User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 5/27/2015 8:51:54 AM EDT
[#1]
Kinetic energy is in what I had in mind when I said power. Poor choice of a word and I know better, so thanks for clearing that up and reopening this. Any conical bullet will yaw eventually but for SD/HD one with the shortest neck possible is the better choice, and that's not something Tula was meant for or does.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2015 9:52:18 AM EDT
[#2]
Well, how does everyone feel about Tula 7.62x39mm?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2015 11:31:47 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Well, how does everyone feel about Tula 7.62x39mm? Same as for .223 - it is steel jacketed, so it does not fragment or expand, which in turns means a minimal permanent wound cavity. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2015 3:25:50 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That's not power; that's KINETIC ENERGY. Power is work over time, which is a much different story. Kinetic energy is one measure that is often used in terminal ballistics, but momentum is just as, if not more so, important. The important point I would like to make is that energy is an interesting number to look at, but there are so many factors that go into a bullet's terminal performance that it's not a very good indicator of what a bullet will do. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Total energy. Projectile mass multiplied by the projectile velocity squared divided by 450436. The explanation. The equation for energy is E=1/2 mv*2. In the fps system of uinits, v is in
feet per second and mass (m) in in the lowly slug. If the bullet weight is in grains, you must divide by 7000 to get pounds and then divide by 32.1740 to get slugs. And you still have that 1/2 to take care of, so you end up dividing by 2 x 7000 x 32.1740= 450,436. You end up with energy in foot pounds. That's not power; that's KINETIC ENERGY. Power is work over time, which is a much different story. Kinetic energy is one measure that is often used in terminal ballistics, but momentum is just as, if not more so, important. The important point I would like to make is that energy is an interesting number to look at, but there are so many factors that go into a bullet's terminal performance that it's not a very good indicator of what a bullet will do. Power is a generic adjective used as a barometer of measurement in regards to energy. Kinetic energy is a form of power. When discussing rounds, kinetic energy is the best way to measure and compare the POWER of different projectiles, as the energy equates from the mass and velocity of the projectile. About the tula, it appears that it (much like the old norinco) seems to have an unknown property that allows it to exhibit early upset and significant yaw. All of the ballistics gel tests prove this. Just because it is not popular ammo, doesn't discount the results from real first hand tests. Yaw isn't related to jacket material / thickness. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2015 4:57:59 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Power is a generic adjective used as a barometer of measurement in regards to energy. Kinetic energy is a form of power. When discussing rounds, kinetic energy is the best way to measure and compare the POWER of different projectiles, as the energy equates from the mass and velocity of the projectile. About the tula, it appears that it (much like the old norinco) seems to have an unknown property that allows it to exhibit early upset and significant yaw. All of the ballistics gel tests prove this. Just because it is not popular ammo, doesn't discount the results from real first hand tests. Yaw isn't related to jacket material / thickness. Wrong on all levels. It's obvious you've never taken a physics class since no one who has would (mis)use power and energy as being somehow equivalent. If Tula doesn't fragment and merely yaws earlier doesn't make it wonder ammo. It's still just a non-fragmenting FMJ and the permanent wound cavity will be minimal. If all it took as early yaw, M43 in 7.62x39 would be an excellent killer - but it's not. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2015 6:12:23 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
By that line of thinking, a BB gun is sufficient for TSHTF. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Absolutely it is. Anyone who says otherwise, I promise, wouldn't want it being shot at them. By that line of thinking, a BB gun is sufficient for TSHTF. You should be in politics 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2015 6:17:02 PM EDT
[#7]
Jesus, holy couch commanding basement dwellers. I have killed a dozen plus, 4 legged, 100 lb plus animals at 50-100 yards easily. I am just betting it will kill a humanoid with correct shot placement, which is everything. Just a wild ass guess
