AR15.Com Archives
 Whats some opinions here on PMC 5.56 Nato 62 Grs. Green Tip LAP? (pictures)
Rockyriver  [Team Member]
5/21/2011 5:46:17 PM EST
I was told this stuff is better than American Eagle XM855. I have never been a fan of PMC ammo, However I was told by more than one at the range that this stuff is great.
I want some opinions here on this stuff from people who have used it.
I will try it out, but want some others opinions.
I know about the ammo oracle.
Does it shoot cleaner than American Eagle XM855?
How about accuracy?
Do you think its junk?




Paid Advertisement
--
TxEnforcer  [Team Member]
5/21/2011 9:11:06 PM EST
5.56 PMC X-TAC AP 62gr is a good ''plinking'' round. I wouldn't use it for shtf purposes.

It went bang everytime I shot. Accuracy is pretty decent. Better than most 55gr or other cheap 62gr stuff I've bought.

Ordering 200rds from Palmetto State Armory tomorrow.
Jolkm  [Member]
5/22/2011 12:27:41 AM EST
The AE stuff in question is made by ATK/Federal originally for the military, but failed QC and was rejected by the military, and so then Federal sells the ones that supposedly were not rejected for safety reasons to civilians. In recent years, there have been a lot of reports of catastrophic failures in guns from using Federal/AE XM193 & XM855, and for quite a while last year I remember reading a lot of reports at this site from people who bought Fed/AE XM855, that on average 6-7% of all rounds were visibly too badly damaged to be safe to fire and thus needed to be discarded, and almost all rounds had minor dents, and/or were filthy,

PMC X-Tac M855 (the box calls it LAP, as you noted) is new production ammo, not military rejects, and because I've been particularly interested in this ammo, I've payed attention to every single mention of it at this site, and I have not heard of one blown up gun while using it, I don't recall anyone having malfunctions with it, and accuracy compared to typical military grade ammo ranges from average to excellent.

I have some PMX X-Tac M855, though I haven't shot any of it yet, but based on everything I've read about both ammunitions mentioned, PMC X-Tac M855>Fed/AE XM855 hands down.
bigjunk1  [Member]
5/22/2011 1:22:06 AM EST
I have had good luck with PMC. I first purchased it because it was the cheapest brass cased ammo I could find and my SS barrels did not extract steal cased ammo.
I have come to find that I can get sub MOA groups out of it and actually have become very confident with it.
BeNotAfraid  [Member]
5/22/2011 5:37:51 AM EST
PMC got my vote.

works fine in my sticks, getting average accuracy (good enough for my tired old eyes) and has reloadable brass (a few with slightly off-center primer holes, but that don't bother me all that much.)

PMC X-Tac

you can download their catalog for the actual X-Tac specs from this site.
AJE  [Team Member]
5/22/2011 5:58:56 AM EST
I have a friend that loves the stuff....bought a whole case of it. He gave me a box to try out but I haven't shot any yet.
hotbiggun42  [Team Member]
5/28/2011 8:38:36 AM EST
Originally Posted By TxEnforcer:
5.56 PMC X-TAC AP 62gr is a good ''plinking'' round. I wouldn't use it for shtf purposes.

It went bang everytime I shot. Accuracy is pretty decent. Better than most 55gr or other cheap 62gr stuff I've bought.

Ordering 200rds from Palmetto State Armory tomorrow.


In your opinion why is this ammo only good for plinking? I was thinking about buying a couple cases for SHTF. Will this ammo not stop a man if you had to defend yourself?
sinlessorrow  [Team Member]
5/28/2011 11:38:20 AM EST
Originally Posted By hotbiggun42:
Originally Posted By TxEnforcer:
5.56 PMC X-TAC AP 62gr is a good ''plinking'' round. I wouldn't use it for shtf purposes.

It went bang everytime I shot. Accuracy is pretty decent. Better than most 55gr or other cheap 62gr stuff I've bought.

Ordering 200rds from Palmetto State Armory tomorrow.


In your opinion why is this ammo only good for plinking? I was thinking about buying a couple cases for SHTF. Will this ammo not stop a man if you had to defend yourself?



