User Panel
Thanks for the post. I know you were after him for those results for a while. Looks like a good load then...
|
|
Thanks! I have been waitng for the review of this ammo. How many rounds were fired and how leaded did the feed ramps get?
|
|
Is this ammunition (or the bullets themselves) available for civilian purchase?
|
|
With that low of a muzzle velocity, I'd like to see how well they perform at 100-200m. DocGKR also commented that the GD's velocity was all over the place.
I'd rather have the TBBC or remington bonded rounds. While penetrating 12-13", the latter had a much larger expanded diameter and much more retained weight. |
|
Quoted:
Thanks! I have been waitng for the review of this ammo. How many rounds were fired and how leaded did the feed ramps get? I've only fired a little over 200 rounds so far; but I have yet to notice any lead build-up on the feedramps. The 64 grain Gold Dot has the smallest area of exposed lead at the meplat of any of the soft-point barrier loads that I have seen so far. It will be interesting to see what the Remington Core-Lokt Ultra-Bonded bullet looks like. |
|
Well I can say good bye to my Federal TBBC and need to find a source of the 5.56 64 grain Gold Dot load. Then again I get only 2450 with 5.56 TAP from my 12" barrel... I am thinking the .223 pressure 64 grain Gold Dot load will be less than 50 fps slower and just looking at the bullet it looks like the BC will not be as good as the 75 grain T2 bullet but not as far off as the 62 grain TBBC bullet... should be close out to 200 yards if they have a similar POI from one round to the next and the increased weight and penetration should be better for my short barrel vs the 62 grain TBBC.
Molon do you know the BC of the 64 grain Gold Dot vs the T2 TAP? |
|
.57" vs .50" equates to a 30% larger crush area which is not insignificant particularly in the critical first 13" of penetration. Additionally, as range increases to 50-100m the remington load would likely penetrate more as velocity dropped leading to less expansion. I also didnt like that the GD weighed only 35gr through glass while the remington weighed 56gr. The remington seems like it meets or exceeds 12" of penetration, expands larger, yet holds together better through barriers. Seems like a win/win.
The GD velocities that DocGKR recorded were very similar to those recorded in ATK's latest ballikstics workshop, also out of a 16" barreled weapon. That makes me think his data is probably more common than those noted above. It's also interesting that the GD load was only reaching ~9" of penetration after glass in the ATK workshops. Seems like a lot of variability. In reality, any of the loads that DOCGKR tested will work. This is good news in that there are now multiple, viable alternatives to the somewhat harder-to-find, and expensive LE223T3. |
|
Quoted:
Well I can say good bye to my Federal TBBC and need to find a source of the 5.56 64 grain Gold Dot load. Then again I get only 2450 with 5.56 TAP from my 12" barrel... I am thinking the .223 pressure 64 grain Gold Dot load will be less than 50 fps slower and just looking at the bullet it looks like the BC will not be as good as the 75 grain T2 bullet but not as far off as the 62 grain TBBC bullet... should be close out to 200 yards if they have a similar POI from one round to the next and the increased weight and penetration should be better for my short barrel vs the 62 grain TBBC. Molon do you know the BC of the 64 grain Gold Dot vs the T2 TAP? The B.C. for the 64 grain Gold Dot is .270. Dave Emary originally quoted a B.C. of .361 for the T2. Hornady's LE information lists it at .355. I've been using .352 with very good results. |
|
The new remington bonded load looks very promising. Cant wait to see the accuracy testing on it.
|
|
I wonder how it performs at very low velocities? Will the Doc be testing at low velocities to see how it performs? Im only gonna get 1950 at 200.
Then again 5.56 TAP only does 2000 at 200 lol. I get 2200ish at 100m with the TAP and 2167 with this load at an estimated 2400 starting velocity. Really wonder what happens down low in the 1900-2200 fps range with this bullet. |
|
The 5.56mm version is very interesting to me. WIth the .270BC and an initial velocity of around 3100fps from a 20" barrel, this would make an EXCELLENT longer-range hunting round for the AR. The poor BC has always been my chief complaint of the LE223T3 load.
Most softpoints work best when kept at 1800fps and above. Nosler BT's can go down to about 1600IIRC. |
|
Where can I get more info on the Remington load?
