AR Sponsor
Barnes Precision Match: 5.56x45mm 85 Grain OTM BT (Page 2 of 2)
|
Originally Posted By Eric802: It's the evolution of the platform, that's all. The fact that it might start overlapping with a different platform is irrelevant. As Molon stated before, there are a whole lot of people (like me) who have zero interest in something like 6.5 Grendel, but who are interested in getting the best bang for the buck out of 5.56. For non-match shooters, it might be the best terminal performance. For long range guys, it might be the best BC. Originally Posted By Eric802: Originally Posted By eracer: This is all very cool (nice work, for sure,) but it begs the question: If you're getting 2583 fps from an 85 gr. projectile in an AR-15, why not just step up to a Grendel, which fires bigger bullets at the same velocity - bullets that maintain that velocity further downrange? It just seems to me that 5.56 shooters are trying hard to turn the platform into something it's not. Or is the point that Camp Perry-type matches are so popular that it's only natural to try to push the limits of the cartridge? And if that's the point, then why are so many shooters who never participate in matches getting excited about this? It's the evolution of the platform, that's all. The fact that it might start overlapping with a different platform is irrelevant. As Molon stated before, there are a whole lot of people (like me) who have zero interest in something like 6.5 Grendel, but who are interested in getting the best bang for the buck out of 5.56. For non-match shooters, it might be the best terminal performance. For long range guys, it might be the best BC. Fair enough. I question the terminal performance angle, if only because the nature of the beast is fragmentation, which depends on velocity. Maybe they'll focus on different bullet designs (instead of just bullet lengths) that appeal to different shooter segments, the way Berger does with their 7mm VLD Hunter and VLD Target bullets. I admit to a certain amount of ignorance (probably a vast amount, actually) about the ability of slow, small diameter bullets to work well as a hunting round. And I've just never thought of the 5.56 cartridge as a 'long range' cartridge. It can be shot to 1000 yards, but starting at 2583 fps? Anyway, I've said enough. Thanks again for a great writeup as usual, Molon. |
"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness."
- Mark Twain
- Mark Twain
|
Originally Posted By eracer:
Fair enough. I question the terminal performance angle, if only because the nature of the beast is fragmentation, which depends on velocity. Generally speaking, the greater the length of the bullet relative to its caliber, the lower the velocity required for reliable fragmentation; and the Barnes 85 grain OTM is a looong bullet . . . 
.... |
All that is necessary for Trolls to flourish, is for good men to do nothing.
In God We Trust. Everyone else must post data.
In God We Trust. Everyone else must post data.
|
Originally Posted By snakeman48:
This will be my next "Molon Effect" ammo purchase.....as soon as my funds recover from last month's purchases.  Well I'll be...it was you, wasn't it? Lol...you magnificent bastard. Beat us all to the punch. P.S. And you left some? What..2 boxes? There was 172......1...7...2 20 round boxes. And how dare you use my trademark. I'm suing for damages. 3 guess's to acceptable compensation. Lol |
|
Originally Posted By snakeman48:
I left you some........you were just to slow Originally Posted By snakeman48:
Originally Posted By GSL:
Originally Posted By snakeman48:
This will be my next "Molon Effect" ammo purchase.....as soon as my funds recover from last month's purchases. 
I left you some........you were just to slow But not faster than I! Thanks for another great review Molon!
|
The G19 will never be the only answer, FACT.
Joined:
Mar 2013
Posts:
9146
EE: 100% (179)
AZ, USA
|
Originally Posted By nmguy23:
But not faster than I! Thanks for another great review Molon!Originally Posted By nmguy23:
Originally Posted By snakeman48:
Originally Posted By GSL:
Originally Posted By snakeman48:
This will be my next "Molon Effect" ammo purchase.....as soon as my funds recover from last month's purchases.
I left you some........you were just to slow But not faster than I! Thanks for another great review Molon!
|
Facts don't care about your feelings.
RIP Grin! 10/09/2015
NorCal_LEO issued nickname: Tombstone
RIP Grin! 10/09/2015
NorCal_LEO issued nickname: Tombstone
| I ran the G7 (Litz) verified BC of the 85 grain Barnes at 2583 fps vs the 77 SMK at 2800 fps at 1,000 yards on JBM software and the 85 grain takes 49 inches MOA to reach 1000 yards vs 40.6 for the SMK. It's about 100 fps slower at that range also. It does have a higher G7 BC but Time of flight is going to make it more wind sensative. Not sure this is the way to go. |
|
Originally Posted By QCB:
I ran the G7 (Litz) verified BC of the 85 grain Barnes at 2583 fps vs the 77 SMK at 2800 fps at 1,000 yards on JBM software and the 85 grain takes 49 inches MOA to reach 1000 yards vs 40.6 for the SMK. It's about 100 fps slower at that range also. It does have a higher G7 BC but Time of flight is going to make it more wind sensative. Not sure this is the way to go. Get back to us when you can do this with the magazine length 77 grain SMK at 2800 FPS . . . 
