B&T Ammo Labs Fragmentation Experiment #5:

"Multiple Round, High Velocity 5.56mm 75 grain Hornady BTHP vs 77grain Nosler BTHP performance in bare gel."

Tatjana von E. and Derek W. F.

The purpose of this experiment was to compare the wounding properties of the aforementioned rounds in 10% calibrated ballistic gelatin.  Given the impressive wounds created by both, and the possibility of a group purchase in which only one round may be chosen, we felt that testing them was of the utmost importance.  

Thanks to one member (name withheld until I contact him), we were able to acquire some of the cannelured Hornady 75gr in standard .223 pressure.  And thanks to the good people at Hornady that took all my money on a 550B, I was able to load up some 77gr Nosler to the same velocity.

We would also like to thank "Hi_Vel" for the gelatin molds that he manufactured for us in the past.  These have become invaluable.

Specifics and Conditions:

Ammo: .223 75 grain Copper Alloy Jacketed BTHP rounds and 77gr Nosler Copper Alloy Jacketed BTHP rounds.

Rifle: Preban Colt 16" A3 with M4 Profile 1:7 Barrel and Phantom Flashhider.

Temp: 65 degrees.  63% Humidity.  Pressure: 30.15 in/Hg.  Alt: 213 feet.

The target was a FBI spec block (20x20x50cm) of 10% ballistic gel (9 parts water, 1 part gelatin by weight). Vyse ballistic gel was prepared according to FBI ballistic gel testing protocols. Additionally, gel temperature was not permitted to exceed 37 degrees C at any time during preparation.

Following preparation, gel was stored at ~4 degrees C and permitted to cure for 72 hours before testing. Gel was tested within 15 minutes after removal of blocks from refrigeration. Gel blocks were calibrated with a .177 caliber BB immediately before testing. (Optimum = 8.5cm @ 590 fps). Our results were within accepted calibration standards for ballistic testing without penetration measurement adjustment.

Procedure:

10 velocity tests on each type of round was conducted using an Oehler Research 35P chronograph 15 feet from the muzzle.  Results are included below:

75gr Hornady
2616 fps (shown in gel)
2556 fps
2575 fps
2551 fps
2533 fps
2560 fps
2538 fps
2543 fps
2583 fps
2546 fps

Calculations on velocity data:

Mean:  2560
Median:  2574.5
Standard Deviation:  25
Extreme Spread:  83

77gr Nosler
2610 fps
2600 fps
2582 fps
2611 fps
2558 fps
2594 fps
2624 fps (shown in gel)
2594 fps
2596 fps
2616 fps

Calculations on velocity data:

Mean:  2598.5
Median:  2591
Standard Deviation:  18.87
Extreme Spread:  66

After some alignment shots, targets (bare gel blocks) were placed 16 feet from the muzzle and each subjected to a single round. Velocity of the projectile was again measured at 15 feet, 1 foot before the gelatin block.

Multiple blocks were shot.

The blocks were examined, photographed and then dissected into slices.  Slices were photographed to measure and record wound profile size.  Fragments were then extracted and their penetration depth measured and recorded. Fragments were organized according to penetration depth and photographed to record fragment distribution throughout the wound cavity.

The highest performance (penetration and fragmentation) are photographically reproduced here.

Results notes/Observations:

1.  The velocity of the best performers in each category was the highest measured.  The 77gr at 2624 fps and the 75gr at 2616 fps.

2.  Velocities as over 100 fps SLOWER than a similar round loaded to NATO pressures.

3.  Fragmentation of each round was quite dramatic, and both rounds had VERY similar neck lengths at 4cm (1.57").  While this is not as short as we'd like, and doesn't quite compare to the 0.5" neck length of the 100gr round, it is still good.

4.  Total recovered weight of the projectiles were:

75gr: 75gr
77gr: 74.2gr

5.  Largest recovered fragment (deepest penetrating in both cases)

75gr:  35.6gr
77gr:  32.1gr

6.  All of the 75gr rounds veered off in one direction or another, but would have most likely equaled the 77gr in terms of penetration if they had kept a straight course.

7.  The nose of each round was sheered off rather quickly in each case.  You can identify the fragments in the charts below.