Its M855 which has issues stopping people in general. The .mil complains alot about M855 not fragmentig and going straight through
Rockyriver  [Team Member]
5/28/2011 1:05:13 PM EST
Originally Posted By hotbiggun42:
Originally Posted By TxEnforcer:
5.56 PMC X-TAC AP 62gr is a good ''plinking'' round. I wouldn't use it for shtf purposes.

It went bang everytime I shot. Accuracy is pretty decent. Better than most 55gr or other cheap 62gr stuff I've bought.

Ordering 200rds from Palmetto State Armory tomorrow.


In your opinion why is this ammo only good for plinking? I was thinking about buying a couple cases for SHTF. Will this ammo not stop a man if you had to defend yourself?


All ammo that fires reliable is good SHTF stuff. When it comes down to stopping a threat 100% of the ammo on the market will work if you shoot the enemy in the right spot.
(And less forget about barriers or the bad guy hiding behind something.)
I would say that even hit in a non vital area that most plinking ammo will stop anyone from trying to attack you further, unless they are a highly trained soldier.
The phsycological effect of being shot is to retreat or to stand ground and not attack further about 99% of the time.
And remember that any ammo that goes bang is better than throwing rocks.
So to answer your question,"Will this ammo stop a man if you need to defend yourself". My answer is, "Hell yes without a doubt".

ETA: I would like to add this is my opinion and not fact on the phsycological effects of being shot.
Thank you Krylancelo for pointig this out to me.
BallisticTip  [Team Member]
5/28/2011 1:11:20 PM EST
I agree if it goes bang reliably, it is good ammo.
TxEnforcer  [Team Member]
5/28/2011 5:39:43 PM EST
Originally Posted By hotbiggun42:
Originally Posted By TxEnforcer:
5.56 PMC X-TAC AP 62gr is a good ''plinking'' round. I wouldn't use it for shtf purposes.

It went bang everytime I shot. Accuracy is pretty decent. Better than most 55gr or other cheap 62gr stuff I've bought.

Ordering 200rds from Palmetto State Armory tomorrow.


In your opinion why is this ammo only good for plinking? I was thinking about buying a couple cases for SHTF. Will this ammo not stop a man if you had to defend yourself?


Realistically, any ammo will stop or hurt someone. I've tested this on a lot of stuff, from bricks, to street signs, etc... The results were rather...not good. Doesn't penetrate brick but cracks it. It isn't likely to go through armor, but it will go through paper.

That saying it's a very accurate round for target use only, in my opinion. Everyone has their own views. So, if you sleep better at night with this round in your gun, then by all means stick with it.
TxEnforcer  [Team Member]
5/28/2011 5:48:55 PM EST
Heres a review of a round that is exactly like X-TAC
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nqTZAzUj1PQ&feature=fvwrel
FAB-10_Guy  [Member]
5/28/2011 8:44:49 PM EST
Originally Posted By TxEnforcer:
Heres a review of a round that is exactly like X-TAC
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nqTZAzUj1PQ&feature=fvwrel


I think you meant to do it like this:
5.56 62GR M855
TxEnforcer  [Team Member]
5/29/2011 4:46:56 AM EST
Originally Posted By FAB-10_Guy:
Originally Posted By TxEnforcer:
Heres a review of a round that is exactly like X-TAC
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nqTZAzUj1PQ&feature=fvwrel


I think you meant to do it like this:
5.56 62GR M855


Thank you for the correction.
Rockyriver  [Team Member]
5/29/2011 9:03:28 AM EST
Originally Posted By TxEnforcer:
Realistically, any ammo will stop or hurt someone. I've tested this on a lot of stuff, from bricks, to street signs, etc... The results were rather...not good. Doesn't penetrate brick but cracks it. It isn't likely to go through armor, but it will go through paper
[That saying it's a very accurate round for target use only, in my opinion. Everyone has their own views. So, if you sleep better at night with this round in your gun, then by all means stick with it.


