Several years ago I bought 400rds of .308 Federal Gold Match 168gr BTHP.  Because of my retirement from the Air Force and my job hunt/relocation I hadn't shot it until today.  I shot 15 rounds through my RRA LAR-8.  They felt like hot loads compared to the M118LR I was shooting and after about every other shot I noticed smoke coming from the bolt/chamber.  When I looked at the cases I noticed they were so hot they had impressions on the rim from the ejector and extractor and six of them had burned through the sidewall of the case.  I stopped shooting and took the rifle home.  I cleaned the rifle and inspected it for damage and checked the headspace.  Everything checked-out and the headspace was a perfect 1.631.

Having ruled-out issues with the rifle, I called Federal.  The receptionist patched me through to their technical department and I spoke to a guy named Brian.  When I started to tell him what was wrong he immediately described how the cases had what looked like a 1/4" laser cut along the case.  He knew exactly what the problem was and said I must have some of their older GM308M.  He asked for the lot number and I told him it was 214452Y194.  He said, "yep, 1995. You'll have to dispose of it at your local hazmat disposal facility."  I said, it may be old, but it was properly kept and it is factory ammo.  I asked if they would exchange box-for-box; and he said, "no, you'll just have to dispose of it."

$400 worth of ammo down the tubes.....




UPDATE: At the request of Federal Ammunition I sent them three cases to inspect.  I just received a call from Ryan at Federal who said he received the cases and they will not replace the ammo.  He said the cause of the rupture/overpressure was because the ammo was old.  I have WWII ammo that shoots just fine, this really puzzles me.  Perhaps ammo needs an expiration date stamped on the side?!?!?!  

In any case with Federal Ammunition - Caveat Emptor

That's disappointing as hell.
"Yeah, we know that lot is bad. Sucks to be you."


I'd call someone else at Federal.
That does not sound right at all.

To be fair, the ammo is almost 20 years old. They could have made it right but I can see their point.

Call back and get another guy to talk to, or email the president of the company.

The ammo has been properly stored, not tampered with, and since he was familiar with this exact issue, it sounds like this was an existing issue.

The squeaky wheel gets the grease.
Fuck the "tech guy". Like stated above, contact the upper echelon.

Yeah. This is bullshit in my opinion.

That looks like something in your chamber is screwed up. Too perfect and repeatable results on that brass.

But, the fact they they knew the problem obviously says its the ammo

Call again, speak to stupidvisor. That's unsat.

What point?  Ammo is defective and dangerous and THEY KNOW ABOUT IT.  Shouldn't matter if it's 20 days old or 20 years old.

I would think that it would be in their own best interest to get that stuff off the streets. An even swap sounds like a great deal for them to ensure this stuff is disposed of properly.  Talk to the bosses.

Is your barrel / chamber marked .308 or 7.62 ?

If 7.62, then that's normal, since .308 is loaded to higher pressures, and many guns markers will tell you not to shoot .308 in them.

It's the same as .223 / 5.56, except the 5.56 is loaded hotter.

Marked .308.  In addition, I fired Lake City M118LR, my .308 reloads with 175gr SMK, and Black Hills .308 Match (168gr) without any issues.

Yeah, well you have an ammo problem then.

They'll work something out. There's no reason for ammo no older than that to break down for any reason. 50 year old ammo doesn't go bad if stored correctly.

Looks like brittle cases along with overpressure.

I would be fine with a swap.  I don't feel safe shooting this or giving it to someone to shoot.  To the other person who thought the fact the ammo was 20 years old was an issue; I kept the ammo in sealed ammo cans with descant.  I would welcome Federal to make a box-for-box swap and if any of my ammo appears corroded or tampered with, they wouldn't have to swap it.  My point is, I shoot; I'm not trying to take advantage of them or come out ahead.  I just want to take my family shooting and not worry the round is going to blow up in my daughter's face.

I had a similar problem when dealing with some bad cases. They basically told me to FK OFF! So, I stayed cool and put everything into a nice email with pictures. I got a reply back about three days later. Not only did they offer to replace the ammo but they offered me more than what I was sending back. SO...with that said. The same information and story you posted here, put it into a nice email (AKA: minus the cussing and name calling). Something tells me they will take care of you.

      Maybe posting this experience at several other gun-related websites will get their attention.

How much do you want for it. For the right price I will pullem remeasure the powder and reseat the projectiles

Ya that's shitty man....considering people are shooting 40yr old ammo no prob its a dick move on their part.
Ya keep calling in, post on their FB too....they hatr bad publicity. Sucks when we're getting better service from.Serbian, Russian and S.Korean companies

It's also headspaced for .308 Win. at 1.631"

I can see both sides of it. on one side of it, it is 20 year old ammo. they probably did a recall on it YEARS ago. at this point, the replacement period is over.

on your side, it sucks, but that is the gamble with buying old ammo.

Now, I'd be willing to buy it off of you for a super cheap price. better than throwing it away, and I can pull the projos

be The squeaky wheel and contact someone higher up on the food chain than brian.

yeah its been 20yrs but I cant believe they would not be interested in getting rid of this bad lot

Hmm...there is a statute of limitations on product liability (varies by state). Texas is 15 years.

Maybe not the best choice for public relations, but it could be a factor.

Keep trying to contact them. Do you think Ford would provide with you free service on a service bulletin that came out for a 1995 F150?

If it was a known-to-them defective part right from the factory that was capable of causing injury, do you think they wouldn't?

They do recalls for a long period of time for dangerous defects. Workmanship and initial quality are totally different animals than dangerous flaws.

Ford replaced a mass air meter / or rather offered to,  in 2003 on a 1989 Mustang 5.0 LX I had. It was an early version that was pre revision from that year, first year of mass air from those cars. I wasn't the original owner, but it was an original / mint car. I had an issue with it and checked the code / voltage tested it, found it bad and called in the part number to see if it was in stock. Parts man said it was still covered under the old recall / replacement, even though it wasn't a safety issue.

Nissan recalled and replaced, in 1998, almost the entire fuel system on a friend's 1987 Nissan Maxima. Fuel pump, lines, everything from the tank to the engine compartment. It was a safety recall, fires and all that.  

Another friend and I were putting a rear end in a Mustang back around 1990, and were in his grandad's shop. We used his grandad's torque wrench, which we found out was the first Crafstman click type made. It broke. so we went to Sears to buy a replacement. An older guy working there looked it up, said he could send it off for refurb or give us the number, but that it was covered, and since it was the top line in it's day, to get the equivalent for that year, which we did. We kept the original tool, and got the new tool free.

Replacing things that are dangerously defective or where cost and return percentages are low is good business, and will often times make you money with trades, new sales, and free advertising.

This situation falls under all three of the criteria above.

It is dangerous.

It is a small amount, so cost to replace is low.

Most of that ammo, that lot, has been shot already, so the percentage of it that has been or will be returned is very low.

Federal should replace it.

FWIW, I've operated or managed retail successfully all my working life, starting with a family owned company early in my teens.

Call them and tell them you are going to sell it on Craigs List.

If your ammo has ever come in contact with ammonia it will destroy the brass eventually. If it was stored near the floor in an unsealed state someone may have poured ammonia in it's direct vicinity starting the process. People mop, sometimes they use ammonia straight up.

The holes in the case side gives me the impression the this may be what happened. The "Hot" sensation you got upon firing was gas escaping to the rear. The powder charge was probably fine. The case failed for other reasons.

All that being said you should know the difference between a service bulletin and a recall.

I do. I don't think they called the mass air meter issue a TSB back in 89, not sure Ford even used that term back then, but I never sold parts or worked in the shop for Ford, I sold the whole cars starting in 91. Two years of Tech school in 90-92. I worked as a service writer for a Firestone / National parts shop from 97-2000, which is where I started hearing the term, even though I was the commercial accounts manager for an Autozone for a couple of years.

The Nissan issue was a recall.


That said, my point stands. CS is CS, and good CS makes money. Any small loss is nothing more than an investment that will in the future net positive gains in customer sales, especially referrals.

Pretty much.  I suppose it's not reasonable to expect someone to stand behind a product that is 20 years old - regardless.  But they should have replaced it.  I would have - for the liability control if nothing else.  Then again - it is Federal, not my favorite manufacturer...

Indeed.  It's going to be a good bullet at least, and the powder will be fine once you download.  I'd pitch the brass though.

Dumb, potentially dangerous advice removed - Eric802

No, I bought the ammo in 2002 or 2003 and there were no prices on the boxes.  The boxes are pristine, so I was surprised when he said they were from 1995.  I stored them in military ammo cans since I bought them, so there was no ammonia spilled on them (another post).

No, it's just how Federal brass is. It's got a very poor, and unfortunately well-earned, reputation.

For ammo thats not "old." I have 7.62x39 thats older than me and its just fine. Did you try going over his head?

Update:
I just received a call-back and they asked me to send them three cases to inspect.  Better news at least....

I purchased a Leupold 1.5X5 VXIII scope at a gun show in 1979 in Washington State.  3 years ago after using it on several guns it was on my wife 6mm Remington Model 7 and after all those years something went wrong with the adjustment knob.  So after 33 years Leupold sent me a brand new in the box $400 1.5X5 VXIII just like the original.  I don't see why Federal cannot stand behind their product.

tag

This is absolutely incorrect horsemalarkey.  Please do some research before you spout such nonsense.

