Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 11/20/2002 12:39:07 AM EDT
What would you suggest? What got me thinking on this is the fact that a fmj would probably go through attacker and continue on going god knows elsewhere. Just imagine "Home owner defends home, kills gun owner and unfortunatly the neighbors dog too.

I mean is there a round that is designed to stop.

What is the TAP TACTICAL APPLICATION
URBAN BALLISTIC TIP?

Just looking for some answers to questions.

oz
Link Posted: 11/20/2002 12:54:20 AM EDT
If you are using the right FMJ, you should have no problem with over-penetration. Use M193 and at close ranges, it should fragment well and stay inside the target for the most part. I suggest reading the ammo FAQ at www.ammo-oracle.com. It should tell you everything you are looking for.
Link Posted: 11/20/2002 12:58:27 AM EDT
I was reading that and thought I would ask here also.

I was told that bh v-max is good defensive ammo also.

oz
Link Posted: 11/20/2002 12:59:05 AM EDT
also, what grain would you reccomend?

oz
Link Posted: 11/20/2002 1:59:38 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/20/2002 2:01:19 AM EDT by Charging_Handle]
I honestly would not recommend any type of ballistic tip ammo for self defense in 223. It is a varmint round and just doesn't have the penetration needed to be a reliable, fast man stopper. These varmint rounds explode on impact and the wound is nasty....but shallow. Avoid this stuff altogether and opt for something that has better penetration.

What I would recommend for defensive work is listed below:

1. M193 spec ammo - This includes Federal XM193, Winchester Q3131A, and IMI M193. This stuff is loaded hotter than commercial 223 loads and fragments in mediums like flesh. However it penetrates a few inches, yaws and then breaks apart. Therefore you get better penetration than with vmax bullets, yet with similar effects. However I would only recommend using this hotter ammo in guns that are compatible with mil-spec ammo such as Colt, Bushmaster, Rock River, etc.

2. Hornady or Black Hills 75 gr BTHP Match - These new rounds also look very good as defensive cartridges. They have shown ideal penetration and fragmentation in tests and should make great defensive rounds. These rounds are most accurate from 1/7 twist barrels.

3. Federal or Black Hills 69 gr BTHP Match - While these rounds seem to have a longer neck in gel than the 75 gr loads (they penetrate deeper before yawing and fragmenting) they are still nice rounds. This is the load the FBI uses in their 16" AR carbines. It works well out of 1/9 twist barrels and will also work well with 1/7 twist rates.

4. M855 spec ammo - This load also has some good qualities and performs in a similar manner to M193. However it is a bit slower because it uses a heavier bullet. Since 223 is dependant upon velocity to do it's thing, this round will run out of steam faster and so will the range in which it will reliably fragment. I still think M193 would be superior to this load.

5. Winchester Supreme Power Point Plus - This ammo is loaded with a 64 gr soft point bullet. While expansion may not be as good as fragmentation in 223 loads, this still appears to be a good round. It offers better penetration that the lighter 55 gr soft points and should be decent self defense ammo. It may also offer controlled expansion at longer ranges as well where other bullets may lose too much steam to fragment well.

Other than the rounds I listed above, I can't think of any 223 round that I would feel comfortable using for defensive purposes. Hornady TAP is good ammo, but make sure you buy the 75 gr BTHP instead of the lighter VMAX/AMAX type designs. Again, polymer tipped 223 bullets just don't offer adequate penetration in people. It does work well on small varmints though. Stick with something that meets the FBI's 12" minimum penetration criteria and also fragments or expands and you'll be ok.

It is nice that you are concerned about your neighbors and are afraid of over-penetrating bullets. But I think your fears are unfounded when talking about the 223. The pro's have started to find out that the 223 often penetrates much less in building materials than 9mm rounds or 00 buckshot!

With the rounds that I recommended above, you can expect something on the order of 14" penetration in flesh. On the other hand don't expect any better than 6-8" of penetration with light ballistic tip rounds....maybe even less in some cases. That just isn't good enough to get the job done on angled shots that may have to pass through an arm to reach the vitals.

I hope this was helpful.