Also do you think Speer might release this bullet to reloaders like they do some of their golddot pistol bullets? ...It might be an easier way to get my hands on a 5.56pressure load. Quoted:
Quoted:
With that low of a muzzle velocity, I'd like to see how well they perform at 100-200m. DocGKR also commented that the GD's velocity was all over the place. I asked the Doc about that and he was referring to Gold Dots in the black boxes in general; "irrespective of caliber," he said. He has specifically mentioned a recent lot of .38 special Gold Dots (#L24N34) that had a velocity extreme spread that was greater than 100 fps. With the lot of 64 grain Gold Dots that I chronographed, the standard deviations were quite acceptable for a duty load and the muzzle velocities were significantly higher than the lot that the Doc tested. Also of interest, the 2009 Speer LE catalog lists a 5.56mm version of the 64 grain Gold Dot with a higher velocity than the .223 version, although I have yet to see a live specimen of this animal. http://www.box.net/shared/static/a1gvt8z3uh.jpg Quoted:
I'd rather have the TBBC or remington bonded rounds. While penetrating 12-13", the latter had a much larger expanded diameter and much more retained weight There was really not all that much difference in the expanded diameter between the 64 grain Gold Dot and the 62 grain Remington Core-Lokt Ultra-Bonded load. In bare gel the 64 grain Gold Dot had an expanded diameter of 0.50" versus 0.57" for the Remington load while the Gold Dot had 2.4" more penetration. In the auto-glass test, the Gold Dot had an expanded diameter of 0.44" versus 0.49" for the Remington load while the Gold Dot had 4.5" more penetration. I'm definitely going to be taking a look at the Remington load myself, but I doubt that it's going to be able to match the Gold Dot for accuracy. http://www.box.net/shared/static/27rggs38xm.jpg The results between the 64 grain Gold Dot and the 62 grain Federal TBBC LE223T3 were not all that different either (see the table below). The LE223T3 load is my current barrier load, but I have not been satisfied with the accuracy level of this load. The single best group that I have been able to obtain with this load was 2.13" at 100 yards with the average being significantly higher. http://i672.photobucket.com/albums/vv81/gocartmozart2/64golddotvs62tbbcgeltestsresized01.jpg http://www.box.net/shared/static/64oio84g0s.jpg |
|
Quoted:
I wonder how it performs at very low velocities? Will the Doc be testing at low velocities to see how it performs? I asked if he had determined the velocity threshold for expansion and his reply was "not yet". Hopefully this means that is on his list of things to do. Im only gonna get 1950 at 200. Then again 5.56 TAP only does 2000 at 200 lol. I get 2200ish at 100m with the TAP and 2167 with this load at an estimated 2400 starting velocity. Really wonder what happens down low in the 1900-2200 fps range with this bullet. The Speer LE literature states: "Gold Dot Duty Rifle bullets are optimized for expansion at a range of velocities out to 200 yards—even out of barrels as short as 10-inches." Unfortunately it doesn't give any specifics as to what that velocity would be at 200 yards. Out of my 14.5" M4 barrel, the 64 grain Gold Dot would have a velocity of 1,978 fps at 200 yards |
|
Quoted:
The 5.56mm version is very interesting to me. WIth the .270BC and an initial velocity of around 3100fps from a 20" barrel, this would make an EXCELLENT longer-range hunting round for the AR. The poor BC has always been my chief complaint of the LE223T3 load. Most softpoints work best when kept at 1800fps and above. Nosler BT's can go down to about 1600IIRC. Unfortunately, I don't think we'll be seeing anything even close to that velocity with the "5.56mm" load. According to the Speer LE literature, the 5.56mm 64 grain Gold Dot has a velocity that is only 50 fps faster than the .223 version. The .223 lot that I chronographed seems to be the fastest lot that anyone has documented to date. From a 20" barrel, the muzzle velocity was 2798 fps; so we're probably looking at a muzzle velocity of roughly 2848 fps for the 5.56mm load. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Thanks! I have been waitng for the review of this ammo. How many rounds were fired and how leaded did the feed ramps get? I've only fired a little over 200 rounds so far; but I have yet to notice any lead build-up on the feedramps. The 64 grain Gold Dot has the smallest area of exposed lead at the meplat of any of the soft-point barrier loads that I have seen so far. It will be interesting to see what the Remington Core-Lokt Ultra-Bonded bullet looks like. I've fired roughly 100-120 rounds with no noticeable lead buildup. I'm very glad that this has been done. I've already made the switch, based up what little research and testing I've been able to do, and this makes me feel much better with my choice. |
|
Quoted:
The GD velocities that DocGKR recorded were very similar to those recorded in ATK's latest ballikstics workshop, also out of a 16" barreled weapon. That makes me think his data is probably more common than those noted above. It's also interesting that the GD load was only reaching ~9" of penetration after glass in the ATK workshops. Seems like a lot of variability. I’m going to assume that you are referring to the ATK Wound Ballistic Workshop at Fort Collins on 6-26-08. Please correct me if my assumption is false. That Workshop has a major credibility issue regarding the 64 grain Gold Dot data. As you stated, the test weapon was a 16” barreled RRA LAR-15. The Workshop reported a velocity of 2575 fps for the 64 grain Gold Dot fired from said 16” barrel. Now, look at the data from the ATK Wound Ballistic Workshop at Aurora on 6-24-08. This Workshop reports the velocity of the 64 grain Gold Dot as exactly 2575 fps, when fired from a (Colt) Commando with an 11” barrel. It would be next to impossible for two different barrels with a difference in length of 5” to produce the exact same velocity with the 64 grain Gold Dot. It's obvious that the velocity data for the 64 grain Gold Dot from one or both of the Workshops is false. Since the Workshops failed to accurately determine/record something as basic as the velocity for the 64 grain Gold Dot, I question the validity of any of the Workshops' reported data for the 64 Grain Dot; especially something as crucial as the penetration depth. We know that DocGKR strictly adheres to the established protocols for terminal ballistic testing and I consider his penetration results for the 64 grain Gold Dot to be the current standard for this load. |
|
The 64gr 5.56 load can be ordered or back ordered. I placed an order for 1 500rd case yesterday from a LE distributor (around 450 a case if my memory is correct). Unfortunately, there is no idea how long it will take me to get delivery. The distributor had just placed their initial order for the 5.56 loaded ammo just a couple of weeks ago.
|
|
I spoke with Johann Boden at ATK LE today via telephone and he stated the 5.56 load is slated for a mid-year release, FWIW.
|
|
|
Quoted:
We know that DocGKR strictly adheres to the established protocols for terminal ballistic testing and I consider his penetration results for the 64 grain Gold Dot to be the current standard for this load. Your reasoning is exactly why I'm guessing DOCGKR's velocity of only 2549fps out of a 16" barrel is most representative. The Gold Dot's 35gr recovered bullet weight through his testing indicates a significant loss of bullet integrity through glass, particularly compared to the competition. By the way, if ATK drives the same bullet even faster in a 5.56mm version, it may lose even more mass through hard barriers ...not a good thing. Given this amount of weight loss and the high level of velocity variability that he also noted, ATK's 8-9" measured penetration through glass may indeed be accurate and indicative of their production variability, particularly since their test results, during the same test sessions, for the TBBC loads are in line with other credible testing, including DOCGKR's. I'll pass on the GD... for now. I'll try out the Remington for S&G but will carry a mag or two of the TBBC (to augment several mags of 8126N) since it's the best L/E barrier round, albeit not necessarily the best for punching paper. |
|
Quoted:
ATK's 8-9" measured penetration through glass may indeed be accurate . . . I'm highly doubting it. A. As I already mentioned their velocity data is obviously false. B. Their penetration data conflicts with that of DocGKR. C. An individual who was present at an ATK Workship recently stated this about the ballistic gel blocks that were used at the ATK Workshop: "the first gelatin block was calibrated initially at the beginning but the other blocks sat outside until they were shot and were not calibrated or the temp checked prior to use. I'm fairly certain that they were warmer than they should have been and without calibration the data was suspect, at best." |
|
Molon: That's pretty disappointing. ATK is spending a lot of time and effort on these workshops, and it seems silly for them to just become sloppy like that.
|
|
Quoted:
Molon: That's pretty disappointing. ATK is spending a lot of time and effort on these workshops, and it seems silly for them to just become sloppy like that. It's sad actually. I was hoping that the Workshops would be a good source for scientifically conducted gel testing since the Doc doesn't have time to test every new load that comes out. Unfortunately, these inconsistencies in their testing procedures, such as failing to calibrate the gel blocks, completely invalidate any of the results in said gel blocks. |
|
I've added your caveats from the previous page to the links to the Wound Ballistics Workshops in the Self-Defense ammo FAQ. Thanks for your diligence.
