User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 5/22/2015 12:35:04 PM EDT
[#1]
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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/22/2015 12:43:27 PM EDT
[#2]
"Decent" in that they didn't bounce off the gel blocks or what? Zero fragmentation, zero expansion, and in the "clear-gel" test it didn't even look like it penetrated enough.
If your goal is to buy the cheapest ammo you can to defend yourself...okay, then. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/22/2015 1:12:14 PM EDT
[#3]
The only steel case that i'd consider for SHTF stashing would be Silverbear(62gr HP), IMO. Right now i'd be buying wolf gold if I had the extra cash to spend on stash ammo.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/22/2015 1:14:48 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: "Decent" in that they didn't bounce off the gel blocks or what? Zero fragmentation, zero expansion, and in the "clear-gel" test it didn't even look like it penetrated enough. If your goal is to buy the cheapest ammo you can to defend yourself...okay, then. 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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/22/2015 1:19:06 PM EDT
[#5]
I'll take any ammo over no ammo if the time comes.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/22/2015 1:19:45 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
"Decent" in that they didn't bounce off the gel blocks or what? Zero fragmentation, zero expansion, and in the "clear-gel" test it didn't even look like it penetrated enough. If your goal is to buy the cheapest ammo you can to defend yourself...okay, then. What gel tests are you looking at? The results I saw showed excessive tumbling similar to 7n6! |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/22/2015 2:03:51 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What gel tests are you looking at? The results I saw showed excessive tumbling similar to 7n6! Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
"Decent" in that they didn't bounce off the gel blocks or what? Zero fragmentation, zero expansion, and in the "clear-gel" test it didn't even look like it penetrated enough. If your goal is to buy the cheapest ammo you can to defend yourself...okay, then. What gel tests are you looking at? The results I saw showed excessive tumbling similar to 7n6! Excessive tumbling? Looks like it yawed and tumbled like any boat-tailed bullet will do. Look at a gel test for M2 ball ammo, it'll yaw and turn over too. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/22/2015 2:12:55 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Excessive tumbling? Looks like it yawed and tumbled like any boat-tailed bullet will do. Look at a gel test for M2 ball ammo, it'll yaw and turn over too. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
"Decent" in that they didn't bounce off the gel blocks or what? Zero fragmentation, zero expansion, and in the "clear-gel" test it didn't even look like it penetrated enough. If your goal is to buy the cheapest ammo you can to defend yourself...okay, then. What gel tests are you looking at? The results I saw showed excessive tumbling similar to 7n6! Excessive tumbling? Looks like it yawed and tumbled like any boat-tailed bullet will do. Look at a gel test for M2 ball ammo, it'll yaw and turn over too. Not quite. Not all rounds yaw the same. Look at 7n6, for instance. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/22/2015 4:45:38 PM EDT
[#9]
Absolutely it is. Anyone who says otherwise, I promise, wouldn't want it being shot at them.
Let's stop quoting this post - it's obviously stupid, and the guy has already been banned - Eric802 |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/22/2015 4:53:10 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/22/2015 5:22:49 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Absolutely it is. Anyone who says otherwise, I promise, wouldn't want it being shot at them. We should start banning anyone who makes the "Well durr, I wouldn't want to get shot with it!" argument in a tech forum. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/22/2015 6:04:50 PM EDT
[#12]
Thing is with stuff that comes from Russia it is hard to know what the bullet itself will perform like. Easy to predict what ammo made with domestic components will do but Russian bimetal bullets doesn't behave the same.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/22/2015 6:15:19 PM EDT
[#13]
I keep it as my SHTF ammo because it is cheap enough to store for decades Without breaking the bank. Hopefully I will never shoot it and my kids can plink with it after my funeral in the year 2050.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2015 1:48:51 AM EDT
[#14]
If it's all I had, yes, I'd use it. However, I've had 3 get their rim ripped off by the extractor leaving the case in the chamber to where a rod was needed to get it out. And if that happens when you NEED your rifle, you're screwed. So me personally, I'd save brass cased ammo for SHTF.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2015 2:28:09 AM EDT
[#15]
Quoted:
you guys consider Tula 223 good enough for SHTF stash? Seems to do decent in gel test. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUAFYW1eaDs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RX045pwVydc What say you? You may get a better answer if you actually define what you mean by SHTF. I'm sure there are quite a few different versions of it in peoples' minds. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2015 2:53:39 AM EDT
[#16]
they work for me.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2015 3:29:56 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You may get a better answer if you actually define what you mean by SHTF. I'm sure there are quite a few different versions of it in peoples' minds. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: you guys consider Tula 223 good enough for SHTF stash? Seems to do decent in gel test. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUAFYW1eaDs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RX045pwVydc What say you? You may get a better answer if you actually define what you mean by SHTF. I'm sure there are quite a few different versions of it in peoples' minds. Self defense and hunting |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2015 5:19:20 AM EDT
[#18]
I usually don't buy Russian .223. Over the years I have bought about 1,000 rounds. of Wolf .223 though.
