Posted: 9/28/2014 12:54:57 PM EDT
|
I know most of you have been hearing about the new lead Free rounds the military will be moving to in the near future. Well some info has been distributed with details about the round and how it is the best thing since sliced bread. A few quotes from the report.
"Performs significantly better than any other military 5.56mm cartridge as a general purpose round" "EPR (enhanced performance round) is superior to legacy 7.62mm against soft targets." "Blurs edges between 7.62mm and 5.56mm performance with no additional weight" What’s the downside? Nothing major, just that the exposed penetrator has been shown to eventually put large divots in the feed ramps and barrel extension which eventually cause feeding problems. Pictures are included of this and I would not want to use this round in any of my rifles. The fix for this issue is a new magazine that will be distributed that will raise the feed angle of the round to keep it from causing the divot. What does this do? It causes a divot above the bore instead (with pictures of this also) but the report says it is cosmetic only and will not affect the reliability or function. Needless to say. I am not convinced. And although this report says it will be the new training round I get the feeling that it will be "the round" once fully implemented. And, I fully expect neck bearding to start soon on all M855 ammo. Also, I give it another 5 years and there will be federal regulations on all civilian ammo to produce non lead bullets only. 
|
|
Quoted:
Are you talking about the M855A1 that's been around for a couple years now? Yes. The one that has been in development and field testing for a while now. There is an official DoD distribution that states the superior performance and also acknowledges the need for a separate magazine and also talks about no civilian distribution (not that we would want it). I know the round is nothing new to some but the DoD acknowledging and making some of the claims that are made might interest some. |
| I was using that round in country back in 2011 over here and I have been using it since I got back in country again. I don't know why DOD is saying what they are I guess some dumb ass office clown doesn't know what the hell they are talking about. I did not see any of the issues they are saying and we went to the range all the time and shot thousands of the M855A1 with standard M4 mag's and did not have any problems. I have not heard of anyone else having these problems with the guys I have talked to and went to the range with. |
|
Quoted:
Couldn't they just make the ramps out of a harder metal? Thats the problem. They are not rebuilding the M4 around this round. The round has feeding issues (after a significant amount of rounds have been through it) and known over pressure issues. I would not want to use the round in a scenario where my life depended on it nor would I want to use a rifle with current ammo if I know that said rifle has had a significant amount of this non-lead ammo used in it for training purposes. Another problem I see is the magazine required for lead free ammo gettign mixed up with current mags. What happens if Joe accidentally uses those new magazines with M855 ammo? The new magazine feeds the round in at a higher angle. It sounds like a legitimate issue and a a logistical nightmare. |
|
Quoted:
Also, I give it another 5 years and there will be federal regulations on all civilian ammo to produce non lead bullets only.
Highly doubt that as too many places don't want their back stops beat up by "armor piercing" bullets and steel core as it is now. If they did make a bill it would easily be spun as "making standard bullets illegal, and only lead free armor piercing rounds legal". How well will that go over? |
|
Quoted:
I was using that round in country back in 2011 over here and I have been using it since I got back in country again. I don't know why DOD is saying what they are I guess some dumb ass office clown doesn't know what the hell they are talking about. I did not see any of the issues they are saying and we went to the range all the time and shot thousands of the M855A1 with standard M4 mag's and did not have any problems. I have not heard of anyone else having these problems with the guys I have talked to and went to the range with. The round has went through a few different iterations in the last few years. I am just relaying what some of the distributed material claimed and had picrures of. I have never used it. It did say that the feeding problems would only come with a significant amount of ammo usage, in the thousands. |
|
Quoted:
Highly doubt that as too many places don't want their back stops beat up by "armor piercing" bullets and steel core as it is now. If they did make a bill it would easily be spun as "making standard bullets illegal, and only lead free armor piercing rounds legal". How well will that go over? Quoted:
Quoted:
Also, I give it another 5 years and there will be federal regulations on all civilian ammo to produce non lead bullets only.
Highly doubt that as too many places don't want their back stops beat up by "armor piercing" bullets and steel core as it is now. If they did make a bill it would easily be spun as "making standard bullets illegal, and only lead free armor piercing rounds legal". How well will that go over? I do not mean these particalar bullets will be the only type but I do beleive that some form of nonlead bullet will be mandated in the next 5-10 years. Just because it is non-lead doesn't mean it has to be "armor piercing". |
|
Quoted:
The round has went through a few different iterations in the last few years. I am just relaying what some of the distributed material claimed and had picrures of. I have never used it. It did say that the feeding problems would only come with a significant amount of ammo usage, in the thousands. Quoted:
Quoted:
I was using that round in country back in 2011 over here and I have been using it since I got back in country again. I don't know why DOD is saying what they are I guess some dumb ass office clown doesn't know what the hell they are talking about. I did not see any of the issues they are saying and we went to the range all the time and shot thousands of the M855A1 with standard M4 mag's and did not have any problems. I have not heard of anyone else having these problems with the guys I have talked to and went to the range with. The round has went through a few different iterations in the last few years. I am just relaying what some of the distributed material claimed and had picrures of. I have never used it. It did say that the feeding problems would only come with a significant amount of ammo usage, in the thousands. Yeah I don't know. I always cleaned my weapon after the ranges and always had it ready when I rolled out since I rolled out every day sometimes two or three times a day. I guess they could have some issues with it then as I never shot so many rounds that my weapon would fail. |
|
Quoted:
I do not mean these particalar bullets will be the only type but I do beleive that some form of nonlead bullet will be mandated in the next 5-10 years. Just because it is non-lead doesn't mean it has to be "armor piercing". Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Also, I give it another 5 years and there will be federal regulations on all civilian ammo to produce non lead bullets only.
Highly doubt that as too many places don't want their back stops beat up by "armor piercing" bullets and steel core as it is now. If they did make a bill it would easily be spun as "making standard bullets illegal, and only lead free armor piercing rounds legal". How well will that go over? I do not mean these particalar bullets will be the only type but I do beleive that some form of nonlead bullet will be mandated in the next 5-10 years. Just because it is non-lead doesn't mean it has to be "armor piercing". I still find it highly unlikely. Perhaps on public land, but not on private. There isn't a cheap alternative to lead. |
|
Quoted:
I still find it highly unlikely. Perhaps on public land, but not on private. There isn't a cheap alternative to lead. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Also, I give it another 5 years and there will be federal regulations on all civilian ammo to produce non lead bullets only.
Highly doubt that as too many places don't want their back stops beat up by "armor piercing" bullets and steel core as it is now. If they did make a bill it would easily be spun as "making standard bullets illegal, and only lead free armor piercing rounds legal". How well will that go over? I do not mean these particalar bullets will be the only type but I do beleive that some form of nonlead bullet will be mandated in the next 5-10 years. Just because it is non-lead doesn't mean it has to be "armor piercing". I still find it highly unlikely. Perhaps on public land, but not on private. There isn't a cheap alternative to lead. BINGO!!! We have a winner!!! If they can't ban guns they can make ammo economically imposable to afford or produce all in the name of saving the earth. It doesn’t matter for the .gov that it is more expensive for the military to use because we the taxpayers are going to foot the bill anyway. |