68/69 otm and 60gr TAP gel tests?

General Firearms Terminal Ballistic Information
1

I’ve scoured google and the term ballistics forum here and could not find it… anyone have pics/video of gel-tests with 68/69grain otm(smk or other)? Id like to see how it stacks compared to 75gr otms. Also, I found 45, 55, and 75 grain tap, but nothing about 60grain tap. I know its ballistic tip, but i was thinking the heavier weight might offer better penetration. Doc Roberts doesnt list it as recommended, but I have not seen anything from it so thought maybe it wasnt tested yet. Any info would be appreciated. Thanks guys.

Also, there was a pdf showing a ton of differnt 223 and 308 loads going through different barriers. I cant seem to find it. Anyone have link? All the tests showed corresponding gel test

2

http://ammo.ar15.com/project/Self_Defense_Ammo_FAQ/WebData/HornadyRifle/HornadyRifle.htm#223%20REM%2060%20gr.%20TAP%20URBAN

As far as the 68/69gr stuff: I don’t think I’ve ever seen any tests either. Most people can shoot 75gr stuff in their 1:9’s, so testing a slightly inferior bullet doesn’t make much sense. The tests are expensive, and people only pay to see the better stuff tested.

3

We’ve previously posted and published results for the 68/69 gr OTM’s–they do not work as well as the 75/77 gr OTM.

4

Do you have links to those results? I wouldn’t mind having those for reference…

5

I think we put those up online over at TF back in the old days circa 1999-2003 when it was populated with solid real-deal folks. That data was also published in the IWBA Journal: Roberts GK: “Law Enforcement General Purpose Shoulder Fired Weapons–The Wounding Effects of 5.56mm/.223 Carbines Compared With 12 ga. Shotguns and Pistol Caliber Weapons using 10% Ordnance Gelatin as a Tissue Simulant”. Wound Ballistics Review. 3(4):16-27, 1998.

6

wow, thanks for the quick replies.

edit, just saw the link on the 60gr. Thanks zukov. Its pretty unimpressive compared to the 75gr stuff.

edit 2, just saw your above post too doc.

7

I don’t have “Law Enforcement General Purpose Shoulder Fired Weapons–The Wounding Effects of 5.56mm/.223 Carbines Compared With 12 ga. Shotguns and Pistol Caliber Weapons using 10% Ordnance Gelatin as a Tissue Simulant" on me, but I do have some data that was in Doc’s paper “Updated 5.56mm/.223 Amunition Test Results” as published in the Hornady TAP catalog.

Barrel 16" 1:9

Bare Gel:

Black Hills 68gr 2615fps, Pen 30.8cm(12.1"), Max TC 9.0cm, RD 0.39", RL 0.23", 53.6% Frag

Fed 69gr JHP-BT 2646fps, Pen 37.4cm(14.7"), Max TC 10.0cm, RD 0.40", RL 0.19", 60.2% Frag

Interior Wall:
Black Hills 68gr 2939fps*, Pen 27.0cm(10.6"), Max TC 8.0cm, RD 0.49", RL 0.27", 45.9% Frag

Fed 69gr JHP-BT 2637fps, Pen 30.3cm(11.9"), Max TC 10.0cm, RD 0.39", RL 0.32", 41.7% frag

The OP asked about 60gr TAP, this info is again from their catalog:
Penetration, Depth to Max TC, Max TC, % Frag
Bare: 11.25", 3.75", 5.25", 64%
Car Door: 10.00", 3.0", 4.0", 61%
Fire Door: 9.00", 2.0", 2.5", 67%
Safety Glass: 5.75", 2.75", 2.75", 86%
Wallboard: 7.0", 2.75", 5.75", 100%

All showed an entry of 0". Barrel was 14.5", 1:9 twist.

* I’m thinking that was a typo in the article.