U.S. Army Says 5.56mm Is Adequate

[tomahawk6]

SOCOM is in search of better 5.56mm ammo.If they can motivate industry with a lucrative contract then we may see the improvements in penetration desired. If SOCOM gets a better 5.56mm round then the Army will not be far behind.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htweap/articles/20060625.aspx

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

And we will follow in about 10 years.

 

[KevinB]

I noticed they said lead free -- the 87gr Compressed Tungsten rounds from Peace River Labs looks like they may be the ticket -- but they are damn pricey...

 

[a_majoor]

Save ammunition and money; lure them in for a throat punch! >

 

[starlight_cdn]

The slight lean and bent knees are so you can still shoot and move while retaining stability in yoru upper torso.
Both Elbows are in - as opposed to as previous taught

Chickenwings are bad. Elbows in good.

This is an aggressive stance that allows the shooter to move forward while maintaining some semblance of stance. Took a bit to train old army out of me but MG34 kept beating me with that stick until I got it right. 

 

[Zeptorem]

SOCOM is in search of better 5.56mm ammo.If they can motivate industry with a lucrative contract then we may see the improvements in penetration desired. If SOCOM gets a better 5.56mm round then the Army will not be far behind.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htweap/articles/20060625.aspx

The M855 is about as good as it gets for terminal ballistics without resorting to decidedly illegal methods. As external ballistics, the 5.56 all-around just kinda sucks.

I'd cast my armchair gunsmith vote for something intermediate between 7.62 NATO and 5.56 NATO. Something in the 6-7mm range, with a long, slender bullet for excellent ballistic coefficient—the 5.56 simply doesn't hold its velocity downrange. Past a few hundred meters it's basically a pointy .22LR. It gets even worse when fired out of a carbine-length barrel, where it'll only fragment up to about 50 meters.

My vote's for the 6.5 mm Grendel. I have an AR15 with an Alexander Arms gas piston upper in 6.5, and it's great. Low recoil and weight, hellfire accurate (apparently shorter, fatter casings with more aggressive neck angles provide a more even powder burn and, therefore, better accuracy), and amazingly flat trajectory. According to FBI tests, it fragments quite well, too, providing superior terminal ballistics to the 5.56, especially at greater ranges.

tl;dr, forget te 6.8mm SPC. Terrible ballistic coefficient, middling accuracy; it's only really good for CQB.

EDIT: I just realized this thread was made back when people were still discovering fire... oh well, at least I used the search function instead of making a new damn thread.

SECOND EDIT: Are you guys allowed to take your own, privately-bought ammunition to fire at the range, since you're alloted so little? Marstar sells 1200 rounds of 5.56 for a mere $419. It'd be totally worth it, in my eyes, if you've got a bunch of money lying around and want some trigger time...

 

[1feral1]

The M855 is about as good as it gets for terminal ballistics without resorting to decidedly illegal methods. As external ballistics, the 5.56 all-around just kinda sucks.

I'd cast my armchair gunsmith vote for something intermediate between 7.62 NATO and 5.56 NATO. Something in the 6-7mm range, with a long, slender bullet for excellent ballistic coefficient—the 5.56 simply doesn't hold its velocity downrange. Past a few hundred meters it's basically a pointy .22LR. It gets even worse when fired out of a carbine-length barrel, where it'll only fragment up to about 50 meters.

5.56mm SS109 penetrates steel helmets and flak jackets at 800m. Far from a .22LR. After being exposed to 5.56mm M193 and SS109 variants from Canada, USA, and Australia, overall, since 1978, in peace time and at war, I've never had any issues with it, and I've seen its results. US SF and some USMC have been also using a heavier bullet in Iraq (from Rapid City SD) with much success. Without giving too much away google this, adn it will tell you all.

I don't know who told you about projectiles fragmenting (I take you talking about the projectile fragmenting in its target) only up to 50 metres from M4 bbls,  but that is incorrect.

EDIT: Using private ammunition is prohibited from military weapons.

 

[Zeptorem]

5.56mm SS109 penetrates steel helmets and flak jackets at 800m. Far from a .22LR.

The .22LR was mostly hyperbole, but the M855 still has about the same energy as a .22WMR after not very long.

