I was talking to a friend yesterday who said he was told that 223s with FMJs are good game bullets because they always tumble and create large wound channels. Iv'e read articles in the past debunking this theory, and recall that it was an issue early on with our troops in Viet Nam.
Anyone have a link to a somewhat comprehensive discussion on this issue. thanks
I almost freaked when I looked inside the forearm half of my Basic Training (Army) M16A1 and it read "Made by Mattel". I also noticed how a not so hard wind would blow my bullet off the 300M silhouette about 3 ft! The wind at Grafenvoehr, Germany blew it 6 feet over, onto the next grunts target! I kept an eye on the spare M60 in the supply truck in case those Krazy Ivans came across the border!
Early M16's had a 1/14 twist rate. The 55gr ball round was known to tumble after impact. The M16A1 had a 1/12 twist, it was also known to tumble bullets after impact.
The M16A2 and later have 1/7 twist. Tumbling is probably not so prevalent with the faster twist, but the bullets are known to fragment at higher impact velocity, I believe around 2500+ fps.
Some of the Anti-gunners are claiming that tumbling 5.56 FMJs are soooo much more lethal than any other available bullet of any weight or diameter. James Fallows at Atlantic Online has been thumping the tub for an AR ban since February(at least) and has repeated that tumbling business in support of his claim that ARs were designed as "military killing machines of unusual lethality". Fallows, having been in the service in Viet Nam considers himself quite the expert on the ballistics of .223/5.56 mm FMJ service loads.
I have seen the XM193 55 grain bullet tumble and break up on game many times. Sometimes it doesn't happen and you get a not so straight thin wound channel.
Some of the Anti-gunners are claiming that tumbling 5.56 FMJs are soooo much more lethal than any other available bullet of any weight or diameter. James Fallows at Atlantic Online has been thumping the tub for an AR ban since February(at least) and has repeated that tumbling business in support of his claim that ARs were designed as "military killing machines of unusual lethality". Fallows, having been in the service in Viet Nam considers himself quite the expert on the ballistics of .223/5.56 mm FMJ service loads.
Sorry, but that guy sounds like a "piece of work."
Honestly, I see absolutely no use, for me at least, for FMJ bullets. I do not understand why anyone would want them. Solids in a 416 yes, solid cast bullets yes, but FMJ doesn't make any sense at all unless having to follow a Geneva convention or something.
Any pointy FMJ bullet is prone to destabilize and tumble when it encounters resistance on the front end. All the weight is in the rear. Apply the front brakes and naturally the rear wants to come around. That's why FMJ's/solids intended for heavy African game and deep, straight line penetration are all blunt nosed.
That was the bull that we were told in Jarhead land, when we were given that POS called a M16.
And then someone fixed a few minor issues that all new guns have when they come out and even the jarheads realized the platform was solid enough that it lasted longer than the M14, in fact so much so that its lasted 50 plus years or so....
don't have a reference handy, but I read at one time that there was more of the projectile coming apart at the cannelure than tumbling. some thought that a cannelure would give you fragmentation in a bullet that still met the standard of the hague Agreement or Geneva convention?
don't have a reference handy, but I read at one time that there was more of the projectile coming apart at the cannelure than tumbling. some thought that a cannelure would give you fragmentation in a bullet that still met the standard of the hague Agreement or Geneva convention?
Fackler mentions the breaking at the cannelure and fragmentation of the rear part.
don't have a reference handy, but I read at one time that there was more of the projectile coming apart at the cannelure than tumbling. some thought that a cannelure would give you fragmentation in a bullet that still met the standard of the hague Agreement or Geneva convention?
That was part of the same study from which Tyrone posted pictures above.
In general out of a 20" barrel and under 200 yards the M193 projectile with cannelure will fragment. The M855......not so much unless it's going through equipment, such as a chest right full of magazines first.
I almost freaked when I looked inside the forearm half of my Basic Training (Army) M16A1 and it read "Made by Mattel". I also noticed how a not so hard wind would blow my bullet off the 300M silhouette about 3 ft! The wind at Grafenvoehr, Germany blew it 6 feet over, onto the next grunts target! I kept an eye on the spare M60 in the supply truck in case those Krazy Ivans came across the border!
You shot the next guy's target. Unless the wind just happened to be blowing 60mph, which is what it takes to blow the M193 six feet at 300 meters.
As for Mattel, there's never been any proof, other than anecdotes by guys who claim they saw them, come to the surface that Mattel made handguards (and they sure as hell didn't make M16s).
In any case, when they took away our M-14s and forced the early M-16s on us, we figured they might as well have been made by Mattel. After we handled them awhile, and shot them a bunch, we were even more convinced that they were probably made by Mattel. "You can tell it's Mattel...it's swell!" That was the jingle in the Mattel toy commercials, for you young guys not old enough to remember those days.
We used to tease our fellow Marines about their "swell" rifles.
