M855A1 Performance Review. Did it live up to the Army's hype? Did going green really work?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 9 авг 2022
- Touted by the Army as a more accurate and lethal bullet than the older M855 "Green Tip". But is this really true? Did going green with a lead-free design really work? Does it damage M4 carbines? Here I take a deep dive into the performance of M855A1 ammo, based off my time using it in Special Forces and my own accuracy testing.
Defensereview.com articles:
defensereview.com/m855a1-pene...
defensereview.com/m855a1-5-56...
Anniston Army 5inch standards:
• Behind the scenes: U.S...
M855A1 used at a match
• M855A1 Enhanced Perfor...
Practical Accuracy Interview NGSW
• NGSW- Interview with S... 
Спорт
On Afghan Walls: He’s not joking. They might be made with a mixture of portland cement and goat dung, but unless they’re hit right next to a corner, or at the top edge they’ll shrug off a shot from an AT4 or RPG-7, no problem. And at the same time they’re soft enough that you can walk up and pull chunks out with your hand. Weird tech, but very tough.
It essentially acts like compacted sand.
You know how good sand is at stopping projectiles.
@@pewpew9193 SAANNNDDD!!!?!?!??!??
@@pewpew9193 I don't like sand. It's rough and it gets everywhere
I've seen one take a whole belt of .50 and still stand
@@cascadianrangers728love the pfp
When 10th mountain made the switch, my groups were cut, literally in half as far as size. We also saw a significant increase in the marksmanship scores during rifle qualifications across the board. I am a huge fan of the new “green “round.
I have also seen some ballistics gel tests on yt that show it has far far better terminal performance in soft targets compared to M855. Regular green tip will sometimes zip through soft targets without tumbling or really dumping any energy, or will tumble really deep like 7-8 inches in at which point it would already be most if not all the way trough a body. So its a bit more accurate and better terminal performance on soft and hard targets. Seems like a good improvement to me.
10th Light Infantry division "Mountain" 85-86.
Biden's gift to the Taliban Billions worth of our Taxes & weapons. & The reason they didn't develop a better Round is because they want to stretch War out it makes the Elites more money
@@Nick-sx6jmthat performance depends almost entirely on the weapon used and the range to the target. The AR-15 platform was designed for a 55gr bullet and a 1:9 twist out of a 20” barrel. By the time you shoot a 62gr bullet out of a 14.5” barrel with a 1:7 twist you lose so much velocity the bullet won’t tumble on impact beyond about 100m. That’s fine for a carbine. It’s not for a battle rifle. That’s why the Marine Corps adopted the M16A4 with a 20” barrel.
@@coryhoggatt7691wrong
Where M855A1 shines is that it still fragments at much lower velocities, like close to 1600FPS. This is around the 600 yard mark for 12.5" to 14.5" barreled rifles. Old M855 minimum fragmenting velocities vary between 2700 to 2500 FPS, which out of an M4 doesnt get you very far.
Bingo. Plus M193/M855 suffer from fleet yaw that causes inconsistent performance even within the fragmentation velocity range.
@ChadTheAfricanBullfrog I don't think the OP even made mention of seeing the effects of A1 against a enemy. It's gel results still give an indication of it's potential performance in living tissue and M855A1 has been proven by many with public gel tests to be superior to M855..
@ChadTheAfricanBullfrog Martin Fackler, who popularized the gel test, was a field surgeon in Vietnam and likely had more experience with 5.56 wounds than anyone else. Gel isn’t something made by guys in lab coats that have never fired a gun before, it’s something made by a combat surgeon who had extensive experience documenting GSWs.
This guy wasn’t very specific at all as to whether the terminal performance was better or worse, and said the information was secondhand anyway. M855 and M193 performance is notoriously inconsistent, and if we just listened to one person and jettisoned gel tests we would either come to the conclusion that M193 is amazing or terrible, when the reality is that it can be either one, depending on the AOA from fleet yaw.
Buh…but my gel test showed it would work, buh…
Ballistic gel is nothing but a consistent test medium from which to compare various projectiles, nothing more, nothing less. It literally is for lab use *only*. There’s a reason why an ammo maker will spend years developing a bullet in the *lab* and then take it to Texas or someplace similar to shoot living animals. Then they find that it really doesn’t work as advertised. Why? Because even when you add test barriers in front or inside the gel they aren’t consistent. There’s a huge difference between live bone and dead bone, so adding a pig scapula inside the block isn’t accurate either.
@@soonerfrac4611 yeah none of that is accurate.
Martin Fackler initially took wound profiles from his experience as a field surgeon in Vietnam. When he later headed the Wound Ballistics Laboratory, they initially used pigs. First anesthetized, then later dispatched and used before rigor mortis set in. He then popularized the use of properly calibrated 10% 250A porcine gelatin not because it was simply consistent, but because it correlated closely with the average wound found in pig and human tissue. This was further demonstrated by Gene Wolberg’s study “Performance of the Winchester 9mm 147 Grain Jacketed Hollow Point Bullet in Human Tissue and Tissue Simulant” published in the IWBA’s Wound Ballistics Review (Winter 1991, Volume 1, Number 1, Page 10).
I used to work in bullet manufacturing for a specialty bullet company. We had several .mil type contracts for our bullets, including for Mk262 type 77gr OTM’s.
I probably made millions of them.
Mk262 is actually significantly cheaper to manufacture. It takes 1/3 of the steps to make and maybe 1/5 the amount of man hours to make compared to a polymer tip hunting bullet.
The real advantage of the 77gr OTM is that it’s easy to keep it consistent in the manufacturing process. Weights stayed spot on to two tenths of a grain, and OAL stayed right around an inch. Because of the simplicity of the design, the bullet was easy to produce in great quantity with good quality.
Great info! I don't claim to be a bullet expert by no means. I consider myself just an end user, so any details on actual bullet design and production is cool
IMO MK262 can’t be beat. But for general range use, I usually run M193. Then re-zero with MK262 when I’m done.
@Kevin Almgren
LOL, tell me you worked for Black Hills or Sierra without saying that you worked for Black Hills or Sierra…
I think Jeff Hoffman from Black Hills is very much responsible for that.
@@bluntsmoke1872 The one place that it does get beat in my opinion is with bonded soft points. They are less velocity and barrier sensitive. But I would have no qualms about using either one they're both fantastic
We hit a qulat wall with an AT-4 and it didn't even make a big enough hole to fit through. People hear "mud hut" and they think something made of paper.
