Originally Posted By DevL: Originally Posted By vicious_cb: Anyone test if PPU 75gr HPBT frags and at what velocities? Not that I know of...  it could have early or late yaw (see 77 grain Sierra vs Hornady 75/Nosler 77) it could also have a thicker or stronger copper alloy in the jacket or more antimony in the lead resulting in less fragmentation or a decrease in the fragmentation range at a given velocity. Untill you see ballistic testing done, Privi 75 bullets are not a cheaper rplacement for Hornady or Nosler bullets for defensive ammunition IMO.

I'd just like to reinforce what DevL is saying.  By posting information on the PPU load, I am in no way advocating that it be used as defensive ammuntion, but rather that it might be considered for use as a less expensive practice load for those looking for such an alternative.

Originally Posted By brucers99: Has anyone tested to see if the POI for 75gr 5.56 TAP with the T2 bullet is similar to the 75gr .223 Black hills round?  I'm just wondering if the Black Hills blue box would be a suitable training round given that it is cheaper than the TAP and given that the TAP practice rounds are AWOL.

I use BH 75gr for protection

since I cant afford 5.56mm 75 TAP

I dont mind the loss of 150fps differ

Its not like I will EVER shoot a BAD GUY at 100 yards anyway

Tell you what Ive shot several ragged hole groups at 50yards with BH 75 & a LMT M4 w/ ML2 aimpoint

Molon-

Do you have any experience with the Lacquer coated practice rounds? The new pricing shows that they can substitute the zinc plated for lacquer coated at the discretion of the supplier. Either way, i still need a bunch for a class, just curious about feeding, ejecting and cleaning intervals. $19.74/50 for the 75gr.



TIA

Originally Posted By goloud: Molon- Do you have any experience with the Lacquer coated practice rounds? The new pricing shows that they can substitute the zinc plated for lacquer coated at the discretion of the supplier. Either way, i still need a bunch for a class, just curious about feeding, ejecting and cleaning intervals. $19.74/50 for the 75gr. www.gandrtactical.com/images/archive/Hornady/75gr%20TAP%2050rds.jpg TIA

I've only tested the zinc plated rounds.

Needs a bump. Any plans for testing SSA 5.56 77gr Mk262 clone?

It's on "The List."

Just thought I'd chime in and say the Barnes Triple Shock is the best 6.8 defense load.

For a strictly anti-personnel/self-defense role, the Barnes Triple Shock X bullet is not the best choice for the 6.8mm SPC.  Both the 5.56mm and 6.8mm SPC rely on temporary cavitation with a concomitant high percentage fragmentation (along with adequate penetration) for their maximum effectiveness.  The Barnes Triple Shock X bullet does not fragment.  While it would serve well as a barrier-load or hunting load, the Hornady 110 grain V-MAX and Hornady 115 grain OTM bullets are better suited for anti-personnel/self-defense usage.

Originally Posted By Molon: For a strictly anti-personnel/self-defense role, the Barnes Triple Shock X bullet is not the best choice for the 6.8mm SPC.  Both the 5.56mm and 6.8mm SPC rely on temporary cavitation with a concomitant high percentage fragmentation (along with adequate penetration) for their maximum effectiveness.  The Barnes Triple Shock X bullet does not fragment.  While it would serve well as a barrier-load or hunting load, the Hornady 110 grain V-MAX and Hornady 115 grain OTM bullets are better suited for anti-personnel/self-defense usage.

The only way to immediately put someone down is the disrupt the CNS.  In other words, you aim for the COM and hope the bullet hits their spine.  Even if it does not hit the spine, a temporary cavity that occurs in the 12-15 inch range (i.e. where someone's spine is) will hit the spine and disrupt it.

Originally Posted By SnakeLogan: Originally Posted By Molon: For a strictly anti-personnel/self-defense role, the Barnes Triple Shock X bullet is not the best choice for the 6.8mm SPC.  Both the 5.56mm and 6.8mm SPC rely on temporary cavitation with a concomitant high percentage fragmentation (along with adequate penetration) for their maximum effectiveness.  The Barnes Triple Shock X bullet does not fragment.  While it would serve well as a barrier-load or hunting load, the Hornady 110 grain V-MAX and Hornady 115 grain OTM bullets are better suited for anti-personnel/self-defense usage. The only way to immediately put someone down is the disrupt the CNS.  In other words, you aim for the COM and hope the bullet hits their spine.  Even if it does not hit the spine, a temporary cavity that occurs in the 12-15 inch range (i.e. where someone's spine is) will hit the spine and disrupt it.