So much misinformation from the POGs that probably never used an M-16 on personnel targets. Yeah, I heard all the anecdotes about the M-16 and found 99% to be utter BS. Only problem was keeping it clean and did have a Colt bolt carrier crack apart once. The GM Hydramatic Div. rifle was a good un. Happy Trails
Certain FMJ bullets do fragment violently, others do not. I have shots a wide variety of 223/5.56 FMJs into jackrabbits, coyotes, and other varmints. Every surplus or remanufactured 5.56 FMJ in 55gr and 62gr I have shot does fragment at moderate ranges and make great game bullets. In my expersince, any of the bi-metal jacketed bullets don’t fragment at all (Wolf, Barnaul, etc.)
Yeah completely bullchit. Modern 5.56 neeeever tumbles....if there were only a reputable source doing scientific tests to demonstrate the Lazer like path a 5.56 makes when traveling in tissue. It was all a dream...
Messing around on ranges on Ft. Bragg taught me a lot about the M193 ball ammo. Going downrange, you'd often find the bullets laying on top of the ground, bent into a U shape at the cannelure, or in some cases, like shooting up an old target vehicle, sticking halfway out of a tire on an old deuceandahalf. I knew thing would be different on flesh, of course, but I sure wasn't impressed with it's penetrating power on something besides meat. It was a nice lesson to learn. It kept me careful.
I was long gone before the M855 ball ammo came out, so I can offer no opinions on that stuff.
So much misinformation from the POGs that probably never used an M-16 on personnel targets. Yeah, I heard all the anecdotes about the M-16 and found 99% to be utter BS. Only problem was keeping it clean and did have a Colt bolt carrier crack apart once. The GM Hydramatic Div. rifle was a good un. Happy Trails
I found the Colts and H&Rs to be better rifles than the Hydromatics, but they were ALL built to spec, so I suppose you can't really pick on any one manufacturer.
I helped take care of around 300 gun shot wounds 24-36 hrs post wound while in Germany. All manners of FMJ from many different cartridges. My impression is that FMJs are unpredictable in wound size and path. Erratic behavior as compared to a good partition or TSX type bullet. Most wounds were small in diameter but took some crazy paths. In all though, much more survivable than a good expanding bullet.
I almost freaked when I looked inside the forearm half of my Basic Training (Army) M16A1 and it read "Made by Mattel". I also noticed how a not so hard wind would blow my bullet off the 300M silhouette about 3 ft! The wind at Grafenvoehr, Germany blew it 6 feet over, onto the next grunts target! I kept an eye on the spare M60 in the supply truck in case those Krazy Ivans came across the border!
How many targets in any war zone are over 100 meters? Dam few and they are for the other weapons.
] How many targets in any war zone are over 100 meters? Dam few and they are for the other weapons.
Not that his statement was correct, but the above isn’t either. Shots past 100m are extremely common. The issue is the current, as issued, M4A1 and current ammo (M855A1) is not mechanically capable of hitting realistic (8-10”) sized targets past about 100m.
However, a properly setup, modern M4 derivative using ammo that currently is in the inventory IS capable of consistently hitting realistic sized targets out to 600+/- meters.
Whether you want to believe it or not the early M-16’s were a death sentence to US troops. They were POS’s. It had nothing to do with cleaning or oiling. It had to do with [bleep] equipment and [bleep] ammo.
Whether you want to believe it or not the early M-16’s were a death sentence to US troops. They were POS’s. It had nothing to do with cleaning or oiling. It had to do with [bleep] equipment and [bleep] ammo.
If you were not there GFY.
Your post infers you were in Vietnam during the early years. If so, thank you for your service!
Indeed the early M-16s without the forward assist and the deadly combination of the old type oil and dirty ball powder contributed to jamming.
Just my .02$. I think the 5.56 is wicked if the speed is up there, once it slows down.. Throw in the different twist rates and you have an eradic bullet.
] How many targets in any war zone are over 100 meters? Dam few and they are for the other weapons.
Not that his statement was correct, but the above isn’t either. Shots past 100m are extremely common. The issue is the current, as issued, M4A1 and current ammo (M855A1) is not mechanically capable of hitting realistic (8-10”) sized targets past about 100m.
However, a properly setup, modern M4 derivative using ammo that currently is in the inventory IS capable of consistently hitting realistic sized targets out to 600+/- meters.
What's your preferred ammo in the inventory for use in the M4?
I almost freaked when I looked inside the forearm half of my Basic Training (Army) M16A1 and it read "Made by Mattel". I also noticed how a not so hard wind would blow my bullet off the 300M silhouette about 3 ft! The wind at Grafenvoehr, Germany blew it 6 feet over, onto the next grunts target! I kept an eye on the spare M60 in the supply truck in case those Krazy Ivans came across the border!
You shot the next guy's target. Unless the wind just happened to be blowing 60mph, which is what it takes to blow the M193 six feet at 300 meters.
As for Mattel, there's never been any proof, other than anecdotes by guys who claim they saw them, come to the surface that Mattel made handguards (and they sure as hell didn't make M16s).
The issue is the current, as issued, M4A1 and current ammo (M855A1) is not mechanically capable of hitting realistic (8-10”) sized targets past about 100m.
