AR Sponsor
Posted: 3/18/2015 7:46:01 PM EDT
|
In light of all the M855 controversy regarding if it's AP or not, I was wondering if someone could clarify the exact original purpose of the M855 round. I'm not an ammo expert nor do I have military experience that might have otherwise helped me understand this issue. I tried to do my own research but there's too much conflicting information and I'm not sure what can be trusted as accurate information. Some of you were were probably in the military when they first developed this round and I'm sure you know more about its original purpose then the rest of us.
From my understanding it was to penetrate body armor or helmets better, but it's also my understanding that it simply stabilizes the round better at longer distances where M193 ammo isn't as accurate. Is there any information on the initial purpose of why the round was developed in the first place? Also, I hope I'm not wrong in assuming DoD is responsible for initially developing the round or paying someone to develop it, so why if they were responsible for it's development are we (and the ATF) debating the purpose of the round since they are the one that continues to classify it's designation by means of a green vs black tip? |
|
IIRC and I think I do.
Original purpose was to increase lethality of 5.56 in light machine guns. Higher pressure US rounds were developed in conjunction with M4 and a 14.5 barrel to work together. Not developed for accuracy it's not that accurate compared to 77 OTM though I believe it is to be more accurate than 55 grain M193 in 1/7 barrels. M855a1 is the round supposedly developed to be more barrier blind than the standard M855. Barrier blind does not mean armor piercing. |
|
Quoted:
IIRC and I think I do. Original purpose was to increase lethality of 5.56 in light machine guns. Higher pressure US rounds were developed in conjunction with M4 and a 14.5 barrel to work together. Not developed for accuracy it's not that accurate compared to 77 OTM though I believe it is to be more accurate than 55 grain M193 in 1/7 barrels. M855a1 is the round supposedly developed to be more barrier blind than the standard M855. Well that brings up several other questions too... The ongoing debate is simply regarding M855 ammo but we also have M855 vs M855A1. If I'm not mistaken it's steel/lead vs steel/copper core? When I buy some (and I've bought a lot over the years) it just designates M855 and I've always assumed it's the standard M855 with steel/lead. When they issue ammo to units what are they currently issuing, do they still produce both types, and for what purposes do they issue each type? Also, IF the M855A1 round with the steel/copper core is the one they're crying about being AP, then why don't they just attempt to classify the M88A1 as an AP round and leave the M855 exemption in place? Furthermore, (sorry lol) I hate the fact they classify by means of a green tip instead of an AP black tip that M855 is steel core but not necessarily AP by using a "sporting" exemption for the AP classification. The 2nd Amendment isn't about sporting, it's about protecting ourself from tyranny and I feel silly that we are fighting to keep this "sporting" exemption instead of arguing why we have a right to it in the first place. |
|
Quoted:
Well that brings up several other questions too... The ongoing debate is simply regarding M855 ammo but we also have M855 vs M855A1. If I'm not mistaken it's steel/lead vs steel/copper core? When I buy some (and I've bought a lot over the years) it just designates M855 and I've always assumed it's the standard M855 with steel/lead. When they issue ammo to units what are they currently issuing, do they still produce both types, and for what purposes do they issue each type? Also, IF the M855A1 round with the steel/copper core is the one they're crying about being AP, then why don't they just attempt to classify the M88A1 as an AP round and leave the M855 exemption in place? Furthermore, (sorry lol) I hate the fact they classify by means of a green tip instead of an AP black tip that M855 is steel core but not necessarily AP by using a "sporting" exemption for the AP classification. The 2nd Amendment isn't about sporting, it's about protecting ourself from tyranny and I feel silly that we are fighting to keep this "sporting" exemption instead of arguing why we have a right to it in the first place. Quoted:
Quoted:
IIRC and I think I do. Original purpose was to increase lethality of 5.56 in light machine guns. Higher pressure US rounds were developed in conjunction with M4 and a 14.5 barrel to work together. Not developed for accuracy it's not that accurate compared to 77 OTM though I believe it is to be more accurate than 55 grain M193 in 1/7 barrels. M855a1 is the round supposedly developed to be more barrier blind than the standard M855. Well that brings up several other questions too... The ongoing debate is simply regarding M855 ammo but we also have M855 vs M855A1. If I'm not mistaken it's steel/lead vs steel/copper core? When I buy some (and I've bought a lot over the years) it just designates M855 and I've always assumed it's the standard M855 with steel/lead. When they issue ammo to units what are they currently issuing, do they still produce both types, and for what purposes do they issue each type? Also, IF the M855A1 round with the steel/copper core is the one they're crying about being AP, then why don't they just attempt to classify the M88A1 as an AP round and leave the M855 exemption in place? Furthermore, (sorry lol) I hate the fact they classify by means of a green tip instead of an AP black tip that M855 is steel core but not necessarily AP by using a "sporting" exemption for the AP classification. The 2nd Amendment isn't about sporting, it's about protecting ourself from tyranny and I feel silly that we are fighting to keep this "sporting" exemption instead of arguing why we have a right to it in the first place. It's not about gun control, it's about control pretty much sums it up. Just look at the other stuff they try to control and you can see what it is about. There was even one gun control proponent who stated something like "we're not here to talk about reducing crime we're here to talk about gun control. Hell, I really don't know anyone who has a problem with background checks in this state. Just show your permit to purchase and no records to be kept to prevent registration by fiat and you could easily get that passed. Everyone knows they are looking for registration and confiscation down the road. Anyone who thinks different in their camp is just deluding themselves. |
|
HISTORY:
The US unilaterally adopted the M16 rifle and its M193 round in the 1960s, while the rest of NATO stuck with the 7.62x51NATO round foisted on them by the US a decade earlier. By the 1980s the rest of NATO was ready to replace its aging 7.62 rifles with something new, and the 5.56 was the obvious choice. However, the then-standard M193 was known to underperform; it was unable to penetrate a steel pot helmet at 500M (IIRC), which - at the height of the Cold War - was considered a critical deficiency. The SS-109 round was developed to pass this test and allow NATO to adopt 5.56 across the board. The question of which is better - M193 or M855 - is a long-standing dead horse here, as is the flawed logic the BATFE is trying to use to justify its unlawful ban. |
|
Someone went to a lot of trouble to put the Ammo Oracle and the FAQs together. Folks should read them.
http://www.ar15.com/ammo/project/hist_m855.html |
AR Sponsor