User Panel
Posted: 9/26/2010 9:20:12 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Molon]
MK318 Mod 0 (Federal T556TNB1)
One version of MK318 Mod 0 that is now available to the general public is being sold as Federal "white box" T556TNB1. The SOST projectile loaded in the MK318 Mod 0 cartridge has a nominal weight of 62 grains and a nominal length of 0.87”. It is constructed with a copper base and a small, non-bonded lead core in the ogive section of the bullet. Due to this higher copper to lead ratio, the MK318 Mod 0 projectile is longer than a traditional copper jacketed/lead core projectile of the same weight, but is still slightly shorter than an M855 projectile. While it is often stated that the SOST projectile used in MK318 Mod 0 is similar to the Federal Trophy Bonded Bear Claw, the form of the SOST projectile more closely resembles that of Federal’s Trophy Bonded Tip projectile (without the tip of course.) As previously mentioned, the MK318 projectile does not have a bonded core. The loaded MK318 Mod 0 cartridge has a nominal OAL of 2.20". The projectile does not have a cannelure per se, but the case mouth is crimped into the top relief band. The cartridge is sealed at the case mouth, however not with the asphalt sealant typically found on military ammunition. The primers are sealed and crimped. The casehead is stamped "FC 10". The cartridge is charged with ball powder. A typical copper jacketed/lead core FMJ bullet will have a specific gravity of approximately 10.2. Due to its higher copper to lead ratio construction, the MK318 Mod 0 projectile has a lower specific gravity. When fired from typical AR-15 barrel lengths with a 1:9” twist rate, MK318 Mod 0 will have a gyroscopic stability factor of approximately 1.3. When fired from typical length barrels with a 1:7" twist rate, MK318 Mod O will have a gyroscopic stability factor of approximately 2.2. MK318 Mod 0 Chronograph Data Chronographing of the Mk318 Mod 0 ammunition was conducted using an Oehler 35-P chronograph with “proof screen” technology. All velocities listed below are muzzle velocities as calculated from the instrumental velocities using Oehler’s Ballistic Explorer software program. All strings of fire consisted of 10 rounds each. Each round was single-loaded and cycled into the chamber from a magazine fitted with a single-load follower. The bolt locked-back after each shot allowing the chamber to cool in between each shot. This technique was used to mitigate the possible influence of “chamber-soak” on velocity data. Each new shot was fired in a consistent manner after hitting the bolt release. Atmospheric conditions were monitored and recorded using a Kestrel 4000 Pocket Weather Tracker. Atmospheric conditions: Temperature: 75 degrees F. Humidity: 47%. Barometric pressure: 29.97 inches of Hg Elevation: 950 feet above sea level Two different barrel lengths were used in obtaining velocity data; a 14.5” Colt M4A1 barrel and a 20” Colt M16A2 barrel. Both barrels have NATO chambers, are chrome lined and have 1:7” twist rates. Both barrels have low round-counts on them. M4A1 barrel. M16A2 barrel. For comparison, the MK318 Mod 0 ammunition was fired in sequence with two different brands of 62 grain M855 ammunition. The firing order for both barrels was as follows: 1.A 10-shot string of Winchester Ranger M855 2.A 10-shot string of MK318 Mod 0 3.A 10-shot string of IMI M855 Finally, the data: The Crane Warfare Centers' publication, “U.S. Navy Small Arms Ammunition Advancements” reported that MK318 was “optimized” for the MK 16 with a 14 inch barrel and claimed it has a velocity of 2925 fps at 15 feet from the muzzle (presumably from said 14 inch barrel.) The lot of Federal T556TNB1 (MK318 Mod 0) that I chronographed from the Colt 14.5” M4A1 barrel would have a velocity of approximately 2889 fps at 15 feet from the muzzle (at standard atmospheric conditions.) Accuracy Evaluation of MK318 Mod 0 An accuracy (technically, precision) evaluation of the MK318 Mod 0 ammunition was performed following my usual protocol. This accuracy evaluation used statistically significant shot-group sizes and every single shot in a fired group was included in the measurements. There was absolutely no use of any Group Reduction Techniques (e.g. fliers, target