what is the best round for a 11.5 barrel with 1x9

.45ACP JHP is the only good round from an 11.5" bbl.  

-- Chuck

If the .45ACP is good, then the .458 SOCOM must be great, right? [;)]  300gr HP at about 1200fps (total guess based on V loss)

mcad,

The 11.5" barrel is almost useless, IMO.  However, since you obviously have one, I'd stick to 55gr.

I'm assuming you're asking for defensve purposes, correct?

Defensive purposes?  Is there a different ammo for this compared to offensive?  [;)]

-- Chuck

"Defensive" as opposed to plinking.

This must be "Give brou a hard time" day.

I'll try a serious answer [:)]

How about a 52 gr BTHP loaded to about 3500 fps ( velocity measurement out of 20" barrel).

For use under 50 yds on soft targets.

Just an idea,it might be pretty deadly at close range???

Try the 75gr Hornady BTHP - BH is cheaper than the TAP.
For close range you might be okay.

Failing that the 69gr SMK.

Stay (no better yet) run away from any of the light bullets in this weight.


-Kevin

Really? You seem to have forgotten the Karzai assination attempt threads already.

They worked rather well there. I would think they would work well any time you needed a SMG instead of a carbine or rifle.

Mine eats what ever I feed it.  If you have to worry about "fragmentation", you need to learn to place shots better. Mine gets mostly 52gr Hornady HP handloads, but will digest M193, surplus 62gr, 50gr handloads, Wolf.

the tap ammo was what i had in mind so as not to depend on velocity as much as bullet design any more information would help

And I have no need for a CQB [i]only[/i] rifle, which is what the 11.5" is...thus it's useless to me.

Yes, it did work well at the Karzai incident, but look at the ranges involved.  I don't have the numbers handy, but, IIRC, the M193 thru a 11.5" ceases to fragment at about 45yds.  I want a little more utility in a rifle than what the 11.5" gives.

[img]http://forums.iroczone.com/images/smiles/bsflag.gif[/img]

Well that is you, that doesn't meen that the type is useless. Its still better than either a pistol caliber SMG or a FN P90 and it fits into places that a carbine would not.

And that is what I said to begin with, when I ended the sentence with "IMO".

Sheesh...some people just feel the need to argue.

The 11.5 and 10" uppers (or smaller) are specialty items.
[img]http://www.canadiantactical.ca/Images/M411.JPG[/img]

Like Brou said they are a dedicated CQB gun.  M855 and M193 are NOT effective with thse barrel lengths as the velocities are non-existant.  Add the increased muzzle blast and flash - well you know.

If you look at the wound profiles of these bullets (M855+M193) out of shorties you can find pistol rounds that are better performers, with less disadvantages (depending upon your mission req's).

If you are going to use a shorty the 75/77gr BTHPs are your best bet commercially available.

With your 1:9 you might be screwed - then go for the 69gr SMK.

I would recommned the addition of a good (i.e. KAC) sound supressor to any SBR 5.56mm weapon.
[img]http://www.canadiantactical.ca/Images/AUCQB.jpg[/img]


-Kevin

Mmmmmmm.  Sound surpressor.

The Israeli special forces cut down their barrels this short.  
They see a lot of action.
Must work.
Of course it is a small country...
and if the BG is more than 45 yards away, the Israeli can take all the shots they want, cause it's hard to throw a rock that far or figure out the arc required to fire your AK straight up and land it on top of the israeli[:d]

[url]http://www.isayeret.com/weapons/assault/car15/car15sawn.htm[/url]

GlockShooter - it is still a special use weapon - look around at the local yahoos on the streets they have M16's not CAR's.


Tat if you like suppressors
[img]http://www.canadiantactical.ca/Images/AUCQB90rdsFA.jpg[/img] - after 90rds from the little guy
[img]http://www.canadiantactical.ca/Images/T8ARM4C.jpg[/img]

and last but not least
a short video of my buddy with a M249 suppressed. [url]http://www.canadiantactical.ca/pictures.html[/url]
opps the link did not work - you have to go to our picutre link and click on the video


-Kevin

I have lots of them! [:I]

The real question is what rounds do they use?

O.K., so you missed the sarcasm clues.
Let me lay it out for you.  
1) Although Israel is a "small country", it is most assuradely bigger than 45 yards in any direction.