Conclusions:

These rounds will fragment at MUCH lower velocities than standard M193 or M855 ammunition will, making them suitable for shorter barreled rifles, or for longer distance shots.  Both faired very well, and are just about equals to each other, and definitely outperformed our previous M193 experiments and the M855 data that we've seen. However, we both think that the 77gr Nosler has a larger temporary wound cavity than the 75gr Hornady.  However, this could have been due to the slightly increased velocity.  However, given that the Nosler *slightly* outperformed the Hornady, we would choose the Hornady over the Nosler due to the possible setback issues inherent in non-cannelured rounds.

*insert funny Dr. humor and laughs shown in the last 4 experiments by Tatja here*  (sorry, Tatja couldn't stick around to help write all of this up)


Figure A:  Left to right: M193, M196, M855, M856, 75gr Hornady BTHP, 77gr Nosler BTHP


Figure B:  First section of "High" penetrating 75gr Hornady BTHP in gel


Figure C:  Main section of "High" penetrating 75gr Hornady BTHP in gel


Figure D:  Last section of "High" penetrating 75gr Hornady BTHP in gel


Figure E:  Recovered fragments by depth for "High" penetrating 75gr Hornady BTHP round


Figure F:  First section of "High" penetrating 77gr Nosler BTHP in gel


Figure G:  Main section of "High" penetrating 77gr Nosler BTHP in gel


Figure H:  Last section of "High" penetrating 77gr Nosler BTHP in gel


Figure I:  Recovered fragments by depth for "High" penetrating 77gr Nosler BTHP round

With all that said and done, I'd like to make some comments.

First of all, Tatjana will most likely not be here to answer any questions anytime soon.  So I wouldn't direct any towards her.  I will not be around much either, but I'll check in when I can.

Second of all, this will most likely be my final gelatin experiment.  Doing these has been fun and quite a learning experience.  However, some issues have come up to preclude me from doing anymore...at least not in the near future.

Tat, you left some of your things behind.  I'll make sure to keep the [b]safe and secure[/b], and you can be assured it won't come into contact with anything that will mess it up.  Contact me when you get a chance so we can discuss.

Brou:

It's unfortunate that this will be the last of your gelatin experiments.  I think we at ARFCOM have learned A LOT  from your (AND TATJANA, TOO!) dedication in providing this board with no-nonsense ballistics data.  

Okay, on to the results.  I think that if Black Hills is able to push the 75 gr Hornady bullet about 100 fps more we should have a more than adequate load.  Yes, the Nosler bullet appeared to have a larger temporary wound cavity, but, like you said, that bullet DOES NOT HAVE A CANNELURE.

I for one would be completely satisfied in purchasing a BH's loaded 75 gr Hornady round running at 2700 fps.

What does everyone else think?

I have since learned that there IS a Nosler with a cannelure.  The question is whether or not Black Hills will be able to obtain this round.

Pushing either an extra 100 or 150 fps is very possible.  I loaded the Nosler rounds myself to equal the velocity of the Hornady.  I wanted to compare apples to apples.  I could have easily hit 2750fps or so before I started showing too much pressure.

Thanks Brou and Tatja, we appreciate this highly detailed test information. With that said I would be very happy with the Hornady bullet. It seems plenty adequate enough...and then some. I too would prefer the cannelured bullet to the non-cannelured Nosler counterpart. But either seems very, very good when it comes to terminal performance. Maybe this test has put this issue to rest somewhat now! Hehe.

I would also like to say that it saddens me to hear that you two won't be around much. Whoever will help keep us sane in your absence? LOL. I guess Troy will have to pull OT until your return! But at any rate, thank you both for sharing so much info with the rest of us and being here to answer some rather difficult and complex questions. It is appreciated.

So for all the hard work, let me say thanks (donka, ta, etc) and we wish ya both a speedy return to the wild and chaotic world of ARF.com! And until next time, take care.

-Charging Handle

Brou,
Excellent work thanks

FYI BH can indeed get the Nosler with cannelure
it is the Mk262 Mod 1 round they make.

Once again many thanks you guys have outdone yourselves again as usual.


- Thanks Kevin

At what velocities do these stop fraging, and from a 16in barrel what is that range?  

Quoted: At what velocities do these stop fraging, and from a 16in barrel what is that range?

