Speer Gold Dot Duty Rifle 75gr load?

[Sixgun_Symphony]

Anyone have any info on this yet?


https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-s_Pt1TsrnNA/VMKCpv3r_zI/AAAAAAAAPg4/gELlqeh8YNc/w1283-h722-no/20150123_091929.jpg

[Sigfan26]

http://tapatalk.imageshack.com/v2/15/02/27/31f3708133fcb8d3f61ba8da8b304ca5.jpg

[DocGKR]

We will be testing this in the relatively near future...

[Sixgun_Symphony]

We will be testing this in the relatively near future...


Thanks Doc, got your reply on lightfighter too..Looking forward to seeing what results you get, you got an educated guess on what youre likely to see?
Thanks for what you do.

[DocGKR]

Both the 55 & 62/64 versions have performed well, so it it likely that this will carry on in the same fashion--but you never know until it gets tested...

[Sixgun_Symphony]

Both the 55 & 62/64 versions have performed well, so it it likely that this will carry on in the same fashion--but you never know until it gets tested...

Understood..What do you think the penetration might be?
64gr GD already pen's pretty deep..and within the requirements..What might be the advantage of a 75gr bullet be? Barriers, larger game? (to me it seems somewhat more appropriate in for example Federals Fusion line and marketed to hunters going after larger hogs, as like you said both the 55 & 62/64 versions have performed well..Unless the weight would overall improve performance against hard barriers in an LE setting?)
http://i672.photobucket.com/albums/vv81/gocartmozart2/Speer64grainGoldDotonbaregel.jpg http://i672.photobucket.com/albums/vv81/gocartmozart2/speergolddotlegelresults02-1.jpg

Also do you have plans to test Federal new 223 loading of the 62gr Trophy Bonded Tip?

[oldtexan]

Thanks for posting this Sixgun_Symphony. Anyone know what the "239" on the label refers to? And what is the Speer product number for this load?

[Lon]

Our rep just told us the 64 gr load was discontinued. Anyone got an idea of why?

[Sixgun_Symphony]

they went with the "common weight" of 62gr, Doc posted an industry update about it awhile back on lightfighter IIRC

[Unobtanium]

I like the idea of it, but I don't know the purpose unless it is a redesigned construction. The 70gr monometals will always out-penetrate it, and the 62/64gr does just fine. Plenty of penetration through various mediums to meet FBI spec. So...why? I mean, I get the "Well...why not?" but...

[5pins]

Maybe they are looking for better long range performance.

[Unobtanium]

Maybe they are looking for better long range performance.

Then they should push it at 5.56 pressure like everyone else does. The 64gr round expands nicely down to at LEAST 1900fps. That's past 200 yards from a 10.3" gun.

[DocGKR]

Superior long range performance, better intermediate barrier capability--particularly auto glass, closer trajectory to other 70+ gr ammo.

[Unobtanium]

Superior long range performance, better intermediate barrier capability--particularly auto glass, closer trajectory to other 70+ gr ammo.

It will be too slow to match any of the other 70gr+ stuff out there unless PPU 75gr was their target.

[DocGKR]

Lot's of agencies still issue the .223 75 gr Hornady OTM, plus once the 75 gr GD bullet is available, it is easy to load a 5.56 mm version for the right contract...

[shootist26]

they went with the "common weight" of 62gr, Doc posted an industry update about it awhile back on lightfighter IIRC

Guess I missed that memo. Not on lightfighter.

the 64gr Gold Dot (24448) is gone? That was my chosen AR defensive load. Sucks... Any news on when the replacement is going to be available?

[DocGKR]

About a year ago, Speer announced that the 64 gr Gold Dot was being replaced with the IDENTICALLY performing 62 gr version which had previously been used on contracts for USG LE agencies requiring a 62 gr loading. This is NOT a big deal.

[ssb]

Lot's of agencies still issue the .223 75 gr Hornady OTM, plus once the 75 gr GD bullet is available, it is easy to load a 5.56 mm version for the right contract...

Why do they bother starting with .223 for serious ammo? That never made much sense to me, given that all of the serious AR manufacturers (and even most of the hobbyist guys) do their chambers in 5.56.

[Chuck Haggard]

Why do they bother starting with .223 for serious ammo? That never made much sense to me, given that all of the serious AR manufacturers (and even most of the hobbyist guys) do their chambers in 5.56.

Because vast numbers of LE agencies buy Bushampsters and such, then complain that the ammo is the problem when the guns choke.

[DocGKR]

Bingo...

[ffhounddog]

Doc and Chuck,

Is loading to 5.56 vice .223 really necessary for this round? I know I like speed and a 10.3 inch gun is less barrel but sometimes I have had better accuracy with .223 ammo than I did 5.56 ammo loaded with the same bullet.

[2alpha-down0]

Why do they bother starting with .223 for serious ammo? That never made much sense to me, given that all of the serious AR manufacturers (and even most of the hobbyist guys) do their chambers in 5.56.

