Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
User Panel

Site Notices
Posted: 9/6/2022 2:58:59 AM EDT
I haven't really gotten a straight answer on this one, but here goes:

My current "long-range" build is a 16" AR shooting M193 at 3168FPS and IMI 77gr OTM's at 2774 FPS. The rifle shoots 1 MOA and has a 1-6x LPVO.

I've got Strelok and know my holds, it's just that I don't know what the range is for pinging steel versus what the actual effective range is for fragmentation, yaw, etc. Most people say ~2500 FPS is minimum frag for M193 and ~2200 FPS for 77gr OTMs. In that case, 250y seems to be the maximum effective range for my 16" rifle to reliably fragment/yaw/wound etc.

I want to learn how to calculate this myself, as I've got an 11.5" build that I'm also curious about. What is the absolute minimum velocity/energy that a .22 bullet should have to do *anything* or not be tossed around too much by the wind?
Link Posted: 9/6/2022 1:43:22 PM EDT
[Last Edit: ballisticxlr] [#1]
Download any ballistics app. Use it. All of the data you seek will be available. Strelok is my least favorite but it should be able to provide the data you're wanting. It's just got the shittiest user interface that I think they could design.

If you need more help than that, download BallisticXLR  (free download) and then you can ask me for support and I'll provide it free of charge. It requires that you have access to a copy of Microsoft Excel. I designed it to be ridiculously easy to use and so that it provides all the data you're asking for in a super simple to read and digest manner.
Link Posted: 9/6/2022 3:59:08 PM EDT
[#2]
FPNI............ as far as the trajectory side of things.

As far as the terminal effects.......... you won't get a straight simple answer because there isn't one.

Read this thread:
https://www.ar15.com/forums/AR-15/16-barrel-with-M193-max-realistic-effective-range-/16-773468/
Link Posted: 10/13/2022 1:42:57 PM EDT
[#3]
If you want terminal performance use a bullet designed for terminal performance.  The two you have listed are two of the worst designs for such-- FMJ and OTM.  There is an entire world of designed-to-expand bullets that will have much wider terminal performance envelopes. Minimum expansion velocities lower and temp/permanent cavities much larger and more uniform.
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