movement, Butterfly Shots). The shooting set-up will be described in detail below. As many of the significant variables as was practicable were controlled for. Also, a "control group" was fired from each barrel used in the evaluation using match-grade, hand-loaded ammunition; in order to demonstrate the capability of the barrel. Pictures of shot-groups are posted for documentation. All shooting was conducted from a concrete bench-rest from a distance of 100 yards (confirmed with a laser rangefinder.) The barrels used in the evaluation were free-floated. The free-float handguards of the rifles rested in a Sinclair Windage Benchrest, while the stock of the rifles rested in a Protektor bunny-ear rear bag. Sighting was accomplished via a Leupold VARI-X III set at 25X magnification and adjusted to be parallax-free at 100 yards. A mirage shade was attached to the objective-bell of the scope. Wind conditions on the shooting range were continuously monitored using a Wind Probe. The set-up was very similar to that pictured below. Attached File The Wind Probe. In order to establish a working baseline for the intrinsic accuracy of the 62 grain SOST projectile itself, when fired from a semi-automatic AR-15, I worked-up a SAAMI pressure hand-load with pulled MK318 bullets and fired a 10-shot group of that load from a Krieger barreled AR-15 from a distance of 100 yards. The Krieger barrel has a 1:7.7” twist rate. Prior to firing the 62 grain SOST hand-load, I fired a 10-shot control group consisting of hand-loaded 62 grain Berger hollow points. The extreme spread for the control group measured 0.66”. The extreme spread of the 10-shot group of the 62 grain SOST hand-load measured 1.9”. Since MK318 Mod 0 is intended for use as a combat round, I used AR-15s with chrome-lined, NATO chambered barrels for this accuracy evaluation, as it most likely that these are the types of barrels that this ammunition will most commonly be fired from. It is sometimes possible to obtain slightly better accuracy from mil-spec/NATO pressure loads by firing them from an AR-15 that has a stainless steel match-grade barrel with a hybrid chamber such as the Noveske NMmod0 chamber or the Wylde chamber for examples; but you're not going to make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear. As previously mentioned, it is reported that MK318 was “optimized” for a 14 inch barrel, so it seemed only fitting to evaluate MK318 from a similar length barrel. The first test vehicle used in this accuracy evaluation was a 14.5” Colt M4A1 barrel. The barrel was free-floated with a Daniel Defense Omega rail. (I was not able to use the mirage-shade with this barrel, due to the original standard front sight base on it.) A previous accuracy evaluation of this M4A1 barrel demonstrated that this barrel is capable of excellent accuracy for a chrome-lined, NATO chambered barrel. That evaluation can be viewed here: The Colt M4A1 SOCOM Barrel A control group fired from the M4A1 barrel using hand-loaded 62 grain Berger hollow-point projectiles had an extreme spread of 1.13”. Three 10-shot groups of the MK318 were fired from the Colt M4A1 barrel from the previously described bench-rest set-up. The extreme spreads of those groups measured: 2.91” 3.22” 2.70” for a 10-shot group average extreme spread of 2.94”. The three 10-shot groups were over-layed on each other using RSI Shooting Lab to form a 30-shot composite group. The mean radius of this composite group was 1.02”. (For those of you not familiar with the mean radius, I've posted an explanation of it in the third post of this thread.) The smallest 10-shot group of MK318 fired from the Colt M4A1 barrel is shown below. The next test vehicle was a 16” Colt HBAR with a 1:9” twist. This is the same barrel found on the Colt 6721 Tactical Carbine. This barrel is one of the most accurate “out of the box” chrome-lined, NATO chambered barrels that I’ve evaluated. The barrel was free-floated with a LaRue Tactical handguard. A 10-shot group from this barrel fired using hand-loaded Sierra 52 grain MatchKings had an extreme spread of 0.98”. Three 10-shot groups of the MK318 fired from the Colt 6721 barrel produced the following extreme spreads: 2.98” 2.85” 2.89” for a 10-shot group average extreme spread of 