They used to load 5.56 Gold Dots; I've got a few mags worth of 55gr for my carbine at the house. The reason they discontinued the 5.56, as I understand it, is because too many people couldn't wrap their heads around the concept that .223 compatibility with 5.56 chambers is a one-way street, and the .223-spec loads perform fine anyway.

[Rich]

Doc in all of your testing of BB 5.56mm and 223rem which load penetrated the most Bare Gel and Auto Glass.

I think I remember seeing a old gel test of the Nosler Partition 62gr in 223rem
BG P= 18 inches
AG P=18
Not bad for a 60year old bullet design

[Sixgun_Symphony]

Doc in all of your testing of BB 5.56mm and 223rem which load penetrated the most Bare Gel and Auto Glass.

I think I remember seeing a old gel test of the Nosler Partition 62gr in 223rem
BG P= 18 inches
AG P=18
Not bad for a 60year old bullet design

I believe the 70gr TSX pens deeper than that.

[BWT]

Doc and Chuck,

Is loading to 5.56 vice .223 really necessary for this round? I know I like speed and a 10.3 inch gun is less barrel but sometimes I have had better accuracy with .223 ammo than I did 5.56 ammo loaded with the same bullet.

I'm not Doc or Chuck (So whoooooa nelly before you take my advice too seriously),

However, in observing this thread over on M4C by Mike Pannone.

I'll give a direct quote,


The addition of 1.5" from the military configuration (14.5"bbl>7.5"tube) over-gassed an already over-gassed design. The 14.5 over gassing was by design for reliability under adverse combat conditions.

http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?97540-Mid-Length-Gas-Systems-and-the-M4

I believe we're in the same school of thought with 5.56mm versus .223 Rem. The military asked for a higher pressure loading going from 55k PSI of .223 to 62k PSI of 5.56 chamber pressures to promote reliability.

That's it. Accuracy is one of the goals but not before reliability. That's why BH Mk 262 Mod 1 introduced a cannelure into the bullet so it could be crimped in the cartridge. As a side note, I'd be interested to see if that feature came over to the BH 77 gr TMK. They cannelured and crimped the MK 262 Mod 1 not to improve accuracy, but to ensure there wasn't any set back or other issues with the MK 262 Mod 1 not being crimped. Sierra, IIRC, wasn't excited about potentially damaging the accuracy potential of their rounds by introducing a cannelure in the bullet and crimping it in the cartridge.

But, push came to shove and the cartridge was designed with auto-loading weapons in mind and that needed to be done.

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?226192-Mk-262-77-grain-5-56mm

That's also why primers are crimped in most 5.56mm loading to more permanently attach the primer, and usually have some kind of sealant to prevent moisture into the cartridge.

We see things like this in military/L.E. Systems.

Now my concern with this 75 gr loading is being a Soft Point, do you still run into leading issues on the M4 Feed ramps.

I'm no SME though.

[Unobtanium]

I'm not Doc or Chuck (So whoooooa nelly before you take my advice too seriously),

However, in observing this thread over on M4C by Mike Pannone.

I'll give a direct quote,



http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?97540-Mid-Length-Gas-Systems-and-the-M4

I believe we're in the same school of thought with 5.56mm versus .223 Rem. The military asked for a higher pressure loading going from 55k PSI of .223 to 62k PSI of 5.56 chamber pressures to promote reliability.
It was actually to maintain X velocity out to X distance. The same can be seen with the push to drive M855A1 beyond reasonable pressure, which has led to many interesting URG's.

That's it. Accuracy is one of the goals but not before reliability. That's why BH Mk 262 Mod 1 introduced a cannelure into the bullet so it could be crimped in the cartridge. As a side note, I'd be interested to see if that feature came over to the BH 77 gr TMK. They cannelured and crimped the MK 262 Mod 1 not to improve accuracy, but to ensure there wasn't any set back or other issues with the MK 262 Mod 1 not being crimped. Sierra, IIRC, wasn't excited about potentially damaging the accuracy potential of their rounds by introducing a cannelure in the bullet and crimping it in the cartridge.
TMK is crimped.

But, push came to shove and the cartridge was designed with auto-loading weapons in mind and that needed to be done.

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?226192-Mk-262-77-grain-5-56mm

That's also why primers are crimped in most 5.56mm loading to more permanently attach the primer, and usually have some kind of sealant to prevent moisture into the cartridge.

We see things like this in military/L.E. Systems.

Now my concern with this 75 gr loading is being a Soft Point, do you still run into leading issues on the M4 Feed ramps.

I'm no SME though.

Allegedly, the Gold dots don't have the leading issue secondary to how little lead is exposed. According to Dr. Roberts, most of the leading came from non-bonded rounds.

[BWT]

Allegedly, the Gold dots don't have the leading issue secondary to how little lead is exposed. According to Dr. Roberts, most of the leading came from non-bonded rounds.

