It seems the bonded CCI has the edge when it comes to accuracy, but are there any other reasons to choose one over the other?
I am about to order some defensive ammo (with and better than average chance of having to use it around barriers/vehicles) and would like additional input. I noticed DocGKR is leaning towards the MK318 …
From what I have gathered from Doc’s post on these loads, the 64gr Gold Dot expands more reliably thru auto glass than the MK318 does.
I cant remember specifically where I read this, but it is my understanding that the Mk318 “Barrier Blind” loads were designed to have less deflection thru auto glass than the 62gr “Green Tip” does, but they do not necessarily expand optimally thru auto glass.
I believe you’re exactly correct. It’s much better than standard ball in glass, but it’s not in the same league as the bonded rounds.
The MK318 doesn’t expand at all through automobile glass, and it’s weight retention is only about 50% after. The Gold Dot expands and retains almost all of it’s weight, while still penetrating similarly to the MK318 after auto glass. (All per ATK documents).
Doc has said the original bonded barrier round performed much better. I’m sure that’s true, though I’ve never shot it or seen any of the testing docs on it.
I was referring to this quote from the 5.56 Duty Loads sticky:
“At this time, given the current ammo choices available via the standard green/white side military supply system, for a general purpose carbine, I’d load my mags with Mk318 Mod0 if available.”
That was a recommendation for military use.
Makes sense, since “soft points” are not approved for military use. Thanks.
[i].223 BH loaded Nosler 60 gr Partition JSP, vel=2685 fps from a 16” 1/7
BG: pen=18.5”, NL=3.5cm, Max TC diam=11.5cm@11.5cm from 3.5-20cm, RD=0.41”, RL=0.43", RW=52.5gr
Glass: pen=18.9", NL=0cm, Max TC diam=8.5cm@10cm from 0-15cm, RD=0.32", RL=0.34", RW=35.4gr
.223 Fed 62 gr JSP Tactical (LE223T3), vel= 2681 fps from a 16" 1/7
BG: pen=15.4”, NL=1.5cm, MAX TC diam=11cm@10cm from 1.5-18cm, RD=0.48”, RL=0.36", RW=61.8gr
Glass: pen=14.0", NL=0cm, Max TC diam=9cm@10cm from 0-16.5cm; RD=0.46", RL=0.36", RW=46.9gr
.223 Rem 62 gr bonded JSP, vel=2704 fps from a 16" 1/7
BG: 13.0", NL=0.5cm, Max TC=7.5cm@9.5cm from 0.5-16cm; RD=0.57”, RL=0.32”, RW=61.6gr
Glass: 12.0", NL=0cm, Max TC=7@9cm from 0-15cm; RD=0.49”, RL=0.28”, RW=56.6gr
.223 Speer 64 gr JSP Gold Dot, vel=2549 fps from a 16" 1/7
BG: pen=15.4", NL=2cm, Max TC diam=9.5cm@12cm from 2-21cm, RD=0.50”, RL=0.35”, RW=59.2gr
Glass: pen=16.5", NL=0cm, Max TC diam=8cm@7.5cm from 0-16cm, RD=0.44", RL=0.33”, RW=35.5g[/i]
The GD only retains 35 of 64gr through glass. GD isn’t bad but I’d use TBBC for barriers if given the option.
As noted in the stickied thread: https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=19881, the 5.56 mm Federal 62 gr Trophy Bonded Bear Claw (TBBC) bonded JSP (XM556FBIT3) and 5.56 mm Winchester 64 gr solid base bonded JSP (Q3313/RA556B) developed for the FBI are the best intermediate barrier loads available. The next best choices are the .223 55 & 62 gr Federal bonded JSP Tactical loads (LE223T1 & LE223T3), followed by loads using the 75 gr Swift Scirocco and Nosler 60 gr Partition JSP. The various Gold Dot/Fusion, Core-Lokt, TSX’s, and non-bonded SOST loads are also reasonable choices, but not as good as those previously listed for barrier use.
Thanks for the repplies.
I’m a moron… I pulled the document I was referencing, and I was recalling the bare gel numbers instead of glass. I agree the TBBC is a better choice on barriers, though the GD still beats ball and most other soft points, and in answer to the OP, it also beats the MK 318. The cost difference, along with the Gold Dot’s excellent non barrier performance, would still sway me towards it over the TBBC for all around LE use though.