Besides, penetrating a regular steel helmet isn't much of an accomplishment for a military round. Hell, my compound bow can quite easily penetrate an M1 (so can my .22, come to think of it) at close range.

What a 5.56 does on the other side is an entirely different matter.

After being exposed to 5.56mm M193 and SS109 variants from Canada, USA, and Australia, overall, since 1978, in peace time and at war, I've never had any issues with it, and I've seen its results. US SF and some USMC have been also using a heavier bullet in Iraq (from Rapid City SD) with much success. Without giving too much away google this, adn it will tell you all.

I don't know who told you about projectiles fragmenting (I take you talking about the projectile fragmenting in its target) only up to 50 metres from M4 bbls,  but that is incorrect.

My original source was a 2001 issue of "Special Weapons for Military and Police", an OPERATOR magazine whose primary clientele is probably Counter-Strike players, but I looked into it a bit more, and these were my sources (note: they're old and now 404, and I can't seem to find any reputable mirrors):

http://www.fen-net.de/norbert.arnoldi/army/wound.html
http://home.snafu.de/l.moeller/military_bullet_wound_patterns.html

Anyway, fired from a 10-inch Colt Commando barrel, the M855 only fragments at the cannelure up to about 50m, from a 16-inch M4 (C8) barrel 95-130m, and from a full-length 20-inch barrel that range extends to 150-190 m. Fragmentation at the upper end of that scale is unimpressive, though; from looking at the gel tests, it only breaks into three or four pieces, instead of forming those fist-sized wound channels that happen up close.

EDIT: Using private ammunition is prohibited from military weapons.

Oh well. Wonder why they don't allot you guys at least a few hundred rounds a year; ammo isn't that expensive, especially for the military.

 

[GAP]

Instead of your magazine....you might want to listen to Wes....he was an armorer, I believe.

As an aside, he spent his time in Iraq.....

 

[Zeptorem]

Instead of your magazine....you might want to listen to Wes....he was an armorer, I believe.

As an aside, he spent his time in Iraq.....

Oh, don't get me wrong, I appreciate real-world experience. I'd like to know specifically what he's seen, but whatever. I'm just arguing my points from a different perspective (as someone who's competitively shot precision rifles since I was twelve) in a pretty civilized manner, backing them up, et cetera. Hell, what I'm suggesting isn't even that radical or different. I'm just going by scientific ballistics tests and my experience with external ballistics.

What I don't appreciate is this undeserved indignation toward us uncivilized, filthy, loser civilians. IE, quoting my tongue-in-cheek profile and adding a sarcastic roll-eyes smily at the end instead of actually addressing my points.

 

[KevinB]

Mk262 Mod1 is a 77gr Sierra Matchking, made by BlackHills Ammunition, it briefly had a 77gr Nosler.

M856 Tracer, Mk262 Mod1, M855 pulled bullets

Some basic comparrision

There is Brown Tip ammo issued to SOF as well and a well sourced article by Defense Review
http://www.defensereview.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1130
unfortunately that ammo construction is not open source 


FYI M855 fragments to about 15m from a Mk18 - however just since the ammuntion is below its fragmentation impact velocity does not mean it is simply ineffective.
C77 has a slightly thicker bullet jacket (thus needs a  higher impact velocity for fragmentation)

 

[1feral1]

Oh, don't get me wrong, I appreciate real-world experience. I'd like to know specifically what he's seen, but whatever. I'm just arguing my points from a different perspective (as someone who's competitively shot precision rifles since I was twelve) in a pretty civilized manner, backing them up, et cetera. Hell, what I'm suggesting isn't even that radical or different. I'm just going by scientific ballistics tests and my experience with external ballistics.

What I don't appreciate is this undeserved indignation toward us uncivilized, filthy, loser civilians. IE, quoting my tongue-in-cheek profile and adding a sarcastic roll-eyes smily at the end instead of actually addressing my points.

Mate, to sum up, and not to be too rude, but you're ONLY 17 yrs old, you are not an adult, and not even old enough to legally own a rifle and a restricted one (AR15) at that. Thats regardless since you've been shooting since you were 12, a whopping 5 yrs ago.

I know many civilian shooters who I admire, respect, and learn from, so that 'filthy loser civilians' line you are trying to pull does not go far with me. I judge people for their individual worth, not the catagory they belong to.

