User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/6/2009 9:48:18 AM EDT
[#1]
I haven't seen American Eagle ammo in a while. The last I saw had FC brass which is good for reloading. But I do KNOW for a fact that the FC brass that Federal is using in the Bulk pack ammo you find at walmart is VERY NICE for reloading.
I'd rank it up there as one of my favorites due to the tight primer pocket and no need to trim after the first firing.... maybe no need to trim for several firings, but I haven't got there yet with it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2009 5:31:28 PM EDT
[#2]
FC brass is notorious for having soft primer pockets and thin webs that can lead to head separations. I cull out all FC brass and trade/sell it because it isn't worth the processing trouble for 1 or 2 more reloadings.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2009 8:12:27 PM EDT
[#3]
I think the older stuff was weak. I've fired the newer 07 and 08 headstamps with crimped primers many times with no problems. I like the fact that trimming is not an issue. No problems with loose pockets either. I've got thousands of it. The older stuff.....after the first firing ,not reloading, the pockets were loose. These were uncrimped and had no year marking. I would only load those once and leave em.....if you can get a primer to stay in.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2009 9:45:01 PM EDT
[#4]
I went through my Fed 223 brass a while ago. Had a 50 cal ammo can almost full.
I made a case web checker tool as described by Kieth_J in many posts of his. I used a 3/16" dia rod and cut to 2 inches. Cut a hole in the center of the end of the rod to clear the flashole burr. (drill bit) The cases I checked had FC and 223 rem in small letters on the headstamp. Primer was not crimped. Here are some pics of my process. Just some of my cases are shown in the pics. 
Tool shown in caliper. Next step was to zero caliper with the 2" rod. So now I would be measuring the web only. I sorted into 3 groups. Under .175 = unsafe, I recycled these. .175 to .185 = safe, but I would save these for SHTF or something. .185 + = GTG, I will load and shoot these. 
Caliper is zeroed with 2" rod. Shown measuring the web of a bad (unsafe case) that measured .170. The smallest web I measured was .163,  very bad.
My batch of brass was gathered in the 1999-2000 time frame IIRC. I have been shooting a batch of 100 of these cases in my M70 bolt action 223. I always wondered why my 5 shot groups would hover around 1". Always thought the groups should be better. As you can see, I had very few cases that I would load. For reference, all the LC, WCC, Rem, Win brass that I had on hand measured more than .185. That is how I came up with my personnel value of .185 or more is GTG. Remember this test was with old FC brass with the small 223 rem on the headstamp. Non crimped primers. I do not claim to know about all the other variations of FC brass. Like the new FC brass. I have a couple of other pics I'll post later. Don't want to loose this post and all the typing I've done. edit, the other pics were of more cut away cases being measured. LC and some others. I now remember deleting them because they were so blurry, so no more pics. EDIT 2, went out to workshop and took more pics, here's what I have, 
Not much web. 
What I consider good. 
Real good. 
Very thick. I love this brass. Beware charges must be reduced by 2 full grains over LC/Win brass IMO. 
Comparison shot. Not all webs are created equal. Threw in a Berdan case (top) just because I could. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2009 9:56:07 PM EDT
[#5]
Thank you guys for your responses. There's a possibility that I may be given hundreds of once fired FC brass from a LE buddy of mine used on a LE range.. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2009 10:03:48 PM EDT
[#6]
I'll tack this up for dryflash3 for a while.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2009 10:16:30 PM EDT
[#7]
Thanks AeroE , I will try to get some more quality pics posted.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2009 11:00:09 PM EDT
[#8]
Awesome. I didn't know you could zero a digital to any length. Makes measurement EASY. Guess I will have to buy one to augment my dial type 1950s style.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2009 11:07:21 PM EDT
[#9]
Quoted:
Awesome. I didn't know you could zero a digital to any length. Makes measurement EASY. Guess I will have to buy one to augment my dial type 1950s style. Thanks for the inspiration. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2009 12:40:56 AM EDT
[#10]
Nice post!
Thanks for doing the hard work for us too! |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2009 10:50:58 AM EDT
[#11]
Quoted:
Awesome. I didn't know you could zero a digital to any length. Makes measurement EASY. Guess I will have to buy one to augment my dial type 1950s style. 
