User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 2/25/2015 5:16:12 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The core of the bullet is definitely a soft steel, I can scratch it with a push pin Which part of the core? There are two separate pieces.....the front is supposed to be hardened steel and the second 2/3 is a mild steel. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2015 6:11:51 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Which part of the core? There are two separate pieces.....the front is supposed to be hardened steel and the second 2/3 is a mild steel. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The core of the bullet is definitely a soft steel, I can scratch it with a push pin Which part of the core? There are two separate pieces.....the front is supposed to be hardened steel and the second 2/3 is a mild steel. You've got the Jacket, Penetrator, and core. I'm talking about the core, but it is harder than I originally thought. Much harder than lead. It didn't deform much for all the forces I put on it using pliers and a wire cutter to open it up. I was much harder on the front section and didn't even scratch the penetrator. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2015 6:13:25 PM EDT
[#3]
deleted
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2015 6:13:43 PM EDT
[#4]
Nice pic!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2015 6:14:09 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No offense... but I do not understand the photo... Are any of those holes from this specific NM229 ? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Showed up today (from the last batch) and its definitely NM229. My rare earth magnets are much more strongly attracted to the NM229 than M855 Any plans to put some against 1/4" AR500? https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8564/16024905624_f1d4728bd7_o.jpg No offense... but I do not understand the photo... Are any of those holes from this specific NM229 ? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2015 11:27:13 PM EDT
[#6]
For those that have received their ammo from aims recent offerings, what year is it produced?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2015 11:47:58 PM EDT
[#7]
By "LOT 01 - CG - 07" I'm guessing 2007, the ammo can shows 2006 manufacture. Not from AIM though.
 I jumped the gun and bought at Midway without knowing AIM had any. Did not know of this thread nor of the lead free primer either until after ordered. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2015 6:02:50 PM EDT
[#8]
can from AIM end and side view
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2015 6:19:46 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryMine looks the same... The big white sticker looks like something they made up for the US market because its stuck ontop of the factory label. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2015 6:39:23 PM EDT
[#10]
I'll buy a box or two from you grim and put it up against m855 and ar500 next weekend if you're too snowed in.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2015 7:59:54 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
For those that have received their ammo from aims recent offerings, what year is it produced? My can from AIM is 07, the 500rds I bought from ammunitiostore before prices went bananas is 10. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 2:00:11 PM EDT
[#12]
I bought a couple cans of it too. It's due to arrive Monday.
Question: If long-term storage is an issue due to the "green" primers, has anyone looked into pulling the projectiles and reloading them into say LC brass with conventional primers? Might not be the most cost effective way to do things, but is it possible? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 4:08:36 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I bought a couple cans of it too. It's due to arrive Monday. Question: If long-term storage is an issue due to the "green" primers, has anyone looked into pulling the projectiles and reloading them into say LC brass with conventional primers? Might not be the most cost effective way to do things, but is it possible? Yes my shooting partner is already doing it. He is also switching out the powder only to see how accurate this projectile can be with the existing case and primer. Unless you are planning on storing these for over 20 years my guess is they will go bang for a long time. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 9:01:37 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'll buy a box or two from you grim and put it up against m855 and ar500 next weekend if you're too snowed in. Send me UPS label |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2015 6:03:43 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yes my shooting partner is already doing it. He is also switching out the powder only to see how accurate this projectile can be with the existing case and primer. Unless you are planning on storing these for over 20 years my guess is they will go bang for a long time. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I bought a couple cans of it too. It's due to arrive Monday. Question: If long-term storage is an issue due to the "green" primers, has anyone looked into pulling the projectiles and reloading them into say LC brass with conventional primers? Might not be the most cost effective way to do things, but is it possible? Yes my shooting partner is already doing it. He is also switching out the powder only to see how accurate this projectile can be with the existing case and primer. Unless you are planning on storing these for over 20 years my guess is they will go bang for a long time. Is there any proof that non lead primers will decay and not work over time, or is it all purely conjecture? I can't imagine that the primers will no longer be viable after only two or three decades. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2015 7:18:49 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