Assuming arguendo that your temporary cavity/CNS thesis is correct, it seems you are talking self-defends on quadra-peds.  12-15" range is well beyond the spine of (if not through) most bi-peds.  This is true at nearly all degrees obliquity, save elevation angles.

Are we to assume that since Black Hills 75gr Match HP uses the Hornady 75gr bullet, it would be just as terminally effective as Hornady 75gr TAP "Black Box"?

Originally Posted By vicious_cb: Are we to assume that since Black Hills 75gr Match HP uses the Hornady 75gr bullet, it would be just as terminally effective as Hornady 75gr TAP "Black Box"?

No assumptions about it.  Dr G.K. Roberts has tested the Black Hills load in ballistic gelatin and the results are equivalent to the Hornady load.

Originally Posted By Molon: Originally Posted By vicious_cb: Are we to assume that since Black Hills 75gr Match HP uses the Hornady 75gr bullet, it would be just as terminally effective as Hornady 75gr TAP "Black Box"? No assumptions about it.  Dr G.K. Roberts has tested the Black Hills load in ballistic gelatin and the results are equivalent to the Hornady load.

Do you have a link? Or any gel test pictures by any chance?

Originally Posted By vicious_cb: Originally Posted By Molon: Originally Posted By vicious_cb: Are we to assume that since Black Hills 75gr Match HP uses the Hornady 75gr bullet, it would be just as terminally effective as Hornady 75gr TAP "Black Box"? No assumptions about it.  Dr G.K. Roberts has tested the Black Hills load in ballistic gelatin and the results are equivalent to the Hornady load. Do you have a link? Or any gel test pictures by any chance?

Old school links:


"Terminal Ballistics; A critical consideration", by M.L. McPherson, Tactical Shooter , December 1998


"The Wounding Effects of 5.56mm/.223 Law Enforcement General Purpose Shoulder Fired Carbines Compared with 12 GA. Shotguns and Pistol Caliber Weapons Using 10% Ordnance Gelatin as a Tissue Simulant", by Gary K. Roberts, DDS, Wound Ballistics Review,  volume 3 - number 4

Silver State Armory 77 grain OTM




Silver State Armory is now producing a 5.56mm NATO pressure, 77 grain OTM load with velocities on par with the Black Hills MK262 load.  This makes SSA the fourth commercial ammunition manufacturer to currently offer a 5.56mm heavy OTM round loaded to NATO pressure; the other three being Black Hills (MK262), Hornady (5.56 TAP) and HSM (5.56-17T).

The SSA 77 grain load comes in simple brown boxes with nothing more than a “5.56” designation on it to give you a clue as to what’s inside the box.  There is no indication of the bullet weight found anywhere on the box.  This round is loaded with a 77 grain Sierra MatchKing without a cannelure.






The cartridge is charged with ball powder.  The primers are crimped in place, although some of the crimps are so shallow that I needed magnification to see them.  The primers are not sealed.  As mentioned, the bullet does not have a cannelure, but there does appear to be a slight taper crimp on the case mouth that leaves a small indentation on the bullet.  There is no sealant at the case mouth.



















The SSA 77 grain load was chronographed using an Oehler 35-P chronograph with “proof screen” technology.  All velocities listed are muzzle velocities, as calculated from instrumental velocities using Oehler’s Ballistic Explorer software program.  All strings of fire consisted of 10 shots each.  Colt barrels in the lengths of 20”, 16” and 14.5’ were used as the test vehicles.  All barrels used were chrome lined, NATO chambered and have 1:7” twists.  Atmospheric conditions were recorded using a Kestrel 4000.


Temperature: 74 degrees F
Humidity:   58%
Barometric pressure: 30.15 in Hg
Elevation: 950 feet above sea level


















The SSA 77 grain cartridges had a nominal length of approximately 2.250”.  All rounds used in this test session fed, fired, extracted and ejected without any malfunctions.  There was definite primer flattening noted on the fired caseheads, but no significant ejector or extractor brass flow marks.









Finally, here’s the data!








At one point during the test session I noticed an unexpected visitor on the range.  The big guy pictured below was sitting on the berm about 10 feet above the target frame watching me.  








