Wait till I get some time to run ballistics tables and post them! I just ran quick ones for 62 and 70 TSX and even with the lower velocity and from the 11.5" barrel, the 70gr performs better. 62's BC is .287 and gives 1060 ft/lbs at the muzzle while the 70's BC is .314 and gives 1090 ft/lbs at the muzzle. Also, 62's max expansion range from my 11.5" barrel (1900fps expansion floor) is about 310yds vs the 70 at 345yds (1800fps expansion floor). Windage is similarly better with the 70gr.

Bump for 12.5" tests done. See 3rd post for results!

I really like these tests.  Shows Wolf Gold is doing pretty darn good.

Bump for 14.5" tests done!

Thanks for the posting of your chronograph findings.  I am running a 10.5" suppressed for my HD gun and if I did it again I would go with a 12.5" barrel as it seems as though you gain a lot for just 2 more inches.

    Do you have a decent source for the 62 TSX or are you loading yourself?  I picked up some of the Federal Fusion MSR 62 grain but those Barnes are moving quite a bit faster.

Thanks! Between you, me and the rest of Arfcom, I'm thinking about selling the barrel for my 10.5" Noveske and going with either an 11.5 or 12.5 stainless Noveske SWB barrel. I mentioned before that I did group all of this ammo and the 10.5" chrome lined CHF barrel from them was by far the worst of the bunch for accuracy. Granted the test was done on a day with high winds but I can't imagine every single load was as bad as it was. I chatted with Noveske about it and they told me their CL CHF barrels are a lot more durable, but definitely not as accurate as a stainless barrel from them. That may depend on any sales Noveske has coming up though.

This test was ONLY factory loads. The Barnes tested here was their VOR-TX load (Barnes stock numbers next to their description). I believe I bought it from Midway USA this time around but it's not carried at too many places. I'm 'in the industry' and I have trouble finding it at distributors, although I'll admit haven't looked too hard.)

I love these chrono tests, but there must be a lot of variables that can put #'s all over the place.

The fusion lost 4-fps out of the 2" longer barrel?

I think the Wolf Gold being faster than xm193 is a bit strange too. I usually get about 100-fps more from the 193 in both my 14.5" and 16".

Also getting nearly 100-fps more with the 64g GD's in my 14.5".

I'm within 1-fps of yours with the 77g IMI Razorcore and Wolf Gold, and within a few fps with both xtac 62g and federal xm855, though.

Great job, OP.
I know you put a lot of time and money into this.

i really appreciate this OP. I just recently finished a mini-recce using a 12.5" bbl and was mostly guessing on velocity with given loads and anticipating drop.
I actually feel better about this little gun with IMI 77gr OTM now and i cant wait to get out and stretch its legs.

Yep, there are a LOT of variables that go into it, both internal and external. I tried for similar atmospheric conditions each day but a review of the data I posted will show differences even there. I'm not a ballistics expert so I can't account for all of the idiosyncrasies but I did try to account for as much as reasonably possible. For instance, in addition to doing the tests on days with similar weather, I staked a spot on the ground where two of the tripod legs sat so I could get the same distance to the chronograph every time.

There's also differences in the individual barrels that can affect any number of things. You'd best serve yourself by using the numbers I posted as more of a guide than the final answer on what a given load will do out of YOUR barrel...Maybe I should add that caveat to the OP.

You're welcome! I'm working on side by side comparisons of a given load in all barrel lengths right now. Should have a lot of it done and posted tonight. It'll make the results easier to read so everyone doesn't need to scroll up and down to compare the different barrel lengths in the different posts. Excel skills for the win!

If you plan on doing anymore testing, I would gladly send you some money to buy a box of IMI 69gr to compare against the other 69gr ammo. Even if you just did it as a side note... Kinda curious about it in the 10.5 up to the 12.5.

I am going to do more, not sure of a timeline though. I have an inquisitive mind and I'm always looking for the best performance out of short barrels. Thanks for the offer to send money but it won't be necessary. IMI 69gr SMK is one I was looking for but I wasn't able to get any for this round. It is on the list for next time!

I just don't know if next time will be this summer-fall or not at this point.

Awesome.  Now for another practical application.

This table shows the effect of zero distance on bullet drop for XM193 in an 11.5" barrel, and comparison to the ACOG TA31F BDC.  Purpose is to figure out the best zero distance to use to approximate the BDC hashes on the TA31F.

Data derived from the empirical XM193 11.5" bbl data presented here and the Norma ballistics calculator.

