All theory aside i have managed to shoot out several M1A and M14 barrels shooting HP. We had match guns and practice guns. The practice guns we used for rapid fire practice with M80 ball, most of which had the soft steel jacketed bullets. The barrel on my practice M14 lasted 2+ times as long as my match rifle. The differentiating criteria being the match rifle had to maintain 1.5 moa accuracy with old M118 white box or the new (at the time) M852. The practice gun had to hold 3 1/2 moa with selected M80 ball. I went through 3 barreles on my match M1A before I sent the M14 back for a rebarrel.

The round count was pretty close to the same for M14 as for the 2 match barrels. I extrapolated the data knowing the accuracy capability of the match barrels with the M80 and for all intents and purposes i got pretty close to the same accuracy life out of each barrel. Perhaps a little more with the M14 using the steel jacketed M80 even though 95%+ of the shooting with it was rapid fire. That was pretty hard on the practice guns especially when we ran practice Infantry Trophy Matches. Uncle suger did lots of testing and found the soft steel jacketed bullets used caused no more wear on the barrels that with brass jacketed bullets. It is the hot gases cutting the hot steel that washes barrels out.

Larry Gibson

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Gibson:
Perhaps a little more with the M14 using the steel jacketed M80 even though 95%+ of the shooting with it was rapid fire.

US "steel jacketed" M-80 used for match practice ........ in your dreams, BSer!

Where the hell do these clowns come up with their BS?!!!

quote:

We had match guns and practice guns.

Sure! What team was that?!!!

I can assure you that Larry Gibson is no clown. He spend a career in the Army, had some very bad shit over in Nam. He knows what he is talking about. He's, so to say, been there done that.

quote:

Originally posted by SmokinJ:
I can assure you that Larry Gibson is no clown. He spend a career in the Army, had some very bad shit over in Nam. He knows what he is talking about. He's, so to say, been there done that.

Riiiight!!! NG is NOT retired Army!

MG ammo does not even have to meet the accuracy requirements of standard M80 ball.

The only steel jacketed M-80 had to be removed from linked MG ammo. The boxed US M80 was all GM.

If you're stripping MG ammo for match practice, that's not a good sign for a serious military team!

Crap! Any and ALL M80 was unsuitable for serious HP practice.

I remember making "Mexican Match" when we got a lot of crappy M118 instead of M852 FOR PRACTICE!

quote:

Originally posted by DaMan:

quote:

Originally posted by SR4759:

quote:

On some bullets he measured, the Cu coating over the steel jacket was only 12μm thick (a human hair is about 50μm).

So if you think that copper coating serves any purpose other than keeping the steel of the bullet jacket from rusting, I've got a bridge to sell you.

And did he fire thousands of rounds through multiple barrels both with and without a copper wash to see what the effect on barrel life is? No.....And you can keep your teeth...

You can go ahead and shoot all the bi-metal cheap stuff in YOUR guns! I could care less!

Just remember you told me that the next time you dig out one of your com bloc rifles and shoot it.
I seem to remember you playing with a M91 Nagant.....

But you never have set back the barrel on an M1 have you?

I have a fair amount of experience with M80 7.62x51 ammo.

Larry Gibson is correct. Quite a bit of US M80 ball was loaded with "steel jacketed" bullets.

I have not been able to find any official info on exactly when the steel jacketed bullets were loaded, production info, etc. but I can tell you the following, all baised on me actually testing and shooting the following M80 ammo.

Headstamp:
TW 68 ball, WCC 70 ball, Steel jackets.
This ammo was packed in stripper clips in bandoleers.

RA 69 Tracer, Steel jackets, this ammo was packed in M60 links, 100 rounds of tracer per belt.

LC 76 Tracer, steel jacketed bullets. I do not know how this ammo was originaly packed.

LC67 Ball, copper jacketed bullets, packed in stripper clips in bandoleers.

LC 63 ball, packed in stripper clips and bandoleers, OR packed in brown 20 round boxes copper jacketed bullets.

TW 67, ball and tracer 4 to 1, packed in M60 links 100 rounds per belt.

IMI [Canadian 7.62x51] copper jacketed bullets.

NOTICE that TW 68 packed for use in the M14 is with steel jacketed bullets and TW 67, packed for use in the M60 has copper jacketed bullets, including its tracer bullets.

So to repeat, a LOT of US M80 ball ammo was loaded with steel jacketed bullets.

Also a LOT of Foreign 7,62x51 ammo is also loaded with steel jacketed bullets.

Also let me make a few comments on using Ball ammo for practice, with a non "high dollar" rifle.

The principle is simple.

You take your "practice gun" and "practice ammo", and carefully shoot some groups at the range and from the position you will be practicing from.

Say this is High Power and 300 yard Rapid Fire.

Lets say you shoot consistantly just under 15" at 300 yards, ie 5 MOA...

So when you are practicing your 300 yard Rapid Fire under Match times, and your groups are 15", then you are shooting up to the gun and ammo, ie doing good.

If you are shooting 25" groups, then.. Well that is why you are practicing...

By using a "rack gun" and "rack ammo", [rack ammo being nearly unlimited in the quanity avialable] you can get in a LOT more Trigger time...

quote:

Originally posted by DaMan:

quote:

Originally posted by SmokinJ:
I can assure you that Larry Gibson is no clown. He spend a career in the Army, had some very bad shit over in Nam. He knows what he is talking about. He's, so to say, been there done that.

Riiiight!!! NG is NOT retired Army!

MG ammo does not even have to meet the accuracy requirements of standard M80 ball.

The only steel jacketed M-80 had to be removed from linked MG ammo. The boxed US M80 was all GM.

If you're stripping MG ammo for match practice, that's not a good sign for a serious military team!

Crap! Any and ALL M80 was unsuitable for serious HP practice.

I remember making "Mexican Match" when we got a lot of crappy M118 instead of M852 FOR PRACTICE!

The JSWB-IPT discovery that Lake City has manufactured TWO distinct types of M80 FMJ over the last several decades was quite important, as the two types of projectiles offer substantially different terminal performance at close range. One uses a thick copper jacket that does not fragment, as tested by Dr. Fackler at LAIR; the other version was previously untested and uses a steel jacket that fragments at velocities above approximately 2800 f/s. Yaw and fragmentation occurs at about the same penetration depth as with copper jacket M80, and is thus deeper than ideal (ie. NL too deep). When the velocity drops to below 2800 f/s (by approx 100 m from a 22" barrel M14), M80 steel jacketed bullets no longer fragment and instead act like the non-fragmenting copper jacketed M80 FMJ. Note that LC does NOT distinctly label the different M80 FMJ projectiles and the only way to tell them apart is to use a magnet.

I have not found any practical difference in accuracy between the copper jacketed and the steel jacketed M 80 ball...

Also the German Steel jacketed 7.62 NATO ammo circa @ 1967 or so, has a reputation for extreme wounding within 150, 200 yards or so.

It is very accurate ammo as well.

DeMan

Well you've managed to shoot your mouth off and demonstrate quite clearly your level of knowledge concerning the subject. N E 450 No 2 has given you a pretty concise picture of the mix match of steel jacketed and copper jacketed bullets available in M80 ball intended for the M14. All of it we used for NMC rapid fire practice was from stripper clips and bandoliers intended for M14 use. We did not strip ammuntion from M60 belts for practice ammuntion.

BTW, The unit I deployed to Viet Nam with had a lot of M14s in addition to the XM16s. The supply system wasn't all that great when it came to getting M14 ammo in the jungle, hell the m16 ammo came in 20 round cardboard boxes then not stripper clips in bandoliers. Many times we did strip M60 belts for ammo because that's what we got to use. We found (yes we had a practice range outside our base camp at Bien Hoa) most of it was as accurate as the stripper clipped M80. Some years back I did strip M80 from numerous M60 belts specifically to test the ammuntion for accuracy. It all was very lot dependant on accuracy as is stripper clipped M14 M80 ammuntion, yet it was very comparable in accuracy to standard issue M80 for M14s. Some TW 68 I stripped turned out to be the most accurate of any lot of M80, it rivaled most lots of old M118 White Box with sub 1.5 moa capability.