Do not believe anything you read in gun-gossip magazines.

I find your points meaningless and ill informed at best.

Want some advice? Stick to your lane of expertise. Read and listen on here instead of playing the SME you are not, because you are not. Am I? Yes, and thats offically recognised by ALTC Bandiana, a Force wide SME for Small Arms, and registered, thats not including +33 yrs in two armies, and I have been shooting since 1969.

I6 has forgot more than I will ever know, so listen to what he has to say. A very knowledgable man.

Read, heed and fail naught,

OWDU

 

[Zeptorem]

I judge people for their individual worth, not the catagory they belong to...



...you're ONLY 17 yrs old, you are not an adult ...

Hmm...

Do not believe anything you read in gun-gossip magazines.

I don't, that's why I looked into it further and verified with multiple sources.

I find your points meaningless and ill informed at best.

Great, then argue them instead of personally attacking me.

Want some advice? Stick to your lane of expertise. Read and listen on here instead of playing the SME you are not, because you are not.

Didn't say I am, that's why my profile says "Armchair Commando" and my signature says what it does.

Am I? Yes, and thats offically recognised by ALTC Bandiana, a Force wide SME for Small Arms, and registered, thats not including +33 yrs in two armies, and I have been shooting since 1969.

Cool, then instead of just saying that "5.56 is great and you are wrong because I say so, and I have more experience than you", provide your reasoning, give me some wound profiles, energies, and velocities at different ranges. I'm legitimately curious and crave this kind of information and knowledge! Besides, how do you expect me to learn anything or be convinced of a differing view if you don't back what you say up? All the experience in the world isn't going to convince someone if you just state your opinion without justifying it, especially to someone on the internet that's never met you.

I6 has forgot more than I will ever know, so listen to what he has to say. A very knowledgable man.

Yes, I-6 is very helpful and given me some wound profiles (though at close range, they're still interesting). That's the kind of thing I want to see when I go here.

 

[1feral1]

Since when does some fair dinkum advice turn into a personal attack?

If you think you were personally 'attacked', you've got some issues.

Don't be so lazy. Information you want me to give you can be found on the INet, and that can then be compaired to 5.45 x 39mm, 7.62mm NATO, and 7.62 x 39mm also.

There is nothing wrong with the current 5.56 x 45mm cartridge (it will be around as the workhorse of the west for decades to come), and a 17 yr old telling me otherwise really irritates me. I certainlly would NOT want to be on the business end of of a SS109 ball projectile. Would you?

As for your 5 posts in question, you barge in with a  I've been shooting for 5 yrs-own an AR15-(legally you cannot, you are not even an adult)-know-it-all attitude, and to me attitude means everything. Calling this cartridge nothing but a .22LR does nothing but demonstrate your own ignorance.

Learn on here, gobbing off about stuff you don't know about does nothing for you, and thats more advice, not an attack.

Enjoy your day.

 

[Infanteer]

Great, then argue them instead of personally attacking me.

No one has attacked you on this page, so cool it.

If you want to broaden your horizons with informed debate, why don't you try asking questions of the more knowledgeable members around here?  Lord knows these folks like to talk about bullets and shit if prompted.

 

[Zeptorem]

Since when does some fair dinkum advice turn into a personal attack?

When the advice is "shut up, you're obviously too young to have an opinion", yeah, it's a bit hostile.

Don't be so lazy. Information you want me to give you can be found on the INet, and that can then be compaired to 5.45 x 39mm, 7.62mm NATO, and 7.62 x 39mm also.

Yes, I've already found it, that's how I came to my conclusion.

There is nothing wrong with the current 5.56 x 45mm cartridge (it will be around as the workhorse of the west for decades to come), and a 17 yr old telling me otherwise really irritates me.

Ugh...

Then if my opinion (which must seem so unreasonable and ill-advised; basically "I think we can use a cartridge that provides all-around superior ballistics without sacrificing much of the benefits of a small, light round") is so obviously flawed and invalid, maybe you can actually ADDRESS it instead of poisoning the well?

I certainlly would NOT want to be on the business end of of a SS109 ball projectile. Would you?

I wouldn't want to be on the business end of a .17 HMR, does that mean we should chamber our C7s in it?

