AR Sponsor
| Now wait a minute. With a given twist, the faster the MV, the higher the rotational velocity. So, with a slow twist barrel, if you get the MV high enough, the bullet will develop enough rotational velocity to stabilize. You can't "overstabilize" a bullet by spinning it too fast, but it may want to fly apart from the gyroscopic forces. Accuracy may be more affected by the concussive wave coming behind the bullet as it exits the barrel, upsetting the trajectory just a fuz. Someone correct me if I'm wrong here. |
|
Quoted:
Now wait a minute. With a given twist, the faster the MV, the higher the rotational velocity. So, with a slow twist barrel, if you get the MV high enough, the bullet will develop enough rotational velocity to stabilize. You can't "overstabilize" a bullet by spinning it too fast, but it may want to fly apart from the gyroscopic forces. Accuracy may be more affected by the concussive wave coming behind the bullet as it exits the barrel, upsetting the trajectory just a fuz. Someone correct me if I'm wrong here. Look at the chart Molon posted on the previous page - even at 4000 fps, it's not even close to stable out of a 1/10 tube. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Now wait a minute. With a given twist, the faster the MV, the higher the rotational velocity. So, with a slow twist barrel, if you get the MV high enough, the bullet will develop enough rotational velocity to stabilize. You can't "overstabilize" a bullet by spinning it too fast, but it may want to fly apart from the gyroscopic forces. Accuracy may be more affected by the concussive wave coming behind the bullet as it exits the barrel, upsetting the trajectory just a fuz. Someone correct me if I'm wrong here. Look at the chart Molon posted on the previous page - even at 4000 fps, it's not even close to stable out of a 1/10 tube. OK, that makes sense. So the bullet would have to travel significantly faster than 4000fps before stabilizing in a 1:10 twist barrel. I wonder how fast exactly that would be? |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Now wait a minute. With a given twist, the faster the MV, the higher the rotational velocity. So, with a slow twist barrel, if you get the MV high enough, the bullet will develop enough rotational velocity to stabilize. You can't "overstabilize" a bullet by spinning it too fast, but it may want to fly apart from the gyroscopic forces. Accuracy may be more affected by the concussive wave coming behind the bullet as it exits the barrel, upsetting the trajectory just a fuz. Someone correct me if I'm wrong here. Look at the chart Molon posted on the previous page - even at 4000 fps, it's not even close to stable out of a 1/10 tube. OK, that makes sense. So the bullet would have to travel significantly faster than 4000fps before stabilizing in a 1:10 twist barrel. I wonder how fast exactly that would be? Fast enough to severely lessen the life of the barrel/rifling and probably do bad things to the bullet jacket. |
|
So ... 1) The increased velocity helps in 2 areas, first in aiding very short barreled weapons to get reliable fragmentation at close to medium range, and second to aid non NFA weapons to extend reliable fragmentation distance. 2) Accuracy becomes increasingly important with distance. 3) This ammo appears to really only be beneficial to SBR (and pistol) owners. Is all that fair to say? |
|
Who's selling it?
I need to buy a box or two to add a data point to the group-size discussion. Meantime, I wasn't aware that this load existed until I read this thread, and was under the impression that the superformance ammo had issues with high SD's. It replaced the Light Magnum ammo that I was a huge fan of, and I wish I had bought more LM for my 30-06 before it was discontinued. edit: ATG has it in stock, and the spousal unit just approved the purchase of two boxes for testing purposes. Results will be posted ASAP. |
|
Quoted:
So ... 1) The increased velocity helps in 2 areas, first in aiding very short barreled weapons to get reliable fragmentation at close to medium range, and second to aid non NFA weapons to extend reliable fragmentation distance. 2) Accuracy becomes increasingly important with distance. 3) This ammo appears to really only be beneficial to SBR (and pistol) owners. Is all that fair to say? I'd debate your third point. Even for those of us with 16" and longer barrels, for typical SD distances encountered by citizens, ~3 MOA is plenty adequate. That translates to roughly .75" at 25 yards, and even less for most "in the home" distances. Some folks might be willing to sacrifice a bit of accuracy for more velocity (and thus potentially better terminal ballistics). For perspective, consider that similar accuracy with a combat pistol is downright amazing. I also wonder if this is some early-run kink that Hornady will work out. |
|
Quoted:
Who's selling it? I need to buy a box or two to add a data point to the group-size discussion. Meantime, I wasn't aware that this load existed until I read this thread, and was under the impression that the superformance ammo had issues with high SD's. It replaced the Light Magnum ammo that I was a huge fan of, and I wish I had bought more LM for my 30-06 before it was discontinued. edit: ATG has it in stock, and the spousal unit just approved the purchase of two boxes for testing purposes. Results will be posted ASAP. Looking forward to seeing your results. |
