User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 12:14:46 AM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You can do that with a 6.5 Grendel without the need for hard to find ammo. 12" Grendels can do it with many common types of ammo. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: ...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 12:34:50 AM EDT
[#2]
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: 4/7/2019 12:35:43 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm not a hunter and I have no clue what "light skinned" means. I'm not talking about shooting animals and that's not what anyone was talking about in this thread. V-Max is a shit terminal performer out of rifle length barrels on human targets. 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. Deer are WAY tougher than people. Anything that works well on deer, will work very well on lighter skinned bi-pedal animals, i.e. humans. 62gr. bonded bullets work very well with 3,000 + FPS muzzle velocities. As I said from the beginning speed is what really enhances terminal performance. Take a 62gr. SS109 projectile. 12” AR @ 2,600 FPS it’s very “meh”. In a 22-250 @ 3,600 FPS it’s “wow”. Speed overcomes a lot of shortcomings in terms of bullet construction from a terminal performance standpoint. My whole point of posting in this thread. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 4:23:42 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What's the big issue with the round and feed ramps? Magpul M3 magazine's change the feed angle so that the ogive of the bullet is more the contact point. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 7:22:22 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: is A1 only issued the SF community? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 9:39:49 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So you have never shot anything with VMAX and you think it’s a shit terminal performer...... Deer are WAY tougher than people. Anything that works well on deer, will work very well on lighter skinned bi-pedal animals, i.e. humans. 62gr. bonded bullets work very well with 3,000 + FPS muzzle velocities. As I said from the beginning speed is what really enhances terminal performance. Take a 62gr. SS109 projectile. 12” AR @ 2,600 FPS it’s very “meh”. In a 22-250 @ 3,600 FPS it’s “wow”. Speed overcomes a lot of shortcomings in terms of bullet construction from a terminal performance standpoint. My whole point of posting in this thread. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 10:07:24 AM EDT
[#7]
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. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
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: 4/7/2019 10:20:43 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So by this logic, I guess everyone should be using 50g Civil Defense 9mm in their carry gun. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 10:38:12 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
In general yes. But their are M855 offerings out there that are equal in accuracy. PMC Xtac being one. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 11:23:47 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No. My Army Reserve company qualified with it on the last two ranges. We’re the definition of pogues. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 11:30:51 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So by this logic, I guess everyone should be using 50g Civil Defense 9mm in their carry gun. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: So you have never shot anything with VMAX and you think it’s a shit terminal performer...... Deer are WAY tougher than people. Anything that works well on deer, will work very well on lighter skinned bi-pedal animals, i.e. humans. 62gr. bonded bullets work very well with 3,000 + FPS muzzle velocities. As I said from the beginning speed is what really enhances terminal performance. Take a 62gr. SS109 projectile. 12” AR @ 2,600 FPS it’s very “meh”. In a 22-250 @ 3,600 FPS it’s “wow”. Speed overcomes a lot of shortcomings in terms of bullet construction from a terminal performance standpoint. My whole point of posting in this thread. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 1:36:20 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So by this logic, I guess everyone should be using 50g Civil Defense 9mm in their carry gun. I have advocated bringing speeds into the mid-3,000 - 4,000 FPS range, not going lighter regardless of caliber of velocity. It's really easy to tell the people who have never shot anything with an impact velocity above 3,500 FPS. Speed kills. I love to watch gel tests as much as the next guy, but I can tell you from real world experience extremely high velocity bullets work, from a VMAX, to a Fusion to a TSX. Hydrostatic shock is a very important factor. Regarding M855A1. It does many things the military requires well. But it is a compromise round. My argument is there is basically no time where a regular joe is going to want, let alone need: Armor penetration = shooting dudes with plates, military scenario. Barrier Blindness = shooting through walls and vehicles, military scenario. Terminal performance = actual effect on target, self defense or hunting scenario. Accuracy = consistency, target or match shooting. In the same afternoon. I hate to spoil people's fantasies here. Most regular joes need / want something with decent accuracy and excellent terminal performance or vice - versa. Maybe they just want excellent accuracy. Question, does anyone have the BC of the projectile in M855A1 and the pressure to which it is loaded? I know this won't make me any friends in this thread but it needs to be said. In my experience the guys who lusted after military ammo did so, so that they could brag to other guys at the range, BBQs, etc that they have "the armor piecing stuff the military uses". TL / DR: put off buying your next couple of cases of mil-spec ammo and learn to reload and buy either a long barreled upper or even better a fast twist 22-250 or 220 Swift. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 2:00:12 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No. Not capable of extremely high velocity. I have advocated bringing speeds into the mid-3,000 - 4,000 FPS range, not going lighter regardless of caliber of velocity. It's really easy to tell the people who have never shot anything with an impact velocity above 3,500 FPS. Speed kills. I love to watch gel tests as much as the next guy, but I can tell you from real world experience extremely high velocity bullets work, from a VMAX, to a Fusion to a TSX. Hydrostatic shock is a very important factor. Regarding M855A1. It does many things the military requires well. But it is a compromise round. My argument is there is basically no time where a regular joe is going to want, let alone need: Armor penetration = shooting dudes with plates, military scenario. Barrier Blindness = shooting through walls and vehicles, military scenario. Terminal performance = actual effect on target, self defense or hunting scenario. Accuracy = consistency, target or match shooting. In the same afternoon. I hate to spoil people's fantasies here. Most regular joes need / want something with decent accuracy and excellent terminal performance or vice - versa. Maybe they just want excellent accuracy. Question, does anyone have the BC of the projectile in M855A1 and the pressure to which it is loaded? I know this won't make me any friends in this thread but it needs to be said. In my experience the guys who lusted after military ammo did so, so that they could brag to other guys at the range, BBQs, etc that they have "the armor piecing stuff the military uses". TL / DR: put off buying your next couple of cases of mil-spec ammo and learn to reload and buy either a long barreled upper or even better a fast twist 22-250 or 220 Swift. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 2:09:18 PM EDT
[#14]
Quoted:
The cut of your jib is coming dangerously close to saying the 2A is for hunting. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 2:17:00 PM EDT
[#15]
@nick1983 I think you’re looking at this from a completely different perspective than everyone else in the thread. None of us want to buy m855a1 for hunting, nor do we want to be running around with some 26” barrel monstrosity. I do agree with you that velocity is a huge factor, but in a 10.3-16 inch barrel most rounds don’t get going that fast. That’s the beauty of this round, it retains its ability to fragment even out of a short barrel at longer ranges.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 2:44:36 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The cut of your jib is coming dangerously close to saying the 2A is for hunting. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 2:52:40 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No. Not capable of extremely high velocity. I have advocated bringing speeds into the mid-3,000 - 4,000 FPS range, not going lighter regardless of caliber of velocity. It's really easy to tell the people who have never shot anything with an impact velocity above 3,500 FPS. Speed kills. I love to watch gel tests as much as the next guy, but I can tell you from real world experience extremely high velocity bullets work, from a VMAX, to a Fusion to a TSX. Hydrostatic shock is a very important factor. Regarding M855A1. It does many things the military requires well. But it is a compromise round. My argument is there is basically no time where a regular joe is going to want, let alone need: Armor penetration = shooting dudes with plates, military scenario. Barrier Blindness = shooting through walls and vehicles, military scenario. Terminal performance = actual effect on target, self defense or hunting scenario. Accuracy = consistency, target or match shooting. In the same afternoon. I hate to spoil people's fantasies here. Most regular joes need / want something with decent accuracy and excellent terminal performance or vice - versa. Maybe they just want excellent accuracy. Question, does anyone have the BC of the projectile in M855A1 and the pressure to which it is loaded? I know this won't make me any friends in this thread but it needs to be said. In my experience the guys who lusted after military ammo did so, so that they could brag to other guys at the range, BBQs, etc that they have "the armor piecing stuff the military uses". TL / DR: put off buying your next couple of cases of mil-spec ammo and learn to reload and buy either a long barreled upper or even better a fast twist 22-250 or 220 Swift. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 2:56:23 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Both of you are morons. Did he say it should be illegal? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The cut of your jib is coming dangerously close to saying the 2A is for hunting. How in the world can you make an argument you don't want the best projectiles within a given platform you already own? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 2:57:03 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
@nick1983 I think you’re looking at this from a completely different perspective than everyone else in the thread. None of us want to buy m855a1 for hunting, nor do we want to be running around with some 26” barrel monstrosity. I do agree with you that velocity is a huge factor, but in a 10.3-16 inch barrel most rounds don’t get going that fast. That’s the beauty of this round, it retains its ability to fragment even out of a short barrel at longer ranges. You want to go SBR on an AR, just do a 12" Grendel. It basically equals a 20" 5.56 AR. I have built a rifle around a single bullet that became unavailable. It sucks. This could happen tomorrow with the stroke of a pen to M855A1 by the ATF. There's a shit load of types of 6.5mm bullets that work really well in Grendel SBR applications. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 2:57:29 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
