FMJ yaw and upset performance

[JASmith]

...You have it backwards. It's not the request to publish that causes the view someone is trying to hide bad news. It's the refusal to publish.

Someone indeed has it backwards. Continued strident demands for information suggest that someone suspects that something is amiss.

I repeat, is this the message you want to give the world about the Grendel and its community?

[LRRPF52]

Any military among Western Nations will give a crap about what projectile design Wolf uses in the civilian market, as far as consideration for adoption as a military cartridge goes. If anyone in NATO starts to look at the Grendel seriously, it will be with the understanding that they will spend considerable resources on RDT&E for a dedicated line of standard, tracer, AP, and blank cartridges with specific requirements, none of which will have anything to do with steel-cased Grendel.

On the other hand, countries in that region close to Wolf production may be watching development of steel-cased Grendel ammunition, based on economics, logistics, and so forth. 5.56 is gaining more and more favor among Eastern Europeans and Central Asians for individual weapons, but the Grendel might rear its head in other platforms, and thus, my shameless plug for LMG again...

[stanc]

Someone indeed has it backwards. Continued strident demands for information suggest that someone suspects that something is amiss.

No, it's refusal to provide info that raises suspicion of hiding something.

And I have made no demands, strident or otherwise. I've made one respectful request. The rest of my posts have been to deal with objections by you and others.

You do like to use pejorative terms, don't you.

I repeat, is this the message you want to give the world about the Grendel and its community?

It ain't me sending that message. It's those like you who oppose publishing the gel test.

[stanc]

Any military among Western Nations will give a crap about what projectile design Wolf uses in the civilian market, as far as consideration for adoption as a military cartridge goes. If anyone in NATO starts to look at the Grendel seriously, it will be with the understanding that they will spend considerable resources on RDT&E for a dedicated line of standard, tracer, AP, and blank cartridges with specific requirements...

Of course. But to reach that point, IMO first it must be shown that 6.5 Grendel is capable of sufficient performance with military-type ball projectiles to be worth considering for further development and possible adoption. The Wolf FMJ load offers the opportunity to see how close theory and reality match up.

On the other hand, countries in that region close to Wolf production may be watching development of steel-cased Grendel ammunition, based on economics, logistics, and so forth. 5.56 is gaining more and more favor among Eastern Europeans and Central Asians for individual weapons, but the Grendel might rear its head in other platforms, and thus, my shameless plug for LMG again...

Well, don't just make a plug. Grendelize an RPD.

[JASmith]

...And I have made no demands, strident or otherwise. I've made one respectful request. The rest of my posts have been to deal with objections by you and others...

LRRPF52 has it right -- there isn't much military interest in the gel tests you demand.

Listen to folks who have been in the military combat and development arenas. They know what is doable and what constitutes a credible test.

Every post after the first you made on this topic constitutes a repeated demand, especially when the responses uniformly indicate that an answer is not forthcoming for now. I don't care whether you are looking at the Grendel, another cartridge, or a car that I would never own, the multiple demands (not just ONE as you claim) annoys a lot of folks.

Give folks space to get their stuff done and you will likely want to get what you're demanding in due time even though the gel and barrier tests won't make much difference in a military decision.

[stanc]

Every post after the first you made on this topic constitutes a repeated demand, especially when the responses uniformly indicate that an answer is not forthcoming for now. I don't care whether you are looking at the Grendel, another cartridge, or a car that I would never own, the multiple demands (not just ONE as you claim) annoys a lot of folks.

So aside from your convoluted reasoning that my single request is actually a "repeated demand", are you saying that when others oppose what I've written, that I shouldn't reply to their posts and address their objections?

If you and "a lot of folks" found my "repeated demand" (as you call it) annoying, there is an easy way you could've avoided it: by not making repeated objections.

[JASmith]

So aside from your convoluted reasoning that my single request is actually a "repeated demand", are you saying that when others oppose what I've written, that I shouldn't reply to their posts and address their objections?