That made my day. I'm not feeling like such a dinosaur right now with my "old fashioned is better" approach to most things. [It is, too. So there, if any of you naysayers disagree.] |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2009 11:07:18 AM EDT
[#12]
Quoted: Having never used a dial I never would have thought you couldnt adjust the zero. Quoted: Awesome. I didn't know you could zero a digital to any length. Makes measurement EASY. Guess I will have to buy one to augment my dial type 1950s style. That made my day. I'm not feeling like such a dinosaur right now with my "old fashioned is better" approach to most things. [It is, too. So there, if any of you naysayers disagree.]  Someday I will get a good dial to use to augment my digital. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2009 3:12:28 PM EDT
[#13]
dryflash3,
Thanks.......I love those pics. It makes it real easy to understand Keith_J's idea. And, your digital caliper makes it real easy to "see" the numbers. Not only for phorgraphs but in real life too. 
_______________________ For those that don't have one...........Harbor Freight has their digital caliper going for about $12.99 last time I saw it on sale. Aloha, Mark |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2009 8:28:15 PM EDT
[#14]
Maybe this weekend, I'll do some of my newer FC cases. Have about 20 range pick ups.
FC 05 headstamp, with a crimped primer. Thanks for the kind words all.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/8/2009 12:32:05 AM EDT
[#15]
The rifle brass is known to be soft and have thin webs, ok.
My question is, is the pistol brass GTG? And also now that federal runs Lake City, I've got some batches of XM193 that instead of having a NATO cross and LC 0x, will say F C 0x and have the NATO cross, or not have the NATO cross. I wonder if that brass is good like LC brass, or shit like regular Federal rifle brass. I guess I'll have to shoot some and find out. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/8/2009 9:36:48 AM EDT
[#16]
Quoted:
I think the older stuff was weak. I've fired the newer 07 and 08 headstamps with crimped primers many times with no problems. I think I've had good luck with brass as far back as 04 with crimped/sealed primers. Internut stupidity lasts a long time. We'll still be reading how bad FC rifle brass is in 10 years. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/8/2009 12:08:19 PM EDT
[#17]
This is a really great post. Good job.
So, a minor technical correction is due. That tool measures case "HEAD" thickness, not case "web" thickness. The web is the case wall in the area where it transitions from the really thick case head, to a less thick nominal wall. Have you ever correlated case head thickness with case weight variations? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/8/2009 9:19:38 PM EDT
[#18]
Quoted:
The rifle brass is known to be soft and have thin webs, ok. My question is, is the pistol brass GTG? I never had a problem with FC pistol brass. I am still loading a box of 357 nickel cases I bought new in 1976. About 30 survivors left. And also now that federal runs Lake City, I've got some batches of XM193 that instead of having a NATO cross and LC 0x, will say F C 0x and have the NATO cross, or not have the NATO cross. I wonder if that brass is good like LC brass, or shit like regular Federal rifle brass. I guess I'll have to shoot some and find out. Like in my post, I only tested what I had. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/8/2009 9:31:29 PM EDT
[#19]
Quoted:
This is a really great post. Good job. So, a minor technical correction is due. That tool measures case "HEAD" thickness, not case "web" thickness. The web is the case wall in the area where it transitions from the really thick case head, to a less thick nominal wall. You are correct of course, what I am measuring is the web and the head gets thrown in also. Have you ever correlated case head thickness with case weight variations? Yes, I have posted many times to reduce your load with PMP brass. Did you notice how much thicker the web/head measurement was? PMP is high quality brass, and measured .202 to .203 web thickness. Weight in the 103 to 105 gr range. This is with deprimed, flasholes debured, trimmed to 1.750, deburred necks, brass. With my loads in my rifles, I load PMP brass 2 grains less than I would load a LC/Win case, with the same load. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/8/2009 11:22:38 PM EDT
[#20]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Having never used a dial I never would have thought you couldnt adjust the zero.
Quoted:
Awesome. I didn't know you could zero a digital to any length. Makes measurement EASY. Guess I will have to buy one to augment my dial type 1950s style.
That made my day. I'm not feeling like such a dinosaur right now with my "old fashioned is better" approach to most things. [It is, too. So there, if any of you naysayers disagree.]
