Would have made far more sense, IMHO, to use mk318 for carbines and just keep the M855 loaded for the SAWs. 5.5MOA means very little from a belt fed gun.
Would have made far more sense, IMHO, to use mk318 for carbines and just keep the M855 loaded for the SAWs. 5.5MOA means very little from a belt fed gun.
Mr. Bell, take a look here: http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=19881. The 50-60 gr PT projectiles are basically varmint bullets; they will work fine for unobstructed frontal shots, but can result in poor performance through intermediate barriers and on oblique shots on larger individuals.
Nice write up and thanks for posting the link! I agree with your assesment here:
Also, interesting info on the V-max, as I said my knowledge has been limited to critter killing. Currently my carbine setup is a 16 inch 1:9 twist, Wilson combat match barrel, with Federal XM193 (black box) for training and Remington 55gr Soft Point, with every 5th round being M855 for home defense. I may look to swap the M855 out with the Mk 318 and do some “redneck testing”.At this time, given the current ammo choices available via the standard green/white side military supply system, for a general purpose carbine, I'd load my mags with Mk318 Mod0 if available. For long range shooting the Mk262 Mod1 is optimal. A couple of mags of M995 AP for barriers wouldn't be a bad idea either.
Thanks for the info!
Why not shoot the more effective Federal TBBC, Winchester bonded, BH 50 gr TSX, Speer Gold Dot, or Rem CLUB?
How much does the "green" part weigh into the fielding of this round? It seems absurd to me that we will willingly rip a region apart with DU rounds, but then give our boots on the ground a turd bullet just because it makes Hippies happy.
I think absurd is a requirement for government projects
I think you've hit the nail on the head. The military, especially the Army, will go to great great lengths to keep environmentalists happy at the expense of our troops.Originally Posted by Suvorov
5.5 MOA--if I were a soldier I'd be pissed. That's well within the range of a WASR10 shooting cheap steal cased ammo.
The more component parts you add to a bullet design, the harder it is to keep consistent uniformity in large batches of ammo and thus the precision and accuracy drops. Just my $0.02 and I'm only speculating here. The performance limitations of the bullets design probably drove the requirement of 5.5 MOA and not the other way around, i.e. requirement driving the design. We all know designing a bullet capable of sub 2 MOA is within the realm of the possible but precision cost money and in the DOD acquisition world, cost is an independent variable that drives everything. Then add on top of that the pressure to get something to the field quickly that is "Green".
"Take the message to Garcia."
GKR, my reason for the SP’s and M855 is that I have experience with them, know what they will do and that gives me some comfort (especially with the house/neighborhood issues. I like the way SP’s deform, tumble and do not over penetrate, but I like keeping the SS109 round every fifth round in case I have to deal with a vehicle. To be honest I have taken the M855’s out and put them back in several times, I tend to change my idea on it fairly regularly. I would like to find a round that is more general purpose, maybe one of the bonded rounds. But I just lack the time in finding what’s on the market and putting it through my “redneck” testing, so that I know what the round will and won’t do. I will be checking the rounds you mentioned out, and see if I can’t pick up a few boxes for testing during the combat rifle course I am running the end of the month. I appreciate the information and round recommendation.
As for the 5.5 MOA stuff, I agree that it is absolutely absurd. I thought 3 MOA was retarded, with today’s technology; there is no reason why we can’t have 1 MOA standards for a general purpose combat round. To be honest I think it’s almost criminal, and the fact that it happens on a lot of the equipment and weapons being rapidly fielded is what really gets my blood about to boil. The M110 SWS comes to mind, I mean really a “Sniper rifle” that can’t hold 1 MOA, and some reports as bad as 8 MOA (I personally was shooting 3-4 MOA with one with less than 200rds through it). WTF? I mean for the amount of money the DoD is paying for this junk, you would think it would at least be on par with our LE and commercially available equipment.
Reply With Quote