Opinions on this round out of a MOE MID w/1 in 8 twist, and a 6920 with a 1 in 7 as a defensive round. Any input from anyone who has used this out of said barrels appreciated. Any better picks ? Thanks.

If you want the 77-gr MatchKing bullet, I'd recommend Mk 262 Mod 1 in 5.56 NATO, available commercially from Black Hills Ammunition (link to midwayusa.com).

For non-5.56 NATO, I also like Hornady .223Rem 75-gr TAP FPD (link to midwayusa.com).

Both should work fine in 1/8 barrels (both will work in 1/7 barrels).

Thanks. That Hornady looks pretty good based on the reviews posted in your link. I'll try some of that too.

It's good stuff. I don't know how much of a difference it would be between those 2 barrels though.

IMI uses them too (SMK bullets)

I have used the Sierra 77gr MatchKing almost exclusively for the past 5 years in my F class AR for 600 yard matches. I can only speak to the accuracy of the projectile, not its defensive potential. I know that in my handloads, I am getting about 0.75 MOA groups at distance.

Please remember that the MatchKing is a ballistic hollow point, not a hunting bullet, it is not designed for controlled expansion. While the MatchKing may expand, don't expect the expansion to be consistent.

Sadly, I can't offer an alternate bullet choice, since 99% of my rifle shooting is KD precision shooting.

__________________
Judge control not gun control!

Match bullets are for precision shooting accuracy. They do not make good defensive rounds. You would be looking for a soft point or a standard hollow point for that purpose. I'm not sure if there is a hollow point out there for the .223/.5.56 but there are jacketed soft points.

Except that Black Hills got Sierra to put a cannelure on the 77-gr. MatchKing, making it the ultimate in long-range accuracy as well as fragmenting defensive capability.

Check out Shooting Times: Reviewing Black Hills’ MK 262 Mod 1 Ammo

Interesting! If I read the article correctly, they went back to the tumbling bullet idea as originally intended when the M-16 first came out. That makes the 5.56 back into a lethal round instead of a hole puncher.

I find it funny that the Hague Convention keeps being brought up. The U.S. never signed on to that and thus, was never limited by it. We had soft point rounds in Afghanistan and special forces often uses hollow points. Ball rounds are just cheaper, that's why most service personnel see them. The Hague Convention never had anything to do with it.

Thanks for the input, folks. Over the last few days I have been reading reviews on a variety of round options, some of which have been suggested here. I'll probably buy a box of each and experiment a bit to see what either rifle likes.

One round not mentioned here that seems impressive is made by Barnes. In various grains I've seen pictures of petaling like a ninja throwing star after beong recovered from various game.

Any thoughts here on Barnes?

which Barnes rounds are they?

Terminal effects of the Barnes TSX are better than the other bullets but it is also way more expensive, the TSX 70 grain Brown Tip is also used by SOCOM. All 3 of the bullets mentioned are good defensive rounds with the cannelured 77 grain SMK and 75 grain Hornady being excellent and the 55-70 grain Barnes TSX being superb with the 5.56 loadings of all 3 being just a tad better than the .223 version. But the question is what engagement range are you looking at? The 77 and 75 grain bullets shine at long range accuracy but for defensive use out of a carbine there are other excellent loads that are much less expensive. If I were looking for a carbine load for out to 3-400 meters that is readily available, reasonably priced with good terminal effects I would start with the 62 grain Federal Fusion. If it shot well out of my rifle I would stock up on it.

Hollow point Spitzer type bullets are typicially used exclusively for precision shooting. The reason for this is because it allows a longer shape that is more efficient in ballistic terms (longer bullets produce less drag). Due to the much higher velocities typical to rifle calibers hollow point bullets normally don't perform well in wounding effects, typically they'll come apart on impact and fail to produce enough penetration.

Oddly enough FMJ bullets have proven to be very effective in wounding effects because the Spitzer profile produces a bullet with a rearward weight bias that causes it to tumble on impact. So, don't ignore your basic military "ball" ammo, it's actually quite effective. For Hunting what has proven to work are bullets that feature a controlled expansion that allows deeper penetration than what is needed for the Human torso. So, you'll see lot's of different designs that are specifically intended to expand at a controlled manner while retaining as much of the full mass of the bullet as possible. One plus for many of these Hunting bullets is that they are extremely well constructed and balanced and as a result are typically more accurate than your basic FMJ.

So, for defense in the 223, I'd likely go with Hornady SST or Nosler Accubond because I've had good experience with them for accuracy.

I went on tour in search of Barnes, Black Hills or Hornady defensive ammo today. Didn't find any unless I go online. I did pick up some Fusion 62 grain and have a question regarding that.

There are two loads in 62 grain. One is labeled MSR, the other is not. I chose the not. The salesman sad it is a better round for defensive purposes than the MSR. I don't know that I believe that, in fact I'm not sure there is any decernible difference between the two, based on a cursory search of reviews and explanations about the "differences" online.

I chose the regular Fusion after opening a box and looking at the brass. The MSR brass cases all had random dents below the shoulder. The standard Fusion brass was perfect. I was told at the store that "the dents were normal and were a byproduct of the process used to increase the accuarcy of
those rounds".

Anybody here have a definitive explanation or comment on these ?