User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/5/2019 9:16:37 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Army ordnance has a rich history of fucking the American soldier. This is no different. A jack of all trades master of none round. Not a big enough increase of anything on paper to warrant service wide adoption. There will always be a contingent of people that cling to it like it’s the best thing ever, but it’s not. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: So? Similar statements could be made about MK318 and the Navy. (Mk318 is excellent, but it's a different animal) There will always be a contingent of people that cling to it like it’s the best thing ever, but it’s not. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2019 9:44:37 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Definitely not. @BigMan74 qualified with it recently and he's not SF. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
.Gov doesn’t even allow it to be sold to other NATO countries, let alone the civilian market. Anything that fails lot testing gets scrapped. Both EPR rounds (M80A1 and M855A1) are that way. For what it’s worth, the Army is still ordering WAY more M855 than A1. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2019 10:02:58 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Maybe, but it'll likely cost as much as, or more than, the SMK/TMK/BSP ammo we already have that's better in every way terminally. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2019 10:16:52 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Why would you want something that needs a specially designed magazine to function in your rifle while it chews your feedramps out? I mean, if you want it then buy it, but I don't see the big deal of having any. Eventually, once production meets Mil contract, we'll see surplus ammo for sale and civilian production runs. Further down the line, everyone and his mother will be producing 855A1, probably foreign manufacturers as well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2019 10:17:01 PM EDT
[#5]
It’s AP based on performance not composition so it’s pretty unlikely that it will change status.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2019 10:20:02 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It’s AP based on performance not composition so it’s pretty unlikely that it will change status. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2019 10:29:46 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's AP based on performance not composition so it's pretty unlikely that it will change status. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2019 10:32:19 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
LoL, that's not proof. Ammunition has to meet specific specs to be considered AP. And penetration isn't one of them, otherwise a lot of FMJ bullets of high velocity calibers would be AP, they're not, because of their construction, it doesn't meet the criteria. Though I have no doubt there's people that don't want civilians to have it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
No shit? A hardened steel penetrator is better against barriers than a Trophy Bonded Bear Claw? I would still pick a Mk318 as a general purpose load over M855 A1. As to your last request about proof that it's an AP round, Enhanced Penetrating is in the name of the round, and you and everyone else won't be getting it in bulk. I can't even get Barnes 224 copper solids for reloading anymore, which were awesome for lack of pelt damage. Though I have no doubt there's people that don't want civilians to have it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2019 10:32:56 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Nope .gov doesn't want peasants to have their special ammo 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2019 10:40:54 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Does anyone have proof that it's currently classed as AP? Based on performance sounds like a poor determining clause, otherwise several calibers should be classified as AP, they're not. So it must be based on construction of the projectile, right? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2019 10:43:09 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Federal law doesn't class ammunition as AP or not based on performance. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2019 11:07:02 PM EDT
[#12]
Sure hope so. I could stand about 10,000 rounds on the shelf.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2019 11:11:58 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: is A1 only issued the SF community? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2019 1:59:30 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It is in every way better than all the general issue rounds that have come before. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2019 2:05:19 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: How? I’m ignorant on the subject. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2019 5:25:00 AM EDT
[#16]
I picked up over 900rds a few months ago, still haven't tried any out.....yet.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2019 6:44:01 AM EDT
[#17]
The Army holds patents on both the EPR and EPM, and anyone who gets a contract to manufacture either has to agree to only sell to .gov customers.
Let that sink in for a moment, keeping in mind that we're being denied the use of technology we paid to have developed in the first place. Quoted: Pmag Gen 3 work perfectly with 855A1. Eventually, once production meets Mil contract, we'll see surplus ammo for sale and civilian production runs. Further down the line, everyone and his mother will be producing 855A1, probably foreign manufacturers as well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2019 7:22:26 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I saw M855A1 in the CG. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: is A1 only issued the SF community? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2019 7:41:41 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No. Federal should concentrate on making Mk318 their bulk 5.56 ball round I think I’ll load my rifle with Mk318 today in solidarity. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2019 7:46:13 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No. Federal should concentrate on making Mk318 their bulk 5.56 ball round |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2019 9:03:21 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Pmag Gen 3 work perfectly with 855A1. Eventually, once production meets Mil contract, we'll see surplus ammo for sale and civilian production runs. Further down the line, everyone and his mother will be producing 855A1, probably foreign manufacturers as well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2019 9:20:29 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The Army holds patents on both the EPR and EPM, and anyone who gets a contract to manufacture either has to agree to only sell to .gov customers. Let that sink in for a moment, keeping in mind that we're being denied the use of technology we paid to have developed in the first place. Not until 2027. That's when the patents run out. God willing, it'll still be legal by that time. Quote HistoryQuoted:
The Army holds patents on both the EPR and EPM, and anyone who gets a contract to manufacture either has to agree to only sell to .gov customers. Let that sink in for a moment, keeping in mind that we're being denied the use of technology we paid to have developed in the first place. Quoted: Pmag Gen 3 work perfectly with 855A1. Eventually, once production meets Mil contract, we'll see surplus ammo for sale and civilian production runs. Further down the line, everyone and his mother will be producing 855A1, probably foreign manufacturers as well. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2019 9:21:55 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What production problem do you think exists with A1? There isn’t one...runs on the same lines as regular old 855. There’s no real issue in meeting delivery schedule on the round, and they don’t buy nearly the quantities of A1...currently. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: Pmag Gen 3 work perfectly with 855A1. Eventually, once production meets Mil contract, we'll see surplus ammo for sale and civilian production runs. Further down the line, everyone and his mother will be producing 855A1, probably foreign manufacturers as well. Reality is, until lake city starts phasing out 855 to exclusively produce A1 for Mil contracts, we won't see much of it on the civilian market. That is, unless someone else is licensed to produce and sell it to civilians, probably at ass-rape prices. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2019 9:28:54 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yep. We paid for SIPRnet and shit too and they won’t let us use that either. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The Army holds patents on both the EPR and EPM, and anyone who gets a contract to manufacture either has to agree to only sell to .gov customers. Let that sink in for a moment, keeping in mind that we're being denied the use of technology we paid to have developed in the first place. Quoted: Pmag Gen 3 work perfectly with 855A1. Eventually, once production meets Mil contract, we'll see surplus ammo for sale and civilian production runs. Further down the line, everyone and his mother will be producing 855A1, probably foreign manufacturers as well. ETA: Yeah, Liberty Ammunition. The Army lost the patent suit to the tune of 15 million dollars and 1.4 cents per round And then the higher court says "Fuck you, it belongs to the state, now." |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2019 9:32:34 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I thought the EPR was basically an existing round that the army copied... I remember some dude suing the army for it, winning, and then on appeal, the army won and didn't have to pay the man one cent. ETA: Yeah, Liberty Ammunition. The Army lost the patent suit to the tune of 15 million dollars and 1.4 cents per round 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2019 12:18:18 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I figured the Army was buying up a fuckload of A1 to stockpile and issue to combat arms units. Odd that they're still buying 855... Cheaper for training purposes, I supposed. Reality is, until lake city starts phasing out 855 to exclusively produce A1 for Mil contracts, we won't see much of it on the civilian market. That is, unless someone else is licensed to produce and sell it to civilians, probably at ass-rape prices. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted: Pmag Gen 3 work perfectly with 855A1. Eventually, once production meets Mil contract, we'll see surplus ammo for sale and civilian production runs. Further down the line, everyone and his mother will be producing 855A1, probably foreign manufacturers as well. Reality is, until lake city starts phasing out 855 to exclusively produce A1 for Mil contracts, we won't see much of it on the civilian market. That is, unless someone else is licensed to produce and sell it to civilians, probably at ass-rape prices. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2019 12:23:44 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yep. We paid for SIPRnet and shit too and they won’t let us use that either. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2019 12:26:40 PM EDT
[#28]
A1 is a dramatically better round than Green Tip (855). As a general purpose round, it far outpaces the old and should absolutely be adopted widespread in lieu of Green Tip. Accuracy potential alone is enough to make it a worthwhile solution.
That said, I much prefer Mk262 in the Afghan environment. Army should stock M193, 855A1, and 262. M193 for steel, range, training M855A1 for general purpose Mk262 for special purposes |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2019 1:44:13 PM EDT
[#29]
Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but I thought I read somewhere that they reduced the pressure of the round back to approximately what the original 855 was?