Are you sure about the chamber pressure. What a brief Google search on XM193 chamber pressure indicated was its maximum chamber pressure of tested XM 193 was around 63,000k PSI. Whereas tested .223 was around 50k.

http://www.ar15.com/archive/topic.html?b=3&f=16&t=244375

I think they switched powder types in early 5.56mm partially to reach that goal, IIRC.

ETA: I may be incorrect, but I didn't think I was.

[Unobtanium]

Are you sure about the chamber pressure. What a brief Google search on XM193 chamber pressure indicated was its maximum chamber pressure of tested XM 193 was around 63,000k PSI. Whereas tested .223 was around 50k.

http://www.ar15.com/archive/topic.html?b=3&f=16&t=244375

I think they switched powder types in early 5.56mm partially to reach that goal, IIRC.

ETA: I may be incorrect, but I didn't think I was.
Velocity isn't free. Chamber pressure is required to increase barring dimensional changes or technology advancement in propellant to produce said velocity. Think horsepower vs. Fuel consumption at a constant volumetric efficiency.

[BWT]

Velocity isn't free. Chamber pressure is required to increase barring dimensional changes or technology advancement in propellant to produce said velocity. Think horsepower vs. Fuel consumption at a constant volumetric efficiency.

Ah. I think we're talking about two different things.

I'm talking about the early adoption of 5.56mm in traditional cannelure 55 FMJ in M193 format versus .223 Remington 55 FMJ.

You're talking about M855A1.

Standard XM193 is around 62k PSI versus 50-55k of .223 Remington.

So they took the same weight projectile and increased the pressure/velocity of the loading in that instance.

ETA: I'm talking about when the M16 was first accepted and then modified to fit military needs. I may be mistaken about reliability being the only reason. But I do know it played a part.

[Unobtanium]

Ah. I think we're talking about two different things.

I'm talking about the early adoption of 5.56mm in traditional cannelure 55 FMJ in M193 format versus .223 Remington 55 FMJ.

You're talking about M855A1.

Standard XM193 is around 62k PSI versus 50-55k of .223 Remington.

So they took the same weight projectile and increased the pressure/velocity of the loading in that instance.

ETA: I'm talking about when the M16 was first accepted and then modified to fit military needs. I may be mistaken about reliability being the only reason. But I do know it played a part.
Here. This will explain it all.
http://www.thegunzone.com/556dw.html

[Unobtanium]

Still curious what velocity this load honestly develops. For example, Federal's LE223T3 loading is actually FASTER than Winchester's RA556B 5.56 loading (LE223T3 is typically 1-200fps hotter. Even though RA556B is 5.56 pressure, and LE223T3 is .223 pressure, and they are within 2gr prjectile weight of each other). .223 vs. 5.56 doesn't mean shit in the real world after the bullet leaves the barrel. What matters is velocity, not pressure (to external ballistics). I'm curious what this round ACTUALLY clocks.

[Stone]

We will be testing this in the relatively near future...

Have you had a chance to test this round out? Also curious if you know of a release date on it?

[DocGKR]

Not yet--probably at least another 3-4 mo at the earliest.

[Stone]

Thank you, looking forward to it...

[JM Campbell]

Still curious what velocity this load honestly develops. For example, Federal's LE223T3 loading is actually FASTER than Winchester's RA556B 5.56 loading (LE223T3 is typically 1-200fps hotter. Even though RA556B is 5.56 pressure, and LE223T3 is .223 pressure, and they are within 2gr prjectile weight of each other). .223 vs. 5.56 doesn't mean shit in the real world after the bullet leaves the barrel. What matters is velocity, not pressure (to external ballistics). I'm curious what this round ACTUALLY clocks.
I can chronograph some if you have some samples to send.

I can do 11.5" and 16", suppressed as well.
[emoji41]

[Unobtanium]

I can chronograph some if you have some samples to send.

I can do 11.5" and 16", suppressed as well.
[emoji41]

When I get some, I'll be happy to. It's cheaper than me buying a chrony.

[breakingtime91]

any updates?

[Stone]

About a year ago, Speer announced that the 64 gr Gold Dot was being replaced with the IDENTICALLY performing 62 gr version which had previously been used on contracts for USG LE agencies requiring a 62 gr loading. This is NOT a big deal.

I don't doubt your statement but I just picked up a case of the 64g with a 2015 head stamp. I wonder if they decided to go with both or were just finishing out what they had in stock.

[DocGKR]

They are producing both right now.

[Unobtanium]

So...when is the 75gr ammo going to hit the market? I can buy 62gr Gold Dot all day long today, but the 75gr stuff we were told about a LONG time ago? Nada.

[Unobtanium]

Well...it's out and easily available...who's shot something with it?

