Title says it all. I want 62gr FMJ with no steel penetrator for use at my local range, to be purchased online. I haven't been able to find shit. Any help is appreciated.

Maybe

Usually some on ammoseek

The American-made lead ore 62 FMJ ammo is fairly accurate.

But the imported lead 62 FMJ ammo has been terrible in Accuracy.

SS109 Prvi is great, but lead core was terrible.

Same with lead core Armscor, just no decent accuracy.

Hornady used to sell expensive lead 62 grain FMJ ammo.

Federal sometimes sells it.

Several years ago, Winchester sold it, but I haven't Winchester or Armscor in a while.

Maybe look for Federal if possible.

I haven't Winchester recently, but might be worth a try.

Hornady makes FMJ bullets for other companies, but their 62 grain FMJ ammo is rare.

Winchester was the worse of the US made ammo.

https://www.federalpremium.com/rifle/american-eagle/american-eagle-rifle/11-AE223N.html

https://bulkmunitions.com/gun-store/223-rem-62-grain-fmj-bt-federal-american-eagle-ae223n-500-rounds/

https://winchester.com/Products/Ammunition/Rifle/USA/USA223R3

https://www.midwayusa.com/product/1018226197?pid=950461

https://www.midwayusa.com/product/102284021?pid=568444

"Coming soon" (but overdue), best lead core 62 grain FMJ.

https://www.midwayusa.com/product/1019566780?pid=992330

Optimized for barrel twist rate?? 1:7 versus 1:9 maybe?

I'm gonna be shooting it through a 1:9 barrel after I do a rebuild on my PSA.

This guy gets it.

Try a search for  Hornady Frontier 62 gr FMJ # FR260

This is manufactured at Lake City (using Frontier stamped Lake City cases) for Hornady and uses the Hornady lead core 62 gr FMJ.

A few places have it in stock at the moment.

500 round case here

Magtech, decent accuracy, haven't seen it in a while though

Thanks, brother. Rock on.

Hornady Black.  Natchez has it in stock right now.

https://www.natchezss.com/hornady-black-rifle-ammunition-223-rem-62-gr-fmj-3100-fps-20-ct.html


Aguila

https://aimsurplus.com/aguila-223-5-56-62gr-fmjbt-ammunition-50rd-box/?mc_cid=19d2cd4d3a&mc_eid=a90fbf7d85

Federal AE223N

Can you still get the purple case, purple bullet, 62-gr  HSI “match” training ammo?

Does anyone realize that a 1:9 is actually a "Fast" twist for a .22 caliber rifle?

A 1:9 will stabilize up to a 75gr bullet and I have a 14.5" 1:9 that shoots 77gr bullets just fine out to 600 yards.

I have a Savage bolt action 1:9 that even stabilizes M856 tracers out to 600 yards! The increased velocity from the 24" barrel makes up for the slower twist.

The 55gr bullet can easily be stabilized in a 1:12 twist and even 1:14 in non-arctic conditions.

1:12 was the standard twist in most any non military style sporting rifle up until the mid 2000's when people wanted to shoot heavier match grade bullets in their bolt guns.

If you want to shoot a 62gr bullet go for it, but thinking you have to because your rifle has a "fast" 1:7 twist and won't do well with the 55gr version because it is overstabilized is incorrect.

I was going to type almost those exact same words

Why 62 FMJ ?

For the same cost or cheaper... bulk or blem  Hornady 68 hpbt or Nosler,Sierra,PPU 69 hpbt match bullets.

It’s largely Internet myth that bullet stability increases with increasing barrel length. Technically, the gyroscopic stability factor does increase with increased barrel length, however the amount that it increases is miniscule and lost in the noise of other variables.

As an example, the 55 grain bullet in M193 will have a gyroscopic stability factor of approximately 4.25 when fired from a 14.5” Colt M4 barrel. When the same M193 round is fired from the 5.75” longer barrel of the 20” Colt A2 barrel, the gyroscopic stability factor of the 55 grain bullet only increases to approximately 4.27.

