Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 38

Thread: Movin away from CL?

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    SWMT
    Posts
    8,165
    Feedback Score
    32 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by sinlessorrow View Post
    .20c over M855 for a round that actually works and is being made on older less efficient machines. I am ok with paying .20c more for a round that actually fragments and actually works a whole lot better than M855 according to InfiniteGrims gel tests back when he had them available to see.

    It is .11c more expensive than MK318 SOS.
    I think the question being asked is, "Is it twenty cents more expensive or two-tenths of a cent more expensive?"
    " Nil desperandum - Never Despair. That is a motto for you and me. All are not dead; and where there is a spark of patriotic fire, we will rekindle it. "
    - Samuel Adams -

  2. #22
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    3,095
    Feedback Score
    7 (89%)
    Quote Originally Posted by scoutfsu99 View Post
    Considering our training and operation budgets are being slashed, that .20 over M855 is a significant number for questionable gains.
    I wouldnt say questionable. The gel tests showed large improvements over the maybe yaw in 6" M855. That stuff fragmented and split into 3 pieces(penetrator, slug, and jacket) jacket fragged, slug went straight, and penetrator went 40* up, it was impressive and would seem a large upgrade.

    This again is about chrome lining not M855A1.

    I believe R0N posted it was .60c per round of M855A1.
    Last edited by sinlessorrow; 02-27-13 at 21:44.
    Quote Originally Posted by C4IGrant View Post
    Colt builds War Horses, not show ponies.
    Quote Originally Posted by Iraqgunz View Post
    This is 2012. The world is going to end this December and people are still trying to debate the merits of piece of shit, cost cutting crap AR's. Really?

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,968
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Fjallhrafn View Post
    I think the question being asked is, "Is it twenty cents more expensive or two-tenths of a cent more expensive?"
    Correct.

    I'm guessing it's $0.002 based on what has been posted since, which makes a lot more cents.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    XXX
    Posts
    1,849
    Feedback Score
    0
    The military by any definition should be considered by its actions an environmental pollutant.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    47
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)

    Re: Movin away from CL?

    So is chrome lining bad for pollution from manufacture, or is someone worried about all the little bits of chrome that are breaking off while firing?

    Off topic: I love giving anyone who drives a brand new "green" machine the same facts of how in reality driving any used vehicle is leaps and bounds better for the environment then buying a brand new prius, or whatever.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    818
    Feedback Score
    31 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by sinlessorrow View Post
    I wouldnt say questionable. The gel tests showed large improvements over the maybe yaw in 6" M855. That stuff fragmented and split into 3 pieces(penetrator, slug, and jacket) jacket fragged, slug went straight, and penetrator went 40* up, it was impressive and would seem a large upgrade.

    This again is about chrome lining not M855A1.

    I believe R0N posted it was .60c per round of M855A1.
    I don't even pretend to fully grasp the minute details. Frankly, I heavily rely on DocGKR's words to form my opinion. But flat out, .20 is a significant price increase, especially with our budgets about to be slashed. They're talking about units not being able to train above CO/BN level. A move to such a high priced round is insane given the reality of our situation.

    This goes hand in hand w/ the CL.....isn't 855A1 reputed to burn out barrels quicker due to the propellant? If they're leaning away from CL, what does that mean for barrel wear/ other options?

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,968
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by sinlessorrow View Post
    I believe R0N posted it was .60c per round of M855A1.
    Holy crap.

    But again, confusing. You of course mean $0.60/round, correct?
    Last edited by Warp; 02-27-13 at 22:09.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    3,095
    Feedback Score
    7 (89%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Warp View Post
    Holy crap.

    But again, confusing. You of course mean $0.60/round, correct?
    Yes, here is what R0N listed the pricing as for ammo for the Marines(probably less for the Army given their quantity vs the Marines), Also remember it is being made on the slower more costly machines which I cannot remember their name.

    Quote Originally Posted by R0N View Post
    I talk to the ammo guys for the Marine Corps they provided the following on current year ammo costs.

    US military pays $.40 a round for AO59 Ctg, 5.56mm Ball M855 10/Clip; $.56 a round for AA53 Ctg, 5.56mm Ball Special Match LR MK 262 Mod 0; $.57 a round for AB49 Ctg, 5.56mm Ball MK318 MOD 0; $.68 a round for AB57 Ctg, 5.56mm M855A1 EPR
    If the Army gets it running on the quicker cheaper machines the cost will go down.

    Quote Originally Posted by scoutfsu99 View Post
    I don't even pretend to fully grasp the minute details. Frankly, I heavily rely on DocGKR's words to form my opinion. But flat out, .20 is a significant price increase, especially with our budgets about to be slashed. They're talking about units not being able to train above CO/BN level. A move to such a high priced round is insane given the reality of our situation.

    This goes hand in hand w/ the CL.....isn't 855A1 reputed to burn out barrels quicker due to the propellant? If they're leaning away from CL, what does that mean for barrel wear/ other options?
    Would you rather our soldiers be strapped with M855 that has a tendency to do nothing but perform like an icepick? Supposedly it does but there are better barrel treatments like NiCor that would greatly increase barrel life vs CL.
    Last edited by sinlessorrow; 02-27-13 at 23:50.
    Quote Originally Posted by C4IGrant View Post
    Colt builds War Horses, not show ponies.
    Quote Originally Posted by Iraqgunz View Post
    This is 2012. The world is going to end this December and people are still trying to debate the merits of piece of shit, cost cutting crap AR's. Really?

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    4,922
    Feedback Score
    4 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Jdbl14 View Post
    So is chrome lining bad for pollution from manufacture, or is someone worried about all the little bits of chrome that are breaking off while firing?

    Off topic: I love giving anyone who drives a brand new "green" machine the same facts of how in reality driving any used vehicle is leaps and bounds better for the environment then buying a brand new prius, or whatever.
    Manufacture. The plating waste is classified as Hazardous Waste and expensive to dispose of.
    My brother saw Deliverance and bought a Bow. I saw Deliverance and bought an AR-15.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Austin TX.
    Posts
    693
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    when puting crome on anything, the left over chems, are really bad, but as far as the m-855 it was made becouse it will go through stuff at longer ranges,thats becouse our rounds are 55-62 grains and such a small cal. 24 verses 30 cal. the m-855 does what its supposed to.

Page 3 of 4 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
  •