Is the 62gr. "green tip" good for anything besides plinking? It seems like the bonded bullets are better for intermediate barriers like auto glass, sheet metal, and plywood. On the other end, high velocity rounds (potentially including M193) appear to be better at penetrating hard armor (like AR500). Does the green tip have a niche? Better at piercing medium steel targets like Soviet helmets or mild steel plate than either the M193 or a bonded bullet?
Are M855 Rounds Good For Anything?
- Thread starter HGM22
- Start date
- Status
Sav .250
Member
Look up M855 ammo reviews..........
I wouldn't think too hard. Buy both. M855 does pretty well at fragmenting at the 100 yard mark by many accounts and will penetrate auto glass with follow-up shots. Plenty of videos showing penetration through various mediums.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HRbAfdoU9vY
M
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HRbAfdoU9vY
M
Acera
Member
For general purpose use, defensive loading and plinking that is all I buy. With online prices hovering around $0.40, that translates to the same price of $5/20 box that most stores sell cheap stuff around here.
Figure it is on hillarys list, so getting all I can ahead of that. See no reason to buy any of the other variations until I am forced to.
My rifles love it.
.
Figure it is on hillarys list, so getting all I can ahead of that. See no reason to buy any of the other variations until I am forced to.
My rifles love it.
.
lysanderxiii
Member
They penetrate 3mm of Rolled Homogenous Armor at zero obliquity out to around 300 meters*.
That's better either M193 and Mk 262.
They penetrate 9.5mm thick A36 mild steel plate at zero obliquity out to about 150 meters*.
That's better either M193 and Mk 262.
And, that's should be surprising, that's what they were designed to do....
________________________
*Vm = 3100 fps
Snowdog
Member
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2002
- Messages
- 4,608
From memory, the M855's 62gr pill develops around 2900+ FPS from a 16" carbine.
The fragmentation range of the M855 (again, from memory) is 2,700 FPS and greater.
So, the M855 should still fragment from a 16" carbine out to at least 100 yards.
Perhaps someone out there have more accurate numbers, but I believe that's about right.
The fragmentation range of the M855 (again, from memory) is 2,700 FPS and greater.
So, the M855 should still fragment from a 16" carbine out to at least 100 yards.
Perhaps someone out there have more accurate numbers, but I believe that's about right.
denton
Member
From the foggy recesses of distant memories....
The original M193 was not the accepted NATO round. Instead, NATO standardized on the M109 62 grain bullet.
At close range, M193 penetrates steel better than a jacketed lead 62 grain bullet at the same speed. The M193 is faster, and speed is essential for drilling holes in steel.
The small steel penetrator in the M855 was added to create a 62 grain bullet that penetrates roughly as well as the M193.
The mission of the M855 is to penetrate a Russian soldier's helmet.
The original M193 was not the accepted NATO round. Instead, NATO standardized on the M109 62 grain bullet.
At close range, M193 penetrates steel better than a jacketed lead 62 grain bullet at the same speed. The M193 is faster, and speed is essential for drilling holes in steel.
The small steel penetrator in the M855 was added to create a 62 grain bullet that penetrates roughly as well as the M193.
The mission of the M855 is to penetrate a Russian soldier's helmet.
MTMilitiaman
Member
IIRC, M855 acheives 2700 fps needed for consistent fragmentation out to about ~50 yards out of the 11.5 inch barreled Mk 18 type sub-carbines, ~90 in the M4-length 14.5 inch barrel, and 125 yards for a 20 inch M16. Velocity is important with these rounds. I would certainly say that beyond these ranges, the 5.56mm may not be useless with these rounds, but for sure without the fragmentation, I would prefer its Eastern rival, the 5.45x39.
Now if you want to load for terminal effect in tissue and effective range with some 75 gr TAP or 77 gr Mk 262 Mod 1, that's a different story.
Regardless, you can see there may be a reason (host of them actually) that the Marines have steadfastly stuck to their M16s despite pressure to adopt the more sexy M4 like everyone else.
Now if you want to load for terminal effect in tissue and effective range with some 75 gr TAP or 77 gr Mk 262 Mod 1, that's a different story.
Regardless, you can see there may be a reason (host of them actually) that the Marines have steadfastly stuck to their M16s despite pressure to adopt the more sexy M4 like everyone else.
Rubber_Duck
Member
Actually the Marines are dumping the rest of their M16s and going with M4s for everybody. I don't have all the information on it but with a bit of googling you should find some articles about it. I have heard of some rounds that will fragment as low as 1800 FPS but I can't recall what type of bullet or who was making it.
C-grunt
Member
M855 is an okay round. It has better intermediate barrier penetration than the M193 out to a few hundred yards. I used it in the Army and never found it lacking. Penetrated buildings and cars well enough. Never seen it lacking in lethality.
The round did have issues with fleet yaw and angle of attack causing it to sometime yaw late in the enemy which reduced its effectiveness. No way to really determine how big of a problem it is as it was different with every rifle. If we experienced it in my unit, no one ever noticed. Im glad it's being replaced because of those issues, even though Ive never seen them.
Personally though I stockpile M193/55grn 223. It works good enough and is usually a good bit cheaper. Plus it's usually a bit more accurate.
The round did have issues with fleet yaw and angle of attack causing it to sometime yaw late in the enemy which reduced its effectiveness. No way to really determine how big of a problem it is as it was different with every rifle. If we experienced it in my unit, no one ever noticed. Im glad it's being replaced because of those issues, even though Ive never seen them.
Personally though I stockpile M193/55grn 223. It works good enough and is usually a good bit cheaper. Plus it's usually a bit more accurate.
C-grunt
Member
funny story. Brother in law and I both served at the same time. He was Marine infantry and I was Army infantry. He carried a M4 and I carried a M16A4.
MTMilitiaman
Member
Hmm, well I'll be...
I gotta say I am disappointed in my USMC. I greatly preferred my A4 to an M4. Though I liked the RCO for its ruggedness, I always thought a different sight would be a better option--maybe one of those ACOGs with the red dot piggy-backing on it.
It's been tested. It's a fact, the M16 runs cooler, cleaner, and smoother than the M4. The M16 is more reliable and more durable. It also gets better ballistics. I am not a fan of the current trend to turn perfectly good rifles into SMGs. I don't care how sexy they are perceived to be, to me, it's like wearing your hat sideways and your pants half way down around your posterior--just fads I'll never understand. I'll usually opt for a real rifle like an M14 over any poodle shooter, but if you're going to issue me a poodle shooter, I'll take the M16A4 over any of them, including the M4.
I gotta say I am disappointed in my USMC. I greatly preferred my A4 to an M4. Though I liked the RCO for its ruggedness, I always thought a different sight would be a better option--maybe one of those ACOGs with the red dot piggy-backing on it.
It's been tested. It's a fact, the M16 runs cooler, cleaner, and smoother than the M4. The M16 is more reliable and more durable. It also gets better ballistics. I am not a fan of the current trend to turn perfectly good rifles into SMGs. I don't care how sexy they are perceived to be, to me, it's like wearing your hat sideways and your pants half way down around your posterior--just fads I'll never understand. I'll usually opt for a real rifle like an M14 over any poodle shooter, but if you're going to issue me a poodle shooter, I'll take the M16A4 over any of them, including the M4.
Rubber_Duck
Member
Well when you have to ride a round in a vehicle with your rifle between your legs you'll come to appreciate and prefer the more compact M4 over the obnoxiously long musket called the M16.
Acera
Member
Remember the military is now using a round that is not available on the civilian market.
The M855A1 is replacing the M855 we can currently buy.
Something to take into account when talking military v. civilian uses and performance.
One thing I see in the future is that domestic production of the 'old' green tip will stop, either by being legally banned or by not having a civilian market justification. From what I have read the A1 round will probably never find it's way on to shelves of the local gun store in any useful quantities.
The next thing is that will leave us with foreign military supplies like the Israeli, British, etc. that we can buy now. A ban would obviously stop that importation, but it may also be stopped due to it's perceived unsuitability for hunting/target shooting through a BATFE move.
I also remember when green tip was a great buy if you could find it at less than $1 each a few years back.
And, yes I see that price being a bargain in the not so distant future.
.
The M855A1 is replacing the M855 we can currently buy.
Something to take into account when talking military v. civilian uses and performance.
One thing I see in the future is that domestic production of the 'old' green tip will stop, either by being legally banned or by not having a civilian market justification. From what I have read the A1 round will probably never find it's way on to shelves of the local gun store in any useful quantities.
The next thing is that will leave us with foreign military supplies like the Israeli, British, etc. that we can buy now. A ban would obviously stop that importation, but it may also be stopped due to it's perceived unsuitability for hunting/target shooting through a BATFE move.
I also remember when green tip was a great buy if you could find it at less than $1 each a few years back.
And, yes I see that price being a bargain in the not so distant future.
.
W.E.G.
Member
A center-mass shot with any 5.56 round will take the recipient out of the fight, no matter what stories you've read about "skinnies" on the internet.
I leave it to the military to decide what round is does the most damage shooting through various types of concealment/cover/armor. They are the ones in that business. I shoot for accuracy. The steel-tip 5.56 bullets are slightly less accurate than open-tip bullets.
I have been known to shoot the green-tip ammo at casual targets for personal entertainment and to generate a supply of once-fired brass. It does work well for that.
I leave it to the military to decide what round is does the most damage shooting through various types of concealment/cover/armor. They are the ones in that business. I shoot for accuracy. The steel-tip 5.56 bullets are slightly less accurate than open-tip bullets.
I have been known to shoot the green-tip ammo at casual targets for personal entertainment and to generate a supply of once-fired brass. It does work well for that.
lysanderxiii
Member
Not quite.
In establishing penetration performance, you establish what is known as V50. This is the velocity that 50% of the shots will achieve complete penetration. This is done by varying the charge weight (and thus velocity) and shooting at a fixed range at a target. Some shots will penetrate, some won’t. After you shoot a statistically valid sample of shots over a range of velocities, you can find the velocity where statistically half of the shot will penetrate. The lower the V50, the better the penetration performance of that bullet against that armor level.
From there, you use statistical methods to calculate the velocity that 100% of the shots will achieve complete penetration, V100. Once you have this velocity, you compare it to the exterior ballistics and estimate the range at which the bullet slows to V100.
M193 V50 against 3/8 steel is around 2840 fps
M855 V50 against 3/8 steel is around 2670 fps
The same is true for all metallic armor, M855 will always have a lower V50.
M193 V50 against 3 mm RHA is around 2290 fps
M885 V50 against 3 mm RHA is around 2000 fps
As to the development of 5.56mm NATO:
5.56mm NATO was created because it was well know that the 55 grain FMJ-BT was not achieving the maximum potential of the cartridge. There were two major schools of thought in the US:
1) A longer bullet would have better exterior ballistic properties, the XM287 was a 68 grain FMJ-BT developed back in the mid 1960's for the Stoner 63 to improve long range performance in the MG versions. The Vm was around 2950 fps. While it starts at a lower Vm, it retains more velocity down range, yielding a better maximum effective range. However, this would require a tighter rifling twist, at least 1-10.
2) Improved bullet structure would improve penetration performance, M2 Armor Piercing ammunition was always preferred combat ammunition over M2 Ball. By making an approximately 55 grain bullet with better internal structure better long range and short range performance could be achieved, but at a higher per bullet cost, but could use the same barrel as the current M16A1.
The second school won out and the US developed the XM777. Basically it was a scaled down version of the 7.62mm Armor Piercing, M61.
The Belgians combined the two schools of thought and came up with the SS109, which had the advantages of both, and well as the disadvantages of both.
Last edited:
Carl N. Brown
Member
My use was in my son's M4 at the modern military matches at the club. Most people I know buy 5.56mm/.223 based solely on cost per round and accuracy at 100 yds from their rifle.
BSA1
member
The M855 is a good choice for long term storage. It has a black sealer to help hold the bullet in the cartridge case and waterproof primers.
600 rounds carefully stacked will fill up a .30 caliber steel military ammo can.
600 rounds carefully stacked will fill up a .30 caliber steel military ammo can.
denton
Member
You are comparing M193 with M855, which is fair enough. But my statement was comparing M193 with a jacketed lead 62 grain bullet. Different animal.
MTMilitiaman
Member
Been there, done that. Actually I usually had the SAW, which was worse. Plus, I am tall enough that I couldn't sit up straight with my k-pot on, esp with the PVS-14 attached. I still prefer the M16A4. It's not as fast in and out of vehicles or through doorways, but that is only a part of infantry duty. For everything else, the M16 is superior, plus, it is a more durable, more reliable, smoother running machine.
lysanderxiii
Member
A 62 grain copper jacketed lead bullet will still have a lower V50 than a lighter bullet of similar construction, by virtue of its higher mass.
Whether, or not, the muzzle velocity is sufficient to maintain the velocity above V100 (the velocity at which 100% will achieve full penetration), is the different animal....
Last edited:
Jackal
Member
Eh. With 5.56 FMJ, I'll take 100fps more speed over 7gr of extra weight anyday. 55gr for me.
denton
Member
Perhaps.
But we know that a 62 grain bullet out of an AR15 cannot attain the same MV as a 55 grain bullet out of the same rifle. So I think the question should be, if a 55 grain bullet and a 62 grain bullet are loaded to their highest MV, which will penetrate better?
The tests I've seen show an M193 (probably just barely) penetrating AR500 steel, and M855 (more likely to penetrate than a simple jacketed lead bullet) bouncing off.
Ackley amused himself by putting 48 grain 220 Swift bullets through 1/2" armor grade steel. In comparison, 100 grain 270 bullets barely scratched the surface and armor piercing bullets left shallow craters. The force a bullet exerts on a target is equal to the rate at which it is shedding momentum. If the force per unit area is above the target's strength, the bullet will penetrate. All that leads me to believe that against steel targets, speed is the main factor in penetration, all other factors equal.
But, I'll be the first to admit that I don't have a lot of data and will wait for more illumination.
- Status