|
Quoted:
Even for those of us with 16" and longer barrels, for typical SD distances encountered by citizens, ~3 MOA is plenty adequate. That translates to roughly .75" at 25 yards, and even less for most "in the home" distances. Some folks might be willing to sacrifice a bit of accuracy for more velocity (and thus potentially better terminal ballistics). Of course, the flip side of that is that at those typical SD distances, that extra velocity isn't really necessary. You're still well within the frag range of even the .223 FPD load. |
|
Quoted:
Now wait a minute. With a given twist, the faster the MV, the higher the rotational velocity. So, with a slow twist barrel, if you get the MV high enough, the bullet will develop enough rotational velocity to stabilize . . . Someone correct me if I'm wrong here. With regard to this discussion, your statement is meritless. The increase in gyroscopic stability created from an increase in muzzle velocity is miniscule. As an example, increasing the muzzle velocity of the 75 grain BTHP in a 1:10” twist barrel by 500 fps is only going to increase the gyroscopic stability factor by 0.02. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Now wait a minute. With a given twist, the faster the MV, the higher the rotational velocity. So, with a slow twist barrel, if you get the MV high enough, the bullet will develop enough rotational velocity to stabilize. You can't "overstabilize" a bullet by spinning it too fast, but it may want to fly apart from the gyroscopic forces. Accuracy may be more affected by the concussive wave coming behind the bullet as it exits the barrel, upsetting the trajectory just a fuz. Someone correct me if I'm wrong here. Look at the chart Molon posted on the previous page - even at 4000 fps, it's not even close to stable out of a 1/10 tube. OK, that makes sense. So the bullet would have to travel significantly faster than 4000fps before stabilizing in a 1:10 twist barrel. I wonder how fast exactly that would be? It's never going to happen. The rifle is going to explode long before it generates a velocity that produces a gyroscopic stability factor of 1.0. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Looks excellent. Are they actually going to sell it to people? It's listed as varmint ammo, not LEO ammo - I don't see any reason why they wouldn't. That stuff is scooting along at 2900fps - it'll definitely ruin your day. 
Yep, pretty sure that wouldn't buff out easily...
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Even for those of us with 16" and longer barrels, for typical SD distances encountered by citizens, ~3 MOA is plenty adequate. That translates to roughly .75" at 25 yards, and even less for most "in the home" distances. Some folks might be willing to sacrifice a bit of accuracy for more velocity (and thus potentially better terminal ballistics). Of course, the flip side of that is that at those typical SD distances, that extra velocity isn't really necessary. You're still well within the frag range of even the .223 FPD load. Very true. So it begs the question of whether or not this is worth the premium. For punching paper at longer ranges, I'd say no, because 3 MOA would be unacceptable, IMO. Anyone know if the canister Superformance powder is on shelves yet? I wonder if careful handloading can improve group size. |
|
Interesting reading...
http://www.hornady.com/ammunition/superformance-in-gas-operated-firearms It is recommended that to get the best functioning with Superformance ammunition in gas operated/gas piston semi-automatic or select fire guns, rifle length gas systems with 20 inch or longer barrel lengths are best for reliable firing and extraction. Any other configuration, particularly shorter barrels/gas systems are best served with the installation of an adjustable gas system, ESPECIALLY if a suppressor is to be installed.
Due to the longer duration of peak pressure produced by Superformance™, the post peak/declining port pressure at common carbine and mid-length gas port locations is still higher than that produced by standard propellant. This has a tendency to flood the system with a larger volume of gas, at a higher velocity, that tries to open the bolt of the gun too fast. It’s a timing issue. The cartridge case is still swollen from the application of pressure during firing while the gun is simultaneously trying to extract the cartridge case before it has had an opportunity to settle back to its original size, or more simply: the gun is still in the process or firing while it’s trying to extract the cartridge case. |
|
Interesting reading... http://www.hornady.com/ammunition/superformance-in-gas-operated-firearms It is recommended that to get the best functioning with Superformance ammunition in gas operated/gas piston semi-automatic or select fire guns, rifle length gas systems with 20 inch or longer barrel lengths are best for reliable firing and extraction. Any other configuration, particularly shorter barrels/gas systems are best served with the installation of an adjustable gas system, ESPECIALLY if a suppressor is to be installed.