For those that have received their ammo from aims recent offerings, what year is it produced? 2008 |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2015 8:02:28 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:Is there any proof that non lead primers will decay and not work over time, or is it all purely conjecture? I can't imagine that the primers will no longer be viable after only two or three decades. Conjecture at this point. The good old primers would last but I can't find any guarantee on life expectancy on the new ones. I have US issue M193 from 1967 that still fires and hasn't lost any velocity, It is still HOT. In fact it is the hottest 55 gr I have ever fired. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 2:15:20 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Conjecture at this point. The good old primers would last but I can't find any guarantee on life expectancy on the new ones. I have US issue M193 from 1967 that still fires and hasn't lost any velocity, It is still HOT. In fact it is the hottest 55 gr I have ever fired. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:Is there any proof that non lead primers will decay and not work over time, or is it all purely conjecture? I can't imagine that the primers will no longer be viable after only two or three decades. Conjecture at this point. The good old primers would last but I can't find any guarantee on life expectancy on the new ones. I have US issue M193 from 1967 that still fires and hasn't lost any velocity, It is still HOT. In fact it is the hottest 55 gr I have ever fired. I'd love to see some chrony numbers with that stuff! |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 12:46:04 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Conjecture at this point. The good old primers would last but I can't find any guarantee on life expectancy on the new ones. I have US issue M193 from 1967 that still fires and hasn't lost any velocity, It is still HOT. In fact it is the hottest 55 gr I have ever fired. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:Is there any proof that non lead primers will decay and not work over time, or is it all purely conjecture? I can't imagine that the primers will no longer be viable after only two or three decades. Conjecture at this point. The good old primers would last but I can't find any guarantee on life expectancy on the new ones. I have US issue M193 from 1967 that still fires and hasn't lost any velocity, It is still HOT. In fact it is the hottest 55 gr I have ever fired. There is more to the limited shelf life of lead free priming than conjecture. Old primers, corrosive or not, do not bother me. I have a case of Russian 7.62x54r from 1946 that has not yet failed to fire. I have shot a lot of Chicom 7.62x39 from early 70's, 100% sure fire. I have Federal SP primers from the '80's I am using in handloads, no problems. Lead free primers do not use the same chemistry. I do not doubt the reliability of the NM229 lead free primer. I do question primers shelf life, how long will NM229 be reliable. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2015 11:47:51 PM EDT
[#20]
i just got mine can, its 1-07 from aim surplus. I pulled one of the rounds. and crap that thing was stuffed with powder. it was clumped up
heres the pics, im a new member, short lurker so my pics may not show but im posting the links as well. it looks like the bullet compresses the powder, just based on where the powder stops and the cannulure for the round is. 
http://i58.tinypic.com/noav4n.jpg 
http://i59.tinypic.com/313nf2v.jpg |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2015 11:55:02 PM EDT
[#21]
Yes the powder charge is compressed. Thats why the powder is balled up like that. I couldn't get all the powder of the case I pulled because of it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/4/2015 12:00:37 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yes the powder charge is compressed. Thats why the powder is balled up like that. I couldn't get all the powder of the case I pulled because of it. I had to tap mine to get it all out . heres two more pictures. 
powder is almost all the way up the shoulder near the start of the neck, the camera is tilted, not the round 
bullet length in relation to powder level. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/4/2015 12:12:42 AM EDT
[#23]
took 30 rounds from my newest can to the range today. its 06-10 that i got from ammunitionstore the day before the panic started when it was still $369/1000
my groups were...weird. they were the same size at 50 yards as they were at 100 yards (about 2.5"-2.75"). i think that because the bullet is so long and with me firing it out of a 1/9 AUG, at 50 yds it still hasnt really settled into its flight path. i'm picturing it moving like the upper left image in this graph...  one thing i noticed about the smokiness. there was only smoke or a noticeable smell if a primer was pierced. i had 2 out of the 30 that did and those were the ones that made smoke. reading up on the lead free primers, it seems that they have zinc in them and that could be where the zinc particles that testing showed were being emitted at high levels |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/4/2015 8:23:37 AM EDT
[#24]
I can't wait until we start to see some gel and barrier penetration tests with this stuff.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/4/2015 9:24:31 AM EDT
[#25]
Still waiting on mine.
