Lake City M855 SBR Ballistic Gel Test - Page 2

General » General Discussion

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Lake City M855 SBR Ballistic Gel Test (Page 2 of 2)

Posted: 9/20/2017 10:04:11 PM EDT

[#1]

Posted: 9/21/2017 1:18:54 AM EDT

[#2]

Thanks for the test.

Posted: 9/21/2017 9:33:40 AM EDT

[#3]

Quote History

Quoted:

@bluefalcon Nice work!

.

View Quote

Dude. Every time i see your avatar my stomach drops and a I get a lump in my throat. I might even start drooling. Fuuuuuuuuuuu..........

Posted: 9/21/2017 10:25:31 AM EDT

[#4]

Quote History

Quoted:
Thank you. Testing at longer distances is problematic. I have to lug 30lbs of gel downrange along with the table and cameras, then race back before it warms up and gets out of calibration. On top of that, I have to not only hit the face of the block in the right spot, but align the shot so that it passes through in the right place in three dimensions. I may simulate longer distance with a reduced charge if there is enough interest.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
Thanks for the vids....could you please shoot some various 556 rounds at 100 yards+ out of the SBR to see if the terminal effects change with distance and less velocity since they are already so close to the 2500fps magic number.....

Thank you. Testing at longer distances is problematic. I have to lug 30lbs of gel downrange along with the table and cameras, then race back before it warms up and gets out of calibration. On top of that, I have to not only hit the face of the block in the right spot, but align the shot so that it passes through in the right place in three dimensions. I may simulate longer distance with a reduced charge if there is enough interest.

A laser can help you locate the ideal firing spot/angle.

A block of dry ice and a small battery powered fan (Dewalt) could help with melting.

Posted: 9/21/2017 10:32:55 AM EDT

[#5]

Quote History

Quoted:
In.

View Quote

@bluefalcon

I sent you a PM a while ago, but i didnt hear back.

I really appreciate the tests you do and would be willing to pony up some ammo of various types if you'd agree to posting videos of it. There are no videos showing performance in gel of the below rounds anywhere that i can find:

.223/5.56

- Hornady Steel Match 75gr BTHP .223 (SBR and 16")
- Hornady Black 75gr BTHP .223 (SBR and 16") this is a new ammo to market.
- IMI 77gr Razor Core BTHP 5.56mm (SBR and 16")
- Hornady SP 55gr Training ammo (SBR and 16")

6.5 Grendel

- Hornady Black 123gr ELD-M 6.5 Grendel (SBR and 16")
- Wolf 100gr FMJ 6.5 Grendel (SBR and 16")

Most of the 5.56 rounds i believe would be of great popular interest as they fall into the category of inexpensive versions of known high performance HD/Match ammo, and a lot of folks would like to see their performance documented before "stacking deep" as these rounds are much more affordable than say, MK262 or FGMM for very little loss in peformance comparatively.

Posted: 9/21/2017 12:10:14 PM EDT

[#6]

Quote History

Quoted:

Thank you. Testing at longer distances is problematic. I have to lug 30lbs of gel downrange along with the table and cameras, then race back before it warms up and gets out of calibration. On top of that, I have to not only hit the face of the block in the right spot, but align the shot so that it passes through in the right place in three dimensions. I may simulate longer distance with a reduced charge if there is enough interest.

View Quote

Yes, we want long distance simuated M855 and M855A1 please!

Posted: 9/21/2017 12:12:50 PM EDT

[#7]

Quote History

Quoted:
A couple of old school ARFCOM members already did the frag distance work many, many, years back...

http://www.qiangyou.org/bbs/data/attachment/forum/201406/30/184101gx37l6hhx3jl6xx6.gif

https://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h113/urbankaos04/BallisticsA.gif

https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4183/33848928344_75be311fe5_o.jpg

View Quote

Damn, crazy thing about that is that he simulated M855AQ at 220M and it still exploded in the gel.

Posted: 9/21/2017 12:14:46 PM EDT

[#8]

Quote History

Quoted:

Yes, we want long distance simuated M855 and M855A1 please!

View Quote

Just wondering, what is the difference between M855A1 hitting a block at 2400fps from 20 yards, and 2400fps from 200 yards?

Posted: 9/21/2017 12:23:04 PM EDT

[#9]

Quote History

Quoted:

Just wondering, what is the difference between M855A1 hitting a block at 2400fps from 20 yards, and 2400fps from 200 yards?

View Quote

I would think there would be a difference in the rotation, stabilization, and yaw of the bullet.

Posted: 9/21/2017 12:31:08 PM EDT

[#10]

Quote History

Quoted:

I would think there would be a difference in the rotation, stabilization, and yaw of the bullet.

View Quote

Are we talking match grade ammunition fired from a match grade gun or are we talking military grade ammunition out of a standard rifle? IE whats the point for ammunition that is so imperfect?