As mentioned by N E 450 No 2, the practice with ball ammo was to hold group, not shoot a good score. As I stated the practice M14 with ball M80 was used on the SR-1 target for practice. If you know anything about NMC shooting you'd know that is the 200 yard target reduced for use at 100 yards. We used the rack grade M14s with M80 for RAPID FIRE practice as stated. If you held "the black" of the SR-1 target you would shoot 10/Xs with the match M14 and M118 The "practice" wasn't in shooting a good score, only holding "black". The "practice" was in position building, sitting and prone from "targets up", cadence of fire, use/position of the spotting, speed and smoothness of the reload, getting back into the same position and resuming a proper cadence of fire to utilise ALL of the time available amoung other things. Very usefull "practice" and a good score comes from the practice, not from shooting good ammuntion

When we were doing all this M118 White Box WAS the "good" ammuntion. It was long before M852 was made. Mexican Match was not allowed in many leg matches back then. We also quickly found the mexican match ammo with the 168 MK would not hold at 1000 yards and shot better scores there with M118.

Before you call "BS" you should make sure you know what you're talking about. BTW; I did spend time in the NG and the USAR and am proud of that service. Seems I recall they all went to war right along side the active duty folks. I also spent a lot of time pulling duty OCONUS as an SF NCO because the AC SF couldn't do all their missions. They seemed to like us "reservists" along. Saw some NG and USAR folks bleed aand die in Iraq right along with the active duty folks. You should watch you're mouth before criticising thsoe folks. ALSO, I served 22 1/2 years on active duty in the airborne infantry, Special Forces and brigade level operations. What is it you have done that gives you the right to criticise my service to our Country or the NG and the USAR's service?

Larry Gibson

US Army retired and damned proud of it.

Mr. Gibson,

This thread has gone way beyond it's original intention.

Understand that DaMan is quite simply an ass-clown-troll who is twisting his nipples at the very thought of your response. It gives him the attention he craves.

It's classic seeking behavior, like heroin addiction. Don't feed the addiction.

Do what most do around here: learn to use the ignore button, and don't feed the Troll addiction, however much you may want to.

akalinin

Sometimes trolls on the internet, just like juvenile bullies, need to be stood up to. The meek have not inherited the Earth and turning the other cheek is not always the best way. There's a difference between feeding trolls and politely telling them where to go. I appreciate your response though, shows he is seen for what he is.

Larry Gibson

Well said Larry Gibson.



Thank You and Your Family For Your Service and Sacrifice.

Larry Gibson

Before you quit shooting High Power, did you ever switch to an AR15???

If so what were your thoughts on "it".

quote:

Originally posted by N E 450 No2:
Larry Gibson

Before you quit shooting High Power, did you ever switch to an AR15???

If so what were your thoughts on "it".

I competed on a state NG team back in the '70s and early '80s with the M16A1 in "combat" matches which was on the "D" target at 200, 300 and 500 yards. Did fairly well back then and saw the beginnings of tricking out AR "service rifles" in that game. By the time I did make the switch to the AR in the late '90s my eyes were too far gone. Converted my Colt Comp to match rifle configuration and shot a few matches with it. That was about the time the "space" guns came on strong and I didn't continue much after that. I do shoot a few belly matches with my M70 target and even my M1903 National Match Type II now and again for fun....I hold my own with those. I'm probablygoing to end up one of the old duffers in F Class one of these days.........time does catch us all........

Larry Gibson

Yes time does catch us all and F Class is a great way to stay in th4e game and have fun.

I still remember the first time my shooting buddy and I shot AR's in a Match.

It was a typical "Match trip", we had worked late, left early, shot the match and were on our way home.
Normally we were pretty worn out, but on this day we shill had a fair amoung of "energy" left.

That is when we realized that shooting an AR was easier on your body than a M14, or a M1 Garand...

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Gibson:When we were doing all this M118 White Box WAS the "good" ammuntion. It was long before M852 was made. Mexican Match was not allowed in many leg matches back then. We also quickly found the mexican match ammo with the 168 MK would not hold at 1000 yards and shot better scores there with M118.

1,000 yards? Yup! Very credible!

Folks, this clown should explain the 1,000 yd. leg of the HP course!

Da Man

Many times, Military HP matches, fired on Military range, by military shooters, included 20 rounds fired at 1000 yards.