---Charging Handle
Link Posted: 11/20/2002 1:17:22 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Ozmodiar: I was reading that and thought I would ask here also. I was told that bh v-max is good defensive ammo also. oz
View Quote
We wrote the ammo FAQ partially so you would not HAVE to ask here. You should find the answers to all your questions there. v-max is NOT good defensive ammo in .223
Link Posted: 11/20/2002 1:47:58 PM EDT
sorry tat, I had not gotten that far in my reading in that faq. right after someone mentioned it, I got to the question concerning it. oz
Link Posted: 11/21/2002 4:15:19 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/22/2002 12:34:53 PM EDT by ColtRifle]
Here is some info from the FBI ammunition tests. Very interesting reading since the FBI is one of the most often quoted resources for ammunition tests. Also note that the FMJ bullet tested used a 20" barrel versus a 14.5" barrel. Bullet Type: Nosler Ballistic Tip Lot #: 325058Z231 Weapon Type: Colt M4A1 Barrel Length (inches): 14.5 Bullet Diameter (inches): 0.224 Date Tested: 10/25/99 Bullet Weight (grains): 55 .223 - 55 grain - Federal - Nosler Ballistic Tip 2809 FPS CQB PENETRATION RESULTS: Penetration Performance 11.55 Bare Gelatin 11.90 Heavy Clothing 10.35 Steel 12.00 Wallboard 12.20 Plywood 7.70 Auto Glass 11.30 Heavy Clothing at 20 yards 9.05 Auto Glass at 20 yards 11.55 Bare Gelatin at 50 yards 9.70 Bare Gelatin at 100 yards 8.10 Exterior Wall at 10 feet 9.75 Level IIA Body Armor at 10 feet 9.75 Level IIIA Body Armor at 10 feet Range of penetration (inches): 4.5 - 13.75 Penetration Performance FBI Close Quarter Battle (CQB) Ammunition Test Summary .223 - 55 grain - Federal - Nosler Ballistic Tip 55 Rnd averages: Shots Less than 12": 39 Penetration (inches) 10.49 Expansion (inches) 0.24 Retained Weight 11.0 As a % . . . 20.0 Bullet Type: Winchester Pointed Soft Point Lot #: 42NM40 Weapon Type: Colt M4A1 Barrel Length (inches): 14.5 Bullet Diameter (inches): 0.224 Date Tested: 12/ 7/99 Bullet Weight (grains): 55 .223 - 55 grain - Winchester - Pointed Soft Point 2897 FPS CQB PENETRATION RESULTS: Penetration Performance 9.75 Bare Gelatin 9.80 Heavy Clothing 7.70 Steel 8.05 Wallboard 8.90 Plywood 3.50 Auto Glass 9.95 Heavy Clothing at 20 yards 5.55 Auto Glass at 20 yards 9.75 Bare Gelatin at 50 yards 10.80 Bare Gelatin at 100 yards 8.15 Exterior Wall at 10 feet 8.80 Level IIA Body Armor at 10 feet 8.40 Level IIIA Body Armor at 10 feet Range of penetration (inches): 1.75 - 12.5 Penetration Performance FBI Close Quarter Battle (CQB) Ammunition Test Summary .223 - 55 grain - Winchester - Pointed Soft Point 55 Rnd Averages: Shots Less than 12": 54 Penetration (inches) 8.35 Expansion (inches) 0.40 Retained Weight 23.1 As a % . . . 42.0 Bullet Type: FMJ Lot #: 14ED40 Weapon Type: Colt M16A1 Barrel Length (inches): 20 Bullet Diameter (inches): 0.224 Date Tested: 3/15/93 Bullet Weight (grains): 55 .223 - 55 grain - Winchester -FMJ 3038 FPS CQB PENETRATION RESULTS: Penetration Performance: 17.25 Bare Gelatin 14.15 Heavy Clothing 10.50 Steel 9.45 Wallboard 9.90 Plywood 7.35 Auto Glass 15.05 Heavy Clothing at 20 yards 7.85 Auto Glass at 20 yards 14.25 Bare Gelatin at 50 yards 14.95 Bare Gelatin at 100 yards 13.80 Exterior Wall at 10 feet 11.25 Level IIA Body Armor at 10 feet Range of penetration (inches): 5.75 - 19.25 Penetration Performance FBI Close Quarter Battle (CQB) Ammunition Test Summary .223 - 55 grain - Winchester -FMJ 55 Rnd Averages: Shots Less than 12": 23 Penetration (inches) 12.23 Expansion (inches) 0.30 Retained Weight 32.2 As a % . . . 58.5
Link Posted: 11/21/2002 8:53:35 AM EDT
Where did you get that data if you dont mind my asking?
Link Posted: 11/21/2002 12:27:14 PM EDT
Originally Posted By DevL: Where did you get that data if you dont mind my asking?
View Quote
I have a database on a CD that lists numerous ammo tests that the FBI did. This is official FBI info....not something that I made up. There are many other ammo tests available but these are the ones that most people are interested in. If you wonder about any others, let me know and I will post the info if I have it. I also have test results for other .223 rounds (not all though), as well as 9mm, .40, .357, and 10mm. Very facinating info since everyone likes to quote the FBI but often don't know what the actual test results are.
Link Posted: 11/21/2002 8:15:01 PM EDT
Originally Posted By ColtRifle:
Originally Posted By DevL: Where did you get that data if you dont mind my asking?
View Quote
I have a database on a CD that lists numerous ammo tests that the FBI did. This is official FBI info....not something that I made up. There are many other ammo tests available but these are the ones that most people are interested in. If you wonder about any others, let me know and I will post the info if I have it. I also have test results for other .223 rounds (not all though), as well as 9mm, .40, .357, and 10mm. Very facinating info since everyone likes to quote the FBI but often don't know what the actual test results are.
View Quote
I can't understand where their calculation "Range of Penetration" means.
Link Posted: 11/21/2002 8:22:25 PM EDT
OK if you have it I would like to see data on the 55 and 62 grain Federal trophy bonded or "tactical police" loads as well as 75 grain TAP ammo.
Link Posted: 11/21/2002 8:24:40 PM EDT
Originally Posted By tatjana: I can't understand where their calculation "Range of Penetration" means.
View Quote
I am going to guess and say that the numbers listed for penetration are averages and the "range of penetration" were the extremes of all the tests they did.
Link Posted: 11/22/2002 12:08:33 AM EDT
The "range of penetration" means of all the rounds fired what the lowest penetrating and the highest penetrating rounds for that particular round were. It covers all the mediums that the bullets were fired into. Also the penetration depths were the averages of all the rounds fired into that particular medium. I will check and see what I have on the rounds that you asked about. I know that I do not have the info for the 75 grain TAP. I wish I did because I would like to see it myself. I have info on at least one of the tactical rounds that you are interested in. As soon as I am able to get to my other computer I will post the info. While I have my own theories about the info that I have posted, I am not trying to advocate a particular round.
Link Posted: 11/22/2002 2:13:12 AM EDT
It is important to keep in mind that the penetration with the Federal Nosler ballistic tip's and the Winchester SP loads will be less as barrel length increases. Out of the 14.5" barrel, the Nosler's almost meet the minimum 12" criteria for penetration. But if fired from a 16" or 20" barrel, that penetration will decrease. These bullets will fragment more spectacularly at the higher velocities provided by the added barrel length, meaning penetration will not be as good. Most people use AR rifles with either 16" or 20" barrels, so for them I would still recommend something other than ballistic tips or 55 gr SP's for defensive use. I too would like to see some of the other various .223 as well as the .357 test results if you don't mind posting them. I've seen most of the other FBI pistol caliber tests over at firearmstactical, but I haven't seen much regarding the .357 loads. Again, thanks ColtRifle for sharing this info.
Link Posted: 11/22/2002 3:56:25 AM EDT
I'll post the most common rounds that I have info on as soon as I have a chance. Good point about the barrel length. Guess the FBI needs to do a little more research on those barrel lengths and bullet selections!
Link Posted: 11/22/2002 5:20:49 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/22/2002 12:38:02 PM EDT by ColtRifle]
Here's the .223 info: Bullet Type: Bonded JHP Lot #: 291797Y167 Weapon Type: Colt M16A2 Barrel Length (inches): 16 Bullet Diameter (inches): 0.224 Date Tested: 6/ 4/96 Bullet Weight (grains): 55 .223 - 55 grain - Federal - Bonded JHP 2798 FPS CQB PENETRATION RESULTS Penetration Performance: Shots Less than 12": 0 16.05 Bare Gelatin 17.30 Heavy Clothing 14.90 Steel 13.70 Wallboard 14.70 Plywood 13.90 Auto Glass 13.85 Heavy Clothing at 20 yards 14.75 Auto Glass at 20 yards 14.60 Bare Gelatin at 50 yards 14.15 Bare Gelatin at 100 yards Range of penetration (inches): 12.5 - 18.5 Penetration Performance FBI Close Quarter Battle (CQB) Ammunition Test Summary .223 - 55 grain - Federal - Bonded JHP 50 Rnd Averages: Penetration (inches) 14.79 Expansion (inches) 0.45 Retained Weight 50.0 As a % . . . 90.9 Bullet Type: Tactical Bonded Weapon Type: Colt M4A1 Barrel Length (inches): 14.5 Bullet Diameter (inches): 0.224 Date Tested: 12/29/98 Bullet Weight (grains): 62 .223 - 62 grain - Federal - Tactical Bonded 2765 FPS CQB PENETRATION RESULTS Penetration Performance: 16.55 Bare Gelatin 15.55 Heavy Clothing 14.55 Steel 15.20 Wallboard 15.05 Plywood 13.45 Auto Glass 16.10 Heavy Clothing at 20 yards 13.10 Auto Glass at 20 yards 15.45 Bare Gelatin at 50 yards 15.20 Bare Gelatin at 100 yards 13.60 Exterior Wall at 10 feet 10.00 Level IIA Body Armor at 10 feet 9.75 Level IIIA Body Armor at 10 feet Range of penetration (inches): 11.75 - 17.25 Shots Less than 12": 1 FBI Close Quarter Battle (CQB) Ammunition Test Summary .223 - 62 grain - Federal - Tactical Bonded 55 Rnd Averages: Penetration (inches) 14.89 Expansion (inches) 0.46 Retained Weight 56.4 As a % . . . 