Accuracy Report


Following my usual procedures, an accuracy evaluation of the Silver State Armory 77 grain OTM NATO load was conducted shooting from a concrete bench at a distance of 100 yards. The test vehicle used for this evaluation was a Noveske barreled RECCE.  The 16” Noveske Recon barrel is made of stainless steel and has the 5.56 Noveske Match Mod 0 chamber, a 1:7" twist and polygonal rifling.  The barrel is free-floated in a LaRue Tactical railed handguard.














The fore-end of the RECCE was rested in a Sinclair Windage Bench Rest with the aid of a modified Sinclair fore-end stabilizer.  The butt-stock was stabilized in a Protektor bunny-ear bag.  Sighting was accomplished using a Leupold VARI-X III with a mirage shade attached.  Magnification was set at 25X and the scope was adjusted to be parallax free at 100 yards.   The lower receiver used during testing has a Geissele match rifle trigger in it.















Atmospheric conditions were recorded on a Kestrel 4000.  Skies were sunny and the winds were breezy.  Wind conditions were continuously monitored using a Wind Probe which was positioned approximately 33 yards from the muzzle.


Temperature:  77 degrees F
Humidity:  51%
Barometric pressure:  29.87 inHg
Elevation: 950 feet above sea level















Prior to firing the SSA 77 grain load, I fired a 10-shot control group from 100 yards using a hot hand-load seated with Sierra 77 grain MatchKings (the same bullet used in the SSA load).  That group had an extreme spread of 0.97”.









Three 10-shot groups of the SSA 77 grain OTM NATO load were fired from 100 yards using the described set-up.  Those groups had extreme spreads of:

1.92”
1.60”
2.03”

for an average extreme spread of 1.85”.  Those three groups were over-layed on each other using RSI Shooting Lab to form a 30-shot composite group.  The mean radius of the composite group was 0.54”.

For comparison, three 10-shot groups of Hornady’s 75 grain 5.56 TAP previously fired from the same Noveske barrel had extreme spreads of:

1.03”
1.42”
1.20”

for an average extreme spread of 1.22”.  The 30-shot composite group formed by over-laying those three groups on each other had a mean radius of 0.37”.  The composite groups of the two different loads are shown below for visual comparison.









Lastly, for the Internet Commandos in our viewing audience I fired a 3-shot group of the SSA 77 grain load from 100 yards.  That group had an extreme spread of 0.80”.

Originally Posted By Molon on page 21: 100 Yard Accuracy Evaluation of Prvi Partizan 75 grain Match Ammunition.

Very nice!  Thanks!

Molon, thanks for the new review of the SSA 77gr load.  I have gotten much valuable information out of this thread.  I will not be purchasing any of this new load.  I have already put back a bunch of HSM 5.56 75gr partly due to this thread and first hand experience.  One thing I did notice is that my last lot delivered in ‘08 had a less pronounced crimp than the first lot I purchased in ’07.

Once again, thank you for the time and energy you've put into this.

Originally Posted By Rcd567: Once again, thank you for the time and energy you've put into this.

Da nada.

Originally Posted By bsf: Molon, thanks for the new review of the SSA 77gr load.  I have gotten much valuable information out of this thread.  I will not be purchasing any of this new load.  I have already put back a bunch of HSM 5.56 75gr partly due to this thread and first hand experience.  One thing I did notice is that my last lot delivered in ‘08 had a less pronounced crimp than the first lot I purchased in ’07.

Have you observed any difference/improvement in accuracy with the lighter crimp?

Originally Posted By Molon: For a strictly anti-personnel/self-defense role, the Barnes Triple Shock X bullet is not the best choice for the 6.8mm SPC.  Both the 5.56mm and 6.8mm SPC rely on temporary cavitation with a concomitant high percentage fragmentation (along with adequate penetration) for their maximum effectiveness.  The Barnes Triple Shock X bullet does not fragment.  While it would serve well as a barrier-load or hunting load, the Hornady 110 grain V-MAX and Hornady 115 grain OTM bullets are better suited for anti-personnel/self-defense usage.

Has the V-Max now found favor as a defensive round? I thought that the A-Max's were better for that purpose.

