antco
Ultimate Member
Wow! Natchez sold out quickly.
Boom Boom said:Did you submit your email address to be notified when they get more in? Who knows, they could get more this week. Act fast when you get the email and you can order all you want.
1K bulk
http://www.natchezss.com/cart.cfm?contentID=availabilityRequest&prodID=FAXM193BK
20rd boxes
http://www.natchezss.com/cart.cfm?contentID=availabilityRequest&prodID=FAXM193F
If you need something now, Palmetto has PPU M193 and PMC Bronze 55gr in stock for $6.49/box.
http://palmettostatearmory.com/index.php/ammunition/rifle-ammunition/prvi-partizan-5-56-m193-200rd.html
http://palmettostatearmory.com/index.php/ammunition/rifle-ammunition/pmc-223a-55gr-fmj-20rd-box.html
By the way, Natchez is back in stock for the XM193 bulk. It's a bit more expensive, but not too bad.
There's also a note on the Natchez webpage for XM193 bulk that says Natchez can't get more until June. Natchez has a new order limit of one 1K box per day.
My back order has been in since the end of February.
Just got off the phone with Brownells.
They are giving no dates and they have no idea of when it will be in.
My back order has been in since the end of February.
Just got off the phone with Brownells.
They are giving no dates and they have no idea of when it will be in.
A few reasons:Anyone wish to explain why they are purchasing 193 instead of 855?
A few reasons:
1. Cost
2. 193 is not magnetic (matters for shooting at FreeState)
3. 193 has increased lethality due to higher velocity (and thus, increased fragmentation)
4. 193 is slightly more accurate (or so I've heard)
I'm not shooting through cover, a penetrating tip isn't going to help me much.
1. Cost is nearly same
2. Ok.....
3. False......mil abandoned 193 because it was less lethan than 855
4. meh
855 was adopted primarily due to better pen/terminal perf
I've read just about everything I could find concerning 193 vs 855. It seemed like there was a lot more info out there saying 193 is the way to go for the reason erwos mentioned.
All of my info comes from the interwebz so it very well could mean nothing. Do you know of a reliable source comparing the performance of each round. Not trying to say that you aren't a reliable source
While 5.56 mm 55 gr M193 (FN SS92) was standard in the 1960’s and 1970’s, attempts to
improve 5.56 mm effectiveness included the XM287 68 gr FMJ and the IWK 77 gr FMJ--both used
in the Stoner 63 by NSW in Viet Nam; the 54 gr XM777, as well as the SS109 62 gr FMJ
developed by FN for their Minimi LMG. As we all know, the end result was the 1980 decision to
adopt the 5.56 mm Minimi as the M249 SAW and the SS109 as the 62 gr FMJ M855 “green-tip”.
1. Cost is nearly same
2. Ok.....
3. False......mil abandoned 193 because it was less lethan than 855
4. meh
855 was adopted primarily due to better pen/terminal perf
No, they went with M855 because they wanted better penetration ability at longer ranges. It had nothing to do with terminal ballistics and lethality. M855 is a poor choice by the military IMHO.
The penetration is marginally better at longer ranges than M855. The tests were to be able to penetrate a helmet at 600 yards. Close range tests have shown that M193 may be better at penetration in close ranges only due to higher velocity. Either way, the penetration difference is marginal.
M193 is way better at lethality than M855. Regardless of caliber, people should not rely on a magic one hit one kill bullet...however...M855 does not fragment reliably like M193. It is much more likely to just pass through soft tissue due to its design, and M193 is more likely to violently fragment in tissue.
I don't know about you, but the slightly better penetration at long ranges through solid objects isn't something I want if it means losing the fragmenting abilities of M193. I would rather have a round that performs well when hitting the enemy, as opposed to wasting rounds trying to hit them through objects. Also, neither round will penetrate rifle plates...so there is no advantage there.
If you are speaking strictly of lethality...M193 > M855