90.9 Bullet Type: .223 - 64 grain - Winchester - Pointed Soft Point Weapon Type: Colt M16A2 Barrel Length (inches): 14.5 Bullet Diameter (inches): 0.224 Date Tested: 6/30/94 Bullet Weight (grains): 64 .223 - 64 grain - Winchester - Pointed Soft Point 2463 FPS CQB PENETRATION RESULTS: 13.00 Bare Gelatin 13.30 Heavy Clothing 11.60 Steel 11.35 Wallboard 11.05 Plywood 5.85 Auto Glass 13.85 Heavy Clothing at 20 yards 6.65 Auto Glass at 20 yards 21 Shots less than 12" Range of penetration (inches): 3.5 - 14.25 FBI Ammunition Test Summary 40 round Averages Penetration (inches) 10.83 Expansion (inches) 0.45 Retained Weight 46.7 As % . . . 73.0 Bullet Type: JHP Lot #: 29A-0444 Weapon Type: Colt M16A2 Barrel Length (inches): 20 Bullet Diameter (inches): 0.224 Date Tested: 3/18/93 Bullet Weight (grains): 69 .223 - 69 grain - Federal - JHP 2777 FPS CQB PENETRATION RESULTS: Penetration Performance 12.25 Bare Gelatin 5.90 Heavy Clothing 6.85 Steel 11.15 Wallboard 12.00 Plywood 7.65 Auto Glass 14.80 Heavy Clothing at 20 yards 6.15 Auto Glass at 20 yards 13.30 Bare Gelatin at 50 yards 13.15 Bare Gelatin at 100 yards 11.95 Exterior Wall at 10 feet 12.00 Level IIA Body Armor at 10 feet Range of penetration (inches): 4.5 - 16 Shots Less than 12": 32 FBI Close Quarter Battle (CQB) Ammunition Test Summary .223 - 69 grain - Federal - JHP 55 Rnd Averages: Penetration (inches) 10.47 Expansion (inches) 0.33 Retained Weight 22.3 As a % . . . 32.3
Link Posted: 11/22/2002 5:40:28 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/22/2002 12:39:32 PM EDT by ColtRifle]
Here are a couple of the common .357 rounds: .357 Mag. - 125 grain - Federal - JHP Bullet Type: JHP Lot #: 16A9539 Weapon Type: S&W M13 Barrel Length (inches): 3 Bullet Diameter (inches): 0.357 Date Tested: 7/27/90 Bullet Weight (grains): 125 1265 FPS 10.65 Bare Gelatin 11.75 Heavy Clothing 16.85 Steel 9.70 Wallboard 12.10 Plywood 10.95 Auto Glass 12.00 Heavy Clothing at 20 yards 12.35 Auto Glass at 20 yards Range of penetration (inches): 8.5 - 18.5 Shots less than 12" 24 FBI Ammunition Test Summary .357 Mag. - 125 grain - Federal - JHP 40 round Averages Penetration (inches) 12.04 Expansion (inches) 0.52 Retained Weight 96.3 As % . . . 77.1 .357 Mag. - 158 grain - Federal - JHP Bullet Type: JHP Lot #: 12B-0412 Weapon Type: S&W M19 Barrel Length (inches): 4 Bullet Diameter (inches): 0.357 Date Tested: 2/28/91 Bullet Weight (grains): 158 1200 FPS 16.50 Bare Gelatin 15.90 Heavy Clothing 18.85 Steel 14.25 Wallboard 18.55 Plywood 13.85 Auto Glass 19.30 Heavy Clothing at 20 yards 15.25 Auto Glass at 20 yards Range of penetration (inches): 11 - 21.5 Shots less than 12" 1 FBI Ammunition Test Summary .357 Mag. - 158 grain - Federal - JHP 40 round Averages Penetration (inches) 16.56 Expansion (inches) 0.54 Retained Weight 137.3 As % . . . 86.9
Link Posted: 11/22/2002 8:27:54 AM EDT
Looks like the 55 grain bonded beat the 62 grain bonded. I wonder how much of that had to do with the 55 grain being shot out a 1.5" longer barrel?
Link Posted: 11/22/2002 12:43:12 PM EDT
I realized that I did not include the velocities for the rounds. I have gone back and edited my posts to put in the velocities. The velocity numbers are for the individual weapons that were used to test the rounds and not a SAAMI test barrel.
Link Posted: 11/22/2002 2:03:51 PM EDT
Originally Posted By ColtRifle: The "range of penetration" means of all the rounds fired what the lowest penetrating and the highest penetrating rounds for that particular round were. It covers all the mediums that the bullets were fired into. Also the penetration depths were the averages of all the rounds fired into that particular medium.
View Quote
I thought so too, till I did the numbers. I don't think they jibe.
Link Posted: 11/22/2002 2:43:07 PM EDT
Originally Posted By tatjana:
Originally Posted By ColtRifle: The "range of penetration" means of all the rounds fired what the lowest penetrating and the highest penetrating rounds for that particular round were. It covers all the mediums that the bullets were fired into. Also the penetration depths were the averages of all the rounds fired into that particular medium.
View Quote
I thought so too, till I did the numbers. I don't think they jibe.
View Quote