@nick1983 I think you're looking at this from a completely different perspective than everyone else in the thread. None of us want to buy m855a1 for hunting, nor do we want to be running around with some 26" barrel monstrosity. I do agree with you that velocity is a huge factor, but in a 10.3-16 inch barrel most rounds don't get going that fast. That's the beauty of this round, it retains its ability to fragment even out of a short barrel at longer ranges. M855A1 gives you consistent terminal performance on human targets and does so through clothing and certain barriers. It's loaded in an extremely common and available cartridge with equally common and available firearms chambered in it. Said cartridge is small, light weight, gives a minimal recoil impulse, and gives you better capacity and carrying ability. Not to mention its adaptability to short barrels. I have no idea what's so hard to grasp about that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 3:01:30 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So you have never shot anything with VMAX and you think it’s a shit terminal performer...... Deer are WAY tougher than people. Anything that works well on deer, will work very well on lighter skinned bi-pedal animals, i.e. humans. 62gr. bonded bullets work very well with 3,000 + FPS muzzle velocities. As I said from the beginning speed is what really enhances terminal performance. Take a 62gr. SS109 projectile. 12” AR @ 2,600 FPS it’s very “meh”. In a 22-250 @ 3,600 FPS it’s “wow”. Speed overcomes a lot of shortcomings in terms of bullet construction from a terminal performance standpoint. My whole point of posting in this thread. when humans get into gun fights they are moving and bladed. making shots thru arms and cross torso more common, right? thay being the case, i’ll stick with the guys opinions that shoot people for a living, not hunters. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 3:13:43 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Lol, enjoy your 1200 round barrel life with those 2 cartridges. You dont know what you are talking about. A1 offers excellent barrier penetration along with outstanding terminal ballistics, especially in shorter barrels in which higher velocities are not achievable. It's a damn good self defense round. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: No. Not capable of extremely high velocity. I have advocated bringing speeds into the mid-3,000 - 4,000 FPS range, not going lighter regardless of caliber of velocity. It's really easy to tell the people who have never shot anything with an impact velocity above 3,500 FPS. Speed kills. I love to watch gel tests as much as the next guy, but I can tell you from real world experience extremely high velocity bullets work, from a VMAX, to a Fusion to a TSX. Hydrostatic shock is a very important factor. Regarding M855A1. It does many things the military requires well. But it is a compromise round. My argument is there is basically no time where a regular joe is going to want, let alone need: Armor penetration = shooting dudes with plates, military scenario. Barrier Blindness = shooting through walls and vehicles, military scenario. Terminal performance = actual effect on target, self defense or hunting scenario. Accuracy = consistency, target or match shooting. In the same afternoon. I hate to spoil people's fantasies here. Most regular joes need / want something with decent accuracy and excellent terminal performance or vice - versa. Maybe they just want excellent accuracy. Question, does anyone have the BC of the projectile in M855A1 and the pressure to which it is loaded? I know this won't make me any friends in this thread but it needs to be said. In my experience the guys who lusted after military ammo did so, so that they could brag to other guys at the range, BBQs, etc that they have "the armor piecing stuff the military uses". TL / DR: put off buying your next couple of cases of mil-spec ammo and learn to reload and buy either a long barreled upper or even better a fast twist 22-250 or 220 Swift. What's funny is you think I don't think I know what I am talking about, yet you are worried about barrel life. No one who actually really knows about what they are talking about gives a shit about this. In fact we look forward to it. How many 22-250 barrels have you shot out? Which cartridges do you reload for? Have you shot deer and hogs with a 22-250? Long barreled ARs with a reloading kit give you a bunch of options great options for barrier penetration and terminal performance. Hornady GMX Barnes TSX and TTSX Nosler Partition Federal Fusion Swift Scirocco Federal TBBC Barnes LRX LeHigh Controlled Choas How much do M855A1 projectiles cost? What chamber pressure are they loaded to? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 3:30:30 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: .223 / 5.56 round from it's inception was designed around high velocities to work well across a broad spectrum of projectiles. This means longer barrels. You want to go SBR on an AR, just do a 12" Grendel. It basically equals a 20" 5.56 AR. I have built a rifle around a single bullet that became unavailable. It sucks. This could happen tomorrow with the stroke of a pen to M855A1 by the ATF. There's a shit load of types of 6.5mm bullets that work really well in Grendel SBR applications. I don’t have any m855a1 due to it being pretty much unavailable, so a ban by the ATF wouldn’t affect me anyways. I do still wish that we could buy it in bulk like any other round though. In the end, use what works best for you and your purposes. If shooting deer with a 26” barrel and hand loaded vmax works well for you, then keep using that. Others with different purposes could hugely benefit from using m855a1. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 3:49:06 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 6.5 Grendel is a good round, but I still would rather have a 556 for the reasons previously mentioned (ammo availability, low recoil, lightweight, etc.) 855a1 performs so well out of short barrels that it negates the need to even switch to another caliber. Yes, the original cartridge was designed to be used out of a 20” barrel, but no one really uses such a long barrel on a fighting rifle these days. Hence the trend towards rounds such as m855a1 that are less velocity dependent. I don’t have any m855a1 due to it being pretty much unavailable, so a ban by the ATF wouldn’t affect me anyways. I do still wish that we could buy it in bulk like any other round though. In the end, use what works best for you and your purposes. If shooting deer with a 26” barrel and hand loaded vmax works well for you, then keep using that. Others with different purposes could hugely benefit from using m855a1. So you’re advocating use of a round that’s made from unobtainium. What’s the cost per round of M855A1? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 4:24:53 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Not at all. I stated clearly in my first post civis should be able to own what they want. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 4:28:42 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Have you shot a Grendel. The recoil difference between that and .223 is very little. So you’re advocating use of a round that’s made from unobtainium. What’s the cost per round of M855A1? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: 6.5 Grendel is a good round, but I still would rather have a 556 for the reasons previously mentioned (ammo availability, low recoil, lightweight, etc.) 855a1 performs so well out of short barrels that it negates the need to even switch to another caliber. Yes, the original cartridge was designed to be used out of a 20” barrel, but no one really uses such a long barrel on a fighting rifle these days. Hence the trend towards rounds such as m855a1 that are less velocity dependent. I don’t have any m855a1 due to it being pretty much unavailable, so a ban by the ATF wouldn’t affect me anyways. I do still wish that we could buy it in bulk like any other round though. In the end, use what works best for you and your purposes. If shooting deer with a 26” barrel and hand loaded vmax works well for you, then keep using that. Others with different purposes could hugely benefit from using m855a1. So you’re advocating use of a round that’s made from unobtainium. What’s the cost per round of M855A1? NO ONE has said, "ONLY stock up on M855A1. Everything else is garbage". The thread title is pondering the possibility of it eventually becoming readily available to the public, as M855 did after some time. Posters are talking about the empirical qualities of the round vs the current crop of more readily available loads. The consensus is simply: - consistently better terminal ballistics than M193 and M855, out of even short barrel lengths. Fragmentation with sufficient penetration seems to be better than an expanding round - excellent barrier penetration compared to most of the other currently available offerings, while still exhibiting very good terminal performance. If barrier blind performance was completely unnecessary for civilians, that everyone should ignore HST, Federal Fusion, Gold Dot, Ranger, Barnes TSX and the like, because their unnecessary right? - better accuracy than M193 and M855. The whole thread is about whether this particular round, that's been shown to be a great all-around performer, will ever be commonly available in the civilian market, at reasonable prices similar to M193 and M855 are now. No one's advocated buying/building/keeping a 5.56/.223 solely predicated on the possible availability of this round in the future. 5.56 is popular because it's widespread, easily available, and pretty darn effective in general. Folks just want as many options available as possible, especially one that's this effective all around. If you can't find M855A1, you can still use any of the abundant 5.56/.223 options that are easily found anywhere. 6.5 Grendel OTOH, is still nowhere near as abundant. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 4:36:11 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Have you shot a Grendel. The recoil difference between that and .223 is very little. So you’re advocating use of a round that’s made from unobtainium. What’s the cost per round of M855A1? Right now the price per round is somewhere in the $2-3 range if you can even find it. You can buy the projectiles for something like a dollar each. I don’t reload so that means nothing to me, but you clearly do so that may be an option for you |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 5:22:38 PM EDT
[#28]
I don't think it will ever be quite as common or quite as cheap as M193 or M855 is. But yes, it will eventually be commonly available.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 5:41:17 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I don't think it will ever be quite as common or quite as cheap as M193 or M855 is. But yes, it will eventually be commonly available. That's when the patents will run out, but the government could still fuck with us if they wanted. Much in the way they had Colt by the balls for all those years with the out of spec pins and all that bullshit. They could still stipulate that anyone wanting government contracts for M855A1 would have to agree to not sell to civilian customers. So they could own Lake City like they did Colt. So under those circumstances a manufacturer with no chances of getting a contract could in theory say fuck it I'm never getting a contract anyways so I'll manufacture it solely for the civilian market. But if they do, it would likely be at higher cost, since you're not getting those sweet contract overrun prices. Probably cheaper than a buck a round, but probably also higher than what it would cost if it were just Lake City overruns. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 5:46:13 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Anecdotally, I don't know anyone using 62 grain M855 of any brand for the 600 yard course of fire in High Power competition. However, I do know people, myself included, using 77 grain MK262 at 600 yards. 