Been stuck in Cheyenne for 3 days due to a snow storm. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/4/2015 10:10:43 AM EDT
[#26]
deleted
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/4/2015 2:29:22 PM EDT
[#27]
Well I have had excellent results with it in all my AR's, in over 800 rounds fired so far I have had zero problems of any kind with it . Accuracy was on par or better than Federal 855 in all my 1/7 barrels . I like it a lot and if I can get more at a far price I will buy it . My latest build with an Adams Arms 14.5 piston with the Samson 7 FF rail on it and a Anderson manufacturing lower and Hipperfire 24c trigger and aim point pro loves the stuff and gets 2/12 inch groups at 100 yards with it . Not to shabby .
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/5/2015 12:29:29 PM EDT
[#28]
NM229's design could be an answer to the windshield penetration problem from which most .223/5.56 ammo suffers.
Hopefully someone will do a gel test video behind a windshield |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/6/2015 7:42:09 PM EDT
[#29]
I purchased 1k rounds of this ammo before I found out about the Zinc and possible barrel wear problems. For 5.56 the only other ammo I've got is Wolf Gold.
Should I flip it on Armslist or keep it? I'm not into reloading yet so the berdan primer is not an issue. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/7/2015 9:27:02 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I purchased 1k rounds of this ammo before I found out about the Zinc and possible barrel wear problems. For 5.56 the only other ammo I've got is Wolf Gold. Should I flip it on Armslist or keep it? I'm not into reloading yet so the berdan primer is not an issue. From what I gather, its really not terrible. I won't be shooting it inside, but as I said before, I find it interesting that this is pretty much AP ammo. I would however, like to see the results of some of this shot at body armor, preferably the same stuff some guy recently shot where the M855 did not penetrate, but the M193 did... This video <-- I am a little skeptical, as the video doesn't show the actual rounds being loaded and fired directly after. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2015 2:55:28 PM EDT
[#31]
I did a little bit of informal accuracy testing today at the range with my AUG with 2 barrels. Blurry pics to follow.
Rifle: AUG A3M1 with 3x scope and 16", 20" 1 in 9 barrels. Previously sighted in at 150yds with Wolf Gold. 
Range: 100yds 45F with a slight breeze and a fence for a rest while kneeling. I fired one shot about every 5 seconds. 
16" shots: 10 shots each of left to right CG 08-CG-10 855, Lake City LC14 855, and Wolf Gold 55grn 1"x1" bullseye 
20" shots: this time I shot from right to left. 
My barrels like the WG much more than the 855, but the 20" did pretty well with the CG. The CG had more recoil than the LC and was noticibly smoky and had the cat piss smell. I shot around 250rds of the CG with no issues, and no signs of blown primers. 
The CG seems to be the normal "minute of man" as any ball ammo. I need to get some steel to shoot at next time to check the AP capabilities. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/16/2015 2:56:35 AM EDT
[#32]
heres an article from Nammo about the ammo and its little friend the 995
http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2014armaments/Wed16542Fredrick.pdf |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/16/2015 8:23:41 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: heres an article from Nammo about the ammo and its little friend the 995 http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2014armaments/Wed16542Fredrick.pdf good find. the 5.56 ball round discussed there though is the replacement to the one available here |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 4:22:55 PM EDT
[#34]
I found an old 1/4" steel table at work an d took it to the range to see how the CG compared to M193 and 855. At 100yds all rounds zipped right through it, but 2 layers of it stopped both the CG and M193, I didn't have anymore 855 to shoot through 2 layers. I also had a chunk of railroad that I shot with CG and 855 to see what left the deepest craters.
Blurry pics below Railroad tie from 100yds. CG on the left, 855 on the right. 
The 855 made slightly deeper craters. Slightly. 2 layers of steel, CG failed to exit the second layer but tore it up and left the steel tips in it. 
2 layers with m193. Also failed to penetrate second layer, didn't do much damage to it. 
Table I shot at. 9mm didn't do anything other than leave a mark 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 4:44:14 PM EDT
[#35]
The first real test we have seen!
Thanks so much! |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/1/2015 12:33:52 AM EDT
[#36]
Stainless steel barrels wear out much, much faster than chromed steel. Sounds like he's got good equipment but doesn't understand the purpose.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/1/2015 1:01:12 AM EDT
[#37]
How is this destroying a barrel in 1000 rounds? Because it's a match stainless steel barrel. I hear they lose their accuracy with as few as 1000 rounds of match ammo. Stainless is smoother but not harder than chromed steel.
