User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/19/2006 8:13:49 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Molon]
[#1]
Hi Justin, I wouldn't read too much into the velocity difference between those two loads. First of all, ignore the load with the Nosler 77 grain OTM bullet as that was a one time run for a special group purchase. As far as I am aware, it is no longer being produced. Now, looking at the difference between the MK262 seconds and 5.56 TAP there is only a 9 fps difference. That is less than one standard deviation of either load. Also, I have chronographed a particular lot of MK262 that averaged 2805 fps and a particular lot of 5.56 TAP that averaged 2836 fps so the results are reversed when comparing those two particular lots. Molon |
|||
|
|
NY, USA
|
Posted: 10/20/2006 1:33:19 PM EDT
[#2]
Thanks for clearing that up Molon!  Best Regards, Justin |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/22/2006 12:01:57 AM EDT
[#3]
No problemo. I'm gald I was able to answer this question a little better than your last one. |
|||||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2006 5:20:45 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Molon]
[#4]
(experimental post in progress)
|
|
|
|
PA, USA
|
Posted: 10/23/2006 7:15:33 PM EDT
[Last Edit: army_eod]
[#5]
ALL You guys are fantastic...ammo geeks for sure. I just bought some ammo to try in my RRA 1:9 carbine. From what I read, the 75 gr may work. Here is the link to GT Distributors where I bought the stuff. Is this the "good stuff?" www.gtdist.com/ProductDetail.aspx?PartNumber=HORNADY-83XXX Also picked up the 62 gr version and a box of Federal 69 match. Thanx for the serious work. |
|
|
|
NY, USA
|
Posted: 10/23/2006 7:30:17 PM EDT
[#6]
Excellent work, Molon! Is there any way to make the photos in the first link to show up? Best Regards, Justin |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2006 8:03:54 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Molon]
[#7]
Absolutely! It takes a little work but the results are worth the effort. In order to get the pictures to show up in the .htm file you need to download the folder with the pictures and graphics in it and then un-zip it. 1. left click on the following link to take you to the down load page. Hornady 556 TAP versus TAP FPD_files 2. Once the down load page completely loads (all the pics are viewable), left click on the "down arrow" located next to the "Hornady 556" file name. 3. When you left click as instructed above, a menu opens up. Left click on on the"ZIP FOLDER" selection. 4. A prompt will appear asking you "Would you like to open the file or save it to your computer?" Left click on the "Save" button. 5. Select the location on your hard drive you want to save the file and left click on the "Save" button. This file is almost 15 Mb so it will take a while to load. (It will be near death to 56K users.) 6. Once the download is complete left click on the "open folder" button. You will see a "zipped" folder with the name "Hornady 5.56 TAP versus TAP FPD_files". RIGHT click on that folder and then left click on the "extract all" selection from the pop up menu. 7. The extraction wizard will walk you through the unzipping process. Just left click the "next" button to start. When the files are finished being extracted, left click on the "finish" button. At this point you should have successfully downloaded and unzipped the pictures and graphics folder. In order for the .htm file to access these pics, you need to save the .htm file into the same location as the folder holding the un-zipped pictures. In order to due this: 8. RIGHT click on the following link. Hornady 556 TAP versus TAP FPD 9. Left click on the "Save Target as.." selection from the menu. Save the file in the same location as the folder holding the un-zipped pictures and graphics then click on the "open folder" button that appears. 10. Left clicking on the "Hornady 5.56 TAP versus TAP FPD" .htm file that you just saved will open your web browser with all the pictures and graphics now showing in the file. You can even add this file to your "Favorites" on your web browser. |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2006 10:24:26 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Molon]
[#8]
The instructions in the above post are for a download of two files that contain a condensed and edited version of this entire thread that can be viewed on your web browser. All of the "technical" posts from this thread have been put into one file for easier viewing and reference.
Molon |
|
|
|
NY, USA
|
Posted: 10/23/2006 10:46:05 PM EDT
[#9]
Molon,
You rock! I nominate you and Stickman for most informative posters of the year!  Justin |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2006 12:42:05 AM EDT
[Last Edit: saucy]
[#10]
I wholeheartedly agree!! +1
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2006 11:01:01 AM EDT
[#11]
YUP. This one is both saved, and a hard copy printed out. |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2006 10:00:16 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Molon]
[#12]
I've converted the edited and condensed .htm files of this thread into a single .pdf file. The viewing is a little more awkward, but downloading is much easier. Simply RIGHT click on the link below and then left click on the "Save target as" selection from the menu.