Most Civilian ranges do not have 1000 yard capability, so thus, rounds are not fired to 1000 yards in those matches.

In fact many Civilian ranges onlhy go to 300 yards, and the 600 yard slow fire stage is shot at 300 yards on a "reduced' official target.

Here is THE DEAL Da Man...

Larry Gibson IS the REAL DEAL...

I have shot enough High Power, Service Rifle, and Palma, and 1000 yard ANY, ANY, to know he is WHAT HE SPEAKS.

Now I have never critized you on any posts you have made. But I can say, that you do not know where of you speak, AT ALL, on this thread.

I mean no offense, and I never engage in a Hatfield and Mccoy type fued on the internet...

But I can say, that Larry Gibson, baised on MY PERSONAL shooting experience, IS spot on, 100% correct in EVERYTHING he has stated.

His post on M118, Mexican Match, M852, and I will include Federal 168gr Match, is Perfect.

This is baised on MY PERSONAL shooting of ALL the above ammo at 1000 yards...

quote:

Originally posted by DaMan:

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Gibson:When we were doing all this M118 White Box WAS the "good" ammuntion. It was long before M852 was made. Mexican Match was not allowed in many leg matches back then. We also quickly found the mexican match ammo with the 168 MK would not hold at 1000 yards and shot better scores there with M118.

1,000 yards? Yup! Very credible!

Folks, this clown should explain the 1,000 yd. leg of the HP course!

DaMan

To further your education in HP shooting; the NMC (that's National Match Course in case you don't know) which consists of shooting from 200 to 600 yards is only one of several HP type matches. Others are "belly" matches of 20 shot strings or Palma matches (shot at 800, 900 and 1000 yards) of 15 shot strings. Most of these will have a SR (that's Service Rifle BTW) classification if there are enough shooters. Most state championships and regional matches with have a 1000 yard match if there is such a range available. Those will have an SR classificication.

BTW; I earned my NRA Long range classification with the M1A/M14 shooting in 1000 yard matches and Palma matches in the SR classification. You might check the NRA web site (assuming you are a memeber?) to find out what the qualification for that is.

Larry Gibson

450 N E no. 2, Larry Gibson, I'm in awe.

I bandy words with the guy. I flatter myself that I come out well in the exchanges.

But you guys. You slice and dice.

I stand corrected. Any sight and Palma are included under the rubric of "High Power".

Now, about the effectiveness of M-80 from an M-14 at 1,000 yds. .....you boys are still FOS!

Da Man

He never said he shot M80 for practice at 1000 yards. He used it for practice in Sitting Rapid Fire at 200 yards and at 300 yard Prone Rapid Fire.

I have done the same, I also used standard 5.56 55 gr Ball for practice when I started shooting An AR.

You can burn up a LOT of ammo practicing Rapid Fire, it is all about the cadence and timing.

Match ammo is much more expensive, even if you load you own.

If you can get ball ammo for free.....

quote:

When we were doing all this M118 White Box WAS the "good" ammuntion. It was long before M852 was made. Mexican Match was not allowed in many leg matches back then. We also quickly found the mexican match ammo with the 168 MK would not hold at 1000 yards and shot better scores there with M118

DaMan, that is what I said regarding 1000 yard shooting with the M1A/M14. Where do you find the mention of "M80" ammuntion use in that? Your comprehension level is getting lower as we proceed. Perhaps you should reassess your knowledge and understand you've put your foot in your mouth. Don't you think you should quit trying to swallow?

Larry Gibson

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Gibson:
[QUOTE]When we were doing all this M118 White Box WAS the "good" ammuntion. It was long before M852 was made.

Ah, so it was "white box" M118 that you were using as your favored 1,000 yard round in the M-14?!!!!!

Was that better than the brown box M118SB?!!!

OMG! You're such a BSer!

quote:

Will steel bullets shorten Garand barrel life?

No but shorten life of target quickly.

quote:

Originally posted by DaMan:

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Gibson:
[QUOTE]When we were doing all this M118 White Box WAS the "good" ammuntion. It was long before M852 was made.

Ah, so it was "white box" M118 that you were using as your favored 1,000 yard round in the M-14?!!!!!

