Tested: The Polycase ARX Bullet

[Trooper]

I have seen the need for plastic cases for some time. It is stupid leave brass on the battlefield. Too valuable. And as the article points out, the enemy takes the brass to reload for themselves.

One thing, this bullet design could also have lead or even a steel penetrator for combat use. Copper in training.

http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2015/10/23/tested-the-polycase-arx-bullet/

[stanc]

I have seen the need for plastic cases for some time. It is stupid leave brass on the battlefield. Too valuable.

Cost has never been that much of a concern. The real value of polymer cases is in reducing soldier carry load.

And as the article points out, the enemy takes the brass to reload for themselves.

Riiiiiiight. As if there is a consequential number of terrorists and insurgents who police up fired cases from the battlefield to reload them with black powder from firecrackers. Gimme a break.

One thing, this bullet design could also have lead or even a steel penetrator for combat use. Copper in training.

a. The US Army is switching to lead-free bullets.

b. It remains to be seen if the technology is usable with penetrator rifle bullets.

c. Even if it should be technically feasible to make such penetrator projectiles, it's questionable if they'd be practical, since they would be extremely light for caliber.

d. There is also the matter of whether or not such copper/epoxy resin bullets would be lawful for land warfare.

e. Copper for training, not likely. It has long been SOP in most armies to use a single load for both training and combat.

[LR1955]

I have seen the need for plastic cases for some time. It is stupid leave brass on the battlefield. Too valuable. And as the article points out, the enemy takes the brass to reload for themselves.

One thing, this bullet design could also have lead or even a steel penetrator for combat use. Copper in training.

http://www.americanrifleman.org/arti...se-arx-bullet/

I tested a similar design of bullet about 25 years ago. It was not an injection molded polymer though. It was hardened steel with a similar design. Similar intent. The pistol stuff fired and functioned the M-9. The pistol ammo was accurate enough for pistol distances. The rifle ammo was pretty horrible. About fifteen or twenty minutes, keyholes, short cycling.

As for the enemy policing up the brass and reloading it, I didn't see that in the article but when ever someone says this I wonder where the enemy is getting the primers and bullets for his reloading set up.

LR55

[stanc]

As for the enemy policing up the brass and reloading it, I didn't see that in the article but when ever someone says this I wonder where the enemy is getting the primers and bullets for his reloading set up.

Second paragraph, Gene:

"In many countries, terrorist organizations and cartel members pick up spent brass cartridge cases (the single most difficult ammunition component to obtain) that were left behind by government security forces, and reload them with homemade lead bullets and propellant extracted from fireworks."

When I was in high school many years ago, I read the book, American Guerrilla in the Phillipines, which told how the people fighting Japanese occupation troops would save fired .30-06 brass for reloading. Don't recall what they did for bullets or powder, but they re-used the primers by filling them with an improvised priming compound made from ground up match heads.

So, it is theoretically possible, but I'd be quite surprised if there's more than a few people -- if there are any at all -- who are actually doing it. It sounds to me like an exaggeration intended to boost sales, instead of a genuine cause for concern. Since drug cartels and terrorists seem to have no problem acquiring the weapons they want, I'd think they would be able to also get ammo.

[LR1955]

Second paragraph, Gene:

"In many countries, terrorist organizations and cartel members pick up spent brass cartridge cases (the single most difficult ammunition component to obtain) that were left behind by government security forces, and reload them with homemade lead bullets and propellant extracted from fireworks."

When I was in high school many years ago, I read the book, American Guerrilla in the Phillipines, which told how the people fighting Japanese occupation troops would save fired .30-06 brass for reloading. Don't recall what they did for bullets or powder, but they re-used the primers by filling them with an improvised priming compound made from ground up match heads.

So, it is theoretically possible, but I'd be quite surprised if there's more than a few people -- if there are any at all -- who are actually doing it. It sounds to me like an exaggeration intended to boost sales, instead of a genuine cause for concern. Since drug cartels and terrorists seem to have no problem acquiring the weapons they want, I'd think they would be able to also get ammo.

Stan:

Same thoughts exactly. Especially the drug cartels.

That said, I would think it a good idea to go for technology that would make ammo lighter and less expensive. My experience with the very first batches of 'Green' bullets was they sucked. In fact, a person would be hard pressed to come near a E Sil at 300 with them. They shot somewhere around 7 or 10 minutes. Never could get a decent idea of how badly they shot. That was how badly they shot.

LR55

[sneaky one]

Check the article in Dec. 15 Shooting Times- .458 Socom- 140 ARX bullet.

[motoxxx_ryder]

these are for CQB only, in teh 458 socom it falls flat pretty quick but within 100 yards its pretty devatating. the 458socomforums have a kill shot with it.

[am4966]

Check the article in Dec. 15 Shooting Times- .458 Socom- 140 ARX bullet.

Why 50 Beowulf has a ARX out for a couple months. It's heavier though.

The 458 Socom is the big brother to the 6.8 SPC. MIL use you know..

But you'd think they'd have polymer cases by now, the MIL just needs a better cartridge and I don't think it'll ever happen. To much politics and not enough science and common sense.

Sorry for the rant

[stanc]

Why 50 Beowulf has a ARX out for a couple months. It's heavier though.

The 458 Socom is the big brother to the 6.8 SPC. MIL use you know..

But you'd think they'd have polymer cases by now, the MIL just needs a better cartridge and I don't think it'll ever happen. To much politics and not enough science and common sense.

Sorry for the rant

No problem. A lot of people would like to see a better cartridge adopted. I wish I were still able to do some comparison testing of these two.

[BluntForceTrauma]

Stan, anyone can tell just by looking at 'em which is the cooler cartridge.

[stanc]

Stan, anyone can tell just be looking at 'em which is the cooler cartridge.

Heh, heh. Yeah, John...I guess you can.

Still, these two loads are just what I wanted for shooting tests when I did my 6.5 vs 6.8 comparison 10 years ago.*

Both have lead-core FMJ bullets designed specifically for each cartridge, of exactly the same weight, with the same type of ogive, and (maybe) the same jacket material. Would finally allow an apples-to-apples evaluation of the military potential.



*Doesn't seem possible it's been that long. Apparently it's true -- time really does fly when you're having fun. (And even when you're not! )

[VASCAR2]

How were you going to evaluate the two FMJ, Stan. Accuracy at various combat ranges , barrier penetration, gel test, weight/size of cartridges (combat load), reliability, recoil/controllability, full auto control? Inquiring minds want to know! I'd sure be interested in seeing this evaluation, especially if the test involved 6.5/6.8 FMJ versus 5.56 55 grain/M-193, FMJ/62 grain M855, 77 grain SMK and 7.62X 51 147 grain FMJ. I wouldn't even object to throwing in 30 caliber 168 grain match or 7.62 X39 - 5.45 X 39 FMJ.

Sounds like something Luckygunner would do.

[LR1955]

How were you going to evaluate the two FMJ, Stan. Accuracy at various combat ranges , barrier penetration, gel test, weight/size of cartridges (combat load), reliability, recoil/controllability, full auto control? Inquiring minds want to know! I'd sure be interested in seeing this evaluation, especially if the test involved 6.5/6.8 FMJ versus 5.56 55 grain/M-193, FMJ/62 grain M855, 77 grain SMK and 7.62X 51 147 grain FMJ. I wouldn't even object to throwing in 30 caliber 168 grain match or 7.62 X39 - 5.45 X 39 FMJ.

Sounds like something Luckygunner would do.

VC2:

It is probably almost impossible for Stan to do much more than read and type on a computer.

When we talked about such a test years ago it mostly dealt with terminal ballistics. At least that is the subject we discussed the most because of the difficulty in defining such things as barrier penetration then terminal effects on human tissue.

We also talked about combat distances so the test would be as focused as possible. I still contend that 95 percent of all engagements are under 300 meters and although guys may shoot at each other past 500 meters, they are relying on luck more than training to inflict a casualty.

We talked about shooting through cinder blocks, built up gallon milk jugs of water, auto glass, and various types of compounds that simulated human tissue. One was a tube of ballistic jel that you shot into and then cut down the middle to see wound cavities.

We also talked about the carbines and sighting systems that best replicated service grade. No match triggers, match grade and floated barrels.

It was a great discussion with the only thing missing being a ball round for the Grendel.

Aside from a FMJ Grendel round, the cost was pretty prohibitive.

Anyway, no real interest anymore. At least not from the funding stand point.

LR1955

[VASCAR2]

Seems like I remember reading a thread similar to this topic on the old forum before it got trashed by hackers. I knew Stan was unable to do another evaluation but I think this test would make intersting reading. I've always been intrigued by these types of firearms questions. I guess that's why I've shot a lot of jugs of water over the years plus a couple of junk cars.

I think a test like the one mentioned above would just validate how close the performance is for the 6.5 Grendel and 6.8 SPC. I read somewhere that European Countries (Maybe Hague Convention interpretation) expects a FMJ bullet to stay intact upon stiking a target and not fragment or expand. The PPU 6.5 Grendel 110 grain FMJ certainly fits into that requirement after I recovered a bullet shot through water.

With the current political climate and the EPA I don't see the US military adopting another lead core FMJ bullet in the future. I think the concern for lead is grossly overstated, look at all the battle fields in the world where millions if not billions of lead bullets were expended. I can't see any evidence to show the lead ammunition has made these old battle fields uninhabitable today, heck, there still fighting over the same areas like Crimea.

[stanc]

How were you going to evaluate the two FMJ, Stan. Accuracy at various combat ranges , barrier penetration, gel test, weight/size of cartridges (combat load), reliability, recoil/controllability, full auto control? Inquiring minds want to know!

Barrier penetration and gel test, definitely.

Accuracy at 100 meters, probably. At 200 and 300 meters, maybe.

Reliability, no. For statistically meaningful results, it'd be necessary to use a lot more than one gun in each caliber, and shoot many thousands of rounds of ammo.

Full-auto controllability, no. I haven't had access to a select-fire lower for about 20 years.

Weight/size of cartridges (combat load), sure. Although I expect the difference would be negligible. IIRC, the 6.5 with 123gr Scenar and 6.8 with 115gr MatchKing weighed about the same.

I'd sure be interested in seeing this evaluation, especially if the test involved 6.5/6.8 FMJ versus 5.56 55 grain/M-193, FMJ/62 grain M855, 77 grain SMK and 7.62X 51 147 grain FMJ. I wouldn't even object to throwing in 30 caliber 168 grain match or 7.62 X39 - 5.45 X 39 FMJ.

Personally, I'd limit it to lead-core FMJ in each caliber, to keep it "apples vs apples" as much as possible. But, that's just my opinion.