They all over penetrate, some more than others. Here is a decent vid to start your research with. I use a 53 and 40 gr vmax in my 10.3 and 11.5.
this vid is not anything scientific, just something to think about.
Like, didn't I say 55gr VMAX?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
To enter, all you need to do is add an image of yourself at the range below! Subscribers get more entries, check out the plans below for a better chance of winning!
Join the contest SubscribeThey all over penetrate, some more than others. Here is a decent vid to start your research with. I use a 53 and 40 gr vmax in my 10.3 and 11.5.
this vid is not anything scientific, just something to think about.
At least half of the information in your “technical posts” are not actual technical data. And the majority of the technical data isn’t often relevant to the question you’re answering. As you mention, they’re articles. Forum thread replies aren’t the right venue for full copy and pasted articles. But, you’re not going to accept this feedback and will instead insult me and throw a tantrum.I'm so sorry that posting technical data in a technical thread in a technical forum hurts your delicate little feelings. Try taking an extra dose of your Ritalin and focusing for the two whole minutes that it takes to view my articles, or if that's just too much for you to bear, just scroll past my posts.
...
Now that’s a quality technical post with to-the-point information relevant to the quoted post.All depends on what your objective is. As noted before, the legacy 77 grain MathKings tend to be a hair more accurate at medium distances, but as others have mentioned, the 77 grain Tipped MatchKing has better terminal ballistic properties than the legacy 77 grain MatchKing.
![]()
![]()
....
You have ZERO license to be accusing others about having delicate little feelings in the technical threads. I had you turnt into a raving lunatic just because I posted positive results of a barrel brand you don't like.I'm so sorry that posting technical data in a technical thread in a technical forum hurts your delicate little feelings. Try taking an extra dose of your Ritalin and focusing for the two whole minutes that it takes to view my articles, or if that's just too much for you to bear, just scroll past my posts.
...
Just challenge him to a shoot contest and he'll shut right the fuck up.At least half of the information in your “technical posts” are not actual technical data. And the majority of the technical data isn’t often relevant to the question you’re answering. As you mention, they’re articles. Forum thread replies aren’t the right venue for full copy and pasted articles. But, you’re not going to accept this feedback and will instead insult me and throw a tantrum.
Now that’s a quality technical post with to-the-point information relevant to the quoted post.
The 77 TMK terminal ballistic performance in tissue, and especially its consistency, are a big factor for me using it.
Just challenge him to a shoot contest and he'll shut right the fuck up.
Oh, this again. I can explain things to you, but I can't comprehend them for you.Myself and several other members here that offered to purchase one of your 0.25 MOA Faxon government profile barreled uppers are still waiting for you to tell us the name of your "business" and post a link to where we can buy one of your 0.25 MOA Faxon government profile barreled uppers so we can post the results of testing here. I've never seen a "business" that refuses to sell there "products" to so many people with cash in hand.
....
It took me 20 seconds to scroll past Molons posts.Could care less about feelings. Scrolling for 2 minutes to get past all the bullshit pictures, including your dog is the part that hurts.
No business. I challenged you to a shoot off with me & this Faxon and you went crickets. Non response is still a loud response.Myself and several other members here that offered to purchase one of your 0.25 MOA Faxon government profile barreled uppers are still waiting for you to tell us the name of your "business" and post a link to where we can buy one of your 0.25 MOA Faxon government profile barreled uppers so we can post the results of testing here. I've never seen a "business" that refuses to sell there "products" to so many people with cash in hand.
....
I mean, that was the best of the photos!I think Molon’s dog is cute.
Yes he does. I've seen them since 2004 or so. What he don't need to do is call others liars and frauds for posting good results too.Molon does excellent 10-200 shot groups and research.
Yep arfcom sucks let's not be like arfcomNever thought I'd see arfcom like responses to technical data on this site. Technical data in a technical forum seems appropriate
Molon's home base is AR15.com. Since 2002. So that explains things.Never thought I'd see arfcom like responses to technical data on this site. Technical data in a technical forum seems appropriate
Molon has provided more technical data to support his claims in one post than every other single person in this thread combined. If you believe something in opposition of his data, then post actual evidence in support of your claims.Molon's home base is AR15.com. Since 2002. So that explains things.
That is your opinion. Your opinion does not make facts.Molon has provided more technical data to support his claims in one post than every other single person in this thread combined. If you believe something in opposition of his data, then post actual evidence in support of your claims.