Was that better than the brown box M118SB?!!!

OMG! You're such a BSer!

Your ignorance is apparent again and you are really trying to swallow that foot (perhaps both feet?) you've stuck in your mouth.

"White box" refers to XM118 and M118 7.62 Match ammunition that was made up through the '80s before M118SB was made. White box M118 was discontinued in favor of M852 which was loaded in the same "white box". M118LR (packaged in the same "white box" as older M118) loaded with the Sierra 175 MK (the ballistic twin of the M118 bullet) is the long range M118 7.62 NATO ammuntion used these days.

Yes, M118 "white box" was the "favored" round for 1000 yard matches in the M14 if reloads were not allowed. This was before (as I have already told you) the advent of M118LR. M118LR is the choice today. M118SB would be the better choice than M852 for 1000 yard matches if M118LR is not available.

If you'd care to research it there was a test and article was done in the American Rifleman "back in the day" demonstrating the accuracy superiortiy of M118 white box over M852 (loaded with the Sierra 168 MK) at 1000 yards for use in match M14s. Out to 800 yards or so the M852 was, of course, the more accurate round. However, somewhere around 800 - 900 yards the 168 MK would drop sub sonic and lose accuracy. The higher BC of the 174 gr M118 bullet kept it sonic past 1000 yards. That's why it was more accurate and preferred "back in the day" for 1000 yard matches if reloads were not allowed. M118LR is far and away more accurate at 1000 yards than is M118 white box or M118SB and M852 is not even in the running at that range.

No, I did not use M118SB for 1000 yard matches. I didn't have to because reloads became acceptable for matches and the 175 MK was then available. I used that for 1000 yard matches in my M1A and M70 target then and now. I have shot a bit of M118 SB though in my M70, M1A, match M14s, M21s and M24s. Most lots will shoot 1 - 2 moa for a 22 shot string (that's 2 sighters and 20 for record as in most match strings) depending on the rifle. That is entirely adequate for the NMC, 1000 yard SR matches and sniping as done by a DM. If you are at Master or High Master levels of competition or a sniper with a M24/M40 then the M118LR is needed for maximum accuracy potential. I have seen a couple lots of M118SB shoot right alongside of M118LR but those lots are rare. M118SB doesn't have the quality control the older M118 white box had and some lots of it don't shoot much better than some M80.

You really need to get more informed before you choke to death on your misinformed statements (I was going to say ignorant but that wouldn't be nice...oops, seems I already said that. Oh well if the shoe fits wear it....don't swallow it).

Larry Gibson

BTW; "white box" also refers to T291 and M72 match '06 ammunition.

quote:

Originally posted by DaMan:
Ah, so it was "white box" M118 that you were using as your favored 1,000 yard round in the M-14?!!!!!

Was that better than the brown box M118SB?!!!

OMG! You're such a BSer!

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Gibson:
"White box" refers to XM118 and M118 7.62 Match ammunition that was made up through the '80s before M118SB was made.

Wrong "white box" M118 production was discontinued in 1982.

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Gibson:
White box M118 was discontinued in favor of M852 which was loaded in the same "white box".

Wrong again. M118 white box was discontinued in favor of brown box M118SB.



Notice the velocity listed on the white box M118. The M118 would go subsonic and lose stability before 1,000 yards EXACTLY LIKE THE M852 in the M14.

So don't try to BS me about "effectiveness of the M118 at 1,000 yards from an M14!

Da Man

I have NEVER had M 118 173gr, US Match ammo, what most "Old Guys" call White Box, go subsonic when shot aout of a M14 or even a factory Remington 700 Varmint/"Police Sniper" rifle with the 1 in 12 twist at 1000 yards...

Never...

I have had some days where Factory Federal 168gr Match would shoot OK at 1000 yards, aand then the very next day, same rifle same lot of ammo hit the target sideways at 1000, a sure sign of going subsonic...


Also the term "White Box" or "White Box Match" ammo can mead different things to different shooters.

When I shot NRA Bullseye [Handgun] we called 45 ACP 230gr Match ammo "White Box" or "White Box Match" as well.