Yessssss. Thank you for pointing out some reality
The M107 155mm round out preformed the M855 and the M855A1 lol. Thank you for sharing your experience with M855A1
I prefer the 84mm Carl Gustav myself
@ Modern Tactical Shooting
I find it very ironic that your Bravos had to wheel and deal just to get proper ammo and such. As MP on our SRT (early ‘02 time frame) we had to consistently beg borrower and tactically acquire just about everything. Ammo, range time, smoke grenades, even M4’s because our parent unit didn’t have any assigned to us so we took over spare M4’s from the local CID & RCF. We would run M9 ranges for artillery officers and SNCO’s just to get extra training time, or borrow tools and gear. We had zero up armored vehicles at that time also.
@@soonerfrac4611 SF still Army and we had our own funding problems too. Part what makes a 18B or Cs excel is their ability to wheel and deal to get stuff or get something done.
Ha ha, OP, were you a Redleg?
I work for a body armor company, and tests M855A1 almost weekly. To give you an idea of my familiarity with this round, the thumbnail of this video (at the time of this comments posting) is actually showing M80A1 loaded in a magazine, the 7.62x51 version of this round.
I have to say M855A1 (per the BATFE) IS considered an actual AP round while M855 is considered EP or MSC. To note, anything that punches through level III steel can be considered "AP", but for the sake of this conversation, Ill keep that to projectiles with a hardened steel insert that can punch through level III steel.
I've seen M855A1 out of a 20" barrel punch through some RF2 (III+) plates with relative consistency while M855/M193 does not (again take note; RF2, NOT RF1, or NIJ level III, as M855 out of a 20" will punch through RF1/ NIJ III).
There is an enhanced design of this projectile in the form of a kinetic "bump" that is similar to a tank sabot. The rear end of the projectile acts like a hammer while the hardened steel insert punches through a surface making sure there is a little extra umph when it gets through a hard surface like steel.
I don't have any data the army has, nor any anti-personal stats of the round that you may have but don't want people to walk away from this video thinking M855A1 is over hyped. Its not.
IF I had to cite my personal experience with this round, it's that its far more effective than standard MSC/ EP rounds (SS109 and M855), but not as effective as Teflon or tungsten carbide rounds.
What's relevant to this conversation however is projectile availability. While Black tip SS190 (not to be confused with SS109) 5.56 is all but unobtanium, M855A1 falls off the back of the supply truck pretty often.
No, I'm not at liberty to say what company I work for and what plates are defeated, but a simple search online will show this.
Good info in this video from the perspective of a retired SF operator, but not exactly inline with my personal testing and others who have posted results online.
Another (un)fun-fact about A1 is that you have to be careful of the steel penetrator that protrudes out of the front of the projectile. Because its not like normal M855, the exposed penetrator is susceptible to rust from (oxidization) sweat and water and if you keep rounds loaded in mags in humid environments for long periods of time, its likely you could end up with rust deformation and pitting of the projectile that could case an ogive flight path, deteriorating accuracy.
Good information I mentioned it in a few responses.. I'm not really a bullet expert I'm an end user and yes the video is going off of my view of downrange information and not scientific testing.
What a bullet can and can't penetrate on a federasl level doesn't denote whether it's Armor Piercing or not. It's solely based on 1> That it can be used in a pistol (5.56 can), and it's 2 > construction. There's varying gray areas on what the ATF has considered the "core" of the bullet. One could argue that the M855A1's core is copper, and the tip is the penetrator, but the ATF does what it wants.
Do you have any data on what period of time is needed to cause rusting and degradation of the exposed steel? All production M855A1 has a rust inhibitor coating on it..
M193 goes through level 3 steel like butter and it's a copper jacket with soft lead. I guess it's AP. I guess all .270 is AP, too.
@@spraynpray
M193 does not go through level III like butter. Velocity is relevant with M193. M193 out of a 16" or less barrel will not pass through level III. M193 out of an barrel length greater than 16" will pass through with increasing frequency as the barrel length is increased.
Reread what I said:
"To note, anything that punches through level III steel can be considered "AP", but for the sake of this conversation, Ill keep that to projectiles with a hardened steel insert that can punch through level III steel."
In other words, yes the rounds you cited could be interpreted as Armor Piercing, but only in the sense that they pierce armor (as you noted), not in the sense that they are designed to and left the factory with the intention of defeating armor.
@@spraynpray Velocity defeats armor, not weight. M193 from a full length barrel is +3000 FPS.
As the state marksmanship coordinator for the national guard in my state we did some work with these rounds on a known distance range. Using our All Guard shooters (and other team shooters but I was mostly paying attention to our All Guard members) we saw a noticable improvement in groups fired at 300 yards, the only yard line we fired both rounds. If you discount the worst round of either 855 or 855A1 5 round groups the A1 was clearly superior. It was about 1 MOA better. Including the fliers it was still almost a half minute tighter over the 5 groups of 5 rounds. I think including the .8 MOA group of the M855, that you admitted was an aberration, skews your results.
As for lethality it's my understanding that the fragmentation threshold for M855 is about 2600fps but that for the A1 it's about 1900fps. I can't confirm that from experience but maybe one day I'll get some test media and try it out.
As for the mags, we got them in bulk in the guard about a year and a half ago. Can't say I've seen much of a difference in mags, assuming they are not damaged. Damaged mags are shit no matter the specifics.
I'll see if I can find the notes from our informal tests on the KD range as my comments are from memory. I can say with confidence that we saw a noticable improvement in accuracy.
Sounds very similar to our state's experience. We used up the last of our green tip stuff in 2020 and saw an increase in points during TAG rounds in both 2021 and 2022; as an "and but" our over all numbers for competition was less in 21 and 22, but our range of experience was more diverse and should have had a greater variance. I can't speak too personally on the performance as I consider myself a horrible marksman with horrible eyes who compensates by a lot of range time; but the A1 rounds have only seem to perform on par or better with guys using the M4 rifles on red dots. The guys with that and ACOG's have seen an average increase, as well as the A2's and A4's (M16) both iron sight and ACOG.
This pretty much matches the test the AF tests from '10 comparing 855, 855A1, and Mk318. Ultimately our field tests showed Mk318 slightly more accurate (about .06 mil), but not enough to allow hits that 855A1 would not allow. Green tip M855 was the least accurate by about .2 mil. The most significant difference was in wounding. Inside 50-75 meters M855A1 was only slightly better than M855. Past that distance, the M855A1 was CLEARLY superior to legacy M855 and Mk262. Our testing was only out to 613M. On a side note, wounding for the Mk318 was characterized as "acceptable" at short to medium ranges, but far inferior to the M855A1 at all tested ranges.
@@anthonybarker9123 in my initial read my brain read MOA where you wrote Mil. For a moment I thought your numbers seemed wrong to me. I quickly realized you were using mil. I'm old and learned moa, not mil.
I've become a fan of the A1 and wish we could get it for my civilian job. Sadly we are using M855 out of our 11.5 inch guns.
Its 1600 fps sec min
@@anthonybarker9123At 600 Meters what are the MOA wind constants for each cartridge? I get an 8.5 constant from Mk262 which means I can counter uncertain wind better than other rounds.
I don’t know if they are still loading it as hot as the original spec, but that stuff beat our M4s to death. My unit did a series of ranges in Alaska in 2017 and it took almost 10% of our rifles out of the fight over two weeks. We had so many broken bolt lugs, it was incredible.
It made me want to buy an extra bolt and keep it with me.
I carried a spare bolt in my pack on mission, after I broke a bolt on the range in Afghanistan. I figured sure.... I put a new bolt in and doubt it would fail. But I figured all the team's carbines had close to the same high round counts, so just in case a teammates bolt broke on mission, I had one to offer.
@ Riorozen
Combination of “lowest bidder” and the fact that it was developed for a lower level to begin with.
You probably already had significant gas port erosion on your M4's before fielding M855a, and the new higher pressure round just exponentially accelerated the deterioration of your carbines.
@@ModernTacticalShooting It's good to keep stuff in stock because if there was ever a time were you need to start burning the tires in the street, the people you defend your community with might need it.
The original A1 load was about 10% hotter than M855 but later development found a powder charge that would get the same velocity results with only a 5% increase in pressure. That's what was briefed at the Wilson match a few years ago.
M855A1 might see a longer service life in Big Army far beyond the adoption of 6.8mm because my gut feeling is that the higher-ups will hopefully understand (or maybe planned all along???) that NGSW is better suited to replace the .308 lineup and the 5.56mm SAW rather than the 5.56mm carbine.
Edit: If I remember correctly, Jeff covered this in the Practical Accuracy NGSW vid (link's in the description).
Yes agree
Great insight. We can only hope.
Sounds like they're going to have to improve the bolts and barrel extensions on older M-4s, and maybe go to a stainless hybrid case for M-855a1. Or a1(b) or whatever you'd like to call it.
@@dangvorbei5304 LMT Enhanced Bolt could probably fix all of those problems. I don't know enough about metallurgy to say if you would need a beefed-up barrel extension as well, but if you are breaking those I think you have bigger problems.
@@Laotzu.Goldbug That's an awesome idea, and there's bound to be a way to handle the barrel extensions as well. SIG isn't about to share their secrets, but as LMT demonstrated, they aren't the only game in town. Next, to do something about this BS 5moa rebuild standard.
If M855A1 isn't such a big improvement on M855, why is it so hard for civilians to get their hands on M855A1? The exclusivity makes it seem like it's some miracle cartridge that the government wants to keep out of civvie hands.
Reason: Army sold M855A1 hard as the "wonder Bullet"
@@KeterMalkuth pretty sure the govt is prohibited from holding patents
You can get M855A1 but its $3 a round lol . Shark Arms has some
rarity does not equal quality.
Nobody wants to spend the money to ramp up production at this time.
One thing most people don't talk about is the flash suppressant in the powder. It works very well at night
Does it take a break during the day?
Thanks for the first hand report on M855A1. We get so much political "Gas Lighting" from the military "Managers", that I don't have a lot of faith in what they have to say. I had heard that the Army had to reduce the chamber pressure of this round once it was issued. I know there is no way to measure that in the field, but have you heard that too?
Regarding the 6.8x51 round, all the videos I see are guys shooting the low pressure "Practice Ammo" and not the full power 80,000 to 100,000 PSI "Combat Ammo". I imagine the reason for every rifle having a suppressor is the incredible report from such a high pressure round out of a 13" barrel. I was able to talk to the SIG development team and they weren't allowed to disclose any AP data, as the Army requested that they not discuss it. I did handle all the new weapons and the M5 is ridiculously long and heavy and for CQB, I would say it is less then ideal. Personally I think this rifle is going to be quietly dropped once it gets in the hands of the trigger pullers.
The new 338 machine gun, which is lighter than the M240B and supposedly uses a shorter round than the 338 Lapua Mag, impressed me as the pressure was reasonable and it didn't require the new hybrid case. I could see this replacing the M240B in the Medium Machine Gun role. The 6.8x51 M250 is much lighter than the M249 and if chambered for the 7.62x51 round would be a great squad weapon that can use current ammo stocks and retain NATO compatibility, especially if the sound suppressor was optional. .
I agree I dont see The M5 rifle going force wide with success but who knows
That was very informative. Those photos from your deployments are awesome. I'd have to agree with you. 1MOA is the gold standard for match grade accuracy. Great video.
Thanks
Marine here, were issued mk262 when I was in Afghan, saw the aftermath of a combatant’s leg afterward and jeez, his whole calf was gone. Didn’t see that type of flesh damage with the army’s m855A1 in my experience
Saw 855A1 explode a dude's face.
Really the takeaway here is that getting shot is pretty trash.
Yeah the Mk262 is a soft bullet and when it hits bone, it fragments. Much better external ballistics. When I was in Afghan, we had the M855, M855A1, the Mk-318 mod 0 and the Mk262. We played around with it at the range at Leatherneck when I got there and told the ammo tech that I’d rather have the Mk-318 mod 0 and the Mk-262. The new Mk-318 mod 1 has a nickel jacket. I got a friend that’s still active at Camp Pendleton. I retired in 2015.
Semper
I bought a can of Federal M193 5.56mm stripper clips in 2018 or 2019. A few months ago I got to that can, and I was at the range loading mags when I saw a single M855A1 round on one of the stripper clips. That round is on my wall shelf now lol.
Are you sure it wasn’t an underpowered reduced range training round?
was it worth 100 million dollars to the military? No.
what was it worth 100 million of the US federal budget to keep a factory open in a congressional district and that individual elected to congress every single time? absolutely.
