Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 23
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    891
    Downloads
    1
    Uploads
    0

    10½" SBR ammo test

    Ok, fun day at the range. Poor guy sharing my banks of shooting lanes with his College level competition air rifle (ANSCHÜTZ, I think?) had to put up with my SBR unsuppressed (mostly ). But I didn't want to clutter up Molon's thread on the Hornady TAP SBR any more than we did. But there was discussion about the Hornady TAP SBR ammo and how it would run differently in a SBR - all Molon had to test with was a 14½" barrel and supposedly the TAP SBR is designed for 10½-12" barrels.

    Anyways... interesting data. I did NOT do anything for accuracy as Molon can and does do a MUCH better job than I ever could. But, with my magnetospeed chrony I was able to get some good info. I ended up testing a number of different loads:

    Winchester 5.56 55gr FMJ (bulk white box)
    Series, 1, Shots:, 5
    Min,2660, Max,2794
    Avg,2739 ,S-D,51.7
    ES , 134

    Series,Shot,Speed
    1, 1, 2660, ft/s
    1, 2, 2775, ft/s
    1, 3, 2727, ft/s
    1, 4, 2794, ft/s
    1, 5, 2741, ft/s


    my plinking reloads - CFE223 powder with Hornady 55gr FMJ
    Series, 2, Shots:, 5
    Min,2190, Max,2313
    Avg,2220 ,S-D,51.8
    ES , 123

    Series,Shot,Speed
    2, 1, 2313, ft/s
    2, 2, 2200, ft/s
    2, 3, 2195, ft/s
    2, 4, 2190, ft/s
    2, 5, 2206, ft/s

    PMC 223 55gr FMJ
    Series, 3, Shots:, 5
    Min,2322, Max,2433
    Avg,2369 ,S-D,55.9
    ES , 111

    Series,Shot,Speed
    3, 1, 2427, ft/s
    3, 2, 2340, ft/s
    3, 3, 2324, ft/s
    3, 4, 2322, ft/s
    3, 5, 2433, ft/s


    Black Hills 5.56 77gr OTM
    Series, 4, Shots:, 5
    Min,2318, Max,2374
    Avg,2346 ,S-D,22.8
    ES , 56

    Series,Shot,Speed
    4, 1, 2318, ft/s
    4, 2, 2374, ft/s
    4, 3, 2353, ft/s
    4, 4, 2328, ft/s
    4, 5, 2358, ft/s

    Hornady TAP 223 75gr
    Series, 5, Shots:, 5
    Min,2243, Max,2273
    Avg,2259 ,S-D,14.7
    ES , 30

    Series,Shot,Speed
    5, 1, 2243, ft/s
    5, 2, 2268, ft/s
    5, 3, 2273, ft/s
    5, 4, 2270, ft/s
    5, 5, 2244, ft/s

    Hornady TAP 5.56 SBR 75gr
    Series, 6, Shots:, 5
    Min,2170, Max,2188
    Avg,2178 ,S-D, 7.4
    ES , 18

    Series,Shot,Speed
    6, 1, 2184, ft/s
    6, 2, 2179, ft/s
    6, 3, 2170, ft/s
    6, 4, 2173, ft/s
    6, 5, 2188, ft/s

    I was a little surprised at the TAP SBR... I thought it was gonna be faster. But, it is a 75gr bullet and what surprised me more was the data... the SD and ES numbers are outstanding... the consistency was extremely good. I need to work on my reloads to get my numbers down, but in my defense they are just a 'steel plate at the range' plinking round (100yrd). Thi sfall maybe I'll see how it does in the home made gel...
    -----------------------------------------------
    Jim
    "You can never have too many guns" - my wife's actual comment
    Alaska Fun

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,101
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Interesting that the TAP .223 and the Black Hills ammo were both faster at the same weight.

    I thought the point of the SBR load was to be faster out of a shorter barrel. Did I miss something?
    -One Nation, Under God

    -"The bad news is time flies. The good news is you're the pilot." ~ Michael Althsuler

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    5,854
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Aragorn View Post
    Interesting that the TAP .223 and the Black Hills ammo were both faster at the same weight.

    I thought the point of the SBR load was to be faster out of a shorter barrel. Did I miss something?
    I am not so sure if that is the entire story here or not. The idea is for fragmentation or expansion. The bullet design on the SBR load is a blunt nosed soft point. I will speculate but it could be that too much velocity with that type of bullet would cause the bullet to shatter and not really penetrate as much.

    I really have no idea so I am just giving it a SWAG.

    Here is the description from Hornaday:

    TAP® SBR™ is designed specifically for 10.5"-11.5" SBR’s by using proprietary propellant technology and a bullet designed with technology from industry leading Critical Duty® FlexLock® bullets. TAP® SBR™ provides exceptional ammunition performance in SBR’s suppressed or unsuppressed, with virtually no flash or residue, dramatically reduced sound signature, will not foul or overheat suppressors, uniform velocity and accuracy, and provides controllable rate of fire in automatic platforms. Designed to meet the requirements of the FBI protocol, TAP® SBR™ is the optimum choice for 10.5"-11.5" barreled 5.56 rifles.

    The flexlock is supposed to have a tougher core but has the ability to penetrate barriers while still expanding...

    The rest of it is pretty much summed up in the second underlined sentence.

    It would be interesting to see a sound test with it to see if it's any better. If you recall I tried doing an experiment on reducing sound signature by choosing a different powder and I wasn't very successful (but I learned a lot)....

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    5,854
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Aragorn View Post
    Did I miss something?
    To add a little bit more.... Keep in mind I am going totally from memory here but when they tested a series of bullet designs (shot out of SBRs) there was all different types of results in the terminal ballistics category. Bullets like the Sierra 77gr were longer and sleeker and had a thinner copper casing...which made them more uniform and accurate and aerodynamic but when it came to terminal performance the bullets would either shatter or they would just punch .22 holes.

    Bullets like the Nosler CC 77gr were broader and less 'sleek' so terminally it was better. Basically it is a more robust bullet on that front but it also required certain velocity to perform. Same thing with regular Hornaday 75gr.

    Now look at that TAP SBR... its broad and soft point... I could imagine that with the supposed 'more robust' core material (not just plain cheap lead)... they call it "high-antimony lead"... that in ballistics gel this stuff would be pretty nasty at a lot slower velocities.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    5,854
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    I lifted this from an article about shotgun shells:


    "We come now to the hallowed ground of shot hardness. The Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers Institute (SAAMI) tells us that “lead shot pellet hardness is established by the amount of antimony alloyed with the lead in the pellets and is varied by the manufacturer depending on the purpose for which the shotshell is designed.”

    Hardness increases as the antimonial content increases. Shot containing up to 0.5% antimony is generally called “soft shot.” Shot containing more than 0.5% is known as “hard shot.” "


    Edit:

    You can see some gel tests here:

    http://www.hornadyle.com/products/ri.../75-gr-tap-sbr

    Just click the link that says 'Gelatins'

    If you click 'compare rifle' you can get to bigger images in the gel tests.
    Last edited by alamo5000; 17 June 2016 at 20:53.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,101
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Oh I got it now. So it's bullet based performance rather than velocity based performance. More or less.

    I hadn't really dug into it as I don't own an SBR.
    -One Nation, Under God

    -"The bad news is time flies. The good news is you're the pilot." ~ Michael Althsuler

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    5,854
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Aragorn View Post
    Oh I got it now. So it's bullet based performance rather than velocity based performance. More or less.

    I hadn't really dug into it as I don't own an SBR.
    I am no expert but it seems that way to me. Those ballistics gel tests seem to tell a whole lot.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    2,070
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Aragorn View Post
    Oh I got it now. So it's bullet based performance rather than velocity based performance. More or less.

    I hadn't really dug into it as I don't own an SBR.
    I'd say they're related. Terminal performance, especially expansion, is dependent on velocity, but not all bullet designs behave the same way. My read of the TAP SBR round is that the bullet will have acceptable terminal performance for the velocities to which it is loadad. The velocities are lower, I suspect, because they are using a faster burning powder that will be consumed within 10" or so, which sacrifices a bit of velocity, all for the reasons that Alamo quoted above.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    891
    Downloads
    1
    Uploads
    0
    I can't comment on the noise factor, as I have no fancy gear for that other than my hear impaired ears. But I can say that suppressed they did not smoke much, SEEMED quieter, and I wish I had peeked down the barrel afterwards to see if there was any unburnt powder - I've seen some with certain other loads. Next time I take them out I'll try that. I won't be able to gel test anything till fall, since my homemade gel is a little temp sensitive (ie starts melting). I honestly thought I'd get better FPS from the SBR stuff, even with faster powder, but more efficient burn and terminal ballistics is more important to me. I may pull one apart and see what the charge weight is but at a buck a pop I may not LOL
    -----------------------------------------------
    Jim
    "You can never have too many guns" - my wife's actual comment
    Alaska Fun

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Wa
    Posts
    684
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Anybody got a Tap-SBR clone yet ? Iv'e got 6k of 55gr coming tomorrow and these will all be run through a 10.5 in barrel .

  11. #11
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Wa
    Posts
    684
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    BUMP

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    891
    Downloads
    1
    Uploads
    0
    I don't, but I did pick up more powders to try, and just got 2k of 62gr soft points to play with along with the 55gr FMJ's. Going to try some faster powders and see if I can get my load better. Got a slower to if that doesn't work out.
    -----------------------------------------------
    Jim
    "You can never have too many guns" - my wife's actual comment
    Alaska Fun

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Central Florida - Gulf Side
    Posts
    2,219
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    2
    Nicely done Jim, thanks.

    Any comments on POI difference between the loads tested?
    NRA Benefactor Member
    NRA Certified Instructor

    "I won't be wronged, I won't be insulted, and I won't be laid a hand on."
    John Wayne - "The Shootist"

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    5,854
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Sak007 View Post
    Anybody got a Tap-SBR clone yet ? Iv'e got 6k of 55gr coming tomorrow and these will all be run through a 10.5 in barrel .
    I have a 10.5 SBR and I am shooting 55gr bullets through it for the time being. They shoot just fine but the rounds themselves are plinker rounds.

    A while back we had several threads on this subject so I will try to sum it up briefly as possible while still getting the point across.

    Basically a 55gr bullet in almost any format (barring they can come up with some copper expanding $1 a bullet magic solution) isn't good for SD purposes out of an SBR. There is simply not enough velocity for those particular bullet designs for them to function as designed.

    I will try to remember all this but anyone feel free to correct any errors I will make.

    A 5.56 55 grain round is designed to be effective by tumbling. That is how they designed it to happen for the military out of X length of barrels and so forth. Keep in mind I am talking about terminal ballistics only against bigger targets.

    So basically when you remove substantial velocity it becomes a glorified .22. It just punches little pencil holes and that's that. Given I wouldn't want to get shot with that or anything else, but the consistency of the performance isn't good because that's not what a 55gr is designed for.

    On the internet somewhere there is a lot of data and some studies done about optimal SBR performance and ammo. They tested what they had at the time to figure out the best SBR terminal ballistics. In a nutshell the 77 grain noslers and the 75 grain Hornaday's are both pretty good and both were near the top of the list of consistent performers because of a bunch of various factors.

    Basically those bullets are not as sleek and are a bit more 'rounded' designs so they don't just punch through soft targets. If I recall those bullets will fragment reliably up around 1800 FPS. Basically that means that within about a 50 yard range with either of those bullets they will fragment and cause massive wounds.

    For shooting I am finishing off a bag of 1000 55gr bullets but those aren't for self defense purposes.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    2,070
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Sak007 View Post
    Anybody got a Tap-SBR clone yet ? Iv'e got 6k of 55gr coming tomorrow and these will all be run through a 10.5 in barrel .
    Quote Originally Posted by alamo5000 View Post
    Basically a 55gr bullet in almost any format (barring they can come up with some copper expanding $1 a bullet magic solution) isn't good for SD purposes out of an SBR. There is simply not enough velocity for those particular bullet designs for them to function as designed.
    Alamo, I think Sak007 is looking for load data that mimics the Hornady TAP round. The main difference here is, I believe, that Hornady is using a faster burning powder than normal. A little bit of internet trolling suggests the propellant used by Hornady for this round isn't available to reloaders.

    Regarding 55gr bullets, the Barnes TSX 55gr and Speer Gold Dot 55gr should give you good expansion out of an 8"-10.5" barrel at HD ranges. Plinking w/ cheap 55gr FMJ will likely give you a very close POI to the HD rounds, too, but always verify zero on your HD weapon with the rounds you intend to use in a HD role.

    Personally, any weapon that I'd even consider reaching for in a HD situation has a few mags of either Gold Dot or Barnes TSX loaded up (factory loads).

    FWIW, PSA has been selling the GD for $10/box lately. Stock up.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •