MVM ballistic medium comparative impacts

[APLP]

The below pictures from left to right are of comparative bullet impacts into MVM ballistic media as recorded on X-Ray slides.

The pictured 65 pound MVM impact medium is a room temperature, 14”x8” US variation of the European non balistic gelatin impact test medium. The M-262 bullet exited the first 14 inch block and penetrated an additonal 4.5 inches into the second 14"x8" 65 pound block. The M-262 bullet that exited the first block was recovered almost completely intact and provided no additonal fragmentation than was demonstrated in the first block.

Both the 5.56 M-262 and Le Mas 5.56 short range armor piercing bullet were fired from a 10.5 inch 1/7 twist barrel.

Shown left to right,

M-262 5.56 NATO

Le Mas Ltd. 5.56 NATO Short Range Armor Piercing

Remington 6.8 115 grain hollow point

Le Mas Ltd. 7.62x51 NATO Short Range Armor Piercing

[Gene Econ]

Mr. APLP:

Ok -- so what was the test trying to determine and then what were the results?

If the test was against some sort of armor with residual penetration then where is the armor? Or was the test strictly against ballistic medium?

Am interested but am not sure what this is trying to prove.

Gene

[EX-Gold Falcon]

The 7.62 image is downright scary!!

Do you have any issue 7.62 images for comparison?

And has 6.8 been produced in BMT as well?

Travis

[APLP]

Mr. APLP:

Ok -- so what was the test trying to determine and then what were the results?

If the test was against some sort of armor with residual penetration then where is the armor? Or was the test strictly against ballistic medium?

Am interested but am not sure what this is trying to prove.

Gene

Howdy Gene,

The M-262 5.56 77 grain long range match bullet was recommended by those ballistic experts who advise the US DoD as the go to bullet which would solve the historical M-855 lack of lethality and mission capability concerns. Hundreds of millions of dollars have since been appropriated to procure the M-262.

Although the M-262 demonstrates increased lethality when fired from longer barrel length weapon systems, the same bullet demonstrates reduced lethality at close ranges when fired form short barreled weapons. What is shown in the MVM block impact is typical for the M-262 or M-855 when the required energy level drops below the threshold to ensure effective bullet fragmentation.

Billions of dollars will soon be up for grabs with respect to the selection and procurement funding for new US DoD follow on small arms weapons systems. Any potential weapon system that proposes a shorter barrel length than the current 20 inch M-16 will surely have to address the demonstrated lack of M-262 and M-855 lethality against those who will push for a new caliber such as the Remington 6.8 SPC.

Although the M-855 penetrates hard armor more effectively than the M-262, neither the M-855, M-80, M-118, or the 6.8 SPC have the ability to penetrate hard armor.

I have been told that folks appreciate the ability to disable vehicle's normally found in country with the same 5.56 AP bullet that also provides dramatic one shot incappacitation without over penetrating non armored tissue.

In the below picture the hard armor penetration capability of the M-855 5.56 when impacting 5/16" AR-500 is shown on the upper left. The impacts of the same Le Mas 5.56 Short Range Armor Piercing ammunition which was shown in the prior posted non armor MVM impact is shown below when fired from a 12 inch 1/7 twist 5.56 barrel.

[APLP]

The 7.62 image is downright scary!!

Do you have any issue 7.62 images for comparison?

And has 6.8 been produced in BMT as well?

Travis


Hello Travis,

Sorry, I don't have any 7.62x51 ball or M-118 issue 7.62 MVM or live tissue comparative pictures.

We have not made any BMT 6.8 SPC. With respect to all of the available
cartridges to that could fit into the M-16 lower receiver the 6.8 SPC would
not have been our pick. The 6.5 Grendal would probably be the best non 5.56 NATO case that we could have worked with.

I have not heard whether the 6.8 SPC problems in full auto weapons systems were solved or not. From the little experience I have had with the 6.8 SPC HP ammunition the round performs very well as one would expect in live tissue however it has no hard armor capability, and some of the bullet designs seems prone to over penetrate. The RBCD CQB 7.62x39 ammunition creates substantially more tissue destruction than the 6.8 HP does, but again we could not create the energy levels to also provide hard armor as well. I know there are other issues involved with the potential assimilation of the 6.8 SPC rounds into DoD, but others are more qualified to comment on those issues than I.


Stan

[Martin]

Sir (Stan), may I ask how much more it would cost the government to procure Le Mas rounds versus the M-855 or M-262?

Martin

[APLP]

Sir (Stan), may I ask how much more it would cost the government to procure Le Mas rounds versus the M-855 or M-262?

Martin

Hello Martin,

I won't be much help to you with respect to cost comparisons between the rounds I work with in 5.56 and what the US Government pays for M-855 or M-262. I know that the BMT rounds would cost quite a bit more, but for large quantities the APLP or Short Range Armor Piercing rounds would be less than $1.50 per round. I am not sure that the cost for BMT could be justified as training ammo for most folks, but those who have been hands on sure seem to think that the cost of their own human life justifies to cost for the BMT as operational ammunition.