Originally Posted By Tromatic: Originally Posted By Molon: For a strictly anti-personnel/self-defense role, the Barnes Triple Shock X bullet is not the best choice for the 6.8mm SPC.  Both the 5.56mm and 6.8mm SPC rely on temporary cavitation with a concomitant high percentage fragmentation (along with adequate penetration) for their maximum effectiveness.  The Barnes Triple Shock X bullet does not fragment.  While it would serve well as a barrier-load or hunting load, the Hornady 110 grain V-MAX and Hornady 115 grain OTM bullets are better suited for anti-personnel/self-defense usage. Has the V-Max now found favor as a defensive round? I thought that the A-Max's were better for that purpose.

No and no. The 110 grain V-MAX in 6.8mm SPC is a whole different animal than any V-MAX load in 223 Remington.  The 223 Remington A-MAX is not, and never was intended to be a self-defense/hunting bullet.  Here's what Dave Emary, Chief Ballistician for Hornady and designer of the A-MAX had to say about it.

"The AMAX was developed primarily as a high BC bullet with relatively thin jackets intended for target shooting. They do not have jacket construction associated with hunting applications. They tend to expand quickly and have lesser penetration as compared to similar weight hunting bullet designs. The .224" 75 and 80 gr AMAX bullets are intended to maximize the BC for long range target shooting in the AR-15/223 Rem platform."

Originally Posted By Molon: Originally Posted By Tromatic: Originally Posted By Molon: For a strictly anti-personnel/self-defense role, the Barnes Triple Shock X bullet is not the best choice for the 6.8mm SPC.  Both the 5.56mm and 6.8mm SPC rely on temporary cavitation with a concomitant high percentage fragmentation (along with adequate penetration) for their maximum effectiveness.  The Barnes Triple Shock X bullet does not fragment.  While it would serve well as a barrier-load or hunting load, the Hornady 110 grain V-MAX and Hornady 115 grain OTM bullets are better suited for anti-personnel/self-defense usage. Has the V-Max now found favor as a defensive round? I thought that the A-Max's were better for that purpose. No and no. The 110 grain V-MAX in 6.8mm SPC is a whole different animal than any V-MAX load in 223 Remington.  The 223 Remington A-MAX is not, and never was intended to be a self-defense/hunting bullet.  Here's what Dave Emary, Chief Ballistician for Hornady and designer of the A-MAX has to say about it. "The AMAX was developed primarily as a high BC bullet with relatively thin jackets intended for target shooting. They do not have jacket construction associated with hunting applications. They tend to expand quickly and have lesser penetration as compared to similar weight hunting bullet designs. The .224" 75 and 80 gr AMAX bullets are intended to maximize the BC for long range target shooting in the AR-15/223 Rem platform."

I have that backwards I guess.  I thought the V was the accuracy bullet and the A the hunting bullet.
Thanks

Originally Posted By Molon: Originally Posted By bsf: Molon, thanks for the new review of the SSA 77gr load.  I have gotten much valuable information out of this thread.  I will not be purchasing any of this new load.  I have already put back a bunch of HSM 5.56 75gr partly due to this thread and first hand experience.  One thing I did notice is that my last lot delivered in ‘08 had a less pronounced crimp than the first lot I purchased in ’07. Have you observed any difference/improvement in accuracy with the lighter crimp?

Sorry, I do not think I will be able to help you there.  I have not shot any of the new lot yet.  The best accuracy I can maintain out of my M4gery w/ Aimpoint M3 (4moa dot) is 4moa at 100m.  If I knew someone locally who was a better shooter and had a better setup, I would gladly give them some for testing.

After reading this thread over (and over) again...

TAP FPD and Black Hills 75gr. OTM's  are far superior for HD/SHTF (anti-personnel) than either the M193 or the M855 at any distance...is this correct?



214

Is there any noticeable accuracy difference between a 16" Heavy barrel and a 16" Govt/Medium barrel? Assume both are chrome lined.

I can't wait to see the 75gr Wolf Black Box tests.  

Originally Posted By Silence214: After reading this thread over (and over) again... TAP FPD and Black Hills 75gr. OTM's  are far superior for HD/SHTF (anti-personnel) than either the M193 or the M855 at any distance...is this correct? 214

Originally Posted By FlyPenFly: Is there any noticeable accuracy difference between a 16" Heavy barrel and a 16" Govt/Medium barrel? Assume both are chrome lined.

Here are a couple of data points on the subject.  Three 10-shot groups fired from a free-floated, 16” Colt HBAR barrel (chrome lined, NATO chambered) at a distance of 100 yards using hand-loaded 52 grain Sierra MatchKings had an average extreme spread of 0.956”.  The 30-shot composite group formed by over-laying those three groups on each other using RSI Shooting Lab had a mean radius of 0.33”.

