View Full Version : Adams Arms 7.5 PDW gel test with GD and TBBC (gel data added)
ATK came out to our range yesterday to do a ballistics demo. I got there at the very end and shot 64 gr Gold Dot .223 and 62 gr Federal TB LE223T3 .223 through my PDW, just to see what it would do.
GD .223
http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n5/xpd54/photo2.jpg
Fed TB LE223T3
http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n5/xpd54/photo.jpg
penny for comparison
Our guys were really impressed with the Federal rd. gonna switch our duty ammo to it.
Both look like they performed very well, especially out of the short barrel. Your department made an outstanding choice. Do you have any muzzle velocity data for these rounds out of the short barrel?
Not yet. They gave me a box of each to do more testing on. Will post it when I have it.
TBBC is about the best 5.56 mm projectile currently available--perhaps that is why the FBI selected it and it is so highly recommended here: https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=19881.
What is better overall, the 64 gr Gold Dot 223 or the 62 gr Federal TB LE223T3 223?
Or..
What would make someone want one over the other?
While the 64 gr Gold Dot is an adequate projectile that is much better than older designs like the Win 64 gr Power Point (RA223R2) or Fed 64 gr TRU (T223L), the 62 gr TBBC is far superior to the Gold Dot in terminal performance--particularly through barriers.
Despite less robust performance, Gold Dots are frequently selected by Municipal and State LE agencies over TBBC loads because Gold Dots are often approximately half the price of the TBBC loads under their purchasing contracts.
The only reason to choose the Gold Dot over TBBC is due to price and perhaps availability...
Is the available loading the same velocity as the FBI contract ammo?
How does this bullet compare to whatever the best TSX is?
Despite less robust performance, Gold Dots are frequently selected by Municipal and State LE agencies over TBBC loads because Gold Dots are often approximately half the price of the TBBC loads under their purchasing contracts.
This. I checked the price. State bid can get us a case of 500 GD for $250ish. A case of 200 TBBC cost basically the SAME price.
"Is the available loading the same velocity as the FBI contract ammo?"
The 62 gr TBBC LE223T3 load is a .223 pressure load; the FBI contract 5.56 mm pressure TBBC (XM556FBIT3) is not yet available for municipal and state LE purchase.
"How does this bullet compare to whatever the best TSX is?"
The "best" LE TSX is the 5.56 mm BH 50 gr TSX loading--the TBBC might be a touch better, although I would be perfectly happy with either one.
So where does that place the Winchester load that the FBI approved at the same time as the TBBC?
Like I noted in the second paragraph here: https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=19881
It is too bad there seem to be no cheap bullets which are good for barriers followed by soft targets.
I see in that link you have a list of decent barrier loads, and the Remington Core-Lokt ultrabonded is listed along with the 223 version of the TBBC.
How does the Remington 62 grain bonded fit into the Gold Dot vs TBBC range vs Mk318?
How much better, if any, is the Barnes 50 TSX compared to the Remington 62 bonded?
decodeddiesel
04-09-11, 17:53
If you don't mind me asking, what medium were you firing these projectiles into? What were the penetration depths?
Impressive projectile performance regardless though.
There is some info here: https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=26127&page=2
I'd put the Rem Core-Lokt above the Gold Dot and below the TBBC--probably on par with the TSX, although it is hard to accurately compare given the different pressues..
If you don't mind me asking, what medium were you firing these projectiles into? What were the penetration depths?
Impressive projectile performance regardless though.
These two were just straight ballistic gelatin.
They also fired them through the common barriers during the testing - glass, drywall and some clothing I believe. I wasn't there for that part of the test. I got there right before they tore down and had em shoot those two rds for me. They both penetrated @ 17-18". I'll try to get the pictures from the rest of the testing and the data to go with it and pass it on.
decodeddiesel
04-09-11, 22:34
These two were just straight ballistic gelatin.
They also fired them through the common barriers during the testing - glass, drywall and some clothing I believe. I wasn't there for that part of the test. I got there right before they tore down and had em shoot those two rds for me. They both penetrated @ 17-18". I'll try to get the pictures from the rest of the testing and the data to go with it and pass it on.
Once again, simply curious, but was it properly calibrated BG?
I am eager to see some data with intermediate barriers.
ETA: OK I understand the context now. I would assume it must have been for such testing. It is impressive to see these results from an 7.5" AR.
All right. I have the results from the testing in an excel file. Who can host it so we can put it in the thread. I can't. Photobucket wont do it.
Here it is
https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0Ak5R08tueXwldGhTdmpqOW1zTUJ3SWRCQUJ5S09jb2c&hl=en&authkey=CLXPwYAH
Here it is
https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0Ak5R08tueXwldGhTdmpqOW1zTUJ3SWRCQUJ5S09jb2c&hl=en&authkey=CLXPwYAH
You had a .40SW expand to 1.74 inches? :confused:
I would guess that was a typo. Wasn't there for that part of the test.
I would guess that was a typo. Wasn't there for that part of the test.
If it isn't I need to reevaluate my ammunition selection. :D
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.