You can also just left click on the link to view the .pdf without saving it. Hornady 5.56 TAP versus TAP FPD.pdf |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2006 12:35:37 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Molon]
[#13]
I updated the down-loadable .htm files; same down-load instructions as before.
In order to get the pictures to show up in the .htm file you need to download the folder with the pictures and graphics in it and then un-zip it. 1. left click on the following link to take you to the down load page. Hornady 556 TAP versus TAP FPD_files 2. Once the down load page completely loads (all the pics are viewable), left click on the "down arrow" located next to the "Hornady 556" file name. 3. When you left click as instructed above, a menu opens up. Left click on on the"ZIP FOLDER" selection. 4. A prompt will appear asking you "Would you like to open the file or save it to your computer?" Left click on the "Save" button. 5. Select the location on your hard drive you want to save the file and left click on the "Save" button. This file is almost 20 Mb so it will take a while to load. (It will be death to 56K users.) 6. Once the download is complete left click on the "open folder" button. You will see a "zipped" folder with the name "Hornady 556 TAP versus TAP FPD_files". RIGHT click on that folder and then left click on the "extract all" selection from the pop up menu. 7. The extraction wizard will walk you through the unzipping process. Just left click the "next" button to start. When the files are finished being extracted, left click on the "finish" button. At this point you should have successfully downloaded and unzipped the pictures and graphics folder. In order for the .htm file to access these pics, you need to save the .htm file into the same location as the folder holding the un-zipped pictures. In order to due this: 8. RIGHT click on the following link. Hornady 556 TAP versus TAP FPD 9. Left click on the "Save Target as.." selection from the menu. Save the file in the same location as the folder holding the un-zipped pictures and graphics then click on the "open folder" button that appears. 10. Left clicking on the "Hornady 5.56 TAP versus TAP FPD" .htm file that you just saved will open your web browser with all the pictures and graphics now showing in the file. You can even add this file to your "Favorites" on your web browser. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2006 12:44:17 PM EDT
[#14]
Am I understanding fragmentation ranges correctly? From a 16" barrel-the bullet does not reach full frag till 185 yards? If so how do we tell the bad guys to move back some? Are these bullets good for HD/Jerico situations at 100, 50, 25 yards or less?
Oh and thanks Molon for your efforts. |
|
|
IN, USA
|
Posted: 10/25/2006 1:00:26 PM EDT
[#15]
The fragmentation range is the maximum range at which the bullet is still fast enough to fragment. At any range from the muzzle to that distance it'll work as well as it can. Beyond that range the effectiveness will be reduced due to the lack of fragmentation.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2006 1:24:40 PM EDT
[#16]
thanks mike
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/27/2006 2:55:10 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Molon]
[#17]
The black nickel cases shown in the ad would indicate the ammunition is the SAAMI pressure TAP FPD loading. |
|||
|
|
PA, USA
|
Posted: 10/27/2006 3:21:23 PM EDT
[#18]
Well, that blows chunks. I will try to acertain what it is and update you all. |
|||
|
|
PA, USA
|
Posted: 10/27/2006 3:22:31 PM EDT
[#19]
Another question:
Where does the BH 75 Grain Match ammo fall out in this discussion? |
|
|
PA, USA
|
Posted: 10/27/2006 3:33:30 PM EDT
[#20]
|
|||
|
|
IN, USA
|
Posted: 10/27/2006 4:22:01 PM EDT
[#21]
Nominally the same as the TAP FPD, but without the black nickel cases of course. I can't remember if it has the cannelure or not though. I think it does. Same bullet otherwise. Blue Box lot 1701120783 averaged 2641fps from my 16" RRA middy. SD 14fps, ES 46fps. 10ft from muzzle on an 80+ & humid day 2 years ago. I don't have chrono data for 14.5 or 20" barrels. Q3131A lot TG61 ran 3168fps in the same barrel that day. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/27/2006 4:29:39 PM EDT
[#22]
 |
||
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 10/27/2006 9:10:01 PM EDT
[#23]
In older Black Hills ammo none of it was cannelured (75 grain both Red and Blue). For the past couple years and from now on all of it is cannelured. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2006 2:49:02 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Molon]
[#24]
|
|
|
|
OH, USA
|
Posted: 10/29/2006 6:08:04 PM EDT
[#25]
I just picked up some red boxes of FDP and noticed that they are marked .223. Is this an old run or something new?