2.91”. These three groups were also over-layed on each other to produce a 30-shot composite group with a mean radius of 0.82”. The smallest 10-shot group of MK318 fired from the Colt 6721 barrel . . . The third barrel used to evaluate the accuracy of MK318 was a 20” Colt HBAR with a 1:7” twist, chrome-lining and a NATO chamber. The barrel is free-floated with a PRI handguard. A 10-shot group from this barrel fired using hand-loaded 55 grain Sierra BlitzKings had an extreme spread of 1.18”. Three 10-shot groups of the MK318 fired from the 20” HBAR had extreme spreads of: 2.70” 2.49” 3.24” for a 10-shot group average extreme spread of 2.81”. As before, the three 10-shot groups were over-layed on each other to form a 30-shot composite group that produced a mean radius of 0.91”. The smallest 10-shot group of MK318 fired from the 20” HBAR . . . A summary of the results from this evaluation are shown below. Lastly, for the Internet Commandos in our viewing audience, here’s a pic of a sub-MOA group of the MK318 fired from the 16” Colt HBAR from 100 yards; a cherry-picked 3-shot group that is. Attached File .... |
|
All that is necessary for Trolls to flourish, is for good men to do nothing.
In God We Trust. Everyone else needs to post data. |
Originally Posted By mike12345: I would like to know the velocity at which this will no longer fragment to extrapolate distance from different weapons. I know the fragmentation distance will be farther than what you get from other fragmenting ammo. I seem to remember someone saying 2300FPS but thats still only 200yards from a 14.5in anyone have a 7.5in barrel and mk318? fire it into water jugs at 25yard increments that shuld tell you where. This round doesn't rely on fragmentation as much as expansion. Also, water jug tests don't tell you anything except how well the round does vs water jugs. |
|
Proud member of the National Rifle Association, Nebraska Firearms Owners Association, and Eastern Nebraska Gun Club.
I avoid political discussion because no one agrees with my strange mix of beliefs. But I am pro-gun, pro-self defense, and pro-America. |
Originally Posted By Krylancelo:
Originally Posted By mike12345:
I would like to know the velocity at which this will no longer fragment to extrapolate distance from different weapons. I know the fragmentation distance will be farther than what you get from other fragmenting ammo. I seem to remember someone saying 2300FPS but thats still only 200yards from a 14.5in anyone have a 7.5in barrel and mk318? fire it into water jugs at 25yard increments that shuld tell you where. This round doesn't rely on fragmentation as much as expansion. Also, water jug tests don't tell you anything except how well the round does vs water jugs. as i've said before ballistics jel is 90% water so firing into water jugs will show you what the round would do. You dont have the wound channel to look at but the bullet does the same thing. This bullet dosent expand the jacket is very thin and fragments. |
|
|
|
|
|
Originally Posted By Vapor-Trail:
Looks like there is now a third version of MK318 packaging. MK318 in NEW BOX IIRC, the BVAC are another companies' loads using pulled Mk318 bullets, not Federal Mk318 as a complete cartridge. |
|
This is...a clue - Pat_Rogers
I'm not adequately aluminumized for this thread. - gonzo_beyondo CO, FL, MI, SC, NH - Please lobby your legislators to end discrimination against non-resident CCW permit holders |
Originally Posted By Gamma762:
Originally Posted By Vapor-Trail:
Looks like there is now a third version of MK318 packaging. MK318 in NEW BOX IIRC, the BVAC are another companies' loads using pulled Mk318 bullets, not Federal Mk318 as a complete cartridge. I just bought 13 boxes of this for $9 a box at a gun show today. Does it perform as well or close enough to the Federal stuff or does anyone know? I noticed they are crimped with a FCD into the top grease ring instead of roll crimped over the top drive band and the bullets can be slightly turned inside of the casing on a few of the bullets. I can't tell and haven't pulled one yet, but I would almost bet they don't have a grease seal on them. Also, they don't seem to have crimped primers either. |
|
US Army Action Figure...Now with 10% less brain matter!!!!
