Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 99

Thread: M855A1 article

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    4,928
    Feedback Score
    4 (100%)
    This is the Family Truckster of rifle ammo.

    "If you think you hate it now, just wait till you drive it!"
    My brother saw Deliverance and bought a Bow. I saw Deliverance and bought an AR-15.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    San Antonio, TX
    Posts
    46
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)
    I thought M855 green tip was contracted at no more than 4MOA? Perhaps the 6MOA were some of the "not for duty use" ammo?

    Most of the people I've heard feedback on the M855A1 said it was around 2MOA and was proving better terminally (unscientifically of course) than M855. The higher pressures and such does lend some worry to a higher turnover of 5.56 weapons.

    MK318 still appears to be the best general purpose round available through military channels, and holds 2MOA or less......

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    San Antonio, TX
    Posts
    46
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)
    Copied from MickFury of LF:

    Pro's:

    A) Sub 2 MOA Accuracy. I was averaging 1.7-1.75 MOA with my lot, but I believe it was shooter error due to me sucking. I am told by reliable sources anecdotally it is averaging 1.5 MOA.
    B) Puts bad guys down harder. Shot placement reigns supreme and I'm not a Terminal Ballistics guru or done autopsies on bad guys and had to delete the photos I took of bad guys all shot up for research purposes due to being investigated for war crimes, but those shot with the M855A1 ate shit harder than those shot with standard ball M855. Sorry for not being scientific, but I lack the tools and the talent.
    C) Availability. I ran out of MK 262 MOD 1 early on, and we couldn't source any SOST / MK 318 MOD 0 even though it is now a STRAC'd ammo. We could get M855A1 all deployment.
    D) Enhanced exterior ballistics. Higher velocity, better ballistic coefficient resulted in a flatter trajectory and easier hold-off's. Win / Win.

    Cons:

    A) 3-part Bullet Construction. I do not want to see a catastrophic malfunction because a tip worked itself loose into the lower receiver / fire controls group.
    B) Lack of performance against automobile windshield glass.
    C) Increased chamber pressures to the tune of 63,000 psi in a 14.5" M4. Most Soldiers in my Unit don't know about / comprehend the issue or ramifications of bullet setback, and simply replace the round they ejected back into the top of their magazine post patrol since people here are retarded and want Amber weapon systems. I am willing to bet an incident arose here directly due to this, but odds are it was either misdiagnosed or covered up.
    D) Lack of information about the round that is needed by shooters on the ground. AWG stepped in and squared this away for us. They are awesome. Lot of misinformation out there still, sadly, perpetuated by PEO Soldier mostly.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    4,928
    Feedback Score
    4 (100%)
    Increased chamber pressures to the tune of 63,000 psi in a 14.5" M4.
    To paraphrase Boromir: "One does not simply increas the chamber pressure in an M-4 to 63,000psi." This is going to play hell on bolts.
    My brother saw Deliverance and bought a Bow. I saw Deliverance and bought an AR-15.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Palo Alto, CA
    Posts
    3,347
    Feedback Score
    0
    3 MOA was typical for M855 greentip we shot in the late 1980's and early 1990's. With the post 9/11 ramp up in ammo production, the accuracy requirement was relaxed to reduce the number of rejected lots...

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    6,162
    Feedback Score
    0
    I guess this means that the BRM standards will soon be changing. Good luck scoring "Expert" with those 300 meter targets and that 5.5 MOA standard.
    I like my rifles like my women - short, light, fast, brown, and suppressed.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Palo Alto, CA
    Posts
    3,347
    Feedback Score
    0
    Again, 5.5 MOA is the max allowable and is no different than current M855. Current M855A1 is shooting quite accurately at about 2 MOA--however these are projectiles built on the old inefficient, more costly BAM, as to date M855A1 has not successfully been run on the SCAMP line. IF they are ever able to build M855A1 on SCAMP, then who knows where accuracy will be...

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    4,928
    Feedback Score
    4 (100%)
    Doesn't this stuff also have issues with hard deposits in the BCG?

    I swear, this stuff looks like it is turning out to be the ACU and ARPAT of ammo.
    Last edited by Heavy Metal; 03-09-12 at 09:58.
    My brother saw Deliverance and bought a Bow. I saw Deliverance and bought an AR-15.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    3,095
    Feedback Score
    7 (89%)
    Quote Originally Posted by C-grunt View Post
    Another swing and a miss by the Big Green.
    They seem to do that well.

    Now they spend millions on ammo thats more expensive and not as good as what the marines use.

    Yeah their missing alot lately.

    Hey Doc, are the marines switching to this as well? Hopefully they keep the SOST i hear it performs well
    Last edited by sinlessorrow; 03-09-12 at 09:50.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    66
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by C-grunt View Post
    Another swing and a miss by the Big Green.
    For some reason Big Army has had their heads firmly lodged up their 4th point of contact for some time now.
    Jeremiah 25: "Do not provoke me to anger with what your hands have made. Then I will not harm you".

Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •