AR Sponsor
Posted: 11/11/2006 7:06:55 AM EDT
|
I have searched far and wide and have not been able to find the answer to this question: How lethal is an AP projectile (of any caliber) compard to a standard ball projectile? It seems that there are a lot of folks out there that feel the need to have AP in their favorite caliber and that it has some magical powers that make it a must-have addition to their arsenal. The problem I see is that AP rounds were designed to primarily defeat armor and damage engines, controls, etc., not to kill. When an AP round strikes a hard target, much of the energy is consumed in penetrating. When/if the hardened core hits a soft target, it does not have the mass or energy of a ball round, nor is it likely to fragment or tumble like a ball projectile. Has anyone run across ballistic gelatine tests of AP rounds, say where the AP penetrates a steel plate and the core continues on to the gel? Devil Dog |
|
For clarification, are you talking about true armor-piercing ammo, or M855 (which is often advertised as armor piercing because it has a steel penetrator)? True armor-piercing ammo is not readily available to the public and not legal in many areas. With all that being said, a true armor-piercing round wouldn't be as effective against an unarmored target as standard ball ammo would be. If the target is wearing armor that can stop ball ammo, then obviously armor-peircing ammo would be more effective. Although the bullet loses energy passing through the armor, it will still do more damage than a bullet that doesn't make it through the armor at all. In the case of the .223/5.56mm round, you would be better off stocking up on M193 than you would M855, the M193 is the better performing round in most circumstances. I would recommend reading the ammo oracle that is tacked up in this forum, it goes into greater depth about the reasoning behind a lot of this. |
|
I am talking about actual AP, like .30-06 M-2, 7.62x51mm M-61, 5.56x45mm M-995, 7.62x39mm and 7.62x54r API, etc... all of which are legal and readily available to the general public (except for the M-995). I know that M-855 is not AP and I am not interested in the M-193 vs. M-855 debate. My question has nothing to do with that. I also know that any round that gets through a vest is better than any that does not, and OBVIOUSLY the energy of the round that penetrates will be reduced. What I want to know is, in a quantifiable measure, such as ballistic gel, what are the terminal effects of the core that gets through? THAT is what I want to know. While informative, the Oracle did not answer my question. Devil Dog |
|
I think it would be possible to make an AP core that has some fragmentation effects as well but I have no idea if it has been attempted in the past. I do know there is a difference in how they make M2 30-06 and M61 7.62Nato. I've cross sectioned the rounds and the M2 round has a steel core with small amount of lead placed at the tip of the projectile's core between the core and the jacket(have heard theories that this is allow it to plant/seat upon impact and help the core properly penetrate). The M61 core on the other hand has a small amount of lead at the rear of it's core, this extra mass at the rear of the bullet could potentially help it upset sooner when that density helps cause it to want to swap ends. That difference alone could cause a behavior difference in tissue, maybe not fragmenting but maybe a difference in how they tumble or how quickly they tumble. |
|
I had heard that troops wanted nothing bt the M-2 AP in the ETO due to it's overall versatility. No doubt that being hit with an M-2 Ball or AP projectile would be very lethal, but I still want to see how lethal just the core is after penetrating armor plate or some other hard object. Devil Dog |
|
Rifle rounds that tumble do so not due to their makeup, but rather due to their shape. As such, I would think that an AP round would be just as effective in flesh as a non-fragmenting lead cored ball round. With a round such as the 5.56, the M-193/M-855 ball loading would be more effective than an AP M-995 as far as wounding. This is due to the fact that so much of the 5.56mm rounds terminal performance comes from fragmentation. The M-995 won't fragment, so it will have less terminal performance. However, past the 5.56mm fragmentation threshold, I owuld think they would perform about the same. I would think that AP could even be more effective than a non-fragmenting ball round because it will maintain its shape, while many ball rounds will flatten or bend (but not break) and create a smaller wound channel. I could be totally wrong about this though, and I'm sure someone will correct me if I am. Troy? -K |
AR Sponsor