|
Originally Posted By Gamma762: Originally Posted By Vapor-Trail: Looks like there is now a third version of MK318 packaging. MK318 in NEW BOX IIRC, the BVAC are another companies' loads using pulled Mk318 bullets, not Federal Mk318 as a complete cartridge. They are reloads, albeit commercial ones. They can suffer all the same maladies of any other reload such as fatigued brass, improper powder charge, decreased accuracy due to using pulled bullets, etc. |
|
“When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.” Thomas Jefferson
|
They are reloads, albeit commercial ones. They can suffer all the same maladies of any other reload such as fatigued brass, improper powder charge, decreased accuracy due to using pulled bullets, etc. What fo you mean that it could be fatigued? That round uses new brass. |
|
|
I just pulled one of the BVAC rounds that i found to have a loose projectile about halfway out of the casing with a kinetic puller. These are not sealed, in fact I pushed it back in place with my fingers and re-crimped it with my FCD and now it no longer spins freely. I'm gonna go through and double check them all and re-crimp what needs it and never buy ammo from them again. I sent an email to them asking if they are loaded to give the same velocity as the real stuff but still waiting on the answer.
|
|
US Army Action Figure...Now with 10% less brain matter!!!!
|
Originally Posted By Swstock: Alrighty then. Any clue whether the reloading company did any research at all into the powder charge? Is it full-powered compared to the original loading? Or did they just drop in a load charge straight out of some reloading book? Or did they pull the charge weight out of their ass? Then there is the (lack of a) crimp issue, on the bullet and the primer. And is it a hard mil-spec primer, or a standard small rifle primer?They are reloads, albeit commercial ones. They can suffer all the same maladies of any other reload such as fatigued brass, improper powder charge, decreased accuracy due to using pulled bullets, etc. What fo you mean that it could be fatigued? That round uses new brass. I'm fairly certain Federal did the work. The cost savings on those particular reloads, compared to the price of the genuine stuff, just does not outweigh the potential downsides enough for me to purchase them. EVAR! |
|
“When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.” Thomas Jefferson
|
Originally Posted By eric10mm:
Originally Posted By Swstock:
Alrighty then. Any clue whether the reloading company did any research at all into the powder charge? Is it full-powered compared to the original loading? Or did they just drop in a load charge straight out of some reloading book? Or did they pull the charge weight out of their ass? Then there is the (lack of a) crimp issue, on the bullet and the primer. And is it a hard mil-spec primer, or a standard small rifle primer?
They are reloads, albeit commercial ones. They can suffer all the same maladies of any other reload such as fatigued brass, improper powder charge, decreased accuracy due to using pulled bullets, etc. What fo you mean that it could be fatigued? That round uses new brass. I'm fairly certain Federal did the work. The cost savings on those particular reloads, compared to the price of the genuine stuff, just does not outweigh the potential downsides enough for me to purchase them. EVAR! Im trying to figure out why they are cheaper. New brass, same bullet, the only thing left is the powder. They say that it 5.56 but Im not sure where they learned how to load them. Ill either be buying another 1000 rounds of Federal Mk318, ir trying the BVAC. I havent made that decision yet. Facts as of now: New brass, new bullets. This is confirmed by BVAC. |
|
|
I got a response back from BVAC but all it said was they are loaded to exact specifications as the real stuff and the loose projectile is ok as long as bullet push is tight.
|
|
US Army Action Figure...Now with 10% less brain matter!!!!