|
|
|
NE, USA
|
Posted: 10/29/2006 9:09:56 PM EDT
[#26]
Different load. Different bullet, case, primer, and powder. |
|
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 10/30/2006 2:44:59 PM EDT
[Last Edit: DevL]
[#27]
All FPD ammo is .223... there is no 5.56 FPD ammo and never has been and never will be. Are you concerend about the box color? Is the brass coated or not on your FPD? Can you post a pic of your box? I have never seen a red box FPD package before. |
|
|
|
OH, USA
|
Posted: 11/1/2006 3:29:06 PM EDT
[#28]
Molon, this is really great work! Does anyone know what the fragmentation ranges would be of this using 10.5,11.5 and 12.5" barrels?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2006 10:51:20 AM EDT
[#29]
Unforunately the state of MI does not allow us peons to own such things as SBRs. (It's for the children, don't you know.) If you can come up with the muzzle velocities for the above barrel lengths I can give you the approximate fragmentation ranges. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2006 11:10:30 AM EDT
[#30]
AWESOME WORK THANKS ALOT |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2006 11:16:18 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Molon]
[#31]
Has anyone down-loaded the .pdf or .htm files from this thread? I'm just wondering if they are working OK.
Molon |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 11/5/2006 11:08:24 PM EDT
[#32]
IIRC, Some of the Pics stil showed as"X" 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/6/2006 1:04:16 AM EDT
[#33]
I got the pdf fine and it worked well.
Thanks Molon.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/6/2006 2:10:56 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Austin_Nichols]
[#34]
Just did it, looks good. Thanks for the hard work. eta: I did the .htm download |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 11/6/2006 12:04:27 PM EDT
[#35]
Great post!!!
 
|
|
|
IA, USA
|
Posted: 11/6/2006 10:26:50 PM EDT
[#36]
Molon,
You are the KING!
|
|
|
FL, USA
|
Posted: 11/7/2006 1:34:14 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Kyrinn]
[#37]
A related side-topic to attempt to address expected Muzzle Velocity in shorter barrels.
Data is based on Molon's initial data at the beginning of the .pdf. - - - Velocity Drop-Off Projections Based on Barrel Lengths (20" - 7.3") Using Hornaday 75gr. TAP/FPD This piece was initially arrived at using the average of chronographed data between the .223 FPD and the 5.56 TAP rounds, as fired out of Colt 20" Gov. profile; Colt 16" light weight; and, Colt 14.5 M4 Barrels. Three different calculation methods were used to determine the Muzzle Velocities of the shorter than tested barrel lengths (11.5 - 7.3). * First, the percentage of length compared to the 20" and that percentage applied to the 20" MzV. * Second, the percentage of the bbl. length in comparison to the 14.5" bbl, expressed as a percentage of the 14.5" MzV. NOTE: The '// # \\' is the average between Steps 1 and 2. * Third, a flat 32fps per inch loss, assessed against the untested bbl. lengths. (as discussed toward the end of the .pdf) The '= {#}' is the average of the lowest value (percentage of 14.5" MzV.) and the flat 32fps per inch loss (posted after the '\\') I believe that the '= {#}' is the most accurate of the lot, but I don't know with any real certainty, and would greatly appreciate others proving or disproving my tenuous results. Note, also, that at the high-end of the calculations, the '= {#}' of the 16" bbl. MzV is actually higher than the flat-loss projection. The chronograpgh and projected fragmentation data comes from Molon of www.AR15.com fame. - - - * 7.3" ~ 36.5% of 20" Length ~ 50.3% of 14.5" --1581.745 / 996.2675 // 1276.865 \\ 2323.1 = {1659} fps -F- * 10.5" ~ 52.5% of 20" Length ~ 72.4% of 14.5" --1708 / 1432.987 // 1837.5 \\ 2425.5 = {1929} fps -F- * 11.5" ~ 57.5% of 20" Length ~ 79.3% of 14.5" --1917 / 1569.175 // 2013 \\ 2457.5 = {2013} fps -F- * 14.5" ~ 72.5% of 20" Length --2538.5 ~ 93% of 20" // . \\ 2553.5 = {2546} fps -F- 099Y * 16" ~ 80% of 20" Length --2620.5 ~ 96% of 20" // . \\ 2601.5 = {2611} fps -F- 132.5Y * 20" --2729.5 fps -F- 177.5Y Best, |
|
|
FL, USA
|
Posted: 11/7/2006 9:08:39 PM EDT
[#38]
Bump
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/8/2006 12:35:38 PM EDT
[#39]
Did this occur with the .htm or .pdf file? |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 11/8/2006 12:37:12 PM EDT
[#40]
ctrmass and Rcd567,
Thanks guys.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/8/2006 12:41:17 PM EDT
[#41]