For comparison, three 10-shot groups fired from a free-floated, 16” Colt government (M4) profile barrel (chrome line, NATO chambered) at the same distance using the same ammunition had an average extreme spread of 1.39”.  The 30-shot composite group formed from over-laying those three groups on each other had a mean radius of 0.44”.

Obviously, testing just one sample of each barrel type doesn’t prove anything.  It did however, provide a good indication.

Wow, big difference, did they have the same twist rate?

Are these comparisons indoors or outdoors?

So it seems a Heavy barrel does indeed have an appreciable accuracy difference. I was under the impression barrels were made heavy for rapid fire consistency reasons, didn't know with just 10 shots groups you'd see that sort of improvement.

Originally Posted By FlyPenFly: Wow, big difference, did they have the same twist rate? Are these comparisons indoors or outdoors?

Both barrels have 1:9" twists.  Testing was performed outdoors.  Wind conditions were continuously monitored using a Wind Probe.




government (M4) profile






HBAR profile

I just spent the last 2 hours reading this thread. Amazing stuff. Thanks Molon. I appreciate all your great work and analysis. Best Regards.

Prvi Partizan 75 grain Match; Velocity Update


Here's a little update on the velocity aspect of the PPU 75 grain Match load.  One can't help but wonder if Prvi Partizan has been listening to its customers.  About the only complaint anyone has had with this load is that it has a lower muzzle velocity than the Hornady or Black Hills 75 grain loads.  I recently chronographed the latest lot of the PPU 75 grain Match load that I have on hand and from a 20" Colt A2 barrel it is running approximately 117 fps faster than the original lots of this ammo that I chronographed!

Okay, so the most readily available and effective load for us civvies then is the BH 77 gr load?

Or would that be the Hornady 75 gr FPD load?  

But, I'm betting that the Hornady stuff is  more expensive, right?

Originally Posted By urbankaos04: Okay, so the most readily available and effective load for us civvies then is the BH 77 gr load? Or would that be the Hornady 75 gr FPD load?   But, I'm betting that the Hornady stuff is  more expensive, right?

By all accounts the hornady 75gr bullets is more effective(terminally) than the 77gr SMK

Actually, yeah, you're right, it's the 75 gr load that has a shortern neck and fragments faster.  Thanks for reminding me.

Are there any documented shootings (Military/Law Enforcement) using either the TAP 5.56 75gr or TAP FPD 75gr rounds that give us evidence of  fragmentation to support the data in this thread (threshold and so forth)?

We have plenty when it comes to the M855 and M193 rounds and even the 77gr. SMK. But if one is going to sink a bit of money into a vastly superior round (claimed), there should be evidence to support it aside from gelatin tests.



214

Originally Posted By Silence214: Are there any documented shootings (Military/Law Enforcement) using either the TAP 5.56 75gr or TAP FPD 75gr rounds that give us evidence of  fragmentation to support the data in this thread (threshold and so forth)? We have plenty when it comes to the M855 and M193 rounds and even the 77gr. SMK. But if one is going to sink a bit of money into a vastly superior round (claimed), there should be evidence to support it aside from gelatin tests. 214

I reposted your question in The Terminal Effects Forum of Tacticalforums.com.  Quoted below is the response I received.


"Flawed logic unfortunately. There are scientifically acceptable standards and mediums for testing bullet performance. A race car is timed officially with a calibrated stop watch, a bullet is tested with properly formulated and temperature regulated gelatin. The only thing "claimed" are the proven and repeatable results."

.

Originally Posted By Molon: Originally Posted By Silence214: Are there any documented shootings (Military/Law Enforcement) using either the TAP 5.56 75gr or TAP FPD 75gr rounds that give us evidence of  fragmentation to support the data in this thread (threshold and so forth)? We have plenty when it comes to the M855 and M193 rounds and even the 77gr. SMK. But if one is going to sink a bit of money into a vastly superior round (claimed), there should be evidence to support it aside from gelatin tests. 214 I reposted your question in The Terminal Effects Forum of Tacticalforums.com.  Quoted below is the response I received. "Flawed logic unfortunately. There are scientifically acceptable standards and mediums for testing bullet performance. A race car is timed officially with a calibrated stop watch, a bullet is tested with properly formulated and temperature regulated gelatin. The only thing "claimed" are the proven and repeatable results."