|
Originally Posted By DM1975:
I got a response back from BVAC but all it said was they are loaded to exact specifications as the real stuff and the loose projectile is ok as long as bullet push is tight. If it were loaded to exact (mil)-specifications it would be properly crimped, sealed and use a hard cup primer. I could see them saying it was loaded to match mil-spec performance. I was about to pull the trigger on some of this. I've always had good luck with HSM so I figured BVAC should be of the same quality. |
|
Molon Labe
|
Originally Posted By Minuteman:
Originally Posted By DM1975:
I got a response back from BVAC but all it said was they are loaded to exact specifications as the real stuff and the loose projectile is ok as long as bullet push is tight. If it were loaded to exact (mil)-specifications it would be properly crimped, sealed and use a hard cup primer. I could see them saying it was loaded to match mil-spec performance. I was about to pull the trigger on some of this. I've always had good luck with HSM so I figured BVAC should be of the same quality. Im confused, is the bvac version not a sealed primer? |
|
|
Not that I can tell.
|
|
US Army Action Figure...Now with 10% less brain matter!!!!
|
Anyone have any accuracy tests of the BVAC?
And preferably not bought from a gunshow, that guy could have loaded those himself |
|
|
You think someone is gonna reload a Mk318 round and try and pass it off as BVAC instead of Federal? Small gains for the trouble I think.
|
|
US Army Action Figure...Now with 10% less brain matter!!!!
|
Originally Posted By Saddlerocker:
Anyone have any accuracy tests of the BVAC? And preferably not bought from a gunshow, that guy could have loaded those himself I tried some of the BVAC mk318 loads a couple weeks ago in my 16" LMT MRP which has a 1:7 twist and i was getting around 5" groups at 100 yards. I shot several other BVAC loads and found my rifle just didn't like their stuff but that is not to say you will see the same results. I bought some pulled mk318 bullets from the EE and have been able to get less than 2" groups so far. |
|
|
Ok, I shot my gun show purchased BVAC Mk318 yesterday and had pretty good results. It isn't match quality by any means, but it held under 2 MOA for me pretty well. It also blew the back out of a 2x4 quite nicely too. This was bought at a gun show from a reputable local dealer so I do not expect it to be counterfeit but I guess anything can happen iIf it is counterfeit then he did a good job at it.
My complaint about it is that the primers are not crimped or sealed and the bullets are lacking the grease seal. Other than that performance was as expected. |
|
US Army Action Figure...Now with 10% less brain matter!!!!
|
Originally Posted By DM1975:
Ok, I shot my gun show purchased BVAC Mk318 yesterday and had pretty good results. It isn't match quality by any means, but it held under 2 MOA for me pretty well. It also blew the back out of a 2x4 quite nicely too. This was bought at a gun show from a reputable local dealer so I do not expect it to be counterfeit but I guess anything can happen iIf it is counterfeit then he did a good job at it. My complaint about it is that the primers are not crimped or sealed and the bullets are lacking the grease seal. Other than that performance was as expected. I just got my bvac mk318 and i noticed this too. Primers dont appear to have sealant, neither do the bullets. My federal does though. |
|
|
Originally Posted By Mister_H:
http://i56.tinypic.com/2vn0wft.png http://i51.tinypic.com/2livcap.png A couple of pictures from Afghanistan last year. I was using AA53 (MK262 Mod 1), but this is what we were using in the M16A4's and M4's. If they were using the MK318 in the M16's and M4's but you were using MK262, what rifle were you using? |
|
|
Originally Posted By TinyCrumb:
Originally Posted By Mister_H:
http://i56.tinypic.com/2vn0wft.png http://i51.tinypic.com/2livcap.png A couple of pictures from Afghanistan last year. I was using AA53 (MK262 Mod 1), but this is what we were using in the M16A4's and M4's. If they were using the MK318 in the M16's and M4's but you were using MK262, what rifle were you using? MK12 Mod 1 |
|
|
Originally Posted By DM1975:
I got a response back from BVAC but all it said was they are loaded to exact specifications as the real stuff and the loose projectile is ok as long as bullet push is tight. I must disagree. I was having some severe accuracy problems with some of my reloads, and I found that the bullet was moving FORWARD when the cartridge was chambered, and came to a stop, even though the bullet was not seated loosely and passed the push test against a bench. A couple thou. polished off the expander ball cured the problem. A loose bullet in the case is a no-no. So, measure a BVAC round with a loose bullet for OAL, load it in your mag with a round chambered, fire the weapon, gently extract the round that you measured, and see how much further forward the bullet has moved. Mine moved as much as 14 thou. forward, and the bullet was tight and could not be moved by hand. Accuracy sucked. I would run all the Bvac rounds through a crimp die and use them up in practice, and that would be that for BVAC. |
