M855A1 presentation lists improvements over M855

[TiroFijo]

Yes, but if simply lowering the chamber pressure a little can accomodate the same M855A1 round for all 5.56 plattforms, and the benefit of higher chamber pressure and velocity of the M855 is marginal, so why bother?
The trajectory match with M855 will likely be better, a plus with the existing optics.

[TehLlama]

Yes, but if simply lowering the chamber pressure a little can accomodate the same M855A1 round for all 5.56 plattforms, and the benefit of higher chamber pressure and velocity of the M855 is marginal, so why bother?
The trajectory match with M855 will likely be better, a plus with the existing optics.

The principal argument is that taking COTS bullets in the form of Barnes TTSX 62gr gets basically the same results for the same barrel twist rates, is still lead-free ammunition to meet the misguided green ammunition push, and critically is actually a decent barrier load without performing like a high mass 22 caliber ice pick. Just as easily, accept that the department of the Navy already figured a better solution and implemented it in the form of Mk318, and then spend that money on something useful that can help out line companies instead of finding another way of burning through cash that could otherwise be spent properly in a way.

It's funny/upsetting when my Army friends talk about how awesome the M855A1 is, because they've only heard the popular press, hype, and assume that because it's newer it must be better - I explain what the differences are, and to a man they're pissed that money was spent developing that when for literally the same amount of cash OCP/Multicam could have been shipped as a replacement uniform.

[JSantoro]

Do you think the new cartridge is more suitable for a rifle than a carbine?

@a chamber pressure of 61Kpsi....?

Not even remotely. It introduces a carbine-like wear rate into a rifle, and further exacerbates the higher wear rates that already existed in carbines (versus rifles) with M855 @55Kpsi.

Proof is around 72Kpsi.

[BufordTJustice]

@a chamber pressure of 61Kpsi....?

Not even remotely. It introduces a carbine-like wear rate into a rifle, and further exacerbates the higher wear rates that already existed in carbines (versus rifles) with M855 @55Kpsi.

Proof is around 72Kpsi.

And that 61Kpsi is right on the ragged edge when it's NOT 110 outside.

Sent from my SPH-L720T using Tapatalk

[TiroFijo]

The principal argument is that taking COTS bullets in the form of Barnes TTSX 62gr gets basically the same results for the same barrel twist rates, is still lead-free ammunition to meet the misguided green ammunition push, and critically is actually a decent barrier load without performing like a high mass 22 caliber ice pick. Just as easily, accept that the department of the Navy already figured a better solution and implemented it in the form of Mk318, and then spend that money on something useful that can help out line companies instead of finding another way of burning through cash that could otherwise be spent properly in a way.

It's funny/upsetting when my Army friends talk about how awesome the M855A1 is, because they've only heard the popular press, hype, and assume that because it's newer it must be better - I explain what the differences are, and to a man they're pissed that money was spent developing that when for literally the same amount of cash OCP/Multicam could have been shipped as a replacement uniform.

One thing with M885A1 is that is Hague compliant, something that TTSX or Mk318 bullets are not. Perhaps it does not matter now, facing irregular forces, but it might in the future...

[GTF425]

Will it perform better on target? Yes.

Eh....

I'm on my second deployment using the A1, and it's "meh" past 200m, comparable to 855 for sure. I'm not an expert, but it's not very impressive on soft tissue. Not at all what I had been expecting to see.

I am yet to see a catastrophic failure related to the ammo, BUT I have officially seen one bolt with sheared lugs at a range three weeks ago. I highly doubt it was 100% because of the A1...that bolt was probably on its third or fourth deployment with training cycles in between. But it's still a statistic. My weapon ejects between the 1-2 o clock with A1, so I'm trying to track down an H2 buffer to drop in to tame that a little bit.

[T2C]

@a chamber pressure of 61Kpsi....?

Not even remotely. It introduces a carbine-like wear rate into a rifle, and further exacerbates the higher wear rates that already existed in carbines (versus rifles) with M855 @55Kpsi.

Proof is around 72Kpsi.

Thank you.

In my opinion it does not make sense to spend a tremendous amount of money on the development of a cartridge that will radically decrease the service life of parts on a military weapon system. Even if it does perform slightly better in the field, the new ammunition won't make a difference if it increases the chances that the weapon will go down.

How is the MK318 performing in the field?

[BufordTJustice]

Eh....

I'm on my second deployment using the A1, and it's "meh" past 200m, comparable to 855 for sure. I'm not an expert, but it's not very impressive on soft tissue. Not at all what I had been expecting to see.

I am yet to see a catastrophic failure related to the ammo, BUT I have officially seen one bolt with sheared lugs at a range three weeks ago. I highly doubt it was 100% because of the A1...that bolt was probably on its third or fourth deployment with training cycles in between. But it's still a statistic. My weapon ejects between the 1-2 o clock with A1, so I'm trying to track down an H2 buffer to drop in to tame that a little bit.

Thank you for adding some of your first hand experience.

Also, I would look at an H3 buffer and a Springco 5 coil extractor spring. And maybe a Springco blue recoil spring. I can't emphasize how ridiculously high 61,000 psi is in an AR. Much less in one with a carbine length gas system.

Sent from my SPH-L720T using Tapatalk

[BufordTJustice]

One thing with M885A1 is that is Hague compliant, something that TTSX or Mk318 bullets are not. Perhaps it does not matter now, facing irregular forces, but it might in the future...

We aren't signatories to the Hague convention. We voluntarily comply.

Also, if the mil rules that mk262 is okay under Hague, any TSX could be ruled a ballistic hollow point. Especially the 62 gr which is also a boat tail.

Sent from my SPH-L720T using Tapatalk

[BufordTJustice]

Thank you.

In my opinion it does not make sense to spend a tremendous amount of money on the development of a cartridge that will radically decrease the service life of parts on a military weapon system. Even if it does perform slightly better in the field, the new ammunition won't make a difference if it increases the chances that the weapon will go down.

How is the MK318 performing in the field?

Mk318 works great on Florida feral hog up to and past 250 pounds.

Sent from my SPH-L720T using Tapatalk