I've been thinking on this issue. Many years ago I had very high lead levels which resulted in my converting exclusively to lead free ammo and just not shooting in confined spaces. Eventually I got it under control and can manage it now without LF ammo. But at the time I acquired a huge amount of Federal XM556NT1 which was the std. issue leadfree frangible round. I've shot some of it but mostly when a frangible round was required. I've never been brave enough to shoot it suppressed. But lately I've been wondering if that's really too conservative and there is some real world experience out there on this issue? Surely some has been launched suppressed in army training etc.

That's a good question. In the user manual for one of my Gemtech silencers, it states that the user ought to only shoot FMJ.

It’s not my decision, of course, but when I’ve been concerned that the bullet won’t be stabilized out of the barrel I fire some at a suitable target material at close distances and check for any signs of excessive yawing.

Use something like manila folder material, not flimsy printer paper, or something that’s even heavier that will clearly show the impact of the bullet. Any holes that aren’t perfectly round would be a cause for concern.

The ballistician Bryan Litz says that bullets can become more stable in flight, and therefore testing at close distances is imperative. I don’t believe, though, it has to be so close that we worry about muzzle blast destroying the target material.

I fire multiple shots because the degree of yaw at a specific distance can vary among shots.

quote:

Originally posted by KSGM:
In the user manual for one of my Gemtech silencers, it states that the user ought to only shoot FMJ.

I can only imagine how ... annoyed I would be to discover that after going through the expense and inconvenience of acquiring a suppressor. And why FMJ only? Is it because FMJ bullets are available only in shorter bullets that would be stabilized more than longer, heavier match grade projectiles? That would definitely be something to inquire about before acquiring a specific can, but like so many things, a new user of suppressors might not even suspect it was something to research.

I have not followed that Gemtech advice. I have not, however, made the leap to frangible.

These rounds are completely stable. Its a very long bullet and partially jacketed. Tracer round length...
When I got them so many years ago I also had the Army manual that advised the army rules on when and how to use them. But since I was in a lead crunch there was no chance I was getting any gas into my face and thus I don't remember if it had any rules about using them suppressed. And like usual I can't find the reference document. In any case its I'm probably not willing to give it a try and risk a suppressor baffle strike.

I have fired a few boxes of Fiocchi Sinter Fire frangible 45 grain ammo through my Wilson Combat 16" 1:9 twist barrel with a Surefire SOCOM Mini2 7.62 suppressor. There were no cycling or baffle strike issues. Accuracy was just OK -- 1-1/4" to 1-3/4" groups at 100 yards. I tried the ammo with the hopes of using it on my AR500 steel at close distances. Unfortunately, it produced dimples in the steel out to 80-ish yards, so I won't buy frangible again.

I initially used frangible 223 ammo in a rifle training course a few months before I purchased the Fiocchi Sinter Fire. I don't know the brand, but I had no issues, and I used the same AR and can as noted above. In the training course we shot downward-angled steel as close at 10 yards away. That steel was pretty well hammered, so I don't know if the frangible ammo had an effect on that steel. We didn't experience any splash from the targets, however.