M855A1 article [GRAPHIC - NSFW]

[witchking777]

Yeah, well, there is that.

That steel core or tungsten/steel care bullet does look like a pretty decent GP bullet for a belt fed gun though, I'd guess better than M855/SS109 for shooting through "stuff", although in doing some reading I see they are desperate to do the "lead free" thing and had the law of unintended consequences bite them in the ass.

But,but,but,we need to be a "green" military and care about "climate change"! Forget threats like ISIS and the cartels!

[DocGKR]

Someone please show me a single valid study documenting that jacketed bullets with a lead core pose a health issue to humans once those bullets have come to rest in dirt.

[Unobtanium]

Someone please show me a single valid study documenting that jacketed bullets with a lead core pose a health issue to humans once those bullets have come to rest in dirt.

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5423a1.htm

The last two words of your sentence provide you the loop-hole, but yes, lead can be an issue with indoor ranges, and some training does occur indoors, especially for police departments. I have shot at indoor ranges that certainly did NOT meet the protocol of "Range B" in that study.

Point being, lead in ammo *CAN* be an issue. However, common sense will go further than money, when thrown at a "problem" like this...

That said, what's wrong with TSX/GMX and other monolithic copper/gilding metal/brass alloy designs? I have the opinion that they are typically more lethal than their lead-core counterparts to boot.

[DocGKR]

Disingenuous.

The aerosolized lead from conventional primers in poorly operated indoor firing ranges with shooters firing unjacketed lead bullets and bullets with exposed lead bases is a huge issue.

But it has NOTHING to do with reverse jacketed military bullets fired on outdoor ranges into lead berms.

Lethality is a poor measure of bullet "success" and is not a useful term.

[Sixgun_Symphony]

What about the myriad of other issues with this load?[/I]

Its almost like you haven't already laid out simply the best and most descriptive argument against the EPR several times in this thread alone. Discouraging really

The bonded SOST/TOTM tested by the USMC in 2006-2007 is better than monolithic copper.

Why?

[DocGKR]

Monolithic copper tends to strip off portions of the projectile when impacting intermediate barriers, leaving a caliber size wadcutter projectile; bonded bullets tend to stay together and not lose mass.

[Sixgun_Symphony]

Monolithic copper tends to strip off portions of the projectile when impacting intermediate barriers, leaving a caliber size wadcutter projectile; bonded bullets tend to stay together and not loose mass.

I should have known that's what you were referring.. I known that for while since reading stuff you've posted for years.. thanks again

[Unobtanium]

Monolithic copper tends to strip off portions of the projectile when impacting intermediate barriers, leaving a caliber size wadcutter projectile; bonded bullets tend to stay together and not lose mass.

This is not what your previous ballistic tests on windshields have demonstrated.

http://www.ar15.com/ammo/project/Sel...64grBonded.htm

http://www.ar15.com/ammo/project/Sel...223%20TBBC.htm

http://www.ar15.com/ammo/project/Sel...r%20Rounds.htm

Of note, the monolithic copper projectile retained the highest percentage of its weight, and an actual amount of weight higher than either, and expanded to a diameter between that of RA556B and XM556FBIT3, while also out-penetrating both of them, after the auto-glass. Both of which bonded rounds you place at the top of the food chain in barrier-blind performance.

Have I misinterpreted your data? Why then would you say that the monolithic copper bullet did not perform better? Expansion within the realm of normal for the top two loads, better penetration, more weight retention both as a percentage and as a total weight figure. Also of note, the bonded bullets both lost around 40% of their total mass, while the copper bullet lost well under half of that, starting out 12, and 14 grains lighter, respectively, and ending up heavier, when it was all said and done.

[DocGKR]

The all copper bullets behave much less consistently after first hitting intermediate barriers, often demonstrating reduced surface area and a resulting tendency to overpenetrate--this is fine for a hunting or military situation, but not ideal for LE or self-defense.

[Unobtanium]

The all copper bullets behave much less consistently after first hitting intermediate barriers, often demonstrating reduced surface area and a resulting tendency to overpenetrate--this is fine for a hunting or military situation, but not ideal for LE or self-defense.

Have you noted the GMX performing better than the softer Barnes?