JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Messages
1,083
Reactions
1,469
New 5.56 round. Lead Free, but they claim a number of performance improvements. Is this the next great thing, or a bunch of eco-hippy crap that will eventually lead to lead free ammo laws?


<broken link removed>
 
I'd vote Hippy on the M855A1. The Marines have gone to a solid copper round (lead-free incidentally) but the Army is holding out for an eco "lead-free". Solid copper would have better penetration than the current jacketed rounds, IMO. But it seems the selection has been politicized to foster some eco-friendliness. Here's a link to a military news article: <broken link removed>


elsie
 
It's an interesting development, I don't know if it will be a panacea for all the "problems" the military keeps having with the standard M855 ball, however I do see it as a step in the right direction. I have a few of these on my desk I ordered as samples and need to do some testing with them, however I'm not a huge fan of sticking with the 62gr requirement the military seems to be obsessed with since the adoption of the SS109 bullet in the standard M855 ball.

As an abstract though, I think the SOST round (which still has a lead core) will likely provide the combat effectiveness the military is looking for. However, since it still has a lead core it doesn't meet the new "green" needs of the USMIL. We need bullets that kill the bad guys with as much mess as possible. The new M855A1 seems to be a rehash of WW1 bullet designs that used a bronze/steel tip to cause expansion of the bullet, the only difference here is it's a solid copper bullet.

I think my opinion is wait and see, if it doesn't pan out because of the "green" component, then hippy crap, if it proves itself to be a real killer in combat, then it's a winner. The limitation we're facing here is how much this ammunition is going to cost being made entirely out of copper. I would much rather see the US switch over to a steel composite bullet with a copper jacket to make it easier on the bore.
 
More lead I say! I think they need to take the SOST round and increase the weight to around 75 grains. Screw the hippies and their eco bull. Bring back the days of pouring used motor oil down the storm grate......ok maybe thats going too far.
 
More lead I say! I think they need to take the SOST round and increase the weight to around 75 grains. Screw the hippies and their eco bull. Bring back the days of pouring used motor oil down the storm grate......ok maybe thats going too far.

Well maybe not down the storm drain but at least on dusty dirt roads. After all, didn't the base oil come from the earth?

As for bullets, I only care that they kill efficiently. Exactly what they were designed to do. Isn't it ironic that the Geneva Convention "outlaws" expanding bullets (hollow points, and the like) for infantry weapons but doesn't address "explosive" rounds like 20 mike mike. For that matter .50BMG does a pretty good job too.

Shoot a "jihadist" with a "dum-dum" and your're a war criminal. Nail him with a 40mm grenade, not just killing him but removing body parts in the process, and it's perfectly OK. Go Figure.
 
I'd vote Hippy on the M855A1. The Marines have gone to a solid copper round (lead-free incidentally) but the Army is holding out for an eco "lead-free". Solid copper would have better penetration than the current jacketed rounds, IMO. But it seems the selection has been politicized to foster some eco-friendliness. Here's a link to a military news article: <broken link removed>


elsie

From the article, referring to M855 steel core..

"both of our M249s opened up instantly, forming a crisscross pattern of tracer that met at the vehicles engine compartment and windshield. Within seconds, riflemen and grenadiers were executing magazine changes while the vehicle kept rolling and finally stopped 10 meters from my lead troops," Gillis recalled in an e-mail to Army Times.

Sounds like a win to me, what is the problem? In my tests on sheet steel back in the 1980s the M855 had identical penetration to my very hard cast roundball .66 caliber 12 GA slugs..
 
Wait wait wait....Are we talking about giving a crap what the hippies say when it comes to GUNS? Does no one else see the issue here? When I'm trying to punch big bloody holes in a screaming maniac/OPFOR target I'm certainly not worried about the environment or if he's gonna get lead poisoning.
 
Wait wait wait....Are we talking about giving a crap what the hippies say when it comes to GUNS? Does no one else see the issue here? When I'm trying to punch big bloody holes in a screaming maniac/OPFOR target I'm certainly not worried about the environment or if he's gonna get lead poisoning.

Of course not... the hippies (most are actually communists) always bring up environmental contamination of wetlands and such that affect waterfowl. If that is true (that since they bottom feed they ingest the pellets) then we should use steel or bismuth for goose/duck hunting. War and civvy shooting is not usually done in waterfowl lands so they really don't have a serious basis for the insanity. It is truly a backdoor attempt to disarm us
 
Wait wait wait, I've gotta be missing something here.

Isn't lead a natural element that's found in nature anyways? Why is this such a big deal?

The eco nuts would say yes but it's down in the earth and not on the surface to contaminate wetlands and groundwater. They only have a point concerning waterfowl hunting, IMO
 
The eco nuts would say yes but it's down in the earth and not on the surface to contaminate wetlands and groundwater. They only have a point concerning waterfowl hunting, IMO

...So our military is using waterfowl for their training now, are they?

FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF I HATE HIPPIES

1261995437078s.jpg
 
It's an interesting development, I don't know if it will be a panacea for all the "problems" the military keeps having with the standard M855 ball, however I do see it as a step in the right direction. I have a few of these on my desk I ordered as samples and need to do some testing with them, however I'm not a huge fan of sticking with the 62gr requirement the military seems to be obsessed with since the adoption of the SS109 bullet in the standard M855 ball.

As an abstract though, I think the SOST round (which still has a lead core) will likely provide the combat effectiveness the military is looking for. However, since it still has a lead core it doesn't meet the new "green" needs of the USMIL. We need bullets that kill the bad guys with as much mess as possible. The new M855A1 seems to be a rehash of WW1 bullet designs that used a bronze/steel tip to cause expansion of the bullet, the only difference here is it's a solid copper bullet.

I think my opinion is wait and see, if it doesn't pan out because of the "green" component, then hippy crap, if it proves itself to be a real killer in combat, then it's a winner. The limitation we're facing here is how much this ammunition is going to cost being made entirely out of copper. I would much rather see the US switch over to a steel composite bullet with a copper jacket to make it easier on the bore.
So any word yet?
It seems as accurate as military match ammo (Camp Perry), gel tests show massive and instant permanent wound channels with excellent penetration of the core and it goes through armor like crazy.
 

Upcoming Events

Tillamook Gun & Knife Show
Tillamook, OR
"The Original" Kalispell Gun Show
Kalispell, MT
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top