As for the steel on steel argument, sorry the steel doesn't touch the barrel at all. It's possible the higher pressure and longer shape may reduce it's longevity but I say weigh your pros and cons. I'll certainly have to shoot a few through my hammer forged barrel  since I ordered 2000.
Look at this cross section 
The rifling depth is a small percentage of the diameter and the jacket is certainly more like ~10% in this cross section. The groves on the rifling will never come in contact with the steel. The jacket deforms and not the core and that is exactly what it's suppose to do. The core is usually slotted lengthwise so that the jacket has friction on the jacket and in other photos you clearly see this on this steel core. Perhaps there are other issues with the ammo and maybe the barrel life is decreased but this is probably going to be the case with any jacketed bullet with a higher muzzle velocity. The rifling depth is a small percentage of the diameter and the jacket is certainly more like ~10% in this cross section. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/1/2015 1:54:16 AM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How is this destroying a barrel in 1000 rounds? Because it's a match stainless steel barrel. I hear they lose their accuracy with as few as 1000 rounds of match ammo. Stainless is smoother but not harder than chromed steel. As for the steel on steel argument, sorry the steel doesn't touch the barrel at all. It's possible the higher pressure and longer shape may reduce it's longevity but I say weigh your pros and cons. I'll certainly have to shoot a few through my hammer forged barrel since I ordered 2000.
Look at this cross section http:// http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn199/dre4555/Image8__23542.1424377397.1280.1280_zpsyczzbkyf.jpg The rifling depth is a small percentage of the diameter and the jacket is certainly more like ~10% in this cross section. The groves on the rifling will never come in contact with the steel. The jacket deforms and not the core and that is exactly what it's suppose to do. The core is usually slotted lengthwise so that the jacket has friction on the jacket and in other photos you clearly see this on this steel core. Perhaps there are other issues with the ammo and maybe the barrel life is decreased but this is probably going to be the case with any jacketed bullet with a higher muzzle velocity. The rifling depth is a small percentage of the diameter and the jacket is certainly more like ~10% in this cross section. A stainless match barrel is good for about 3000 rounds of competition use. As to wear from this ammo - all I have is conjecture. But the jacket is "bimetal". I believe that is the same metallurgy used with cheap Russian ammo, and LuckerGunner tests showed greatly accelerated wear from all ammo tested that used bullets with such jackets. Worse, this ammo has a steel core, under the jacket. Yes, the deformation is in the jacket, but it seems logical that some of the deformation from the rifling presses the jacket into the softer lead core. As this core is steel, the jacket is not going to deform into the core as easy under the lands. The combination of bimetal jacket, which can't deform even as easy as Russian bullet jackets can, and then further combine that with compressed ball powder, and - on paper at least - this looks like about the worst bullet ever, for anyone who cares about barrel life. Maybe it's not as bad in reality as it looks. But considering this ammo isn't exactly bargin priced, I can't see much reason to purchasing this, over the many other similarly or cheaper priced options. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/1/2015 11:09:34 AM EDT
[#39]
deleted
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2015 1:09:12 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Thank you for sharing ! What was the temp. that day ? I am curious if your CG will show any difference when it is hotter. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I did a little bit of informal accuracy testing today at the range with my AUG with 2 barrels. Blurry pics to follow. Rifle: AUG A3M1 with 3x scope and 16", 20" 1 in 9 barrels. Previously sighted in at 150yds with Wolf Gold. http://i444.photobucket.com/albums/qq166/beerswimmer/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_20150310_143512_125_zpsdby81smw.jpg Range: 100yds 45F with a slight breeze and a fence for a rest while kneeling. I fired one shot about every 5 seconds. http://i444.photobucket.com/albums/qq166/beerswimmer/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_20150310_140621_728_zpszualchsg.jpg 16" shots: 10 shots each of left to right CG 08-CG-10 855, Lake City LC14 855, and Wolf Gold 55grn 1"x1" bullseye http://i444.photobucket.com/albums/qq166/beerswimmer/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_20150310_135938_841_zpspqfynklp.jpg 