I buy Russian 5.45X39 and 7.62X39. I've never had a failure to fire from Wolf, Tula, or Red Army steel cased ammo. The only "failures" I've seen with Russian commercial ammo is with Wolf .223 on a brand new AR15 that had the bolt dragging and the Wolf ammo just didn't have enough oomph to send the bolt back far enough to pick up the next round in the magazine. We swapped bolts (two brand new builds on their first range day) and had no more issues with the Wolf ammo. As to predicting what bullets will do when they hit....well. Gelatin has no bones, no clothes/fur, no off angles, etc. I've shot enough deer (.308 Sierra 150 grain spritzer boat tails) and ground hogs (45 grain spritzer flat based Speer and Hornaday .223 bullets) to know that one time a bullet can do the "usual thing" and the next time it will do something you won't believe unless you are the one that squeezed the trigger and cleaned the game animal. If all you can afford is Tula, buy it. But if you're going to buy the Tula, stash it away, and then shoot better ammo at the range - why don't you flip that idea. Buy better and stash it away, then buy Tula and shoot it at the range. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2015 8:29:28 AM EDT
[#19]
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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2015 9:12:03 AM EDT
[#20]
as long as it runs
Tula doesn't run in my AR |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2015 11:12:01 AM EDT
[#21]
I would use it only after all my brass ammo ran out. As someone posted above, when that happens I'd sure rather have some Tula than nothing at all. If I had a mag of brass case, and a mag of steel case and my life depended on it I would certainly not use the steel.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2015 11:16:22 AM EDT
[#22]
Shoot the Tula for practice and training, save your brass ammo.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2015 12:14:37 PM EDT
[#23]
No way unless thats all i had.
Shoot that commie ammo now and save a quality brass cased round for SHTF type applications. I save the best ammo i can afford for those types of situations,not the worst. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2015 1:22:03 PM EDT
[#24]
Will it work? Yes, people get killed every day with tula/wolf ammo somewhere in the world.
But there are better performing rounds out there. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2015 1:39:35 PM EDT
[#25]
You got me thinking about this.....
and while I don't have anything against the idea of steel cased ammo..... If it comes to the point that all I have left is Tula..... I can see myself asking "WTF???" |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2015 2:43:47 PM EDT
[#26]
Brass for SHTF. I like Wolf Gold but IMI is the gold standard.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2015 4:33:25 PM EDT
[#27]
It's not exactly a Nerf dart, but I prefer something with better quality control and more consistent terminal performance, not to mention cleaner and more accurate.
Tula gel test link |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2015 4:45:23 PM EDT
[#28]
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. Or poo flinging. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2015 4:46:05 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
We should start banning anyone who makes the "Well durr, I wouldn't want to get shot with it!" argument in a tech forum. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Absolutely it is. Anyone who says otherwise, I promise, wouldn't want it being shot at them. We should start banning anyone who makes the "Well durr, I wouldn't want to get shot with it!" argument in a tech forum. At least a timeout. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2015 2:51:32 PM EDT
[#30]
The crappiest ammo made practically and the OP wants to stack it to defend himself, home and family.