Posting clear data points makes it impossible for it to be opinion. So you must be a troll. Got it.That is your opinion. Your opinion does not make facts.
Molon regurgitates open source information provided by the internet, adds his pictures, and claims supreme authority of the subject. You want to kool-aid that shit, go ahead.
Do try to keep up though. I did not refute a single data point. I just called out Molon for being a hypocrite in his forum. If you pay attention, look how he treats others who disagree with him.
Did I not say 55gr Vmax for the OP's inquiry? Then wasn't there just posted an independent source video where the 55gr VMAX had the least over penetration of the rounds tested? Now, how do you think I knew that prior to the video posted? Life experience is how I knew.
Again, your opinion. Zero facts. Research my posts, and then if you have the same conclusion, feel free to give me that "informed opinion".Ah a troll.
@ Op this is a prime example of poor information. Do not listen to this guy on anything HD relatedAgain, your opinion. Zero facts. Research my posts, and then if you have the same conclusion, feel free to give me that "informed opinion".
Well, your research was concluded in record time.@ Op this is a prime example of poor information. Do not listen to this guy on anything HD related
You have to decide if you want a fragmenting round or a blind to barriers round (or get both!). The Sierra 77 grain Tipped MatchKing has one of the best ballistic coefficients of any 0.224" projectiles loadable to magazine length in an AR-15 and it's also extremely accurate, though often it's a tad less accurate than the the legacy Sierra 77 grain MatchKing.
The 10-shot group pictured below was fired prone off a bipod from one of my AR-15s that has a well used (but not abused) Lothar Walther barrel with a 223 Wylde chamber and a 1:8" twist using a hand-load topped with the legacy 77 grain MatchKing. The group has an extreme spread of 0.54 MOA.
![]()
The next 10-shot group was fired using a handload topped with the 77 grain Tipped MatchKing. The group was fired off the bench from the same Lothar Walther barreled AR-15. The group has an extreme spread of 0.68".
![]()
The 2023 production lots of the factory loaded Black Hills 5.56mm 77 grain Tipped MatchKing ammunition are the most accurate lots of this ammunition that I've tested.
Black Hills 5.56mm 77 Grain Tipped MatchKing Accuracy Evaluation Update
![]()
In 2016 I posted an in-depth review of the Black Hills 5.56 77 grain Tipped MatchKing ammunition. Three 10-shot groups of that 2016 lot had an average extreme spread of 1.26”. The smallest of those groups had an extreme spread of 1.14” with a mean radius of 0.39”.
![]()
The cartridge overall length for the 2016 lot of the Black Hills 77 grain Tipped MatchKing averaged 2.246”, while a 2023 lot averaged 2.243”. The length of the bullet itself is basically the same for both lots. The 2016 lot was loaded in Winchester brass and the 2023 lot is loaded in Lake City brass with stab primer crimps. Both lots have sealant in the primer pockets and neither lot has sealant at the case mouth.
![]()
In my 2016 review, I noted that the 77 grain Tipped MatchKing was one of the longest bullets being commercially loaded to magazine length in the 5.56mm cartridge and that it had such a long ogive that the cannelure extended past the bearing surface of the bullet and onto the ogive, giving the grooves of the cannelure a rather unique “arrowhead” appearance.
![]()
![]()
![]()
The base to ogive measurement of the bullets in the 2023 lot is approximately 0.017” longer than the 2016 lot and the configuration of the bullet at the junction of the bearing surface and the ogive now allows for a full-fledged cannelure that does not appear to extend into the ogive, or it was just a matter of pressing the cannelure deeper that makes it appear so.
![]()
A 10-shot group of the 2023 lot of the Black Hills 5.56mm 77 grain Tipped MatchKing ammunition fired from the same Lothar Walther barreled AR-15 used to test the 2016 lot, fired under the same conditions from a distance of 100 yards had an extreme spread of 0.86” and a mean radius of 0.24”.
![]()
I chronographed two different lots of the 2023 Black Hills 5.56mm 77 grain Tipped MatchKing ammunition from an AR-15 with a chrome-lined, NATO chambered, 20” Colt barrel with a 1:7” twist.
![]()
The muzzle velocity that I obtained from the 2016 lot of this ammunition is shown in the table below. Black Hills now advertises that this load has a velocity of 2750 FPS from a 20” test barrel.
![]()
Chronographing was conducted using an Oehler 35-P chronograph with “proof screen” technology. The Oehler 35P chronograph is actually two chronographs in one package that takes two separate chronograph readings for each shot (primary velocity and proof velocity) and then compares those readings to a statistical table to determine if there is any significant difference between the two readings to determine if the primary velocity is a valid reading or likely to be an erroneous reading. If there is an erroneous reading, the chronograph “flags” the shot to let you know that shot is invalid. There were no invalid shots flagged during this testing.
The velocity stated below is the muzzle velocity as calculated from the instrumental velocity using Oehler’s Ballistic Explorer software program. The string of fire consisted of 10 rounds over the chronograph.
![]()
![]()
Each round was single-loaded and cycled into the chamber from a magazine fitted with a single-load follower. The bolt locked-back after each shot allowing the chamber to cool in between each shot. This technique was used to mitigate the possible influence of “chamber-soak” on velocity data. Each new shot was fired in a consistent manner after hitting the bolt release. Atmospheric conditions were monitored and recorded using a Kestrel 4000 Pocket Weather Tracker.
![]()
Atmospheric conditions
Temperature: 71 degrees F
Humidity: 42.5%
Barometric pressure: 30.05 inches of Hg
Elevation: 950 feet above sea level
The muzzle velocity for lot #703 was 2779 FPS with a standard deviation of 16 FPS. This lot had a coefficient of variation of 0.58%.
The muzzle velocity for lot #723 was 2762 FPS with a standard deviation of 21 FPS and a coefficient of variation of 0.76%.
For those of you who might not be familiar with the coefficient of variation (CV), it is the standard deviation, divided by the mean (average) muzzle velocity and then multiplied by 100 and expressed as a percentage. It allows for the comparison of the uniformity of velocity between loads with different muzzle velocities.
For comparison, the mil-spec for M193 allows for a coefficient of variation of approximately 1.2%, while one of my best 77 grain OTM hand-loads, with a muzzle velocity of 2639 PFS and a standard deviation of 4 FPS, has a coefficient of variation of 0.15%.
….
There's that, but what I get a kick out of is his pejorative use of "internet commando" and that is all he has ever been for the past 20yrs with these "Articles"...I cannot even begin to tell you how obnoxious it is when you spam these massive posts with the temperature, what you ate afterwards everything else nobody cares about to answer a basic question within a thread.
I mean, it's good data to have in its own thread, but holy Jesus you gotta stop CTRL+V'ing it whenever someone asks a simple question about a bullet.
Ok boomer tell us more about how we shouldn't condense information because, "That's the way we did it".Honestly, if Molon’s posts were compiled into a book, I would pay for it.
Technical discussions deserve technical answers with supporting merits based on test and evaluation, vs twitter-like short attention span snippets. The younger guys need to adjust to the technical side, not be spoon-fed because every other interest of theirs provides easy chicken for them.
Time to level-up. If you guys want dumbed-down answers, the Hide has never been the place for that.
Honestly, if Molon’s posts were compiled into a book, I would pay for it.
Technical discussions deserve technical answers with supporting merits based on test and evaluation, vs twitter-like short attention span snippets. The younger guys need to adjust to the technical side, not be spoon-fed because every other interest of theirs provides easy chicken for them.
Time to level-up. If you guys want dumbed-down answers, the Hide has never been the place for that.
and having never shot a hog...Maybe he can burn a CD-ROM with all of it on there for you as well.
It's to the point now where if someone asks, "Hey does anyone use TSX on hogs?", Molon will immediately CTRL+V a 5,000 word essay on the bullet with zero information relative to the question at hand. It's retarded, annoying, and tired.
Yeah, I’m not a boomer. The baby boomers are either all dead or retiring, and taking a generation of know-how with them.Ok boomer tell us more about how we shouldn't condense information because, "That's the way we did it".
Maybe he can burn a CD-ROM with all of it on there for you as well.
It's to the point now where if someone asks, "Hey does anyone use TSX on hogs?", Molon will immediately CTRL+V a 5,000 word essay on the bullet with zero information relative to the question at hand. It's retarded, annoying, and tired.
8/23/11
Failures to stop a suspect because of under-penetration, poor bullet placement, and completely missing the target are far more significant problems than over-penetration. With shots to the center of mass, if a handgun or rifle bullet fails to have enough penetration to reach the large blood bearing vessels and organs in the torso, rapid physiological incapacitation is unlikely and an opponent may remain a lethal threat to officers and citizen bystanders. Conversely, if a bullet fired by officers completely penetrates a violent criminal and exits downrange, the bullet will certainly have had enough penetration to reach the large blood bearing vessels or organs in the torso. As a result, it is more likely to have caused sufficient hemorrhage to induce hypovolemic shock--the only reliable method of physiological incapacitation in the absence of CNS trauma.
Unfortunately, according to the available published date, the majority of shots fired in the field by U.S. LE officers miss their intended target. According to published NYPD SOP-9 data, the NYPD hit ratio by officers against perpetrators in 2000 was 12.3% of shots fired and in 2001 13.5% of shots fired. The Miami Metro-Dade County PD had hit ratios ranging between 15.4% and 30% from 1988-1994. Portland PD reported hits with 43% of shots fired at adversaries from 1984-1992, while Baltimore PD reported a 49% average hit ratio from 1989-2002.
Given that the reported averages for LE officers actually hitting the suspect ranges between 12% to 49% of shots fired, more concern should be given to the between 51-88% of shots fired by LE officers which completely MISS the intended target and immediately result in a significant threat to any person down range, rather than excessively worry about the relatively rare instance where one of the 12%-49% of shots fired actually hits the intended target and then exits the perpetrator in a fashion which still poses a hazard.
In short, the consequences of projectile under-penetration are far more likely to get officers and citizens killed than over-penetration issues.
Those two boomers have shared more meaningful and useful knowledge then you can even imagine. You might learn something if you could move your ego out of the way.Ok boomer tell us more about how we shouldn't condense information because, "That's the way we did it".
Maybe he can burn a CD-ROM with all of it on there for you as well.
It's to the point now where if someone asks, "Hey does anyone use TSX on hogs?", Molon will immediately CTRL+V a 5,000 word essay on the bullet with zero information relative to the question at hand. It's retarded, annoying, and tired.
Those two boomers have shared more meaningful and useful knowledge then you can even imagine. You might learn something if you could move your ego out of the way.
Care to share all your thorough technical helpful data ?
Or would you rather slam other members hard work ?
I'll wait.
I am not autistic.... ( Lol, and it that the best you got ? .. name calling )Are you autistic? We've established that the info is relative to certain people's needs. We've also established that reposting the entire thread of these tests is obnoxious, unnecessary and overall pointless to most people's questions about a bullet. It's AI bot behavior and it's beyond stale.
Let me know if you need this broken down further from a 6th grade level to a 3rd grade level.
Honestly, I don’t think there’s enough evidence that varmint bullets are poor stoppers of human threats. I think the reason why they’re not used is because of theory rather than field evidence that they weren’t effective. I say theory specifically, because it is based on lab evidence and expert assessment. It’s more than a hypothesis, but I still think there hasn’t been enough field testing done to try and disprove the theory.Honestly... if light weight Varmint bullets worked so well for SD... everyone would be using them in .223 and 5.56.
But they don't.
Quote from Dr. Roberts concerning over penetration.
"
The Presumptive Hazards of Over-Penetration
I fully agree.Honestly, I don’t think there’s enough evidence that varmint bullets are poor stoppers of human threats. I think the reason why they’re not used is because of theory rather than field evidence that they weren’t effective. I say theory specifically, because it is based on lab evidence and expert assessment. It’s more than a hypothesis, but I still think there hasn’t been enough field testing done to try and disprove the theory.
There’s a lot of data showing they have poor performance in penetration as a metric. But I haven’t seen any data on their effectiveness of stopping the threat. Measures of Performance vs Measures of Effectiveness. Two distinct things.
That said, I use 77 TMK because it causes massive permanent wound cavities while also penetrating well. I can have my cake and eat it too as long as I’m not shooting into a car.
But, I’m not sold on light VMAX type bullets being worthless because they penetrate less than 10” in gel. If a VMAX hit someone’s arm and failed to reach a vita organ, that’s most likely still going to stop the threat as half their arm starts dangling on a tendon.
Everyone knows you and Molon don't get along.Just challenge him to a shoot contest and he'll shut right the fuck up.
It's not name calling, it's an observation on your lack of comprehending basic social graces and etiquette which glows with autism.I am not autistic.... ( Lol, and it that the best you got ? .. name calling )
And please, Break it down more for me.... we all want you to do exactly what you are complaining about... IE what Molon is doing to you.
And all you have done in this thread, is complain about other people.... you haven't posted anything in context to the Op's question... Atta Boy !!
Show me all your thorough technical helpful data.. simple enough for you ?
And who is "we" ? You don't like Molon's posts, so the rest of us should rally around your choice ?
Go back to the Bear Pit....and stay out of any meaningful learning arena, your high school mentality is showing.
BTW, blocking Molon would solve your having to scroll past his threads.
Like I said before... block him. ( Seems like an "adult" Boomer way of handling it.... you know the whole.... )It's not name calling, it's an observation on your lack of comprehending basic social graces and etiquette which glows with autism.
Myself and others have explained why Molon's posts are equal to obnoxious spamming several times now, and how hes always the first to start name calling and degrading others character the moment anyone brings it up. It's not only here, he does it on every forum. In fact he has to be muted and banned from threads due to his complete lack of decorum when this happens over, and over.
It's like an unruly kid in class who can't take no for an answer, throwing a fit whenever confronted with anything slightly contradictory to his own view. Except he's a grown adult still acting like a 9 year old projecting his own delicate feelings onto others.
That's fine if you want to defend him acting like a dick in every single thread he's in, constantly sewing discourse and getting irate when told to cool it with the AI bot spamming of irrelevant information, just be ready to be called out on it.
And to the OP:
Don't overthink it, they'll both eviscerate a humans intermals with all but guaranteed expansion/frag within CQB range.
TMK will have less penetration after shooting a bad guy. TSX will help you shoot through doors and walls. Both will explode the inside of a person.
Ultimately up to the area you love in.
basic social graces and etiquette thing
View attachment 8267486
So I’ve actually taken this shot 7 times with 62 grain gold dots from a 10.5” AR. None of them “worked” as advertised, and the suspect’s arm was far more forward (closer to front of pectoral) which might actually help. Only 3 of the 7 made it into the close side lung. If it weren’t for the 8th shot (which didn’t have to get through the arm first), the suspect could have walked to the ER with some breathing difficulties after taking 7 rounds of highly rated bonded bullets from an AR at close range.
I’m familiar with another incident with almost identical shots with 77 grain (Hornady T2 if I recall). Same deal. In that case the suspect’s arm saved his life from multiple 5.56 rounds.
Gel shots are cool. FBI minimums are cool. They shouldn’t be discounted. But they don’t capture the realities of conflict.
Pick a good round based on the studies available and then train to fight till the threat is eliminated, not expecting that to happen at any specific point… just drive on till it happens.
too bad to hear their rifle round is lackluster.
I’m not sure it is lackluster.
My point isn’t that there’s a problem with the ammo. My point is all the studies in the world and overthinking ammo selection (which I’m guilty of) are overrated.
Your ammo may not perform the way it does in gel or other tests. That doesn’t mean it’s lacking. It means the real world isn a lab.
Except that it clearly was lackluster. It wasn’t a one off instance, but all 7 shots performed poorly. Both in actual performance and in effectiveness.
What did the guy’s arm look like? Where did those bullets go? Terminal ballistics can get pretty weird, did they deflect and shoot off into other directions? Or did they actually stop in the arm? Did they all expand?
62gr Speer Gold Dots are loaded to .223 pressures, and seemingly low even there. From a 10.5”, they’re probably going 2250 fps, which is pretty pathetic for a 62gr. For a reference, my 9” SP5 shoots 68gr 9mm at 2130 fps.
With the design of the gold dot, it is purely doing crush damage to tissue from the 10.5”. It will not be surpassing the elastic limit of the tissue because it is not enough energy transfer and no fragmentation to reduce the elastic limit.
Relying on crush damage is generally why I avoid barrier blind rifle ammo for defensive purposes. Fragmentation is much more effective. But, I get that LE needs are different.
Thank you for sharing your experience.
The 77 grain Hornady T2 5.56 pressure rounds used in the second shooting I referred to are fragmenting rounds (excellent ones). They didn’t do the trick either.
![]()
Did your department/agency perform any analysis of the shooting? Look at trajectories once they entered the terminal stage, or looked at recovered bullets?The 77 grain Hornady T2 5.56 pressure rounds used in the second shooting I referred to are fragmenting rounds (excellent ones). They didn’t do the trick either.
![]()