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2015 6:19:59 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No.... I would not stake my life on it. I have read enough reported trouble here on AR15.com to see that it is not reliable enough to count on it. Its bullet might work "ok" ballistically... but it is far from perfect..... it is not a consistent performer at all. As a example...what if your car only started 80% of the time ? You really want it to work 99.95% of the time.... so you buy a better car, not because the 80%er didn't work... but the 99.95% car ( with better quality parts ) is more reliable. Tula / Wolf / Steel Cased .223 ammo is , IMHO.... blasting ammo, made as cheaply as humanly possible. Quality control is severely lacking. There are MUCH better choices for a little more money. Bottom line.... if Tula is good enough for you ... then keep it... But it is not even in the running for me. So you are alleging Tula works 80% of the time or you have proof that it does? I see how some manufacturers sue members here, do not agree but I understand. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2015 6:21:12 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
as long as it runs Tula doesn't run in my AR Get a new one or oil it. I have 9 ARs, an HK 91 and Sig 556, it and Wolf function 100% |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2015 6:23:35 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Wrong on all levels. It's obvious you've never taken a physics class since no one who has would (mis)use power and energy as being somehow equivalent. If Tula doesn't fragment and merely yaws earlier doesn't make it wonder ammo. It's still just a non-fragmenting FMJ and the permanent wound cavity will be minimal. If all it took as early yaw, M43 in 7.62x39 would be an excellent killer - but it's not. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Power is a generic adjective used as a barometer of measurement in regards to energy. Kinetic energy is a form of power. When discussing rounds, kinetic energy is the best way to measure and compare the POWER of different projectiles, as the energy equates from the mass and velocity of the projectile. About the tula, it appears that it (much like the old norinco) seems to have an unknown property that allows it to exhibit early upset and significant yaw. All of the ballistics gel tests prove this. Just because it is not popular ammo, doesn't discount the results from real first hand tests. Yaw isn't related to jacket material / thickness. Wrong on all levels. It's obvious you've never taken a physics class since no one who has would (mis)use power and energy as being somehow equivalent. If Tula doesn't fragment and merely yaws earlier doesn't make it wonder ammo. It's still just a non-fragmenting FMJ and the permanent wound cavity will be minimal. If all it took as early yaw, M43 in 7.62x39 would be an excellent killer - but it's not. Instead of berating me with ad hominem attacks, why don't you show how there was anything incorrect with what I said. And FYI, a fmj bullet with early and severe yaw will cause a more effective wound cavity than one that has a very late yaw. Think green tips in Somalia vs. 7N6. They are both FMJs that yaw, are you saying they perform exactly the same? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2015 7:00:27 PM EDT
[#11]
Who cares how it performs if it actually fires. If I am digging out stuck cases, getting key holes and short stroking 20% of the time, what good is it?
Just my experience. I've shot a couple of cases and I found it to be very unreliable. I quit buying it and sold the rest I had. It could be a SHTF load, if it was all I had. YMMV |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2015 7:08:12 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Jesus, holy couch commanding basement dwellers. I have killed a dozen plus, 4 legged, 100 lb plus animals at 50-100 yards easily. I am just betting it will kill a humanoid with correct shot placement, which is everything. Just a wild ass guess .22lr will kill people just fine with correct shot placement as well. As always, the proper question isn't "Will this work?", because damn near anything can kill someone. The proper question is "Is this the best choice of what's available given that I might get one shot to protect myself?" That's what makes an appropriate discussion in this forum. Because we can sit here and flap gums about "I wouldn't want to get hit with xxx" or "I've killed plenty of hogs with xxx" but none of the "This is good enough" stuff reaches the question of "What are the BETTER options?" |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2015 7:14:58 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Absolutely it is. Anyone who says otherwise, I promise, wouldn't want it being shot at them. Factually, your incorrect. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2015 7:17:02 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Absolutely it is. Anyone who says otherwise, I promise, wouldn't want it being shot at them. That's a retarded thing to say. If it's all that could be found, why not. That's about the only time it's an acceptable "choice". |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2015 7:18:53 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Federal fusion is actually less "powerful" a round than tula. In fact, it is on the slower side of .223 loadings. And as long as tula is reliable in your gun and you trust it, I don't see why it's a bad choice. It out penetrates M193 and M855 in some mediums such as wood, and seems to be fairly terminally effective. The only X factor is the reliability, some people have had problems with that ammo in their guns. Thoroughly shoot it and see how it performs for you. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I say no if we're talking .223. Something cleaner with more power and a better performing bullet would be in order for SHTF scenario. Think about it, in that situation you are probably 1000% chance more likely to need it for HD/SD then now. XM193 or M855 would be better but still far from the best. If I had the choice, Federal fusion, or the TSX, GMX projectiles would be great all around choices. Federal fusion is actually less "powerful" a round than tula. In fact, it is on the slower side of .223 loadings. And as long as tula is reliable in your gun and you trust it, I don't see why it's a bad choice. It out penetrates M193 and M855 in some mediums such as wood, and seems to be fairly terminally effective. The only X factor is the reliability, some people have had problems with that ammo in their guns. Thoroughly shoot it and see how it performs for you. That "X" factor is a pretty big deal Blain. I wouldn't want too shelf ammo if it didn't cycle. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2015 7:40:51 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
.22lr will kill people just fine with correct shot placement as well. As always, the proper question isn't "Will this work?", because damn near anything can kill someone. The proper question is "Is this the best choice of what's available given that I might get one shot to protect myself?" That's what makes an appropriate discussion in this forum. Because we can sit here and flap gums about "I wouldn't want to get hit with xxx" or "I've killed plenty of hogs with xxx" but none of the "This is good enough" stuff reaches the question of "What are the BETTER options?" Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Jesus, holy couch commanding basement dwellers. I have killed a dozen plus, 4 legged, 100 lb plus animals at 50-100 yards easily. I am just betting it will kill a humanoid with correct shot placement, which is everything. Just a wild ass guess .22lr will kill people just fine with correct shot placement as well. As always, the proper question isn't "Will this work?", because damn near anything can kill someone. The proper question is "Is this the best choice of what's available given that I might get one shot to protect myself?" That's what makes an appropriate discussion in this forum. Because we can sit here and flap gums about "I wouldn't want to get hit with xxx" or "I've killed plenty of hogs with xxx" but none of the "This is good enough" stuff reaches the question of "What are the BETTER options?" I hear ya. There is always a better option or cheeto stained fingers that will post, and tell you so 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2015 7:58:25 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: And FYI, a fmj bullet with early and severe yaw will cause a more effective wound cavity than one that has a very late yaw. Think green tips in Somalia vs. 7N6. They are both FMJs that yaw, are you saying they perform exactly the same? No. I never said it nor implied it. The early yaw will produce a better result, but only slightly more so. It isn't in the same league as a well-performing bullet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2015 9:58:34 PM EDT
[#18]
If Tula doesn't fragment and merely yaws earlier doesn't make it wonder ammo. It's still just a non-fragmenting FMJ and the permanent wound cavity will be minimal. If all it took as early yaw, M43 in 7.62x39 would be an excellent killer - but it's not. You mean M67. M43 penetrates deeply before yawing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2015 10:23:07 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Well, how does everyone feel about Tula 7.62x39mm? Hi, I've put a considerable amount of Tula 7.62x39 through an Armalite SPR-01 AR-15 and 10.5" AR Pistol with a Faxon Isonite QPQ barrel testing magazines and have come to these conclusions. (1) It goes bang reliably, and cycles reliably in chromed/Isonite chambers (2) It runs about 3 to 3.5 MOA through my AR's (3) It is not crimped and I have had instances where when I ejected the round and the bullet stayed in the barrel and the case and powder ejected creating an awful mess. This always happened with a round that had been used in dry cycling tests. Not being crimped the bolt functioned like an inertial bullet bullet puller and the round's oal increased to the point were it engaged the rifling, the bullet then stuck and case ejected. I just quit using Tula for dry cycling tests and the problem went away. (4) The rounds are not sealed so moisture and oil may be issues. (5) It's available over the counter at Walmart. (6) It is not a "hot round" (7) It's plinking ammo, not end of the world type stuff. Romanian SADU (Red Army), and Golden Tiger are much better for comparable pricing in case lot sizes.. Best Regards: |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2015 12:02:52 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Absolutely it is. Anyone who says otherwise, I promise, wouldn't want it being shot at them. I don't want to be shot at by a Ruger 10/22. That doesn't make it an ideal defensive weapon.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2015 12:30:03 AM EDT