Due to the longer duration of peak pressure produced by Superformance™, the post peak/declining port pressure at common carbine and mid-length gas port locations is still higher than that produced by standard propellant. This has a tendency to flood the system with a larger volume of gas, at a higher velocity, that tries to open the bolt of the gun too fast. It’s a timing issue. The cartridge case is still swollen from the application of pressure during firing while the gun is simultaneously trying to extract the cartridge case before it has had an opportunity to settle back to its original size, or more simply: the gun is still in the process or firing while it’s trying to extract the cartridge case. SOoooo... Hornady is stating that the "performance envelope" of the powder is not "compatible" with carbines and middys, and the accuracy is lousy. I think I'll stick with good ole 8126N for the Colts and Noveske. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Who's selling it? I need to buy a box or two to add a data point to the group-size discussion. Meantime, I wasn't aware that this load existed until I read this thread, and was under the impression that the superformance ammo had issues with high SD's. It replaced the Light Magnum ammo that I was a huge fan of, and I wish I had bought more LM for my 30-06 before it was discontinued. edit: ATG has it in stock, and the spousal unit just approved the purchase of two boxes for testing purposes. Results will be posted ASAP. Looking forward to seeing your results. Given what hornady says about shooting this stuff in a midlength, does anyone want to place bets on how many blown primers I get?
Either way, I ordered two boxes today - but even if it shoots great, considering what Hornady says about midlength or shorter gas systems, I doubt I'd buy any more of it. |
|
Quoted:
Interesting reading... http://www.hornady.com/ammunition/superformance-in-gas-operated-firearms It is recommended that to get the best functioning with Superformance ammunition in gas operated/gas piston semi-automatic or select fire guns, rifle length gas systems with 20 inch or longer barrel lengths are best for reliable firing and extraction. Any other configuration, particularly shorter barrels/gas systems are best served with the installation of an adjustable gas system, ESPECIALLY if a suppressor is to be installed.
Due to the longer duration of peak pressure produced by Superformance™, the post peak/declining port pressure at common carbine and mid-length gas port locations is still higher than that produced by standard propellant. This has a tendency to flood the system with a larger volume of gas, at a higher velocity, that tries to open the bolt of the gun too fast. It’s a timing issue. The cartridge case is still swollen from the application of pressure during firing while the gun is simultaneously trying to extract the cartridge case before it has had an opportunity to settle back to its original size, or more simply: the gun is still in the process or firing while it’s trying to extract the cartridge case. I wonder if this applies to all buffer weights, or if those with T2, H3, or 9mm buffers are excluded. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Interesting reading... http://www.hornady.com/ammunition/superformance-in-gas-operated-firearms It is recommended that to get the best functioning with Superformance ammunition in gas operated/gas piston semi-automatic or select fire guns, rifle length gas systems with 20 inch or longer barrel lengths are best for reliable firing and extraction. Any other configuration, particularly shorter barrels/gas systems are best served with the installation of an adjustable gas system, ESPECIALLY if a suppressor is to be installed. Due to the longer duration of peak pressure produced by Superformance™, the post peak/declining port pressure at common carbine and mid-length gas port locations is still higher than that produced by standard propellant. This has a tendency to flood the system with a larger volume of gas, at a higher velocity, that tries to open the bolt of the gun too fast. It’s a timing issue. The cartridge case is still swollen from the application of pressure during firing while the gun is simultaneously trying to extract the cartridge case before it has had an opportunity to settle back to its original size, or more simply: the gun is still in the process or firing while it’s trying to extract the cartridge case. I wonder if this applies to all buffer weights, or if those with T2, H3, or 9mm buffers are excluded. I doubt it. A heavy buffer cant really solve a timing issue, the extractor putting on a sealed case is what it is.. The only way to see is to examine the spent brass if the rifle didn't blow up during the first few rounds. Personally, I don't know how many people are going to have issues. Extraction is a function of pressure, dwell time, and gas port size. http://ar15barrels.com/prod/operation.shtml |
Looks like the Superformance .223 load benefitted more with the new powder than the 5.56 Nato load. According to my research the claimed velocities are the same between the .223 and 5.56 Superformance. The .223 Superformance is marked as "Match" and the 5.56 Nato is not. In the various tests I have found online "Trustworthy ones" the .223 has been more accurate by about 1.7 m.o.a. than the Nato loading(1.8 m.o.a compared to 3.5 m.o.a.). Is this why Hornady slapped the title "Match" on the .223 and not the 5.56? If the new powder truly improved performance across the board for their entire product line, one would expect the 5.56 loading to at least be rated at 3000fps compared to the .223's 2930fps. I am still perplexed as to why the accuracy discrepency of the .223 and 5.56 using the same T1 style bullet though. I know Molon's testing of the 5.56 Nato load and the 53gr v-max load but didn't see his testing of the .223 superformance load. Any input Molon - anybody?
