This.
No actual twist rate will stabilize a bullet in flesh.
Yaw makes a difference and is barrel dependent, but I think thats more of an m855 thing.
Printable View
That's why I don't get the M193 obsession. Sure, if you only had a 1:12 twist or only had M193 available (or if it was 1969) then I can see the argument. But in 2020 there are faster twists as standard production and MUCH better bullet choices, most of them being heavier. M193 is great for plinking or training so you don't shoot up your good stuff, but for real-world applications today? Not so much.
Both M855A1 and Mk318 utilize fragmentation as part of their wounding mechanism. However, both also have a core that penetrates beyond the fragging (unlike M193). Best of both worlds?
I'm not limited to mil issue ammo. Those who are don't get to choose.
I haven't seen the price and availability on those make me want to compare performance vs the LE stuff that is.
I think a basic load in mags x2 of premium ammo should come first.
Then I'm not concerned with stacked deep ammo not being premium. In fact I like it to also be for training, so M193 fits.
The M193 obsession comes down to two things:
1) It's cheap. For the same reason people buy off-brand, low quality guns and claim that you're "just paying for the name" with the high quality weapons, they want to think the same thing about ammo.
2) It offends the core sensibility that technology is NEVER the answer. The answer always needs to be "Shot placement. Train more and make your shots count and it won't matter kind of bullets you're using..."
Less difference than you'd think between the 20 and 16, and more evident through barriers than bare gel. Pub velocity for the load pictured (.223) is 3025 from a 24". Velocity from one of my 16" is ~2770. I use the 5.56 variant, which is ~100fps faster and even better.