First let say up front, I do not have a “precision rig.” I do not have a 10x Leupold scope, nor do I have a cryogencially treated stainless match barrel, and I am not a competition national match shooter or sniper. I also do not have a chronograph to check the velocities of these loads I tested today.
What I do have, however, is a Noveske N4 lo-pro light carbine with a TA33G-H 3x30 ACOG, and three types of Hornady 75gr ammo to test for my own purposes. I have Hornady 9760EL .223 75gr TAP for training (visible cannelure looks like a T1C bullet), Hornady 80261 Steel Match .223 75gr (no cannelure visible so I think it is a T1 bullet), and recently acquired Hornady Superformance 5.56 75gr which apparently now comes with a T2 bullet from what I can tell. Last year, the Superformance 5.56 variety was widely regarded as crap after it showed it was only capable of 3-4 m.o.a. performance. It apparently was loaded with the T1 bullet last year, but is different now.
So today I had the day off from work, and I headed out to my local 100 yard range. It was 35 degrees out with a light breeze from 6 o’clock.
And here is my afore mentioned Noveske carbine
As I said, I do not have a proper precision scope, what I have is a combat optical gunsight, effective for man size silhouette targets in a combat environment, not x-ring shooting. Here is what my reticle looks like at 100 yards againste the berm:
As you can see, the center dot of my reticle is bigger than the 1" dot in the center of the target. I had to use the horizontal and vertical reference lines to judge my centering on the target sheet. Also, although I am generally pleased with the green reticle, I found the contrast on white target paper to be difficult to see:
Excuses aside, I did my best effort with 10 round groups of each ammo. Here is the target stand:
Let’s look more closely, first at the Hornady 9760EL .223 TAP for training:
I don’t have ballistic analyzing software that some contributors like Molon have, and I don’t really know how you measure a group and compute the true m.o.a., but I measured the spread between the two farthest hits. Maybe someone else can chime in if they know how to convert this to an m.o.a. value. I get 2 3/8" spread by my crude measure:
Next up, the Hornady Steel Match 80261 75gr .223:
And by my crude measure, I see a 2 1/8" spread:
Next up, we change gears to a 5.56 high octane load, the Hornady Superformance 81264 75gr with the T2 bullet. As I said earlier, reports from last year indicated this offering had disappointing 3-4 m.o.a. performance. I purchased this ammo because I wanted the 75gr bullet in a load that had a greater velocity of fragmentation effective range. It would be nice to have 1 m.o.a. and the greater velocity and effective range of a 5.56 loading together (like LEO can obtain in the 5.56 TAP), but it’s not clear yet if the Superformance is a civilan near equivalent of the 5.56 TAP 75gr ammo. Here is what it did for me with my carbine and an ACOG:
And by my measure, my 10 shot group spreads 3"
Again, I’m not sure how a 3" spread translates to an m.o.a. value, but if I can keep 10 shots in a 3" circle at 100 yards with my carbine and have 75gr fragmenting with effective terminal ballistic performance beyond 100 yards, I’ll take it. I’ll keep the 5.56 Superformance 75gr 5.56 for SHTF and self defense, and continue to use the 9760EL for training and practice.
Also, some early reports on the Hornady 81264 5.56 75gr ammo indicated the high pressure was bulging primers and was possibly not recommended for carbines. I saw no such signs, although I have the VLTOR A5 receiver extension system on my Noveske N4 which may have made a difference.
I wish I had a chrony to report on the velocity of the 5.56 load, and I know this data is not of the same caliber and value as Molon’s postings, but I found the results useful.