[#21]
Wow that's really depressing to hear about the Tula 762x39 performance as I have several 640 rd tins stashed for emergency to be used in a slr, sgl, and wasr. I just figured russian ammo would work great in a russian platform. Has anybody tested pdx1 7.62x39?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2015 3:22:56 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Wow that's really depressing to hear about the Tula 762x39 performance as I have several 640 rd tins stashed for emergency to be used in a slr, sgl, and wasr. I just figured russian ammo would work great in a russian platform. Has anybody tested pdx1 7.62x39? The hot stuff for ballistics performance coming out of Russia today is Golden Tiger 7.62x39. Remarkably improved bullet design and reliability. Plink with the Tula, stack the Golden Tiger for a rainy day. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2015 7:39:47 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If it runs in your gun and its all you have available, it doesn't matter if its good or not, it will be your SHTF ammo. I prefer a good brass case load but thats just me. This I built my HD carbine to work with almost anything including Tula and Wolf. One I run out of XM193 then a few thousand rounds of Wolf is it. Better than using your AR as a club. The dead zombie won't know the difference.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2015 8:35:04 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You need to educate yourself on how to interpret ballistic gelatin results: http://www.lightfighter.net/topic/ordnance-gelatin-test-assessment-for-rifle-and-pistol-calibers Like Eric802 already mentioned: ANY conical bullet will yaw. The wounding effect of such a bullet is very predictable and completely underwhelming when compared to well-performing ammo. Granted, if your only criteria are "it makes a hole and it's cheap" then yes - I suppose it's good ammo. Personally, I would suggest stocking up on it for cheap plinking ammo and to start building a stash of quality ammo. Build up the quality stash and over time it will be big enough. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Just made a better wound channel than I though it would. I do try to stock as much IMI 193 as I can becuase I know that stuff works. As well as some of their 77 grain Razorcore. I guess the Tula did better than I expected (yawed and didn't make an ice pick hole) and as cheap as it is keeping a couple thousand rounds is economical. You need to educate yourself on how to interpret ballistic gelatin results: http://www.lightfighter.net/topic/ordnance-gelatin-test-assessment-for-rifle-and-pistol-calibers Like Eric802 already mentioned: ANY conical bullet will yaw. The wounding effect of such a bullet is very predictable and completely underwhelming when compared to well-performing ammo. Granted, if your only criteria are "it makes a hole and it's cheap" then yes - I suppose it's good ammo. Personally, I would suggest stocking up on it for cheap plinking ammo and to start building a stash of quality ammo. Build up the quality stash and over time it will be big enough. Ill admit I just know about gel test from what I gather on videos and reading FBI stuffs. That link only works for members BTW. Do you have another link or can post the info. If its extensive I guess I just create an account. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2015 11:24:00 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You mean M67. M43 penetrates deeply before yawing. Quote HistoryQuoted: If Tula doesn't fragment and merely yaws earlier doesn't make it wonder ammo. It's still just a non-fragmenting FMJ and the permanent wound cavity will be minimal. If all it took as early yaw, M43 in 7.62x39 would be an excellent killer - but it's not. You mean M67. M43 penetrates deeply before yawing. Yes, thank you - I was incorrect. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2015 11:26:27 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Wow that's really depressing to hear about the Tula 762x39 performance as I have several 640 rd tins stashed for emergency to be used in a slr, sgl, and wasr. I just figured russian ammo would work great in a russian platform. Has anybody tested pdx1 7.62x39? Your ammo will work just fine in your AK's. The discussion here is mostly about .223 in ARs and there have been more problems on that side. There are several new types of domestically-produced 7.62x39 ammo on the market specifically for self defense. The PDX1 is probably good to go, as are Hornady and a few others. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2015 11:30:44 AM EDT
[#27]
Let me know if this works - I can't see photobucket images at work so I don't know if the picture shows up.