2) The Israelis show amazing restraint NOT shooting at rock chuckers with lethal weapons.

3)  The enemy fire their weapons up while celebrating.  They usually point in the right direction, if not aim, while fighting, and the 7.62x39 has a lot more range than 45 yards.

4) here are some select quotes from the link:

"So carrying a sawn off CAR15 not only meant you are a SF operator but it also meant that you are a member of one of the more prestigious CT units. The sawn off CAR15 was such a success that soon many high ranking IDF officers have adopted it, although they didn't had any actual need for the shorter barrel. Operationally, the sawn off CAR15 was used in various urban CT application scenarios, both covert and overt and. The weapon was such a smash hit, that many operators even used it for open field combat, regardless of its bad accuracy and limited range," ...
When keeping in mind, that the sawn off CAR15 was originally intended for short range urban CQB fighting alone, then one realize that  the compactor was mainly designed to help those operators who also wanted to use the weapon for open field combat, despite its inherent lack of accuracy and range, a fatal mistake to begin with. Unfortunately this attitude of 'do first think later' is too common in the IDF and when it comes down to choices of firearms its especially severe and often rely on status and other non relevant considerations, rather then on pure tactical-operational ones."

Anyone have some side-by-side terminal ballistic comparisons on this?

Say ferinstance comparing 75gr TAP from an 11.5" vs. one of the better 147gr 9mm JHP from an 11.5"?

"The many modifications to the IDF CAR15 are a source of confusion, since some of the old rifles have new M4/M4A1 features. In the IDF today, most CAR15 still poses all the original characteristic. Most are still fixed loop and maintain the old non heavy 1:12 twist barrel firing the M193 round.

In the elite SF units many of the barrels were switched to the newer 1:7 heavy barrels allowing the CAR15 to fire the newer SS109/M855 round" -isayeret

"We have both ty[pes of music, County AND Western" - the Blues Brothers movie

"While it was very popular in the IDF SF for more then a decade (late 1980's-late 1990's), currently, part from several samples still in usage by several CT units, most of sawn off CAR15 were taken out of service, due to their repetitive malfunction problems, and are no longer used by the vast majority of the IDF SF units. Even Sayeret Duvdevan operators, the past primary end users of the sawn off CAR15, no longer use the weapon. Instead the standard issue weapon for all the IDF SF units is the standard 14.5 inch barrel CAR15, often with a 1:7 twist heavy barrel allowing the CAR15 to fire the newer SS109/M855 ammunition (rather then the old non heavy 1:12 twist barrels that fire the M193 ammunition)." - Blues Brothers again.  

So what's the big deal? So much emotion. The definition of effective is use the right tool for the job.

Around my town I'm lucky if I can see 50M in a straight line. My 11.5" SBR will do just fine with M193 around my house and yard, which is the very definition of CQB. Even if I've got to go further in an emergency, there's no way you can convince me that it's less effective than a pistol round, even through an SMG barrel. It's the right tool for the job for 99.9% of any emergencies I might have.

I just bought a suppressor for it (waiting on the tax stamp). I've demo'd the suppressor, it's going to be the cat's ass for interior work. But now I'm afraid the setup's going to be too long for interior use. Hell, I'm thinking of getting an OA93 7.5" upper now. Anyone want to debate the effectiveness of M193 through a 7.5" barrel at a 10M? From behind the keyboard, maybe, but not in front of my barrel, I'll bet [:)]

Of course, if I had the big bucks I'd get an AUG with both the 14" and 16" interchangeable barrels and be done with it [:D] And nobody's even mentioned going to the .308...

Sitting behind the keyboard we can armchair our personal wpn choices as long as we like.


aa777888-2, go over to tactical forums and browse there the data is out there.
Dont quote em (I am tired) but I think the M193 effective envolope from the 11.5" is about 10-15M.  Lenght hey we used to do CQb with the FN C1A1 after that anything is sweet and the M4 a godsend.

Someone I know went out and got a 7.5" Upper to go caving - I am still not sure who got the worst of it - him from the blast and flash or the people he shot at[%|].

Yes. A home defender has different ammo and equipment considerations than a US Marine in afganistan or Irag.

Canadian_Tactical: would you mind pointing out a specific thread over there, maybe? I was relying on the ammo faq by Tatjana et al, but I'm always willing to read a little deeper on the subject.

You mention blast and flash. I've got a Phantom on my 11.5 and there is no flash to speak of. It is a bit loud indoors, for the operator it's not that much worse than a 16", but for the RO it's a little more exciting. Wouldn't want to use it in a cave, though, at least not unsuppressed. On second thought, I'd rather just not be in a cave...

I ain't CT but will these do?
[url]http://64.177.53.248/ubb/Forum78/HTML/000114.html[/url]

Look here at the Doc's 2nd comment he talks about short barrel 5.56's
[url]http://64.177.53.248/ubb/Forum1/HTML/000258.html[/url]

Thanks Forest. Interesting reading.

I've also seen some of the new gelatin block testing that they've been doing with the 100gr stuff over in the ammo forum.

I guess what I'm more interested in now is a direct comparison in gelatin of say, .40S&W pistol, 9mm subgun, and .223 SBR with M193, rather than a comparison of .223 SBR vs. 14.5 or 16" barrels. If the .223 SBR was still as good or better than the pistol or subgun, I would feel better. Otherwise I'll go back to my .40 pistol (don't have a subgun) Intuitively it ought to be better, but is it?

The other issue is should I start loading alternating .55 and .75 (for example) grain rounds in my mag's? You never know when you will need to shoot through some cover. Going to give up some precision in this, of course, since they both won't zero in the same place, but the difference is probably minor for less than 50M.

Never mix your mag - if nec. have different mags - and color code them with paint or tape.

I can't think of any use for the 55gr in an SBR.

You can always ask GKR about it over at TF's terminal effects.

There was a thread - I will look.

-Kevin

If you're saying you'd like to see this from Tatja and myself, I doubt it'll ever happen.

To begin with, we don't have any 5.56 shorter than 16", and I'm not going to (what amounts to me) waste my money on a 11.5".  

I also don't have a 9mm subgun, but I do have a 9/40/45/357/etc pistol.

I don't know of ANY direct comparison that I can point you to either [:(]

We will most likely be doing pistol caliber gelatin shots at some point, but there is no timetable for them.

Edit to say that CT is right about mixing mags.  It's not a smart thing to do.  Every shot will feel different, have a different POI, etc.  You won't know what to expect next to be able to compensate for it...especially during high stress moments.  Find one ammo that best suits your needs, and stick to it.  Train, train, train.

That's the answer on mag's I expected.

Training is not an issue. I average 500 rifle rounds a month, and an equal number of pistol rounds, both in a "tactical," scenario-based, hot-range environment. That's probably way above average for a "civilian", especially given the environment provides more "training per round", although I'm sure there are a great many on this board that could put me to shame!

Before I make a big change in what I'm doing I really need to see some data that compares pistol vs. subgun vs. SBR. If the SBR is better than the other two with M193, then it all becomes a matter of squeezing the most performance out of the SBR, as opposed to arguing that it is ineffective because it is inferior to longer barrelled weapons. Of course it will never work as well as something with a 16" barrel. The question is really whether it is a worthy rung on the ladder. If it is inferior in some way to the pistol or subgun, then the answer would obviously be "no."

I either own or have access to all the relevant weapons. What I don't have is a lot of time (right now) and the experience of preparing and shooting gelatin. Too bad I'm probably not anywhere near you (I'm in NH), I could simply make the weapons available for your next test series. It may be a bit cold for gelatin testing up here right now, but maybe with your guidance I could accomplish something to publish here?

A gelatin experiment like you want will cost more than $500, and that's just for the gel.

You'd need another $1k or so just to get all the necessary equipment.

I'll take a 5.56mm SBR over a Subgun (MP5/UZI) anyday simply becuase the SBR will penetrate soft body armor and the Subgun will not without expensive and hard to find specialty ammo.

My work long guns are issued to me, no choice in configuration. Some have MP5's and M4's. I have an 870 and 20'A2. Only weapons I get to pick myself are Primary and backup sidearm. If I had my way (not going to happen) We would get rid of the MP5s and 870's all togather.

Mixers, molds, freezers, chony's, etc. I have access to. So capital costs are minimal. Consumables are ammo and gelatin. But I had no idea the jello cost that much!

Latest reference I could find priced it at $2.40 a lb. Multiplied by about 4.4 lbs of gelatin per 20x20x50cm block (is that right?) gives about $11 per block. If we leave out the pistol, a minimal test is one subgun/9mm and SBR/M193 shot each at say 10M and 50M. That's 4 blocks. With a re-fly factor of 2, call it 8 blocks. $100 for a bare minimum test. Still a lot more expensive than I thought for gelatin!

How far off am I?

aa777888-2,

I'm looking at this from pretty much the same place as you e.g. comparing the 5.56mm 11.5" to a pistol caliber sub-gun.

It is my understanding that the terminal performance of the pistol rounds are ~roughly~ just about the same as when fired from a full sized handgun. This step might be omitted if needed. The results from the 11.5" 5.56mm could be compared to already existing pistol caliber data.

The M193 has been tested a good bit. We know it has to get to around 2700fps to perform well. And the distance for this out of a 11.5" barrel (1:9 twist, I think) is around 40 to 45 meters according to the info in the Ammo FAQ (Ammo Oracle).

For a study of the shorty 5.56mm fulfilling a CQB/traditional sub-gun role, I'd really like to see the Hornady 75 gr TAP tested.

[center]"Am I Hot or Not?" or: Why AR15.com seems to want to be Val Kilmer.[/center]

[center][b]Sumarizing:[/b][/center]

[center][img]http://www.valkilmeronline.com/ecards/image8.jpg[/img]
[b]Hot.[/b]

[img]http://www.impactguns.com/store/media/bmCarbine_11.jpg[/img]
[b]Not.[/b][/center]

I still believe that 92.7% of the interest in sub 16" barrels on ARs is based on the fact that Val Kilmer has one in the final robbery scene in HEAT.  i.e. "Cause they look cool."

Look, I agree with you guys.  Kilmer's a total hottie with that weapon and all that long blonde hair.  (Yummy!)  Despite this, the extra 5" on a barrel just gives you a better weapon.  Period.  Were there cameras in your house filming last time you checked?  Do you have lots of full-length mirrors?

I can see 14.5" for very specialized applications, but unless you train regularly with indoor entry based CQB doing live fire drills in a simulator twice a month or so there is literally no reason (aside from the Val Kilmer hotness factor) to be focused on sub 14.5" carbines in a civilian role.

The very very very last thing you ever want to do is clear your house.  It's a tactical nightmare.  The utility of a house clearing only weapon (which an 11.5" basically is, unless you are doing some kind of vehicle borne civie clad operation) is about nil once you leave the house- which should be the first thing you do in the event you're a threatened lone actor.  They just aren't particularly useful.  Dye your hair blonde instead.

No, I don't think we are going to bother comparing handguns with short barreled AR shots.  I can pretty much describe the results regardless.  11.5" muzzles M193 at around 2850fps.  M855 at around 2720fps.  That's really pushing things.  Super close, as in inside of 15 yards, you'll likely see fragmentation out of M193.  Maybe or maybe not out of M855.  Failing fragmentation you'll get small but deep wounds with a tumble (probably).  You can opt for 75 grain TAP if you like.  That will obviously do a better job.  It will do a batter job still out of a 16".

Good .40SW and even some 9mm is just a better bet I think if you're going to be inside 15 yards and you can't handle a 14.5" or a 16" indoors.

That said, handguns are for fighting your way to your 16" rifle.  That's about it.  They are underpowered by design.  Their advantage is hyper-portability and concealability- NOT wounding.  They will make up for the inability of an operator to use long barrels in a close environment (though I'll point out that both Army and Marines used to train CQB with 20"ers- not sure if they still do).

That said, debating the usefulness of an 11.5" weapon vis-a-vis a handgun is a silly exercise in a civilian mission description.  If it's even a question then you should just go with the handgun.  If it's not and you know what you are doing then go with 16" or 14.5" ARs.  The reality is that 90% of the people who debate this issue probably aren't qualified to clear their home with either weapon.  (That's giving a bonus from 99% since you guys ARE on AR15.com).

Learn to operate in all environments with your 14.5" - 16" or stick with a handgun.  And if you just REFUSE to do that and still need the hotness factor, allow me to suggest [url=http://www.hair-clairol.com/blonde_hair_dye.htm]an alternate approach.[/url]

Quite a bit.

