M855A1 New 5.56 military round. Huge progress in 223 rem. Anyone has tried this?

Status
Not open for further replies.
1stmarine

1stmarine

Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2010
Messages
2,957
Location
On the road again
I never felt shorthanded with the 5.56 but some situations could become a little "tricky". I think that after all Stoner was also right about the small form factor round and caliber even after so much criticism but he was over 50 years ahead of his time.

The new solid bullet designs are changing dramatically the way we look at "the little 223 rem round that could",... including the military.

Read this about the new M855A1. I was expecting something good coming but this is much better than anyone expected. This is huge progress...

http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com...ues-new-m855a1-ammo-to-troops-in-afghanistan/

Anyone has been using this? I wish we had this type of performance when I was in the service.

I cannot wait to try some.
 
AP = armor piercing

AP has at least three separate definitions:
-what the military considers as AP
-what is legally considered to be unlawful "armor piercing handgun ammunition" under US federal law
-and what people like us would typically consider AP

The M855A1 is not considered AP by the military, and I don't believe it is within the legal definition of AP handgun ammo either. But I was under the impression it would not be available to the civilian market anyway. Anyone?
 
They are not designated AP rounds but the steel rod is all about penetration. It does very well with steel and other hard objects. A real issue in urban scenarios when shooting through barriers, wood, brick, glass, etc..
The tests show similar or even improved characteristics compared to the 7.62x51 which is huge. What is amazing too me is that after doing so well for antimaterial they seem to do also so very well for antipersonal use with an improved G1 coeficient that also helps in longer range.

Definitively a winner and a huge score for those behind this development. So KUDOS to them!!!.

Even if I cannot try one I feel very good about this and that some of my buddies still overseas can put them to good use.

Cheers.
 
Last edited:
M995 it is. Traditional AP design and purpose in the 5.56 doesn't make a lot of sense. You might get shot 3 times with an AP round and might not even know you got shot depending where it hits (cut clean holes) but this one is a different story.
Standard procedure is to check for holes on your body and buddies back after a fight especially if you have been under suppressed fire like sometimes happens to the gunners that get hammered from many angles.
this one is designed to do its best in both hard and soft targets.
 
But I was under the impression it would not be available to the civilian market anyway. Anyone?
Click to expand...

I haven't seen any yet. It will be awhile before any surplus would be available, and I doubt it ever will with the current administration or anyone who is likely to replace him in charge, but I'm sure with all the interest in "tactical shooting" and whatnot that some ammo company will see the profit potential and start selling some, or making their own version of it. I imagine either way it will not be cheap, as it looks like there is probably a fairly complicated process in swaging the bullets. Also all the buzz about it in the AR community will cause the price to be higher due to buyer hysteria.

I would like to try some out myself, but I won't pay some ridiculous price for it.

I don't know how worried I would be about it tearing up my steel, either. In my experience the current M855 "penetrator" rounds don't crater steel any worse than 7.62x51 ball, and they also have that steel penetrator in front.

As for how they got a higher velocity even though the bullet takes up more of the case, I imagine it is because it is a lighter weight bullet, being made partly from copper and steel, which weigh less than lead.
 
The M855 will do just fine for us the mortals but as soon as I see some of those new babies on sale that would be the first thing to grab a good bunch.
One side is curiosity the other is to have the "go" AR systems with the best round one can have.

These are some of the questions I got from folks:

A) Propellant? SMP-84 ...this is slightly faster burning than the WC-844 used in the M193 and M855. They also say it is cooler burning, cleaner and no flash. From here "it looks and smells" like another totally new development from the old Winchester engineering for the military but it is hard to say.

B) Is the bullet harder to produce? Well, not necessarily. IMO having a bullet with that open cup and the cast arrow tip might well make the swagging process faster, easier and more precise.

C) How they can increase velocity with a longer bullet? that is where the new powder development comes into play. The case is exactly the same. Military chambers provide generous leads and the hard 5.56 casings are rated to 62K+ PSI anyway so pressure should not be of any concern.

D) How a longer bullet with the same weight and low sectional density can produce much better results? It is all about the design for terminal ballistics and not the traditional thinking from decades ago where the performance was restricted by the materials and technology.