While the increased RPM due to the faster velocity will act to increase the bullet stability, the increased velocity also “increases the force applied to the nose of the bullet at the center of pressure and strengthens the overturning aerodynamic torque which actually makes the bullet less stable.”* These two opposing dynamics are the reason for the miniscule increase in gyroscopic stability factor.


* From Applied Ballistcs For Long-Range Shooting by Bryan Litz

.....

No, he doesn't and neither do you.



An Accuracy Comparison of M855 When Fired From AR-15s With 1:9” Twist and 1:7” Twist Barrels.







This test will compare the accuracy (technically, precision) of IMI M855 at a distance of 100 yards, when fired from an AR-15 with a chrome-lined, NATO chambered barrel with a 1:9” twist and an AR-15 with a chrome-lined, NATO chambered barrel with a 1:7” twist.  The IMI M855 is one of the most accurate and consistent loadings of all the M855 clones that I have tested.

IMI M855 is loaded with a 62 grain FMJ bullet with a cannelure. It also has a steel penetrator seated in the ogive portion of the projectile. This makes the projectile unusually long for its weight, as well as giving it a lower specific gravity. The ammunition is charged with "ball powder". The primers are sealed and crimped in placed. The bullet is also crimped in place and the case mouth is sealed with an asphalt sealant.





Chronograph data for the IMI M855 was obtained using an Oehler 35P 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.





This accuracy evaluation used statistically significant shot-group sizes and every single shot in a fired group was included in the measurements. There was absolutely no use of any group reduction techniques (e.g. fliers, target movement, Butterfly Shots).

The shooting set-up will be described in detail below. As many of the significant variables as was practicable were controlled for. All shooting was conducted from a concrete bench-rest from a distance of 100 yards (confirmed with a laser rangefinder.) The barrels used in the evaluation were free-floated. The free-float handguard of the rifle rested in a Sinclair Windage Benchrest with the aid of a Sinclair fore-arm adaptor, while the stock of the rifle rested in a Protektor bunny-ear rear bag. Sighting was accomplished via a Leupold VARI-X III set at 25X magnification and adjusted to be parallax-free at 100 yards. A mirage shade was used.  Wind conditions on the shooting range were continuously monitored using a Wind Probe. All rounds were fired from the magazine. Each upper was fired using the same lower.


The barrels used in this evaluation were both Colt HBARs with NATO chambers and chrome lining. The 1:7” twist barrel was 20” in length and the 1:9” twist barrel was 16” in length. I purposely selected the shorter barrel with a 1:9" twist and the longer barrel with the 1:7" twist in order to exacerbate any possible statistically significant influence that the differing twist rates and intendent muzzle velocities might have on the precision of the M855 ammunition.

The first barrel used in testing was 16” Colt HBAR with chrome-lining, a NATO chamber and a 1:9” twist. This is the barrel found on the Colt 6721. All of my free-floated Colt 6721 barrels have turned in sub-MOA 10-shot groups at 100 yards when using match-grade hand-loads.





The second barrel used in testing was a 20” Colt HBAR, also with chrome-lining, a NATO chamber and of course a 1:7” twist. I've owned three of these barrels and they have all turned in 10-shot groups at 100 yards that hover just above one MOA when free-floated and shooting match grade handloads.






Three 10-shot groups were fired from the upper with the 1:9” twist barrel in the manner described above. The extreme spreads for those groups measured:

2.72”
2.19”
2.24”

for a 10-shot group average of 2.38”. The three 10-shot groups were over-layed on each other using RSI Shooting Lab to form a 30-shot composite group. The mean radius for the composite group was 0.76”.



In the same manner as above, three 10-shot groups were fired from the upper with the 1:7” twist barrel. The extreme spreads of those groups measured:

2.14”
3.01”
1.71”

for a 10-shot group average of 2.29”. As before, the three 10-shot groups were over-layed on each other using RSI Shooting Lab to form a 30-shot composite group. The mean radius for this composite group was 0.68”.





...




55 Grain FMJ Ammunition Fired From AR-15s With 1:9” and 1:7” Twist Barrels


The Internet Commando: "55 grain FMJ bullets are unstable/overstabilized/inaccurate when fired from an AR-15 with a 1:7” twist barrel."