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Molon: That's pretty disappointing. ATK is spending a lot of time and effort on these workshops, and it seems silly for them to just become sloppy like that. It's sad actually. I was hoping that the Workshops would be a good source for scientifically conducted gel testing since the Doc doesn't have time to test every new load that comes out. Unfortunately, these inconsistencies in their testing procedures, such as failing to calibrate the gel blocks, completely invalidate any of the results in said gel blocks. Yeah, and the inconsistencies are also unfortunately manifesting themselves in their recent Gold Dot ammo performance, e.g. 135gr .38 Gold Dot, as indicated by DocGKR. So far, the Federal line seems to be donig well so all hope isnt lost for ATK. |
|
Just curious, does a bullet tend to penetrate shallower or more deeply in an overly warm gel block? (edit: answer is more deeply)
Your velocities where very different from DocGKR's..... so you think your's were wrong, his were wrong, or it's just lot-to-lot variability of ~130fps? If it's the latter then that should be of concern as I dont think a difference that large is likely attributable to barrel-to-barrel differences (both 16"). Maybe you got the 5.56mm version by mistake???...J/K I guess all of this conjecture really doesnt matter, since while all loads he tested were deemed acceptable, DocGKR clearly states that TBBC is a superior barrier load for those who may actually have to use it in a lethal force situation. That's a good enough endorsement for me. Stay safe. |
|
Quoted:
Your velocities where very different from DocGKR's..... so you think your's were wrong, his were wrong, or it's just lot-to-lot variability of ~130fps? If it's the latter then that should be of concern. The differences are possibly due to a stacking of the variables of different barrels used (I always use barrels with very low round counts for chronographing) and lot-to-lot variations, as well as the possibility that the lot that Doc tested was under-charged; which is obviously a major concern. This is one of the reasons that I always chronograph each new lot of ammunition that I will be loading in a self-defense weapon. Doc said that he is going to try to dig up the lot number for me of the 64 grain Gold Dots that he used in testing. I'm going to keep track of the lot numbers of the future lots that I chronograph to try to determine if this is a teething problem for this new load or a genuine quality control issue. Since Speer lists the muzzle velocity of this load as fired from a 24" barrel, I'm also going to chronograph this load from a 24" Krieger barrel to see how it compares. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Your velocities where very different from DocGKR's..... so you think your's were wrong, his were wrong, or it's just lot-to-lot variability of ~130fps? If it's the latter then that should be of concern. The differences are possibly due to a stacking of the variables of different barrels used (I always use barrels with very low round counts for chronographing) and lot-to-lot variations, as well as the possibility that the lot that Doc tested was under-charged; which is obviously a major concern. This is one of the reasons that I always chronograph each new lot of ammunition that I will be loading in a self-defense weapon. Doc said that he is going to try to dig up the lot number for me of the 64 grain Gold Dots that he used in testing. I'm going to keep track of the lot numbers of the future lots that I chronograph to try to determine if this is a teething problem for this new load or a genuine quality control issue. Since Speer lists the muzzle velocity of this load as fired from a 24" barrel, I'm also going to chronograph this load from a 24" Krieger barrel to see how it compares. Regardless of the absolute velocity numbers, the relative differences (130-150fps) between the 64gr GD vs the two 62gr loads that DocGKR tested out of the same weapon does suggest that something funny was going on. Undoubtedly, your proposed, ongoing analysis will bring some clarity to the issue. |
|
Quoted:
Just curious, does a bullet tend to penetrate shallower or more deeply in an overly warm gel block? (edit: answer is more deeply) Unfortunately, the temperature of the blocks is only one component of the issue. The component of the blocks never being calibrated is the main point. Since they were never calibrated we have no idea in what other ways the blocks were "out of spec" besides temperature and therefore we have no way of knowing if penetration was deeper or shallower than it would have been in properly calibrated gel blocks. |
|
I hope your load data is correct... and if it is only 50 fps faster in 5.56 variety it should virtually the same velocity as 5.56 TAP thus making it a perfect ballistic match IF it still expands at 2000 fps and IF the POI shift is minimal.