Assuming properly prepared, calibrated, and sized gel blocks:  "Barrier Blind” ammunition should demonstrate minimal changes in terminal performance between unobstructed shots into bare gelatin and those obstructed by intermediate barriers. With proper gel testing does the gel blocks are NOT dyed, as this prevents accurate interpretation of the data and overemphasizes the temporary cavity effects. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2015 11:46:35 AM EDT
[#28]
Works for me.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2015 9:13:59 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Wow that's really depressing to hear about the Tula 762x39 performance as I have several 640 rd tins stashed for emergency to be used in a slr, sgl, and wasr. I just figured russian ammo would work great in a russian platform. Has anybody tested pdx1 7.62x39? Hi, Humidity and oil would not be issues with Tula 7.62x39 as long as it is hermetically sealed in a spam can. Regards: 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2015 11:45:34 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Wow that's really depressing to hear about the Tula 762x39 performance as I have several 640 rd tins stashed for emergency to be used in a slr, sgl, and wasr. I just figured russian ammo would work great in a russian platform. Has anybody tested pdx1 7.62x39? Meh. Probably okay, but Fusion, TSX, and various soft points did better. Link to test 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2015 11:46:45 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Your ammo will work just fine in your AK's. The discussion here is mostly about .223 in ARs and there have been more problems on that side. There are several new types of domestically-produced 7.62x39 ammo on the market specifically for self defense. The PDX1 is probably good to go, as are Hornady and a few others. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Wow that's really depressing to hear about the Tula 762x39 performance as I have several 640 rd tins stashed for emergency to be used in a slr, sgl, and wasr. I just figured russian ammo would work great in a russian platform. Has anybody tested pdx1 7.62x39? Your ammo will work just fine in your AK's. The discussion here is mostly about .223 in ARs and there have been more problems on that side. There are several new types of domestically-produced 7.62x39 ammo on the market specifically for self defense. The PDX1 is probably good to go, as are Hornady and a few others. I'll defer to your judgment, of course but I think most of the Russian soft point is probably pretty decent. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 2:50:07 AM EDT
[#32]
If shit truly did hit the fan, I'd be happy with whatever ammo I could find.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 9:59:17 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If shit truly did hit the fan, I'd be happy with whatever ammo I could find. +1. Anything is better then nothing, but we can stock up on a sufficient stash now and have a say in what we get. I roll my own Fusion loads and stack it and the 77gr Nosler farely deep. Also just picked up some Black Hills 77gr TMK that I hear is pretty devastating and accurate as a mofo. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/30/2015 10:15:42 AM EDT
[#34]
I have tested some 223 Tula about 10 years ago, the groups were easily twice the size of even the cheapest brass US ammo like Winchester. 4"+ at 100 meters.