Lol we spent a million dollars in one day swapping out APR-39 signal processors that kept frying due to a short. That was for ONE single SOF helicopter. 100 mil in DoD bux is small potatoes. The enormity of DoD spending is only realized in places like Aircraft mx, Space operations and DARPA.
One of the biggest issues (speaking as a current active duty armorer) is chamber and throat erosion, especially in the 249. If a 249 goes to the range, one of the barrels will almost certainly be deadlined because of the gouges that M855A1/M856A1 (tungsten tracer)
Great video. In the Army Infantry. We were issued tan follower mags when i got in in 2012 and up till 2016, then they started issuing everyone Gen 3 PMAGs
This is accurate. Don't forget the magpul stanmags as well in between. They are the Tan metal mags.
Now this is great info. Thanks!
Great work again Jeff. A complete work up on the SOST MOD1 would be greatly appreciated. I've been amazed with this round for a while now. I was lucky to get some of this ammo before the price went crazy and availability dried up.
Be safe out there
Honestly I probably won't be doing a video on that seeing how I have no real experience with that ammo
M16/ A1 also had 1:12 twist barrels which are perfect for M193. The longer twist rate plus the 20" barrel still stabilizes that round but requires less effort from the propellant to push the round through the rifling resulting in higher velocities.
The big one here. . .20 inch barrels. Makes such a big difference, and with xm193 is an absolutely capable fighting rifle. It's when we shortened up the standard barrel that we tried to get something for nothing. Increasing bullet weight to make up for decreased velocity is like saying "well my heavy truck rolls better down hill than my light commuter car, so it gets better mileage" there is no free lunch. Shorten the barrel, and you lose power. Simple as that.
@@life_of_riley88 well said
@@life_of_riley88 Its amazed me for years how guys put a 10" or 12" barrel on their killer build,.....THEN think and start worrying about lower velocities and expansion. I just shake my head and chuckle at the TikTok warriors.
The #1 preferred weapon in SOG was the 11.5" XM177E2, which was used to stack NVA like corkwood.
@@LRRPFco52 and none of us are SOG fighting in the jungles of Vietnam. Short rifles are objectively worse performers for standard infantrymen, hence the movement away from the M4 by the DOD.
Thanks, great deep dive. The practical application is the most reliable source. Side by side with what we know gives a great testimony.
Tactical Hive tested M193 out of 14" ,16" , 20" barrel's using 2" reems of paper, twelve inches in front of a steel target from ten yrs out. The 14" went through 4 reems hitting the steel target staying intact. The 16" went through 3.5 reems fragmenting into small pieces. The 20" went through 3 reems totally fragmentation turning into dust) . As Coach said " The hundred pound heads" knew what they were doing with maximum velocity in the shortest barrel too achieve the greatest damage without over penatration, the 16" barrel was the ticket=(The Vietnam era) Later on, Urban combat required a shorter 14" barrel fighting in buildings where walls were much thicker able to stop rounds passing through , the 14 inch became the new fighting weapon for close quarters combat= CQB.(Afghanistan era)
Thanks Jeff - that was really interesting. When I was in USMC ITR in 1970 we had those aluminum 20 round magazines and they were complete pieces of crap. They weren't all the same size - so the M-16A1's we had had an adjustment to the magazine latch. Once I was issued two magazines for training. The first was too fat and would not go in the weapon - so I had to adjust the magazine catch to fit it in. When I fired that magazine off - I put the next magazine in - and it was a skinny one - so the bolt going home drove the magazine right out of the weapon and into the dirt ...
I was not happy but at least that happened in training. I never saw combat. My contribution to the Vietnam War was being a sentry in California.
Of course, the Army does not have a good history on things like ammunition. The ammunition Custer's troops had did not have brass casings - they were copper. Which had been bought because it was cheaper. The end result of that was that if you fired the weapon to fast the weapon would heat up and the copper would swell tight against the chamber. The extractor would tear off the base of the round - instead of extracting it - leaving a copper coated chamber that you could not fit another round into. Troopers had to take the points of their knives and try to pry the copper out of their chambers in order to load another round.
When the Army became aware of the problem - they stopped buying the copper cased rounds - but - they issued all the ones they'd paid for ...
.
Back in the day for me (early 90s) when we had the black follower 30 rounder, similar problems. I would take a dozen mags to the range, always a couple that did not work, I would mark those that did and stick to them only. green follower mags came out around 1998, they are still them best GI mag I think.
@@ModernTacticalShooting Yeah. That was smart. We had to turn ours in when they said to so we just had whatever they gave us.
One day after training - it was
"Turn all your magazines in!"
Then
"Don't turn your magazines in!"
Then
"Turn all your magazines in!
Then
"Don't turn your magazines in!"
So - after the last one - I went to the guy I'd turned my magazines in to and he didn't have any more ...
So - for the next little while, I had a one round M-16. I'd get the bolt back and stick a round into the chamber through ... I believe ... the magazine well ... though it could have been the ejection port ... I don't remember. We were just firing blanks, chasing each other around the hills on Camp Pendleton.
*_Bang!_*
*_Bang!_*
_"You're dead!"_
_"No I'm not! I shot you first!"_
Such an "improvement" over when I was 11 and chasing my friends through the woods around the MOQ's on Camp Lejeune ...
Never had problems like that with the Steel (?) Magazines for my M-14's. We spent like 3 weeks (?) at Edson Range and I never had a feed problem with an M-14.
When I was a sentry and we had an alert ( *_Bong! Bong! Bong! Bong!_* ) - you'd grab your M-14 out of your wall locker, pull on your pants and sprint down to the Guard Office where they handed out magazines (two iirc) to the guys piling into the backs of pick up trucks to respond to the alert. Then _Off we'd go ..._
We'd turn those back in when we came back from the alert. So we never got to keep any magazines with our weapons. I'm pretty sure they didn't want us to have loaded weapons in the barracks. The only time I ever had ammunition for a weapon - was when I was ON post. We had 1911A1's for Gate Posts and Roving Patrols - but those weapons (with two magazines ea. and only had 5 rounds ea. to keep the springs from becoming depressed) stayed on post with the relief. Same with the M-14 magazines on Walking Posts and Watch Towers. Never had a feed problem with a 1911 either ...
[shrug]
I don't think I ever knew a Marine (and I served with a LOT of Combat Veterans) who didn't love the M-14 and hate the M-16. I do not envy you guys that weapon or it's descendants. Not one damn bit.
.
Excellent info, thanks for the post!
This will be good!
ETA: Good summary. We didn't noticed any performance improvement over M855 when we used it for our deployment in 2017.
I hope!!!! BTW Thanks again for the mag!
I suspect A long winded way to say NO! Guns breaking even faster (via glorified "Proof Loadings") in A military that already poorly services and maintains weapons and keeps them in service too long ............... VERY BAD IDEA! The shorter barrel fetish should necessitate A change of caliber.
@@ModernTacticalShooting happy to help.
That Mark 262 performs very well out of my suppressed Centurion cold hammer forged CL'd barrel. I'm glad I stocked up on that stuff.
855A1 terminal performance seems to do prett well. Out of 14.5 barrels it I've seen it fragment in gel.
Thanks Jeff, great research.
Great video, clear and concise like usual.
Great video and very informative. Good to hear first hand knowledge and not internet lore. Also, thanks for the mention.
Alot of internet lore going around in all things firearms related
1sfg/7sfg maintainer here. When we had the a1 issued to us we saw a massive jump in bolt breakages. New and old bolts were subject to this.
Good to know!
@@ModernTacticalShooting my pleasure, it was a blight when they rolled into the training fold. It pushed teams to shoot mk262 for basically 8 ish months before the powers that be deemed it cost ineffective. From a maintainer standpoint we had issues in a few arenas from bolts, gas rings and barrel wear and tear.
@@Foxholefirearms Yes I always assumed more damage and my team we shot a shit ton, I was surprised to not see more guns go down on my ODA.
@@ModernTacticalShooting luckier than our guys, granted at the time all this was going down at 1sfg I was at the GSB as a civi augmentee, but I can say one thing that made a bit of difference was the roll out of the URGI with its mid length gas system. That little extra dwell time cut back on bolt lugs shearing thankfully
Thanks a ton for the info. Have come to truely enjoy ur channel.
Excellent report.
Thanks for your work, honest opinions and service to our Nation.
This channel is so good...how good ? I actually watch through the advertisements to watch it...that's how good. Great analysis without all the BS....straight dope.
I'm a year late to this one, but, from seeing our State's NG shooting team, and working the ranges with them, we definately saw tighter groups going from greentip to A1s. Some of these guys are National-level good shooters and I have seen/scored 5-shot groupings of sub-moa out to 400y. These are out of issued, but in great shape, M4a1s with 4x Elcans. As the EPR round starts to become affordable, and civilian use gets more widespread, be careful to use the 'improved' mag, or at least the new followers, that give the round a slight lift at the nose. It will help prevent the scouring effect on the feed ramps from that sharp point digging in. My personal 14.5" already shows a few scour marks, where the ramp meets the barrel, just from one old GI mag (tan follower) with 30 rds fired. Awesome round though...very flat shooting and fast.
Thank you for all your info.
The accuracy test seemed incomplete in my opinion, having less strings of fire for the M855 and giving what was admitted a data outlier a hugely weighted impact on the average. It looked to me that with more strings you'd be seeing an average of one MOA improvement in accuracy for the M855A1, from about 3 MOA to about 2 MOA. I'd take that improvement any time.
Just like yourself, I'd like to see some more standardized testing instead of the mystical verbiage of "match-like accuracy" and a few anecdotes from the army.
Yes my intent with the video is just to address the Army's "match like" statement I know my testing incomplete. But shooting it for years when I was in, it never impressed me with its accuracy over M855
@@ModernTacticalShooting fair enough, brother. Thanks for the video!
One of the most experienced channel's I've found. Appreciate your opinions and experience. Now if only the government would take less than a decade to make changes and adjust fire based on guys like your feedback we'd be sittin pretty. Also, probably need a new Commander in Chief.
Great video and great insight.
Thanks for the great videos !
Very good amount if info packed into this video. Having not worn a uniform since 1990 and only having to deal with AR platforms from the civilian LE point of view since, I didn’t t even know about the 855A1 until may 2019 after reading something about the round. I’ve bought green tip but found that after shooting mostly 1-9 barrels since 2004, the 55 grain variants seemed to have sufficient accuracy potential. I’ve gotten as tight as .6 MOA with V-Max 55 grain and some Israeli surplus M193 I bought in 1992-93 was capable of knocking over 2x4 inch prairie dog silhouettes at 500M after aging gracefully in a can for 28 years. That out of a 14.5 P&N 1-9 barrel. I have never shot any of the MK262 but had understood that in addition to accuracy, it was found to have ballistic benefits in shorter barreled platforms. I also have a 16 inch 1-7 that I’ve used to get some fairly decent slightly over MOA groups with some 75 grain commercial, but really didn’t have enough ammo to say it should be my go to.
My question is - with the Mk262 having superior accuracy benefits and a solid track record, why didn’t the Army simply adopt it in place of blowing money on development of the M855A1? (I know…. I know…..)
Johnny’s reloading bench has an entire series based around the accuracy of m855a1 rounds
i follow him great info!!
Great video as always!
I was a small arms repairman and m855a1 killed barrels very quickly making them lose putting small dents in the back end of the barrel. But most of all it destroyed feed paws on SAWs like nobodies business
Really enjoy your channel.
Including this video.
Thank you sir.
That "bad mag" issue where the bullet goes into the feed ramps, is actually an out-of-spec upper. The barrel breech extends beyond the receiver, making a shelf for the bullet tip to catch under.
Perhaps, but you must use the tan mags. They have a different feed lip angle. Solved our problems.
I used a ton of M855 in training and deployed, and a good amount of M855A1 from several different AR type rifles, and both failed to impress me in accuracy, esp. as compared to MK262 or those 75 grain Hornady rounds that were around for awhile (love those). Definitely NOT "match like" accuracy. I was issued the LWRC M6 at a place I worked OCONUS, and our ammunition supply process was unpredictable- you never knew what you may get when forward deployed, so sometimes we would get MK 262, sometimes green tip. We were specifically told not to use the M855A1 round through those M6 guns. I also told our leadership if that was the case to not put it on our resupply pallets if they didn't want it getting used. I have noticed getting consistent yaw with the 75 grain Hornady rounds on pigs and deer. And I have never seen a jacketed 5.56 round NOT go through a standard vehicle door. And even 40mm HE wouldn't penetrate a afghan mud wall, and that has an explosive charge in it. And there sure is lots of body armor in circulation now- not to mention armored vehicles (thanks brandon). I do like the M193 as a general purpose round- accurate enough, mild to shoot, not hard on steel. I think I'll stick with my PMAGS. I noticed on many of the M4's in my unit, they would still be grouping good, but would fail chamber erosion. I never saw a shot out M4 barrel that PASSED chamber erosion testing.