There's just no accounting for sense I guess. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2015 2:54:37 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The crappiest ammo made practically and the OP wants to stack it to defend himself, home and family. There's just no accounting for sense I guess. Just never shot the stuff before and heard mixed reviews. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2015 10:14:15 PM EDT
[#32]
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.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/26/2015 10:38:42 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/26/2015 11:11:06 AM EDT
[#34]
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. I think you're getting power and velocity mixed up. Don't believe me? Shoot a steel plate with Tula, then try the 62gr Fusion, then a 77gr SMK, and for shits and giggles, a 7.62x51 168gr projectile, and tell me which one rings the steel more. All are steadily decreasing in velocity while at the same time increasing energy dumped on target. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/26/2015 12:01:54 PM EDT
[#35]
Power is power. Basic physics here. A 62 grain projectile traveling at 2,750 fps is not going to impact as much energy as a 55 grain projectile at 3,000 fps. Now if by power you mean the bullet design of the fusion will lead to better "stopping power", then you might be right. However, that is bullet design not "power".
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/26/2015 12:58:08 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Power is power. Basic physics here. A 62 grain projectile traveling at 2,750 fps is not going to impact as much energy as a 55 grain projectile at 3,000 fps. Now if by power you mean the bullet design of the fusion will lead to better "stopping power", then you might be right. However, that is bullet design not "power". What do you mean by power? Do you mean the rate of energy transfer or are you referring to the total energy of the projectile? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/26/2015 1:06:13 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What do you mean by power? Do you mean the rate of energy transfer or are you referring to the total energy of the projectile? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Power is power. Basic physics here. A 62 grain projectile traveling at 2,750 fps is not going to impact as much energy as a 55 grain projectile at 3,000 fps. Now if by power you mean the bullet design of the fusion will lead to better "stopping power", then you might be right. However, that is bullet design not "power". What do you mean by power? Do you mean the rate of energy transfer or are you referring to the total energy of the projectile? 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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/26/2015 1:12:18 PM EDT
[#38]
I'll take anything over nothing. That said my answer is no. I roll my own for stocking up on. This way at .18 a piece I have ammunition built with quality components.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/26/2015 1:24:47 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Total energy. Projectile mass multiplied by the projectile velocity squared divided by 450436. The explanation. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Power is power. Basic physics here. A 62 grain projectile traveling at 2,750 fps is not going to impact as much energy as a 55 grain projectile at 3,000 fps. Now if by power you mean the bullet design of the fusion will lead to better "stopping power", then you might be right. However, that is bullet design not "power". What do you mean by power? Do you mean the rate of energy transfer or are you referring to the total energy of the projectile? 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. All right, so you are talking about energy, not power. And taking your velocities and the ballistic coefficients of 55 fmj and 62 Fusion, their energy will be equal at 100 yards, and the fusion will actually be higher beyond that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/26/2015 2:02:54 PM EDT
[#40]
I understand what you're trying to say Blain, but disagree. If that applied to everything, a .223 would be more powerful then a 400 Nitro Express because its faster. A 55gr pill might be traveling faster, but it will also slow down a lot faster. If, and that's a huge if Tula actually chronies to 3000fps it'll still bleed off velocity at roughly 200fps per every 50 yards. The Fusion I've chronied is actually doing 2850fps, but that's a moot point because the design of that bullet doesn't need any more speed. There's a reason guys use the Fusion, TSX, and GMX for taking deer and hogs and you literally never hear of anyone using Tula.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/26/2015 2:03:40 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