SAAMI makes no distinction between 7.62MM and 308Win.

Jerry Kuhnhausen, in his classic Shop Manual (available from Fulton Armory; see the M1 Rifle Parts & Accessories or M14 Rifle Parts and Accessories Pages under Books) has published a somewhat controversial recommendation concerning .308 Winchester and 7.62x51mm NATO ammo, headspace & chambers. I broached the subject with him some months ago. He had his plate full, so we decided to chat on this in the future. When we do I'll report the results of our conversation.

I completely agree with Jerry that if you have a chamber with headspace much in excess of 1.636 (say, 1.638, SAAMI field reject), you must use only U.S. or NATO Mil Spec Ammo (always marked 7.62mm & with a cross enclosed by a circle) since the NATO mil spec calls for a far more "robust" brass case than often found in commercial (read .308 Winchester) cartridges. It is precisely why Lake City brass is so highly sought. Lake City brass is Nato spec and reloadable (most NATO is not reloadable, rather it is Berdan primed). Indeed, cheaper commercial ammo can fail at the 1.638 headspace (e.g., UMC) in an M14/M1 Garand. Many military gas guns (e.g., M14 Rifles & M60 Machine guns) run wildly long headspace by commercial (SAAMI) standards (U.S. Military field reject limit for the M60 & M14 is 1.6455, nearly 16 thousandths beyond commercial (SAAMI) GO, & nearly 8 thousandths beyond commercial (SAAMI) field reject limit!).

I also agree that 1.631-1.632 is a near perfect headspace for an M14/M1A or M1 Garand chambered in .308 Winchester. But I think that it also near perfect for 7.62mm NATO!

I have measured many, many types/manufacturers of commercial and NATO ammo via cartridge "headspace" gauges as well as "in rifle" checks. If anything, I have found various Nato ammo to be in much tighter headspace/chamber compliance than commercial ammo. Indeed, sometimes commercial ammo can not be chambered "by hand" in an M14/M1A with, say, 1.631 headspace (bolt will not close completely by gentle hand manipulation on a stripped bolt, although it will close & function when chambered by the force of the rifle's loading inertia), though I have never seen this with NATO spec ammo. I.e., if anything, NATO ammo seems to hold at the minimum SAAMI cartridge headspace of 1.629-1.630, better than some commercial ammo!

So, why set a very long 1.636 headspace in an M14/M1A or M1 Garand? It probably is the conflict mentioned above. Military headspace gauges say one thing, SAAMI headspace gauges say something else, as do the spec's/compliance covering ammo. In a court of law, who will prevail? I think Kuhnhausen gave all those who do this work a safe way out. However, I believe it not in your, or your rifle's, best interest. Whether you have a NATO chambered barrel (M14/M1 Garand G.I. ".308 Win."/7.62mm NATO barrels all have NATO chambers), or a .308 Winchester chamber, keep the headspace within SAAMI limits (1.630 GO, 1.634 NO GO, 1.638 FIELD REJECT). This subject is a bit confusing, and for me difficult to explain in a one way conversation!

Clint McKee


My mistake was one of not paying attention to what I was writing. The pressures are the same in a barrel chambered where both are safe. My wording is in error, and incorrect, but the premise of a chamber being at issue with one case or another isn't. I ran into this problem with an M1a NM I owned back in 2002-2009 that had the headspace of 1.631. So it is from experience with this exact issue that I speak, and indeed it was Federal GMM, though Hornady and Black Hills was fine.

Clint McKee is Fulton Armory btw,

UPDATE: At the request of Federal Ammunition I sent them three cases to inspect.  I just received a call from Ryan at Federal who said he received the cases and they will not replace the ammo.  He said the cause of the rupture/overpressure was because the ammo was old.  I have WWII ammo that shoots just fine, this really puzzles me.  Perhaps ammo needs an expiration date stamped on the side?!?!?!  

In any case with Federal Ammunition - Caveat Emptor

Not that I respect Federal very much anyway - but wow.

FTW!

Well, looks like I won't be purchasing much Federal ammo now.

Wow. And here I was considering purchasing another case of GMM instead of spending the time to reload for HP matches. This thread made my mind. I will also be buying PMC bronze and wolf gold instead of AE223, as it all shoots the same for me anyways. Federal lost more than the cost of replacing your ammo from me alone, and I'd bet I'm not the only one.

I agree that on such old ammo no company is obligated to replace but I am somewhat surprised that federal is going this way.

I have been under the impression that Fed gold medal was quite good stuff , I am clearly mistaken .

I won't say I will never buy Federal ammo again but I certainly will avoid it whenever possible and stick with pretty much any other available ammo that fits my needs before spending my cash at Federal