If you and "a lot of folks" found my "repeated demand" (as you call it) annoying, there is an easy way you could've avoided it: by not making repeated objections.

Yes, you should politely acknowledge that a substantial majority of posts do not concur with your logic and move on to a topic where concurrence is possible.

I don't want to count the number of posts you have made that constitute this repeated demand, but I'm willing to bet it's on the order of 50. Repeating the claim that you made only one request in the face of the number of posts you've made on the topic is disingenuous at best.

[stanc]

Yes, you should politely acknowledge that a substantial majority of posts do not concur with your logic and move on to a topic where concurrence is possible.

With you taking part? Now, that's hilarious!

[JASmith]

Well, if the shoe fits...

[BluntForceTrauma]

Gentlemen, gentlemen, please. . . . Deep breaths and cold beers are in order. . . . Let's please drop the back and forth.

John

[bwaites]

Stan, we all would love to have gel pictures. But they aren't going to happen until we have production ammo.

Lets review.....

1) The case itself is in testing to determine safe pressures with available projectiles and powders.
2) The final projectile hasn't even been decided on. Multiple projectiles are being used for the case testing.
3) The final pressure and velocity for the bullet you are concerned with hasn't been decided.
4) The powder used for the projectile hasn't been determined.
5) There is no intention for this bullet/cartridge combo to be a military cartridge, its a plinking ammo cartridge, albeit one that has an obvious similarity to some previous art of military cartridges.
6) Terminal ballistics are a consideration, but only one of several which also include: Cost, availability, accuracy, and consistency. BUT above all, COST. This has to be a cheap bullet to make, or the price on steel case won't come close to target.
7) It makes no sense to publish testing on anything but the final product and production ammo. Why publish data on that projectile at velocities that may not meet the production ammunition criteria.
8) Since AA still doesn't know the safe pressure levels, it's impossible to simulate the velocity data and give real world estimates of projectile velocities.
9) Once again, the intent of this ammo is to come in at close to suplus ammo prices. That predetermines that the projectile probably won't be state of the art!
10) Once again, this isn't a military or LEO driven load, its a plinking load.

I've talked with Bill at length about the ammunition. He's assured me that eventually we will have pictures, but not until we have production ammo.

That said, there is little more than can be gained from this discussion until we have actual production ammunition, so lets all take a break, and reconvene when Wolf deigns to bring it to market!

I will promise that if no pictures are forthcoming from AA, I have several friends who have developed the ability to do gel testing, and I'll impose upon them to run some tests with this ammo and I'll publish the pictures.

[stanc]

The final projectile hasn't even been decided on. Multiple projectiles are being used for the case testing.

If the Russkis are not set up to produce any bullets other than the 110gr FMJ, there would have to be significant problems to warrant a change. That's because such a change would add to the cost. Given the priority to keep cost to a minimum, it seems almost certain that the 110gr FMJ will be in production ammo.

" Until the production cartridge is ready and testing is complete, the final bullet won't be set in stone. What we know is that it will be an FMJ, probably of 110 grains, and probably with a shape similar to the 107 Sierra."

http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_2_453/20963...1#i1724532

There is no intention for this bullet/cartridge combo to be a military cartridge...

Never said there was. What I say is that it could be used for comparative testing against other lead core FMJ ammo (such as 7.62x51 M80), to evaluate concepts like John's proposal that a 6.5 LMG would be a viable replacement for a 7.62 MMG.

It makes no sense to publish testing on anything but the final product and production ammo.

Non-concur.

Once again, the intent of this ammo is to come in at close to suplus ammo prices. That predetermines that the projectile probably won't be state of the art!

Of course not.

I've talked with Bill at length about the ammunition. He's assured me that eventually we will have pictures, but not until we have production ammo.

That sure isn't the impression he gave when he wrote:

"Public results, given the nature of the round as an economy entry I see this as an entirely futile effort."

That said, there is little more than can be gained from this discussion until we have actual production ammunition, so lets all take a break, and reconvene when Wolf deigns to bring it to market!