Not sure I agree with the $1000 figure either, Brou, except for the most basic of testing.  Molds are expensive.  Try to build one and wreck some gel, then you'll believe me.  You need a chrony, a good one.  You need a good BB gun for calibration.  (We like the Daisy Red Rider 880).  You need a fridge that will actually hold its temp within 1 degree or so very consistently.  That's harder than you might think.  Scales are pricy for the precision required.  You need a mechanism to hold the gel in place (with higher energy rounds it does all sorts of things).  You need some cinnamon oil or more likely Propionic acid (hard to get in quantity- or at least time intensive).  It's about 1500 grams of gel per mold, BTW, for rifle molds of 20x20x50.

Moreover, the process is very time consuming and messy.  We basically can count on a solid 30 hours of work for a shoot, assuming gel preparation goes perfectly (which it often does not) and only a few gel shots (which we rarely do anymore).

To compare 3 rounds to each other you'd want at least 9 shots I'd think for a single range.  Less would just not be a reliable test.  That's a week of preparation and gel making if you have 3 molds.  3 days if you have 9 molds.  Build nice molds.  They break.  That's a lot of water in there.  It gets heavy.

Now add another range, 50m?  You'll probably get at least one "flyer" gel shot at 50m (it happens to the best of us) so you better make an extra pair of molds, just in case.  11 molds for 50m.

Starts to get pretty involved once you run though it.  You can cut some corners, but you're still talking quite a lot of work.  Not to mention that you had better hope the weather, temp and humidity are all pretty much the same on the days you test (unless you can do 9-18 gel shoots in a day) or you could get skewed results.

At the same time, we'd love to have someone else get involved.  The more data collected the better- just don't underestimate the commitment.

tatjana:

[i]"...debating the usefulness of an 11.5" weapon vis-a-vis a handgun is a silly exercise in a civilian mission description. If it's even a question then you should just go with the handgun. If it's not and you know what you are doing then go with 16" or 14.5" ARs. The reality is that 90% of the people who debate this issue probably aren't qualified to clear their home with either weapon. (That's giving a bonus from 99% since you guys ARE on AR15.com)."[/i]

Allow me to stipulate: My interest is not civilian.

As far as a "qualified" person looking for info here on AR15.com ???

Actually YOU are one of the posters whom I think of when considering getting information here. I may be qualified on tactics, but there are folks here who know alot more than me about the AR15 and 5.56mm ballistic performance. I count you among them.

I ain't proud. I'll take help and information from anywhere I can get it.

Then I would suggest that the 11.5" is useful only for: Specific "entry only" CQB as in Law Enforcement.  I omit military applications because cover fire or fire and maneuver isn't going to be as effective with 11.5" weapons.  Covering an exfiltration, for example, just isn't the 11.5"'s high point, I don't think.  LE is the only application where I can see one needing to enter and then go safe- as the threat is well defined, civilian and the objective is detention of a defined and small set of individuals within a non-hostile theater.

The only quasi-military function I see it serving is in an urban executive protection role (which is arguably not a military function) where vehicles are involved.



Pride is deadly.

Now we are on the same page.

Working in and out of vehicles crammed with other big, sweaty guys draped with gear; working in distances less than 75yds; clearing tiny rat-hole apartments, tweaker trailers, stairwells, attics, crawlspaces, etc. on raids; hostage rescue; counter assault; protection work.. the list goes on.

In this type of operating environment a shorty AR 5.56mm with collapsable stock or a pistol caliber SMG would be the cat's pajamas.

Of the two, I'd like the one which is most reliable and offers the best terminal ballistics given proper ammo choice.

If the 5.56 ammo will be M193 or M855, and you need 75yds to work with, then you need to find a different ammo choice.

The M193 loses it's effectiveness at about 45yds, and M855 loses it at about 15yds.

If you are required to use either of those ammo types, then you need to find a new weapons platform.

However, if you can pick your own, you aren't nearly as bad off.

you guys might want to ask the guys at M2, a friend of mine who is still in and uses an M2(upper) said that he uses special ammo with a fast burning powder in his.  I do not have the details because he is deployed at this time.

Well I have a VIP to protect-me-and I spend a lot of time in vheicles...