Statements such as the one above always seem to be proclaimed by the Internet Commando, without posting any valid, statistically significant data to support that these effects occur, or that if they do occur, that they do so to any degree that has any significant effect on the accuracy/precision spectrum involved with AR-15s firing M193-type ammunition out to distances of 100 yards.

By definition, an “unstable” bullet will have a gyroscopic stability factor of less than 1.0 at the muzzle.  A typical 55 grain FMJ bullet loaded in M193-type ammunition will have a gyroscopic stability factor of approximately 4.27 when fired from a 20” barrel with a 1:7” twist.

[CaptainObvious] 4.27 is not less than 1.0. [/CaptainObvious]


The following demonstration compares the results of firing four, 10-shot groups of the same lot of 55 grain Prvi Partizan M193 ammunition from two different AR-15 barrels; one barrel with a 1:9” twist, the other barrel with a 1:7” twist.  When chronographed from a 20” Colt M16A2 barrel, the muzzle velocity of this lot of PPU M193 was 3219 FPS with a standard deviation of 35 FPS.

The accuracy specification for M193 cited in MIL-C-9963F is as follows:
The average of the mean radii of all targets of the sample cartridges, fired at 200 yards, shall not exceed 2.0 inches.
These averages are from 10-shot groups fired from machine rested, bolt-actioned test barrels.  All things being equal (which of course they seldom are) this specification equates to a mean radius of 1 inch at 100 yards.









The first barrel used in testing was a 16” Colt HBAR with chrome-lining, a NATO chamber and a 1:9” twist.  This is the barrel found on the Colt 6721.  All of my free-floated Colt 6721 barrels have turned in sub-MOA 10-shot groups at 100 yards when using match-grade hand-loads.

The second barrel used in testing was a 20” Colt HBAR, also with chrome-lining, a NATO chamber and of course a 1:7” twist.  I've owned three of these barrels and they have all turned in 10-shot groups at 100 yards that hover just above one MOA when free-floated and shooting match grade handloads.  I purposely selected the shorter barrel with a 1:9" twist and the longer barrel with the 1:7" twist in order to exacerbate any possible statistically significant influence that the differing twist rates and intendent muzzle velocities might have on the precision of M193-type ammunition when fired at a distance of 100 yards.


Colt 16” HBAR




Colt 20” HBAR






Accuracy (technically, precision) testing was conducted from a distance of 100 yards following my usual protocol. The barrels were free-floated during testing.  The fore-ends of the weapons rested in a Sinclair Windage Benchrest and the butt-stock rode in a Protektor rear-bag. Sighting was accomplished via a Leupold VARI-X III set at 25X magnification and adjusted to be parallax-free at 100 yards. A mirage shade was used. The wind conditions on the range were continuously monitored using a Wind Probe. The set-up was very similar to that pictured below.





The Wind Probe . . .




Four 10-shot groups of the PPU M193 were fired from the 1:9” twist barrel. Those groups were over-layed on each other using RSI Shooting Lab to form a 40-shot composite group. The mean radius of that composite group was 1.08”.
As with the 1:9” twist, four 10-shot groups were fired from the 1:7” twist barrel.  Those groups were also over-layed on each other to form a 40-shot composite group; the results were nearly identical to those obtained from the 1:9” twist barrel.  The  composite group had a mean radius of 1.01”. The two composite groups are shown side by side for comparison.






The entire test as described above was also conducted using a second 16" chrome-lined, NATO chambered Colt HBAR with a 1:9" twist and a second 20" chrome-lined, NATO chambered Colt HBAR with a 1:7" twist.  The ammunition used in this test was all from the same lot of Wolf 55 grain FMJ "Performance Ammunition."  

As before, four 10-shot groups fired from each barrel at 100 yards were over-layed on each other using RSI Shooting Lab and just as before, the mean radii for these 40-shot composite groups showed no statistically significant difference.







Quality, modern lightweight bullets of copper-jacket/lead-core construction can shoot superbly from AR-15s with fast twist barrels. Typical 55 grain FMJ bullets found in M193-type ammunition do not fall into the quality category.

The 10-shot group pictured below was fired at a distance of 100 yards using 55 grain Sierra BlitzKings from one of my Krieger barreled AR-15s.  The barrel has a 1:7.7” twist.  The group has an extreme spread of 0.439 MOA.