From what I have heard it seems these will continue to frag down into the 2100 fps velocity range, maybe even lower than that. I'm not really sure about range though...but out to 100 yards and probably farther, even the commercial loads (slower than mil-spec) will fragment nicely. I would guess that with mil-spec velocities you'd see good fragmentation out to 300 yards with thse rounds. But again, that's only an assumption on my part...and everyone knows what they say about assumptions! But with the mil-spec loads its safe to say they will fragment at longer ranges than M193 or M855.

CT:

What's the status on the group buy?  Are we still gonna push ahead with it?  And will we be able to request the 75 gr load to be pushed to 2700 fps?

Thanks.

Thanks Brou and Tatja!  

You guys are tops in my book, and the tests results have been awesome.  I've learned a lot and changed some long-held opinions from reading your posts.  If you're ever in Tennessee the magaritas are on me. [beer]

Regarding the 75 gr. Hornady, at a m.v. of 2620 fps it drops below 2100 fps about 255 - 265 yds out.  I voted for this one, but I am game for either one in a group purchase.

Hmm from what I heard the 68/69 was not fragging past 150yds with a 14.5" barrel.  I would not expect to see fragmentation past 200 or so yards with 75 grain ammo from a 16" barrel.  It would certainly be nice if an experiment could be made at 200yds.  I guess we wont be getting that one after all. [:(]

Sorry to hear you wont be doing any more gel experiments Brou.  I will get that Red Box to you to send in tomorrow.

Urban etc.

I phoned GP today - but did not connect with Tommy - I will try again Tomorrow and Monday Morning.


I think from lookign at this data and other stuff the 75 - 77 is a 6 of one half dozen of another - my vote with be which ever is cheaper.

-Kevin

Both these bullets look pretty awesome. If someone like me was worried about bullet setback(even though I'm not), couldn't I just Lee Factory Crimp them? I have fired hundreds of the Hornady 75 grain bullets without a crimp, and have had no problem with setback. And they were moly coated too.

Brou and Tat, sorry to hear you two won't be doing some more gelatin testing, or hanging out here as much. I'm glad I could help the two of you out.

Take care.

Quoted: Second of all, this will most likely be my final gelatin experiment.

[>Q] This is seriously bad news. Have any arrangements been made to have someone doing these in your absense?

This has all been some seriously good information and discussion. Both here and the discussions I've had with members of our rifle club. I hope something happens to change this bit of news for the better.

One way or the other, sincere thanks for all of your very hard efforts.

Quoted: Brou and Tat, sorry to hear you two won't be doing some more gelatin testing, or hanging out here as much. I'm glad I could help the two of you out.

I was speaking for myself about the testing, not Tat.  And like I said, I may do more, just not real soon.

Also, I'll be around, but I'm pretty busy, and Tat will be around later.

I've tried to put off the urge to ask about this, but I can't fight it any longer. What would be a good home cooked loading for rounds using these bullets? I'm getting ready to get set up to reload as this is something I've wanted to do for many years. What I'd most like to be able to do is load these up hotter than commercial specs, but below mil-spec enough not to cause problems with blown primers, etc. Perhaps somewhere in between.

So, what would you/do you use when loading up these rounds yourself? What kind of powder and how many grains do you use? If you can add chronoed velocities that would be great. And also, I would prefer a powder with low flash and that is fairly clean. Any reloading suggestions will be appreciated and placed into my notes. I would also be interested in sealing any rounds I might produce so they would keep well for long periods of time.

And one other thing....isn't there some type of device available to reloaders that will allow you to put cannelures into bullets that don't originally have them? It seems I read about something like this once over in the reloading forum but I may have just dreamed this up. Does such a thing exist?

All in all, reloading might be a great option for us heavy bullet freaks. That way we can get what we want, get it cheaper and best of all have something to do when we are bored! But I would want to fix them right so that's why I asked. Any ideas?

-Charging Handle

My favorite powder for the 75 grain Hornady's is Vihtavouri N135. It meters easy, burns clean, is accurate, and the muzzle flash is pretty minimal out of my 20" postban rifle. The rifle has a long A2 style brake on it. The flash is about the size of a lemon, and is very low intesity. A kind of dark orange color.

I haven't chrongraphed my load but I'm sure it's going fast enough out of a 20 incher to do what I want.