In my opinion, 855A1 is as close as it gets to the ideal round for general use with today’s technology. But unfortunately I done believe it’ll be available for widespread commercial sale any time soon 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2019 2:07:26 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: We exclusively use A1, even for training. In Afghanistan we were using up the stockpiles of 855 training with it but only carried A1. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2019 2:26:10 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but I thought I read somewhere that they reduced the pressure of the round back to approximately what the original 855 was? In my opinion, 855A1 is as close as it gets to the ideal round for general use with today’s technology. But unfortunately I done believe it’ll be available for widespread commercial sale any time soon I know Crane came out and told the Army that in their opinion there was no significant increased wear and tear on guns. The Army had used a really harsh firing schedule, and Crane said that the results would have been the same using M855. I would say that either they lowered the pressure, or that it was never that high to begin with, because the rumors of it breaking guns seem to be pure myth. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2019 3:08:45 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I would tend to agree. Not match ammo by any stretch, but in my experience it groups better and has less flyers. ETA: I'd take MK262 Mod 1 over either. https://i.imgur.com/5MEzGDa.jpg Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The round is more accurate than M855. ETA: I'd take MK262 Mod 1 over either. https://i.imgur.com/5MEzGDa.jpg |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2019 3:31:39 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but I thought I read somewhere that they reduced the pressure of the round back to approximately what the original 855 was? In my opinion, 855A1 is as close as it gets to the ideal round for general use with today’s technology. But unfortunately I done believe it’ll be available for widespread commercial sale any time soon They've since (and not very publicly) tamed the load closer to 855 to reduce that issue. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2019 3:39:56 PM EDT
[#34]
I believe they noted a different wear pattern. Not bad just different.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2019 5:27:49 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Make yer own. Make 'em better. I don't get why people have such a boner over this round. It's nothing special. 24"-26" barrel, Lapua brass, Varget powder and even plain jane 55gr. FMJ is pretty wicked from a terminal performance standpoint. Something like a 53 gr. Barnes TSX @ 3,400 FPS or 40gr. VMAX @ 3,600 FPS = really nasty. Instead of chasing the latest loaded ammo fad, invest some time and money in learning to reload. It will be the best and worst firearms "investment" you ever make. Failing that, if you want something wicked you need speed, just go buy a 22-250 for $500. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2019 5:47:40 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This. I don't get why people have such a boner over this round. It's nothing special. 24"-26" barrel, Lapua brass, Varget powder and even plain jane 55gr. FMJ is pretty wicked from a terminal performance standpoint. Something like a 53 gr. Barnes TSX @ 3,400 FPS or 40gr. VMAX @ 3,600 FPS = really nasty. Instead of chasing the latest loaded ammo fad, invest some time and money in learning to reload. It will be the best and worst firearms "investment" you ever make. Failing that, if you want something wicked you need speed, just go buy a 22-250 for $500. There is nothing like it on the commercial market. Not even close. There are options that can match its performance in one or two areas, but not all of them, and I would wager none of them give that level of consistency in terminal performance. And of course there's nothing on the commercial market that even comes close in terms of value. Anyone who's done the research and still says they don't want it is lying to themselves. It is the shit in every way possible, and I'm not ashamed to admit that I am seriously pissed over not being able to get it as a civilian. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2019 5:57:52 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This. I don't get why people have such a boner over this round. It's nothing special. 24"-26" barrel, Lapua brass, Varget powder and even plain jane 55gr. FMJ is pretty wicked from a terminal performance standpoint. Something like a 53 gr. Barnes TSX @ 3,400 FPS or 40gr. VMAX @ 3,600 FPS = really nasty. Instead of chasing the latest loaded ammo fad, invest some time and money in learning to reload. It will be the best and worst firearms "investment" you ever make. Failing that, if you want something wicked you need speed, just go buy a 22-250 for $500. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Make yer own. Make 'em better. I don't get why people have such a boner over this round. It's nothing special. 24"-26" barrel, Lapua brass, Varget powder and even plain jane 55gr. FMJ is pretty wicked from a terminal performance standpoint. Something like a 53 gr. Barnes TSX @ 3,400 FPS or 40gr. VMAX @ 3,600 FPS = really nasty. Instead of chasing the latest loaded ammo fad, invest some time and money in learning to reload. It will be the best and worst firearms "investment" you ever make. Failing that, if you want something wicked you need speed, just go buy a 22-250 for $500. V-Max is a shit terminal performer at rifle velocities. Also a poor barrier penetrator. TSX would be ok but it still won't penetrate barriers as effectively as M855A1. I also prefer fragmentation over expansion as the primary wounding mechanism in small caliber projectiles, just makes more sense on a human target. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2019 10:35:46 PM EDT
[#38]
