Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
User Panel

Page AR-15 » Ammunition
AR Sponsor: bravocompany
Site Notices
Posted: 5/21/2024 9:13:51 PM EDT
So far as penetration through light armor, concrete, windshields and barriers? Is it really just ho-hum ammo or not? Is there any 5.56 ammo out there that is far superior that is available to the public?
Link Posted: 5/21/2024 9:31:34 PM EDT
[Last Edit: _DR] [#1]
M855 has the SS109 projectile with the internal steel penetrator. It penetrates very well, better than M193 or any other FMJ, SP, or JHP without a penetrator.

Some who used it against enemy personnel in Mogadishu  reported it seem to penetrate unarmored targets too well. As in leaving a small entry and exit wound with little expansion.

But M855 is M855, IMI or not.
Link Posted: 5/22/2024 5:05:20 PM EDT
[#2]
Originally Posted By freewilly:
Is there any 5.56 ammo out there that is far superior that is available to the public?
View Quote


M855A1 is pretty impressive with respect to terminal ballistics.  Penetrates very well, and has good performance in soft tissue.
Link Posted: 5/22/2024 10:20:10 PM EDT
[#3]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Bravo_Six:


M855A1 is pretty impressive with respect to terminal ballistics.  Penetrates very well, and has good performance in soft tissue.
View Quote

Personally I think it is "ho-hum". Inconsistent terminally AND in accuracy while offering very marginal at best increase in hard cover pen. There are lots of loads that are MUCH better terminally. For bulk ammo that may possibly end up used in some SHTF scenario, I prefer plain M193.

But, I have shot metal things that the M855 penetrated while the M193 did not. So for like a Mad Max type scenario with light armored threats, it may be slightly better.
Link Posted: 5/23/2024 12:33:39 PM EDT
[#4]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ITCHY-FINGER:

Personally I think it is "ho-hum". Inconsistent terminally AND in accuracy while offering very marginal at best increase in hard cover pen. There are lots of loads that are MUCH better terminally. For bulk ammo that may possibly end up used in some SHTF scenario, I prefer plain M193.

But, I have shot metal things that the M855 penetrated while the M193 did not. So for like a Mad Max type scenario with light armored threats, it may be slightly better.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ITCHY-FINGER:
Originally Posted By Bravo_Six:


M855A1 is pretty impressive with respect to terminal ballistics.  Penetrates very well, and has good performance in soft tissue.

Personally I think it is "ho-hum". Inconsistent terminally AND in accuracy while offering very marginal at best increase in hard cover pen. There are lots of loads that are MUCH better terminally. For bulk ammo that may possibly end up used in some SHTF scenario, I prefer plain M193.

But, I have shot metal things that the M855 penetrated while the M193 did not. So for like a Mad Max type scenario with light armored threats, it may be slightly better.


Are you talking M855 or M855A1?

I'm hardly an expert, but ive never heard about inconsistent terminal performance with A1.
Link Posted: 5/23/2024 1:01:25 PM EDT
[#5]
As far as superior.. I’d take 77gr smk or 77gr tmk loads over any 855,  a1 included.
Page AR-15 » Ammunition
AR Sponsor: bravocompany
Close Join Our Mail List to Stay Up To Date! 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.


By signing up you agree to our User Agreement. *Must have a registered ARFCOM account to win.
Top Top