|
|
Ok, I did some shooting this morning:
Hornady #81264, Lot # 3101256, LC 08 Brass w/ a messy bluish primer sealant Temperature: 40 Wind, light, steady and quartering Denny's Operator 16" in a LaRue 9.0 FF forend A2 stock B&L Elite 6500 in a LaRue LT104 mount. Sandbags, 100 yards. 1st ten shots: 2781 2805 2796 2780 2811 2820 2797 2828 2826 2815 avg2805.9 sd17.22046586 es48 Group size: 2.63" Mean Radius: .920" I was actually pleasantly surprised, but decided to let the barrel cool completely and try again. 2770 2769 2796 2830 2772 2756 2816 2737 2771 2840 avg2785.7 sd33.52958892 es103 Group size: 3.947" Mean Radius: 1.274" 
On a more positive note, I observed no issues related to the short (midlength) gas system; no problems with ejection, no signs of problems with the brass (fired brass looked identical to fired brass from the 5 rounds of TAP T2 75 I used as fouling shots after cleaning the barrel last night), no problems with feeding (as had been rumored to exist with the projectile this load uses). In other words, it performed fine, except for the abnormally large group size and an ES that was higher than I'd prefer. |
|
Quoted:
Ok, I did some shooting this morning: Hornady #81264, Lot # 3101256, LC 08 Brass w/ a messy bluish primer sealant Temperature: 40 Wind, light, steady and quartering Denny's Operator 16" in a LaRue 9.0 FF forend A2 stock B&L Elite 6500 in a LaRue LT104 mount. Sandbags, 100 yards. 1st ten shots: 2781 2805 2796 2780 2811 2820 2797 2828 2826 2815 avg2805.9 sd17.22046586 es48 Group size: 2.63" Mean Radius: .920" I was actually pleasantly surprised, but decided to let the barrel cool completely and try again. 2770 2769 2796 2830 2772 2756 2816 2737 2771 2840 avg2785.7 sd33.52958892 es103 Group size: 3.947" Mean Radius: 1.274"
On a more positive note, I observed no issues related to the short (midlength) gas system; no problems with ejection, no signs of problems with the brass (fired brass looked identical to fired brass from the 5 rounds of TAP T2 75 I used as fouling shots after cleaning the barrel last night), no problems with feeding (as had been rumored to exist with the projectile this load uses). In other words, it performed fine, except for the abnormally large group size and an ES that was higher than I'd prefer. Excellent work! So you have an average 10-shot group extreme spread of 3.29" from the Operator barrel. |
|
Quoted:
So you have an average 10-shot group extreme spread of 3.29" from the Operator barrel. That is correct. I don't have a benchmark load to shoot before a test (well, I do, but I'm out of it...  ) but this barrel has turned in MUCH better performance before.
I just don't understand why accuracy is so spotty with this load. 
|
This sucks Molon. I had high hopes for this ammo. I guess the Superperformance 75 grains are "OK" 100 yards in, but if you want "match" or varmit ammo beyond that, it's probably better to use something else for tighter groups (like your 55 grain Sierra Blitzkings  ).
