5.56mm gel test: M855A1 Enhanced Performance Round

A

Andrew Wiggin

New member
3478xnt.jpg



M855A1 "green" enhanced performance round fired from 14.5" barrel AR into calibrated 10% gelatin.

BB: 584.2 fps, 3.3"

Impact velocity: 3,013 fps
Penetration: 19.9"
Retained weight: 24.3 gr
Neck: 0.5"
TSC: 3.5" x 7"

The copper slug from the base of the projectile is the part that was recovered at 19.9" and weighed 24.3gr and measured 0.187" across the middle and 0.409" long.

The steel penetrator tip was found lying on the tarp and weighed 18.9 gr and measured 0.168" across the middle and 0.564" long.

The copper jacket fragmented completely.


Link to video of test


The performance in tissue was far better than I suspected, though not as good as most heavy OTMs like 77gr SMK. Still, those bullets wouldn't penetrate hard obstacles nearly as well as M855A1. Supposedly the pressure is lower now and the velocity of the round I tested is consistent with that, but it's still ridiculously fast.
 
where's you find that stuff? I had no idea it was on public market.

oh, I c now.....

do anyone else think this ammo is being introduced to keep the public out of the mil-spec ammo? I assume this is clearly considered armor piercing.
 
In case anyone wants to know the answer without watching the video, I found it on the range. I even found a live .22lr round that day but no way am I wasting that by shooting it into gelatin.

M855A1 does not meet the legal definition of armor piercing, but neither did M855 when F troop tried to classify that as AP. The DoD also does not consider it AP and it really is not. It probably does have improved performance against hard obstacles over M855 and other FMJ type ammo. It likely would penetrate Level III steel plates simply because the velocity is in the neighborhood of M193, which also defeats Level III steel plates. That super pointy tip doesn't hurt, either.
 
that's cool. I thought the new ammo was 50% + hardened steel. I guess I was told incorrectly by the internet, who woulda thought

I see now it's just a solid copper core. looks like a nice bullet
 
M855A1 falls into the weird area where the steel penetrator and gilding metal jacket clearly meet the constructive definition of "armor piercing" but the "copper slug" which provides the bulk of projectile mass does not.

Performance wise, it does a much better job penetrating steel, even AR500, than M855.

Jimro
 
I was poking around the web to see if any if these projectiles were available to the public.......well, apparently liberty ammunition in Florida owns the patent on this round, patented as EPIC bullet or something. The us army just lost the I.infringement case and owes libert 15.6M for the 200M rounds already made and owes liberty for any future M855A1 made until 2027. I'm sure the government could have saved a huge headache if they just paid them for the patent up front, or could have worked out a contract.
http://www.armytimes.com/story/military/2015/01/21/-liberty-ammunition-m855a1-m80a1/22103351/
 
Andrew Wiggin,

It's in the "Armor Piercing" restriction defined by bullet construction. It comes in two parts, one of which is all about materials made (including brass), the other part about projectiles larger than 22 caliber for use in a handgun.

In the past, the ATF has even pulled X bullets modified by a secondary company to get more explosive results on prairie dogs (opening up the hollow point for better expansion) under the "Armor Piercing" constructive definition. The "copper" is actually "gilding metal" which is a brass compound and so meets the definition of the law.

Conversely, solid pewter handgun bullets cast on common equipment, which will defeat soft body armor, are not regulated because lead and tin are not part of the definition of "armor piercing."

If you really think that there is no obstacle to marketing an M855A1 to civilians, I'd love to buy some from you.

Jimro
 
No, sir. M855 and M855A1 do not meet the following criteria:

constructed entirely from one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper, or depleted uranium.
Click to expand...

or

whose jacket has a weight of more than 25 percent of the total weight of the projectile.
Click to expand...


I don't have the means to manufacture projectiles so you won't be buying any from me any time soon.
 
Andrew Wiggin,

That's awesome.

Now if you could kindly explain to the ATF that 7N6 also has a lead inlay in its bullet construction, and is less than 22 caliber we could get some case law on our side.

https://www.atf.gov/news/pr/test-examination-and-classification-7n6-545x39-ammunition

When ATF tested the 7N6 samples provided by CBP, they were found to contain a steel core. ATF’s analysis also concluded that the ammunition could be used in a commercially available handgun, the Fabryka Bronie Radom, Model Onyks 89S, 5.45x39 caliber semi-automatic pistol, which was approved for importation into the United States in November 2011. Accordingly, the ammunition is “armor piercing” under the section 921(a)(17)(B)(i) and is therefore not importable. ATF’s determination applies only to the Russian-made 7N6 ammunition analyzed, not to all 5.45x39 ammunition. Ammunition of that caliber using projectiles without a steel core would have to be independently examined to determine their importability.
Click to expand...

If you could straighten that issue out I would really appreciate it. Unfortunately the case law surrounding "regulatory agency interpretation" does not give me good confidence in M855A1 being brought to the open market.

Jimro
 
The problem with 7N6 is that it is imported and F troop has a lot more discretion under the sporting purposes clause for imported arms and ammunition. I'm obviously no attorney, but my understanding is they can pretty arbitrarily declare that anything has no sporting purpose.


ETA: to be clear, I don't believe that Lake City M855A1 will ever be sold in any normal quantities to civilians. Federal doesn't own the patent so there would probably be all sorts of weird legal crap involved and the DoD doesn't surplus ammunition anymore. If we were to see any it would have to be made by Liberty or under license by Liberty.
 
Liberty owns the patent only because no government lawyer made a good "prior art" argument against them. I'll always be amazed at the ability of the government to screw up a solid argument. Then again, these are lawyers we are talking about, and the overlap between "Lawyer" and "Gun Person" is not as deep as I would like it to be.

Examples of prior art that would nullify Liberty's 2005 Patent.

1962 Israeli Tear Gas round: http://www.ar15.com/ammo/project/Ammo_Cross_Sections/7.62x51 Israeli_CS 3_resize.jpg

and the old Bronze Tip bullets from the 30s to the 50s: http://i58.tinypic.com/rbwkev.jpg

Jimro
 
That seems a stretch. There is significant difference between those projectiles and the Liberty product. The government's version was obviously a direct copy of Liberty's work. The fact that the concept of a two part projectile existed before might satisfy a prior art argument (again, I'm no lawyer) but the DoD didn't just make another two (actually three) part projectile. They made one that exactly matched the Liberty design.

Like I said, I'm not an attorney so my opinion is largely irrelevant but it seems to this layman that the DoD obviously and intentionally stole the Liberty design and it is my opinion that the government should be held to a tighter standard than private industry.

The bottom line is that the DoD did, in fact, lose the patent case, no matter how we feel about it. Regardless of the reason, they own the patent and as such are free to sell the projectile or ammunition loaded with it to whomever they wish (subject to ITAR, of course).
 
Actually Liberty's patent describes a front and back held together by an open at both ends tube wrapped around the joining area of the front and rear. You can see it in the court documents here, which also say the US Army abandoned previous ammunition to adopt the M855 during the Vietnam War. And from the provided pictures in my previous post you can see that "prior art" existed.

Like I said, someone wasn't doing their homework. https://ecf.cofc.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2011cv0084-112-0

The M855A1 has a traditional reverse drawn jacket, cylindrical rear slug, and steel penetrator. The only difference between a 1930s era Bronze Point hunting bullet and M855A1 is a steel point becomes a steel penetrator, and the lead is replaced with solid copper. Heck, even an old "Anarchists Cookbook" recipe to turn soft point hunting ammo into armor piercing ammunitiong onvolved drilling out the core of the bullet from the tip back and replacing it with a steel nail.

But, you are correct, Liberty won in court. A court that laid down in the facts of the case that M855 was adopted during Vietnam...

Jimro
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top