Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 8/26/2002 12:53:18 AM EDT
If you had to go to Afganistan (or survive another LA riot), and fight against god knows what type of dudes, what type of round would you like to have best if you wanted to shoot it through a 16" 1/9 twist upper? Forget junk like the Geneva convention and how much it costs... I'm looking for the no-holds-barred best choice. I'm thinking that the Nosler 55gr bullet is best, but I'm worried about how it might "explode on contact" and fail to get any real penetration, which might be an even greater problem when going up against even light body armor. I'm also leaning towards teh 55 gr weight because, after reading countless discussion on this topic, it seems to be the only way to go when your velocity is limited by the shorter 16" barrel. Keep in mind that good trauma plates seem to be able to stop everything up to AP 7.62 NATO, so maybe all armor piercing arguments are irrelevant? What do you think? Especially you, Tatanja, I know you're out there and you've helped me with a similar question in the past... I'm just looking for the final answer now that I'm a little wiser. Thanks in advance.
Link Posted: 8/26/2002 1:17:55 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/26/2002 1:18:42 AM EDT by tatjana]

Originally Posted By blackrazor:
If you had to go to Afganistan (or survive another LA riot), and fight against god knows what type of dudes, what type of round would you like to have best if you wanted to shoot it through a 16" 1/9 twist upper? Forget junk like the Geneva convention and how much it costs... I'm looking for the no-holds-barred best choice. I'm thinking that the Nosler 55gr bullet is best, but I'm worried about how it might "explode on contact" and fail to get any real penetration, which might be an even greater problem when going up against even light body armor. I'm also leaning towards teh 55 gr weight because, after reading countless discussion on this topic, it seems to be the only way to go when your velocity is limited by the shorter 16" barrel. Keep in mind that good trauma plates seem to be able to stop everything up to AP 7.62 NATO, so maybe all armor piercing arguments are irrelevant? What do you think? Especially you, Tatanja, I know you're out there and you've helped me with a similar question in the past... I'm just looking for the final answer now that I'm a little wiser. Thanks in advance.



77 Grain FMJ or 100 grain FMJ (black hills) probably, if the 16" was 1:7.

If not one of the better 64 grain rounds.
Link Posted: 8/26/2002 1:43:50 AM EDT
Tatjana,

Do you think currently that the 77 and 100 gr Black Hills and 64 gr SP's are better than the 55 gr M193? If so, is this mainly an accuracy thing, penetration, range or better anti-personnel abililities? I have zero experience with all of the loads that you mentioned, but have been interested in Winchester's Power Point Plus for my 16" carbine....figure at least I could hunt with these loads.

---Charging Handle
Link Posted: 8/26/2002 2:04:50 AM EDT
100 grain bullets for the AR?!! WTF?! Where have I been? I thought those 75 grainers were the heaviest you could get, and they weren't really practical because they had to be loaded sooo long they wouldn't fit in a GI magazine... so what's with the 100 grainers? Please explain. Do they have a steel core? Why are they better? Are they soft point? Tungsten? Noslers are no good, varmint only, perhaps? In our earlier conversation, you recommended the 55 FMJ over the newer SS109 (62 grain FMJ) specifically because it had a high enough velocity to cause real damage (an especailly important issue with shorter 16" AR's). So how can the 100 grain bullet beat everything when the 55 beats the 62? I'm seriously confused now... Help!

P.S. What kind of velocity can you expect with a 16" barrel and a 100 grain bullet? Wouldn't the bullet slow down so much you would loose a lot of the hydrostatic shock that makes a rifle such a great fighting tool (relative to, say, a handgun)?
Link Posted: 8/26/2002 2:56:30 AM EDT

Originally Posted By blackrazor:
100 grain bullets for the AR?!! WTF?! Where have I been? I thought those 75 grainers were the heaviest you could get, and they weren't really practical because they had to be loaded sooo long they wouldn't fit in a GI magazine... so what's with the 100 grainers? Please explain. Do they have a steel core? Why are they better? Are they soft point? Tungsten? Noslers are no good, varmint only, perhaps? In our earlier conversation, you recommended the 55 FMJ over the newer SS109 (62 grain FMJ) specifically because it had a high enough velocity to cause real damage (an especailly important issue with shorter 16" AR's). So how can the 100 grain bullet beat everything when the 55 beats the 62? I'm seriously confused now... Help!

P.S. What kind of velocity can you expect with a 16" barrel and a 100 grain bullet? Wouldn't the bullet slow down so much you would loose a lot of the hydrostatic shock that makes a rifle such a great fighting tool (relative to, say, a handgun)?




Q. So are heavier rounds dead for self-defense purposes?
Link Posted: 8/26/2002 4:34:43 AM EDT
Once this 'weight gain' thing evolves itself up to, say 150 grains, we will have come full circle back to where we started....7.62 NATO!
Link Posted: 8/26/2002 5:58:56 AM EDT
Anybody know if the 69gr Black Hills gives similar performance to the 77gr? Both are Sierra Match Kings, and if they're similar performance-wise, the 69gr would work out of a 1/9 twist.

FWIW, I've shot 77's out of my 1/9 with good results accuracy-wise, but that's out of a 20" barrel. I suppose the lower velocity out of a 16" might not stabilize the 77.
Link Posted: 8/26/2002 2:24:43 PM EDT
I have that same Colt Match Target HBAR2 with the 16" barrel and 1 in 9 twist. I called Colt the other day to see what they had to say about ammo selection and they told me that it can handle up to 70 grain bullets but that the 55 grain would be the most accurate. I have pretty much settled on buying a case of Federal gold medal match BTHP at 55 grains. Does anyone have any actual experience on this?
Link Posted: 8/26/2002 2:38:02 PM EDT
Blackrazor, I shoot Winchester Q3131A (M193) from my 16" Bushmaster. Low velocity isn't a problem with this hot ammo. From a 16" barrel you can expect roughly 3,150 fps, more than enough to cause serious fragmentation. I believe that ball ammo is the best way to go with a rifle if you're not certain on what you'll be going up against. Despite what some people say 55gr M193 will cause some serious wounds. This ammo will also allow you to reach out and touch someone at a much farther range if necessary.

Link Posted: 8/27/2002 1:13:24 PM EDT
I don't know about this heavier and heavier crud with .224 diameter projectiles. You wind up with a non-existent case volume and a MV roughly equivalent to my grandmother’s fastball.

Why not just admit the Russians were right and go with a 7.62x39 round?

Oh damn, KAC already did that – didn't fly

Reissue the M21 with some better glass and a new can?? Hrm...

As far as loading for the AR-15 with a car barrel, I'm kind of fond of a 50 gr. Combined Technology Ballistic Silvertip on top of a case full of 2230-c. (consult a reloading manual) I've seen this load blow coyotes into bag O' burger, it gets way over 3200 fps in cold weather and it shoots clean without much flash.

Hips, head or C.O.M. it's not something anybody will be walking away from.
Link Posted: 8/27/2002 4:40:10 PM EDT

Originally Posted By BOFH:
I don't know about this heavier and heavier crud with .224 diameter projectiles. You wind up with a non-existent case volume and a MV roughly equivalent to my grandmother’s fastball.

Why not just admit the Russians were right and go with a 7.62x39 round?

Oh damn, KAC already did that – didn't fly

Reissue the M21 with some better glass and a new can?? Hrm...

.



the 7.62x39 is a joke thats why. It has neither good accuracy nor good wound ballistcs.

And no .30cal 150grn bullet could ever beat the aerodynamic properties of a 100gr .223. From the figures on the FAQ it looks like the 100gr .223 load only looses about one foot per second per yard of distance travelled. If it has a floor of 2100fps and a MV of 2400fps, well that means good fragmentation out to 300m which is what they seem to be looking for.

Link Posted: 8/27/2002 5:42:01 PM EDT

Originally Posted By ArmdLbrl:

Originally Posted By BOFH:
I don't know about this heavier and heavier crud with .224 diameter projectiles. You wind up with a non-existent case volume and a MV roughly equivalent to my grandmother’s fastball.

Why not just admit the Russians were right and go with a 7.62x39 round?

Oh damn, KAC already did that – didn't fly

Reissue the M21 with some better glass and a new can?? Hrm...

.



the 7.62x39 is a joke thats why. It has neither good accuracy nor good wound ballistcs.

And no .30cal 150grn bullet could ever beat the aerodynamic properties of a 100gr .223. From the figures on the FAQ it looks like the 100gr .223 load only looses about one foot per second per yard of distance travelled. If it has a floor of 2100fps and a MV of 2400fps, well that means good fragmentation out to 300m which is what they seem to be looking for.




More food for thought. I got these from Federal. Their 150 grain / 308 Nosler Ballistic Tip round for medium game carries 2820 fps at the muzzle and 2220 at 300 yards. Thats not bad and a 150 grain bullet is carrying more energy than a 100 grainer. There's more to all this than fragmentation.......
Link Posted: 8/27/2002 5:44:55 PM EDT

Originally Posted By ArmdLbrl:

Originally Posted By BOFH:
I don't know about this heavier and heavier crud with .224 diameter projectiles. You wind up with a non-existent case volume and a MV roughly equivalent to my grandmother’s fastball.

Why not just admit the Russians were right and go with a 7.62x39 round?

Oh damn, KAC already did that – didn't fly

Reissue the M21 with some better glass and a new can?? Hrm...

.



the 7.62x39 is a joke thats why. It has neither good accuracy nor good wound ballistcs.

And no .30cal 150grn bullet could ever beat the aerodynamic properties of a 100gr .223. From the figures on the FAQ it looks like the 100gr .223 load only looses about one foot per second per yard of distance travelled. If it has a floor of 2100fps and a MV of 2400fps, well that means good fragmentation out to 300m which is what they seem to be looking for.




Sectional density means jack if you start with an MV 'like grannies fastball'.

I realize the FAQ is quite enamored with the black hills 100 gr. stuff but

1) If the bullet uses a lead core and a coefficient of form anywhere near one.
- you will wind up with a bullet that is a little over 1.2" long.
If you load that round to max oal you have subtracted over 20% from case capacity and an MV, with optimal powder, of something a little less than 2k fps. (granny's fastball)

2) You can't even buy this mythical round so this debate is irrelevant


I prefer a flatter trajectory with a shallower (but more dramatic) wound track. You rarely encounter someone 30" thick outside of a hospital bed.
Link Posted: 8/28/2002 1:04:03 AM EDT
In the 1965 riots, rioters were shooting down on the guardsmen from rooftops. They hid behind that little piece of cinder block at the top of the buildings. The guardsmen finally caught on and fought back with jeep mounted .50 BMG M2's. That put an end to it quite quickly.

If you need that kind of capability, forget .223. Go with an M1A or a FAL, which is also capable of penetrating that kind of cover. If you must stick to .223, I'm sure M193 or M855 will serve you well.
Top Top