[Stone]

Not sure where the folks who are selling this round are getting their numbers from.
From one site:

Manufacturer - Speer
Bullet Weight – 75 grain
Bullet Type - Gold Dot Bonded Soft-Point
Muzzle Velocity – 3220 fps
Casing - Nickel Plated Brass

But then right above it says this: "In addition, these loads feature flash suppressed propellants and a muzzle velocity of up to 3000 fps" WTF?

And here is another one, look at the chart that says 2775 then down below it says 3220. http://www.eagleeyeguns.com/product_p/24475.htm
Someone please send Skyline a box to chrono.
I cant seem to find any info on Speers website...

[Unobtanium]

Not sure where the folks who are selling this round are getting their numbers from.
From one site:

Manufacturer - Speer
Bullet Weight – 75 grain
Bullet Type - Gold Dot Bonded Soft-Point
Muzzle Velocity – 3220 fps
Casing - Nickel Plated Brass

But then right above it says this: "In addition, these loads feature flash suppressed propellants and a muzzle velocity of up to 3000 fps" WTF?

And here is another one, look at the chart that says 2775 then down below it says 3220. http://www.eagleeyeguns.com/product_p/24475.htm
Someone please send Skyline a box to chrono.
I cant seem to find any info on Speers website...
I'm already sending a box to 2 other people to chrono, put through gel, and put into animals.

[JM Campbell]

The gel results would be awesome, possibly the same YouTube gentleman can also put some rounds on body armor/plates as well.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

[Unobtanium]

The gel results would be awesome, possibly the same YouTube gentleman can also put some rounds on body armor/plates as well.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

I don't know the quality of the gel, sometimes he uses clear, sometimes "actual" gel, always calibrated with a BB though, IIRC.
The meat-shooter kills hundreds of animals per year, and can offer incite into animal reaction from being shot, as well as the technical evidence thereof.
I bet it performs poorly on SAPI, and cuts soft like a hot knife through butter.

[Stone]

Looking forward to his results. On a side note, I just got an email back from a vendor confirming the 2775fps and that the 3220 was a typo. If the 2775 is from the same 24" test barrel length that Speer tests the other .223 gold dots from it seems like it will be anemic out of anything 16" or under in barrel length. For the life of me I cant figure out why these ammo manuf. use such long test barrels. Hardly anyone runs barrels that long anymore unless its a bolt gun. They need to wake up and realize that the standard barrels these days are around 16" on an AR. I could live with the 2775 if it was from a 16" barrel. It seems like more and more they are down loading these rounds to velocity's that are a joke. I actually had to return some 556 SSA 70g TSX back to Nosler because they advertised 2800fps out of a 16" barrel and when my friend tested it for me it was 2444.

[Unobtanium]

Looking forward to his results. On a side note, I just got an email back from a vendor confirming the 2775fps and that the 3220 was a typo. If the 2775 is from the same 24" test barrel length that Speer tests the other .223 gold dots from it seems like it will be anemic out of anything 16" or under in barrel length. For the life of me I cant figure out why these ammo manuf. use such long test barrels. Hardly anyone runs barrels that long anymore unless its a bolt gun. They need to wake up and realize that the standard barrels these days are around 16" on an AR. I could live with the 2775 if it was from a 16" barrel.

Gold Dot uses a faster burning powder. It comes out of shorter barrels pretty darn fast for as slow as it is from a 16" gun.

[Stone]

If your saying I will get better fps out of my 10.5" than I will out of my 14.7" then you just made my day! Made me smile anyways.:D

[Unobtanium]

I fired several rounds today. Function was good, and recoil impulse was more of a "shove". Hard to explain, but it felt like I was moving more than M193 down the barrel, but not snappy.

I fired 2 rounds into milk jugs full of water, at 15m distance, from a 16.1" DDM4 with a Surefire 556-212 suppressor in place. Both rounds performed identically, penetrating 3 jugs fully, and bouncing off of the far inside wall of the 4th jug trying to get out, but not quite making it. In both shots, the first 2 jugs were gnarled up very badly, but unlike the RA556B and TSX rounds I tested, the jugs in both shots did not "fly off" 5-10 feet to the side. They stayed almost perfectly in place, even though they were all but turned inside out and blown open. I don't know if this is meaningful, or not, but it's an observation.


Bullet #1 measures 0.557" at the widest point, and 0.365" at the narrowest point (a juncture between petals), for an average diameter of .461". It is 0.378" high from the front of the mushroom, to the base of the bullet shank, although petals have folded beyond the base of the shank.
Bullet #2 measures 0.5415" at the widest point, and 0.355" at the narrowest point (a juncture between petals), for an average diameter of 0.448". It is 0.379" high from the front of the mushroom, to the base of the bullet shank, although petals have folded beyond the base of the shank.

In comparison to RA556B, RA556B penetrated identically in this test, and digging through my notes when I tested it:

"Terminal performance" was tested using milk jugs full of water, shot at 15 yards. Both bullets "exploded" the first 2 jugs in line, and they were both recovered in the 4th jug. The Barnes, however, split the 3rd jug slightly inside the handle area, and managed to puncture the 5th jug. I believe it may have exited the 4th, compromised the 5th, and "bounced back into" the 4th jug. That's what it looks like to me, anyway. The RA556B simply dented the living hell out of the 4th jug's opposing side, and maybe have made it spring a tiny leak there.
The recovered RA556B bullet had a largest and smallest diameter of 0.454" and 0.420", respectively, for an average diameter of 0.437". Its recovered length was 0.40".

I am sending some Gold Dot to be evaluated at low impact velocities in gel, chronographed, and shot into hogs and deer. For now, I have to say that I favor the RA556B somewhat, although if the velocity on the Gold Dot is better than I think it is (I bet it's dog slow, personally), then it might be a real performer at distance, judging by how "soft" the Gold Dots are, and the prolific boat-tail and small frontal area.

The Gold Dot has a sealed and staked primer, and no neck sealant.

http://i67.tinypic.com/23w9mxs.jpg
http://i67.tinypic.com/f5blev.jpg

[Unobtanium]

Well, I called it. One guy chronograph ed it at 2424fps from a noveske polygonal 14.5, and 2199 from a 10.5 polygonal. Fail.

[Stone]

Yeah I had a feeling these would be anemic out of a barrel under 16" Glad I waited to purchase these. Why aren't these ammo manuf. pushing these heavier loads faster. With a test barrel of 24" at 2775 common sense tells us it will be useless out of a 10.5" barrel. These should be at 3000fps from a 20" barrel. Thanks for the testing though.

[breakingtime91]

Well, I called it. One guy chronograph ed it at 2424fps from a noveske polygonal 14.5, and 2199 from a 10.5 polygonal. Fail.

they didn't test out of a 16?

[Stone]

As a general rule of thumb I use 50fps per inch of barrel for guesstimating fps. Not an exact science but gets me in the ball park. So around 2500 on a 16"

[Unobtanium]

Yeah I had a feeling these would be anemic out of a barrel under 16" Glad I waited to purchase these. Why aren't these ammo manuf. pushing these heavier loads faster. With a test barrel of 24" at 2775 common sense tells us it will be useless out of a 10.5" barrel. These should be at 3000fps from a 20" barrel. Thanks for the testing though.
They will probably run around 2550-2600 from a 20" barrel, given the powder ATK uses.

[JF1]

Well, I called it. One guy chronograph ed it at 2424fps from a noveske polygonal 14.5, and 2199 from a 10.5 polygonal. Fail.

I'm not sure what results your going to see with 100-150 fps more in 5.56 pressures. Folks asked for 5.56 pressures for reliability in short barrels. If you want MV, go with the 50-55 gr rounds. If you want more mass, then understand they are going to be slower. The 60 gr offerings are a good compromise.

[Unobtanium]

I'm not sure what results your going to see with 100-150 fps more in 5.56 pressures. Folks asked for 5.56 pressures for reliability in short barrels. If you want MV, go with the 50-55 gr rounds. If you want more mass, then understand they are going to be slower. The 60 gr offerings are a good compromise.

That's a 300fps loss over other 75 and 77gr stuff. Fail.

[breakingtime91]

That's a 300fps loss over other 75 and 77gr stuff. Fail.

but whats its effect on targets...?

[Unobtanium]

but whats its effect on targets...?

About 100 yards less effective range than it could have. Remember, under about 1800fps, it's just a tiny pistol round.

[Unobtanium]

I regressed Speer's data on the 75gr Gold Dot, and achieved a functional BC of 0.4.

I verified this by plugging in 0.222 for their 55gr load, and 0.27 for their 62gr load (this is the 64gr load's published BC).---These are published BC's.

I checked all residual velocities at 300 yards with the calculator. Using the above data, All of the loads were within a dozen FPS of the published data, using published MV.

It seems for all the world that Speer is claiming a 0.4 +- 0.01 BC for their 75gr load. I have not found it published, but the velocity data regressed indicates such, directly.

Feel free to check my work.

http://i63.tinypic.com/29z5t0n.jpg
http://federalpremium.com/downloads/catalog/LE/le-issue/index.html

*The 75gr Sciroco II is 0.419, and the GD looks at LEAST as streamlined, with a slightly blunter tip...so maybe it's legit?

Here is a revised chart, using 0.4 as the BC.

http://i63.tinypic.com/30htpao.jpg

[Hauptmann]

I regressed Speer's data on the 75gr Gold Dot, and achieved a functional BC of 0.4.

I verified this by plugging in 0.222 for their 55gr load, and 0.27 for their 62gr load (this is the 64gr load's published BC).---These are published BC's.

I checked all residual velocities at 300 yards with the calculator. Using the above data, All of the loads were within a dozen FPS of the published data, using published MV.