Fired from a semi-automatic AR-15 with the Barnes 85 grain MatchBurner loaded to magazine length. .... |
All that is necessary for Trolls to flourish, is for good men to do nothing.
In God We Trust. Everyone else must post data.
In God We Trust. Everyone else must post data.
|
Originally Posted By Molon:
Get back to us when you can do this with the magazine length 77 grain TMK at 2800 FPS . . . https://app.box.com/shared/static/caq50zgmm8fnbwnmq1uydfa759pjrs52.jpg Fired from a semi-automatic AR-15 with the Barnes 85 grain MatchBurner loaded to magazine length. .... Originally Posted By Molon:
Originally Posted By QCB:
I ran the G7 (Litz) verified BC of the 85 grain Barnes at 2583 fps vs the 77 SMK at 2800 fps at 1,000 yards on JBM software and the 85 grain takes 49 inches MOA to reach 1000 yards vs 40.6 for the SMK. It's about 100 fps slower at that range also. It does have a higher G7 BC but Time of flight is going to make it more wind sensative. Not sure this is the way to go. Get back to us when you can do this with the magazine length 77 grain TMK at 2800 FPS . . . https://app.box.com/shared/static/caq50zgmm8fnbwnmq1uydfa759pjrs52.jpg Fired from a semi-automatic AR-15 with the Barnes 85 grain MatchBurner loaded to magazine length. ....  Cant imagine the MR of that group..
|
|
Blessed1,
Molons test shows 2848 fps for Black Hills Mk262 Mod 1 ammo. http://www.ar15.com/ammo/project/Self_Defense_Ammo_FAQ/MOLON/Black%20Hills%20Mk262%20Mod%201.htm IMI razorcore is going about 2820 fps And CBC is faster still at around 2870 fps all from a 20 inch barrel. I only need 35 MOA at 3200 feet above sea level and 60 degrees to get on target at 1,000 yards with the CBC ammo. Very close to what Brian Litz predicts using JBM software. Ive shot more than 200 rounds at 1,000 yards using this elevation adjustment. Thats a great group you have there but wind and range errors will really open that up at long range. The 85 grain is not even close to a NATO spec 77 OTM for elevation and it has 1/2 more MOA windage adjustment at 1,000 in a full deflection 10 mph cross wind. Youre giving up nearly 200 fps for an 7% increase in G7 BC. (.190 vs .204 G7) Trade off just isnt in there for the heavier bullet. |
|
Originally Posted By QCB:
Blessed1, Molons test shows 2848 fps for Black Hills Mk262 Mod 1 ammo. http://www.ar15.com/ammo/project/Self_Defense_Ammo_FAQ/MOLON/Black%20Hills%20Mk262%20Mod%201.htm IMI razorcore is going about 2820 fps And CBC is faster still at around 2870 fps all from a 20 inch barrel. I only need 35 MOA at 3200 feet above sea level and 60 degrees to get on target at 1,000 yards with the CBC ammo. Very close to what Brian Litz predicts using JBM software. Ive shot more than 200 rounds at 1,000 yards using this elevation adjustment. Thats a great group you have there but wind and range errors will really open that up at long range. The 85 grain is not even close to a NATO spec 77 OTM for elevation and it has 1/2 more MOA windage adjustment at 1,000 in a full deflection 10 mph cross wind. Youre giving up nearly 200 fps for an 7% increase in G7 BC. (.190 vs .204 G7) Trade off just isnt in there for the heavier bullet. That's pretty much the conclusion I jumped to about this bullet for long-range. The high BC is nice, but I'd want something I can push a little faster. |
Everyone please read this carefully. Eric802 is correct. - DK-Prof, 1/27/15
MOA All Day
Apparently "Idiocracy" was a documentary.
MOA All Day
Apparently "Idiocracy" was a documentary.
|
Originally Posted By Blessed1:
Cant imagine the MR of that group..
Originally Posted By Blessed1:
Originally Posted By Molon:
Originally Posted By QCB:
I ran the G7 (Litz) verified BC of the 85 grain Barnes at 2583 fps vs the 77 SMK at 2800 fps at 1,000 yards on JBM software and the 85 grain takes 49 inches MOA to reach 1000 yards vs 40.6 for the SMK. It's about 100 fps slower at that range also. It does have a higher G7 BC but Time of flight is going to make it more wind sensative. Not sure this is the way to go. Get back to us when you can do this with the magazine length 77 grain TMK at 2800 FPS . . . https://app.box.com/shared/static/caq50zgmm8fnbwnmq1uydfa759pjrs52.jpg Fired from a semi-automatic AR-15 with the Barnes 85 grain MatchBurner loaded to magazine length. .... Cant imagine the MR of that group..