Someday I will get a good dial to use to augment my digital. Adjusting zero is fo' sucka's. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2009 8:24:27 AM EDT
[#21]
Are you deburing the primer pockets before measuring ? Your samples look like you did.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2009 10:22:46 PM EDT
[#22]
Quoted:
Are you deburing the primer pockets before measuring ? Your samples look like you did. Yes |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2009 12:48:04 PM EDT
[#23]
Dryflash I'm waiting for my LE buddy to obtain the newer year FC brass so I can do the same method of measurement that you posted. I hope you don't mind me copying you. The suspense is killing me. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2009 3:56:46 PM EDT
[#24]
Here is a snippet from an old MilSpec case drawing:
As you can see the drawing specifies that the measurements dryflash3 is making should be .183 (min) to .187(min). The dim. is a stack up of two others = .065 min (that part of the web not precluded by the primer cup hole) and the .118+.004 primer cup hole depth. So the FC is all over the place and it is obvious that the 0.163 case is not meeting the .065 min. but some of the others are. In Federal's defense, they were probably not required to hold the .183 min for their commercial offerings, only the military. They, like many other commercial ammo suppliers, were only required to hold things together, make sure the spent round can be extracted, and keep the spent primer with the brass after one and only one firing. A good primer crimp can hide a multitude of sins, including an expanded head. The reloading community has been fortunate that many NATO ammo suppliers and some commercial ammo suppliers kept to the MilSpec dimensions and tempers for this caliber. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2009 10:17:35 PM EDT
[#25]
Quoted:
dryflash I'm waiting for my LE buddy to obtain the newer year FC brass so I can do the same method of measurement that you posted. I hope you don't mind me copying you. The suspense is killing me. This method was posted many times by Kieth_J, all I did was use his method and take some pics and post them. Please do test your brass, and let us know your results. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2009 10:21:11 PM EDT
[#26]
CCW, thanks for adding that drawing to this thread.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/11/2009 11:26:45 PM EDT
[#27]
Measured some FC 08 tonight.
These are once fired, crimped primer, green sealer on primer. I have 21 cases and measured them all. .183 .178 .1825 181 1815 .184 .1815 .1845 .183 .1815 .182 .1815 .182 .1835 .183 .185 .180 .1825 .179 .180 .1835 |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/11/2009 11:53:38 PM EDT
[#28]
Quoted:
Quoted:
This is a really great post. Good job. So, a minor technical correction is due. That tool measures case "HEAD" thickness, not case "web" thickness. The web is the case wall in the area where it transitions from the really thick case head, to a less thick nominal wall. You are correct of course, what I am measuring is the web and the head gets thrown in also. Have you ever correlated case head thickness with case weight variations? Yes, I have posted many times to reduce your load with PMP brass. Did you notice how much thicker the web/head measurement was? PMP is high quality brass, and weighs in the 202 to 203 gr area. This is with deprimed, flasholes debured, trimmed to 1.750, deburred necks, brass. With my loads in my rifles, I load PMP brass 2 grains less than I would load a LC/Win case, with the same load. I also like PMP, and it is heavy, but 202gr? Most I have measured (from memory) run 101 to 109 gr. It is vital to reduce loads with PMP cases. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2009 12:08:23 AM EDT
[#29]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
This is a really great post. Good job. So, a minor technical correction is due. That tool measures case "HEAD" thickness, not case "web" thickness. The web is the case wall in the area where it transitions from the really thick case head, to a less thick nominal wall. You are correct of course, what I am measuring is the web and the head gets thrown in also. Have you ever correlated case head thickness with case weight variations? Yes, I have posted many times to reduce your load with PMP brass. Did you notice how much thicker the web/head measurement was? PMP is high quality brass, and weighs in the 202 to 203 gr area. This is with deprimed, flasholes debured, trimmed to 1.750, deburred necks, brass. With my loads in my rifles, I load PMP brass 2 grains less than I would load a LC/Win case, with the same load. I also like PMP, and it is heavy, but 202gr? Most I have measured (from memory) run 101 to 109 gr. It is vital to reduce loads with PMP cases. Thanks for the correction. I meant the web/head measured .202 to .203. Weight with my cases is 103 to 105 grs. Off to edit my post. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2009 9:49:29 AM EDT
[#30]
Thanks for your contribution.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/13/2009 6:16:10 PM EDT
[#31]
Quoted:
Here is a snippet from an old MilSpec case drawing: As you can see the drawing specifies that the measurements dryflash3 is making should be .183 (min) to .187(min). The dim. is a stack up of two others = .065 min (that part of the web not precluded by the primer cup hole) and the .118+.004 primer cup hole depth. So the FC is all over the place and it is obvious that the 0.163 case is not meeting the .065 min. but some of the others are. In Federal's defense, they were probably not required to hold the .183 min for their commercial offerings, only the military. They, like many other commercial ammo suppliers, were only required to hold things together, make sure the spent round can be extracted, and keep the spent primer with the brass after one and only one firing. A good primer crimp can hide a multitude of sins, including an expanded head. The reloading community has been fortunate that many NATO ammo suppliers and some commercial ammo suppliers kept to the MilSpec dimensions and tempers for this caliber. http://i255.photobucket.com/albums/hh133/counterclockwisester/a044copy1.jpg What does the ".200" in the box in the upper left corner represent? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/13/2009 9:28:29 PM EDT
[#32]
Quoted:
What does the ".200" in the box in the upper left corner represent? It is called a "basic" dimension in the trade. It gives a reference distance on the feature at, or from which, another dimension is measured. In this case it is the .3759 diameter over the case body .200 inches up from the case head surface. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2009 6:00:38 PM EDT
[#33]
I'm going to untack this thread and set the archive toggle so it stays out of the archive.
dryflash3, how about adding a link from your post in the Gateway thread? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2009 9:34:17 PM EDT
[#34]
Quoted:
I'm going to untack this thread and set the archive toggle so it stays out of the archive. dryflash3, how about adding a link from your post in the Gateway thread? Done. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2009 10:06:41 PM EDT
[#35]
My FC 223 rem are .185 to .201 using the same method , my lake city are in the same range ??
The average weight trimed,chamfered,primer pocket reamed and trued for both lake city and FC 223 rem are 99.4 to 100.5 simular to the same prepped LC. Rem cases that I thought were lite and flimsey were all over .200 and weighed from 100.4 to 101 . These measurments included winchester primers
The FC 223 rem were purchased by the 5 K from a local gun shop last year,so I have no indication of the year. Do you think the .185 and over measurement is a valid GTG situation ?? Thanks John |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2009 12:56:24 AM EDT
[#36]
Quoted:
My FC 223 rem are .185 to .201 using the same method , my lake city are in the same range ?? The average weight trimed,chamfered,primer pocket reamed and trued for both lake city and FC 223 rem are 99.4 to 100.5 simular to the same prepped LC. Rem cases that I thought were lite and flimsey were all over .200 and weighed from 100.4 to 101 . These measurments included winchester primers
The FC 223 rem were purchased by the 5 K from a local gun shop last year,so I have no indication of the year. Do you think the .185 and over measurement is a valid GTG situation ?? Thanks John Something does not sound right with the .200 and over measurements. For those units how far below the surface is the primer cup seated? What diameter rod did you use, and what diameter drill did you use to make the hole in the end? If the "web" is .200 and the weight is the same, then there is some brass missing from somewhere else in the casing. Are those FC .223 rem cases from the gun shop guy guaranteed once fired only? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2009 10:05:52 PM EDT
[#37]
Quoted:
My FC 223 rem are .185 to .201 using the same method , my lake city are in the same range ?? The average weight trimed,chamfered,primer pocket reamed and trued for both lake city and FC 223 rem are 99.4 to 100.5 simular to the same prepped LC. Rem cases that I thought were lite and flimsey were all over .200 and weighed from 100.4 to 101 . These measurments included winchester primers
The FC 223 rem were purchased by the 5 K from a local gun shop last year,so I have no indication of the year. Do you think the .185 and over measurement is a valid GTG situation ??Thanks John This is my thinking, I have fired lots of LC brass. LC measures .185 to .195 for me. So I recycled all of my FC brass that measured less than .185. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/25/2010 6:37:58 AM EDT
[#38]
Thanks for posting this information.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/13/2010 2:55:27 AM EDT
[#39]
I just tried this test briefly.