It seems for all the world that Speer is claiming a 0.4 +- 0.01 BC for their 75gr load. I have not found it published, but the velocity data regressed indicates such, directly.

Feel free to check my work.

http://i63.tinypic.com/29z5t0n.jpg
http://federalpremium.com/downloads/catalog/LE/le-issue/index.html

*The 75gr Sciroco II is 0.419, and the GD looks at LEAST as streamlined, with a slightly blunter tip...so maybe it's legit?

Here is a revised chart, using 0.4 as the BC.

http://i63.tinypic.com/30htpao.jpg

Hopefully you are right with that ballistic coefficient. Sometimes dropping velocity in a load will make it more accurate(less bullet stress), and perhaps the 75gr design reduces the case capacity such that case capacity is reduced.

[Unobtanium]

Hopefully you are right with that ballistic coefficient. Sometimes dropping velocity in a load will make it more accurate(less bullet stress), and perhaps the 75gr design reduces the case capacity such that case capacity is reduced.
No, 70gr tsx is longer. Case capacity is fine. The round is very accurate though. Some I sent off for testing is shooting sub half moa at 100 yards. 2550fps through a 16" barrel at a chrono distance of 7 feet.

Should have dead gello and animals soon...

T

[Hauptmann]

No, 70gr tsx is longer. Case capacity is fine. The round is very accurate though. Some I sent off for testing is shooting sub half moa at 100 yards. 2550fps through a 16" barrel at a chrono distance of 7 feet.

Should have dead gello and animals soon...

T

Cool. I'd definitely be interested in your data.

[Unobtanium]

Today, I fired a round into water jugs (milk-jugs) at a paced 95m. My paces are pretty accurate (about 10m +- over 400m, measured w/surveyor wheel, numerous times, when I lived out in S TX). I used my 16.1" DDM4, suppressed. The round expanded VIOLENTLY, and penetrated the same number of jugs as at 15m. Three, with the round coming to rest in the 4th, after ALMOST breaking out of the outer most side. The bulk of the fragments shown were found in the 2nd and 3rd jugs. This round is still moving "too fast" at 100ish yards to retain 100% of its mass. It is my opinion that the BC really is around 0.4, and this round has some legs on it!



Here it is, shown next to the one fired at 15m, for reference (the fragmented round is, ironically, the one fired at 100-ish yards):
http://i67.tinypic.com/10n59bl.jpg
http://i64.tinypic.com/1vjih.jpg
http://i67.tinypic.com/2wew6lf.jpg

[Unobtanium]

The official BC is 0.373, by the way.

[41magfan]

These velocities aren't surprising.

Thirty years ago - before hunting with black rifles was popular - we hunted deer with a handload using Speer's 70 gr SP bullet. To maintain an OAL that would still fit in an AR magazine, the bullet had to be seated so deep it limited case volume and the most we could get out of them was about 2200 fps. But even at those reduced speeds, they killed deer like lightning.

[Unobtanium]

These velocities aren't surprising.

Thirty years ago - before hunting with black rifles was popular - we hunted deer with a handload using Speer's 70 gr SP bullet. To maintain an OAL that would still fit in an AR magazine, the bullet had to be seated so deep it limited case volume and the most we could get out of them was about 2200 fps. But even at those reduced speeds, they killed deer like lightning.
The powder rattles around fiercely when the round is shaken...

...but honestly, look at the 100m impact. I wonder if more speed wouldn't be counter-productive, and with such a high BC, the round likely upsets all the way out to 300m.

[41magfan]

The powder rattles around fiercely when the round is shaken...

...but honestly, look at the 100m impact. I wonder if more speed wouldn't be counter-productive, and with such a high BC, the round likely upsets all the way out to 300m.

That's interesting .....

We obviously didn't have access to the non-canister grade powders the big boys use and our load (IIRC) was a compressed load of Win 748. I do know you can seat that bullet farther out in some .223 bolt guns and get much better performance.

[Stone]

The powder rattles around fiercely when the round is shaken...

...but honestly, look at the 100m impact. I wonder if more speed wouldn't be counter-productive, and with such a high BC, the round likely upsets all the way out to 300m.

Is this thing growing on you? Maybe our dislike for it from the velocity data was a bit premature... Can you test it at 300?

[Unobtanium]

Is this thing growing on you? Maybe our dislike for it from the velocity data was a bit premature... Can you test it at 300?

I'm having someone with a 7.5" pistol shoot it into gel.
Also, I'm having animals shot with it by another individual.
We will see...

Also, yeah, it's definitely growing on me. The BC is a game-changer in barrier blind ammo, IMO.

[Stone]

I'm glad there is hope for this round. Thanks for taking the time with it! Definitely appreciate your results.

[Unobtanium]

I'm glad there is hope for this round. Thanks for taking the time with it! Definitely appreciate your results.

More than just hope, IMO.