What do you see as the problem? I'll double check myself to see if I made any mistakes transfering the info. Again....the lowest number is the lowest penetration of any rounds into any medium and the highest number is the deepest penetration into any medium. For instance, the penetration after glass is not nearly as deep as the penetration into bare gelatin as I'm sure you are aware. I'd certainly be interested in knowing what you see as flaws in the FBI's testing results. You won't offend me since I don't necessarily automatically believe the conclutions that the FBI draws from their tests. I am just posting this for informational purposes.
Link Posted: 11/22/2002 8:04:09 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/23/2002 7:42:16 AM EDT by tatjana]
Originally Posted By ColtRifle:
Originally Posted By tatjana:
Originally Posted By ColtRifle: The "range of penetration" means of all the rounds fired what the lowest penetrating and the highest penetrating rounds for that particular round were. It covers all the mediums that the bullets were fired into. Also the penetration depths were the averages of all the rounds fired into that particular medium.
View Quote
I thought so too, till I did the numbers. I don't think they jibe.
View Quote
What do you see as the problem? I'll double check myself to see if I made any mistakes transfering the info. Again....the lowest number is the lowest penetration of any rounds into any medium and the highest number is the deepest penetration into any medium. For instance, the penetration after glass is not nearly as deep as the penetration into bare gelatin as I'm sure you are aware. I'd certainly be interested in knowing what you see as flaws in the FBI's testing results. You won't offend me since I don't necessarily automatically believe the conclutions that the FBI draws from their tests. I am just posting this for informational purposes.
View Quote
The range of penetration exceeds the reported numbers for any medium. I suspect that the numbers reported are averages- which explains the difference- but consider something:
.223 - 55 grain - Winchester -FMJ 3038 FPS CQB PENETRATION RESULTS: Penetration Performance: 17.25 Bare Gelatin [...] 7.35 Auto Glass
View Quote
(above I've selected the highest and lowest penetration results in the listed data)
Range of penetration (inches): 5.75 - 19.25
View Quote
Note that the "range" shows that the lowest figure on penetration for the lowest penetration medium (auto glass) is a full 2.6 inches lower than the average penetration for auto glass. That's nearly 50% variability in penetration figures for autoglass. That's a LOT of deviation. I suppose that COULD be right- but it just seems too far off to me given controlled conditions. Then again, some rounds don't have that much deviation. I just dislike the way the data is presented. Why is it not listed as mean data? What are the medians? What SD is present? Why is all the raw data not available? Maybe I'm just being a stats snob. [edited for clarity]
Link Posted: 11/23/2002 1:46:38 AM EDT
The info that I have does list a Standard Deviation but moving the info over to this site makes it difficult to actually list it. I'm not trying to be misleading or trying to use the info for my own agenda. I am just trying to present the information in a method that the average person can understand. Do you feel that the information is inaccurate and if so then why? If I can figure how to list the Standard Deviation then I will. Thanks.
Link Posted: 11/23/2002 3:13:28 AM EDT
Why dont you just burn her a copy and mail it to her. Oh yeah mail me one while you are at it. [;)]
Link Posted: 11/23/2002 7:40:39 AM EDT
Originally Posted By ColtRifle: The info that I have does list a Standard Deviation but moving the info over to this site makes it difficult to actually list it. I'm not trying to be misleading or trying to use the info for my own agenda. I am just trying to present the information in a method that the average person can understand. Do you feel that the information is inaccurate and if so then why? If I can figure how to list the Standard Deviation then I will. Thanks.
View Quote
No, I don't think it's inaccurate (I wasn't at the testing, there's no way for me to say that) but I can't tell how significant the standard deviation might be because I don't know how many samples there are. That makes it really hard to judge the data- particularly the "range of penetration" figure (which still seems really deviant from the mean to me).
Link Posted: 11/23/2002 3:44:48 PM EDT
This data seems to really be irritating you! What have your tests shown? Are your figures that much different? If you have them would you post them? Thanks.
Link Posted: 11/23/2002 3:58:46 PM EDT