Even the weakest .223 ammo has as much knock down power (muzzle energy) as a .357 Magnum and some .44 Magnums.
Without taking into account barriers and distance even plinking ammo is more than enough to stop a threat.
The below statement is for civilians like 98% of the people here on this fourm.
If you are using a .223 for self defense in this world as we know it right now (NO SHTF or Mad Max society), you will not be shooting at threats past 50 feet or more, if you engage someone and kill them you are going to be put on trial for murder. At 50 feet or more the DA is going to say you should have retreated and not got in a gun battle.

PS: I keep 75 grain Hornady Tap in my gun for protection, however if and if SHTF ever happened, I would be glad to have even the crappiest ammo on the market in my gun, because as I stated before "Anything is better than throwing rocks."
sharkbait  [Member]
5/29/2011 9:16:04 AM EST
PMC X-Tac M855 -It,s Good ammo
hotbiggun42  [Team Member]
5/29/2011 9:35:56 AM EST
Originally Posted By Rockyriver:
Originally Posted By TxEnforcer:
Realistically, any ammo will stop or hurt someone. I've tested this on a lot of stuff, from bricks, to street signs, etc... The results were rather...not good. Doesn't penetrate brick but cracks it. It isn't likely to go through armor, but it will go through paper
[That saying it's a very accurate round for target use only, in my opinion. Everyone has their own views. So, if you sleep better at night with this round in your gun, then by all means stick with it.


Even the weakest .223 ammo has as much knock down power (muzzle energy) as a .357 Magnum and some .44 Magnums.
Without taking into account barriers and distance even plinking ammo is more than enough to stop a threat.
The below statement is for civilians like 98% of the people here on this fourm.
If you are using a .223 for self defense in this world as we know it right now (NO SHTF or Mad Max society), you will not be shooting at threats past 50 feet or more, if you engage someone and kill them you are going to be put on trial for murder. At 50 feet or more the DA is going to say you should have retreated and not got in a gun battle.

PS: I keep 75 grain Hornady Tap in my gun for protection, however if and if SHTF ever happened, I would be glad to have even the crappiest ammo on the market in my gun, because as I stated before "Anything is better than throwing rocks."


I don't belive anyone has any illusions of a Mad Max type scenerio but more like a Egypt or Libya type social breakdown or a Government crack down on it's citizens. And I do want to buy the best ammo i can afford now. Not just for self defense but for sporting purposes.
Rockyriver  [Team Member]
5/29/2011 10:00:37 AM EST
Originally Posted By hotbiggun42:
Originally Posted By Rockyriver:
Originally Posted By TxEnforcer:
Realistically, any ammo will stop or hurt someone. I've tested this on a lot of stuff, from bricks, to street signs, etc... The results were rather...not good. Doesn't penetrate brick but cracks it. It isn't likely to go through armor, but it will go through paper
[That saying it's a very accurate round for target use only, in my opinion. Everyone has their own views. So, if you sleep better at night with this round in your gun, then by all means stick with it.


Even the weakest .223 ammo has as much knock down power (muzzle energy) as a .357 Magnum and some .44 Magnums.
Without taking into account barriers and distance even plinking ammo is more than enough to stop a threat.
The below statement is for civilians like 98% of the people here on this fourm.
If you are using a .223 for self defense in this world as we know it right now (NO SHTF or Mad Max society), you will not be shooting at threats past 50 feet or more, if you engage someone and kill them you are going to be put on trial for murder. At 50 feet or more the DA is going to say you should have retreated and not got in a gun battle.

PS: I keep 75 grain Hornady Tap in my gun for protection, however if and if SHTF ever happened, I would be glad to have even the crappiest ammo on the market in my gun, because as I stated before "Anything is better than throwing rocks."


I don't belive anyone has any illusions of a Mad Max type scenerio but more like a Egypt or Libya type social breakdown or a Government crack down on it's citizens. And I do want to buy the best ammo i can afford now. Not just for self defense but for sporting purposes.



I agree.

