SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  Mason's Rifle Room    M193 velocity and stories of ammo being downloaded

Moderators: Chris Orndorff, LDD
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
M193 velocity and stories of ammo being downloaded Login/Join 
Peace through
superior firepower
Picture of parabellum
posted
I'm a big fan of M193 ammunition for defensive use in the AR. Most of my ARs are the ubiquitous 16" length. I have a coupe of 14.5" M4 barrelled ARs with pinned/welded flash hiders.

Recently, someone in the forum mentioned M193 being loaded to lower velocities. M193 is rated at 3240 fps out of 20" barrels twisted 1:7. For years, I have seen M193 tested on youtube, and in 16" barrels, the velocity hovers at around 3000 fps, sometimes approaching 3100 fps, depending upon ambient air temperature, height above sea level, and the inevitable variations among rifles and ammunition lots.

I took a look around and I'm not sure I found the answer, but I think I have.

First, here's are videos from Mrgunsgear and Paul Harrell, both of which compare M193 and M855 velocities (and terminal ballistic effect) in ARs with various length barrels. Their findings are what I would expect.






And now, here's a video from a gent I don't know. It seems that ammo manufacturers are stating 55 grains at 3240 fps, but the velocity testing is done in 24" barrel bolt action rifles. On top of that, from what I can tell, the ammo he is testing- Remington and Fiocchi is not even designated as 5.56mm ammo it's marked as .223.



Now, have I found the reason people are saying they are finding that M193 is downloaded these days, or have I missed something? It's difficult to imagine Federal or IMI putting out ammunition marked as M193, but which is loaded to lower velocity than stated.

I have some IMI, but for the most part, I use the Federal M193 in my ARs.
 
Posts: 95703 | Registered: January 20, 2000Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Green grass and
high tides
Picture of old rugged cross
posted Hide Post
Remember the chatter (even here) about the banning of M855 a few short years ago.

That put me in favor of it.

Having something, is better than having nothing. I have always enjoyed variety myself.

It's all good! Wink



"Practice like you want to play in the game"
 
Posts: 16570 | Registered: September 21, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
XM193 works better at putting a serious pause in a hog @ 100 meters and in than the green tip.
I hunt with a 14.5” Colt SOCOM barrel. I don’t have measurements type of equipment but I can attest to what XM193 does to hogs and coyotes at around 100 yards so there must still be enough velocity out of an M4 barrel to allow the 193 to do what it does inside a critter.
I see no need for a 20” barrel on the AR platform. If I want to put down a hog in it’s shadow at 200 yards and beyond then I’m using a different caliber anyway. If it’s a shtf zombie scenario then I’m not giving up my position until the horde is close enough to give it a go with the head shots so again I don’t need a 20” anchor to lug around..
 
Posts: 61 | Location: NM | Registered: May 30, 2020Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Wait, what?
Picture of gearhounds
posted Hide Post
Also, factor in that you lose as much as 400fps at 100 yards with M193 from a 20” barrel. That is a substantial difference on target. It makes you wonder if non-military manufacturers are throttling down to keep the M193 from achieving the devastating yaw and fragment effect the round is known to have at higher velocity.




“Remember to get vaccinated or a vaccinated person might get sick from a virus they got vaccinated against because you’re not vaccinated.” - author unknown
 
Posts: 13030 | Location: Martinsburg WV | Registered: April 02, 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Freethinker
Picture of sigfreund
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by parabellum:
On top of that, from what I can tell, the ammo he is testing- Remington and Fiocchi is not even designated as 5.56mm ammo it's marked as .223.


As you point out there are many variables that affect the ammunition we can shoot in our AR-15s, and one of them is that. Some of my own velocity test results with averages:

August 2020, JP Enterprises JP-15, 18 inch barrel:
19 rounds Federal AE223, 55 grain 223 Remington: 3019 fps.*
10 rounds Lake City M193, 55 grain 5.56 NATO: 3247 fps.
10 rounds Lake City M855, 62 grain 5.56 NATO: 3082 fps.

August 2014, Colt LE6920, 16" barrel:
10 rounds Lake City M193, 55 grain 5.56 NATO: 3039 fps.