Based on an 1800fps expansion floor, it should open up out to 300 yards. More "cool" data, is that it PERFECTLY matches my Nightforce NXS 1-4 FC-2's drop hash-marks. Zeroed at 100, the bottom of the circle is 300m, the top of the triangle 400m, and the bottom of the triangle, 500. Within 1 MOA.

Also, it's very accurate, and bucks wind well due to the high BC. It drops into "pistol territory" (velocity-wise) further out than RA556B or XM556FBIT3, as well.

Literally the only thing it gives up is a few hundred FPS from muzzle to about 150 yards, and then the difference is academic and it pulls ahead around the 200 mark.

Looking at my expanded open-air 100 yard shot though...should it HAVE more MV? I'm leaning towards "no".

[bernieb90]

Why hasn't anyone developed a commercial defensive load with the 75gr Swift Scirocco. It seems like all this other stuff is trying to copy a bullet that I would think would have a superior BC to the GD, and have the benefit of being bonded over the 77gr TMK.

[Unobtanium]

75gr Gold Dot, 142y to deer, 16" barrel.

Where she was hit:
http://i67.tinypic.com/33b260w.jpg
Lung:
http://i63.tinypic.com/2eb6flf.jpg
Entrance:
http://i65.tinypic.com/25t8gf9.jpg
Entrance from inside:
http://i65.tinypic.com/10fu8g7.jpg
Exit:
http://i67.tinypic.com/e66dj4.jpg

[Unobtanium]

75gr Gold Dot after impacting gel at roughly 1850fps:

http://i64.tinypic.com/ririfd.jpg

I wonder what its expansion threshold is?

[Stone]

Whats the specs on the deer kill? Distance, barrel length? etc,etc...

[Unobtanium]

Whats the specs on the deer kill? Distance, barrel length? etc,etc...

As posted.

[Unobtanium]

https://scontent-ord1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xla1/t31.0-8/12719345_794659535361_5391130030557234490_o.jpg

[Unobtanium]

Also shot some milk-jugs full of water at 100 yards. It went through 4 full jugs, and bounced off of the outside of the 5th one and was lost. The entrance to the 4th jug was a near perfectly round roughly .40 cal hole. I REALLY wish that slug had been recoverable!

Point being, this stuff REALLY seems to penetrate and it tracks straight as a laser.

[vicious_cb]

Any new info on official ballistics tests? It doesnt even show up on speer's LE website.

[bfoosh006]

Also shot some milk-jugs full of water at 100 yards. It went through 4 full jugs, and bounced off of the outside of the 5th one and was lost. The entrance to the 4th jug was a near perfectly round roughly .40 cal hole. I REALLY wish that slug had been recoverable!

Point being, this stuff REALLY seems to penetrate and it tracks straight as a laser.

Next time lay some old carpet over the 3rd, 4th,5th milk jugs.... that usually will catch a slowed down stray bullet.

[Unobtanium]

Any new info on official ballistics tests? It doesnt even show up on speer's LE website.

Official tests are being done. So far, the round is extremely effective in all I have heard of. The "low" velocity is by design. That's where that bullet likes to live. I can attest to that from my back-yard testing. I feel if it were pushed to 5.56 velocity, it would start fragging on close shots.

Is there anything specific that you'd like to know?

[Josh Runkle]

I'm really a lot more interested in seeing performance from this round in 10.3", 10.5" and 11.5" barrels. I don't own any 16" ARs.

[Unobtanium]

Next time lay some old carpet over the 3rd, 4th,5th milk jugs.... that usually will catch a slowed down stray bullet.

The bullets were bouncing, and it was tested outside. that is why I lost 'em They only had to bounce a few feet into leaf cover to be lost forever. I have recovered a few from 100 yards, now. This round doesn't play. Here is one i recovered from 100. Went through 4 jugs and almost out of the 4th, or into the 5th, I don't recall. It penetrates ALMOST as much as the 70gr TSX. Here are pictures I took of it next to 70gr Browntip for comparison. It was also fired into 100m water jugs and penetrated into the 5th jug, IIRC. The GD is significantly larger in diameter, but this is hidden by the fact that it's "shorter" when viewed from the top. Viewed from the side, it's readily apparent.
http://oi68.tinypic.com/2mzz5vs.jpg
http://oi65.tinypic.com/vfa2c3.jpg


My testing shows the petals as more "pressed against the bullet" than the gel testing does. I moved my milk-jugs to have 2" or so separation between them, and my recovered projectiles began looking more like the official testing:
here is a 15m shot into water jugs with them about 2" apart. With their sides touching, I only get around 0.5" expansion (average dia), and the bullet looks more "streamlined" by its passage through them regarding petal position.
https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xla1/t31.0-8/12795138_800934235811_9129277847364041744_o.jpg


Accuracy has not been an issue either.
https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpt1/t31.0-8/12525246_804740488051_5034413203723014528_o.jpg

*Groups from DDM4 CHF .gov barrel. 16.1"

Of note, the bullet tracks like a laser beam through the water jugs. Even the last jug shows to be hit dead-on by the front of the mushroom, and the holes all line up once it stops obliterating the jugs (usually by the 3rd jug). I think it will be a GREAT hunting bullet for deer this year!