The extreme spread of that group is so small that it is not possible to determine the actual mean radius of the group, since some of the shots are "lost" in the ragged hole. ... |
All that is necessary for Trolls to flourish, is for good men to do nothing.
In God We Trust. Everyone else must post data.
In God We Trust. Everyone else must post data.
|
Originally Posted By Blessed1:
Its going to suck when the weather gets warm where ever it is that you live. If the last month or two is any indication,we won't be hearing from you for a while. 
... |
All that is necessary for Trolls to flourish, is for good men to do nothing.
In God We Trust. Everyone else must post data.
In God We Trust. Everyone else must post data.
|
Originally Posted By Molon:
So now you can do a comparison of the two! 
... Originally Posted By Molon:
Originally Posted By threefeathers:
Dang and I just loaded 200 rounds of Sierra MatchKing tipped. Well I'm going to see if Bruno can get the Barns bullets. So now you can do a comparison of the two!
... Yep, and I'll use Range 3 at Ft. Huachuca so I can have a medic with me 
|
Scouts Out
|
Originally Posted By threefeathers:
Yep, and I'll use Range 3 at Ft. Huachuca so I can have a medic with me
Originally Posted By threefeathers:
Originally Posted By Molon:
Originally Posted By threefeathers:
Dang and I just loaded 200 rounds of Sierra MatchKing tipped. Well I'm going to see if Bruno can get the Barns bullets. So now you can do a comparison of the two!
... Yep, and I'll use Range 3 at Ft. Huachuca so I can have a medic with me
Meh. Just throw one of these in your range bag.
... |
All that is necessary for Trolls to flourish, is for good men to do nothing.
In God We Trust. Everyone else must post data.
In God We Trust. Everyone else must post data.
|
Originally Posted By jdillardtiger:
Thanks for the awesome post, Molon. I found this and everything else you post very informative and interesting. Da nada. 
... |
All that is necessary for Trolls to flourish, is for good men to do nothing.
In God We Trust. Everyone else must post data.
In God We Trust. Everyone else must post data.
|
Originally Posted By Molon:
Ordnance gel test conducted by Barnes; published in GUNS & AMMO AR-15. https://app.box.com/shared/static/6d50nxg3sjvkwxc2byg9yikehc3w9jqz.jpg .... Just to confirm, that was the 85gr match burner, correct? I expected more fragmentation. I'm so thankful for your testing and,then finding the gel shot. While impressive the 77gr tmk seems to still be the most damaging heavy (>75gr) round, and it frags very nicely down to 1900fps and below. 
|
I want to die like my uncle did, peacefully in his sleep and not screaming and crying like the people in his car. -J Handy
|
Originally Posted By qwerty4:
Just to confirm, that was the 85gr match burner, correct? I expected more fragmentation. I'm so thankful for your testing and,then finding the gel shot. While impressive the 77gr tmk seems to still be the most damaging heavy (>75gr) round, and it frags very nicely down to 1900fps and below. http://www.ar15.com/media/viewFile.html?i=90776 Originally Posted By qwerty4:
Originally Posted By Molon:
Ordnance gel test conducted by Barnes; published in GUNS & AMMO AR-15. https://app.box.com/shared/static/6d50nxg3sjvkwxc2byg9yikehc3w9jqz.jpg .... Just to confirm, that was the 85gr match burner, correct? I expected more fragmentation. I'm so thankful for your testing and,then finding the gel shot. While impressive the 77gr tmk seems to still be the most damaging heavy (>75gr) round, and it frags very nicely down to 1900fps and below. http://www.ar15.com/media/viewFile.html?i=90776 I believe the main focus by Barnes on the 85gr projectile is accuracy, not necessarily fragmentation. iirc the 77gr TMK has a higher BC thank the 85gr Barnes (correct me if I'm wrong) |
Carry it, shoot it. (repeat forever)
Hard Livin' Clean Given' Cool Driven. - WWIIWMD
God Bless Texas
"... it's the socialism, stupid." - RL
Hard Livin' Clean Given' Cool Driven. - WWIIWMD
God Bless Texas
"... it's the socialism, stupid." - RL
Barnes Precision Match: 5.56x45mm 85 Grain OTM BT (Page 2 of 2)
AR Sponsor