ColtRifle, I think that Tatja is just trying to understand the format that you are posting. I have a very minimal stats background, 2 courses at Univ. so I will not try to get into this but... I cannot really understand your format either. I have a number of published studies on ammo penetration but - in every one there is a detailed description of each test - the number of rounds in each - as well as the extreme spread, mean, standard deviation etc. If you could reformat your data in an easier form that might be easier - instead of trying to hget everythign in at once just do one study at a time. -Kevin
Link Posted: 11/23/2002 4:33:48 PM EDT
Sorry it's not clearer! I realize it is a little overwelming. I just entered it as raw data and not to present a specific agenda. It was originally intended to simply be some information for the original poster.
Link Posted: 11/26/2002 7:21:00 AM EDT
tatjana: Do you have some figures available? I'd like to see them if you have them. Thanks.
Link Posted: 11/26/2002 10:31:00 AM EDT
Originally Posted By ColtRifle: tatjana: Do you have some figures available? I'd like to see them if you have them. Thanks.
View Quote
I don't have anything handy right now but what I would like to see from the FBI data is at least 20-30 measurements. Given that we could statistically do much better in terms of understanding the rounds. As for what's disturbing about the data, let's assume for a moment that we actually have 30 data points and we take... oh... the ".223 - 55 grain - Winchester -FMJ" @ 3038 FPS figures. (First off, not all the shots were at 3038 fps... that's a missing bit of data). I'd love to graph velocity v. penetration in a given media and come up with a regression solution. as for the rest of the data:
CQB PENETRATION RESULTS: Penetration Performance: 17.25 Bare Gelatin 14.15 Heavy Clothing 10.50 Steel 9.45 Wallboard 9.90 Plywood 7.35 Auto Glass 15.05 Heavy Clothing at 20 yards 7.85 Auto Glass at 20 yards 14.25 Bare Gelatin at 50 yards 14.95 Bare Gelatin at 100 yards 13.80 Exterior Wall at 10 feet 11.25 Level IIA Body Armor at 10 feet
View Quote
So looking at what we can expect in penetration for this round from all tested media our dataset would include: 17.25 14.15 10.50 9.45 9.90 7.35 15.05 7.85 14.25 14.95 13.80 11.25 This gives us: Mean: 12.146 Median: 12.525 Standard Deviation: 3.174 This means that 95% of shots with this round in these media should be between 5.798 Inches and 18.494 Inches. That's a HUGE spread. What I really want to know is the dataset for each medium rather than the averages. Then I can run some confidence intervals for the rounds and I can see if there are any outliers.
Link Posted: 11/26/2002 1:54:39 PM EDT
Let me try to be clearer. I am not questioning your test methods. Since I am aware that you have done an extensive amount of testing on various types of bullets, I am sure that you must have the penetration results and maybe the fragmentation (or lack thereof) results. I am sure your testing methods are reliable and I am not wanting to see proof that you actually did the tests or did them scientifically. I will take your word for it. I just would like to see some of your figures so that I can make an informed decision for myself. I particularly would like to see the results for 55 grain FMJ in bare gelatin, the results of 55 grain TAP in bare gelatin, and the results for 64 grain Power Point in bare gelatin. If you have that information or anything similar then I would appreciate seeing it.
Link Posted: 11/28/2002 12:12:45 AM EDT
Originally Posted By ColtRifle: Let me try to be clearer. I am not questioning your test methods. Since I am aware that you have done an extensive amount of testing on various types of bullets, I am sure that you must have the penetration results and maybe the fragmentation (or lack thereof) results. I am sure your testing methods are reliable and I am not wanting to see proof that you actually did the tests or did them scientifically. I will take your word for it. I just would like to see some of your figures so that I can make an informed decision for myself. I particularly would like to see the results for 55 grain FMJ in bare gelatin, the results of 55 grain TAP in bare gelatin, and the results for 64 grain Power Point in bare gelatin. If you have that information or anything similar then I would appreciate seeing it.
View Quote
