Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
1/25/2018 7:38:29 AM
Posted: 1/14/2002 12:04:08 PM EST
[Last Edit: 1/14/2002 12:06:44 PM EST by Striker]
Link Posted: 1/14/2002 5:24:17 PM EST
How long is your barrel? If it's 14.5" or shorter, I'd go 55. If it's a 20", you could go 60 if you plan on shooting at longer ranges.
Link Posted: 1/15/2002 2:36:12 AM EST
Link Posted: 1/15/2002 3:06:32 AM EST
With the ammo facs around here all stating that bigger/heavier is better the 75 grain TAP would be my choice, especially considering you have the faster twist rate. Just my opinion, Mike
Link Posted: 1/16/2002 6:00:28 AM EST
If you haven't already, do check these resources: [url]http://www.iwba.com/[/url] [url]http://www.firearmstactical.com[/url] Last, poke around [url]http://www.tacticalforums.com/[/url] and search for posts by "DocGKR" - he's got great info. on wound ballistics and specific recs for .223 rounds. Good luck!
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 8:39:53 AM EST
I would definitely go with the 75gr Tap. Make sure to check the accuracy of this round. It should do well in the 1/7 twist barrel. I would like to hear about the results of your range sessions. Stay safe.
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 2:05:23 PM EST
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 4:03:46 PM EST
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 5:13:09 PM EST
We use the 55-grain TAP in our G36K's, which have about a 13" 1 in 7 twist barrel. The 55-grain bullets work fine. The 75-grain TAP is a BTHP, not the same design as the 40, 55, and 60-grain TAP loads. The 75-grain was extremely accurate in our .223 Remington 700P. The 55-grain TAP outshoots 55-grain Federal BTHP match in the G36K's by quite a bit. If you're planning on shooting targets at distance, get the 75. If you're planning on being inside buildings, get the 55. My preference is for the 55.
Link Posted: 1/30/2002 6:06:07 PM EST
Ditto Sparky. For CQB, velocity rules. IMO, the real question is, "At what range will I most commonly engage?" If under 100, my vote is 55, due to velocity.
Link Posted: 1/31/2002 3:57:23 AM EST
Top Top