Any ballistics tests you know of yet? I wonder how this bullet performs in gelatin relative to 5.56 TAP due to the TAP's cannelure. I mean, from a tactical perspective, the whole point of the round would be to obtain higher velocities and cover longer distances before the bullet hits that 2200-2250 fps threshold for reliable fragmentation, right? Thanks again for the test Molon. Your posts are outstanding. 
|
|
Quoted: Quoted: So you have an average 10-shot group extreme spread of 3.29" from the Operator barrel. That is correct. I don't have a benchmark load to shoot before a test (well, I do, but I'm out of it... ) but this barrel has turned in MUCH better performance before. I just don't understand why accuracy is so spotty with this load. I wonder if it's the sum total of the components not getting along with each other, so to speak. Because if you look at Molon's data for the 53gr V-Max, the group is much tighter. I'm anxious for the powder to come out so some guys that are really good at reloading can try it out with different bullets/primers/cases. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
So you have an average 10-shot group extreme spread of 3.29" from the Operator barrel. That is correct. I don't have a benchmark load to shoot before a test (well, I do, but I'm out of it... ) but this barrel has turned in MUCH better performance before.
I just don't understand why accuracy is so spotty with this load.
I think the accurracy problem for this amo lies in the fact that its loaded to really high velocities almost ignoring its accurracy potential. Which makes me wonder how the .223 version performs. Molon have you tried it in your Krieger Barrel yet? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So you have an average 10-shot group extreme spread of 3.29" from the Operator barrel. That is correct. I don't have a benchmark load to shoot before a test (well, I do, but I'm out of it... ) but this barrel has turned in MUCH better performance before.
I just don't understand why accuracy is so spotty with this load.
I think its the .6grain extreme spread in the powder.Everyone that reloads accurrate ammo knows that. Hell my SS109 loads an 55gr loads only have a .1-.2 es. Wrong thread, dude. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So you have an average 10-shot group extreme spread of 3.29" from the Operator barrel. That is correct. I don't have a benchmark load to shoot before a test (well, I do, but I'm out of it... ) but this barrel has turned in MUCH better performance before.
I just don't understand why accuracy is so spotty with this load.
I think its the .6grain extreme spread in the powder.Everyone that reloads accurrate ammo knows that. Hell my SS109 loads an 55gr loads only have a .1-.2 es. Wrong thread, dude. Yes that was directed at the ASYM
I think the accurracy problem for this amo lies in the fact that its loaded to really high velocities almost ignoring its accurracy potential. Which makes me wonder how the .223 version performs. |
|
Quoted:
Anyone test the 55gr GMX Superformance load? The GMX is a lead-free, solid gilding metal bullet. I also wonder if Black Hills will load the 68gr Hornady BTHP with Superformance powder (and maybe achieve better accuracy). In the entire history of Federal and Hornady offering ammo loaded with these extra-performance powders, I am not aware of one single commercially offered load that demonstrated accuracy statistically equal to or better than its standard-performance counterpart (edit: in testing by individuals, that is). Like so many other areas of technology, it seems that as you approach the edge of an envelope, stability suffers. (Someone correct me if I'm wrong) Until that changes, I have an extremely hard time imagining Black Hills - a company that built its reputation on consistency - offering such a load. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Anyone test the 55gr GMX Superformance load? The GMX is a lead-free, solid gilding metal bullet. I also wonder if Black Hills will load the 68gr Hornady BTHP with Superformance powder (and maybe achieve better accuracy). In the entire history of Federal and Hornady offering ammo loaded with these extra-performance powders, I am not aware of one single commercially offered load that demonstrated accuracy statistically equal to or better than its standard-performance counterpart (edit: in testing by individuals, that is). Like so many other areas of technology, it seems that as you approach the edge of an envelope, stability suffers. (Someone correct me if I'm wrong) Until that changes, I have an extremely hard time imagining Black Hills - a company that built its reputation on consistency - offering such a load. Possibly. But off the top of my head, I don't recall any other ammo company besides Black Hills loading the Hornady 68gr. Even Hornady doesn't load it. |
|
Quoted:
What's strange about this is that I've heard really good things about these Superformance loads in .308 out of bolt guns. I was expecting the .223 offering to do a lot better. Where? I've heard of poor accuracy and blown primers being the norm in .308 bolt guns. |
|
Quoted:
What's strange about this is that I've heard really good things about these Superformance loads in .308 out of bolt guns. I was expecting the .223 offering to do a lot better. where did you hear or experience this? link my replies are on the last page i believe. i have gotten the replacement ammo i just haven't had a chance to shoot the 178's again. Before they were shooting 1.5 inches at 100 yards. with 50% of the primers being popped and i had to hold the gun down and force the bolt open to eject the brass. I would have LOVED to have had chrono data on the original ammo as it was obviously very hot stuff 
|
|
Laying down prone with no rest and no bipod, I shot five of the new Hornady 75 grain SuperPerformance and 5 of my 75 grain Hornady reloads (LC '09 brass, Hodgdon BLC-2 25.0 grains, Wolf SRM primer, Hornady 75 grain Match BTHP) at this three inch target @ laser 100 yards in my backyard.
