User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 6/12/2016 9:10:21 AM EDT
[#1]
nope, its like 3 MOA ammo
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2016 9:25:48 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
nope, its like 3 MOA ammo This. Doesn't really matter what you are shooting it out of when the ammo itself is 3-5 MOA. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2016 10:19:48 AM EDT
[#3]
Quoted:
Are there bolt guns that get it under 1.5MOA or better? yes, a bolt gun with a 99 yard barrel, then maybe |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2016 11:21:31 AM EDT
[#4]
Quoted:
Are there bolt guns that get it under 1.5MOA or better? No. The best rifle/barrel in the world isn't going to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. The graph below shows the results of LAT of US M855 at Lake City. This testing is conducted using machine-rested, bolt-action heavy test barrels. As you can see in the graph, US M855 can barely hold 3 MOA. 
.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2016 12:59:32 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
yes, a bolt gun with a 99 yard barrel, then maybe Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Are there bolt guns that get it under 1.5MOA or better? yes, a bolt gun with a 99 yard barrel, then maybe I had to read that carefully. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2016 3:13:36 PM EDT
[#6]
No..............
It is what it is..................... I shot and posted this some time ago: http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_3_16/695417_Some_groups_at_200yds_Various_ammunition.html That group of M855 shot unusually well..................but still not close to 1.5MOA, let alone under.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2016 3:29:53 PM EDT
[#7]
From the Ammo Oracle:
M855: Defined in MIL-C-63989 NATO specifications for M855 Ball require a 61.7 grain (q 1.5 grains) with a hardened steel penetrator at a velocity of 3,000 fps (q 40 fps) from a 20" barrel @ 78 feet from the muzzle. Typical velocity 15 feet from the M16A2's muzzle is 3,100 fps. Accuracy: maximum of approximately four MOA over the 100 to 600 yard range. Typical accuracy of average lots in an M16A2 is about 2+ MOA. This round must also penetrate a nominal 10 gauge SAE 1010 or 1020 steel test plate at a range of at least 570 meters (623 yards). The M193 round will penetrate this same plate reliably at 400 yards and about half the time at 500 yards. The 5.56mm and 7.62mm NATO rounds will penetrate it reliably out to 700 yards or more. Because the steel penetrator increases the length and changes the weight distribution of the SS-109 bullet, it is suitable for use only in barrels with a twist of one turn in nine inches or faster. 1:10 twist will barely stabilize this round and not below zero degrees F. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2016 3:51:37 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
From the Ammo Oracle: M855: Defined in MIL-C-63989 NATO specifications for M855 Ball require a 61.7 grain (q 1.5 grains) with a hardened steel penetrator at a velocity of 3,000 fps (q 40 fps) from a 20" barrel @ 78 feet from the muzzle. Typical velocity 15 feet from the M16A2's muzzle is 3,100 fps. Accuracy: maximum of approximately four MOA over the 100 to 600 yard range. Typical accuracy of average lots in an M16A2 is about 2+ MOA. This round must also penetrate a nominal 10 gauge SAE 1010 or 1020 steel test plate at a range of at least 570 meters (623 yards). The M193 round will penetrate this same plate reliably at 400 yards and about half the time at 500 yards. The 5.56mm and 7.62mm NATO rounds will penetrate it reliably out to 700 yards or more. Because the steel penetrator increases the length and changes the weight distribution of the SS-109 bullet, it is suitable for use only in barrels with a twist of one turn in nine inches or faster. 1:10 twist will barely stabilize this round and not below zero degrees F. More like 2++++ MOA. 