Charging Handle, I have been mulling over the same question for some time now.  There is no reason one could not do this.  The only problem would be getting load data with the higher Mil-spec velocity.  With max loads of Varget and Tac I get a little over 2700 fps with my Colt 20in.  So far those are the only powders I have tried with the Hornady 75gr.  I have not tried the 77gr stuff yet.  BTW.  I have been told that Black Hills uses Tac in there .223 ammo.  CH tools makes a canneluer tool. www.ch4d.com/catalog/bullet/cann_tool.htm
Sealing primers and such has been discussed a few times on the reloading forum.  I have used clear finger nail polish and it seems to work but I have never done real testing.      

Coming in here late to the game but I am interested in a 1,000 of either/or!  Great tests and I agree on going the less expensive route (unless the diff. isn't significant)-Horik

Interesting info.  Thanks for posting it.  

Question:  How many shots were made of each round into gelatin and were the results consistent from round to round?

What is the percentage fragmentation of thes rounds?  Or what is the weight of the biggest piece?  Not that that matters much as they are both going into a lot of tiny pieces.

Can someone give me a little help?.  I cannot go back to the previous ammo tests.  I have the 100 grain test (#4) saved on my hard drive.  Can someone link me the tests #1 through #3?  I think I gain archived post access when I become a paying member?  Can I write a check?

Thanks!  Ammo tests are so awesome!!!  Like having a few extra birthdays a year, too bad it will be a while for the next ones.

You know, the A-Team has been on hiatus for an awfully long time?  You guys aren't on "hiatus" are you?  We would have to write to the producers of the AR15.com network and demand to have you back!!!

Thanks!

Quoted: Question:  How many shots were made of each round into gelatin and were the results consistent from round to round?

10 shots of each.  Only 1 of each was shown.

Quoted: What is the percentage fragmentation of thes rounds? Or what is the weight of the biggest piece?

The weight of the largest is listed.  You can use that to find the % fragmentation.

Quoted: Can someone give me a little help?. I cannot go back to the previous ammo tests. I have the 100 grain test (#4) saved on my hard drive. Can someone link me the tests #1 through #3? I think I gain archived post access when I become a paying member? Can I write a check?

#1 and 2 may be lost.  I cannot access #1, and the majority of the posts (including the one with the photos) in #2 are missing.  I've asked Goatboy to look into it.

If anybody has #1 or #2 saved on their hard drive, please let me know.  In the next few days, I will post an announcement at the top with links to all of the experiments that I can (looks like #3-5 for now).

Ok, for percent fragmentation it looks like...

75 grain = 52.5% fragmentation
77 grain = 58.3% fragmentation

Is this correct?  I would think that individual variances between shots, like jacket differences between each individual jacket, and impact velocity, could make percent fragmentation of the 75 and 77 grain bullets the same within 10-12%?  Is this reasonable?  Of course, for the same % fragmentation, there is much more damage for the heavier bullets.

That would be great to provide a tacked post of the framentation tests!

Impressive rounds tested with marked professionalism.  [hail2]

I'm new here in the ole AR15 and the reason I'm here is because of all the rumors about military stuff, test data and the like, that I've heard was being discussed/presented.  To the folks that work with us that may be pumpin themselves up by putting this data on the web, let me just say this....were getting close.  When we can prove you puttin stuff on the web that maybe shouldnt be there, were gonna see that some folks who wear ties come talk to ya.

Quoted: I'm new here in the ole AR15 and the reason I'm here is because of all the rumors about military stuff, test data and the like, that I've heard was being discussed/presented.  To the folks that work with us that may be pumpin themselves up by putting this data on the web, let me just say this....were getting close.  When we can prove you puttin stuff on the web that maybe shouldnt be there, were gonna see that some folks who wear ties come talk to ya.

WTF?

Whoever you are, at least introduce yourselves before coming in all hard and stuff.

Unless you're some kind of wannabe, anyway.

Watch it Ohio!
Don't you know the goverment guys are the only ones allowed to have ballistics data!(LOL)
Anyway if this guy was really a Fed he would have the brains to back it up by introducing himself in a better manner.(at least we hope so,for our country's sake)

The moderators here have clamped down on any rounds that not suitable for discussion on an open forum.




Editted

But I still don't understand why he says he'll send the Mormon missionaries by to talk to us...

Quoted: But I still don't understand why he says he'll send the Mormon missionaries by to talk to us...

Jehovah's Witnesses even ?

Around here the Witnesses are usually women, but I can't say I have seen a tie on the men.

The Mormons dress well.

They look almost like FBI men or something.