55 FMJ, which kind exactly? We have shot older SA, Q3131a, LC... Most M193 is pretty much the same. 12-14" of penetration with nice fragmentation. Some of the pics are in the FAQ. Good example of what we typically post here: [url]http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=16&t=139085&w=searchPop[/url] I don't think we have any of the M193 up anywhere currently. We are about to put it all on a single site somewhere though so you can browse all the shots we done and form your conclusions. Stay away from lighter TAP. Those are topped with VMAX bullets and just don't penetrate well. The 75 grain TAP is an exception.
Link Posted: 11/28/2002 6:36:22 PM EDT
What are your specific test results with 55 and/or 60 grain TAP? I'm sure you personally must have tested it. For the 55 grain FMJ I was wanting to see the results for MilSpec type. I've seen the pics in the FAQ and they are very useful.
Link Posted: 11/28/2002 6:56:15 PM EDT
I still want to see more testing on the 75 gr TAP, after I just shelled out mucho dinero to get some. Where do I send my endowment check?
Link Posted: 11/28/2002 11:15:12 PM EDT
Originally Posted By dissipator556: I still want to see more testing on the 75 gr TAP, after I just shelled out mucho dinero to get some. Where do I send my endowment check?
View Quote
It's high on our list. Don't fret. We consider it (preliminarily) one of the most promising defensive rounds.
Link Posted: 11/29/2002 7:27:43 AM EDT
Originally Posted By tatjana: Stay away from lighter TAP. Those are topped with VMAX bullets and just don't penetrate well.
View Quote
What is your source for the above statement? Do you have that information either from your tests or someone else's tests? I hope you do not take this as an attempt to annoy you. I like data and would love to see what you have compiled on the 55 and 60 grain TAP. If you do not have any information then please tell me and I will quit asking. I want to see a reason for the above statement.
We are about to put it all on a single site somewhere though so you can browse all the shots we done and form your conclusions.
View Quote
That would be great! Look forward to seeing it when you are able to get the time to put it all together. And of course, like most people, I look forward to seeing your test results for the 75 grain TAP.
Link Posted: 11/29/2002 7:39:59 AM EDT
Originally Posted By ColtRifle: What is your source for the above statement? Do you have that information either from your tests or someone else's tests?
View Quote
IIRC Doc G.K. Roberts has tests of these in one of the Professional Journals (try back issues of the IWBA Journal). He has recommended against them due to their lack of penetration.
Link Posted: 11/29/2002 10:43:09 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Forest: He has recommended against them due to their lack of penetration.
View Quote
Sorry. In kind of a rush, but "Yep!"
Link Posted: 11/29/2002 5:06:50 PM EDT
Hornady's OWN LE published data (assited by GKR I believe) supports the fact that 60 and lighter grain TAP rounds have insuffiecient penetration (given the 12" recommendation). FWIW Some LE units have gone with the 60gr TAP irregardless for they beleive the 12" min is not nec applicable in their shooting scenarios - Mike_T would be better able to expound on this than me.
Link Posted: 11/29/2002 6:46:16 PM EDT
Thanks for the replies but what are the actual figures. I am contacting Hornady for their figures. Anyone have the actual penetration figures?
Link Posted: 11/29/2002 11:44:47 PM EDT
Hi Coltrifle, Here are some bits and pieces of info from Hornadies 'law enforcement ammunition' booklet. I hope that it is what you are looking for. 40 TAP @ 3335fps from a 16 inch barrel: tot. pen. 5.13" max. cav. 3.13" dept to max. cav. 2.38" entry .5" retained weight 0 gr. 55 TAP @ 2910fps from a 16 inch barrel: tot. pen. 8.0" max. cav. 3.5" dept to max. cav. 2.38" entry .5" retained weight 13.6 gr. 60 TAP @ 2818fps from a 16 inch barrel: tot. pen. 10.0" max. cav. 3.5" dept to max. cav. 2.75" entry .68" retained weight 20.5 gr. 75 TAP @ 2616fps from a 16 inch barrel: tot. pen. 13.63" max. cav. 3.5" dept to max. cav. 6.25" entry 1.38" retained weight 20.8 gr. While we're at it, here is some 308 data: 110 TAP @ 3180fps from a 24 inch barrel: tot. pen. 10.5" max. cav. 6.75" dept to max. cav. 2.5" entry .25" retained weight 19 gr. 155 TAP @ 2805fps from a 24 inch barrel: tot. pen. 14" max. cav. 7" dept to max. cav. 4" entry .25" retained weight 72.7 gr. 168 TAP @ 2735fps from a 24 inch barrel: tot. pen. 16" max. cav. 7.25" dept to max. cav. 5.25" entry .5" retained weight 79.2 gr. Cheers, Bollocks
Link Posted: 11/30/2002 4:31:47 AM EDT