.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2016 7:20:00 PM EDT
[#9]
The actual requirements:
Quote History3.11 Accuracy. Both average vertical standard deviation and the average horizontal standard deviation shall be not greater than 6.8 inches at 600 yards, or alternatively, shall be not greater than 1.8 inches at 200 yards using an indoor range. I think that is based on a 30 round group out of a Mann barrel. And the requirement has been relaxed since 1984... back then the SD was only allowed to be 6.0" at 600 yards. EDIT: that SD leads one to an expected an extreme spread of about 30 inches at 600 yards or 5 inches at 100. What Molon got, probably means the spec so it's should not be atypical.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2016 9:14:11 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No. The best rifle/barrel in the world isn't going to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. The graph below shows the results of LAT of US M855 at Lake City. This testing is conducted using machine-rested, bolt-action heavy test barrels. As you can see in the graph, US M855 can barely hold 3 MOA. https://app.box.com/shared/static/p0mvkjxmhm.jpg .... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Are there bolt guns that get it under 1.5MOA or better? No. The best rifle/barrel in the world isn't going to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. The graph below shows the results of LAT of US M855 at Lake City. This testing is conducted using machine-rested, bolt-action heavy test barrels. As you can see in the graph, US M855 can barely hold 3 MOA. https://app.box.com/shared/static/p0mvkjxmhm.jpg .... This makes me feel great about my shooting! I was a solid 4 MOA shooter with M855 ammo and a 10 year old gov issued M-16A2. So old and beat up the gap between the upper and lower was wide enough to use as Eskimo sunglasses! Link eskimo sunglasses It was so old I had to have the extractor replaced. But I always shot expert (six times) with 10 out of 10 in the black (within a + or - 10 inch box) at 500 yards with wind, rain, snow, heat, cold, no sleep. I'm almost as good as a machine rest! Thanks! |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/13/2016 12:27:50 AM EDT
[#11]
I've tried three M855 variants, LC XM855, PMC X-TAC 855 and Prvi 855.
I don't recall any grouping better than 3.5" from a solid rest and 4-12x Nikon glass. I don't understand the fascination some have with M855 unless it's just because "issue ammo!". It sucks. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/13/2016 4:24:38 PM EDT
[#12]
I have seen the c77 and radway green variants do 1.5 moa but nothing else would that I have tried,
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/13/2016 5:31:36 PM EDT
[#13]
http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_3_16/679478_Foreign_SS109_Variants_Test.html
try some of the higher quality foreign SS109 rounds. i was able to get right around 2 MOA with a couple of them with a 1.5x optic |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/14/2016 12:25:55 PM EDT
[#14]
Frankly... given its design I'm surprised it does as good as it does.
I can't help but wonder if the steel insert and the lead core were "bonded" in place if the design would be any more accurate. Imagine a bullet with 2 different cores, ( M855 ) fired from a barrel.... do they both "spin" at the same rpm's at the moment of firing ? Just thinking out loud....and NOT making any claims.... just wondering. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/14/2016 1:27:40 PM EDT
[#15]
Anyone know how the "new" M855A1 does?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/14/2016 9:48:05 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Anyone know how the "new" M855A1 does? I listened to all the hype and glory of the M855 performance. We were told how great it was and were "trouble makers" if we questioned or had different opinions than the brass. In the end it was less accurate than other rounds we were able to get, and has dismal terminal performance. The Marine Corps had a very good design commissioned for their use, (MK318 Mod 0)from all I have read it is everything the M855 and A1 should have been, and at about the same cost as the 855. You gotta hand it to those big ol hugable lovable lugs. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/14/2016 10:28:03 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Frankly... given its design I'm surprised it does as good as it does. I can't help but wonder if the steel insert and the lead core were "bonded" in place if the design would be any more accurate. Imagine a bullet with 2 different cores, ( M855 ) fired from a barrel.... do they both "spin" at the same rpm's at the moment of firing ? Just thinking out loud....and NOT making any claims.... just wondering.  wow, thats deep