.........

Thank You @Molon for correcting a misconception I had regarding twist rates and velocity.

I will research this subject further with the source you cited.

You wouldn't have an electronic copy you could email me would you?

I still think I was about 92% correct in my assessment of the OP's situation.

Unfortunately no, but it's a book that every marksman should have in his library!

...

What's your altitude?
How do your 9 twists actually measure? I can't remember if you added to my request thread ~4 years ago.

I am on the Ozark Plateau with an elevation of around 950 feet.

I have not actually measured my barrel's twist but I suspect the Bushmaster Patrolman's Carbine barrel may be cut a bit on the fast side of 1:9 since it does so well with the 77 grain bullets.

The Savage 110 Tactical even stabilizes M856 Tracers and the 80grain Sierra Matchking when single loaded into the chamber at least at 100 yards when I tested them.

I wish Molon could explain this concept as civilly as you can. It appears you're right, I reviewed testing online for this and what you've asserted has been backed up by the results shown on a few videos.

I guess you learn something new every day.

That depends on the length of the bullet.  The group pictured below was fired at 25 yards from a 1:9" twist AR-15 using Hornady 75 grain A-MAX bullets.






...

FIOCCHI AMMUNITION 223 REM 62GR FMJ 50 ROUNDS


Fiocchi Ammunition Rifle 223 Remington 62 Grain Full Metal Jacket Boat Tail – 500 Round Case

Doesn’t look like those heavy bullets worked well out of that barrel…. Looks to not be flying straight correct? FYI learning here… thanks

Win .223 62 gr OT at TSUSA

If you are referring to this post (using the quote feature helps) then yes. The projectiles are "keyholing", they are not stabilized during their spin.

Finding it might be hard, but here you go.

https://winchester.com/Products/Ammunition/Rifle/USA/USA223R3

Paladin

Finding it might be hard?? Hardly....

Winchester USA 223 Remington Ammo 62 Grain Full Metal Jacket

In this thread, you once again made it painfully obvious that you have ZERO FIRST HAND EXPERIENCE on a subject matter and that once again you were just regurgitating Internet Commando BS that you saw somewhere else.  You’re were proven to be wrong again.

How does it feel to be so wrong, so often?


You’ve been here for only TWO MONTHS and in that time, you’ve done nothing but vomit false information in technical forums due to your shear ignorance on the subject matters.  You try to pretend that you’re some deep thinker with keen insight into the subject matters when it’s painfully obvious that you have no experience on these subject matters and that for most of your posts you’re just regurgitating ignorant shit that you saw posted somewhere else on the Internet.

In this thread,

https://www.ar15.com/forums/handguns/-/20-204242/?r=2373447&page=1

you made retarded statements about 147 grain loads due to your fundamental ignorance on the scientific standard for terminal ballistic testing and you were proven to be wrong.

How does is feel to be so wrong, so often?

In the same threadd you posted . . .


Yet another demonstration of your ignorance on the subject matter.  I posted data here years ago from an expert in the field of terminal ballistics showing the results of HSTs fired through auto safety glass.  You’re proven wrong again.

You continued in that thread . . .



Those “lackluster” pictures that you’re whining about, are from one of the foremost experts in the field of terminal ballistics in this country, but you’re too ignorant on the subject matter to know that.  He doesn’t shoot watermelons and pork-chops on YouTube; his articles on the subject matter have been published in peer-reviewed scientific journals, but you’re so ignorant on the subject matter that you haven’t read any of those articles.

This terminal ballistic expert has been a presenter at NDIA conferences, but you’re unaware of the data he has presented at those conferences due to your ignorance on the subject.

This terminal ballistic expert worked with Dr. Martin Fackler at the Army Wound Ballistic Research Laboratory at the Letterman Army Institute of Research, but you aren’t aware of that due to your ignorance on the subject matter.  This terminal ballistic expert served on the Joint Service Wound Ballistic IPT and has been a consultant to the Joint FBI-USMC munitions testing program, but as always, you’re ignorant of the results from actual experts in the field of terminal ballistics.