Stan

[EX-Gold Falcon]

Hello Travis,

Sorry, I don't have any 7.62x51 ball or M-118 issue 7.62 MVM or live tissue comparative pictures.

We have not made any BMT 6.8 SPC. With respect to all of the available
cartridges to that could fit into the M-16 lower receiver the 6.8 SPC would
not have been our pick. The 6.5 Grendal would probably be the best non 5.56 NATO case that we could have worked with.

I have not heard whether the 6.8 SPC problems in full auto weapons systems were solved or not. From the little experience I have had with the 6.8 SPC HP ammunition the round performs very well as one would expect in live tissue however it has no hard armor capability, and some of the bullet designs seems prone to over penetrate. The RBCD CQB 7.62x39 ammunition creates substantially more tissue destruction than the 6.8 HP does, but again we could not create the energy levels to also provide hard armor as well. I know there are other issues involved with the potential assimilation of the 6.8 SPC rounds into DoD, but others are more qualified to comment on those issues than I.


Stan

The 6.5 Grendel; now theres a Cal that is hardly spoken of anymore! Hmm, wonder if there's more to THAT then realized ;)

CQB 7.62x39. Good to see that Operators on deployment are being taken care of.

No worries on 7.62 ball pics.

For what it's worth, I always figured that many of the blowhards on ar15 should stick to paper and coyotes; rather then talking smack about LeMas.

Thanks for your efforts!


Travis


P.S. When are you'll going to copy the infamous Axel Foley "Sound Seeking" projectile!?!? ;)

[swatsurgeon]

Ex Gold Falcon,
excuse me if this is redundant, it is only meant to educate if you don't already know this......
anything you see in ballistic medium can in no way be related to the effects in the human body. What LeMas can do in living tissue can not be replicated in a ballistic medium. It is the same as firing any 15 bullets into a backyard pool and then comparing the expansion, or not, of each bullet....all it tells you is what happens to bullets when fired into pool water, not what will/can/does happen in the body. The study of terminal ballistics is a fascinating one and unfortunately can only be done by examining the human body after it has been wounded.
I would gladly take the Le Mas 5.56 over the 7.62 or 6.8 regular issue into any gun fight due to its terminal ballistics...which have been discussed elsewhere on this site.
As one that has seen alot of the effects in the human body of all calibers of bullets and in many configurations I can say with complete certainty that gelitin gives you only a small part of the bullet's story........

ss

[Team Sergeant]

Ex gold Falcon, Gene, et al:

SwatSurgeon is an experienced Trauma Surgeon as well as being a current Director of Trauma at his hospital. (and a personal friend of myself and my wife, which is also a Trauma surgeon)

What he says concerning La Mas Ammo he says with years of experience, and not with "ballistic medium" but with years of removing bullets from "real" humans. If he says the stuff works thats all I need to know.

TS

[EX-Gold Falcon]

Ex Gold Falcon,
excuse me if this is redundant, it is only meant to educate if you don't already know this......
anything you see in ballistic medium can in no way be related to the effects in the human body. What LeMas can do in living tissue can not be replicated in a ballistic medium. It is the same as firing any 15 bullets into a backyard pool and then comparing the expansion, or not, of each bullet....all it tells you is what happens to bullets when fired into pool water, not what will/can/does happen in the body. The study of terminal ballistics is a fascinating one and unfortunately can only be done by examining the human body after it has been wounded.
I would gladly take the Le Mas 5.56 over the 7.62 or 6.8 regular issue into any gun fight due to its terminal ballistics...which have been discussed elsewhere on this site.
As one that has seen alot of the effects in the human body of all calibers of bullets and in many configurations I can say with complete certainty that gelitin gives you only a small part of the bullet's story........

ss

Actually I very much agree with your opinion with regard to ballistic medium testing. It cannot tell the "whole story". Too many other variables can and will play a factor in the effectiveness of any given type of bullet.

Now I'm out now, but if I were back in, and the option were available, I'd be more then willing to try 5.56 BMT if deployed. This is due in no small part of the the opinions I've read here on PS.

I'll willing admit to having a very limited knowledge of BMT and LeMas. My personal opinion is that factual data is being kept on the QT for opsec. Cool. My curiosity means less then nothing when dealing with the tools that help defend our country.

My minor was in Forensic Science, because as you said, it's facinating! In fact one of my first projects should still be hanging in the Mesa CC forensic science lab. I mounted 24 fired rounds (in a wood box glass framed) from a .40 fired at various distance through various mediums to compare the effects/powder burns-distance/and penetration . All very pro-style.

No arguments from me on this subject; only a very open mind.