We called the standard Brown Box 230gr 45 ACP ammo "Hard Ball".

quote:

Originally posted by N E 450 No2:
Da Man

I have NEVER had M 118 173gr, US Match ammo, what most "Old Guys" call White Box, go subsonic when shot aout of a M14 or even a factory Remington 700 Varmint/"Police Sniper" rifle with the 1 in 12 twist at 1000 yards...

Never...

Well, I've watched them go subsonic from an M14 and do the "crazy chicken" when spotting for other team members. Remember the 700 Remington Varmint/Police Sniper has a longer 24" barrel..... the M14 (a gas gun) has a 22" barrel.

quote:

Originally posted by N E 450 No2: I have had some days where Factory Federal 168gr Match would shoot OK at 1000 yards, aand then the very next day, same rifle same lot of ammo hit the target sideways at 1000, a sure sign of going subsonic...

I'd believe that. The M852 is balistically almost an exact match of the Fed. GM308M. And they are not good at 1,000 yds. either.

quote:

Originally posted by N E 450 No2:
Also the term "White Box" or "White Box Match" ammo can mead different things to different shooters.

To me the "white box" ammo means the M118 Match ammo at 2,550 fps.

The brown box M118 Special Ball. Was loaded to higher velocities with crimped primers. Because at the time of the first sandbox, the M852 (a hollow point) wasn't approved for combat use.

DaMan

Obviously you're an internet shooter.

What part of '82 is not in the '80s?

The BC of the 174 gr FMJBT bullet used in the M118 White Box out of a 12" twist M14 at 2557 fps is .510 - .529 as measured with an Oehler M43. The MV is corrected to the muzzle. Use any ballistics program and you will see the remaining velocity to be 1250+ fps at 1000 yards. That's at 200 feet elevation. Run it at a higher elevation and it gets better. Even at the 2550 velocity it will still be sonic at 1000 yards.

I did a lot of my shooting at Fort Lewis where the elevation is about 200 feet. Now run the 168 MK and you'll find it is begining to go subsonic at 1000 yards. Much of the M852 and Fed Match with the 168 MK only do around 2550 in 24-26" barrels. In the 22" barrel of m14's it is less than 2550 most often (yes I have chronographed a lot of it). It actually gets buffeted sooner which is why sometimes it loses stability before it gets to 1000 yards. Now in reloads where the velocity is pushed over 2600 fps and the 168 MK can hold well at 1000 yards if the wind isn't too bad. However, this "discussion" is about M118 and M852 in its arsenal loadings.

White Box M118 was discontinued in favor of White Box M852. M118SB was brought out after that to satisfy the need for a combat sniper round. M118SB was brought out after M118 was discontinued. It was not "in favor of".

Not too hard to "BS" someone who is obviously ignorant of the subject. M118 White Box was/is more "effective" (actually "accurate" is the more appropriate description) out of an M14 at 1000 yards most of the time.

Larry Gibson

DaMan

BTW; There were a couple of lots of m118SB ('91/'92) that were "off the charts" velocity wise but most of it chugs along at pretty much the same velocity as M118 White Box. I chronographed it out of rack and match M14s and M24s (had a bunch of them in my vault at the SF Company I was at). Have you chronographed any or just going off internet "reports? The reasonM118SB matches M118 performance velocity and pressure wise is when it was made/introduced it was made to the same performance specs as M118 because there were too many M21s and Sniper Scopes in use with cams/adjustments for the M118 white box round. Would have been very bad juju to have a much higher pressure round. Your internet info is just "secret shit one" talking to "rumer control two"....over.

Larry Gibson

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Gibson:
DaMan

Obviously you're an internet shooter.

What part of '82 is not in the '80s?

Hmmmm! you said, ""White box" refers to XM118 and M118 7.62 Match ammunition that was made up through the '80s before M118SB was made."

I would take that to mean from 1980-1989. That's "through" the 80's and not true for M118 M118.

But nice try at editing what you said originally!

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Gibson:
The BC of the 174 gr FMJBT bullet used in the M118 White Box out of a 12" twist M14 at 2557 fps is .510 - .529 ....

Horse sheet! That would be WAY better than the modern commercial VLD 175 grain bullets. I call BS ....once again!

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Larry Gibson: However, this "discussion" is about M118 and M852 in its arsenal loadings.