Thats really interesting. I wonder if you mark the bullet with a marker and shoot it into a medium that doest damage the bullet much if you could see. The backstop at the range I work at is 3 feet of chopped up rubber. Its to close to "catch" a rifle round but handgun rounds look reloadable. If you could build something at an out door range it mightbe doable |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/15/2016 6:55:54 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Frankly... given its design I'm surprised it does as good as it does. I can't help but wonder if the steel insert and the lead core were "bonded" in place if the design would be any more accurate. Imagine a bullet with 2 different cores, ( M855 ) fired from a barrel.... do they both "spin" at the same rpm's at the moment of firing ? Just thinking out loud....and NOT making any claims.... just wondering. The steel penetrator tip is swaged into the jacket with the lead filler. The three parts all 'spin-up' at the same speed, the same as a plain lead core bullet. Sectioned fired bullet show no signs of movement between the penetrator, core and jacket. There is a question of how well the three CGs all line up with the axis of rotation (geometric longitudinal axis of the bullet). This has an effect on the accuracy. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/15/2016 7:26:51 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Supposed to be better. It is a redo of the design, and doesn't have the steel core to throw it off. IMHO, no matter how good you get, one will never combine 2 substances perfectly symmetrical, so it will wobble in flight. The A1 is a cap design with a solid core IIRC. The specs are out there and may or may not be correct.I listened to all the hype and glory of the M855 performance. We were told how great it was and were "trouble makers" if we questioned or had different opinions than the brass. In the end it was less accurate than other rounds we were able to get, and has dismal terminal performance. The Marine Corps had a very good design commissioned for their use, (MK318 Mod 0)from all I have read it is everything the M855 and A1 should have been, and at about the same cost as the 855. You gotta hand it to those big ol hugable lovable lugs. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Anyone know how the "new" M855A1 does? The Marine Corps had a very good design commissioned for their use, (MK318 Mod 0)from all I have read it is everything the M855 and A1 should have been, and at about the same cost as the 855. You gotta hand it to those big ol hugable lovable lugs. How well a bullet performs depends on the target it is designed to defeat. M855 and M855A1 are better at penetration of steel plates at 600 meters than Mk318, which is not surprising as that is the target they were designed to defeat. The Mk318 Mod 0 and Mod 1 are designed to penetrate less substantial barriers and still have sufficient mass for wounding potential. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/15/2016 9:12:24 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The steel penetrator tip is swaged into the jacket with the lead filler. The three parts all 'spin-up' at the same speed, the same as a plain lead core bullet. Sectioned fired bullet show no signs of movement between the penetrator, core and jacket. There is a question of how well the three CGs all line up with the axis of rotation (geometric longitudinal axis of the bullet). This has an effect on the accuracy. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Frankly... given its design I'm surprised it does as good as it does. I can't help but wonder if the steel insert and the lead core were "bonded" in place if the design would be any more accurate. Imagine a bullet with 2 different cores, ( M855 ) fired from a barrel.... do they both "spin" at the same rpm's at the moment of firing ? Just thinking out loud....and NOT making any claims.... just wondering. The steel penetrator tip is swaged into the jacket with the lead filler. The three parts all 'spin-up' at the same speed, the same as a plain lead core bullet. Sectioned fired bullet show no signs of movement between the penetrator, core and jacket. There is a question of how well the three CGs all line up with the axis of rotation (geometric longitudinal axis of the bullet). This has an effect on the accuracy. Yup... just to many things that can be non-conducive to accuracy. I realize my thoughts were probably unfounded, on so many levels.... but, I still would like to try some "bonded" ones.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/15/2016 9:17:00 AM EDT
[#21]
I've got 1-1.5 MOA with M855 out of a semi AR.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/15/2016 4:22:18 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I've got 1-1.5 MOA with M855 out of a semi AR. Specifics ? ...Barrel, Ammo, scoped ? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2016 6:29:38 PM EDT
[#23]
RUAG m855 will hold moa but costs 1$ a round
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2016 7:54:26 PM EDT
[#24]
According to my friend who works at Picatinney arsenal . There has been some work on improving accuracy by not mixing lots of powder ,brass and bullets during a single lot of m855 . It is supposed to have shown some improvement but it is still not match level ammunition.
Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/18/2016 1:02:52 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I've got 1-1.5 MOA with M855 out of a semi AR. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/19/2016 11:35:09 PM EDT
[#26]
Best M855-type I have seen is Australian F1A1. Our extensive trials with that saw it average about 1.25 MOA out of our Steyr AUGs (F88 NZ).
