Posts
TM 43-0001-27, regardless of date, is simply wrong about M882 9mm ball.
It is the only source I have found that claims that it's 112gr and not 124gr.
Now I can sleep well.
What is interesting is how many people have asked that same question and gotten a, "why does it matter?" response.
Because I want to know.
Because I am curious.
I ask, "why don't you want to know?"
It, in the long run, doesn't matter.
Plugging the numbers into GURPS gives the same damage and range as 115gr ammo. It's not even up to +P terms as far as GURPS is concerned.
And all of this fell out of noticing that Phrobus slide for the M9 that never really went anywhere.
When π = 3, there's not really a distinction between all the various normal loads of 9x19mm (or the pistols that fire them).
The voice on the phone NEVER knows anything about the product.
ReplyDeleteWhen reloading, correct bullet weight matters. So, no, persnickety is the correct way to handle little things that go 'boom.' Totally understandable.
ReplyDeleteUhmm, pull a bullet and weigh it?
ReplyDeleteWhat started the ball rolling was someone noticing that TM 43-0001-27 says 112gr and they'd just bought some Winchester M882 that was advertised as using 124gr and confirmed by weighing it.
DeleteThe question became, "Is Winchester really selling M882 or are they just saying it was M882 for marketing reasons?"
In that case, weighing the round will match the 124gr on the box, but doesn't actually settle if that's what genuine issue M882 is supposed to weigh.
Fueling the question is there being a lot of M193 and XM193 marked 5.56x45mm that doesn't meet spec on velocity and/or bullet construction but is merely a 55gr bullet.