I was not saying that gelatin results were useless. I am saying that it would be (gelatin results of any particular round) of greater value if we had corresponding "real life" results which substantiated the gelatin tests of any given round.



214

gelatin results are similar to the results from testing done on anesthetized pigs

Why doesnt anyone gelatin test these rounds @100m or more? It would be good to see the penetration and fragmentation at this distance



214

Originally Posted By Silence214: Why doesnt anyone gelatin test these rounds @100m or more? It would be good to see the penetration and fragmentation at this distance 214

You know, that makes a tremendous amount of sense.  set up at 100, 150, and 200 and put chrongraph screens right in front for real time velocity.

Molon, I have question:  You say that factory-loaded 5.56 TAP is advertised as being sealed both around the primer and case neck, but that none of the ammo that you have received has been sealed around the neck.  How much does this matter?  Ie: have you done any testing where you have immersed 5.56 TAP in water to see how long it holds up?

Originally Posted By Silence214: Originally Posted By Molon: Originally Posted By Silence214: Are there any documented shootings (Military/Law Enforcement) using either the TAP 5.56 75gr or TAP FPD 75gr rounds that give us evidence of  fragmentation to support the data in this thread (threshold and so forth)? We have plenty when it comes to the M855 and M193 rounds and even the 77gr. SMK. But if one is going to sink a bit of money into a vastly superior round (claimed), there should be evidence to support it aside from gelatin tests. 214 I reposted your question in The Terminal Effects Forum of Tacticalforums.com.  Quoted below is the response I received. "Flawed logic unfortunately. There are scientifically acceptable standards and mediums for testing bullet performance. A race car is timed officially with a calibrated stop watch, a bullet is tested with properly formulated and temperature regulated gelatin. The only thing "claimed" are the proven and repeatable results." I was not saying that gelatin results were useless. I am saying that it would be (gelatin results of any particular round) of greater value if we had corresponding "real life" results which substantiated the gelatin tests of any given round. 214

Thats why gelatine was created and standardised... it matches real results in muscle like tissues yet its repeatable unlike living tissues which have varying consistancies and densities.  Its like saying a dyno is not a prpper measure of engine power because its not a street race.  The fact is rounds that perform better in gelatin perform better in tissue and engines that dyno better put more power to the wheels in a race but all the other factors like track conditions, human factors, etc are removed just like the differences in muscle, intestines, lungs, and bone are removed.

It is not possible for a round to perform well in ballistics testing and not in tissue.  The ballistics gel IS a tissue simulant... thats why it exists and is its sole purpose.  Sure hitting differnt organs causes different results... that does not mean the standardised simulant does not correspond to the average tissue shot which is tested in anethsitsed pigs through the rear of the pig... a homogenous muscle area of adequate thickness.

Originally Posted By Silence214: Why doesnt anyone gelatin test these rounds @100m or more? It would be good to see the penetration and fragmentation at this distance 214

The yaw angle of the bullet on contact plays a role in the onset of yaw at distance but reduced velocity shots at close range would give "worst case" type of results with limited yaw.  Testing at close range with reduced velocities provides the needed data and is far easier to accomplish.  Rest assured bullets will fragment earlier at a distance and if they fragment at a particular velocity that is easy enough to calculate without having to actually shooting of gelatin at that distance.

Originally Posted By Silence214: Are there any documented shootings (Military/Law Enforcement) using either the TAP 5.56 75gr or TAP FPD 75gr rounds that give us evidence of  fragmentation to support the data in this thread (threshold and so forth)? We have plenty when it comes to the M855 and M193 rounds and even the 77gr. SMK. But if one is going to sink a bit of money into a vastly superior round (claimed), there should be evidence to support it aside from gelatin tests. 214

Yes there are many documented reports.  Gelatin results dont need to be "substantiated" by real world shootings IMO.  Read the post above.  I know Dr Roberts helped get 75 grain 5.56 TAP into the hands of some shooters overseas a couple years back.  Several LE agencies have used the rounds with mixed results depending on shot placement... thats common with all rounds.  "Street stopping" results are not an effective or scientific way to measure the "stopping power" (a dubious term) of a round... such published testing is always both statiscitally flawed and often faked like the widely published reports you may be familiar with.

Does anybody know a load available to civilians with similar performance to the 6.8 SPC BTHP TAP?