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/20/2016 7:30:50 AM EDT
[#27]
F! is good but the RUAG is better if not twice as much.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/20/2016 9:51:33 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
According to my friend who works at Picatinney arsenal . There has been some work on improving accuracy by not mixing lots of powder ,brass and bullets during a single lot of m855 . It is supposed to have shown some improvement but it is still not match level ammunition. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile That's a typical handloader approach: make each lot of ammunition from all the same lots of components. It works surprisingly well. The biggest problem with getting M855 to be more accurate is that the bullet design has built in opportunities for impaired accuracy. It's a 3-part, small diameter structure that requires precise tolerances to be as accurate as possible - which is hard to manage in something that is made on automated machinery by the thousands per minute. The old 55 grain FMJ design used in M193 is much simpler. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2016 12:15:08 PM EDT
[#29]
It would be helpful if others could do accuracy tests with high quality SS109/M855 loads like the ones I did. My tests seemed to confirm that foreign variants are more accurate than US ones
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2016 1:05:31 PM EDT
[#30]
Roll your own.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2016 1:21:17 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It would be helpful if others could do accuracy tests with high quality SS109/M855 loads like the ones I did. My tests seemed to confirm that foreign variants are more accurate than US ones I could see that. The dominant limitation (by far) is the bullet. If someone had more attention to detail in consistency of bullet construction, that would help. Basically we mas produce little steel cones, call it good enough, and mass produce bullet jackets, call it good enough, then drop the steel tip into the shaped jacket, and then swage some lead into the base. Making a more uniform barrel or more uniform powder is going to have pretty much no effect on fixing an out of balance bullet, with 3 different materials thermal expansions going on while that bullet is exiting the barrel.. If someone went to trouble to make really uniform jackets, and really uniform cones, and made those tolerances really tight, and then had good care on how the lead base was introduced - maybe even with some bonding agents, I could see bullet design tightening up. To be honest, I wonder if a copper washed steel jacket might actually be better than a copper one (bringing us back down to just 2 different rates of thermal expansion/properties (steel steel lead). M855A1 is made pretty much like a ballistic tip, with much more care and tighter tolerances (it appears), so it's not surprising that it's more accurate. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2016 4:16:05 PM EDT
[#32]
I just looked up some of the manufacturer specs for some of the foreign SS109/M855 rounds:
ADI (Australia) shows accuracy for their F1/F1A1 as ‹= 100mm (3.9") @ 300m MEN (Germany) shows accuracy for their SS109 as ‹= 1" @ 110yds |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2016 9:28:25 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I just looked up some of the manufacturer specs for some of the foreign SS109/M855 rounds: ADI (Australia) shows accuracy for their F1/F1A1 as ‹= 100mm (3.9") @ 300m MEN (Germany) shows accuracy for their SS109 as ‹= 1" @ 110yds Has men m855 ever been imported? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2016 9:58:16 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Has men m855 ever been imported? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I just looked up some of the manufacturer specs for some of the foreign SS109/M855 rounds: ADI (Australia) shows accuracy for their F1/F1A1 as ‹= 100mm (3.9") @ 300m MEN (Germany) shows accuracy for their SS109 as ‹= 1" @ 110yds Has men m855 ever been imported? Not that I know of |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2016 10:30:17 PM EDT
[#35]
Any charts on M855A1 ?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2016 10:46:03 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Any charts on M855A1 ? Is M855A1 available to test? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2016 10:52:34 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Any charts on M855A1 ? Mark, I chrono'ed a lot from 2011 out of an FN 1/7 20" A4. ES was 122 FPS, Average MV was 3142. The '13 and newer stuff is supposedly more consistent; I have not had a chance to chrono it, but at the WPW Matches I found it shot very consistently. Stage 1 of Rifle EIC I shot 5 V's and a 4, with the 5 v's measuring ~5". |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/22/2016 3:19:18 AM EDT
[#38]
OK...... but no specific accuracy testing?