The tan mags did make it to unit issue, my BN got sent to Germany in march and we got 500+ of them, I tried to get them to order Pmags but they didn't like listening to a E4 armorer
3MOA at 100 is what even my most budget AR-15s(I'm talking del-ton, PSA, S&W builds) are capable of with standard 55gr plinking rounds.
Yeah the vast majority of ARS, even high-end ones in my experience are 1.5-3 moa with 55gr.
But my Colt 6920 and Geissele Super Duty are MOA/Sub-MOA with several different loads
Most "plinking ammo" isn't loaded nearly as consistently and for the most part is 2-3 MOA ammo
Great video. Would like to see u talk about the URGI upper. I think it was issued after u were already out tho. Thanks Jeff.
I'm an old Vietnam vet and wondering how much ammo do troops carry on a day patrol nowdays? We carried several
hundred rounds, but we stayed out in the bush for weeks and we didn't get reapplied everyday.
Well I carried 11 mags on me for multi-day Ops. After 2 days on ground in SF, we had it set up for air resupply, if teams needed it. This included ammo speed balls at least a fresh basic load of 7 mags per man. Plus there was always a on call emergency ammo resupply if there was a large firefight
I was an 0311 and went to afghan a few times (Helmand). Anyways riflemen had 180 rounds (6mags) and us saw(m249) gunners had between 600-800 linked 5.56.
Great vid!!!
I’d rather see mk262 as the standard round. 855A1 eats up barrels.
Former 10th group dude, here. Solid video, I concur with what you found. I would swap the barrels at 3" or greater.
Nice video bro . Love these types of videos . I'm a small Arms geek for sure . Yeah I'd say that's some pretty bad ass shooting to get those groups at distance with M855 or M855A1 . Then again Colt SOCOMs can be insanely accurate. I know the 4 or 5 SOCOMs I own are definitely some good shooting barrels for being C.L.. Hell I used to use my Colt SOCOM that I chopped to 12.5" for 2Gun Matches because it was the most accurate barrel I owned at the time . This 5+ years ago .
I picked up 10 rounds of M855A1 couple years ago . I'll probably never shoot them because I was told it would blow up my Colt M4s lol. I got them to be cool . This was before CV and those suckers were still $3 a round lol..
I saw some where that Okay Ind / Surefeed is stopping production. Surefeeds and Pmags are literally all I use .
Questions ..
Didn't regular Army boycott Pmags in 2010ish time period . I remeber reading an article about it years ago online but never knew if it was actually true..
Yes, The Army didint allow Pmags to be sold on post I think for a short time, along with some other AR15 type items. I think it was a very brief period, never effected SF.
For a general purpose ball ammo it’s great stuff.
Big Army needed a more environmentally friendly round.
They got their more environmentally friendly round but the guys pulling the trigger got something that’s more accurate and that is more lethal.
Jeff, outstanding review of the M885A1. My first experience with A1 was in 2013 in Afghanistan. Has anyone else witnessed corrosion and tip separation on the 855A1?
Well plenty of oxidation or corrosion, never saw it effect performance.
Great video, thanks
The ammo change was some REMF’s OER bullets point for the year, did nothing to change lethality from my experience.
We switched the new “improved” round in 2010 towards end of our deployment. Saw no difference in terminal effect, only way we knocked anyone down with 556 was to hit CNS. Hips and heads were the only guarantee knock down we found, inside 100ish yards they tumbled and caused good effect. Past 300 you’re pissing in the wind, if you hit the guy they’d barely react , a through and through pin hole wound which would slow them down a bit but that’s it. We’d find blood trails and drag marks but find no bodies consistently, they were so doped up on pills they’d get away. Every time we got in a good fight we’d see multiple funerals for the next week, they’d police their brass and bodies throw them in wheelbarrows cover with grass leave the area. Our air support would report seeing an arm or leg dangling from the wheelbarrow but couldn’t get clearance to engage, they knew our ROE and would exploit them. We figured out real quick if we pinned them down with accurate fire and called in air/arty we had their asses, .50 and 40mm even had limited effect on the mud walls but made it easy for air to locate and eliminate them.
Never used the Navy 77gr load but, 9mm will punch through car doors at handgun range, 556 at close range has “predictable” deflection at the right shot angles.
Can’t give any info on its effectiveness against hard surfaces because I never encountered or tried them. If the enemy is wearing armor it’s time to shoot hips and heads anyhow and the most accurate round is what’s needed.
M118 from our dm rifles was much more effectIve at stopping fights, nearly 3x more bullet weight than 556 green tip.
You mentioned wheelbarrows for dead and wounded.
....I saw this first hand myself too
@@ModernTacticalShooting Yesr, most the guys we fought were disciplined enough to lay blankets down and police their brass and dead. We could always tell the foreigners from the locals. They would run 2 rpg gunners, a pkm, and couple flankers with ak. Just like I read about in Vietnam if they were running ak full auto you could just about stand up and walk to them. The pkm will put you behind cover quick, on rare occasions we’d encounter a dishka and that’s a scary sound for sure. If it was a locals they’d have an ak couple mags maybe a cellphone. Foreign fighters had serious ammo, maps/documents, phone and/or radio, actual kit. Weapons that were maintained and a bag full of pills. A guy who’s jacket up on anti depressant and a amphetamines will fight with no fear or feel pain. Locals would take a few shots and run off, our biggest headache was the kids with mini grenades. Bad guys would find 2-3 kids pay them to parallel us and toss a grenade over the wall. If we couldn’t roll them up quickly they’d drop/ditch them. They were smart enough to wait till pomegranates came into season before they got bold. It was nothing to see a kid with a bag them and a grenade in the bottom, if the kid drops his bag when you approach he’s riding dirty. It was always the 8-12yr olds they put up to it.
That DIY high cut at 18:27 is a thing of beauty.
I'd like to watch one video from you that is not negative about anything related to our military or major firearms and ammo manufacturers. But still fun to watch.
I grew up shooting my grandfathers 1964 Colt SP1 AR-15 (Serial #191) he bought new in 1965. My father also had a 1972 Colt SP1 with a Colt 3.5X scope on the carry handle. I typically only shot with Irons however.