Kyrinn, Wow! Interesting stuff, thanks for posting it. I can see you put a lot of thought into this. I am curious as to why you chose to base your calculations on an average of the TAP FPD and 5.56 TAP loads. These are two completely different loads. Therefore, the results that you worked so hard to calculate are not indicative of either load. I would be interested in seeing the results of your calculations applied individually to the two different loads and compared to the estimated velocities for the shorter barrels that I obtained using the QuickLOAD software program. Cheers, Molon   |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 11/13/2006 6:35:27 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Molon]
[#42]
Here's a little information pertaining to the development of the control loads that I used throughout the testing for this thread. I thought some of you might find it interesting.
 Using the QuickLoad software program we can examine the effects of the variations in weight of the cartridge components on the velocity of the control accuracy load. A large sample of the Sierra 55 grain BlitzKing bullets showed a weight variation of only 0.2 grains (54.9 to 55.1 grains). I consider this to be outstanding for bullets not coming from one of the smaller custom bullet companies. (Sierra’s MatchKing line of bullets have shown even less weight variation, with many samples showing 0 to 0.1 grains of variation). We could choose to weight sort the bullets and not have any measurable variation, but this is one of the areas in which I decided to compromise, although not by much, as you shall soon see. Calculating the change in velocity due to a 0.2 grain variation in bullet weight results in a mere two feet per second variation in velocity according to the QucikLoad software. Granted this is not an actual measurement, but this computer simulation does allow us to make relative comparisons of variations in isolated components and factors affecting cartridge performance; and to do it with just the click of a mouse button. For example, we would need a variation in bullet seating depth of 0.003” to change the bullet velocity by two feet per second. Since the control accuracy load has a bullet seating depth variation of just 0.0015” we can see that the variation in bullet seating depth has even less effect on velocity than the variations in bullet weight. This 0.0015” variation in bullet seating depth accounts for scarcely one foot per second of velocity variation. In one experiment with Lake City 5.56mm cases I weighed a sample of 200 cases and determined the range to be 3.2 grains. I then determined the internal case capacity in grains of H2O of the heaviest and lightest cases. For the entire sample the internal case capacity variation was 0.64 grains of H2O. For each one grain variation of case weight the internal case capacity varied by 0.2 grains of H2O, or a five to one ratio. Once again using the QuickLoad software, I calculated that the 0.64 grains of H2O variation in internal case capacity would result in a velocity variation of 33 feet per second; a much greater variation than that caused by bullet weight and seating depth variations combined. If we weight sorted our cases to a range of one grain this would correspond to an internal case capacity variation of 0.2 grains of H2O and a velocity variation of only 10 feet per second. This is a theoretical reduction in velocity variation due to internal case capacity variation of almost 70% by merely weight sorting cases to within a range of one grain. Further sorting cases to a range of 0.5 grains gives us an internal case capacity variation of 0.1 grains of H2O with an attending velocity variation of 5 feet per second; an 85% reduction in velocity variation from that of unsorted cases. Now, after uniforming the primer pockets with a Sinclair 8000 Series uniformer and chamfering the inside of the case mouth with a K&M tapered case mouth reamer the select Lake City ’01 cases had a weight variation of only 0.1 grains. Now we are talking about a corresponding internal case capacity variation of only 0.02 grains of H2O. This is too small a weight to even detect on my Pact Digital Precision Scale. In fact, after full length resizing these fired cases using a Redding Type S Bushing Die I was unable to measure any variation in internal case capacity. Each case measured had an internal case capacity of 30.7 grains of H2O. Weight sorting of the cases to this degree has virtually eliminated variations in internal case capacity and its attending variations in velocity. For those who are interested, the simulated velocity variation due