All right, so you are talking about energy, not power. And taking your velocities and the ballistic coefficients of 55 fmj and 62 Fusion, their energy will be equal at 100 yards, and the fusion will actually be higher beyond that. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Power is power. Basic physics here. A 62 grain projectile traveling at 2,750 fps is not going to impact as much energy as a 55 grain projectile at 3,000 fps. Now if by power you mean the bullet design of the fusion will lead to better "stopping power", then you might be right. However, that is bullet design not "power". What do you mean by power? Do you mean the rate of energy transfer or are you referring to the total energy of the projectile? 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. All right, so you are talking about energy, not power. And taking your velocities and the ballistic coefficients of 55 fmj and 62 Fusion, their energy will be equal at 100 yards, and the fusion will actually be higher beyond that. You're trying to argue semantics here, and the definition of energy includes powder as an adjective in it! We're not talking about down range ballistics (your statements of which I'd argue aren't even correct), we're talking about power to cycle the weapon. IE, said person stated tula was "under powered". |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/26/2015 2:14:41 PM EDT
[#42]
So now you're talking pressure? Ok, well we are talking SAMI because neither of these are NATO spec. I'm pretty sure factory Fusion rounds are running at a higher PSI and CUP then Tula. Either way Tula isn't something I'd try to do anything but punch paper with, and I don't even use it for that ;)
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/26/2015 2:30:00 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So now you're talking pressure? Ok, well we are talking SAMI because neither of these are NATO spec. I'm pretty sure factory Fusion rounds are running at a higher PSI and CUP then Tula. Either way Tula isn't something I'd try to do anything but punch paper with, and I don't even use it for that ;) No, they aren't. Nice try trying to run around in circles with your reasoning though. Use whatever you'd like, no one is trying to force you to use Tula. The point we're trying to make is that unless it doesn't cycle well in your gun, if all you had in your arsenal was tula, you wouldn't be so bad off. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/26/2015 2:31:11 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You're trying to argue semantics here, and the definition of energy includes powder as an adjective in it! We're not talking about down range ballistics (your statements of which I'd argue aren't even correct), we're talking about power to cycle the weapon. IE, said person stated tula was "under powered". I'm not trying to argue anything here. I'm just stating facts. You say that it is just basic physics but you are misusing some basic physics terms. If you run the numbers on projectile kinetic energy and get different values, I'd like to hear it. I pulled the 55 FMJ-BT B.C. from Hornady and the 62 Fusion from federal and input the values into the Federal Ballistics calculator. At 100 yards the 62 Fusion will have 835 ft-lb of energy and the 55 FMJ-BT will have 836 ft-lb. And it does seem like you are talking about down range ballistics since you talk about impact energy. If you are trying to correlate muzzle velocity with the rifle's ability to cycle with that ammo, there are more factors such as powder burn rate and port pressure to consider. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/26/2015 2:40:29 PM EDT
[#45]
In the world of steel 223 ammo Tula is pretty much on the bottom rung. My rifle will run it but I prefer either Brown Bear for steel cased 223 ammo.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/26/2015 2:41:50 PM EDT
[#46]
Off the rails and done.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/26/2015 9:45:34 PM EDT
[#47]
I would like to continue this. Hope you don't mind.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/26/2015 9:48:26 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Total energy. Projectile mass multiplied by the projectile velocity squared divided by 450436. The explanation. Quote HistoryQuoted: 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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/26/2015 9:52:40 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2015 8:35:16 AM EDT
[#50]
In 2003, I came back from about 7 years over seas and got my first AR. I started buying small amounts of 193 and 855 type ammunition and shooting bulk Wolf (polyformance and military classic). At this point, my stash is all brass cased m193 / M855 type ammunition so I am pretty much done with the steel case stuff. (One day you count all this ammunition and find you have over 25K...). Unfortunately, I now have more ammunition than time to shoot...My SHTF scenario is that I am retired and have time to shoot regularly LOL
I pretty much stick to M193 type ammunition now (IMI and Wolf Gold) Once in a while a training opportunity will come up form me and it is great to not even worry about ammunition, even if it was Wolf poly for a while.... My uninformed 2 cents... Buy samples of what is regularly available to you See what works Buy that when you can...I am a firm believer in buying some every payday whether a case or a few boxes.. Build a stash... Know your dope for what you have stashed.... |
|
|
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.