Whether you want to believe it or not the early M-16’s were a death sentence to US troops. They were POS’s. It had nothing to do with cleaning or oiling. It had to do with [bleep] equipment and [bleep] ammo.
If you were not there GFY.
Early version fueled with ball powder wasn't worth a hoot, no argument there. I don't know when the issues were rectified, but per my experience beginning in May of '69 the problems were fixed and I never had a problem with the -16 or CAR 15 in 2.5 years. Never heard a complaint from any of the troops I served with either. Charlie would have bitched probably, assuming he'd lived to tell the tale.
What's your preferred ammo in the inventory for use in the M4?
MK262 Mod1 for distance, 62gr SOST for general purpose. There is ammo that is not available or used by conventional and general special operations personnel that is extremely effective from 0-500+ meters.
M855A1 is acceptable in tissue, but like M855 (Greentip) is extremely inaccurate
Originally Posted by Crockettnj
Yeah?
Yes. Precision spec for M855A1 is the same as it was for M855- 6.8 MOA Mean Radius. Note: that is mean radius, not extreme spread. It was not unusual to get lots of M855 that grouped 8+ inches for 10 rounds at 100 yards. Early lots of M855A1 were better at around 3.5 MOA, however they are getting worse and the last few I have shot were 4.5 to 5 MOA from match barreled guns, and 6+ from M4’s. Combine 5-6 MOA groups with an non-free floated barrel, and you aren’t reliably hitting vitals past about 100 from good positions. Throw a VFG on the rail and use it, or rest on the hood of a truck, or use a a barricade and you’ll get 12-18 MOA shifts in point of impact. That’s all provided you actually got a real zero. The way the Army, Navy, and Airforce zero, and to a slightly lessor extent the Marines ensures that you aren’t going to reliably hit anything between 75-300 anyways. Then combine the current general issue optics (Acoq)..... it goes downhill from there.
In contrast a properly setup M4 (SOCOM Block II, URG-I, etc) with MK262 zeroed correctly will keep it’s rounds in the vitals out to 450-500 yards mechanically.
The m16 is a fine combat weapon. anyone parroting others opinion of the bullets tumbling don't know what they are talking about, I served my time in VN and never had any troubles with the M16. the horrific wounds caused by it were caused mostly by bones being hit and the fragments of bone caused secondary wounding. all this talk of bullets tumbling is pure BULL CHIT by dumb asses. some of the pot smokers would stuff tobacco in the chambers and suck smoke out the barrels, and when they shot the rifles without cleaning them properly they would jam
What's your preferred ammo in the inventory for use in the M4?
MK262 Mod1 for distance, 62gr SOST for general purpose. There is ammo that is not available or used by conventional and general special operations personnel that is extremely effective from 0-500+ meters.
M855A1 is acceptable in tissue, but like M855 (Greentip) is extremely inaccurate
Originally Posted by Crockettnj
Yeah?
Yes. Precision spec for M855A1 is the same as it was for M855- 6.8 MOA Mean Radius. Note: that is mean radius, not extreme spread. It was not unusual to get lots of M855 that grouped 8+ inches for 10 rounds at 100 yards. Early lots of M855A1 were better at around 3.5 MOA, however they are getting worse and the last few I have shot were 4.5 to 5 MOA from match barreled guns, and 6+ from M4’s. Combine 5-6 MOA groups with an non-free floated barrel, and you aren’t reliably hitting vitals past about 100 from good positions. Throw a VFG on the rail and use it, or rest on the hood of a truck, or use a a barricade and you’ll get 12-18 MOA shifts in point of impact. That’s all provided you actually got a real zero. The way the Army, Navy, and Airforce zero, and to a slightly lessor extent the Marines ensures that you aren’t going to reliably hit anything between 75-300 anyways. Then combine the current general issue optics (Acoq)..... it goes downhill from there.
In contrast a properly setup M4 (SOCOM Block II, URG-I, etc) with MK262 zeroed correctly will keep it’s rounds in the vitals out to 450-500 yards mechanically.
Formidilosus,
Thank you, I greatly appreciate you sharing your experience with us.
I had not idea the quality control on our M855 variants had deteriorated to such a degree. I find it pretty pathetic that we send our solders into harms way with such garbage ammo, when it doesn't need to be. I have some Winchester white box M855 I'm still shooting that was surplussed by the Denver Police Department in the late 90's. Out of a match barrel it's consistently 1.5"-2" ammo at 100 yards. The recent lot of the IMI equivalent I picked up from Midway gives similar performance. It's really unacceptable that we, as civilians seem to get better quality control from Midway than what's issued to our troops when American and Allied lives are on the line.
I'm glad to hear you have some good options. Let's just hope the QC on those doesn't go into the pisser as well.
I also noticed how a not so hard wind would blow my bullet off the 300M silhouette about 3 ft! The wind at Grafenvoehr, Germany blew it 6 feet over, onto the next grunts target! I kept an eye on the spare M60 in the supply truck in case those Krazy Ivans came across the border!
![[Linked Image]](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/da/M16_5.56x45mm_wound_ballistics.gif)