if the military could, would it adopt the 155 scenar over the 175gr? If not, what about the 155 scenar is lacking when compared to the 175?
Range Report 155 scenar in combat
- Thread starter Dsparil
- Start date
Re: 155 scenar in combat
Military cares a lot about terminal performance, especially terminal performance thru some obstacle. How does the 155gr Scenar perform after impact?
Military cares a lot about terminal performance, especially terminal performance thru some obstacle. How does the 155gr Scenar perform after impact?
Re: 155 scenar in combat
The Scenar may not be as friendly as the SMK is to worn throats, jumps to lands, also.
The Scenar may not be as friendly as the SMK is to worn throats, jumps to lands, also.
Re: 155 scenar in combat
I did some testing for an ammo company based on the concept of using a 155 over a 175. The idea is the 155 has a far better fall angle than the 175.
The military has experimented with this concept but I dont know exactly where it stands right now but with money getting tight I bet it is dead
I did some testing for an ammo company based on the concept of using a 155 over a 175. The idea is the 155 has a far better fall angle than the 175.
The military has experimented with this concept but I dont know exactly where it stands right now but with money getting tight I bet it is dead
Re: 155 scenar in combat
The 155 Scenar can be a viable military bullet.
US military reluctance comes from limited application (in 7.62mm it does best with barrels longer than 24-inches to take advantage of the BC, and in shorter carbine barrels it takes up more case space, again cutting back on velocity). It is also tons more expensive than run-of-the-mill GI Ball. You run into a return-on-investment wall when talking about capability for cost and quantity.
135-grain Match Kings are a fairly good match in shorter carbine barrels to 300-Meters -- better accuracy and faster than 147-grain GI M80 machinegun ball, 168 Match Kings, and 175s.
The 155 Scenar can be a viable military bullet.
US military reluctance comes from limited application (in 7.62mm it does best with barrels longer than 24-inches to take advantage of the BC, and in shorter carbine barrels it takes up more case space, again cutting back on velocity). It is also tons more expensive than run-of-the-mill GI Ball. You run into a return-on-investment wall when talking about capability for cost and quantity.
135-grain Match Kings are a fairly good match in shorter carbine barrels to 300-Meters -- better accuracy and faster than 147-grain GI M80 machinegun ball, 168 Match Kings, and 175s.
Re: 155 scenar in combat
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tactical</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I did some testing for an ammo company based on the concept of using a 155 over a 175. The idea is the 155 has a far better fall angle than the 175.
The military has experimented with this concept but I dont know exactly where it stands right now but with money getting tight I bet it is dead </div></div>I agree. Shot a ton of 155's have done better than the 175SMK's. Close but the 155 is the winner.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tactical</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I did some testing for an ammo company based on the concept of using a 155 over a 175. The idea is the 155 has a far better fall angle than the 175.
The military has experimented with this concept but I dont know exactly where it stands right now but with money getting tight I bet it is dead </div></div>I agree. Shot a ton of 155's have done better than the 175SMK's. Close but the 155 is the winner.