Instead of worrying about pretty pictures, take an extra dose of your Ritalin and try actually reading the words and numbers that I’ve posted from this expert in the field of terminal ballistics.

How does if feel to be so profoundly ignorant of a large body of knowledge on a subject matter that you try to pretend that you’re so knowledgeable about?


In the thread on the Federal 9mm 147 Grain HST you made the asinine claim that there was no difference between the terminal performance of the 147 grain HST and the 150 grain HST.  You were proven to be wrong again, due to your monumental ignorance of the subject matter.  In fact, you were proven to be so wrong on matters in that thread, that one of the moderators had to tell you to sit down and shut up.

How does it feel to be so wrong, so often?

In that same thread, you made the moronic statement that ammunition manufacturers just drop a 147 grain bullet onto the same powder and powder charge used for 124 grain bullets, thereby demonstrating that you have absolutely no experience in loading ammunition and that you just parrot stupid shit you saw posted somewhere else on the Internet.

Once again, you’re proven to be wrong.

In that same thread, you shit on the work of Dr Roberts that I posted.  Yet, when 03RN posted a link to data on Pistol-Forum from a poster with the user name DocGKR, you raved about that data; because you were so incredibly fucking ignorant on the subject matter that you didn’t know that Dr Roberts and DocGKR ARE THE SAME PERSON. You were so incredibly ignorant on the subject matter that you weren’t familiar with the data contributed to the subject matter of terminal ballistics by one of the foremost experts on terminal ballistics in this country.

How does it feel to be so wrong, so often?



You can run along now and start typing words into your Google search-bar so that you can come back here and pretend that you were knowledgeable about all of that all along.

...

The 75 grain A-MAX key-holed badly because the 1:9" twist barrel didn't provide enough spin to stabilize the bullet.

....

I've had good lucky when I tested the 75gr Gold Dot awhile back as well as MK262 Mod 0 from a 1:9 bolt gun. 55F is certainly not winter, but is somewhat cooler weather, and I was printing under 1" groups at 100 with them :D

That's a fine bullet.  MOA accuracy, excellent barrier blind properties and a nominal gyroscopic stability factor of 1.62 from a 1:9" twist barrel.



...

I've gotta put on my Meeting Facilitator hat here, and point out a detail that's being missed.

There are enough little variables involved that weight limits vs twist has to be looked at more like a bell curve than a binary Yes/No. Yes, some have 75gr loads that work well in their 1:9. That's because all the little details in their load and rifle have come together on one side of their tolerance ranges. Another person has a similar 75gr load that keyholes in their 1:9 barrel. It doesn't mean the guidance is wrong - it only means the totality of their tolerance stacking has come in on the other side of the GO/NOGO line. When you're on the thin edge of a bell curve, it doesn't take much to bump you over or under the line.

As I stated earlier, it's not the bullet weight that matters, it's the length of the bullet that counts.  You'll be very hard pressed to find any 1:9" twist barrel that will properly stabilize the 75 grain Hornady AMAX/ELD bullet.





...

Federal used to sell a lead core as did Tula.

What is the advantage to using a slower twist rate? I bought a 1:7 twist 5.56 barrel thinking it would just shoot "everything". I must be giving something up or everyone would make their barrels 1:7.

How long is that AMAX? it appears to be very long, even for a 75g .223/.224/5.56 bullet.
I measured one Hornady 75g HPBT Match 5.56 (OTM) and it was 0.962" (0.980" published)
The bullets the original poster is looking for, 62g lead core, are typically only 0.81" long; and M855 about 0.91" long.
Some one bullet samples:
0.918" 62g PMC X-Tac 5.56 M855 (green tip steel penetrator) note: 0.923" on PMC web site
0.900" 62g Norma Tactical 5.56 SS109 (steel penetrator)
0.807" 62g Colt National Match (DoubleTap) .223 (all lead core)
0.810" 62g Armscor USA .223 (all lead core)

That's the point, Sparky.



I wasn't addressing the original poster.  I was addressing Amish-Bill.

..

Molon, So you don't know the length you are posting about? Isn't that the point?
To be helpful, a Sierra 77g Tipped MatchKing™ is about 1.072" for comparison (from JBM list).