to an internal case capacity variation of 0.02 grains of H2O is one foot per second! When meticulously adjusted the powder measure on my Dillon XL 650 will consistently throw powder charges of VihtaVuori N133 within ± 0.1 grains (as weighed on the Pact Powder Scale) of the desired 23.5 grain charge used in the control accuracy load. Thirty charges thrown sequentially had a mean charge weight of 23.53 grains. This is more than adequate for “ government work” and about all that one could hope for with a progressive press. The only powders that meter appreciably better in this powder measure are the finely kerneled “ball powders” such as Winchester W-748. A QuickLoad simulation shows that a 0.2 grain variation in charge weight results in a velocity variation of 24 feet per second. This is six times the variation in velocity of the control accuracy load due to bullet weight, bullet seating depth and case weight/internal case capacity variations combined. This range of 0.2 grains in charge weight is more than compensated for by the speed and convenience of using a progressive press, still, for the purpose of accuracy testing I wanted something better. Enter the Pact Digital precision Powder Dispenser and Powder Scale. The Pact Digital Precision Powder Dispenser and Powder Scale work in tandem to give you “hand tricked” powder charges in less time and with greater ease than with weighing each charge and trickling each one to the desired weight by hand. In a suitable environment (no drafts or fluctuations in ambient temperature and a rock solid bench to rest on) and with frequent calibrations the Pact Powder Scale is the most accurate and consistent electronic scale for reloaders that I have used. Changing the charge weight while working up a new load is as easy as punching in the numbers on the keyboard of the Dispenser. Using the Pact Dispenser and Scale every cartridge of the control accuracy load was given a powder charge of exactly 23.5 grains (accurate to one tenth of a grain) greatly reducing the variations in velocity due to variations in powder charges. A variation in primer weight could indicate a variation in the weight of the actual primer pellet, which in turn could possibly cause variations in the ignition of the propellant. Variation in weight of the Federal Gold Medal Match small rifle primers; zero! Every single primer checked had a weight of 3.6 grains. Enough said. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/13/2006 7:15:41 PM EDT
[#43]
Molon, what load were you using as the "TAP clone" load?
 Handloaders want to know..... 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/15/2006 9:29:39 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Molon]
[#44]
223 TAP clone Start with virgin Lake City brass.  Prime with Federal Gold Medal primers.  Charge with one of those "Finnish" powders. A muzzle velocity of around 2650 fps (plus or minus 50 fps) from a 20" barrel seems to be the sweet spot for accuracy from my Colt barrels.  Seat a Hornady 75 grain BTHP bullet to 2.250" O.A.L.  Repeat as needed.  |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 11/15/2006 9:41:16 PM EDT
[#45]
Thanks!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/17/2006 6:27:43 PM EDT
[#46]
De nada. 
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2006 10:51:49 PM EDT
[#47]
Here is a graph of the trajectory of 75 grain TAP FPD fired from a 16" barrel.
muzzle velocity = 2528 fps iron sights 2.6" above bore line  |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 11/18/2006 11:51:57 PM EDT
[#48]
It was the .htm download, the .pdf seems fine although the page alignments a bit off.  I love the pics of Island Lake and believe I saw you out there one day setting up -- your wind instrument looks familiar. 
|
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 11/19/2006 1:13:56 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Molon]
[#49]
The .pdf format definitely got skewed when converting, but it's easier to download. The .htm file looks much better, but you have to make sure the graphics folder is under the same directory as the main file for it to work properly. Certainly not too many people hauling a Wind Probe out to the Island Lake range. If you see a short guy wearing a LaRue Tactical hat setting up a Wind Probe it's probably me.      |
|||||
|
|
OH, USA
|
Posted: 11/19/2006 9:06:21 AM EDT
[#50]
This may have been answered somewhere in this 16 pages and if so, sorry for asking again. Your wind probe, did you make that or purchase it? If bought, were from?
|
|
|
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.