|
|
Quoted:
I hope your load data is correct... and if it is only 50 fps faster in 5.56 variety it should virtually the same velocity as 5.56 TAP thus making it a perfect ballistic match IF it still expands at 2000 fps and IF the POI shift is minimal. The 50 FPS is going strictly by Speer's LE literature. We won't know for sure until it is actually released this summer and I get a chance to chronograph it. I certainly wouldn't bank on the POI aspect and until DocGKR gets a chance to perform some expansion threshold testing I'm not taking anything for granted on that aspect. |
|
are these test done w/ a piece of autoglass put up just in front of the gel? is there a distance between the gel and the glass and also how does the auto glass compare to what is "real auto glass"? also, is there any data of how much a round will deviate from the windshield angle? i understand that many variables come into play, but is there a ball park?
thanks for the info molon. |
|
Quoted:
Remington 62 grain Core-Lokt Ultra Bonded http://www.box.net/shared/static/2g5xkoqbkn.jpg Here are a few pics comparing the Remington 62 grain Core-Lokt Ultra Bonded bullet to the Speer 64 grain Gold Dot and the 62 grain Trophy Bonded Bear Claw. As with the TBBC, the Core-Lokt bullet has a greater area of exposed lead at the meplat than the Gold Dot. http://www.box.net/shared/static/tqnzs8panx.jpg http://www.box.net/shared/static/i4pk2ld6qr.jpg Would love to see a side by side comparison of these projectiles after they've been fired through a tough intermediate barrier, like laminated glass. |
|
Quoted:
are these test done w/ a piece of autoglass put up just in front of the gel? is there a distance between the gel and the glass and also how does the auto glass compare to what is "real auto glass"? also, is there any data of how much a round will deviate from the windshield angle? i understand that many variables come into play, but is there a ball park? thanks for the info molon. According to Dr. G.K. Roberts, the glass test uses A.S.I. ¼” laminated automobile safety glass. The glass is positioned 18” in front of the gel block. The glass is angled 45 degrees to the horizontal and 15 degrees to the side creating a compound angle. These conditions simulate a shot taken at the driver of the vehicle from the left-front quarter of the vehicle. |
|
|
Quoted: Thank youQuoted: Thanks! I have been waitng for the review of this ammo. How many rounds were fired and how leaded did the feed ramps get? I've only fired a little over 200 rounds so far; but I have yet to notice any lead build-up on the feedramps. The 64 grain Gold Dot has the smallest area of exposed lead at the meplat of any of the soft-point barrier loads that I have seen so far. It will be interesting to see what the Remington Core-Lokt Ultra-Bonded bullet looks like. and Thank you |
|
Quoted:
http://www.box.net/shared/static/2g5xkoqbkn.jpg The muzzle velocity of the Remington 62 grain Core-Lokt load from a 16" Colt barrel with a NATO chamber, chrome lining and a 1:7" twist was 2776 FPS with a standard deviation of 43 FPS. From a 20" Colt barrel with a NATO chamber, chrome lining and a 1:7" twist the muzzle velocity was 2887 FPS with a standard deviation of 56 FPS. Sounds more consistent than some of their other PSP loads. Standard deviation of 90 fps in the 55gr Express load in my M4. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
http://www.box.net/shared/static/2g5xkoqbkn.jpg The muzzle velocity of the Remington 62 grain Core-Lokt load from a 16" Colt barrel with a NATO chamber, chrome lining and a 1:7" twist was 2776 FPS with a standard deviation of 43 FPS. From a 20" Colt barrel with a NATO chamber, chrome lining and a 1:7" twist the muzzle velocity was 2887 FPS with a standard deviation of 56 FPS. Sounds more consistent than some of their other PSP loads. Standard deviation of 90 fps in the 55gr Express load in my M4. It's actually higher than I would like to see. The 64 grain Gold Dot had a standard deviation of only 16 FPS from a 20" barrel and 34 FPS from a 16" barrel. |
|
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.