Quoted: I'm new here in the ole AR15 and the reason I'm here is because of all the rumors about military stuff, test data and the like, that I've heard was being discussed/presented.  To the folks that work with us that may be pumpin themselves up by putting this data on the web, let me just say this....were getting close.  When we can prove you puttin stuff on the web that maybe shouldnt be there, were gonna see that some folks who wear ties come talk to ya.

In addition to the many other hats I've worn I have twice been a GEK team leader and chaired a ballistic research project for NATO.

If you or any of your tie wearing friends (and I promise my ties are far more expensive) have any questions about sources for data please feel free to drop me an email and we'll have a chat on the subject.  I hope it's ok if my friends in the FBI Ballistic Research group come along.  I know they'll be interested in what you have to say.

[email protected]

Austrian - send us your sister, and you wont be hurt [:D]

Quoted: Austrian - send us your sister, and you wont be hurt

You'd prefer me.  I'm far less dangerous.

Quoted: I'm new here in the ole AR15 and the reason I'm here is because of all the rumors about military stuff, test data and the like, that I've heard was being discussed/presented.  To the folks that work with us that may be pumpin themselves up by putting this data on the web, let me just say this....were getting close.  When we can prove you puttin stuff on the web that maybe shouldnt be there, were gonna see that some folks who wear ties come talk to ya.

Wouldn't it be logical for the "Folks who wear ties" not make themselves know if they were going to pay us a visit?

Element of suprise and such......?




I call

Hats off on the excellent data on the comparison of the 2 bullets.

Bulletrus on the other hand is full of crap.  Nothing in the testing here even borders secret DoD testing.  Plus there isn't too much secret about the 5.56 cartidge, after 29 years of use.

The suit types have more important things to do especially when all the testing here is perfectly legal!

When all is said and done;
  JUST HAVE A SAFE, AND A GOOD TIME.
      SHOOTEN THAT THER AR-15

Quoted: I'm new here in the ole AR15 and the reason I'm here is because of all the rumors about military stuff, test data and the like, that I've heard was being discussed/presented.

Hi Chuck.

 Take a look at the Nosler 77 grain bullet in this experiment.  How would one know that the J4 would frag well?  Voodoo?  Ask a competition shooter how a J4 jacket shoots the best in .224 caliber.  Every other service rifle shooter on the line will tell you; right on the lands, slightly into them, or a few thousandths off, because the jackets are thin and can't take jumping without deformation.

Some ammunition companies are open about the gel testing data for their cartridges and bullets.  Surplus factory second bullets can be purchased by us civilians legally too.  Someone skilled in the verses of reloading should be able to work up a load using a readily available chamber strain gauge.  I think you should ask around to prove my points.
   
Just wait until someone makes 100 grain bullet dies.  Anyone can make dies or pay to have them made.  J4 jackets can be purchased also.  Molybdenum disulfide on a long bearing surface bullet would slick up that 100 quite nicely.  I think you folks should see this forum as more of a cooperative than enemy.

Remember, the people that know how cartridges work just don't belong to the military.  I'm sure you military guys are doing some borrowing from the Army Markmanship Unit etc.  Do you think that civilians don't play the heavy 5.56 bullet game too?  Have you ever been to a benchrest match?  

You should copy this and take it to your head hunting C.O. This information can be easily obtained by civilians, without some soldier compromising security clearance, using commonly traveled networking routes like the internet.

Your ignorance and that of your commanding officer(s) breeds fear and contempt.

This is of course, if you're not some internet wannabe, low life troll.

School's out.  Good day.

Doug  

Now yet another complicating factor. Look what lumpy196 found about the Black Hills 73gr BTHP loading, supposedly the favorite of USMC rifle teams. No the USMC cannot be expected to use the same ammunition as the Army and Navy shooters-perish the thought!
www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=16&t=159070

However it works out well for us especally for those who own 1 in 9" twist rifles. Thats actually Bergers reccomended tiwst for this bullet according to the link provided...

Austrian:  Sounds like a troll/wannabe to me.  Have been playing with 68/75 grainers for several months now.  No need to feed the trolls.  They might get bigger. LOL

www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=16&t=150906

More edits to code for new board.

Thanks to one member (name withheld until I contact him), we were able to acquire some of the cannelured Hornady 75gr in standard .223 pressure.

Is this the TAP round?  If not, how does it compare (same projectile loaded milder/hotter?)