All my AR’s are 20” Rifles, most with a Fixed stock, a couple with Collapsible. I have never had a single Jam or failure out of any 20” Rifle length gas system AR.
If the DOD wants to improve the M4, it’s VERY simple. Don’t buy new rifles, buy new UPPERS.
Specifically MID-LENGTH upper receivers (Possibly Free Floating) and a minimum 16” barrel.
Or do what the Canadians did and compromise between Carbine and Rifle. Go back to the 20” barrel, and add Collapsible stocks. Drop the ‘Burst’ and go back to FA.
I loathe(d) my M4. The TRASH Carbine length Gas system, chopped down barrel from 20” to a 14.5” (losing velocity) plus adding a heavier 62gr pill (More loss in Velocity).
I was one of the Designated Marksmen in my Platoon and for a time i was issued a M4 that had a variable magnification scope and suppressor in an attempt to DMR the M4. (This was very brief). The Suppressor only made the M4 more stubborn and I typically wouldn’t use it.
Some of ANA that ran with us had Fixed carry handle M16A3’s/M16A2’s. I wanted that rifle. Badly. And for a time I actually was able to carry one with an ACOG mounted on the carry handle in a DMR role. They didn’t have a rail system like the Marines and their M16A4’s but I made do and was happy to have a Rifle, and it was effective in my DMR role.
I was eventually issued the Mk14 EBR 7.62 with what I think was a Leupold 3.5-10X or 12X scope. The perfect DMR rifle at that time. Will always love it.
20:46 FYI those strikes aren't below the feed ramps....the infamous M4 feed ramps were scallops (ramps) that cut into the receiver itself to extend the ramp from the barrel extension. These extended ramps are obviously softer aluminum so that's why the steel tipped A1 was chewing them up. I do agree tho it was mostly magazine issues
Great video but we need the story behind the photo at 14:14 lol. Love the content!
Bad driving,...Was not me
The 855a1 suspiciously arrived for us when the ana turncoats tried to take over BAF.
I really love your channel.
The image posted at ~22:38 where the nose of the round dug into the receiver appears to be a gun issue not a mag issue. You can clearly see the barrel extension is too far into the receiver. Appears to be an M4 notch/feed ramp on the barrel extension but hardly any M4 feedramp on the receiver. This is something you have to watch for when using M4 vs non M4 feed ramps on the receiver. That setup is literally asking for the rounds to cause issues there.
My understanding that is a magazine problem. That issue was supposedly fixed with a new follower design. They're baby blue if I remember correctly.
In my experience, M193 outperforms M855 in terms of accuracy. Putting a bunch of different materials in a bullet doesn’t exactly improve consistency.
Love your knowledge on this bullet! But one goal WAS met: Lead free.
Very well done.
As a civilian, I only use 55gr. and/or 77gr. bullets depending on the application.
Yes now that I'm out. I find the best ammo for cost and good accuracy is PMC Xtac 55 grain
m855a1 is all I use now. it's an incredible round.
When we adopted the M17 and the M1152 Ball it has an exposed lead base. A concave base that exposes more lead than the old 882.
As far as lead, they went literally backwards.
I carried a Mk18 with 77 gr mk262, got a hold of the M855A1 after arrival in Camp Brown and before moving to TK and other VSO camps between Cobra and TK. There was no noticeable shift from the zero I had with mk262 at 100 meters and could use the same holds all the way up to 400 meters to hit an ammo can. I say it was pretty accurate compared to M855 and decent compared to mk262.
VSO...Horrible idea
@@ModernTacticalShooting lucky for me, I was just delivering and installing new equipment, showing the snipers how it worked and moving on. The VSO was not an easy mission for sure.
Gotta buddy who tested weapons at FN. They started failing mil requirements for barrel life once they started tests with the m855a1.
Take it for what it's worth, but the anecdotal evidence of several thousand weapons tested gave around a 35-40% decrease in barrel life.
I personally have no use for it. Especially since the accuracy (in my shooting group) will be neglible on man sized targets and I'm not willing to sacrifice my barrels since I buy them.
what I liked most about afghan mud houses were that you could shoot anywhere inside pretty safely, so you didn't have to worry about backdrop or over penetration so much
Glad to see they appear to have overcome the accuracy and "component separation" problems experienced during development.
In my 4 combat deployments to Afghanistan with 10th Mountain I only encountered 3 enemy combatants that were wearing some kind of body armor. 2 were outdated steel plates and one was a late 80s US issued flak vest. These dudes needed to be highly mobile in the valleys and mountains so there was rarely any body armor worn. That new round was a solution looking for a problem.
Yeah, because we'll never fight anyone fighting armor ever again /sarc
Better bone up on what's happening in China and the changes not for the betterment of humans.
My experience over the past 10 or so years with it is it's no more accurate than the old green tip. Does is go through car doors well, yes however so did the old stuff. It's just ball ammo with spiffy marketing nothing more nothing less.
For getting through the Kalat walls we found "pick and hammer"(.50 & 40mm) was the best way to get through it if you weren't running tow-2 BB.
That's nonsense. M855 was terrible on ballistics gel and M855A1 was amazing.
If anyone misses with M855A1, you're either using the wrong barrel twist or you can't shoot.
Considering that M855A1 is 62 grains, which means it wants a 1/9 barrel twist......
@@Seth9809 I have great accuracy with 62gr 5.56 and .223 out of 1:7 barrel. 55gr mil-spec ammo shoots 1”-1 ¼”, 55gr varmint ammo(Hornady, Sierra) shoots 1” or a tad less. I have noticed that .223 tends to have better accuracy, as long as I stay 55gr or heavier. I just got some 73gr loads to try.
When I worked at the Pentagon, HQDA spent $1.4 million to decorate about 100 feet of hallway outside a general’s office. $100 million is a steal for something actually useful.
Just one small point I would like to make is that the new 6.8x51 cartridge for the NGSW is not “6.8 ARC”. It’s more commonly known as “.277 Fury”. Awesome video on a round unknown to a lot of shooters.
"Advanced Rifle Cartridge"?
@@Laotzu.Goldbug Yes, that’s what ARC stands for in the above comment. If you google “6.8 ARC” nothing pops up for it. It is all 6.8 SPC and 6mm ARC. Why? Because it is not called 6.8 ARC.
@@creekochee3592 that's what I thought. So oes it have an official DoD designation at this point? I know that ".277 Fury" is the commercial trademark that Sig is selling it under on the civilian market, but I don't think that the Army is going to be calling it that...