Posted: 9/21/2017 12:48:04 PM EDT

[#11]

Quote History

Quoted:

Just wondering, what is the difference between M855A1 hitting a block at 2400fps from 20 yards, and 2400fps from 200 yards?

View Quote

This for M855. M855A1 isn't yaw dependant though

Posted: 9/21/2017 1:04:31 PM EDT

[#12]

Quote History

Quoted:

This for M855. M855A1 isn't yaw dependant though

https://www.ar15.com/ammo/project/Misc_Images/Zhukov/FleetYaw1.jpg

http://www.ar15.com/ammo/project/Misc_Images/Zhukov/FleetYaw2.jpg

View Quote

Thats my point, they're really doing the best at distance, or behaving most normally, for any bullet that yaw is a major factor. So... whats the point?

Posted: 9/21/2017 2:36:40 PM EDT

[#13]

Quote History

Quoted:

Just wondering, what is the difference between M855A1 hitting a block at 2400fps from 20 yards, and 2400fps from 200 yards?

View Quote

More just ease of hitting a gel block center.

It's easier to do at 20M simulating a 500M velocity, than it is at 500M.

Posted: 9/21/2017 5:41:53 PM EDT

[#14]

Quote History

Quoted:

@bluefalcon

I sent you a PM a while ago, but i didnt hear back.

I really appreciate the tests you do and would be willing to pony up some ammo of various types if you'd agree to posting videos of it. There are no videos showing performance in gel of the below rounds anywhere that i can find:

.223/5.56

- Hornady Steel Match 75gr BTHP .223 (SBR and 16")
- Hornady Black 75gr BTHP .223 (SBR and 16") this is a new ammo to market.
- IMI 77gr Razor Core BTHP 5.56mm (SBR and 16")
- Hornady SP 55gr Training ammo (SBR and 16")

6.5 Grendel

- Hornady Black 123gr ELD-M 6.5 Grendel (SBR and 16")
- Wolf 100gr FMJ 6.5 Grendel (SBR and 16")

Most of the 5.56 rounds i believe would be of great popular interest as they fall into the category of inexpensive versions of known high performance HD/Match ammo, and a lot of folks would like to see their performance documented before "stacking deep" as these rounds are much more affordable than say, MK262 or FGMM for very little loss in peformance comparatively.

View Quote

I'm really sorry about that. I must have missed it. The Hornady 75gr BTHP and 55gr SP as well as the 77gr SMK used in the Razor core load are all documented pretty well. Is the ELD-M the same as the SST? If so, I tested that a few weeks ago for the Arfcom channel. I do plan to do the Wild
Wolf one someday, though.

Posted: 9/21/2017 5:44:30 PM EDT

[#15]

Quote History

Quoted:

Just wondering, what is the difference between M855A1 hitting a block at 2400fps from 20 yards, and 2400fps from 200 yards?

View Quote

One big difference is the rotational speed. The bullet retains its spin much better than its forward speed. By lowering the MV to simulate range, I also lowered the rotational speed below what it would have been at distance.

Posted: 9/21/2017 7:52:08 PM EDT

[#16]

Quote History

Quoted:

More just ease of hitting a gel block center.

It's easier to do at 20M simulating a 500M velocity, than it is at 500M.

View Quote

Which is literally what was done, wasn't it?

Posted: 9/21/2017 7:55:53 PM EDT

[#17]

Quote History

Quoted:

I'm really sorry about that. I must have missed it. The Hornady 75gr BTHP and 55gr SP as well as the 77gr SMK used in the Razor core load are all documented pretty well. Is the ELD-M the same as the SST? If so, I tested that a few weeks ago for the Arfcom channel. I do plan to do the Wild
Wolf one someday, though.

View Quote

The hornady 75gr BTHP in the steel match is the non-cannelured version which I haven't seen any gel-testing of, have you seen any links?

And the ELD-M is supposedly optimized for accuracy and is (more stuff/less spongy?) so I'm not entirely sure if it'll do the same as the SST.

Testing the Wolf would be a definite new one though, there's one still photo and that's it on the internet from what I've seen.

Posted: 9/21/2017 7:56:34 PM EDT

[#18]

Quote History

Quoted:

One big difference is the rotational speed. The bullet retains its spin much better than its forward speed. By lowering the MV to simulate range, I also lowered the rotational speed below what it would have been at distance.

View Quote

I can see that making some difference in fragmentation, but not a lot really, do you think?

Posted: 9/21/2017 9:03:27 PM EDT

[#19]

Quote History

Quoted:

Which is literally what was done, wasn't it?

View Quote

Yes, but it was 250M simulated. I want to see it pushed down to 400 and 500.

