20:29

That was my understanding. The slower twist rate barrels would not stabilize the tracer rounds?

Did shooting in arctic cold conditions have something do to with the choice in 1:7 barrel twist rate as well?

In the mid 1970s NATO began to look into the standardization of a second caliber round. It was quickly settled that the round would be based on the cartridge case of the M193, the the projectile was still up for debate, the US preferred the XM777, a 53 grain bullet with a steel penetrator, as this could be used in the M16A1 with the 1-12 twist barrel. The only other real contender was FN's SS109/SS110 which had been designed for the FN Minimi for the US Army's SAW program. This combination (SS109/Minimi) were designed around 1-7 twist rifling.

The range and penetration requirements for the SAW were carried over as a baseline for the new NATO cartridge. Eventually, the SS109/SS110 combination was adopted as NATO standard in 1980. That same year the Minimi was adopted as the M249. These two factors cemented 1-7 twist as the only twist worth considering when the M16A1E1 came about.

So, why was the SS110 so long? The XM287, a 68 gr ball round designed for the XM207E2 (Stoner 63), was the exact same length as the SS109. The tracer version of the XM287, the XM288, wasn't any longer than the XM287 and both would be stable out of a 1-9 twist barrel. So, why was the Belgian tracer so much longer that it required a faster twist? It all goes back to the NATO/SAW program tracer burn-out range requirement. That was set at 800 meters, and that required a lot of tracer composition.