@@Laotzu.Goldbug It’s not what you thought because 6.8 ARC would be copyright infringement on Hornady… in my comment I was quoting the video, I thought you were asking if that’s what “ARC” meant in my comment. It is not called that.
More than likely, it will be called 6.8x51 because the DoD doesn’t assign anything other than metric caliber measurement. Colloquially, by the people who will carry it, probably just 6.8 or 6.8 Fury.
@@creekochee3592 well 6.8x51 will be the measurement but not the _designation_ for the cartridge. I'm referring to something like M193, M855, etc.
The inability to use M855A1 on certain targets and whatnot is pretty much why I, as a civilian, couldn't even bother to care about acquiring M855 or M855A1. I can't use them at an indoor range, and outdoor ranges with steel targets won't allow them, so my best bet is to horde M193 and MK262-like ammo. It's kind of interesting that the military ends up with some of the same problems we have.
Military not testing M855A1 in all aspects of training prior to adoption= buffoonery
The majority of my ammo is M855 Green Tip. I have half as much in M193, and then 100 M855 A1 for good measure. If I ever have to engage (hopefully not) in any more combat shooting it would only be in CONUS as my military days are behind me. I think what I have is probably overkill for that sort of native soil scenario. I'm shooting out of a 16 inch AR with an LPVO and offset red dot. I've only shot it out to 100, and at that junior varsity distance it is sub MOA to MOA with all three types of ammo.
I think it'll do for my needs.
Great video!
my mk12 inspired clone has a 18 inch barrel and I have steel at 65 yards.. the m855 is stopped by the steel, the m193 zips right though like nothing
@@soup31314 My experience with the 16 inch at 100 yards matches yours.
$100,000,000 to develop this round? holy crap you think anyone lined their pockets with some of that money 💰
I work in US Army Range Control.
Yes the EPR round is excessively lethal. We have to redesign our shoot houses due to it punching thru AR-500 steel.
It’s Range Operations now!!!!
I’ve been told on the radio.
I’m so happy this isn’t one of those channels with silly gimmicks, stupid expressions, unnecessary hyperbole and horrific “comedy”.
Considering how much money we send to other countries that’s money well spent compared to the usual spending
I love these videos
FWIW, I bought a box of green tip M855 and fired it at 100 yards from my AR-15 with a 20" bbl and 1in8 twist, which is quite accurate with handloads. My handloads of 52 grain match bullets generally shoot a bit less than 1" for 10 rounds on a good day. The green tip however was more like 2" for 5 round groups (limited ammo supply). Green tip velocity was about 3250 fps, 150 fps faster than my handloads.
Thanks Jeff.
Without being military (outside of ROTC, was RE4 due to an eye injury) I can say based on the ballistic data and combat reports plus personal testimonies from soldiers I have talked to that YES it was worth the 100 Million Dollar Switch.
M855A1 EPR is more than just a new 5.56 and 7.62 round (M80A1 EPR is the 7.62 NATO version)... this new round is THE GENERAL PURPOSE design for the foreseeable future. It improved accuracy, GREATLY improved barrier defeating performance, and also better armor penetration even though its not an AP round, the design just makes it better at it, and finally its TERMINAL performance is superb with how it shreds the jacket and creates multiple permanent wound cavities in the target, all while adhering to the Hague Convention standards that we never ratified in the first place.
Crazy how MK262 is the only obvious choice. Both big infantry’s should have adopted that and been done with it.
I think the Army and Marines were put off by the price of it. Wonder if they could’ve gotten the price down by ordering a whole bunch of it at once.
@@JG54206 it’s possible. I also think it’s gotta be more complicated than I can understand. Black Hills might not have wanted to do it in massive quantities or let someone else do it with them. Who knows.
MK262 under penetrates after hitting barriers. If you look around on Google images, there is a photo of MK262 penetrating literally only 4" after hitting a loaded AK mag at 3 meters. M855 does better than it in that respect, and M855A1 much better
@@Whiskey.Tango.Actual Black Hills has come a long way. But I don't think they have the capacity for huge ongoing contracts like Lake City or other almost unknown plants.
@@KP-ty9yl that's fine. But I usually shoot for the face.
It's a lot easier to find ammo or a loading to shoot well in a barrel, then to find a barrel a load will fire well out of. If you have 50 to 100 uppers with different barrel lengths and twists, but you can also get a big difference between barrel manufacturers for same length & twist, let alone same line of barrel.
I think M855A1 is the best performer for home defense if you aren't worried about over penetration. I wouldn't use it if I lived in an apartment or a house not made out of brick with neighbors.
Really interested to see this available to civilians at good prices per round. Use a PMAG genM3 and it could be a great SBR round/GPR round.
Would you say the mk262 or the M855 was more lethal in combat as far as terminal effects? Great video, love the content! Looking forward to the next video
Well its actually hard to say, in theory via gel tests and other studies based off bullet weight and design one could draw a conclusion as a few people have already responded, I am wrong in my assessment of it terminal effects. In real life if a shot stops a threat from trying to kill you its a success, shooting targets at distance once a threat is wounded they usually run away or die sometime later. But up close, most all 5.56 acts the same, and it takes anywhere 2-10rds to see a response from one's shots on target. You dont have time to look for a terminal effects response from the threat, hence training to drive the threat down with long string of fire.
My NG unit has those tan epm mags. When we were doing the riots in Minneapolis we got issued pmags also.
I have great groups results using m855. not sure where the bad accuracy rumors came from unless its shooter error or a faux m855 manufacturing process. thanks for the cool vid.
During the Surge period in Iraq I remember reading the reports that the Army was accepting M855 batches that failed the accuracy specs due to the need. Maybe it was a bigger issue when massed production had to double-time it.
@@ChucksSEADnDEAD sounds very possible. crank em out. QC goes down.
The best consistent accuracy I've ever had was about 1.5MOA. I've shot a small handful of sub-MOA groups, but those aren't normal.
M855 was never designed to be accurate. It's not a myth that it's not very good, it's by design.
Very, very good video and range testing. I was disappointed the 6.8 SPC in 110gr - 120gr wasn't adopted or even a 6.5 SPC variation. The recoil wasn't bad and if it had been a thin jacket fragmenting HPBT Sierra with cannelure, it would been good. It struck the sweet spot between 5.56 and 7.62. It never took off. The MK262 mod 1 ballistics are outstanding.