Krylancelo  [Team Member]
5/29/2011 11:01:49 AM EST

Originally Posted By Rockyriver:
All ammo that fires reliable is good SHTF stuff. When it comes down to stopping a threat 100% of the ammo on the market will work if you shoot the enemy in the right spot.
(And less forget about barriers or the bad guy hiding behind something.)
I would say that even hit in a non vital area that most plinking ammo will stop anyone from trying to attack you further, unless they are a highly trained soldier.
The phsycological effect of being shot is to retreat or to stand ground and not attack further about 99% of the time.
And remember that any ammo that goes bang is better than throwing rocks.
So to answer your question,"Will this ammo stop a man if you need to defend yourself". My answer is, "Hell yes without a doubt".


I realize you're using hyperbole to get your point across but I think this is extremely dangerous misinformation. Psychological effects of being shot are so varied from person to person that they are completely unreliable. You need to phsyiologically incapacitate an attack to stop them reliably. This means central nervous system damage or a shot directly to the heart. You can nick many of those systems by aiming center of mass, which is why it's generally recommended, also it's a larger target than the brain.
Rockyriver  [Team Member]
5/29/2011 2:25:04 PM EST
Originally Posted By Krylancelo:

Originally Posted By Rockyriver:
All ammo that fires reliable is good SHTF stuff. When it comes down to stopping a threat 100% of the ammo on the market will work if you shoot the enemy in the right spot.
(And less forget about barriers or the bad guy hiding behind something.)
I would say that even hit in a non vital area that most plinking ammo will stop anyone from trying to attack you further, unless they are a highly trained soldier.
The phsycological effect of being shot is to retreat or to stand ground and not attack further about 99% of the time.
And remember that any ammo that goes bang is better than throwing rocks.
So to answer your question,"Will this ammo stop a man if you need to defend yourself". My answer is, "Hell yes without a doubt".


I realize you're using hyperbole to get your point across but I think this is extremely dangerous misinformation. Psychological effects of being shot are so varied from person to person that they are completely unreliable. You need to phsyiologically incapacitate an attack to stop them reliably. This means central nervous system damage or a shot directly to the heart. You can nick many of those systems by aiming center of mass, which is why it's generally recommended, also it's a larger target than the brain.


If you feel that this is dangerous incorrect information to say then i will add to my previous post that this is my opinion and not fact.
Thank you for the correction.

Krylancelo  [Team Member]
5/29/2011 2:34:58 PM EST

Originally Posted By Rockyriver:
If you feel that this is dangerous incorrect information to say then i will add to my previous post that this is my opinion and not fact.
Thank you for the correction.

Originally Posted By DocGKR on TOS:
The last 25 years of modern wound ballistic research has demonstrated yet again what historical reports have always indicated––that there are only two valid methods of incapacitation: one based on psychological factors and the other physiological damage. People are often rapidly psychologically incapacitated by minor wounds that are not immediately physiologically incapacitating. Psychological factors are also the reason people can receive severe, even non-survivable wounds and continue functioning for short periods of time. Up to fifty percent of those individuals rapidly incapacitated by bullet wounds are probably incapacitated for psychological rather than physiological reasons. Psychological incapacitation is an extremely erratic, highly variable, and completely unpredictable human response, independent of any inherent characteristics of a particular projectile.

The degree and rapidity of any physiological incapacitation is determined by the anatomic structures the projectile disrupts and the severity of the tissue damage caused by the bullet. Physiologically, immediate incapacitation or death can only occur when the brain or upper spinal cord is damaged or destroyed. The tactical reality is that in combat, opportunities for military personnel to take precisely aimed shots at the CNS of enemy combatants is rare due to high stress unexpected contact marked by rapid fleeting movements, along with frequent poor visibility on the battlefield including use of cover and concealment. Thus the reduced likelihood of frequent planned CNS targeting in combat conditions. Absent CNS damage, circulatory system collapse from severe disruption of the vital organs and blood vessels in the torso is the only other reliable method of physiological incapacitation from small arms. If the CNS is uninjured, physiological incapacitation is delayed until blood loss is sufficient to deprive the brain of oxygen. Multiple hits may be needed before an individual is physiologically incapacitated. An individual wounded in any area of the body other than the CNS may physiologically be able to continue their actions for a short period of time, even with non-survivable injuries. In a 1992 IWBA Journal paper, Dr. Ken Newgard wrote the following about how blood loss effects incapacitation:


"A 70 kg male has a cardiac output of around 5.5 liters per minute. His blood volume is about 4200 cc. Assuming that his cardiac output can double under stress, his aortic blood flow can reach 11 Liters per minute. If this male had his thoracic aorta totally severed, it would take him 4.6 seconds to lose 20% of his total blood volume. This is the minimum amount of time in which a person could lose 20% of his blood volume from one point of injury. A marginally trained person can fire at a rate of two shots per second. In 4.6 seconds there could easily be 9 shots of return fire before the assailant’s activity is neutralized. Note this analysis does not account for oxygen contained in the blood already perusing the brain that will keep the brain functioning for an even longer period of time.


Originally Posted By DocGKR on TOS:
"In 1980, I treated a soldier shot accidentally with an M16 M193 bullet from a distance of about ten feet. The bullet entered his left thigh and traveled obliquely upward. It exited after passing through about 11 inches of muscle. The man walked in to my clinic with no limp whatsoever: the entrance and exit holes were about 4 mm across, and punctate. X-ray films showed intact bones, no bullet fragments, and no evidence of significant tissue disruption caused by the bullet’s temporary cavity. The bullet path passed well lateral to the femoral vessels. He was back on duty in a few days. Devastating? Hardly. The wound profile of the M193 bullet (page 29 of the Emergency War Surgery—NATO Handbook, GPO, Washington, D.C., 1988) shows that most often the bullet travels about five inches through flesh before beginning significant yaw. But about 15% of the time, it travels much farther than that before yawing—in which case it causes even milder wounds, if it missed bones, guts, lung, and major blood vessels. In my experience and research, at least as many M16 users in Vietnam concluded that it produced unacceptably minimal, rather than "massive”, wounds. After viewing the wound profile, recall that the Vietnamese were small people, and generally very slim. Many M16 bullets passed through their torsos traveling mostly point forward, and caused minimal damage. Most shots piercing an extremity, even in the heavier-built Americans, unless they hit bone, caused no more damage than a 22 caliber rimfire bullet.”

Fackler, ML: "Literature Review”. Wound Ballistics Review; 5(2):40, Fall 2001


Note that many consider M193 to wound better than M855.

So while having a stash of M855 is never a bad thing (I have at least a couple thousand rounds at all times of the stuff), it definitely isn't my first choice nor would I recommend it first and foremost as a self-defense round. You can psychologically incapacitate someone with a .22LR or .25ACP but that doesn't make it the best round either.

Carry on.
hotbiggun42  [Team Member]
5/29/2011 6:49:43 PM EST
So what would be your first choice as a self defense round?
TxEnforcer  [Team Member]
5/29/2011 7:19:20 PM EST
Personally, I would use ss109 AP or Black Hills MK 262. I have both stocked up. Exspensive, but well worth every penny.
Krylancelo  [Team Member]
5/29/2011 7:24:03 PM EST

Originally Posted By hotbiggun42:
So what would be your first choice as a self defense round?

Probably Barnes 50gr TSX if I wanted to penetrate barriers. If I wanted to limit penetration or if I wanted long range accuracy for long range unobstructed shots, I'd use 75gr TAP or 77gr Sierra Match King loaded cartridges. Those have proven to have some of the best wounding ballistics available.

Mk318 SOST rounds are also a good choice for "barrier blind" ammo although their accuracy is only about equal to that of standard military-surplus ball ammo.

I've heard the M855-A1 has much better overall accuracy, a straighter flight path, and better wounding ballistics but I'm going to wait to hear more before buying it (nor can we even buy it yet). It also has problems with barriers though, as do all bullets designed around a fragmenting wound mechanism. If you want to penetrate barriers, use an expanding bullet such as Barnes TSX.
Krylancelo  [Team Member]
5/29/2011 7:26:34 PM EST

Originally Posted By TxEnforcer:
Personally, I would use ss109 AP or Black Hills MK 262. I have both stocked up. Exspensive, but well worth every penny.