Posted: 9/21/2017 9:13:30 PM EDT

[#20]

From the Grendel thread:

Attached File

Posted: 9/21/2017 9:32:23 PM EDT

[#21]

I have a few mags full of it in my go bag next to my 10.5" 1/7 sbr.

Never had an issue with it and it kills them dead.

I think the mag lock and loaded is either fusion or 77grain rounds.

But I don't feel uncomfortable using M855

Good video and thank you

Posted: 9/21/2017 9:33:53 PM EDT

[#22]

Quote History

Quoted:
Better penetration at long range. Reduced fragmentation range. My choice would be M193 IMHO.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
Serious question: is there any reason to favor M855 over M193?

Or any particular situation where you would, if not in general?

Better penetration at long range. Reduced fragmentation range. My choice would be M193 IMHO.

Would you still prefer M193 with a 1/7 twist?

Posted: 9/21/2017 9:53:08 PM EDT

[#23]

Quote History

Quoted:
The hornady 75gr BTHP in the steel match is the non-cannelured version which I haven't seen any gel-testing of, have you seen any links?

And the ELD-M is supposedly optimized for accuracy and is (more stuff/less spongy?) so I'm not entirely sure if it'll do the same as the SST.

Testing the Wolf would be a definite new one though, there's one still photo and that's it on the internet from what I've seen.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

I'm really sorry about that. I must have missed it. The Hornady 75gr BTHP and 55gr SP as well as the 77gr SMK used in the Razor core load are all documented pretty well. Is the ELD-M the same as the SST? If so, I tested that a few weeks ago for the Arfcom channel. I do plan to do the Wild
Wolf one someday, though.

The hornady 75gr BTHP in the steel match is the non-cannelured version which I haven't seen any gel-testing of, have you seen any links?

And the ELD-M is supposedly optimized for accuracy and is (more stuff/less spongy?) so I'm not entirely sure if it'll do the same as the SST.

Testing the Wolf would be a definite new one though, there's one still photo and that's it on the internet from what I've seen.

I didn't know they used a different projectile. Yes, I'm down to test them, but it may be quite some time. Email me.

Posted: 9/21/2017 9:54:33 PM EDT

[#24]

Quote History

Quoted:
I can see that making some difference in fragmentation, but not a lot really, do you think?

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

One big difference is the rotational speed. The bullet retains its spin much better than its forward speed. By lowering the MV to simulate range, I also lowered the rotational speed below what it would have been at distance.

I can see that making some difference in fragmentation, but not a lot really, do you think?

I'm not really qualified to answer. My gut says it shouldn't matter much, but it is possible that lower RPMs, and therefore less stability, results in greater yaw prior to impact, causing more reliable fragmentation and a shorter neck.

Posted: 9/21/2017 10:00:16 PM EDT

[#25]

Quote History

Quoted:

I didn't know they used a different projectile. Yes, I'm down to test them, but it may be quite some time. Email me.

View Quote

Wilco!

Posted: 9/22/2017 2:17:37 PM EDT

[#26]

Quote History

Quoted:

Would you still prefer M193 with a 1/7 twist?

View Quote

Yes. Just for the option of using heavy 75+grn rounds as well. 1/7 should have little effect on M193.

Posted: 9/22/2017 11:54:38 PM EDT

[#27]

Quote History

Quoted:
Seems the argument could be made that an 11.5 inch 1/9 will stabilize m855 less that a 14.5-20 inch 1/7, so this test may be showing optimum performance of this bullet.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

62grn 1/9 twist b fin...

Seems the argument could be made that an 11.5 inch 1/9 will stabilize m855 less that a 14.5-20 inch 1/7, so this test may be showing optimum performance of this bullet.

Yeah, I picked up on that too. Maybe 1/7 makes a bullet too stable that depends upon upset and fragmentation to be effective. Heck, I dunno, and I ain't doin' the math, but it makes a certain amount of sense doesn't it?

Posted: 9/23/2017 12:26:26 PM EDT

[#28]

For those who think that M855 is inherently inaccurate, check out the RUAG M855 thread in the ammo forum

https://www.ar15.com/forums/ar-15/-/16-715278/?

Posted: 9/24/2017 10:19:47 PM EDT

[#29]

My bad, wrong thread. Lol

Posted: 10/3/2017 10:21:00 AM EDT

[#30]

Quote History

Quoted:
Makes me want to have a 50 yard 556 rifle. Get a 1:12 twist barrel and shoot m855 out of it and keyhole my "soft targets"

View Quote

Me too... Lots of shots/engagements in urban combat are at about 70 yards and closer, much closer... I slightly prefer M193 out of my SBR's because it groups a bit better. But M193 does more damage and cratering to my AR-500 steel plates than M855 does though. I've always liked 855 for its costs and availability.