As for your 5 posts in question, you barge in with a  I've been shooting for 5 yrs-own an AR15-(legally you cannot, you are not even an adult)

The guns are in dad's name, but I've paid for them all with my money, and I shoot, maintain, and modify them. They are, de-facto, mine.

-know-it-all attitude,

Christ man, what have I done so far to suggest any sort of know-it-all attitude? I'm the first one to admit my opinion may be invalid, which is why I present facts and figures. I do get a bit pissed off, though, when someone from the internet comes in and says "oh you're completely wrong" without providing any reason other than "I'm more experienced than you". Tell me why I'm wrong, dammit, I'm genuinely curious!

and to me attitude means everything. Calling this cartridge nothing but a .22LR does nothing but demonstrate your own ignorance.

I have to type this with one hand right now, 'cause the palm of the other is firmly planted in my face.

I did not call the 5.56 "nothing but a .22LR". You are demonstrably misrepresenting me. I said "after a few hundred meters, it's basically a pointy .22LR". I explained in my next post that it was hyperbole—a joke.

Learn on here, gobbing off about stuff you don't know about does nothing for you, and thats more advice, not an attack.

I've been logged on here for over six hours, spending many times that looking into this topic beforehand. Don't think for a second I'm just here firing off posts as quickly as I can think them up.

Enjoy your day.

I will now—I was stuck in a stuffy, dark room in my library for three hours while my school was in lockdown, so I'd much rather be at home than sitting in the dark.

 

[1feral1]

I would suggest in taking the moderator's advice he personally provided to you, so noted two posts back, but it does not seem you are.

You only get one chance at a first impression, remember that.

 

[KevinB]

Zeptorem,

Your first comment was that M855 was 'as good as it gets' for 5.56mm, this is utterly false.

Secondly I've met Bill Alexander (Alexander Arms, who make the 6.5 Grendel) he is not marketing it as a 5.56mm replacement, but that is a different story even if he wanted to.  The Grendel mags are not 5.56mm mags, so you would need to chnage out the fleet of magazines, along with uppers and a metric boatload of other items.  Since Bill controls the reamers, and production of his ammo, its not ever going to get exposure.

The other issue you face is that several of us who have been USING 5.56mm rifles and carbines, are telling you the round works.

So yes its a little annoying when someone who has been alive less time than some of us wear or wore uniforms, and has never fired a round in anger comes to tell us we are all RTFO.

Additionally their are several barrier blind ammuntions being developed, more non open source material is available if you have the need to know.  Until then you can rant around in your little corner and be completely ignored or ridiculed by those who have the info.
  If you want to be in the know, I suggest you pony up the bar, and raise your hand to swear allegiance. 

 

[MG34]

I-6 Amen to that.
If our young fellow had any experience at all he would know that the Rifleman is not the main killing tool in the Infantry "toolbox" the Support weapon is the real killer on the battlefield and the Rifleman is simply there to ensure the security of these weapons. The cartridge issued to the Rifleman has only to be capable of that task, killing or putting down the enemy so that the Support weapons can do their job with as little interference as possible.
The Rifleman's weapon doesn't have to penetrate barriers,or kill at long range that is the job of the support weapon, it does have to provide accurate fire on point targets with lethal or wounding effect within it's maximum effective range, and lethal fire at close range during the assault where the effectiveness of the support wea[pons is reduced due to the close proximity of enemy and friendly forces.
 

 

[GAP]

I-6 Amen to that.
If our young fellow had any experience at all he would know that the Rifleman is not the main killing tool in the Infantry "toolbox" the Support weapon is the real killer on the battlefield and the Rifleman is simply there to ensure the security of these weapons. The cartridge issued to the Rifleman has only to be capable of that task, killing or putting down the enemy so that the Support weapons can do their job with as little interference as possible.
The Rifleman's weapon doesn't have to penetrate barriers,or kill at long range that is the job of the support weapon, it does have to provide accurate fire on point targets with lethal or wounding effect within it's maximum effective range, and lethal fire at close range during the assault where the effectiveness of the support wea[pons is reduced due to the close proximity of enemy and friendly forces.
 

Really.....all that humping through rice patties and jungle was to protect the big guys.....?  ;D