No problemo. The futile nature of this and other discussions has pretty much burned out my remaining interest in 6.5 Grendel for military use.

[bwaites]

If the Russkis are not set up to produce any bullets other than the 110gr FMJ, there would have to be significant problems to warrant a change. That's because such a change would add to the cost. Given the priority to keep cost to a minimum, it seems almost certain that the 110gr FMJ will be in production ammo.

There is more than one available option, the 110 FMJ is simply the leading candidate, and unless serious problems are encountered, it will be used. That doesn't preclude continued testing of other options.

" Until the production cartridge is ready and testing is complete, the final bullet won't be set in stone. What we know is that it will be an FMJ, probably of 110 grains, and probably with a shape similar to the 107 Sierra."

http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_2_453/20963...1#i1724532

Never said there was. What I say is that it could be used for comparative testing against other lead core FMJ ammo (such as 7.62x51 M80), to evaluate concepts like John's proposal that a 6.5 LMG would be a viable replacement for a 7.62 MMG.

Perhaps not, but your history and posts in the past have repeatedly focused on the military capabilities and possibilities, as have your articles. I've never seen anything you have written with any other objective. Your history thus indicates your interest. I apologize if you are looking at the FMJ in another bent, but the only real world reason for FMJ is plinking because of their cost, and military because of their required use. You've never indicated any interest in plinking, ergo, you must be interested in military use. (Plinkers also couldn't care less about gel tests.)

That sure isn't the impression he gave when he wrote:

"Public results, given the nature of the round as an economy entry I see this as an entirely futile effort."

You interpreted that to mean that there would be no public release of the gel results ever, I read that to mean that Alexander Arms won't release the testing results until the final bullet selection and production ammo is released. My conversations with Bill Alexander have also confirmed that. It makes no sense to release anything BUT the final production ammunition results.

[stanc]

Re FMJ yaw:

[video=youtube;55CkeT7qdtM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55CkeT7qdtM[/video]

[video=youtube;PGgojSI62pI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PGgojSI62pI[/video]

[Variable]

Any link for those of us who are "embed" blind?LOL

[bwaites]

Any link for those of us who are "embed" blind?LOL

Youtube:

Search "M855 versus Ballistic Gelatin" and "M855 Slower Version". Both uploaded by BrassFetcher

[stanc]

Any link for those of us who are "embed" blind?LOL

Sure thing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55CkeT7qdtM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PGgojSI62pI

[Variable]

Thanks guys.

[LRRPF52]

Looks like what it's done to everyone I've seen shot with it...simply brutal really. I can't recall any clear entrance or exit with most 5.56 wounds that I've seen...just hamburger. I'd like to see an M193 gel test as well. This is why I'm a 5.56 nazi. Will it do this at distance.....nope, but other FMJ's poke little holes through people at distance as well. As long as the 5.56 is above that 2600 fps threshold, you usually see catastrophic hydrostatic tissue separation, even breaking bones that had zero contact with the projectile and projectile fragments. It often just tears apart the tissue so fast, even femurs fracture into a compound open injury with massive avulsion and permanent muscle mass destruction that requires radical debridement and removal of much of the remaining muscle mass as well, if the casualty survives.

[DocGKR]

["The 6.8 developed much of its reputation based on early gel test photos by Gary Roberts using a preproduction Hornady projectile with an "illegal" preformed cavity at excessive velocity. "

This is NOT a true statement, as I have previously noted. There was a batch of Hornady 115 gr projectiles manufactured AFTER our initial SPC testing in June of 2002 that exhibited a larger than normal cavity--we never saw them, shot them, or tested them at our facility. The early AMU 6.8mm ammo we tested was indeed loaded hot, much like AMU ammo in other calibers...

Below are a couple of 6.8 mm Hornady production OTM shot into bare gel from 100 yds away, MV was in the 2550 fps range (certainly NOT an "excessive velocity")--personally this looks like ideal terminal performance, but hey, what do I know...