Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15

Thread: Winchester M1152

  1. #1

    Winchester M1152

    TNoutdoors9 reviews the new M1152 round:


  2. #2
    Member JHC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    North Georgia
    Excellent ammo from what I’ve shot.

    @GJM. #bearbrainbuster.
    “Remember, being healthy is basically just dying as slowly as possible,” Ricky Gervais

  3. #3
    Site Supporter OlongJohnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    "carbine-infested rural (and suburban) areas"
    I like the flat nose.

    I've read that, still being FMJ, even flat-nose FMJ is subject to collapsing on bone and failing to penetrate well. Not sure how to reconcile that with the effectiveness of flat-nose hard cast, unless it's just the difference in hardness of the lead between soft swaged pure recycled Johnson Controls batteries and something with a little extra in it.
    .
    -----------------------------------------
    Not another dime.

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by JHC View Post
    Excellent ammo from what I’ve shot.

    @GJM. #bearbrainbuster.
    Penetration was poor in his testing, worse than 115 WWB?
    Likes pretty much everything in every caliber.

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by GJM View Post
    Penetration was poor in his testing, worse than 115 WWB?
    So it seemed -- I was surprised. Possibly a fairly soft bullet.

    Why they'd make a hot, flat nosed FMJ from a soft alloy that doesn't penetrate well is somewhat baffling.

  6. #6
    Member JHC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    North Georgia
    Quote Originally Posted by GJM View Post
    Penetration was poor in his testing, worse than 115 WWB?
    Meh, wood baffles shot repeatedly with multiple loads. I didn't pay much mind to his wood baffle test with 115 WWB going further than 124 gr NATO also.
    “Remember, being healthy is basically just dying as slowly as possible,” Ricky Gervais

  7. #7
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Allen, TX
    I enjoy the guy's presentations, but properly run 10% gel tests with repeatable barrier materials tell us more. I'm curious about the round's steel and windshield glass penetration numbers myself.
    Regional Government Sales Manager for Aimpoint, Inc. USA
    Co-owner Hardwired Tactical Shooting (HiTS)

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by JHC View Post
    Meh, wood baffles shot repeatedly with multiple loads. I didn't pay much mind to his wood baffle test with 115 WWB going further than 124 gr NATO also.
    Yeah, you're right, come to think of it... The strength of the boards was compromised after the first shots. They would have flexed more when hit by subsequent shots, reducing penetration.

  9. #9
    Member JHC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    North Georgia
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Mac View Post
    Yeah, you're right, come to think of it... The strength of the boards was compromised after the first shots. They would have flexed more when hit by subsequent shots, reducing penetration.
    What Wayne said! Don't know who would go to that trouble with a FMJ load although the Army may have done standard penetration testing. I'd like to see somebody shoot up a car with the 1152 also.
    “Remember, being healthy is basically just dying as slowly as possible,” Ricky Gervais

  10. #10
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Allen, TX
    Quote Originally Posted by JHC View Post
    I'd like to see somebody shoot up a car with the 1152 also.
    That's exactly what I'd like to see from the steel and glass barrier events in the standard testing.
    Regional Government Sales Manager for Aimpoint, Inc. USA
    Co-owner Hardwired Tactical Shooting (HiTS)

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •