AR Sponsor
Posted: 3/2/2016 7:25:56 PM EDT
|
Accuracy and cleanliness are my 2 concerns, in that order. We are awash in them. I tested M855 that shot <2 MOA 10-shot groups at 200 yards, and 3+ MOA groups at 200 yards, years ago, so I know it varies WILDLY. What is currently the cream of the crop?
IMI S&B ZQI PPU Q3269 (least accurate that I tested years ago) PMC XTAC What? |
|
Quoted:
Where are you finding F1A1? I've only ever seen F1 available Quoted:
Quoted:
Australian F1A1. Accuracy about 1.25 MOA, and very insensitive to changes in temperature. Where are you finding F1A1? I've only ever seen F1 available Right you are. Also seems it might be a bit weak. $$ and underpowered...not a fan so far of the idea, even if it is a touch more accurate. http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2011smallarms/WednesdayInter12397Evenden.pdf |
|
Quoted: Right you are. Also seems it might be a bit weak. $$ and underpowered...not a fan so far of the idea, even if it is a touch more accurate. http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2011smallarms/WednesdayInter12397Evenden.pdf Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Australian F1A1. Accuracy about 1.25 MOA, and very insensitive to changes in temperature. Where are you finding F1A1? I've only ever seen F1 available Right you are. Also seems it might be a bit weak. $$ and underpowered...not a fan so far of the idea, even if it is a touch more accurate. http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2011smallarms/WednesdayInter12397Evenden.pdf It's not weak, it just has a different pressure curve than US m855 |
|
Quoted: Right you are. Also seems it might be a bit weak. $$ and underpowered...not a fan so far of the idea, even if it is a touch more accurate. http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2011smallarms/WednesdayInter12397Evenden.pdf Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Australian F1A1. Accuracy about 1.25 MOA, and very insensitive to changes in temperature. Where are you finding F1A1? I've only ever seen F1 available Right you are. Also seems it might be a bit weak. $$ and underpowered...not a fan so far of the idea, even if it is a touch more accurate. http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2011smallarms/WednesdayInter12397Evenden.pdf a couple of years ago, it was going for about $285/case shipped. more recently, it was going for $329/case i tested a few different SS109 type rounds here...http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_3_16/679478_Foreign_SS109_Variants_Test.html |
|
Quoted:
Right you are. Also seems it might be a bit weak. $$ and underpowered...not a fan so far of the idea, even if it is a touch more accurate. http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2011smallarms/WednesdayInter12397Evenden.pdf Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Australian F1A1. Accuracy about 1.25 MOA, and very insensitive to changes in temperature. Where are you finding F1A1? I've only ever seen F1 available Right you are. Also seems it might be a bit weak. $$ and underpowered...not a fan so far of the idea, even if it is a touch more accurate. http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2011smallarms/WednesdayInter12397Evenden.pdf It's been 100% reliable in my BCM mid and hits 6" steel with boring consistency at 300yds. My only complaint is I didn't get more of it when BulkAmmo had 900 round cans for $250 a year ago. |
|
After testing out a dozen or so varieties of 855, the only ones I will buy anymore are IMI and PMC X-TAC.
Both are considerably more accurate than the others and while IMI & X-Tac were similar, the X-Tac seems to have a slight edge out of my Noveske Recon and CHF barrels. |
|
Quoted: After testing out a dozen or so varieties of 855, the only ones I will buy anymore are IMI and PMC X-TAC. Both are considerably more accurate than the others and while IMI & X-Tac were similar, the X-Tac seems to have a slight edge out of my Noveske Recon and CHF barrels. There's that many M855 type rounds available? I've only ever seen about 6 or so. Can you list which ones they are so I can try them... |
|
Quoted:
There's that many M855 type rounds available? I've only ever seen about 6 or so. Can you list which ones they are so I can try them... Quoted:
Quoted:
After testing out a dozen or so varieties of 855, the only ones I will buy anymore are IMI and PMC X-TAC. Both are considerably more accurate than the others and while IMI & X-Tac were similar, the X-Tac seems to have a slight edge out of my Noveske Recon and CHF barrels. There's that many M855 type rounds available? I've only ever seen about 6 or so. Can you list which ones they are so I can try them... A dozen was an estimate. Below are 10 that I've tried and I believe there were others.....S African or Swiss maybe? PMC X-TAC IMI Lake City Remington ZQI PRVI Partizan Federal Winchester AMA DENEX Carl Gustav |
|
Quoted: A dozen was an estimate. Below are 10 that I've tried and I believe there were others.....S African or Swiss maybe? PMC X-TAC IMI Lake City Remington ZQI PRVI Partizan Federal Winchester AMA DENEX Carl Gustav Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: After testing out a dozen or so varieties of 855, the only ones I will buy anymore are IMI and PMC X-TAC. Both are considerably more accurate than the others and while IMI & X-Tac were similar, the X-Tac seems to have a slight edge out of my Noveske Recon and CHF barrels. There's that many M855 type rounds available? I've only ever seen about 6 or so. Can you list which ones they are so I can try them... A dozen was an estimate. Below are 10 that I've tried and I believe there were others.....S African or Swiss maybe? PMC X-TAC IMI Lake City Remington ZQI PRVI Partizan Federal Winchester AMA DENEX Carl Gustav Understood. Thanks BTW, the Carl Gustav isn't an ss109/m855 type round. |
|
Quoted: https://www.ar15.com/ammo/project/Self_Defense_Ammo_FAQ/MOLON/Attack%20of%20the%20M855%20Clones%20and%20M193%20Comparison_files/cnay84e90q.jpg IMI is the "best" in my book, followed closely by ZQI. I just noticed that the SS109 type rounds I showed in my thread all shot as good as the IMI M855 in Molon's chart |
|
Quoted:
Understood. Thanks BTW, the Carl Gustav isn't an ss109/m855 type round. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
After testing out a dozen or so varieties of 855, the only ones I will buy anymore are IMI and PMC X-TAC. Both are considerably more accurate than the others and while IMI & X-Tac were similar, the X-Tac seems to have a slight edge out of my Noveske Recon and CHF barrels. There's that many M855 type rounds available? I've only ever seen about 6 or so. Can you list which ones they are so I can try them... A dozen was an estimate. Below are 10 that I've tried and I believe there were others.....S African or Swiss maybe? PMC X-TAC IMI Lake City Remington ZQI PRVI Partizan Federal Winchester AMA DENEX Carl Gustav Understood. Thanks BTW, the Carl Gustav isn't an ss109/m855 type round. You're probably correct. AIM Surplus listed it as 855/SS109 and with a 62gr steel core projectile I always assumed it was a 855 variant. http://www.aimsurplus.com/product.aspx?item=A556CG&name=Carl+Gustaf+NATO+5.56X45%2F.223+62grn+1%2C000rd+Can&groupid=6 |
| I've shot about five varieties and Australian F1 wins hands down. ~1 MOA out to 200 yards from my Daniel Defense 16," then dial in 13.5 MOA and smack the 600 yard steel until my SDN-6 gets so hot that the mirage manages to turn the image into an incoherent wavy mess despite the Manta sleeve. I've transitioned back to Lake City and American Eagle for most of my shooting to conserve my last ~1k of F1. |
|
so far out of all the M855 I've messed with the IMI /Lake City has the hardest steel tip: IMI - 50-55C ZQi - 45-47C LC - 52-55C Carl Gustaf - 42-45C... Carl Gustaf "core" 25-30B IMI M855: Nickel: .679%, Iron: 97.06%, Manganese: .491%, Titanium: .436% ZQI M855: Nickel: .378%, Iron: 98.25%, Manganese: .674%, Chromium: .13% Lake City M855: Iron: 98.6%, Manganese: .6%, Titanium: .342 Carl Gustaf Tip: Zinc: 2.868%, Iron: 96.69%, Manganese: .211% Carl Gustaf Core: Iron: 98.61%, Manganese: .825%, Titanium .193% |
|
I really don't see the point in buying M855. It's not really accurate, with rare exceptions, it's more expensive than M193 and 193 is generally a bit more accurate with better performance against steel. Velocity and all.
Now if 855A1 was available I would buy as much as I could. But it isn't and probably never will be. As far as ball 5.56 goes I don't get the fascination with 855. |
|
Quoted: I really don't see the point in buying M855. It's not really accurate, with rare exceptions, it's more expensive than M193 and 193 is generally a bit more accurate with better performance against steel. Velocity and all. Now if 855A1 was available I would buy as much as I could. But it isn't and probably never will be. As far as ball 5.56 goes I don't get the fascination with 855. i think what mine and Molons threads show is that most foreign M855/SS109 can be just as, or more, accurate than M193. i dont know why US M855 has a problem there. yes, M193 will perform better against steel at close range (under 25 yds) while M855 will do better at longer distances before the last scare, they were both pretty close in price. now M855 is about 15-20% more expensive |
AR Sponsor