|
|
Posted: 6/14/2012 5:25:59 AM
THE IMAGE ABOVE IS A PAID ADVERTISEMENT Typically when one refers to surplus, one is talking about 70's and 80's. However I have recently seen some ammo that is 5-6 years old, in the sealed metal containers with nice shiny brass being marketed as "new". Does anyone have any opinion on that? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/14/2012 5:54:06 AM
New = Never Fired
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/14/2012 9:24:49 AM
Originally Posted By Backnblack:
New = Never Fired Thats how I see it, but I'm not an expert. Surplus just means military surplus. Even though its made in the 1970's, its all still new! It's either new or re-manufactured. Surplus/handloaded, etc, are just ways to describe new or re-manufactured ammo. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/14/2012 9:56:59 AM
OK, but from a marketing perspective, things markets as "surplus" tend to be old, and thus sell for a huge discount. An example would be surplus yugo ammunition from the 80's versus new winchester.
So would a batch of say, 5-6 year old ammunition in original packaging that has been sealed and there is no oxidation at all on the brass sell more like "new" ammunition or more like "surplus"? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/15/2012 1:55:18 AM
New surplus?
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/16/2012 8:13:26 AM
Well, the US government would call it "new stock". But I'm just curious what everyone else sort of things.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2012 12:21:19 AM
Originally Posted By nordland:
Well, the US government would call it "new stock". But I'm just curious what everyone else sort of things. 5-6 years old? That's not 'new' and shouldn't be sold as such. Selling ammo that is 1 or 2 years old as 'new' is fine. From a function perspective you wouldn't be able to tell the difference, but it's still not 'new' ammo. In fact, when I first started posting here the conventional wisdom was to rotate your ammo every 5 years. |
|