Rife is a SigBoy 556 NATO carbine wtih a 16-inch barrel with a 1:7 inch twist rate. The Super Performance has an Black X in the holes and the Green X is my reloads. There is some water on the target as I shot a half-dozen one gallon water jugs too...
The 1-4X Burris XTR scope has a Point Of Aim for my reloads which is one inch above the bullseye. My Kestral 400 said the air temp was 42*F, wind speed 12 mph into the wind, and baro of 31.22 inches. All ammo functioned fine with no signs of high pressure, shells were ejected 20-25 feet. This certainly is adequate accuracy for hog hunting and southern whitetails (majority of my kills are about 80-120 yards) so when I put down a large porker with the SuperPerformance ammo I'll document the structural damage. 
|
| I'm not a rocket scientist, but given that the velocity increase is mainly achieved by longer burning, I expect that the thermodynamics of the bullet are going to be measurably changed. I expect someone will eventually (soon) work out a bullet/guilding metal that works better with the longer burn time, and a chamber/rifling that benefits as well. I wouldn't be surprised if a whole new cartridge comes out of it... |
|
Quoted:
Laying down prone with no rest and no bipod, I shot five of the new Hornady 75 grain SuperPerformance and 5 of my 75 grain Hornady reloads (LC '09 brass, Hodgdon BLC-2 25.0 grains, Wolf SRM primer, Hornady 75 grain Match BTHP) at this three inch target @ laser 100 yards in my backyard. Rife is a SigBoy 556 NATO carbine wtih a 16-inch barrel with a 1:7 inch twist rate. The Super Performance has an Black X in the holes and the Green X is my reloads. There is some water on the target as I shot a half-dozen one gallon water jugs too...
The 1-4X Burris XTR scope has a Point Of Aim for my reloads which is one inch above the bullseye. My Kestral 400 said the air temp was 42*F, wind speed 12 mph into the wind, and baro of 31.22 inches. All ammo functioned fine with no signs of high pressure, shells were ejected 20-25 feet. This certainly is adequate accuracy for hog hunting and southern whitetails (majority of my kills are about 80-120 yards) so when I put down a large porker with the SuperPerformance ammo I'll document the structural damage. http://www.phossil.com/thom/SIG%20556%20Commando/Reloading/75%20grainSuperPerformance%20&%20HandLoads.jpg Do you have chrono comparisons of the Superformance vs your handloads? |
|
Here is my experience with the new Hornady 75gr Superformance 5.56:
I ordered 2 boxes of the stuff. Glad I didn't get any more! Also, along side it, I tested some more 75gr TAP FPD. Remember, these two loadings use the same bullet. 
I was less than impressed with the attention to detail in how these rounds were put together. One of the things I noticed was the variation in the meplats in the one box. Notice how varied they are with some holes quite large compared to others. Not sure if this makes much difference or not, but thought I'd at least report it. 
These bullets seem to be loaded in virgin LC 09 brass, as previously reported by Molon. However, the attention to the crimping of the primers seems to be sub-optimal, as most have been crimped A LOT off center: 
My set-up is in my back yard. The field used to be a gravel pit when they built the Interstate just other side of our house, so there is a large gravel mound that I can use as a backstop and a nice gravel berm to shoot from. I set up my portable metal target stand frame at 100yd confirmed by my CRF 1200. 
Weather conditions: Temp=72 deg F Wind=0-5mph from 06:00 position Chrono: Competition Electronics placed at 4 paces from the muzzle Rifle: SPR Mk12 mod0 clone built by me. It has a Douglas match grade SS 18" barrel with a 1:7 twist, rifle length gas system, Wylde chamber, and Ops Inc muzzle brake and suppressor. All shots were taken from bipod supported prone position with sand bags under the A2 stock. Not quite the bench-rest setup that Molon uses in his testing, but it is a real-world practical application, I think. I'm not the most experienced AR shooter, but these results represent what my rifle can do in my hands with this ammo. First up, Hornady 75gr TAP FPD to "calibrate" things and get a reference of what a known acceptable commercial load will do. This result is pretty typical for my rifle and my abilities. 10 shots with group size and statistical data recorded in the photo. For those not able to view the images, the data is as follows: group: 1.600", n=10 shots H=2619 L=2569 A=2591 ES=50 SD=17 
I then shot 3 separate 10-shot groups with the Hornady 75gr Superformance 5.56 ammo and combined the velocity data. Groups: 3.830", 3.910", 4.185", and for the "internet commandos", the first 3 shots from that last group (sorry, I didn't measure it): Data recorded on the 2nd photo: n=30 shots H=2892 L=2801 A=2834 ES=91 SD=23 Notice how in the first group a shot hit the wire from the clip and drove it through the target. Sorry, I don't have the software to overlay the 3 ten-shot groups, but here are the images. POA was the same for each of the 3 groups: center of each diamond target. 