Travis


P.S. sorry about the late reply, didn't realize this thread was active again.

[EX-Gold Falcon]

Ex gold Falcon, Gene, et al:

SwatSurgeon is an experienced Trauma Surgeon as well as being a current Director of Trauma at his hospital. (and a personal friend of myself and my wife, which is also a Trauma surgeon)

What he says concerning La Mas Ammo he says with years of experience, and not with "ballistic medium" but with years of removing bullets from "real" humans. If he says the stuff works thats all I need to know.

TS

No disrespect intended. With most info on BMT being kept quiet, it's interesting to see anything on it; even ballisitc gel photos!


My above post should clear up my original intent.

cheers


Travis

[APLP]

No disrespect intended. With most info on BMT being kept quiet, it's interesting to see anything on it; even ballisitc gel photos!


My above post should clear up my original intent.

cheers


Travis

The BMT 7.62x51 Short Range Armor Piercing bullet shown after impacting bare MVM ballistic medium above, is pictured below after penetrating 3/8" AR-500 armor.

Both the primary and secondary armor displacements created from the BMT bullet were also captured as shown below after impacting soft level 3 armor.

Although designed as a dedicated armor piercing bullet design the same bullet BMT SRAP bullet demonstrates secondary charateristics of reduced lethal over penetration probability when impacting non armored living tissue.

[swatsurgeon]

here are 2 pics of a guy that not only survived 2 chest hits with .40 cal Speer Gold Dots, he left the hospital in just a few days. Yes he punctured his lung and broke a rib, no he did NOT fall down when shot. Had he been hit with Le Mas ammo as APLP has demonstrated I would not have had a live patient to work on.
Remember, as LEO is taught, 2 hits center of mass....he didn't fall but no further shot were fired. These perfectly expanded rounds did what they were designed to do but didn't remember to tell the patient to fall down and no longer be a threat....he remained one, walked to a chair and sat down. A .45 would have done the same thing to him....so would a .22.
The point is the weapon plateform won't change the outcome unless you change to a high velocity rifle from a handgun, but both the choice of ammo in this case (Le Mas) and shot placement would have made a big difference...he would no longer be a threat.

[Smokin Joe]

here are 2 pics of a guy that not only survived 2 chest hits with .40 cal Speer Gold Dots, he left the hospital in just a few days. Yes he punctured his lung and broke a rib, no he did NOT fall down when shot. Had he been hit with Le Mas ammo as APLP has demonstrated I would not have had a live patient to work on.
Remember, as LEO is taught, 2 hits center of mass....he didn't fall but no further shot were fired. These perfectly expanded rounds did what they were designed to do but didn't remember to tell the patient to fall down and no longer be a threat....he remained one, walked to a chair and sat down. A .45 would have done the same thing to him....so would a .22.
The point is the weapon plateform won't change the outcome unless you change to a high velocity rifle from a handgun, but both the choice of ammo in this case (Le Mas) and shot placement would have made a big difference...he would no longer be a threat.

swatsurgeon,

Thanks for the photo's and case. It appears that the rounds impacted at an angle, missing his heart and other organs. Is that correct? Additionally did the rounds exit the torso?

[swatsurgeon]

they were at an angle, shot towards his right side...that is his right nipple in the pic. Both bullets were removed from his side, fully expanded.

[EX-Gold Falcon]

here are 2 pics of a guy that not only survived 2 chest hits with .40 cal Speer Gold Dots, he left the hospital in just a few days. Yes he punctured his lung and broke a rib, no he did NOT fall down when shot. Had he been hit with Le Mas ammo as APLP has demonstrated I would not have had a live patient to work on.
Remember, as LEO is taught, 2 hits center of mass....he didn't fall but no further shot were fired. These perfectly expanded rounds did what they were designed to do but didn't remember to tell the patient to fall down and no longer be a threat....he remained one, walked to a chair and sat down. A .45 would have done the same thing to him....so would a .22.
The point is the weapon plateform won't change the outcome unless you change to a high velocity rifle from a handgun, but both the choice of ammo in this case (Le Mas) and shot placement would have made a big difference...he would no longer be a threat.


Were there any other factors that could help explain your patient's rapid recovery?

Bloody amazing.....


Travis

[swatsurgeon]

people are going to hate this...........
reasons he did well (as per the guru of life)
1) can't kill dirt
2) when shot by police you have a 90% chance of no wound, a 5% chance of a survivable wound, a 3% chance of a wound that keeps you in the hospital for more than a week and a 2% chance of a fatal wound......this is where I catch heat but can prove it!!!
3) god protects kids, drunks, and otherwise nasty people

is that enough or do we chalk it up to luck of patient and appropriate acute care provided him.

ss

[EX-Gold Falcon]

appropriate acute care provided to him.

ss

I'll take this answer for $400 Alex ;)


T.