Shot 150 of it today at that range. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 6:15:19 PM EDT
[#31]
I have a question
How does it compare to the Mk318 or whatever that the USMC has started to field? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 6:36:54 PM EDT
[#32]
The Green tip NATO rounds used to be hard to find back in the early/mid 90s - pretty much couldn't get it unless a foriegn contract fell through or had an overrun or if it fell off a truck.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 6:42:59 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
But anything not geared for hunting is stupid. Gotcha. Pick the right bullet for the task required. The whole jack of all trades thing. Armor penetration Barrier blindness Terminal performance Accuracy When is a regular civilian going to want / need to place a higher priority for Armor penetration and Barrier blindness over Terminal performance and Accuracy? Even in Texas, I doubt Johnny Cochrane could twist shooting up dudes wearing body armor in a vehicle into a legit self defense scenario. The 77gr. SMK load in .223 / 5.56 will actually be affordable to practice with. Any range session needs to start and end with a zero check. Not all projectiles shoot the same POA. I don't disagree that M855A1 is great in 5.56 SBRs compared to other .22 cal projectiles. Problem is 5.56 SBRs are a very distant second best to 6.5 Grendel SBRs. You actually afford to practice with your 6.5 Grendel SBR with the ammo you intend to use. Even with shit Russian steel case 6.5 Grendel, an SBR has wicked terminal performance. Most projectiles in 5.56 SBRs are "meh". Most projectiles in 6.5 G SBRs are "good" - "wow". Now let's look at cost. These things are about $1 per bullet. .338 projectiles cost less. Loaded ammo is $3 per round. That's more than 5 times the price of quality 6.5 Grendel. Again I don't see what all the excitement surrounding this loading is. It's too rare and expensive to practice with and check zeros often with. In an SBR AR application, the 6.5 Grendel wins without any doubt. There are much better hunting projectiles. There are much better target projectiles. It is good at shooting through body armor and windshields. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 6:45:02 PM EDT
[#34]
Quoted:
Shot a 150 of it today at that range. 
And what was your score? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 6:46:40 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Is there a reason why you keep moving the goalposts on the topic? NO ONE has said, "ONLY stock up on M855A1. Everything else is garbage". The thread title is pondering the possibility of it eventually becoming readily available to the public, as M855 did after some time. Posters are talking about the empirical qualities of the round vs the current crop of more readily available loads. The consensus is simply: - consistently better terminal ballistics than M193 and M855, out of even short barrel lengths. Fragmentation with sufficient penetration seems to be better than an expanding round - excellent barrier penetration compared to most of the other currently available offerings, while still exhibiting very good terminal performance. If barrier blind performance was completely unnecessary for civilians, that everyone should ignore HST, Federal Fusion, Gold Dot, Ranger, Barnes TSX and the like, because their unnecessary right? - better accuracy than M193 and M855. The whole thread is about whether this particular round, that's been shown to be a great all-around performer, will ever be commonly available in the civilian market, at reasonable prices similar to M193 and M855 are now. No one's advocated buying/building/keeping a 5.56/.223 solely predicated on the possible availability of this round in the future. 5.56 is popular because it's widespread, easily available, and pretty darn effective in general. Folks just want as many options available as possible, especially one that's this effective all around. If you can't find M855A1, you can still use any of the abundant 5.56/.223 options that are easily found anywhere. 6.5 Grendel OTOH, is still nowhere near as abundant. We are in overall agreement for the most part. However, selecting 5.56 for an SBR over 6.5 Grendel is at odds with the data. People fawn over M855A1 due to its short barrel performance. However, 6.5 Grendel is THE way to go in SBRs in small frame ARs with ammo that costs 1/5 as much as M855A1. Grendel is easy enough to find that it isn't an issue keeping them fed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 6:56:27 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