20" shots: this time I shot from right to left. http://i444.photobucket.com/albums/qq166/beerswimmer/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_20150310_140719_418_zpsyoghti7i.jpg My barrels like the WG much more than the 855, but the 20" did pretty well with the CG. The CG had more recoil than the LC and was noticibly smoky and had the cat piss smell. I shot around 250rds of the CG with no issues, and no signs of blown primers. http://i444.photobucket.com/albums/qq166/beerswimmer/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_20150310_141021_002_zpssqlfhshe.jpg The CG seems to be the normal "minute of man" as any ball ammo. I need to get some steel to shoot at next time to check the AP capabilities. Thank you for sharing ! What was the temp. that day ? I am curious if your CG will show any difference when it is hotter. Thanks. It was a beautiful 40F! The steel core didn't touch my rifling, I found a bullet laying on the dirt. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2015 3:11:29 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Thanks. It was a beautiful 40F! The steel core didn't touch my rifling, I found a bullet laying on the dirt. [img]http://i444.photobucket.com/albums/qq166/beerswimmer/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_20150330_123947_852_zpsyip7bz65.jpg[/url] Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I did a little bit of informal accuracy testing today at the range with my AUG with 2 barrels. Blurry pics to follow. Rifle: AUG A3M1 with 3x scope and 16", 20" 1 in 9 barrels. Previously sighted in at 150yds with Wolf Gold. http://i444.photobucket.com/albums/qq166/beerswimmer/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_20150310_143512_125_zpsdby81smw.jpg Range: 100yds 45F with a slight breeze and a fence for a rest while kneeling. I fired one shot about every 5 seconds. http://i444.photobucket.com/albums/qq166/beerswimmer/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_20150310_140621_728_zpszualchsg.jpg 16" shots: 10 shots each of left to right CG 08-CG-10 855, Lake City LC14 855, and Wolf Gold 55grn 1"x1" bullseye http://i444.photobucket.com/albums/qq166/beerswimmer/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_20150310_135938_841_zpspqfynklp.jpg 20" shots: this time I shot from right to left. http://i444.photobucket.com/albums/qq166/beerswimmer/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_20150310_140719_418_zpsyoghti7i.jpg My barrels like the WG much more than the 855, but the 20" did pretty well with the CG. The CG had more recoil than the LC and was noticibly smoky and had the cat piss smell. I shot around 250rds of the CG with no issues, and no signs of blown primers. http://i444.photobucket.com/albums/qq166/beerswimmer/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_20150310_141021_002_zpssqlfhshe.jpg The CG seems to be the normal "minute of man" as any ball ammo. I need to get some steel to shoot at next time to check the AP capabilities. Thank you for sharing ! What was the temp. that day ? I am curious if your CG will show any difference when it is hotter. Thanks. It was a beautiful 40F! The steel core didn't touch my rifling, I found a bullet laying on the dirt. [img]http://i444.photobucket.com/albums/qq166/beerswimmer/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_20150330_123947_852_zpsyip7bz65.jpg[/url] That.. doesn't look very coppery to me. That looks like steel. It looks like the steel (excuse me, "bimetal") jacket, with the copper washing scrapped off. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2015 4:29:09 PM EDT
[#42]
Only other pic I have, it's hard to take a pic of something so small! The copper was NOT worn through on it. It did have black on it, I'm guessing carbon and sealant? The steel at the butt is visible(didn't get a pic) and is bright silver and plainly much different than the bright copper. From the shredded bullets I found the copper is pretty thick, no steel on steel.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2015 11:12:30 PM EDT
[#43]
Where is the bimetal jacket description coming from? I thought the jacket was copper or a copper alloy. I did not think this ammo has steel or copper plated steel(bimetal) jacket.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2015 12:36:03 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Where is the bimetal jacket description coming from? I thought the jacket was copper or a copper alloy. I did not think this ammo has steel or copper plated steel(bimetal) jacket. the jacket is supposed to be Tombac, which is copper and zinc |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2015 1:08:06 AM EDT
[#45]