Light was starting to fade, so I tried to hurry the next phase. I shot the same two types of ammo in my Bushmaster 16" M4 profile carbine. Two groups of 5 shots were shot with the 75gr TAP FPD, and one nine shot group of the 75gr Superformance 5.56, after the 1st shot hit the wire support and shot it off due the the POI being significantly higher than the POA. It was also shot from a sandbag up front and left hand support for the stock (not the most stable). Hornady 75gr TAP FPD (16" chrome-lined M4 profile carbine) group=1.875", 3.774" Lost the data for one shot, presumed due to the lighting, but: n=9 H=2578 L=2515 A=2541 ES=63 SD=18 
The shot up target stand: 
Only was able to record data for 5 of the shots. group=3.326" n=5 H=2766 L=2726 A=2750 ES=40 SD=19 The 9-shot group from the 16" chrome-lined M4 profile carbine shooting 75gr Superformance 5.56: 
So, in summary, I won't be rushing out to hoard any of this ammo just yet. It did seem to perform about as I would expect m193 to perform from my 16" barrel, so based on the one group I shot, I don't think I would be giving up much accuracy wise, and terminal performance would be expected to be significantly better than m193. The 75gr bullet does seem to stabilize in my Bushmaster, but accuracy is still meh. In my SPR I may use the brass for reloads, but with the off-center primer crimp I may even re-think this. Bottom line: I was not impressed and until I hear many, many, glowing reports that Hornady has managed to improve accuracy in this loading, it will remain a learning experience for me and I will continue to focus on developing accurate reloads for this rifle. |
|
FAB,
I also noticed erratic primer crimping on the Superformance I tested (see page three). Also, in one of Molon's pictures in his original post, a degree of off-centeredness is visible in one of the crimped rounds. However, mine was loaded into LC 08 cases, whereas yours and Molons were in LC 09 cases. Hmmm... |
|
Thanks for the great "home range" benchrest report that mirrors Molon's and others target data.
Your lot number (3101256) is the same lot number of the 200 rounds that I received in LC '09 brass. It seems that there are many different lot numbers of this ammo already out there. If Hornady is unable to provide any more consistent round lot to lot or individually with his new SuperPerformance powder (since the bullets are basically the same T1s), I doubt if I will waste time trying out the new Hodgdon powder in my 75-77 grain reloads when it comes out next year..... |
|
Quoted:
Thanks for the great "home range" benchrest report that mirrors Molon's and others target data. Your lot number (3101256) is the same lot number of the 200 rounds that I received in LC '09 brass. It seems that there are many different lot numbers of this ammo already out there. If Hornady is unable to provide any more consistent round lot to lot or individually with his new SuperPerformance powder (since the bullets are basically the same T1s), I doubt if I will waste time trying out the new Hodgdon powder in my 75-77 grain reloads when it comes out next year..... So two of you have LC 09 cases in your lot # 3101256, but I have LC 08 cases in my lot# 3101256. I would have thought that changing cases would have constituted changing lot numbers. Either way.......is Hornady aware of this thread?
|
|
Here’s a short recap on what we’ve seen so far for the accuracy of the 75 grain 5.56 NATO Superformance load. 10-shot groups fired from semi-automatic rifles/carbines at 100 yards had the following average extreme spreads:
arowneragain- - 3.3” Molon - - - - - - - -3.4” FAB-10_guy - - - 4.0” Belmont31R - - - 4.3” Oh, and lest I forget: SIG-boy - 1.6” . . . from a 1:10” twist barrel that isn’t even capable of adequately stabilizing the Hornady 75 grain BTHP bullet. 
|
AR Sponsor