E) Primer is the same, I think nr. 41 with crimp.
 
by the way 68wj thanks for sharing...

These guys seem to have different bullet but ..yes! very similar and the same principals for design.
I wonder if they have licensed the military or sold some royalties.

This is the video....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ap8O9ArPjWg&feature=player_embedded#!


This is the amazing 110gr 5.56 tungsten bullet.... 0.6 G1 BC !!! This is in line with some similar developments in Europe...

shapeimage_8.png
 
Last edited:
So I have been considering a rifle in 5.56x45 for my first AR rifle. How does this new 855A1 compare to the MK318 mod 0? I am a bit confused, because my reading has said that the MK318 is the new round to be used. It was used by special ops and USMC for some time, then ordered for the general military. Can someone clarify this?

Thanks
 
unlimited4x4,
I think the MK318 was a nice improvement but the M855A1 seems to be the ticket. The results are impressive, nothing like before.
I do not know anyone that would hold investment in a nice 5.56to see if MK318 or M855A1 become available. Other options are there for civilian use that offer huge advantages over traditional FMJ designs.
For example the glass deflection issue is not a problem for the barnes 62gr TAC-X BT or even the TSX and it is an amazing performer for many things including hunting pigs and deer. And you know what is good for pigs is goof for defense too. If you do not mind reloading that is affordable but I think barnes ammo is pretty good too.
There are other good makers and designs. If you want more horse power the 6.8 is a great option but again, you will have to look for bullets that have good terminal performance. Raw power alone is not the solution, it helps but the actual bullet, its external and terminal ballistics is the actual medicine and the solution. Also keep the weight down so one can carry more fire power that is why the small from factor AR was created for in the first place.
The AR was created for the round and not the other way around.
Stoner was very clear about this and other fundamental design aspects.
 
It all sounds kitschy in the article.
What that bullet actually does is meet the military requirement for a "green" environmentally safe bullet design.
 
Hell, I heard the military was working on some sort of electric ignition and powderless cartridge cases to protect everyone from harmful pollutants and fumes while the eco friendly bullets are killing them!

Yes friends, the world has truely gone insane!;)
 
The article is a year and a half old. Just out of curiosity, do we have any first-hand accounts on effectiveness from the field yet? Has anyone actually seen these fielded yet?
 
I havent shot this new round, but in theatre last year we got ahold of the mk318 and it seemed to us that it worked better than M855 green tip. Interested in seeing these
 
I live just a hr. from lake city & have 3 friends that work there, so I am not saying anything.
 
Onmilo, I hear you man.
Politicians not only they want us to kill the enemy with eco-friendly bullets but they also send us to this 'politically correct' type of warfare.
In WWII took 4+ years to take care of Hitler and with all the technology today took us more than 10 years to take care of Bin Laden? Come on!
Anyway lets stay with the Eco Friendly bullets. I am playing now with the math and the tungsten 223 bullet.
 
Well, the first problem with M855A1 is it doesn't track the ballistic path of M855, which shouldn't be a shock given the increased muzzle velocity and BC; but it basically means all of the existing sights out there don't track M855A1 well past 300m.

I've also read reports from several guys in the industry who claim that pressure levels in M855A1 are on par with a 5.56x45 proof round.

According to DocGKR, M855A1 is better than M855 but still not as good as Mk318 in terminal effectiveness - and there are better options than any of those if you aren't required to use ammo compliant with the DoD's legal department.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Shawn Dodson
  • Locked
Army's Proposed New M855A1 to Use Solid Copper Bullet
2 3 4
Replies
93
Views
42K
Bartholomew Roberts
B
R
  • Locked
Military rounds and there civilian counter-parts?
Replies
2
Views
327
ocabj
O
Keyfer 55
  • Locked
5.56 nato vs 223 rem. Ar 15
2
Replies
25
Views
2K
hdwhit
H
G
  • Locked
.45acp Vs .223/5.56
2 3 4
Replies
91
Views
13K
moooose102
M
T
  • Locked
DPMS Sweet 16 Q's ["Full size" Bolt, .223/5.56, & BUIS]
Replies
9
Views
4K
proven
P
Back
Top