11.5 bbl M193 BDC Calcs 2017 Update by FredMan, on Flickr

Based on this table two things are fairly obvious:

1.  If you shoot XM193 out of an 11.5" barrel, and you have a TA31F in a LaRue mount, you should zero at 100 meters (tip of the chevron) for near-perfect match with the BDC all the way out to 500 meters.
2.  If you're shooting XM193 out of an 11.5" barrel, you're basically shooting a glorified .22 (from a fragmentation/wounding standpoint) at distances beyond 75 yards.

Well said.  Velocity and accuracy at a specific point are only part of the story, with terminal ballistics my concern.  I really question the effectiveness of any barrels less than 10.5" and fully realize the ammunition effectiveness/selections of my 10.5" truck gun, which I consider to be a maximum 100 yard gun. 

I use Oehler's/Dexadine's Ballistic Explorer and input my chrono data along with a best guess of the BC for each bullet (Internet searches), sight height, etc. to establish a point blank range for each ammunition for the serious stuff and practice.  And then graph and analyze the results for the best zero range for my needs- which are less than 200 yards.  My 10.5" using Speer GD 55 and IMI OTM 77 have nearly identical flight paths out to ~ 250 yards and from 10 yards - 210 yards with a 50 yard zero are -2" to +1.2" from aim point.  The Speer GD 75 is +1" to -1.2" from 10 yards to ~ 170 yards.  Are three are in my standby kit using MagPul G3-20s: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00HVDFSQ0?tag=vglnk-c102-20 and should have enough velocity/energy (graphed) at those distances to do the job.

The 16" also has its best point blank zero range for my purposes at 50 yards using Speer GD 55, Speer GD 75 and IMI OTM 77 with similar data as the 10" but longer ranges due to increased velocity of the longer barrel.  Basically, +2" to -2" out to 210 yards (GD 75) - 240 yards (GD 55/IMI 77).  All three types are in a separate stand by kit.

I have a 16" CMMG AR .22LR conversion using otherwise identical hardware as the 16" 223/556, including a Leupold 2-7x33 VX-1 scope, POF 3.5# drop in trigger, BCM 15" hand guard, etc- zeroed at 24 yards using Aguila Interceptor 40 grain and CCI Velocitor 40 grain that have very similar flight paths as M193/M855 ammunition types (tested with IMI, Fed AE and Geco) from 10 yards to 120 yards, +- 1.6".  My private shooting range is out to 100 yards using steel and paper.  Other than recoil and noise, this .22 mimics trigger, sight picture, weight, etc. of the 223/556 version which makes for great practice.

A bit confused. Are you saying that Gold Dot 55 and 75 gr, and IMI 77 will frag/expand at 100 yards from a 10.5 barrel? If so, are there any others you can add to the list, or are these the best?

Let me preface my information following by saying I am not any kind of expert and do not perform gelatin tests, which with today's technology, is arguably the best available for terminal ballistics in flesh and comes with the FBI's blessing.  My opinions are based upon my chronograph data, my general hand loading experience and works of others available through the Internet and sources I consider valid, in one regard or another.  And sometimes we just have to take a SWAG and add it to other data points to come up with a conclusion.

Golds Dots in hand guns and rifles are my bullet of choice for my particular usage, have been around a long time and have stood the test of time where some others have faltered.  I am sure that today there are other excellent bonded, expanding bullets- but I have not tested.  I have stood behind Gold Dots and hand loaded them in hand guns for quite a few years.  Now this said, I do not like the velocity data I have gotten from the Speer loading of 64 grains 223.  Nor do I like the Speer loading of their 135 grain in short barreled .38/.357 short barrels.  Buffalo Bore and a couple other OEMs are my ammunition of choice for Gold Dots and flash suppressed powders when Speer disappoints me with their loads.

- Per Speer, their .223 Gold Dots are designed to expand out of barrels down to 10" at various velocities out to 200 yards.  http://le.vistaoutdoor.com/ammunition/speer/rifle/default.aspx

- I am not able to find my reference at the moment but the Sierra 77 grain OTM was noted to fragment down to the ~2100 - 2300 FPS range.  Expanding bullets are my first choice but I also provide an option of a heavy FMJ type of bullet.  This used to be provided by IMI M855 but M193 and M855 have gotten bad raps for reliability due to requiring >= 2500 - 2700 FPS terminal velocity for operation.  And bullet jacket inconsistencies have caused issues from various OEMs since this is apparently not part of the specs for the bullet, but does impact bullet performance- especially at lower velocities.  Reference Wikipedia and Ammo Oracle on AR15.com.