March 2014, Tikka T3, 20" barrel:
10 rounds Lake City M855, 62 grain 5.56 NATO: 3065.


I usually rotate through my ammunition by date and shoot the older first, so I can’t say when the different ammunition types and lots were manufactured.

* Although I can shoot 5.56 ammunition with my T3 that’s marked for 223 Remington with no signs of excessive pressure, I usually use Federal AE223 for training with that gun. Federal AE223 might be confused with M193, though, because of similar packaging and bullet weight. The one obvious difference in appearance other than the head stamps is that the 223 cases have the annealing discoloration polished off as usually does other commercial ammunition.




“The fundamental cause of trouble in the world today is that the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.”
— Bertrand Russell
 
Posts: 44492 | Location: 10,150 Feet Above Sea Level in Colorado | Registered: April 04, 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
"Member"
Picture of cas
posted Hide Post
quote:

On top of that, from what I can tell, the ammo he is testing- Remington and Fiocchi..


I bought 1k rounds of Fiocchi once for a large match, I only cared about price as I was only going to use it on the closer range stages. Testing it I could tell it was a weaker loading right away. You didn't need a chronograph, you could feel and hear the difference between it and other ammo.


_____________________________________________________
Sliced bread, the greatest thing since the 1911.

 
Posts: 19069 | Location: 18th & Fairfax  | Registered: May 17, 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Freethinker
Picture of sigfreund
posted Hide Post
Now that this thread has gotten me thinking about the question, is M193 used by the US military at all any more? If not, and despite the fact that manufacturers still make what they label and what appears to be that load, how concerned would they really be about maintaining some specification that isn’t subject to a major contract requirement?

Long ago Evan Marshall stated in a post on another forum (IIRC) that ammunition manufacturers load for pressure standards, not velocity. This is something that’s been discussed here about precision rifle ammunition. At least a couple of us shooters have found that even a quality product like Hornady match ammo can have large velocity variations among lots.

I may have to do some more experimenting and testing with ammunition that I believe was made more recently than my old stocks. But testing for one variable while controlling for all the others can be difficult in itself. The Colt 6920 that I used for the velocity measurements posted above doesn’t have the same barrel as was used then. Although some environmental conditions like air temperature and station altitude don’t have much effect on short distance velocities, the temperature of the ammunition itself does affect things. That’s why I try to keep it from being unusually hot or cold when I test it myself.

Interesting question.




“The fundamental cause of trouble in the world today is that the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.”
— Bertrand Russell
 
Posts: 44492 | Location: 10,150 Feet Above Sea Level in Colorado | Registered: April 04, 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of RichardC
posted Hide Post
I wouldn't have guessed that it would take 35-40 rounds (esp. green tip) to chew through Mr. Harrell's concrete block setup.


_____________________
 
Posts: 13231 | Location: Florida | Registered: June 23, 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Ace31
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by cas:
quote:

On top of that, from what I can tell, the ammo he is testing- Remington and Fiocchi..


I bought 1k rounds of Fiocchi once for a large match, I only cared about price as I was only going to use it on the closer range stages. Testing it I could tell it was a weaker loading right away. You didn't need a chronograph, you could feel and hear the difference between it and other ammo.


Same reduced result with PMC bronze. Frown
 
Posts: 2099 | Location: Wherever the voices in my head tell me to go | Registered: April 08, 2009Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Glorious SPAM!
Picture of mbinky
posted Hide Post
Here is some velocity info taken back in 2013 with Federal XM193:

Colt 14.5” 1/12 twist:

XM193
1) 2875.0 -28.8
2) 2894.0 -9.8
3) 2884.0 -19.8
4) 2911.0 7.2
5) 2955.0 51.2

High: 2955.0
Low: 2875.0
E.S.: 80.0
Ave.: 2903.8
S.D.: 31.6

Colt 20” 1/7 twist:

XM193
1) 3153.0 28.0
2) 3123.0 -2.0
3) 3114.0 -11.0
4) 3119.0 -6.0
5) 3116.0 -9.0

High: 3153.0
Low: 3114.0
E.S.: 39.0
Ave.: 3125.0
S.D.: 16.0

24” Stainless 1/9 twist: (forgot the manufacturer)

