Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Posted: 1/23/2006 11:38:49 AM EDT
Reading a lot in the ammo forum has shown me quite a trend. I'd say the majority of shooters view M/XM193 as THE ammo of choice for shooting AR's, and all other ammo is judged against it. What I don't understand is WHY? Mil spec is 62 gr, yet M/XM855 gets no mention, even as a SHTF ammo. Even for blasting people seem to favor the 55gr stuff even though 62gr is readily available at the same price.

Am I missing something? I prefer the 62gr stuff for its balistics and that it seems to run better in my rifle.
Link Posted: 1/23/2006 11:45:47 AM EDT
Link Posted: 1/23/2006 11:47:22 AM EDT

Originally Posted By USAF_Hop_N_Pop:
Reading a lot in the ammo forum has shown me quite a trend. I'd say the majority of shooters view M/XM193 as THE ammo of choice for shooting AR's, and all other ammo is judged against it. What I don't understand is WHY? Mil spec is 62 gr, yet M/XM855 gets no mention, even as a SHTF ammo. Even for blasting people seem to favor the 55gr stuff even though 62gr is readily available at the same price.

Am I missing something? I prefer the 62gr stuff for its balistics and that it seems to run better in my rifle.




I got a 20" 1/7 twist barrel and it shoots M855 just as good as 55gr Q3131 which is 2-3" groups. The only match ammo I've shot is BH blue box 68gr. match and it groups an inch or less at 100 yards.

Shok
Link Posted: 1/23/2006 11:59:46 AM EDT

Originally Posted By brouhaha:
Did you read the FAQ posted at the top of this forum?



Yes i read the ammo oracle cover to cover and still have this question.
Link Posted: 1/23/2006 12:20:15 PM EDT
Fragmentation, military-chic, and sealant makes XM193 a good performing combat round and great for stockpiling.

Though XM193 (from the ATK plant in lake city) may die, we still have Q3131 and the new wolf m-193 clone has promise.
Link Posted: 1/23/2006 12:25:06 PM EDT
I mainly buy it for the fragmentation. My plinking ammo will be a mix of XM193/Q3131, BH and American Eagle, etc. Whatever is the days flavor/cheapest.
Link Posted: 1/23/2006 12:56:30 PM EDT

Originally Posted By USAF_Hop_N_Pop:
, yet M/XM855 gets no mention, even as a SHTF ammo. .



Good reasons for it, I'd suggest you re-read the FAQ.

M855 was designed as a LMG round for the SAW which needed the ability to defeat helmets and Soviet body armor at 600M.

It's terminal performance can vary, and in general it's history shows poor performance out of carbines.

M193 on the other hand is more consistant (though IIRC roughly 25% of M193 won't fragment/yaw) in it's terminal performance.

In any event, there are much better rounds on the market than either if you're worried about SHTF/Personal Defense/Duty Use...
Link Posted: 1/23/2006 1:30:34 PM EDT

Originally Posted By USAF_Hop_N_Pop:
Reading a lot in the ammo forum has shown me quite a trend. I'd say the majority of shooters view M/XM193 as THE ammo of choice for shooting AR's, and all other ammo is judged against it. What I don't understand is WHY? Mil spec is 62 gr, yet M/XM855 gets no mention, even as a SHTF ammo. Even for blasting people seem to favor the 55gr stuff even though 62gr is readily available at the same price.

Am I missing something? I prefer the 62gr stuff for its balistics and that it seems to run better in my rifle.



M193 is usually cheaper, and at all ranges Ive shot to (up to 200yds) its just as accurate as a 62gr. The M193 also fragments better at longer ranges since it runs at a higher velocity. As a defense round it usually does more damage than a M855 at shorter ranges, as that round is designed more for penetrating mild armor and wounding. The M193 will fragment better, and cause more wound damage.

For most of us (myself included) this fragmenting means absolutely nothing. Im sure some armchair commandos here will tell me otherwise. But the bottom line is you should use whatever ammo will work best for you.
Link Posted: 1/23/2006 3:28:40 PM EDT

Originally Posted By jaymeister99:

For most of us (myself included) this fragmenting means absolutely nothing. Im sure some armchair commandos here will tell me otherwise. But the bottom line is you should use whatever ammo will work best for you.



AHH yes, the guys who have to write with their toes because they sit on top of a pile of ammo cans with a 1911 in one hand and an AR in the other waiting for the gov't/hippies/communists/zombies to pile in at any second?
Link Posted: 1/23/2006 3:57:49 PM EDT

Originally Posted By USAF_Hop_N_Pop:
AHH yes, the guys who have to write with their toes because they sit on top of a pile of ammo cans with a 1911 in one hand and an AR in the other waiting for the gov't/hippies/communists/zombies to pile in at any second?



Do you have camera in my house?
Link Posted: 1/23/2006 4:34:05 PM EDT

Originally Posted By USAF_Hop_N_Pop:

Originally Posted By jaymeister99:

For most of us (myself included) this fragmenting means absolutely nothing. Im sure some armchair commandos here will tell me otherwise. But the bottom line is you should use whatever ammo will work best for you.



AHH yes, the guys who have to write with their toes because they sit on top of a pile of ammo cans with a 1911 in one hand and an AR in the other waiting for the gov't/hippies/communists/zombies to pile in at any second?



LOL, yeah they arent responding, that must be why!
Link Posted: 1/23/2006 6:48:56 PM EDT

Originally Posted By USAF_Hop_N_Pop:
Reading a lot in the ammo forum has shown me quite a trend. I'd say the majority of shooters view M/XM193 as THE ammo of choice for shooting AR's, and all other ammo is judged against it. What I don't understand is WHY? Mil spec is 62 gr, yet M/XM855 gets no mention, even as a SHTF ammo. Even for blasting people seem to favor the 55gr stuff even though 62gr is readily available at the same price.

Am I missing something? I prefer the 62gr stuff for its balistics and that it seems to run better in my rifle.



Well, I personally like M855. With that being said, I've never once shot it in my life so it's not from experience that I like it. But, you say it's just as cheap as M193 and I don't have that experience. I see this PD stuff floating around and that might be as cheap but I don't know if I'd buy that stuff. Maybe it's fine. In any event, any boxed stuff I've seen is always more expensive than M193 of any sort. But, as of late, the M193 spec stuff has been getting more expensive. So, the gap is closing.

M193 is more popular with the shooters because #1 it usually is cheaper, #2 there's usually more of it (like I said though, in the last year the norm has been changing), #3 it is reported to have more fragmentation out to a little bit longer distances than M855 by very knowledgeable people and #4 everyone who shoots an AR has a soft spot for Vietnam Era Weapons and ammo. (I'm sort of kidding about that last one, although with many, the M193 had a very good reputation for making a mess of the enemy, whereas M855 gets more of a bad rap, much of which I take with a grain of salt)

I hope this helps.

Hey USAF, my M9 is shooting low, do you have any suggestions?
Link Posted: 1/23/2006 7:49:27 PM EDT

Originally Posted By JJREA:


Hey USAF, my M9 is shooting low, do you have any suggestions?



Aim higher... get it?.... USAF....... *groan*

As for the M855 vs M193 generation gap, I bet you're right.... Kinda like the old school military guys swearing by the 1911 and swearing AT the M9, while at the same time, most of the young guys that I know in the military (my generation) who have carried the M9 their whole careers and in combat would never think to trade it for a 1911. I'd imagine it comes from the same line of thought.

As for effect on bad guys, I know plenty of guys who have given Johnny Jihad a chance to test out that 70 virgins theory using M855, so I know for a fact M855 is nasty shit.

As for price/availability, I was more refering to other brands and not so much the official Federal stuff. With the non-federal ammo (Winchester, Wolf, and many others) the 55gr and 62gr ammo are comparable if not equal in price, with the weight being a simple matter of preference.
Link Posted: 1/23/2006 8:31:10 PM EDT

Originally Posted By USAF_Hop_N_Pop:

Originally Posted By JJREA:


Hey USAF, my M9 is shooting low, do you have any suggestions?



Aim higher... get it?.... USAF....... *groan*

As for the M855 vs M193 generation gap, I bet you're right.... Kinda like the old school military guys swearing by the 1911 and swearing AT the M9, while at the same time, most of the young guys that I know in the military (my generation) who have carried the M9 their whole careers and in combat would never think to trade it for a 1911. I'd imagine it comes from the same line of thought.

As for effect on bad guys, I know plenty of guys who have given Johnny Jihad a chance to test out that 70 virgins theory using M855, so I know for a fact M855 is nasty shit.

As for price/availability, I was more refering to other brands and not so much the official Federal stuff. With the non-federal ammo (Winchester, Wolf, and many others) the 55gr and 62gr ammo are comparable if not equal in price, with the weight being a simple matter of preference.



Oh, you're alot of help. I may have to call the factory and see If they got replacement rear sights that go higher!!! As far as the M855, more power to ya for using it. I think there may be some advantages to it that get overlooked. And just so you know, ADCO has it for sale on their sight. New stuff. but like I said, it taint cheap. Be safe and shoot straight!!!!

Link Posted: 1/23/2006 8:33:26 PM EDT
Personally I would not buy 855 over 193 even if it was the same price; M193 is cheaper, more available and shoots better than M855 even ( especially) at distance.
Link Posted: 1/23/2006 8:43:22 PM EDT
The only advantage of M855 is that the real deal US issue ammo is available from Ammoman and others.

No matter how you stack it, XM193 is not front line issue ammo.

I have a bunch of M855 for this reason.

Now that Q3131 is available, I'm going to start stocking up on it instead.
Link Posted: 1/23/2006 9:17:07 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/24/2006 5:51:54 AM EDT by Forest]

Originally Posted By USAF_Hop_N_Pop:
...As for effect on bad guys, I know plenty of guys who have given Johnny Jihad a chance to test out that 70 virgins theory using M855, so I know for a fact M855 is nasty shit.
....



And there are MANY documented cases of M855 not doing squat quick enough even when the target was hit in the critical areas. Some of these cases resulted in the deaths of the American servicemen.

That is why it's labeled 'inconsistant' (look up the definition). Sometimes it works fine, sometimes not, thanks to all the manufacturing variances in that complex projectile. Just because it's current issue that doesn't mean it's the best, especially for an individuals particular situation.
Link Posted: 1/23/2006 9:38:02 PM EDT
Good M193 loads are more readily available and cheaper than good M855 loads. M855 isn't a bad round, it's just M193 is more practical. I have both, and like to keep the M855 around for use on those "Soviet helmets at 600 m."
Top Top