Following are four links to .zip files on one of my personal NASes if you care to see graphs of my ammunition choices and their bullet paths and energy at various distances for my 10.5" barrel and my 16" barrel mentioned.  It will ask if you want to download the file.  Your choice :-).  It will take a couple mouse clicks to get it opened from the zip file.  Each zip is ~ 13kB in size.  The original files are ~ 1MB in size.  For security reasons I typically do not leave the NASes online but will for a couple days if someone wants to view these files.

10.5" barreled bullet paths-  https://gofile.me/6s5CX/EY9R0F5C2
16" barreled bullet paths-  https://gofile.me/6s5CX/AqJX1S1tG
10.5" barreled velocity-  https://gofile.me/6s5CX/fjUVUNzni
16" barreled velocity-  https://gofile.me/6s5CX/9C3rwLt0r

made hot

Thanks......

Thank you for the data!  I stockpiled Black Hills .62TSX prior to the Barnes availability.  Off the top of my head Black Hills is a little hotter, and expensive, but may not be that much of a difference.

I'm working on the charts now. I plan on posting them for the Gold Dots, TMK, IMI Razor, MSR and both TSX's soon!

Charts are up for the 8 most popular hunting/SD loads. See post #6.

Great thread OP! I'm going to have to take some time to read through and digest everything.

Because it came up in a companion thread, and there's a lot of interest here in the 62 gr. TSX, I'll add a little tidbit for those seeking this round.

Remington uses the 62 gr. TSX in their Hog Hammer loading. It's less expensive than Barnes and BH, and is much easier to find. Obviously, velocities will be different.  If the OP can't do it, maybe someone else can chrono the Remington version.

I'm having a hard time finding that Hog Hammer in stock anywhere, and the places that list a price, it's actually above the price of the Barnes VOR-TX 62gr load. It is cheaper than Black Hills though, but it still doesn't appear to be very easy to find.

WalMart used to stock it, haven't looked for it lately.

Thank you!

You're welcome brother! I'd love to say I'm sitting on a pile of Black Hills 62gr TSX like you are but these numbers are pretty impressive for the Barnes loaded ammo from SBR's.

Concerning the accuracy issue of short barrels, with modern technology and all things else being equal, I believe barrel length itself has little affect on mechanical accuracy (shot group sizes).  If most/all ammunition are having grouping problems, I believe it is a problem within the barrel structure unrelated to its length, assuming all else is okay with the firearm.  That said, increased barrel length can cause an increase in the sight radius for iron sights which can increase accuracy and it can also increase velocity which can impact accuracy, but this does not seem to be your issue.

My BCM 16" chrome, CHF shoots fine at my distances (<= 100 yards) and is nearly a tack driver using any ammunition at my zero distance with its Leupold 2-7x33 and POF 4.5# drop in trigger, along with AAC three prong flash suppressors.  My Green Mountain 10.5", chrome shoots nearly as well with all of the same ammunition at my zero distance and I have not shot it any further yet.  The 10.5" uses the same trigger group and its shot groups are a small bit larger, but I attribute this to using the red dot sight (Meprolight RDS) and the astigmatism in my eyes causing the dot to be shaped more like a tiny triangle of three dots which tends to mess with the POA/POI at distance. 

Both ARs like the same ammunition I have tested of Geco 556 55 grain, IMI M193, IMI M855, Fed AE XM855 and Speer Gold Dots in 55 grain and 75 grain.  I have not tested the GD 64 grain in the 10.5" for accuracy due to velocity issues.  I have also tested some Black Hills 69 and 75 in the 16" and they shoot the best, slightly better than the IMI 77 and Speer Gold Dots.  Both barrels like the heavier bullets better than the lighter ones for accuracy, along with 223 velocities better than 556 velocities, both of which are to be expected.  I have not fired any ammunition for accuracy out of either barrel that one or the other did not like in any regard.

I have an inexpensive 10.5" barrel from PSA I purchased on sale as a test of inexpensive barrels, and it is a piece of crap, accuracy wise.  Its shot groups are more akin to a shotgun pattern at closer distances.  So two 10.5" barrels (yes from different OEMS and different costs) and one shoots great and the other shoots poorly.  Not a barrel length issue in my case.  I realize this is not an apples to apples comparison- but still, both are 10.5" in length. 