My initial post was saying I didn't see why everyone got such a boner over this round. When you break down the pros and cons, I stand by my statement. We are in overall agreement for the most part. However, selecting 5.56 for an SBR over 6.5 Grendel is at odds with the data. People fawn over M855A1 due to its short barrel performance. However, 6.5 Grendel is THE way to go in SBRs in small frame ARs with ammo that costs 1/5 as much as M855A1. Grendel is easy enough to find that it isn't an issue keeping them fed. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Is there a reason why you keep moving the goalposts on the topic? NO ONE has said, "ONLY stock up on M855A1. Everything else is garbage". The thread title is pondering the possibility of it eventually becoming readily available to the public, as M855 did after some time. Posters are talking about the empirical qualities of the round vs the current crop of more readily available loads. The consensus is simply: - consistently better terminal ballistics than M193 and M855, out of even short barrel lengths. Fragmentation with sufficient penetration seems to be better than an expanding round - excellent barrier penetration compared to most of the other currently available offerings, while still exhibiting very good terminal performance. If barrier blind performance was completely unnecessary for civilians, that everyone should ignore HST, Federal Fusion, Gold Dot, Ranger, Barnes TSX and the like, because their unnecessary right? - better accuracy than M193 and M855. The whole thread is about whether this particular round, that's been shown to be a great all-around performer, will ever be commonly available in the civilian market, at reasonable prices similar to M193 and M855 are now. No one's advocated buying/building/keeping a 5.56/.223 solely predicated on the possible availability of this round in the future. 5.56 is popular because it's widespread, easily available, and pretty darn effective in general. Folks just want as many options available as possible, especially one that's this effective all around. If you can't find M855A1, you can still use any of the abundant 5.56/.223 options that are easily found anywhere. 6.5 Grendel OTOH, is still nowhere near as abundant. We are in overall agreement for the most part. However, selecting 5.56 for an SBR over 6.5 Grendel is at odds with the data. People fawn over M855A1 due to its short barrel performance. However, 6.5 Grendel is THE way to go in SBRs in small frame ARs with ammo that costs 1/5 as much as M855A1. Grendel is easy enough to find that it isn't an issue keeping them fed. If M855A1 were to become as common as M855, which is the scenario we're discussing, it would be a HIGHLY effective all around loading that allows you to retain magazine and parts commonality across multiple AR rifles, and mag commonality across STANAG mag using rifles while also retaining the many benefits of the 5.56 cartridge which I've already covered. I could buy M855A1 and use it in all my AR rifles to great effect, or buy an entirely new rifle/new parts/new optics/new magazines/etc. to fire a heavier, larger cartridge with greater recoil and less magazine capacity just to squeeze out some additional short barrel performance. Your ideas are awful and your thinking on this is completely backwards and outdated. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 8:41:29 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You're so dense it's not even funny. If M855A1 were to become as common as M855, which is the scenario we're discussing, it would be a HIGHLY effective all around loading that allows you to retain magazine and parts commonality across multiple AR rifles, and mag commonality across STANAG mag using rifles while also retaining the many benefits of the 5.56 cartridge which I've already covered. I could buy M855A1 and use it in all my AR rifles to great effect, or buy an entirely new rifle/new parts/new optics/new magazines/etc. to fire a heavier, larger cartridge with greater recoil and less magazine capacity just to squeeze out some additional short barrel performance. Your ideas are awful and your thinking on this is completely backwards and outdated. How is narrowing down use then selecting the best possible projectile, "dense, backward and outdated"? Pick the best tool / projectile for the job. M855A1 might be an adjustable wrench, but I prefer individual sockets. Wanting to have 5.56 ARs is the definition of outdated. From a guy who has done both, there's no going back once you do the Grendel SBR route. It's so much better. 1.25 MOA rifle. 700-800 yard reach. Awesome terminal performance with tons of ammo types. Cheap ass wolf, with great terminal performance. Projectiles with BCs that are DOUBLE M855A1, which means good terminal performance is extended to much longer distances than M855A1. WAY less wind drift. This is a very big deal. I think I lost only 2-3 rounds of capacity in my 20 rounders. Recoil increase is very minimal. As in girls love to shoot it. This is mental speculation on a round that is so cost prohibitive and rare it's almost not useable for the average Joe. Which is why I advocated in my original post until unobtanium becomes obtainium, taking conventional .224 projectiles and pushing them faster. By various different means. For the SBR route on small frame ARs the 6.5 Grendel presents a solution NOW. Not maybe in 2027 when the .gov will give us lowly civilians the uber-rare ammo we need to make SBR 5.56 ARs viable compared to other options. With as fast as bullet technology has advanced in the last 5-10 years, there will be many other options far better than M855A1, by 2027. Which still doesn't address the biggest 5.56 AR issue. Magazine length and overall shitty BC of .22 cal bullets. I am not trying to be a dick here, I am just trying to break down the pros and cons and give people an alternative to something that is almost unobtainium. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 8:48:05 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That isn't what I said. Pick the right bullet for the task required. The whole jack of all trades thing. Armor penetration Barrier blindness Terminal performance Accuracy When is a regular civilian going to want / need to place a higher priority for Armor penetration and Barrier blindness over Terminal performance and Accuracy? Even in Texas, I doubt Johnny Cochrane could twist shooting up dudes wearing body armor in a vehicle into a legit self defense scenario. The 77gr. SMK load in .223 / 5.56 will actually be affordable to practice with. Any range session needs to start and end with a zero check. Not all projectiles shoot the same POA. I don't disagree that M855A1 is great in 5.56 SBRs compared to other .22 cal projectiles. Problem is 5.56 SBRs are a very distant second best to 6.5 Grendel SBRs. You actually afford to practice with your 6.5 Grendel SBR with the ammo you intend to use. Even with shit Russian steel case 6.5 Grendel, an SBR has wicked terminal performance. Most projectiles in 5.56 SBRs are "meh". Most projectiles in 6.5 G SBRs are "good" - "wow". Now let's look at cost. These things are about $1 per bullet. .338 projectiles cost less. Loaded ammo is $3 per round. That's more than 5 times the price of quality 6.5 Grendel. Again I don't see what all the excitement surrounding this loading is. It's too rare and expensive to practice with and check zeros often with. In an SBR AR application, the 6.5 Grendel wins without any doubt. There are much better hunting projectiles. There are much better target projectiles. It is good at shooting through body armor and windshields. Just... Retarded. A) Fuck 6.5G, this is a discussion about 5.56. Get that through your fucking skull. 6.5 requires new bolts, new barrels, new magazines, and probably entire new receivers to accommodate these things reliably, without a serious decrease in durability, in a select-fire rifle firing F/A, suppressed, etc. Also... HEAVIER. It's great for a short DMR, not a general-issue rifle. B) Understand this conversation and stop trying to throw the thread off-track. 855A1 is a great general-purpose cartridge, basically an upgraded FMJ. The BASIC cartridge, that does everything very well, but does nothing perfectly. There are other options when pure terminal performance or accuracy are what one wants... But 855A1 is the best all-around cartridge, purely a step forward from M193 and M855. C) Why in the hell wouldn't you want the best possible option for your basic 5.56 load? Intermediate barriers are very common in SD scenarios. And when more than just one factory is cranking out A1, the price will drop to reasonable levels. It's not much more than 855... Maybe 36 cents a round instead of 30. Your arguments against it sound a LOT like "Only the ARMY needs bullets like that!" |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 9:05:31 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
isnt 855a1 technically AP and we almost never seen the black tip AP in the civi world right? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 9:06:42 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted: And mk318 is more accurate than 855a1. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 9:11:04 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That isn't what I said. Pick the right bullet for the task required. The whole jack of all trades thing. Armor penetration Barrier blindness Terminal performance Accuracy When is a regular civilian going to want / need to place a higher priority for Armor penetration and Barrier blindness over Terminal performance and Accuracy? Even in Texas, I doubt Johnny Cochrane could twist shooting up dudes wearing body armor in a vehicle into a legit self defense scenario. The 77gr. SMK load in .223 / 5.56 will actually be affordable to practice with. Any range session needs to start and end with a zero check. Not all projectiles shoot the same POA. I don't disagree that M855A1 is great in 5.56 SBRs compared to other .22 cal projectiles. Problem is 5.56 SBRs are a very distant second best to 6.5 Grendel SBRs. You actually afford to practice with your 6.5 Grendel SBR with the ammo you intend to use. Even with shit Russian steel case 6.5 Grendel, an SBR has wicked terminal performance. Most projectiles in 5.56 SBRs are "meh". Most projectiles in 6.5 G SBRs are "good" - "wow". Now let's look at cost. These things are about $1 per bullet. .338 projectiles cost less. Loaded ammo is $3 per round. That's more than 5 times the price of quality 6.5 Grendel. Again I don't see what all the excitement surrounding this loading is. It's too rare and expensive to practice with and check zeros often with. In an SBR AR application, the 6.5 Grendel wins without any doubt. There are much better hunting projectiles. There are much better target projectiles. It is good at shooting through body armor and windshields. I seriously don't understand what your point is, and I'm not sure you do either. Yes, there are rounds on the commercial market that can slightly outperform M855A1 in one or two areas, but for at least twice the cost. For example, 77 grain SMKs are arguably slightly more accurate and have a slightly longer range, but they're also a buck a round. And they don't come anywhere close to M855A1 in terms of barrier blindness or penetration. As a general purpose self defense round, M855A1 blows everything else out of the water. And did I mention it's cheap? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 10:19:42 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I have a question How does it compare to the Mk318 or whatever that the USMC has started to field? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 10:20:36 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And what was your score? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 10:40:03 PM EDT
