Marine Corps to issue "Open" point bullets

General Firearms Terminal Ballistic Information
21

Is there any difference in noise between the M855 vs MK318 and MK 319 vs regular 7.62 NATO? If the new rounds have less muzzle flash?

And the new rounds have a new propellant, is the powder charge still the same?

22

I’ll be honest, I haven’t noticed any difference between noise/flash with Mk262 and the AB49. Our next night shoot should be in a couple of weeks, and I’ll try to do a side-by-side comparison and report the results here.

I don’t have any insight on the propellant or powder charge - I’m just an end-user. I’ll see if my contacts at Crane can shed any light, though…

Regards,

Kevin

23

Is the MK262 the M855 that you were talking about and the AB49 is the Mk 318?

Anyway I look forward to seeing what you have to say in a couple weeks or if any of your contacts can shed some light I would be very thankful.

24

Mk262 is 77gr JHP, not M855, which is 62 gr FMJ. AB49 and Mk318 are the same, just different nomenclature for the same round. Sorry about all the jargon - we are acronym CRAZY in DOD!

Regards,

Kevin

25

Ah I see, so I take it the MK262, M855 and MK 318 all have the same chamber pressure making them the same in noise level?

26

“Is there any difference in noise between the M855 vs MK318 and MK 319 vs regular 7.62 NATO?”

Just like most rifle rounds, they are all loud. With shorter barrels, they are even louder. Put a suppressor on them and they are quieter. Why all the questions about loudness?

“If the new rounds have less muzzle flash?”

Yes, less muzzle flash.

27

Sorry for the dumb questions.

As for the new MK318 rounds with less muzzle flash, the noise is still the same as the M855?

28

Flash has nothing to do with noise. A few decibels one way or the other–who cares, they are still loud without a suppressor, just like every rifle cartridge.

Again, why the incessant interest in noise levels?

29

I was just curious because it said reduces flash and the MK 318 has a new type of powder.

30

Why not just throw the new powder into the MK262 cartridge line, up the production of that, and then start issuing that en masse instead of developing this new round?

31

Because, as noted in several threads and in this briefing: http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2008Intl/Roberts.pdf, while being superb for long range precision shooting, Mk262 does not meet the CQB requirements, as it is NOT a barrier blind load.

32

I am sorry I was under the impression that the MK262 performed like the ATK 77grain TOTM discussed in your briefing.

33

Mk262 uses a thin jacketed, fragile 77 gr SMK OTM that while very accurate, is somewhat variable in its terminal performance and does not handle intermediate barriers very well.

34

So, what would be the commerical load/source for this round? Can civilian end-users purchase it?

35

The Federal Cartridge Mk318 SOST ammunition is NOT currently available to civilians.

The closest civilian loadings would be the Federal 62 gr Federal bonded JSP Tactical (LE223T3) and the similarly performing 55 gr Federal bonded JSP load (Tactical–LE223T1 or identical Premium Rifle–P223T2). In addition, the Nosler 60 gr Partition JSP, Remington 62 gr bonded JSP, Speer 64 gr Gold Dot JSP, Federal 64 gr Fusion JSP, Swift 75 gr Scirrocco PT, and Barnes all copper TSX bullets offer similar performance.

36

DocGKR,
Are they not currently available because Federal is running maxed out to fulfill .mil orders or are they not going to sell it?

37

They are definitely making a LOT of them for the military. I have no idea whether Federal plans to sell them commercially…

38

Hmmm, I thought mk318 had both fragmenting and barrier properties.

39

The current Mk318 Mod0 does fragment a bit–kind of like the Nosler 60 gr Partition; the original TOTM 77 gr OTM designed for the Marines did not fragment.

40

Would you know what kind and how many grains of powder the Federal 62 gr or the Federal bonded JSP Tactical (LE223T3) have?