If I were a gun store owner, convinence store owner, pawn shop operator, ran a jewlery store, I'd have to consider this. It has to be easier to hit with than a handgun. It penetrates body armor that a handgun or shotgun wont. Its way more portable than any other non-handgun with its power, which makes it more likely to be within reach when you need it. Its wounding might not be comparable to a M4 but its certainly better than a P90.

I am sorry, I like most of your guys stuff but I cant agree with you on this. You are thinking too military. You don't have shootouts with armed robbers at 75 yards. More like 7. If kevlar didn't exist a 12ga shotgun, as short as you can legally acquire, would be the best choice-it had been the best choice for over a century and a half.

The only thing that has kept these ultra-short carbines from becoming popular in civilian weapons sales here is the NFA, specificly the LEO sign off and the 200 dollar tax. But LEOs are getting friendlier and with the rise in the base price of guns 200 bucks is a reasonable price for a "option".

As I said earlier:



In addition to the 75gr TAP, I'm also interested in several others 60 to 75gr JSP and JHP cartridges.

I appreciate the heads up on M2. I may contact them.

Likewise, if anyone else might know of some places that may have some of this, I'd appreciate a nudge in the right direction.

Also, the 75yrd figure is an estimated MAX distance with the real intent to be making sure that everything 50yds and in is WELL inside the performance envelope.

See, I don't think so.

This is half of the problem.  You have put a long, long list right on top of the actual utility of the weapon.

Crawlspaces?  Handgun.  Absolutely.

Stairwells?  16" Carbine.  (Why not?  Have you tried it?)

Hostage Rescue?  That's far too vague. Where?  In what environment?  I would far prefer the precision of a 16" for dealing with hostage stuff.  Longer sight radius in the absence of optics, better precision for duress headshots.  Better fragmentation to avoid over-penetration woes.

Counter Assault?  Again, too vague.

Protection work?  Well, if concealability is an issue no AR is going to work.  The only reason you'd go down to 11.5" is in the presence of vehicles such as the lead/follow car and in urban areas where ranges are low.

Don't overblow the usefullness of the 11.5" weapon.  It is highly (overly) specialized.

Almost all of what you described a good operator should be able to use 16 or 14.5 weapons for- and should therefore prefer them.



You make it singular in this sentence despite the fact that you have described at least 4 if not many more distinct operating environments.



Some people like telescoping stocks.  I'm not a huge fan.  They are useful for concealment which is like putting a dress on a pig with the AR.  Not to mention cheek weld- which gets MORE important, not less as quick and close snap shots are required, as in CQB.



*shrug*  I'm not a fan of 9mm/45/10mm SMGs for these uses- or many uses at all really.

How is a 11.5" going to be better than a 14.5" in a shop and in the face of body armor?  You get almost nothing from the missing 3 inches in terms of maneuverability and it makes body armor far more effective.  Tie/Lose it looks like to me.

Go with the 14.5" in this example.

With 11.5" ?  Tall order.  Very tall.

75 gr TAP
69 gr SMK
64 gr Power Point

Probably in that order- and, frankly, I wouldn't even bother with anything under 69 gr.  The Power Point might even be a stretch.  You're still going to be HIGHLY limited at 50 yards, maybe even less.  And if you're at those ranges, as opposed to getting out of the rear of a Mercedes 300E to shoot at a lone gunman... why the heck keep the barrel that short?

Tatjana is usually pretty much on the ball. But it seems she forgot that a significant number of the people here have a professional, not academic or hobby interest in this stuff.

Some of us clear houses & point guns at people every day that we go to work.  I [b]wish[/b] i could make my own equipment decisions, but most of them are made for me.

I'm not forgetting that at all!  I'm just making sure to clarify the requirements.  If the requirement is simple home defense then the 11.5" isn't really necessary.  You really don't need to whack off the 3-5" for any environment in the house- except maybe INSIDE the bedroom closet and deploying OUT.  (Perhaps a-la "SURPRISE!" or something?)  Since that's a non-issue we rule out that purpose.

If it's CQB we have to more properly ask what KIND of CQB.  Military v. LE.  I then point out that in my view only LE CQB, and then only a subset of that, or LE/ParaLE Protection functions, and then only a subset of those, would call for a 11.5.

I would never forget the men in blue (black).