Do you mean M995? SS109 is the NATO designation for M855, which does not penetrate armor plates. It is designed only to penetrate light armor (soft armor) and helmets. It is unlikely we (meaning civilians) will be fighting against foes with armor plates, but just wanted to be clear. If that happens, things are not going well for America.
TxEnforcer  [Team Member]
5/29/2011 7:41:30 PM EST
ss109 does penetrate most armor plates, depending on the level issued from DOJ. Let me dig up some proof, standby.
phoenix27  [Member]
5/30/2011 3:27:26 AM EST
Getting back on point, +1 for the PMC X-Tac green tips vs Federal's Lake City M855 rejects. I have shot 1,000+ rounds of the PMC through a number of different Colt and Rock River AR-15 platforms with no problems. It is as accurate or more accurate than the Federal M855, more reasonably priced and although it seems to chrono slightly (30-to-40 fps) less than the Lake City M855, it's brand new production ammo, versus the mufugly USGI rejects.

PMC makes good ammo and is under contract to supply stocks for the US Military. The USAF is currently using lots of Poongsan PSD and PMJ headstamp 50-cal ammo, so if it's good enough for them, it's good enough for me.
TxEnforcer  [Team Member]
5/30/2011 4:46:00 AM EST
Originally Posted By phoenix27:
Getting back on point, +1 for the PMC X-Tac green tips vs Federal's Lake City M855 rejects. I have shot 1,000+ rounds of the PMC through a number of different Colt and Rock River AR-15 platforms with no problems. It is as accurate or more accurate than the Federal M855, more reasonably priced and although it seems to chrono slightly (30-to-40 fps) less than the Lake City M855, it's brand new production ammo, versus the mufugly USGI rejects.

PMC makes good ammo and is under contract to supply stocks for the US Military. The USAF is currently using lots of Poongsan PSD and PMJ headstamp 50-cal ammo, so if it's good enough for them, it's good enough for me.


The military also buys from the lowest bidder. Hence, why we unfortunately have to shoot LC most of the time. We literaly spend about 30 minutes digging through ammo cans of LC 5.56 to toss out rounds that arn't likely to go bang on the first try.
FMJ  [Team Member]
5/30/2011 9:57:40 AM EST
I would take PMC over any LC M855

The last batch of LCM855 I bought groups like crap


BTW
I wouldnt use it for SD !
Unless I ran out of barrier blind loads & 75/77 OTM
AKARS  [Team Member]
5/30/2011 7:24:33 PM EST
I voted American Eagle 5.56 62 Grs FMJ-BT Ball.
damcv62  [Life Member]
5/31/2011 8:43:16 AM EST
I've shot a good bit of it. Always goes bang for me. I'd shoot which ever is cheaper.
Winn  [Team Member]
5/31/2011 9:03:18 AM EST
Originally Posted By Jolkm:

The AE stuff in question is made by ATK/Federal originally for the military, but failed QC and was rejected by the military, and so then Federal sells the ones that supposedly were not rejected for safety reasons to civilians. In recent years, there have been a lot of reports of catastrophic failures in guns from using Federal/AE XM193 & XM855, and for quite a while last year I remember reading a lot of reports at this site from people who bought Fed/AE XM855, that on average 6-7% of all rounds were visibly too badly damaged to be safe to fire and thus needed to be discarded, and almost all rounds had minor dents, and/or were filthy,

PMC X-Tac M855 (the box calls it LAP, as you noted) is new production ammo, not military rejects, and because I've been particularly interested in this ammo, I've payed attention to every single mention of it at this site, and I have not heard of one blown up gun while using it, I don't recall anyone having malfunctions with it, and accuracy compared to typical military grade ammo ranges from average to excellent.

I have some PMX X-Tac M855, though I haven't shot any of it yet, but based on everything I've read about both ammunitions mentioned, PMC X-Tac M855>Fed/AE XM855 hands down.


What does the "LAP" refer to ?

