Warning

 

Close
Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Cancel Confirm
AR15.COM
AR Sponsor
6/6/2006 1:40:24 PM EDT
I'm specifically interested in the muzzel velocity of the Polycoated 55 gr stuff from a 20" barrel. I read all 17 pages of the ammo review thread and the numbers seem to vary considerably. Wolf claims 3241 fps (exaggerated or maybe from a 24" barrel?). A couple posts had it from around 2750 fps to 3000 fps. Someone even said that the 55 gr was actually slower than the 62 gr. Odd.

Do any of you guys have any reliable numbers on this. I know its underpowered compared to m193 but I'm just curious about actual results from the chronographers. Please forgive me if I missed it somewhere.

Thanks
Scott
6/6/2006 3:03:57 PM EDT
[#1]
I show 2714fps out of my 16" carbine. Sorry - no 20" data.
6/6/2006 3:10:30 PM EDT
[#2]
Good luck on getting any information on Wolf ammo. I have been trying through many different methods to get someone to perform a real test on Wolf ammo. The only testing that I have seen done is the picture of the ballistic gel shot in the ammo oracle.
This however was the fmj round only, and was taken some time ago. Wolf ammo has been changed since then, and there are rumors that they have taken steps to increase muzzle velocity.

Everyone assumes that the hollowpoint performs the same as the fmj, but as far as I can tell, this is based on tests of Wolf 7.62x39mm in which the hollowpoint rounds failed to open up reliably. To the best of my knowledge, no one has ever seriously tested Wolf .223 HP ammo.

I don't expect it to perform like M193, but I would at least like to see someone test the stuff out of curiosity and maybe post pictures of the gel shot results so people can make up their own mind.
It appears that the folks who have access to the materials and facilities needed to perform realiable testing  just aint interested, and everytime you ask, everyone just repeats the same old montra "Wolf doesn't fragment".

6/6/2006 3:36:07 PM EDT
[#3]
brouhaha and tatjana tested the HP round, and it didn't fragment. The jacket is too thick. End of story.
6/6/2006 4:55:45 PM EDT
[#4]
OK, I had never been able to get anyone to confirm if it was tested or not. Do they have any pictures by any chance? I am a ballistic gel junkie!!
Thanks.
6/6/2006 5:06:07 PM EDT
[#5]
No pics. They shot some gelatin blocks that had been used for another experiment and didn't bother to take pics.
6/6/2006 5:09:17 PM EDT
[#6]
Ohh, I had just sent  bruhaha an e-mail before I read your response.
Oh well.
Thanks anyway.
6/6/2006 5:29:45 PM EDT
[#7]
I ran Wolf Poly through a 20" A1 and got just over 2800 fps avg of 5.  I ran it through an 11.5 Colt 1:7 and got 2510 fps avg of 5.

I can't find the slip with ambient temp, etc. right now, am operating from memory.  I distinctly remember that my M193 SA ran faster from the 11.5 than the Wolf in a 20".

Sam
6/6/2006 5:53:48 PM EDT
[#8]

Quoted:
I distinctly remember that my M193 SA ran faster from the 11.5 than the Wolf in a 20".

Sam



That really says something when M193 is faster in a 11.5" pipe than comparable Wolf in a 20" rifle.
6/6/2006 5:58:16 PM EDT
[#9]
I wonder how Wolf gets their 3241 fps number. They must be shooting with a heck of a tail wind.

6/7/2006 3:41:15 AM EDT
[#10]
2940 fps avg from my 20" A4 rifle...last summer, temp was in the 80-90 range.

Hotgun
6/7/2006 5:13:32 PM EDT
[#11]
Hmm, 2800 and 2940. That's quite a spread. Would environmental factors alone account for that difference?
6/8/2006 2:35:56 AM EDT
[#12]

Quoted:
Hmm, 2800 and 2940. That's quite a spread. Would environmental factors alone account for that difference?



Possibly.  IIRC, I shot at around 50 degrees.  

There are other variables.  My barrels have seen alot of FA use.  Round count is up there.

Sam
6/8/2006 9:12:01 PM EDT
[#13]
It has been my experience that velocities for Wolf can vary up to 100 fps between lots of the same bullet weight.  Variations with elevation above sea level, atmospheric pressure, and barrel/ambient temperature can cause 50 to 100 fps change in velocity for the same lot easy.  

Changes in velocity and pressure with barrel temp and ambient temp depends a lot on what type of powder is used.  Some powders are more sensitive to this than others.

It should also be noted that different brands and types chronographs can vary in their accuracy for measuring acutal bullet velocity.  Chrony's are notorious for this.  Oehler's are supposed to be calibrated better, but you pay for it.

So that all said, other people's chrono data should be within maybe 150 to 200 fps of each other for the same type of ammo and barrel length, with the only difference being with ammo lots, rifles, and shooting conditions.

Final thing, the Wolf steel case ammo is underloaded compared to milspec, period.  200 to 400 fps below m193/m855 velocities for the same bullet weight is the norm.

Some of my chrono data has been posted in the long thread on the ammo.  The full data is below using a base model Chrony (the F1 I think):

The lot stayed the same for each bullet weight, the only thing that changed was barrel length and ambient temp.  Shooting was at a elevation of approx. 1000 ft above sea level.

16" barrel, Temp = 95F (10 shot avg. at 10 ft from muzzle)
55gr. FMJ - 2837 fps
62gr. FMJ - 2886 fps
62gr. HP - 2774 fps

16" barrel, Temp = 80F
55gr. FMJ = 2760 fps

20"  barrel, Temp 80F
55gr. FMJ - 2843

20" barrel, Temp 40F (tried to keep ammo warm before shooting)
62gr. FMJ - 2873 fps

So long story short, all Wolf probably shoots somewhere in the 2700 to 2900 fps range.
6/9/2006 11:47:37 AM EDT
[#14]
Thanks for the replies. I have zero experience with chronographs so all this has been very enlightning.
AR Sponsor