What specific groups did you shoot? The OP wants to know if M855 will shoot under 1.5MOA in a bolt gun....... |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/22/2016 6:29:15 AM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
OK...... but no specific accuracy testing? What specific groups did you shoot? The OP wants to know if M855 will shoot under 1.5MOA in a bolt gun....... Some lots of 855 are very accurate. Most are not. Some are so bad that they get a waiver and are stamped training use only. Comes in cardboard boxes of 1800 rounds. I saw one lot that was accurate, well under 1 MOA out of multiple M-4s on a measured 100 meter range during a qualification with ACOGs. Multiple shooters had groups during zero that were 3/4 of an inch. It is the only time I have ever seen that with green tip. Generally, it seems to be around 2 MOA with a good shooter and good weapon. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/22/2016 5:50:03 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I could see that. The dominant limitation (by far) is the bullet. If someone had more attention to detail in consistency of bullet construction, that would help. Basically we mas produce little steel cones, call it good enough, and mass produce bullet jackets, call it good enough, then drop the steel tip into the shaped jacket, and then swage some lead into the base. Making a more uniform barrel or more uniform powder is going to have pretty much no effect on fixing an out of balance bullet, with 3 different materials thermal expansions going on while that bullet is exiting the barrel.. If someone went to trouble to make really uniform jackets, and really uniform cones, and made those tolerances really tight, and then had good care on how the lead base was introduced - maybe even with some bonding agents, I could see bullet design tightening up. To be honest, I wonder if a copper washed steel jacket might actually be better than a copper one (bringing us back down to just 2 different rates of thermal expansion/properties (steel steel lead). M855A1 is made pretty much like a ballistic tip, with much more care and tighter tolerances (it appears), so it's not surprising that it's more accurate. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
It would be helpful if others could do accuracy tests with high quality SS109/M855 loads like the ones I did. My tests seemed to confirm that foreign variants are more accurate than US ones I could see that. The dominant limitation (by far) is the bullet. If someone had more attention to detail in consistency of bullet construction, that would help. Basically we mas produce little steel cones, call it good enough, and mass produce bullet jackets, call it good enough, then drop the steel tip into the shaped jacket, and then swage some lead into the base. Making a more uniform barrel or more uniform powder is going to have pretty much no effect on fixing an out of balance bullet, with 3 different materials thermal expansions going on while that bullet is exiting the barrel.. If someone went to trouble to make really uniform jackets, and really uniform cones, and made those tolerances really tight, and then had good care on how the lead base was introduced - maybe even with some bonding agents, I could see bullet design tightening up. To be honest, I wonder if a copper washed steel jacket might actually be better than a copper one (bringing us back down to just 2 different rates of thermal expansion/properties (steel steel lead). M855A1 is made pretty much like a ballistic tip, with much more care and tighter tolerances (it appears), so it's not surprising that it's more accurate. You realize the US M855 is good enough to hit man sized targets out to 500 yards consistently, right? 18 year old girls with only 2 weeks of rifle practice in their lives can shoot 10 out of 10 in the black at 500 yards. Seems good enough to me. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/22/2016 7:57:32 PM EDT
[#41]
I have to go with the reports of 2 MOA, I don't shoot on formal ranges much lately, but if I was getting 3.5 MOA out of any brass cased 5.56mm round I would assume either I having a seizure or the rifle and or optics were having an issue.
I used to shoot m855 after zeroing with Black Hills OTM 68 grain with an LMT M4 clone and I don't remember the groups sizes being that different. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/22/2016 8:20:01 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryYou realize the US M855 is good enough to hit man sized targets out to 500 yards consistently, right? 18 year old girls with only 2 weeks of rifle practice in their lives can shoot 10 out of 10 in the black at 500 yards. Seems good enough to me. Seems like a pretty big target. 4 minutes by 8 minutes (and scoring rings outside the black). But then all Marines shoot Expert, right? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/22/2016 9:23:15 PM EDT
[#43]
I am telling you guys the RUAG stuff will shoot moa.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/23/2016 9:01:46 AM EDT
[#44]
So, I might get some shooting in today.