More accurate than an AK I suppose. I would shoot it if I had absolutely nothing else available. There was another anecdotal data than steel ammo slightly accelerates wear of extractors and other parts. Not enough to make a financial difference (cheaper to buy the ammo and replace the parts) but you are talking about TSHTF, where presumably spare parts might not be available. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/30/2015 10:52:43 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'll take any ammo over no ammo if the time comes. Ditto........ |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/2/2015 5:38:29 PM EDT
[#36]
I definitely wouldn't. I buy Tula for practice but after about 150 rounds every 3rd or 4th case sticks in the chamber. If SHTF and I didn't have time to be cleaning my chamber out after every shooting session this would become a big problem. It's not terrible ammo and is great for going out in the backyard and shooting a couple of mags worth but I would never bet my life on the stuff.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/3/2015 11:13:42 AM EDT
[#37]
I couldn't resist using the Arfcom Funeral guy meme. I think as others have mentioned, if it's really SHTF, you won't care what you have as long as it goes bang. But if you really think you're ever going to be in a situation where you have to shoot someone, you may want to buy something else. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/3/2015 11:53:45 AM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I have tested some 223 Tula about 10 years ago, the groups were easily twice the size of even the cheapest brass US ammo like Winchester. 4"+ at 100 meters. More accurate than an AK I suppose. I would shoot it if I had absolutely nothing else available. There was another anecdotal data than steel ammo slightly accelerates wear of extractors and other parts. Not enough to make a financial difference (cheaper to buy the ammo and replace the parts) but you are talking about TSHTF, where presumably spare parts might not be available. I was trying to sight in my Eotech quite a few years ago using Tula. I was going nuts at 50 yards because the three-shot groups I was using to walk in the zero just wandered all over the place. I thought the rifle wa FUBAR until I figured out that the ammo was that inaccurate even at 50 yards. Some lots of Tula are OK while others, such as the one I was using, will make you pull your hair out. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/3/2015 12:50:12 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I was trying to sight in my Eotech quite a few years ago using Tula. I was going nuts at 50 yards because the three-shot groups I was using to walk in the zero just wandered all over the place. I thought the rifle wa FUBAR until I figured out that the ammo was that inaccurate even at 50 yards. Some lots of Tula are OK while others, such as the one I was using, will make you pull your hair out. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I have tested some 223 Tula about 10 years ago, the groups were easily twice the size of even the cheapest brass US ammo like Winchester. 4"+ at 100 meters. More accurate than an AK I suppose. I would shoot it if I had absolutely nothing else available. There was another anecdotal data than steel ammo slightly accelerates wear of extractors and other parts. Not enough to make a financial difference (cheaper to buy the ammo and replace the parts) but you are talking about TSHTF, where presumably spare parts might not be available. I was trying to sight in my Eotech quite a few years ago using Tula. I was going nuts at 50 yards because the three-shot groups I was using to walk in the zero just wandered all over the place. I thought the rifle wa FUBAR until I figured out that the ammo was that inaccurate even at 50 yards. Some lots of Tula are OK while others, such as the one I was using, will make you pull your hair out. Why were you trying to sight your optic in with tula? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/3/2015 1:53:12 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Why were you trying to sight your optic in with tula? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I have tested some 223 Tula about 10 years ago, the groups were easily twice the size of even the cheapest brass US ammo like Winchester. 4"+ at 100 meters. More accurate than an AK I suppose. I would shoot it if I had absolutely nothing else available. There was another anecdotal data than steel ammo slightly accelerates wear of extractors and other parts. Not enough to make a financial difference (cheaper to buy the ammo and replace the parts) but you are talking about TSHTF, where presumably spare parts might not be available. I was trying to sight in my Eotech quite a few years ago using Tula. I was going nuts at 50 yards because the three-shot groups I was using to walk in the zero just wandered all over the place. I thought the rifle wa FUBAR until I figured out that the ammo was that inaccurate even at 50 yards. Some lots of Tula are OK while others, such as the one I was using, will make you pull your hair out. Why were you trying to sight your optic in with tula? Why wouldn't he? You think it's good enough for SHTF use, why wouldn't you want your rifle zero'd with it? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/3/2015 2:05:09 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Why wouldn't he? You think it's good enough for SHTF use, why wouldn't you want your rifle zero'd with it? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I have tested some 223 Tula about 10 years ago, the groups were easily twice the size of even the cheapest brass US ammo like Winchester. 4"+ at 100 meters. More accurate than an AK I suppose. I would shoot it if I had absolutely nothing else available. There was another anecdotal data than steel ammo slightly accelerates wear of extractors and other parts. Not enough to make a financial difference (cheaper to buy the ammo and replace the parts) but you are talking about TSHTF, where presumably spare parts might not be available. I was trying to sight in my Eotech quite a few years ago using Tula. I was going nuts at 50 yards because the three-shot groups I was using to walk in the zero just wandered all over the place. I thought the rifle wa FUBAR until I figured out that the ammo was that inaccurate even at 50 yards. Some lots of Tula are OK while others, such as the one I was using, will make you pull your hair out. Why were you trying to sight your optic in with tula? Why wouldn't he? You think it's good enough for SHTF use, why wouldn't you want your rifle zero'd with it? Are you confused with the difference between him and I? He is not as good looking for one! |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/3/2015 2:50:03 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Why were you trying to sight your optic in with tula? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I was trying to sight in my Eotech quite a few years ago using Tula. I was going nuts at 50 yards because the three-shot groups I was using to walk in the zero just wandered all over the place. I thought the rifle wa FUBAR until I figured out that the ammo was that inaccurate even at 50 yards. Some lots of Tula are OK while others, such as the one I was using, will make you pull your hair out. Why were you trying to sight your optic in with tula? I was using it because I had forgotten to take my better ammo to the range. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/3/2015 7:17:21 PM EDT
[#43]
What ever goes bang when you pull the trigger, is good to go.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/7/2015 11:53:08 AM EDT
[#44]
I have shoot about 3000 rnds of the wolf steel cases ammo that was supposedly made by tula. This ammo was polymer coated steel cased, had copper jacketed bullets and cost about $120 per k when I bought it in 2004. Ran great, never had a problem in my ar.
Bought 3000 rnds of tula. Supposed to be the same stuff. I got it in 2009 for about $200 per k. This lot is very problematic. I get a stuck case every 100 rnds. I bought some Tula 45 from walmart. 1 dud primer out of 100 rnd. I bought 5000 tula small pistol primers. I get 1 dud primer every 150 rnds. I am not a Tula fan based on this and won't be buying more. I had no issue with steal case ammo. I reload steel cases and they work fine. I had good luck with the old wolf brand and will try some of the new WPA next time the price is right. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/7/2015 12:14:40 PM EDT
[#45]
That's the thing with Russian manufacturers. They switch things up whenever they feel like it and you have no idea what the quality of the next case you get will be like. Usually it's nothing drastic, but sometimes you can definitely tell they switched something up.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2015 6:52:33 PM EDT
[#46]
Tula is something I'd use at the range for blasting things or running drills. My rifle shoots it ok put I certainly wouldn't depend on it in a crisis. Even in the world of steel cased Russian ammo Tula is bottom end at best.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2015 6:54:55 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'll take any ammo over no ammo if the time comes. This |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2015 7:20:18 PM EDT
[#48]
If it was all I could get sure but given a choice I will ALWAYS choose brass over steel case. If for no other reason, steel case is harder on extractors and I don't want to take the risk. If I were feeding a bolt gun then I would use Tula without any worries but in a semi or full auto I wouldn't recommend it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2015 11:55:55 PM EDT
[#49]
I never liked steel cases in a rifle. A pistol I'm okay with but not a rifle. Just seems like brass slamming into the chamber would be more reliable. Then again I'm not a expert and it's a personal opinion. I also rather have American made ammo in a American made rifle.
Don't Tula ammo have a bi-metal core? If so, it probably has good penetration potential with the only question if it produces consistent results. The price point is comparable to xm193 and looking at results, it seems like it produces rather consistent and repeatable results. So why couldn't Tula do the same? In the end though, whatever you're shooting at probably wouldn't care what you were shooting. It's not like someone would be screaming to his buddies, "Don't worry, he's using Tula ammo" and everyone laughing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/13/2015 2:04:02 PM EDT
[#50]
Bi-metal jacket, lead core. Also the "bi-metal" jacket is pretty much just mild steel with a copper wash.
|
|
|
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.