[swarty1]

Does anyone know if they have test data out there for this round yet? Found some for a good price and it has me interested but was wondering about penetration in a home defense situation

[Unobtanium]

Does anyone know if they have test data out there for this round yet? Found some for a good price and it has me interested but was wondering about penetration in a home defense situation

Yes, official test data exists, but requires an NDA or LE credentials or whatever.

[littlejerry]

Just finished a range session at 200, 300, and 600 yards.

Rifle was a 16" Sionics medium profile.

Went to the range to confirm zero before the OK biathlon and test some other loads.

Ammo tested:
IMI Mk262(my go to long range ammo)
Creedmoor 223 77gr TMK
Creedmoor 223 75 gr HP(Hornady)
Speer GD 75 gr
Wolf Gold 55gr

Temp was 65F (I love the south...)
Started off at 200 and confirmed zero with all loads. There were slight shifts between each, within 1MOA.

Moved to 300. All but the Gold Dots required 2.5-3 MOA of elevation. Gold Dots required a surprising 5 MOA to go from 200 to 300. This should have been a red flag...

Moved to 600 next. All but the GD required 15-16.5 MOA of adjustment from the 200 yard zero. Gold Dots were off paper. Didn't have a spotter so I have no idea where they landed. I'm assuming low... Initially tried 15.5 MOA, then16.5, then 16.5 holding over... Nada. Gave up not wanting to waste ammo or damage range equipment.

Need to borrow a chrono and see what these are running. My guess is that the MV is much lower than the other 70+gr loads or the BC is much lower than advertised(or both).

It's a shame really because I've gotten fantastic groups at 200 and 300 with the ammo. At $13 a box it's as cheap as the IMI Mk262. If it performed at 600 I'd just switch to it for everything.

Gotta say I'm super impressed with Wolf Gold. It's consistently a 3 MOA load at 300 yards. It even does well at 600 yards when it's warm out and there isn't any wind. For how cheap it is it does better than some "match" loads like Freedom Munitions or ADI.

[fishing]

Just finished a range session at 200, 300, and 600 yards...


Could you advise of the elevation where you were shooting - an estimate is fine - even better if you know the DA or can provide me coordinates etc.

I want to run the numbers on my ballistic calc app quick to see if i can make a few educated guesses about the 75gr GD

thx

[littlejerry]

Could you advise of the elevation where you were shooting - an estimate is fine - even better if you know the DA or can provide me coordinates etc.

I want to run the numbers on my ballistic calc app quick to see if i can make a few educated guesses about the 75gr GD

thx

CMP range in Talladega AL

CMP Talladega Marksmanship Park

https://goo.gl/maps/BCjVpk3mXX92

Temp was 65 with winds gusting up to 10MPH

[fishing]

CMP range in Talladega AL

CMP Talladega Marksmanship Park

https://goo.gl/maps/BCjVpk3mXX92

Temp was 65 with winds gusting up to 10MPH

Thx.

Assuming (let me know if im way off)

16'' Barrel
65*F Temp
1,770 DA
1 in 7 Twist
100 Yd. Zero
1.75 In. Sight Height over Bore

My calc. is showing a few example scenarios including the following approx stats. in order to get 5 MOA Elevation needed to get from 200 to 300 yards.


G1 BC of .150 and Velocity of 2750 FPS
G1 BC of .250 and Velocity of 2300 FPS
G1 BC of .350 and Velocity of 2100 FPS


thats nuts - are you sure it took 5 MOA of elevation?

[littlejerry]

I agree it's nuts. My notes show 5 MOA, but maybe I goofed and it was less. Still, it wasn't even on paper at 600 when the other loads were relatively close.
Maybe it was only 4? It certainly wasn't 3 because I had to dial up from all the others.

Regardless I'm gonna have to go back when I have more time and test again.

[vicious_cb]

I agree it's nuts. My notes show 5 MOA, but maybe I goofed and it was less. Still, it wasn't even on paper at 600 when the other loads were relatively close.
Maybe it was only 4? It certainly wasn't 3 because I had to dial up from all the others.

Regardless I'm gonna have to go back when I have more time and test again.

That does sound strange. Speer 75gr GD should be getting ~2500fps out of a 16" bbl. Considering that IMI is 5.56 pressure and a pretty hot load, Im surprised the other .223 loads were holding close to it.

[LSW]

For reference I'm getting 2440 out of a 14.5" barrel and 2130 fps out of a 10.5" barrel with the 75 gr gold dot. They were grouping better than 2 MOA out to 200, but I have not tested beyond that. It chronos about 170 fps slower than mk262 out of the 14.5" barrels. 500 feet, 65 degrees.