What's the big issue with the round and feed ramps?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2019 10:38:40 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's not a fad. Amazingly, it's way undersold, despite being probably in the top ten, or even top five, things that the military has gotten right in its entire history. Match grade accuracy, amazing 100% consistent terminal performance from any barrel at any range, crazy penetration in hard barriers-and all this at a cost of 35 cents per round. There is nothing like it on the commercial market. Not even close. There are options that can match its performance in one or two areas, but not all of them, and I would wager none of them give that level of consistency in terminal performance. And of course there's nothing on the commercial market that even comes close in terms of value. Anyone who's done the research and still says they don't want it is lying to themselves. It is the shit in every way possible, and I'm not ashamed to admit that I am seriously butthurt over not being able to get it as a civilian. I get it this is free country and civis should be able to own what they want, etc. However, armor penetration and barrier blindness aren't ever something that really ever enter the civilian need category. For the average Joe that uses an AR to hunt with the primary concerns are accuracy, terminal performance and then to a lesser extent for some, how long it hangs to velocity and bucks the wind. The percentage of civilian self defense scenarios where armor penetration and barrier blindness were needed and legally justified have to be in the 0-1% range. What I was trying to say that I probably should have been more explicit about was that more velocity is a "cure-all" for many problems. Terminal performance issues I have seen and experienced with a .223 / 5.56 were far less common than when I was using a 22-250. An AR with a 12" barrel vs. one with a 24" barrel and hot handloads might as well be a different caliber in terms of terminal performance. Speed can take a projectile with "meh" terminal performance into the "wow" category. In my own personal experience have seen deer and hogs shot and still run with everything from .223 to 30-06. I have also seen plenty DRT from plain jane M193. I have never seen a deer or a hog do anything but drop like a bag of shit after being hit with a 22-250 / .220 Swift / Very fast. TL / DR instead of drooling over M855A1, buy a 22-250 and learn to reload. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2019 10:43:12 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Lol. V-Max is a shit terminal performer at rifle velocities. Also a poor barrier penetrator. TSX would be ok but it still won't penetrate barriers as effectively as M855A1. I also prefer fragmentation over expansion as the primary wounding mechanism in small caliber projectiles, just makes more sense on a human target. TSX at the velocity I listed if WAY better than "ok", it's actually quite impressive. High velocity TSX through barriers has excellent performance. How can you state VMAX suck in the first part of your statement then say you prefer frag over penetration in the next? Serious question. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2019 10:47:54 PM EDT
[#41]
However, armor penetration and barrier blindness aren't ever something that really ever enter the civilian need category. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2019 10:49:50 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
VMAX is very impressive on anything thin skinned. Ok it doesn't penetrate 12" but you don't always have to. TSX at the velocity I listed if WAY better than "ok", it's actually quite impressive. High velocity TSX through barriers has excellent performance. How can you state VMAX suck in the first part of your statement then say you prefer frag over penetration in the next? Serious question. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Lol. V-Max is a shit terminal performer at rifle velocities. Also a poor barrier penetrator. TSX would be ok but it still won't penetrate barriers as effectively as M855A1. I also prefer fragmentation over expansion as the primary wounding mechanism in small caliber projectiles, just makes more sense on a human target. TSX at the velocity I listed if WAY better than "ok", it's actually quite impressive. High velocity TSX through barriers has excellent performance. How can you state VMAX suck in the first part of your statement then say you prefer frag over penetration in the next? Serious question. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2019 11:21:59 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
He didn’t say that. He said he preferred frag over expansion. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2019 11:26:08 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The projectile itself is a solution to a military problem, barrier blindness, armor penetration, terminal performance and to a lesser extent accuracy. I get it this is free country and civis should be able to own what they want, etc. However, armor penetration and barrier blindness aren't ever something that really ever enter the civilian need category. For the average Joe that uses an AR to hunt with the primary concerns are accuracy, terminal performance and then to a lesser extent for some, how long it hangs to velocity and bucks the wind. The percentage of civilian self defense scenarios where armor penetration and barrier blindness were needed and legally justified have to be in the 0-1% range. What I was trying to say that I probably should have been more explicit about was that more velocity is a "cure-all" for many problems. Terminal performance issues I have seen and experienced with a .223 / 5.56 were far less common than when I was using a 22-250. An AR with a 12" barrel vs. one with a 24" barrel and hot handloads might as well be a different caliber in terms of terminal performance. Speed can take a projectile with "meh" terminal performance into the "wow" category. In my own personal experience have seen deer and hogs shot and still run with everything from .223 to 30-06. I have also seen plenty DRT from plain jane M193. I have never seen a deer or a hog do anything but drop like a bag of shit after being hit with a 22-250 / .220 Swift / Very fast. TL / DR instead of drooling over M855A1, buy a 22-250 and learn to reload. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2019 11:26:45 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