[#44]
Damn I really want A1
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 10:42:13 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Damn I really want A1 |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 11:10:38 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Meh Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Damn I really want A1 
Sure, I can buy mk262 and have. I want moar stuff |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 11:15:23 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I have no idea what your problem is. You're mad that one round can do all those things, and do them damned well? Or you just think it performs too well for civilians? I seriously don't understand what your point is, and I'm not sure you do either. Yes, there are rounds on the commercial market that can slightly outperform M855A1 in one or two areas, but for at least twice the cost. For example, 77 grain SMKs are arguably slightly more accurate and have a slightly longer range, but they're also a buck a round. And they don't come anywhere close to M855A1 in terms of barrier blindness or penetration. As a general purpose self defense round, M855A1 blows everything else out of the water. And did I mention it's cheap? Pick an application, pick the best projectile. Shooting through windshields, walls and body armor are not common "applications" for an average joe. Show me where a civilian can buy this "cheap" M855A1. You guys want to speculate about how and when M855A1 will be cheap and commonly available. Best answer is don't wait on the government. It's not classed as AP. You guys would be better off pooling resources and establishing a company to produce M855A1 type projectiles. You never know, with the brain trust on here, you might be able to improve it. It would be a really cool project for people to work on. There are a lot of guys who make projectiles in their garage or back shops that are light years ahead of mainstream projectiles. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2019 11:50:33 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Neither. Pick an application, pick the best projectile. Shooting through windshields, walls and body armor are not common "applications" for an average joe. Show me where a civilian can buy this "cheap" M855A1. You guys want to speculate about how and when M855A1 will be cheap and commonly available. Best answer is don't wait on the government. It's not classed as AP. You guys would be better off pooling resources and establishing a company to produce M855A1 type projectiles. You never know, with the brain trust on here, you might be able to improve it. It would be a really cool project for people to work on. There are a lot of guys who make projectiles in their garage or back shops that are light years ahead of mainstream projectiles. Even if you took away its armor penetrating and barrier blind capabilities, it’s still an outstanding round due to its ability to frag at reduced velocities. I hear it’s pretty accurate too but I haven’t shot any so I can’t speak for certain on that. As for price, I think he’s talking about how much the round SHOULD cost if it was readily available for purchase. Right now the demand vastly exceeds the supply since its being withheld from the market, so the few people that have it are able to charge outrageous prices for it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/8/2019 12:35:34 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Neither. Pick an application, pick the best projectile. Shooting through windshields, walls and body armor are not common "applications" for an average joe. Show me where a civilian can buy this "cheap" M855A1. You guys want to speculate about how and when M855A1 will be cheap and commonly available. Best answer is don't wait on the government. It's not classed as AP. You guys would be better off pooling resources and establishing a company to produce M855A1 type projectiles. You never know, with the brain trust on here, you might be able to improve it. It would be a really cool project for people to work on. There are a lot of guys who make projectiles in their garage or back shops that are light years ahead of mainstream projectiles. It's like someone trying to give you a hundred dollar bill and you're all like no thanks, I only need 47.50, not a penny more. Not a penny more I say! Be gone with your free money! |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/8/2019 2:11:31 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No it is a copper core with a steel tip. It does not meet the legal definition of AP. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
isnt 855a1 technically AP and we almost never seen the black tip AP in the civi world right? |
|
|
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.