|
|
Originally Posted By freewilly: Originally Posted By DM1975: I got a response back from BVAC but all it said was they are loaded to exact specifications as the real stuff and the loose projectile is ok as long as bullet push is tight. I must disagree. I was having some severe accuracy problems with some of my reloads, and I found that the bullet was moving FORWARD when the cartridge was chambered, and came to a stop, even though the bullet was not seated loosely and passed the push test against a bench. A couple thou. polished off the expander ball cured the problem. A loose bullet in the case is a no-no. So, measure a BVAC round with a loose bullet for OAL, load it in your mag with a round chambered, fire the weapon, gently extract the round that you measured, and see how much further forward the bullet has moved. Mine moved as much as 14 thou. forward, and the bullet was tight and could not be moved by hand. Accuracy sucked. I would run all the Bvac rounds through a crimp die and use them up in practice, and that would be that for BVAC. I would return them as defective rounds. |
|
“When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.” Thomas Jefferson
|
I just ran them through my fcd and shot a box of em and they were fine.
|
|
US Army Action Figure...Now with 10% less brain matter!!!!
|
Superior report, Sir
|
|
|
Gents,
I took some handloaded ammo with pulled Mk318s on a feral pig hunt just to see how they'd perform. Only was able to take one pig, a 250 pounder, from fairly short range. Two bullets were recovered from the body cavity. They had both completely shed the nose (the copper and lead) with just the copper shank being left. Remarkably, the remaining weight on the two is only one tenth of a grain different. Very consistent. I was kind of surprised, being barrier penetration rounds, that they stopped within the pig. I'd post a photo of the recovered bullets, but can seem to find a way to upload one. Matt |
|
|
Originally Posted By SharpsShtr:
Gents, I took some handloaded ammo with pulled Mk318s on a feral pig hunt just to see how they'd perform. Only was able to take one pig, a 250 pounder, from fairly short range. Two bullets were recovered from the body cavity. They had both completely shed the nose (the copper and lead) with just the copper shank being left. Remarkably, the remaining weight on the two is only one tenth of a grain different. Very consistent. I was kind of surprised, being barrier penetration rounds, that they stopped within the pig. I'd post a photo of the recovered bullets, but can seem to find a way to upload one. Matt www.tinypic.com Distance and barrel length? Impact point, angle, structures penetrated and distance traveled in said pig? |
|
|
So in your opinion which round is better?
MK 318 or M855 |
|
|
MK 318
|
|
|
Molon , Thanks !!! That is great information.
Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
Write your congressman or senator today !!!!The liberals ride the backs of dead children promoting gun control.
NRA life member .Notary public. taxpayer Tennessee Squire. |
Originally Posted By tw4:
MK 318 |
|
Join the Nebraska Firearms Owners Association. http://www.nebraskafirearms.org
Archer: Cry "Havok!" And let slip the hogs of war! Lana: DOGS of war....... Archer: WHATEVER FARM ANIMAL OF WAR, LANA! |
|
Talk about thread resurrection.
I haven't seen any of this ammo for sale since Sandy Hook. Where did you find your box for testing? |
|
This is...a clue - Pat_Rogers
I'm not adequately aluminumized for this thread. - gonzo_beyondo CO, FL, MI, SC, NH - Please lobby your legislators to end discrimination against non-resident CCW permit holders |
|
|
Interesting article with one of the individuals involved with the development of MK318:
SADJ MK318 article |
|
|
Originally Posted By Vapor-Trail:
Interesting article with one of the individuals involved with the development of MK318: SADJ MK318 article View Quote Already posted: http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_3_16/667677_USMC_Gets_the_Silver_Bullet.html |
|
|
Originally Posted By mcantu:
got a box of T556TNB1 this week for testing Steyr AUG-A1 20" barrel, 1/9 twist 1.5x optic http://i58.tinypic.com/2e4fey0.jpg http://i60.tinypic.com/8x4lev.jpg View Quote more thread resurrection; i had about the same results you did at 50 and 100 yds with my SCAR 16 and an aimpoint. |
|
|
Fantastic report on what appears to be crappy ammo.
