WS6,
It seems you might be confusing a few issues, especially with regard to Fleet Yaw vs. AOA variations, as well as the relation of twist rate and wounding effects.
The U.S. Army Wound Ballistic Research Laboratory conducted terminal performance testing using 5.56 mm 55 gr M193 FMJ ammunition fired in 20” barrels of 1/14, 1/12, 1/9, and 1/7 twist rates. No difference in terminal performance was noted between shots made with the different twists. Similar testing was conducted with 5.56 mm 62 gr M855 FMJ ammunition fired in 1/9 and 1/7 twist barrels. Again, no difference in terminal performance was noted. There are some projectiles where the terminal performance can be effected by twist rate, but these are not generally in military use. Also, if the bullet is not adequately stabilized in flight, then alterations in the wound profile will be evident.
As Sinister notes above, twist rate can definitely effect external ballistics. For example, in testing ammunition at the CHP Academy in the mid 1990’s, a number of lightweight, thin-jacketed, relatively high velocity .223 varmint loads were observed to disintegrate in mid-air a few yards from the muzzle when fired from fast 1/7 twist weapons, but not in slower twists; the Federal 40 gr Blitz loading was particularly problematic in this regard. Sinister hit the nail on the head in discussing this issue in his post above.
Angle-of-Attack (AOA) variations between different projectiles, even within the same lot of ammo, as well as Fleet Yaw variations between different rifles, were recently elucidated by the JSWB-IPT. These yaw issues were most noticeable at close ranges (usually under 25 m) and were more prevalent with certain calibers and bullet styles.
Projectile impact angle-of-Attack (AOA) variability is caused by bullet to bullet variations at impact and can substantially alter wound severity; this factor is more prevalent with certain calibers and projectile types. Testing demonstrated that 5.56 mm is highly susceptible to AOA variations, particularly when using FMJ projectiles such as M193 & M855. For example, with 5.56 mm FMJ, at higher AOA’s, for example 2-3 degrees, bullets had a shorter neck length (NL) and upset rapidly, thus providing adequate terminal effects; at low AOA, like 0-1 degree, the projectiles penetrated deeper than ideal prior to initial upset (ie. long NL) with significantly reduced terminal effects. Note that other calibers were less susceptible to AOA variations than 5.56 mm, OTM’s tend to have less AOA issues than FMJ, while PT and JSP’s tend to not have major AOA induced terminal performance changes.
Fleet Yaw is the terminal performance AOA variation caused by inherent variability in each rifle; Fleet Yaw is caused by weapon to weapon variations separate from projectile induced AOA issues.
What this means is that two shooters firing the same lot of M855 from their M4’s with identical shot placement can have dramatically different terminal performance results: one shooter states that his M855 is working great and is effective at dropping bad guys, while the other complains his opponents are not being incapacitated because M855 is zipping right through the targets without upsetting. Both shooters are telling the truth… Restricting M855 for what is was designed for–use in the SAW and simply adopting new 5.56 mm barrier blind combat loads that are optimized for carbines with shorter barrels, offer consistent early upset, along with adequate penetration, and minimal AOA/Fleet yaw issues may be the critical answer to many deficiencies noted with currently issued U.S. military 5.56 mm ammunition.
