Has anyone used the new M855A1 ammo during contact with the enemy and verified its effectiveness against soft & lightly armored targets?

It will see normal usage once the stockpiles of M855 run out. And since it is lead free, it is actually "safer" on training ranges.

but is the cost to make it the same? not that I care im just curious.

Thanks for the response man, I've seen these tests (I get American Rifleman every month...the $350 NRA Life Membership for vets was my first retirement gift!) I was just looking for firsthand accounts...not asking anybody to talk about stuff they don't want to (I'm a Gulf War vet and I saw shit I still don't talk about). Just looking for firsthand experience that would give me an idea of its capability over the old load. Kind of like the difference in M80 Ball vs M852...the M14 EBR's handle each one differently and the terminal performance is different, so there is a consideration made as to what ammo to use.
I am a reloader and have been for 35+ years, so it interests me.

SSgt (Join to see)
That was surprising? I did not think it would penetrate that well?

MSG Brad Sand - Nor did I. I knew it was supposedly an improvement, but being that the Army billed it as an environmental move, not a performance move, I had my doubts.

That was my view as well. Same bullet weight (62 grains) but the "penetrator" is of a different design and thus accounts for more of the "mass". The bullet itself is LONGER to accommodate the penetrator and that changes its ballistic coefficient. NOW, to compensate for these changes they increased the powder charge (with a "new" powder as well---SMP-842 or so I've heard). I have looked at the specs on it and it is a "hot" load....(yes, I am an AVID reloader and this stuff interests me to no end. I have an "as good as factory" MK-262 Mod 1 (cannelured SMK 77 grain) and its all I shoot in my MK-18 clone with Colt M4A1 "SOCOM" barrel cut down by me to 10.3" a'la Crane NSWC. ANYWAY..LOL..the M855A1 is having a bad effect on the M4's because of its inherent "HOTNESS"...so all are being updated due to it...the main thing being the swap to the M4A1 "SOCOM" or "heavy" barrel. HOWEVER, the round is causing increased wear across the board, and that is shortening the service life of the rifles.
SO..yes, I AM slightly surprised that the new penetrator is actually penetrating the way it does vs the "old" M855...but PLEASANTLY so! Any time you change a bullet design (or create a new one) the way the M855A1 was and still keep it the SAME WEIGHT, then you honestly don't expect that much of an increase in penetration. The increase in velocity due to the "new" powder has a positive and negative effect...any old reloaded will tell you that. In this case the trade off is MUCH increased wear and tear on the rifles; so much so in fact, that the rifles themselves have to be updated/upgraded to handle it.
I was trying to research the battlefield effect and the view from the guys in the field who've used it AND the M855 to see if (in their view at least, since it's the one that really counts after all) it works BETTER/WORSE/ABOUT THE SAME. I'm certainly no "newbie" to this but since it didn't exist during my service and since I can't get my hands on any right now, I can't form an educated opinion.so I appreciate it a ton! SSgt (Join to see) - MSG Brad Sand -