|
|
|
Originally Posted By jmar93: Fantastic report on what appears to be crappy ammo. View Quote it seems to meet the same accuracy spec as M193 (<=1" mean radius @100 yds). its terminal ballistics though is a huge improvement over M193/M855. i'm really curious what the changes in the Mod 1 version will do |
|
|
|
THX OP!!!
so some guy called po boy special, has a youtube channel, maybe has an acct here, maybe someone already mentioned this between the OP and here, but that fellow tested like a copule dozen types of ammo from his 7.5" AR. There is youtube playlist on his channel and a spread sheet you can download from his site. Of all the rounds, 14 fragged &/or expanded, 11 penetrated to 12" or greater. of all of them that had an expanded slug left, the mk318 expanded to .461" and partially fragged. penetration was a little much, 21.5". Energy was a respectable 700 ft-lbs at the muzzle, 2255 fps. Thoug the penetration may be higher than is ideal for many scenarios, this had the best all around performance, IMO. Retained weight was 46 grains here is vid for that test: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNekOq9CBQA&index=21&list=PLW31XX5XBJOrDU1GQhsKrFBUsJjo5RWPd |
|
|
Originally Posted By JSmithXYY:
Energy was a respectable 700 ft-lbs at the muzzle, 2255 fps. View Quote Energy transfer is not a wounding mechanism for small arms fire. WHAT'S WRONG WITH THE WOUND BALLISTICS LITERATURE, AND WHY by M.L. Fackler, M.D. Letterman Army Institute of Research Division of Military Trauma Research Presidio of San Francisco, California 94219 Institute Report No. 239 The “Shock Wave” Myth By Dr. Martin Fackler Wound Ballistics Review, Winter 1991 and the Journal of Trauma, (29[10]: 1455, 1989). Ballistic Injury By Dr. Martin Fackler Annals of Emergency Medicine, December 1986 Bullet Penetration By Duncan MacPherson Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness By Special Agent Urey W. Patrick Firearms Training Unit FBI Academy |
|
All that is necessary for Trolls to flourish, is for good men to do nothing.
In God We Trust. Everyone else must post data. |
|
Just bought a thousand pulled MK 318 Mod 0 projectiles. This thread is relative to my interests!
|
|
Your body can never go where your mind has never been.
|
that round from the video travelling at 2250 is interesting in that the pedals peeled back and stayed on the base. i'm guessing that at higher velocity is when the pedals sheer off. now where is that theshold?
|
|
|
I have had good results with 25.0 gr of cfe 223 and #41 primers
|
|
|
i have had better luck with milder loads
|
|
|
Originally Posted By mcantu:
it seems to meet the same accuracy spec as M193 (<=1" mean radius @100 yds). its terminal ballistics though is a huge improvement over M193/M855. i'm really curious what the changes in the Mod 1 version will do View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Originally Posted By mcantu:
Originally Posted By jmar93:
Fantastic report on what appears to be crappy ammo. it seems to meet the same accuracy spec as M193 (<=1" mean radius @100 yds). its terminal ballistics though is a huge improvement over M193/M855. i'm really curious what the changes in the Mod 1 version will do A couple of the goals for the new projectile are that is to be "barrier blind" and "limits fragmentation." Since they supposedly (I haven't seen any actual cross sections yet) will "replace the lead with copper" in the new projectile, it sounds like it will be a 62 grain monolithic hollow-point; but who knows. One would expect terminal performance to be similar to the 62 grain TSX. ... |
|
All that is necessary for Trolls to flourish, is for good men to do nothing.
In God We Trust. Everyone else must post data. |
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.