"Testing the M855A1"

[kaltesherz]

It performs better than M855, I think most can agree on that- but is it worth the trade off of damaging / wearing out weapons at a much faster rate? I'm with TehLlama on just using Mk318, but of course the Army won't because that actually makes sense.

As a side note, this is yet another reason my AR500 armor is a bad idea. When M855A1 becomes common to stateside units, inevitably rounds will be "acquired" and make their way into private hands.

[jstone]

For all the M855A1 hate.... I can tell you that in gel, it was the best performing 5.56 I have EVER seen. Better than the self defensive ammo out there too.

I posted my results on here and AR15.com, but after a call from ATK/Pentagon it was taken down and I had to delete it from everywhere I posted it.

I saw your test before it was removed, and it was very impressive. Your test was what I was referring to in an earlier post. I just forgot your screen name.

[kaltesherz]

I saw your test before it was removed, and it was very impressive. Your test was what I was referring to in an earlier post. I just forgot your screen name.

I missed the earlier test, can anyone (like the original poster) give a Cliff Notes version about the results?

[Ash Hess]

I know it works well on real targets. Very well.

It does everything they say it does. It is hard on guns but with Uncle Sam footing the bill, and the M4A1 upgrade, I give it 2 thumbs up.

That said, I am not sure about running vast amounts through something I have to pay for though.

[kaltesherz]

and the M4A1 upgrade, I give it 2 thumbs up.

How does the M4A1 upgrade mitigate the higher chamber pressures? It's just a more consistent trigger and a heavier barrel, I don't see how that would keep parts from wearing out at an accelerated rate.

I'm all about increasing lethality but not at risk of durability and reliability. The Army isn't know for it's stellar weapons maintenance when it comes to round counts...

[Ash Hess]

The H2 buffer helps. And the heat is transferred better with the A1 profile. This doesn't help with the main problem with the M855A1 round though. That would be wear from the penetrator hitting the chamber on feeding.
I know the pressures are high and its rough on bolts. That is being addressed.
Units will be using it stateside soon, but it has been used for a few years in combat and I have heard of no issues with it with the H2 or higher buffer and I fired a couple thousand rounds on my last deployment of the 855A1 with no issues. Only time will tell if we truly see massive failures. My guess is no.

[Slater]

On rifle-length weapons, I would imagine that the wear would be slightly less. Accurate?

[markm]

On rifle-length weapons, I would imagine that the wear would be slightly less. Accurate?

Probably so. At least bolt breakage would be less as is currently reported with regular M855.

[opngrnd]

I'm neither an armorer nor an expert, but seeing how often gear is already dealt with in a "use it till it breaks and fix it when it does" manner, I wonder if it will make all that big a difference. If things are replaced as they are broken, will it matter in the bigger picture (think Army wide) that they are broken and replaced more often? Not that I've never seen weapons deadlined and waiting for parts.