AR Sponsor
Posted: 12/26/2014 3:38:37 PM EDT
| I was watching a video and the person said that the ss109 is not a good round for self defense because it does not tumble when striking a person. What purpose does the ss109 serve? |
|
http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_10_17/650758_M855_vs__M193.html
For practical purposes, the SS109 and M855 can be treated as synonymous. The reasons for the SS109 and M855 designations are a different discussion that centers on ownership of the design. The M193 had a 55 gr conventional projectile that predated the 62 grain penetrator ammo. The clue in the discussion is that the ammo spec included penetration requirements and at the same time the trend was toward the change in bbl twist and projectile weight. In the design era of the M855, we would have been facing the concept of light body armor and flak jackets. It was that simple. If the idea is SD, there are better options but at the same time nothing wrong with M855 if you understand its characteristics. |
|
It serves a purpose for what the military wants and needs in a small arms projectile. Reliable feeding in belt fed weapons, durable meplat, good penetration through a wide verity of materials, being ok under hague conventions, NATO standardized.
While it's a poor choice for civilians given what's available and what our needs are it's perfectly suited for military use. Specifically reason for its construction was such that it could penetrate a soviet steel pot helmet at 600 yards. The rear weighted bullet would stay pointed correctly and the non-ap steel core would help slow meplat deformation. |
AR Sponsor