Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Posted: 10/4/2004 9:57:41 PM EST
Will 1:9 shoot 55-62 grain better than 1:8
if so by how much?

What minumin grain should i use to shoot out to 300 yards?
Link Posted: 10/4/2004 10:00:53 PM EST
No, and if you just want to hit at 300 yards use anything quality. If you want close holes, 69+ gr match ammo.
Link Posted: 10/4/2004 10:20:37 PM EST
i plan to shoot 50-350 yards, but 100 yards about 75% of the time
I want to be as accurate as possible and dont know which grain or barrel to get.

most people suggest 1:8 but i hear 1:8 dosent shot well with 55-62 grain.
Link Posted: 10/4/2004 10:28:04 PM EST
Even 1/7 shoots 55gr just fine.
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 3:18:35 AM EST
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 3:27:35 AM EST
1/9 is generally excepted as the most versatile for the widest variety of ammo. As far as 1/9 vs. 1/8, I have experienced tighter groups using a 1/8 barrel using 55 grn. M193 ammo vs. the 1/9. I tried some 62 grn. Nato ammo and the groups sucked. I also have a Colt with a 20" 1/7 barrel and that shoots 55 grn. M193 very well at 200 yd. matches and the 62 grn. Nato sucked in that too. That's just my experience so far.
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 3:33:58 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/5/2004 3:34:23 AM EST by Hokie]
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 3:47:24 AM EST

I tried some 62 grn. Nato ammo and the groups sucked. I also have a Colt with a 20" 1/7 barrel and that shoots 55 grn. M193 very well at 200 yd. matches and the 62 grn. Nato sucked in that too. That's just my experience so far.


That's because 62 grain M855 (NATO SS109) SUCKS! The steel penetrator is almost never concentric to the jacket, resulting in a bullet with horrible aerodynamics.
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 3:48:10 AM EST

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
No, and if you just want to hit at 300 yards use anything quality. If you want close holes, 69+ gr match ammo.



Read and heed.
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 4:35:34 AM EST

Originally Posted By SWO_daddy:

I tried some 62 grn. Nato ammo and the groups sucked. I also have a Colt with a 20" 1/7 barrel and that shoots 55 grn. M193 very well at 200 yd. matches and the 62 grn. Nato sucked in that too. That's just my experience so far.


That's because 62 grain M855 (NATO SS109) SUCKS! The steel penetrator is almost never concentric to the jacket, resulting in a bullet with horrible aerodynamics.



So I've heard, but usually (as above) with a generic reference to M855 and/or NATO SS109 in general. I would assume there's some quality variation among M855/SS109 rounds from various manufacturers. Has anyone ever looked into this deeply, or identified particular makes and designations that have seemingly poor/random penetrator alignment (or ones that seem to have consistently good alignment and therefore better accuracy and repeatability)? I know there's a fair number of different makers of SS-109, and I know IMI sells a true "M855", etc...
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 5:56:59 AM EST

Originally Posted By SWO_daddy:

I tried some 62 grn. Nato ammo and the groups sucked. I also have a Colt with a 20" 1/7 barrel and that shoots 55 grn. M193 very well at 200 yd. matches and the 62 grn. Nato sucked in that too. That's just my experience so far.


That's because 62 grain M855 (NATO SS109) SUCKS! The steel penetrator is almost never concentric to the jacket, resulting in a bullet with horrible aerodynamics.


Bingo! The shit I had was foreign made garbage. It was brass cased but berdan primed and shot like shit.
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 6:11:29 AM EST
No but 1/9 will shoot 45 grain better than 1/8
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 8:08:33 AM EST

Originally Posted By rockytherotty:

Originally Posted By SWO_daddy:

I tried some 62 grn. Nato ammo and the groups sucked. I also have a Colt with a 20" 1/7 barrel and that shoots 55 grn. M193 very well at 200 yd. matches and the 62 grn. Nato sucked in that too. That's just my experience so far.


That's because 62 grain M855 (NATO SS109) SUCKS! The steel penetrator is almost never concentric to the jacket, resulting in a bullet with horrible aerodynamics.


Bingo! The shit I had was foreign made garbage. It was brass cased but berdan primed and shot like shit.



Berdan priming does not make ammo inaccurate. Inconsistent powder quantities, bullets with uneven weight distribution, and lame primers (Boxer or Berdan) make the ammo inaccurate.

There is Berdan primed, steel cased match ammo made by Hornady with their 75 grain HPBT match bullet and sold through CAL III Enterprises that rocks.

Some foreign ammo is very, very good. Swiss surplus is one. Some of it is as good as US surplus. Anything with a NATO headstamp (cross in circle) is decent enough for about 2 to 3 MOA.

SS109 is a NATO spec for 62 grain steel penetrator core 5.56X45. M855 is the US designation for same. Though the specs are not identical, they are close enough that ammo is interchangeable.
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 8:09:08 AM EST

Originally Posted By _DR:
No but 1/9 will shoot 45 grain better than 1/8



Not always.
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 8:26:10 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/5/2004 8:26:39 AM EST by ALPHA9000]
I can't stand people bringing up the idea that the fast twist barrels like the 1/7-1/8 will not shoot the light 40-50 grain bullets very well. Please can we just make it clear that those light .223 bullets are only good for varmint hunting! They suck ass at longer range competition and are terrible for self defense. It amazes me that all of these AR manufacturers are making the 1/9 standard when this is supposed to be a serious self defense firearm. If it was seriously for self defense then they would go for a faster twist capable of stabilizing the heavier bullets which are by far the best for self defense.
Top Top