Eric802  [Moderator]
5/31/2011 9:15:55 AM EST
Originally Posted By TxEnforcer:
Personally, I would use ss109 AP or Black Hills MK 262. I have both stocked up. Exspensive, but well worth every penny.


SS109 = M855. It's not AP, and there are much better choices out there for self-defense. See the "best choices for defensive ammo" thread up top.
hotbiggun42  [Team Member]
5/31/2011 10:33:44 AM EST
You make a good point but the ammo listed in the above tackted thread is 1-2 dollars a rounds making it hard to stock up on and practice with.
Krylancelo  [Team Member]
5/31/2011 11:41:29 AM EST

Originally Posted By Winn:
Originally Posted By Jolkm:

The AE stuff in question is made by ATK/Federal originally for the military, but failed QC and was rejected by the military, and so then Federal sells the ones that supposedly were not rejected for safety reasons to civilians. In recent years, there have been a lot of reports of catastrophic failures in guns from using Federal/AE XM193 & XM855, and for quite a while last year I remember reading a lot of reports at this site from people who bought Fed/AE XM855, that on average 6-7% of all rounds were visibly too badly damaged to be safe to fire and thus needed to be discarded, and almost all rounds had minor dents, and/or were filthy,

PMC X-Tac M855 (the box calls it LAP, as you noted) is new production ammo, not military rejects, and because I've been particularly interested in this ammo, I've payed attention to every single mention of it at this site, and I have not heard of one blown up gun while using it, I don't recall anyone having malfunctions with it, and accuracy compared to typical military grade ammo ranges from average to excellent.

I have some PMX X-Tac M855, though I haven't shot any of it yet, but based on everything I've read about both ammunitions mentioned, PMC X-Tac M855>Fed/AE XM855 hands down.


What does the "LAP" refer to ?


"Light Armor Piercing," which seems silly because any rifle round will penetrate light armor. I'm gonna guess it's a marketing gimmick. That said, the ammo isn't bad for an M855 clone.
Winn  [Team Member]
5/31/2011 12:20:55 PM EST
Originally Posted By Krylancelo:
Originally Posted By Winn:
Originally Posted By Jolkm:
<snip>

PMC X-Tac M855 (the box calls it LAP, as you noted)

<snip>

What does the "LAP" refer to ?

"Light Armor Piercing," which seems silly because any rifle round will penetrate light armor. I'm gonna guess it's a marketing gimmick. That said, the ammo isn't bad for an M855 clone.


Thanks. Actually, that was my first guess ... but then I thought "naaahh".

Anyway, I also noticed the 5.56 K designation on the box as well, and wondered about that too (please don't tell me it stands for Korea ).

But not a big deal really, just as long as the ammo uses true SS109 bullets.

whenheavenfell  [Member]
5/31/2011 8:33:43 PM EST
just a (probably pointless) correction

ss109 is just the type of bullet. so while all m855 will be ss109, the inverse is not true. m855 refers to the the nato specs for the round, and many rounds that use ss109 have different/lesser specs.

just sayin'
Jolkm  [Member]
6/1/2011 1:02:03 AM EST
Originally Posted By Winn:
Originally Posted By Krylancelo:
Originally Posted By Winn:
Originally Posted By Jolkm:
<snip>

PMC X-Tac M855 (the box calls it LAP, as you noted)

<snip>

What does the "LAP" refer to ?

"Light Armor Piercing," which seems silly because any rifle round will penetrate light armor. I'm gonna guess it's a marketing gimmick. That said, the ammo isn't bad for an M855 clone.


Thanks. Actually, that was my first guess ... but then I thought "naaahh".

Anyway, I also noticed the 5.56 K designation on the box as well, and wondered about that too (please don't tell me it stands for Korea ).

But not a big deal really, just as long as the ammo uses true SS109 bullets.



"Light Armor Piercing" was my guess as well, and although it is not really the correct/official terminology for the SS109 projectile, it is IMO an accurate description, since it's design is not the same as, or as well suited for the purpose as an actual armor piercing projectile, but the design is inherently better for penetrating metal/armor etc., than an ordinary FMJ projectile.
Paid Advertisement
--