My guess is there is a problem with the barrel, either in the chamber or the crown or an interrupted piece of barrel from drilling out the gas port, assuming the rifling is okay.  I measured the chambers on 4 or 5 of my 556 marked ARs and all measured to be 223 instead of 556 except the BCM, which was a tight 556.  I reamed the chambers to 556 and have no before and after comparisons.  But shooting 556 pressures in 223 chambers can cause accuracy issues- among other things.  And the Internet has lots of different methods for redoing the crown. 

Roger that, thanks.

Seems like all the ammo that is good in a 10.5-11.5 is going to cost around $1 or more a round.. This isn't good for stockpiling.

I did find some IMI 69gr for around 60 cents,,, may end up going that route.

On a regular basis, Palmetto State Armory has Speer Gold Dots in 55, 64 and 75 grain for $10 per box/20 with free shipping for 10 boxes.  They usually have other ammunition on sale on a regular basis also.

I got a full case of Fusion MSR earlier this month for $543 shipped from Cabelas, which is the best price I've seen on it since the fall of 2015. I did have to stack discounts and use about $300 in Cabela's Club points to do so through. It was priced at $16.99/20, and I get an automatic 5% military discount from them, used a coupon for free shipping and the points.---The points are really what made me pull the trigger though.

Gold Dots are the next best value out there currently and I've taken advantage of that as well through PSA. --$.50/rd with free shipping (when it's on promotion) is hard to pass on, even if it's not what I consider the best ammo out there.

I want to get my hands on some of Creedmoor Ammunition's 77gr TMK to test. It's roughly $.70/round but it's been out of stock for a while. At 60-70% of the cost of Black Hills TMK, it may be worth it.

I found a local shop that was carrying it. I kept buying it until it was gone.

Amazing data, thank you!

So what should I do with the Scar 16?

10.5, 11.5, 12.5, or 14?

mostly wolf gold and m855

got all the sizes in various ar sbr's at the moment

I would go 11.5 or 12.5. 10.5 seems pretty short (I may be selling my 10.5"barrel) and 14 is so close to a 16"legal gun that it's hard to say it's worth it.

Just my opinion though.

Great thread, thanks for your work.

I have a blend of fusion msr and 64gr gold dot from PSA, I'll keep the msr for my sbr's.

Great thread. Great info.

Thanks for posting it.

Just reread and saw where you updated the ballistics.

Man, you did your work, Eagle.

I petition the mods to make this thread a Sticky.

Agreed on all counts. I'm glad its helping you!

Thats what I'm doing. 64GD's are a GREAT budget choice for 14.5" barrels and up. You really can't beat the performance for the price in any round I've found. They're just not so great in SBR's.

You're welcome.

I've done a few more ballistic charts as I've had time and I plan on finishing up with a bunch more soon-ish. I'll be sure to update that post when I've got them (and bump the thread).

I don't know if they'll do a sticky but I can ask Zhukov to set the thread to never archive. At least then it will always be easy to find!

This  

With the quality and extensive testing of short barrel ARs ammunition in this post, it deserves to be in the Ammo Oracle section.  It would complement all of the testing I have read there and provide important groundwork for all interested in short barreled 223/556 firearms.

Zhukov just set this thread to not archive so it'll remain active. If you all want any more actions on it, you'll need to get a petition going

I noticed that you said you really like the BHA TMK and the Federal Fusuion MSR. If you look closely both with a 50 yard Zero, have VERY similar trajectories from 0-300 then the Fusion loses its heat at 400 about 1" lower, then 4.25" inches low at 500, and 11" low at 600. These were studied on Shooter's calculator using a 16" carbine I used 2650 for TMK out of the 16" tube and 2750 for the fusion MSR out of a 16" tube. I find these two round to be great for General hunting and long rang capabilities without much difference in POA/POI.
Thanks for your efforts, and I hope this bit of information helps aswell.

I "stocked up" on 75 grain gold dots for my 10.5 and 16 and then this thread came out.

I'm not switching. Not at PSA prices for 75 grain gold dots.

Not that it matters. I'm going to start reloading. Asap.

There is the light and fast bullet crowd and the slow and heavy bullet crowd, with others in between.  Velocity is not the only important item to consider in bullet performance.  I go from one side to the other depending upon circumstances- typically driven by research of suspected/proven bullet terminal performance and accuracy for the task I have tailored each particular weapon to.  Velocity at a particular distance is just one component of the equation.