I will shoot the 5x5 (5 five round groups) at 100m with: 69gr FGMM (to verify accuracy of the rifle, an 16" Noveske 1:7" bbl) M855A1 LC M855 PPU M855 62gr Speer GDSP Look for a pic dump tomorrow, if it happens. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/23/2016 11:38:01 AM EDT
[#45]
Cvtrpr:
If you can.............. 10 shot groups........... it'd make it easier to compare to Molons work. Do you have the "On Target" app? It's free and would give accurate information........... 100m........... you're stuck on some sort of military range? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/23/2016 11:39:14 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I am telling you guys the RUAG stuff will shoot moa. Ok, post some groups............... More shooting, less talking............... :) |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/23/2016 11:44:10 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Cvtrpr: If you can.............. 10 shot groups........... it'd make it easier to compare to Molons work. Do you have the "On Target" app? It's free and would give accurate information........... 100m........... you're stuck on some sort of military range? Im a military guy, but I can do it at 100Y. I'll get the app, is it for iOS or Droid or PC? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/23/2016 12:53:43 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
OK, 10 shot groups... too easy. Im a military guy, but I can do it at 100Y. I'll get the app, is it for iOS or Droid or PC? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Cvtrpr: If you can.............. 10 shot groups........... it'd make it easier to compare to Molons work. Do you have the "On Target" app? It's free and would give accurate information........... 100m........... you're stuck on some sort of military range? Im a military guy, but I can do it at 100Y. I'll get the app, is it for iOS or Droid or PC? Firstly: Thanks for doing this! Here's a link to it: http://www.ontargetshooting.com/ The application is great....... helps with this measuring with grps etc, gives Mean Radius etc............ After that, I'm not a computer guy........... so I'm going to guess I use the PC version. Just like I'm not sure why the link isn't hot. Here's an example: 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/23/2016 1:10:08 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You realize the US M855 is good enough to hit man sized targets out to 500 yards consistently, right? 18 year old girls with only 2 weeks of rifle practice in their lives can shoot 10 out of 10 in the black at 500 yards. Seems good enough to me. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It would be helpful if others could do accuracy tests with high quality SS109/M855 loads like the ones I did. My tests seemed to confirm that foreign variants are more accurate than US ones I could see that. The dominant limitation (by far) is the bullet. If someone had more attention to detail in consistency of bullet construction, that would help. Basically we mas produce little steel cones, call it good enough, and mass produce bullet jackets, call it good enough, then drop the steel tip into the shaped jacket, and then swage some lead into the base. Making a more uniform barrel or more uniform powder is going to have pretty much no effect on fixing an out of balance bullet, with 3 different materials thermal expansions going on while that bullet is exiting the barrel.. If someone went to trouble to make really uniform jackets, and really uniform cones, and made those tolerances really tight, and then had good care on how the lead base was introduced - maybe even with some bonding agents, I could see bullet design tightening up. To be honest, I wonder if a copper washed steel jacket might actually be better than a copper one (bringing us back down to just 2 different rates of thermal expansion/properties (steel steel lead). M855A1 is made pretty much like a ballistic tip, with much more care and tighter tolerances (it appears), so it's not surprising that it's more accurate. You realize the US M855 is good enough to hit man sized targets out to 500 yards consistently, right? 18 year old girls with only 2 weeks of rifle practice in their lives can shoot 10 out of 10 in the black at 500 yards. Seems good enough to me. Happy: You are missing the point to these posts........... the question here is can M855 get close to 1.5MOA out of a bolt gun. That is what the OP asked. Mcantu brought up the idea that foreign M855 might be more accurate. Lazy suggested the inaccuracy of M855 is due to the construction of the bullet. (and indirectly that the foreign stuff might be better due to a better made bullet.) That the USMC shoots M855 out to 500yds (for now anyways) on silhouettes has little to do with either one of those comments. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/23/2016 2:09:04 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: From the Ammo Oracle: M855: Defined in MIL-C-63989 NATO specifications for M855 Ball require a 61.7 grain (q 1.5 grains) with a hardened steel penetrator at a velocity of 3,000 fps (q 40 fps) from a 20" barrel @ 78 feet from the muzzle. Typical velocity 15 feet from the M16A2's muzzle is 3,100 fps. Accuracy: maximum of approximately four MOA over the 100 to 600 yard range. Typical accuracy of average lots in an M16A2 is about 2+ MOA. This round must also penetrate a nominal 10 gauge SAE 1010 or 1020 steel test plate at a range of at least 570 meters (623 yards). The M193 round will penetrate this same plate reliably at 400 yards and about half the time at 500 yards. The 5.56mm and 7.62mm NATO rounds will penetrate it reliably out to 700 yards or more. Because the steel penetrator increases the length and changes the weight distribution of the SS-109 bullet, it is suitable for use only in barrels with a twist of one turn in nine inches or faster. 1:10 twist will barely stabilize this round and not below zero degrees F. More like 2++++ MOA. http://www.box.net/shared/static/vukkp8mmds.jpg .... Molon, have you tested anymore M855 or M193 rounds since you made those charts? I use them all the time (esp the combo M855/M193 one) and it would be great if you had more data points to add |
|
|
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.