No, Larry! This "discussion" is about your claims of M118 performance and ballistics!

But once again,...... nice attempted distraction!

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Gibson: White Box M118 was discontinued in favor of White Box M852.

For MATCH purposes.

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Gibson: M118SB was brought out after that to satisfy the need for a combat sniper round.

No. Wrong again. M118SB was brought out at about the same time as the discontinuation of M118 and introduction of the M852. I know this because we were using both in 1984. We would use the M852 most of the time for competition, but would use the M118SB for practice or to convert them to Mexican Match.

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Gibson: M118SB was brought out after M118 was discontinued.

Well, no shit, Sherlock?!!!

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Gibson: It was not "in favor of".

Should I have said "as an improved version of the M118"? Would that make you happy?

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Gibson: BTW; There were a couple of lots of m118SB ('91/'92) that were "off the charts" velocity wise but most of it chugs along at pretty much the same velocity as M118 White Box.

Chugs along at the same speed, eh?!!! I guess if you consider 90fps faster as "pretty much the same speed, eh?!!!

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Gibson: Not too hard to "BS" someone who is obviously ignorant of the subject.

You're right there, Larry! That's why I'm calling you on your BS!

Obviously Daman is just an internet troll looking to argue. Also obvious he never shot back when M118 white box was the ammuntion to use in the M14 for 1000 yard matches if reloads were not allowed. I'll waste no further time on him.

Larry Gibson

Larry, why don't you go back to something you know about. Like your bolo badges from basic and AIT!

I understand you qualified as "expert" in bayonet. I was quite impressed!

Geez DaMenstruation,
You sure spent a lot of time researching to continue a wrong headed argument. Have you ever seen a military specification for military ammo?

He's probably never seen any military ammo 'cept in the movies.

quote:

Originally posted by DaMan:
Larry, why don't you go back to something you know about. Like your bolo badges from basic and AIT!

I understand you qualified as "expert" in bayonet. I was quite impressed!

Actually I did (AIT at Fort Ord), good to see that impresses you but you should see the awards and decorations post basic/AIT.

Craigster

I'm sure he got all the photos he posts off the internet. Probably went there after watching the old war movies on TCM........

Larry Gibson

quote:

Originally posted by DaMan:
Larry, why don't you go back to something you know about. Like your bolo badges from basic and AIT!

I understand you qualified as "expert" in bayonet. I was quite impressed!

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Gibson:
Actually I did (AIT at Fort Ord), good to see that impresses you but you should see the awards and decorations post basic/AIT.

I'm just puzzled why a high-speed/low-drag trooper like you would post that to establish his bona fides. It would bring laughter from other high-speed/low-drag troopers!

quote:

DaMan wrote:

You can go ahead and shoot all the bi-metal cheap stuff in YOUR guns! I could care less!

Why should you, they aren't your guns. You remind me of another poster on another forum. If everybody isn't falling all over themselves following his "sage advice," he gets all pissy and childish. Only difference is at least he has a little dignity.

You and I have "bumped heads" before, however you don't seem "to get it." You post a bunch of crap and all I ever see of your "bonafides" is the articles you are reading. Exactly what have you ever done to establish your "bonafides" except post references to magazine articles, or tear into another because they don't agree with you? None that I've ever seen.

Once I mentioned that some of my work had been published. You basically called me a liar because you couldn't find it on the Internet. So what? Are you as naive as all that to believe that everything ever written by man is available on the Internet? And my offer to send you a digital copy was rebuffed. Why? Because you are a "poser" that chooses to not actually learn something different, other than what you seem to believe.

I myself believe you to be a young person, with a shallow life. You spend a good deal of your time on the Internet because you obviously don't have much of a life. Except of course to lurk here and attempt to belittle others that do not agree with you. Why would I say this? Why the astronomical number of posts made by you, "DaMan," (using an avatar of a movie hero that you obviously do not deserve to use as you are far removed from any small semblance of that character) who belittles, obfuscates, and inveigles the words of others to make a minor point.

The pity is that some who don’t know better may actually follow the advice of a person who gives advice gleaned from the work of others and has no personal experience to share.

Truly, “DaMan,” you are pathetic.

Eric