I would like to second the "Not a defense round". It's a great SHTF rifle or on the range but burgler through the door I prefer a hand gun or shot gun. If you want to get a good feeling for what the .223 can do, shoot some tracers at night and watch the bullet travel. Warning, it will scare you.
Link Posted: 11/30/2002 10:18:52 AM EDT
Tom Jefferson - funny both the choices you mentioned (pistol and shotgun) have less general purpose lethality and more over penetration issues than the 5.56mm Carbines. Bollocks - yep thats the one thanks Most of the Mil special operations units tasked with HR/AT duties have gone to the 75gr BTHP loading and have stuck with it for more than 5 years - they have a good reason for doing so. LE units that have done actual research have typical done the same thing.
Link Posted: 11/30/2002 9:18:06 PM EDT
Originally Posted By TomJefferson: I would like to second the "Not a defense round". It's a great SHTF rifle or on the range but burgler through the door I prefer a hand gun or shot gun. If you want to get a good feeling for what the .223 can do, shoot some tracers at night and watch the bullet travel. Warning, it will scare you.
View Quote
I hope your kidding. Which handgun round exactly would you propose as superior to even the worst .223?
Link Posted: 11/30/2002 10:50:29 PM EDT
Hi guys, There is much more data in the Hornady 'Law enforcement ammunition' documentation than what I posted. Is this info available or are you guys interested. I'd like to know before I start posting it because it's quite a lot. Cheers, Bollocks
Link Posted: 12/1/2002 1:52:59 AM EDT
Originally Posted By TomJefferson: I would like to second the "Not a defense round". It's a great SHTF rifle or on the range but burgler through the door I prefer a hand gun or shot gun. If you want to get a good feeling for what the .223 can do, shoot some tracers at night and watch the bullet travel. Warning, it will scare you.
View Quote
I am doing some research on terminal ballistics. While I'm not sure I fully agree with some of the conclusions of the ballistics testers here due to the information that I have gathered so far, they are absolutely right that the .223/5.56 is a great defensive round. I would much rather have a .223 than any handgun round or even a shotgun round. I have personally shot literally hundreds of tracer rounds and watched thousands more and I am not sure what you mean by saying that it will scare you. The only time that tracers scared me was when they were coming at me. Please explain what you mean by that. Bollocks: Please post whatever you have. I'd love to see it.
Link Posted: 12/1/2002 2:15:26 AM EDT
tatjana: One last time, have you ever personally tested any of the TAP rounds? I know that you are planning to test the 75 grain TAP when time and money become available.
Link Posted: 12/2/2002 4:49:56 AM EDT
I've seen the test results for the 75 TAP-I'll have to dig through my notes but as far as I remember it is one of the better ctgs. to use in the 5.56mm realm.
Link Posted: 12/2/2002 2:45:52 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/2/2002 2:51:52 PM EDT by tatjana]
Originally Posted By ColtRifle: tatjana: One last time, have you ever personally tested any of the TAP rounds? I know that you are planning to test the 75 grain TAP when time and money become available.
View Quote
Yes. I have. And "one last time...." ? This is the first time you asked this question.
Link Posted: 12/2/2002 9:15:42 PM EDT
Originally Posted By ColtRifle:
Originally Posted By tatjana: Stay away from lighter TAP. Those are topped with VMAX bullets and just don't penetrate well.
View Quote
What is your source for the above statement? Do you have that information either from your tests or someone else's tests? I hope you do not take this as an attempt to annoy you. I like data and would love to see what you have compiled on the 55 and 60 grain TAP. If you do not have any information then please tell me and I will quit asking. I want to see a reason for the above statement.
We are about to put it all on a single site somewhere though so you can browse all the shots we done and form your conclusions.
View Quote
That would be great! Look forward to seeing it when you are able to get the time to put it all together. And of course, like most people, I look forward to seeing your test results for the 75 grain TAP.
View Quote
Please read the above post tatjana. This is a request. Since you have tested the TAP rounds (minus the 75 grain), what were the results? Do you have them? I'd like to see the results and, as I have said before, I do not plan to question your test methods. I just would like to see your results.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top