XM193
1) 3329.0 -15.4
2) 3332.0 -12.4
3) 3355.0 10.6
4) 3349.0 4.6
5) 3357.0 12.6

High: 3357.0
Low: 3329.0
E.S.: 28.0
Ave.: 3344.4
S.D.: 13.1
 
Posts: 10309 | Registered: June 13, 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
the thing i love about M193 is: using the same load for HD and training / practice

cost is not prohibitive of doing both -- load it -- shoot it -- rinse and repeat

if i was a LE sharpshooter, distance shooter, or needed a higher tech bullet for hunting that would be a different matter

but for GP uses : M193 is a great loading to have a big stock of

--------------------------------------------


Proverbs 27:17 - As iron sharpens iron, so one man sharpens another.
 
Posts: 8692 | Location: Florida | Registered: September 20, 2004Reply With QuoteReport This Post
fugitive from reality
Picture of SgtGold
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by sigfreund:
Now that this thread has gotten me thinking about the question, is M193 used by the US military at all any more? If not, and despite the fact that manufacturers still make what they label and what appears to be that load, how concerned would they really be about maintaining some specification that isn’t subject to a major contract requirement?


The only 'real' M193 is\was manufactured at the Lake City ammunition plant by whomever holds the contract to operate the plant. XM193 is M193 that failed to pass some part of military QA\QC. Real M193 was never loaded in NATO cross marked brass.

Everyone else's M193 is a 55gr bullet running at at an advertised velocity of 3,250 FPS out of a 20" barrel. Most of it is probably running a little bit slower because there is no standard to be held to.

Unless they have been recalled there are still DOD M16A1's out there being used by LEO agancies on a kind of lend lease basis. I have no idea where they get their ammo, but AFAIK the federal military hasn't used 55gr 5.56 in over a decade.


_____________________________
'I'm pretty fly for a white guy'.

 
Posts: 6941 | Location: Newyorkistan | Registered: March 28, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Freethinker
Picture of sigfreund
posted Hide Post
Thanks for that discussion, SgtGold.




“The fundamental cause of trouble in the world today is that the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.”
— Bertrand Russell
 
Posts: 44492 | Location: 10,150 Feet Above Sea Level in Colorado | Registered: April 04, 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
semi-reformed sailor
Picture of MikeinNC
posted Hide Post
quote:
Sgt Gold: Unless they have been recalled there are still DOD M16A1's out there being used by LEO agancies on a kind of lend lease basis. I have no idea where they get their ammo, but AFAIK the federal military hasn't used 55gr 5.56 in over a decade.


A071(M193-55grain fmj) was still in use when I retired in 2011 and there was enough of it to be used for training for 25-30 years forward. It can be used in the M16A2-forward for training in short ranges like the USCG uses (1000inch/27.7 yards) targets because they can’t use or get access to Known Distance Ranges& at that distance the ballistics is good enough.

There was a lot of A071/M193 in storage or prepositioned when A059/M855 was given the go ahead for use in everything but the origina M16 & A1.

I’m sure regular Army and Marine units ran thru their stuff on site within a year and replaced it in the 90’s when they went to the A2,A3 &M4 but huge numbers of USANG units and CG units still field A2s.

As to police units issued M16s, my dept got ten of them and a pallet of M855 with it…dunno why but that’s the ammo they gave us. (The guns came from FtBragg and maybe that’s all the ammo they had on hand) this was back in 2007-8. I retired in ‘17 and I’m sure the rifles were turned into the Army as we never used them-the chief didn’t want full auto rifles given to us lowly street cops. (The swat guys got new semi/full auto m4s on a grant later)



"Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than has any other factor.”
― Robert A. Heinlein

“ You may beat me, but you will never win.” sigmonkey-2020

 
Posts: 8963 | Location: Temple, Texas! | Registered: October 07, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata  
 

SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  Mason's Rifle Room    M193 velocity and stories of ammo being downloaded

© SIGforum 2021