Good video Blue Falcon. Thanks for taking the time and effort. That ballistic block was hammered to hell by that M855 round/SBR combo. I'd love to see a slow motion yaw angle strike at impact but I'm just being greedy. I'll continue to buy M855 for SHTF purposes...

Posted: 10/11/2017 8:04:33 AM EDT

[#31]

I shot a nuisance racoon through the heart at about 40' with M855. Racoon simply fell over on its side and appeared to have died instantly. Closer inspection revealed a small hole in and out. The animal did not even bleed until I moved it. Its nighty routine of getting in the fig tree and making my dog bark for hours came to an abrupt end. M855 for the win!

Posted: 11/3/2017 12:12:27 PM EDT

[#32]

Why don't they ever put the gel out at 100yds.?

Posted: 11/3/2017 12:21:34 PM EDT

[#33]

Quote History

Quoted:
Why don't they ever put the gel out at 100yds.?

View Quote

Its easier to simulated long range with short barrels or hand loads. The blocks are relatively small and need to be at a certain temp to be correct, putting it at distance just makes things harder for no gain.

Posted: 11/3/2017 12:25:46 PM EDT

[#34]

Quote History

Quoted:

Its easier to simulated long range with short barrels or hand loads. The blocks are relatively small and need to be at a certain temp to be correct, putting it at distance just makes things harder for no gain.

View Quote

It may be easier but it takes fleet yaw at distance out of the equation, and that's a huge factor in the performance of yaw dependant rounds

Posted: 11/5/2017 11:27:30 AM EDT

[#35]

So does a one shot test. There is a lot of data already available on M855. I don't have the time or the money to shoot a statistically relevant sample size at 100m. As I mentioned in the video, it's really more of a demonstration.

Posted: 11/5/2017 12:42:59 PM EDT

[#36]

Quote History

Quoted:
Yeah, I picked up on that too. Maybe 1/7 makes a bullet too stable that depends upon upset and fragmentation to be effective. Heck, I dunno, and I ain't doin' the math, but it makes a certain amount of sense doesn't it?

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

62grn 1/9 twist b fin...

Seems the argument could be made that an 11.5 inch 1/9 will stabilize m855 less that a 14.5-20 inch 1/7, so this test may be showing optimum performance of this bullet.

Yeah, I picked up on that too. Maybe 1/7 makes a bullet too stable that depends upon upset and fragmentation to be effective. Heck, I dunno, and I ain't doin' the math, but it makes a certain amount of sense doesn't it?

1/7 twist spins the RPMs faster.

Faster RPM on impact causes more stress on the frontal area of the bullet, yielding more likelihood of jacket shearing forces.

All the crap that has been stated about M855 over the years about spin rate causing it to icepick has been unsupported by physics, and I personally suspect financial incentives clouded people's presentations on performance of M855 because they wanted to offer something new and shiny.

I still do think that jacket thickness variation influences the outcome of expansion or fragmentation, but we've been spitting M855 from 14.5" barrels at over 2900fps average for decades, and it slays people just fine.

As to the comment about suppressors increasing mv, it is negligible at maybe 9-20fps suppressor boost effect.

For shooting at distance, it's better to shoot normal mv with the actual spin rate, because RPM is a factor in terminal effects.

Because Time of Flight is so short, you don't see any real degradation in RPMs like you do with V0.

As usual, great video. I have cases of M855, and after what I've personally seen it do to people on numerous occasions spanning a decade and 3 continents, I have zero reservations about using it in an HD or perimeter defense role, works great for blasting through vehicles as well.

Posted: 11/5/2017 1:01:10 PM EDT

[#37]

Quote History

Quoted:
1/7 twist spins the RPMs faster.

Faster RPM on impact causes more stress on the frontal area of the bullet, yielding more likelihood of jacket shearing forces.

All the crap that has been stated about M855 over the years about spin rate causing it to icepick has been unsupported by physics, and I personally suspect financial incentives clouded people's presentations on performance of M855 because they wanted to offer something new and shiny.

I still do think that jacket thickness variation influences the outcome of expansion or fragmentation, but we've been spitting M855 from 14.5" barrels at over 2900fps average for decades, and it slays people just fine......

As usual, great video. I have cases of M855, and after what I've personally seen it do to people on numerous occasions spanning a decade and 3 continents, I have zero reservations about using it in an HD or perimeter defense role, works great for blasting through vehicles as well.

View Quote

Always good to hear from a voice of personal experience.

Posted: 11/5/2017 1:14:59 PM EDT

[#38]

Quote History

Quoted:

Always good to hear from a voice of personal experience.

View Quote

Indeed it is.

Thanks, LRRP.

I've been buying a bunch of PPU 855 lately. I have lots of SP, BTHP etc so ball 5.56 is a niche role for me and as such I need it do something unique and I like the mild AP properties of 855. Im especially confident in it out of my 20" A2 type.