VMAX is very impressive on anything thin skinned. Ok it doesn't penetrate 12" but you don't always have to. TSX at the velocity I listed if WAY better than "ok", it's actually quite impressive. High velocity TSX through barriers has excellent performance. How can you state VMAX suck in the first part of your statement then say you prefer frag over penetration in the next? Serious question. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Lol. V-Max is a shit terminal performer at rifle velocities. Also a poor barrier penetrator. TSX would be ok but it still won't penetrate barriers as effectively as M855A1. I also prefer fragmentation over expansion as the primary wounding mechanism in small caliber projectiles, just makes more sense on a human target. TSX at the velocity I listed if WAY better than "ok", it's actually quite impressive. High velocity TSX through barriers has excellent performance. How can you state VMAX suck in the first part of your statement then say you prefer frag over penetration in the next? Serious question. Frag is, in my opinion, a superior wounding mechanism for small caliber projectiles. Expansion with small, light, sub .30 cal projectiles just isn't very impressive. Pushing frag deep as you get with loads like M193, M855, and M855A1 opens up more potential for lethal wounding. Having multiple fragments spread several inches apart into various areas ups the possibility of a solid strike on a vital organ than maybe getting up to .40 inches of expansion assuming you don't lose the petals early which makes the expansion meaningless. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2019 11:29:46 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There is nothing that frags like a high velocity VMAX. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
He didn't say that. He said he preferred frag over expansion. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2019 11:42:32 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
V-Max is an extremely shallow penetrator due to its early and rapid fragmentation. It's the same sort of effect you get when hitting someone with birdshot at close range. Yes, it's ugly. It creates very visible wounds. But are they lethal? Not really. Gel performance out of rifle length barrels averages around 5 to 7 inches of penetration. Ironically it actually performs better (for use on human targets) out of 10" and under barrels due to the velocity loss which causes it to act more like a soft point than a fragging varmint bullet. Frag is, in my opinion, a superior wounding mechanism for small caliber projectiles. Expansion with small, light, sub .30 cal projectiles just isn't very impressive. Pushing frag deep as you get with loads like M193, M855, and M855A1 opens up more potential for lethal wounding. Having multiple fragments spread several inches apart into various areas ups the possibility of a solid strike on a vital organ than maybe getting up to .40 inches of expansion assuming you don't lose the petals early which makes the expansion meaningless. On the second highlighted statement, have ever shot anything with a bonded bullet in .243 / 6.5mm anything / 7mm anything? Terminal performance with a bonded bullet in a 7mm doesn't get any better. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2019 11:55:06 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Does anyone have proof that it's currently classed as AP? Based on performance sounds like a poor determining clause, otherwise several calibers should be classified as AP, they're not. So it must be based on construction of the projectile, right? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
It’s AP based on performance not composition so it’s pretty unlikely that it will change status. Even by Army performance standards, M855A1 is not AP. If a SAPI plate stops it, it is not AP for the military. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 12:07:13 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: ...and the 855A1 makes both a 12" barrel and 24" barrel rifle perform far better, in terms of consistent terminal ballistics. I don't see the downside. I'd happily retire my 24" Long Tom monstrosity and enjoy shorter barrels with similar performance... if I could. 12” Grendels can do it with many common types of ammo. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 12:10:08 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Obviously you have never shot anything light skinned with VMAX from a 22-250. Instant lights out. On the second highlighted statement, have ever shot anything with a bonded bullet in .243 / 6.5mm anything / 7mm anything? Terminal performance with a bonded bullet in a 7mm doesn't get any better. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
V-Max is an extremely shallow penetrator due to its early and rapid fragmentation. It's the same sort of effect you get when hitting someone with birdshot at close range. Yes, it's ugly. It creates very visible wounds. But are they lethal? Not really. Gel performance out of rifle length barrels averages around 5 to 7 inches of penetration. Ironically it actually performs better (for use on human targets) out of 10" and under barrels due to the velocity loss which causes it to act more like a soft point than a fragging varmint bullet. Frag is, in my opinion, a superior wounding mechanism for small caliber projectiles. Expansion with small, light, sub .30 cal projectiles just isn't very impressive. Pushing frag deep as you get with loads like M193, M855, and M855A1 opens up more potential for lethal wounding. Having multiple fragments spread several inches apart into various areas ups the possibility of a solid strike on a vital organ than maybe getting up to .40 inches of expansion assuming you don't lose the petals early which makes the expansion meaningless. On the second highlighted statement, have ever shot anything with a bonded bullet in .243 / 6.5mm anything / 7mm anything? Terminal performance with a bonded bullet in a 7mm doesn't get any better. I said small and light sub .30 cal projectiles. Even .243 leans to the heavier side. Once you step into 6.5mm typical weights are 100grns and up, with 87gr being on the low end. The expansion of 62gr projectiles and under is not exciting and it is in this realm that fragmentation shines. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