My first AR purchase was a Bushmaster 16" pencil barrel back in 2003.  My 10.5" is a recent build and has quickly become my favorite for MY uses, as a quick access, quick pointing all around defensive gun and my primary go to long gun; it is my truck gun (after the revolver.)  It has a Meprolight RDS that is always ready to go, so the usage and parts match the purpose.  It is a short range piece- out to 110 yards.  And of course the shorter barrel has less velocity and less bullet terminal performance at distance, which is why I limit it to 110 yards for my purposes.  Since I built and tested the pistol with tested accuracy as good as my BCM CHF 16" at my distances, I have gotten to the point I see little purpose for my 16" barrels with their reduced velocity.  With experience, if I had things to do over, I would have a 18" or 20" barrel for longer distances from a static position- which is not a priority of mine, and my 10.5" barrel as the primary, short range piece it has become.

I am using GD 55s for my 10.5" for bonded core performance with IMI OTM 77 as secondary.  I have chronoed each, among others and fired for accuracy.  Speer's statement on their LE web site concerning their 223 Gold Dots:  "...Gold Dot rifle bullets are optimized to ensure expansion out of barrels down to 10" at a wide variety of velocities out to 200 yards..."  But they do not state what the velocities are.  I am more conservative on the velocity vs. terminal performance and consider my 10.5" as a 110 yard gun, which is where the velocity drops to 2200 FPS- my minimum standard for GDs and 77 grain Sierra OTM types.  With a 50 yard zero and GD 55s or IMI OTM 77s, point-blank-range (P-B-R) is -2" at 10 yards to +1.25" at 110 yards from the point of aim.  With -+2" at 210 yards. -+2" is exactly what I require as a maximum variation. 

I am using GD 75s for my 16" as a 150 yard gun for the bullet weight and bonded core performance- again as the bullet velocity drops to 2200 FPS.  And GD 55s and IMI OTM 77s out to 200 yards.  P-B-R with GD 55 and IMI OTM 77 is -2" at 10 yards to +1.8" at 135 yards to -1.6" at 200 yards.  For the GD 75 it is -2" at 10 yards to +1.2" at 110 yards to -1.6" at 200 yards.  However, its velocity drops to 2200 FPS at 150 yards.

I do wish Speer would increase the 223 GD velocities.  But there is a potential down side to velocity increases.  In a bonded bullet, increased velocity most likely will cause increased expansion in tissue earlier and cause decreased penetration at shorter distances.  While increasing velocity on an OTM bullet type can cause increased fragmentation earlier and decreased penetration in flesh at shorter distances.  To me it is all a balance of terminal distance and material vs. terminal velocity, bullet construction and impact point, along with momentum for penetration depth.  Velocity is not the do all, end all.

I do hand load hand gun ammunition but quit hand loading defensive bullets since I can't get my hands on flash suppressed powder.  I will start loading 556 this winter when I have time and do have all of the components and equipment to do so, but probably not for defensive purposes.

Concerning the GD 75s in the 10.5" which I did not document above for you.  Following are my stats:
Path with 50 yard zero:  -2" at 10 yards to +0.75" at 95 yards to -2" at 170 yards
Energy:  820 ft. pounds at the muzzle to 600 at 170 yards.  BTW:  600 ft. pounds at distance is my minimum.  Just me.
Velocity:  2220 FPS at the muzzle with 1880 FPS at 170 yards.

I do not use the heavy weight, 223 velocity cartridges in my short barrel and the above stats are why.  YMMV.  However, heavy weight bullets with 556 velocity/pressure are doable for me- such as the IMI OTM 77 grain, but not as a primary bullet as I prefer bonded cores.

Thanks for all your work. Great thread!

Great post. I'm really into this level of analysis.

The OP has done a great job and certainly deserves accolades for his hard work.  I also chronograph everything that goes down the barrel of any rifle or hand gun I own or have interest in as part of ammunition selection, and know how much effort Eagle_19er put forth in his testing and documentation.  I seldom look forward to prepping for those long range days in the sun and doing everything to be as methodical as possible, trying not to heat the barrels up too much, keeping the ammunition and firearms out of the sun as it tracks across the sky, using the same magazines, dealing with horses and dogs in the near vicinity, etc., etc, and then collating all of the data into an easily searchable format with additional calculations to provide additional data the chronograph did not calculate; it is not an automatic process.  But the end results are always worth the effort.  By the time I get to the 150 round count mark of baggies containing 10 rounds each of different cartridges, it is getting a bit tiring, especially if shooting magnum hand guns or small, CC pieces.

Great thread!

I was about to pull the trigger on an 11.5, but now you've got me torn between doing a 12.5 instead