User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/11/2005 11:58:54 AM EDT
[#1]
Ummmm.... I hope that's not "AP". You've probably got the british version of M855/SS109, AIM surplus had a bunch of it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2005 12:00:24 PM EDT
[#2]
yes that is AP , why is it bad ammo? i knew it was their version of ss109 but i thought i would chance it at the price
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2005 12:40:31 PM EDT
[#3]
SS109 and M855 are not considered AP despite the steel penetrator.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2005 1:59:28 PM EDT
[#4]
No, it's not. If you don't believe us, ask ATF, who specifically don't consider the ss109 or M855 to be AP. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2005 2:45:46 PM EDT
[#5]
AIM was selling it for $149 per 900 rounds on strippers, in bandoleers and in a 50" can. It works fine in my guns, so-so in some peoples. It is NOT AP ammo tho. It is the brit equivelent of our green tip 62 grain 855. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2005 5:15:47 PM EDT
[#6]
i wasnt making a statement that it was or wasnt .i was making it clear in my first post that i was in fact meaning ap was standing for AP. Ibelieve you guys thats why i was making this post to learn more about it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2005 5:31:44 PM EDT
[#7]
I got your drift which was why I was telling you exactly what it was and what it was equivilent to. It's decent ammo, but the powder has a different pressure curve as per the guys from Britian. Works great in my ARs, I run mine a bit wet, seems as if it will short stroke some if you let the gun run dry from what I picked up anyways. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2005 8:03:22 PM EDT
[#8]
I know it has been explicitly exempt from AP classification by ATF but I wonder if this move was more of a political one than a decision based on the round's ballistics. This month's Guns and Ammo (or one of those rags) said M855 was developed during the cold war in response to Russian troops receiving armor. Some say it was developed for the SAW to maintain penetration capability at distance. Either way, it is in essence a light AP round IMO so maybe ATF's decision had more to do with making the US's standard issue ammo more politically correct than anything else. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 12:14:35 PM EDT
[#9]
Thats a nice idea but the fact is M855 has reduced penetration of all objects at 200 yards and under due to reduced velocity compared to lowly M193. Also it sucks for penetrating intermediate barriers because the penetrator rips off and you have reduced mass through car windsheidls etc. It cant penetrate armor plate of any type real AP could. In fact the only thing M855 can do that M193 cant is penetrate steel helmets at 600m. Thats is the "enhanced penetration" part. Sucks huh? |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 12:25:59 PM EDT
[#10]
Can you post pics of your AP ammo? I'd like to see it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 12:57:42 PM EDT
[#11]
That's absolutely correct Mark |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 6:48:42 PM EDT
[#12]
Mark, do you know where I could find a graph, or the x-y data, for the reduced pressure curve?
PSI (or MPA) vs milliseconds at the chamber, or an equivalent location. I have only found one pressure trace curve for 556 ammo, can't remember the source, and I don't think it stated the ammo used. I think it was on a site by a guy who did some FEA for barrel tuning, but I can't find the site now. thanks in advance RMT edit: I guess I should address this to fxntime too, he posted the statement originally. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 7:41:27 PM EDT
[#13]
Based on what I have read here and elsewhere, I will assume M855, with it's armour piercing core and enhanced velocity, has no real AP ability "under 600 yds". Can someone state what does equate to an effective AP round then?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 8:00:10 PM EDT
[#14]
One of the Brit gents had some data the military had done, and how the pressure curve was different then US ammo [GI] It would be absolutely fine in a 20" M-16 but so-so reliably in an M-4 varient. Since all I have is the 16" M-4 wanna be and it works fine a bit wet, I figure the 2" longer BBL length makes a difference and causes more pressure to be exerted on the carrier. I have had no problems with mine at all and it locks back when the mag is empty. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 8:16:05 PM EDT
[#15]
I have a 16" Bushy that short stroked 3 times with RORG SS109. However, that was the first 3 rounds out of a new Okay mag so the new mag may have played a role. No problems after that. I only shot 150 rds of it though. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2005 9:11:06 PM EDT
[#16]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2005 2:54:01 AM EDT
[#17]
Troy,