***
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2015 2:33:07 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Where is the bimetal jacket description coming from? I thought the jacket was copper or a copper alloy. I did not think this ammo has steel or copper plated steel(bimetal) jacket. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Where is the bimetal jacket description coming from? I thought the jacket was copper or a copper alloy. I did not think this ammo has steel or copper plated steel(bimetal) jacket. From AIM website Recent Production (2007+) Surplus Swedish Carl Gustaf NATO SS109/M855 5.56X45 (.223) Ammunition. Features a 62grn Steel Core Full Bi-metal Jacketed Bullet, Brass Case and Non-Corrosive Berdan Primer. Packaged 10rds on a Charger Sealed in a Plastic Pack, 1,000rds in a Resealable M2A1 .50cal Can. Includes M16/AR15 and HK G36 Magazine Loaders as Pictured. I thought I also remembered a report of it being magnetic that someone posted, but can't recall |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2015 5:58:35 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
From AIM website I thought I also remembered a report of it being magnetic that someone posted, but can't recall Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Where is the bimetal jacket description coming from? I thought the jacket was copper or a copper alloy. I did not think this ammo has steel or copper plated steel(bimetal) jacket. From AIM website Recent Production (2007+) Surplus Swedish Carl Gustaf NATO SS109/M855 5.56X45 (.223) Ammunition. Features a 62grn Steel Core Full Bi-metal Jacketed Bullet, Brass Case and Non-Corrosive Berdan Primer. Packaged 10rds on a Charger Sealed in a Plastic Pack, 1,000rds in a Resealable M2A1 .50cal Can. Includes M16/AR15 and HK G36 Magazine Loaders as Pictured. I thought I also remembered a report of it being magnetic that someone posted, but can't recall I think Aim's description regarding the jacket is incorrect. Or at least incorrect in the typical bimetal sence as in copper washed steel jacket. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2015 3:16:17 PM EDT
[#48]
I cannot count how many people have told me their stainless wore out around 1000...
And yes lot of conjecturing about metalurgical theories has been happening but here are some useful tidbits: The ammo is a two part hardened steel tip resting on a softer alloy steel core with a copper/zinc full metal jacket. This jacket combo is considered a "gliding metal" and is essentially a FMJ with a small amount of zinc. It is not anything like the Steel/Zinc formulation of the Russian ammo. Bi-metal means two metals, of which type is not specified by the term. Steel jackets are terrible for your barrel as someone quoted about the Tulamo brand but if you have a cheap barrel then do whatever you want. I wouldn't touch that Russian stuff. The Carl Gustav has been giving people better accuracy than average M855 and it has a composition and trajectory similar to the new US M855 Enhanced Performance round so why anyone would call this "expensive" isn't clear to me (I quess I don't know how much they've paid). I got a few cases from Ammunitionstore.com. I broke open 5 rounds and the ball powder wasn't clumped, flowed like sand out of the case with maybe 5-7 grains remaining. The fact it was made in Sweden by such a good company was the reason I bought it right away. BTW nothing in IKEA is made is Sweden... I'll post some pics. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2015 3:37:37 PM EDT
[#49]
Upon opening the box you see two speed loaders and 10 round clips of individually sealed rounds in thick plastic. This is awesome. Every set of ten remains waterproof. The speed loader works perfectly.
Upon ripping open some rounds I found that the powder was completely free flowing and looked non-compacted. The Copper/Zinc jacket is super thick and is not ferromagnetic so it's not cheap steel like the russian stuff. I am talking about the jacket not the casing. The Gustav is brass but due to the partial beridian primer it wouldn'y be great to reload. There are two sections to the core and both are ferromagnetic (steel or steel alloy, see pics). With a pair of visegrips I could tell the tip section was much harder. This is a higher pressure ammo for military rifles. It might overpressure your gun if you don't have a gun with the spec to handle the pressure. I'll be firing it through a cold hammer forged barrel on a rifle rifle made to shoot 62 grain military ammo so I am expecting no problems. If you don't have a military grade gun then maybe it'll tear it up. I will follow up with post range info like chamber cleanliness and accuracy... http://s304.photobucket.com/user/dre4555/library/Carl%20Gustav I am currently rethinking if I should just keep this deal to myself so it wont sell out
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2015 4:07:41 PM EDT
[#50]
Did anyone gel test it yet?
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