The ammo-oracle is wrong on this one, British 5.56mm is not / never was underloaded. The UK uses stick powder : The US uses ball powder. As you are are aware stick loadings generally have a lower pressure then ball loadings so of course it feels weaker. Brit ammo meets STANAG 4172 61.7gr +/- 1.7gr 3025 fps +/- 40fps (20" Barrel measured at 25M) Accuracy >4 moa Penetration:- 10 gauge SAE 1010 or 1020 steel plate at 570M / 623 Yards RG L2A2 BALL Chamber pressure = 4,000 bar MAX Port pressure = 880 bar MIN Arsenal, It is not AP ammunition, RG doesn't currently make AP in 5.56mm we buy our SF loads from overseas:- RAUFOS, RUAG, HIRTENBERGER or DAG |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2005 9:15:54 AM EDT
[#18]
My in-law works in a tool and die shop that makes the armour plating fro humvees, he brought some of the plate down to the range(he thinks it's placed in the wheel wells) anyway my RG SS109 went throught it quite nicely, it's about 1/2" to 5/8" thick and I also witnessed .223 soft point go through it . |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2005 10:16:20 AM EDT
[#19]
EXACTLY it wont go through anything that regular .223 softpoint or whatever cant go through. Its not AP at all. Not even close. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2005 11:57:41 AM EDT
[#20]
No, it isn't. Read again. It says "some lots" of Brit SS-109 were underloaded, and in fact, they were. It was a lot of ammo made to test the L85 following the Gulf War, but prior to having HK rebuild them. We're talking 2600 fps from a 20" barrel, and not reliably cycling the action. If you don't think that I know the difference, then I don't know what to tell you, and I certainly was not the only person to experience these problems. "Normal" Brit SS-109 is fine ammo, and I've never said otherwise. -Troy |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2005 12:53:57 PM EDT
[#21]
I haven't seen any further threads on "KBs" or problems with the AIM sold RG SS109 (L2A2). What gives? I see AIM either ran out or isn't selling it. Any info?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2005 2:38:27 PM EDT
[#22]
Sold out. I don't know if they are going to get any more in. I bought 6 cans of it. Mine were still lead sealed. [I did ask them when I ordered Adcom ammo.] |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2005 3:39:57 PM EDT
[#23]
I recently purchased 120rds of the British, and was very dissapointed in its performance. It failed to cycle my 20" HB Armalite about 80% of the time. The gun functions perfectly on all the other ammo I have ever gotten, but IMHO, this stuff SUCKED.
Consistently failed to cycle, and would not lock the bolt open on last round. Just my .02 B |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2005 11:37:01 PM EDT
[#24]
Exactly. However, it is miss-leading, The ammo is still loaded with SS-109 bullets and labeled as SS-109, but it is nowhere near the M855 velocity specifications. Ammo-oracle gives the impression that the normal service load for the L85, and more importantly the lots currently imported (L1A2 or L2A2) are underpowered. I agree test batches were made for the evaluation phase. However, there were also loadings with ball powder or the lead only no-penetrator load or the increased armour penetration round. We both agree that this reduced charge exhisted, I don't doubt your experience. But, for GS issue, the round has never been undercharged. Can you please update ammo-oracle to reflect the standard RG round and not just a test lot? After all, it is cleared for use by NATO and independantly the US Military |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2005 11:46:11 PM EDT
[#25]
I used some M855 in my L85A1 a few years back at AFSAAM Little Rock, very dissapointed in its performance. it blew the extractor off my bolt and damgaed the locking splines. My L85 functions perfectly on RG. but IMHO, this stuff SUCKED. Had to get another L85A1 Just my 2p  Sorry AR15Pilot, Brit humour LOL Just interested:- .223 or 5.56 chamber? Standard gas port? New rings and tube? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/14/2005 5:04:29 AM EDT
[#26]
The symphony that is a semiautomatic weapon and its ammunition is complex and requires balance. Perfect harmony if you will. The burn rate and impulse of the L2A2 cartridge was primarily designed for the L85A1, and secondarily for anything else. We are using this ammunition in "anything else", i.e., the AR15 platform, which can be finicky little bastard in its various morphings. I have six ARs, M1 Garands, M1A clones, AK clones etc, and by far the AR is the most finicky of them all. When the balance is right, however, it makes great music. If your AR doesn't work with L2A2, I'd recommend not buying it
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/14/2005 7:18:39 AM EDT
[#27]
well man lol! looks like i got screwed on the ammo. Owell i run it through my m5 instead of the m4 the m5 eats anything. Thank god for a 223 ak i always give it the leftovers lol
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