10 FC brass. Most in .180 area. A couple over 190. One .178. Grabbed 3 LC brass, .183, 188, .190. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/13/2010 3:46:48 AM EDT
[#40]
I have 4K rounds of American Eagle 5.56 M193 in the 200 round bulk packs and it's all LC 08 brass and very good for reloading, I haven't seen any AE M193 bulk pack this year that used FC brass, it all LC as far as I know and would not hesitate reloading it. I keep this and 3K rounds of new Hornady factory 55 gr FMJ-BT ammo as my stash since they both shoot great and have very good brass for reloading, if the time ever comes that I need to use bulk factory loaded ammo this is what I will be using.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/13/2010 8:29:00 AM EDT
[#41]
I've collected LOTS of FC and I'm finding that about 10% (estimate - haven't bothered to accurately count) is below .185. I've added a measuring step to my workflow when dealing with FC based on this thread.
Rick |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2012 6:50:54 PM EDT
[#42]
I just made a measuring rod from an old aluminum cleaning rod. It doesn't matter how long it is just so long as it is longer than the case. zero is zero no matter how long it is. I measured the following cases.
FC (New from box fired at local range) sample of 20 range - .186 to .195 avg .1898 FC (new from box at my police dept range) sample of 13 range - .187 to .194 avg .1903 LC11 (public range pickup were new in box) sample of 30 range - .178 to . 194 avg .1835 So it looks like the FC's are fine but the LC11's are bad according to this thread. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2012 8:05:44 PM EDT
[#43]
THANKS DRYFLASH and others for all your time and knowledge .will be ckin 5 gal bucket
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2012 9:49:36 PM EDT
[#44]
I just measured about 200 pcs of Federal once fired brass. Only two pieces, both nickel plated, were below .175in. Most of the rest was around .180 with some about .200in. The vast majority of it had crimped primer pockets but none had a date stamp.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2012 9:57:34 PM EDT
[#45]
I`m sitting here wondering what the case tolerances are. Does each manufacturer have a different drawing?
Dryflash, It was refreshing to see someone with a creative side! 
The only question I come up with in any of this is........ If the manufacturer doesn`t have a tight tolerance on the ANGLE and amount of the material around the cartridge powder area to primer pocket web, and can`t control the thickness of the material it contains to a fixed tight tolerance, if one was to measure the appeared distance to the cartridge case head area with the tool shown in the pics, the measurement in appeared perceived thickness would change as the angle of the case powder material thickness area to primer case web area would change. I haven`t been in any ammo manufacturing plants. I know those guys surely must have QC personnel that could verify what goes out the door and what doesn`t. Aero has gotta be around somewhere on this one. Aero, you ever been near an ammo plant or ever been in one or 2 or 5? This is not a "bash your fellow shooter question". I am only curious for what others know. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2012 10:34:08 AM EDT
[#46]
Ok so I measured some more cases this morning. It occurred to me that this method is missing a step. One must subtract the primer pocket depth from the overall measurement described in this thread. I measured several primer pockets and actually had some variance.
Winchester 5.56 Nato overall Measure - .190 primer pocket - .117 Head measure = .073 Federal 06 overall measure - .190 primer pocket - .116 head measure = .074 AP overall measure - .192 primer pocket - .121 head measure = .071 Remington 223 overall measure - .177 primer pocket - .117 head measure = .060 So according to the diagram the head measurement should be .065 min therefore it is only generally true that the measurement being made is accurate to the head thickness. To be exact the primer pocket depth must be accounted for. Another observation from measuring is that Federal Win and Rem are pretty consistent at a primer pocket depth of 116 to 117. LC was very consistent at 115 to 116 across several years (10 and 11). Hornady (1 sample case) was at 118 PMC (1 sample case) was at 118 Speer (2 sample cases) was at 117 and 114 (making the head measurement a .064 on this one) |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2012 10:35:55 AM EDT
[#47]
Quoted:
I`m sitting here wondering what the case tolerances are. Does each manufacturer have a different drawing? Dryflash, It was refreshing to see someone with a creative side!
The only question I come up with in any of this is........ If the manufacturer doesn`t have a tight tolerance on the ANGLE and amount of the material around the cartridge powder area to primer pocket web, and can`t control the thickness of the material it contains to a fixed tight tolerance, if one was to measure the appeared distance to the cartridge case head area with the tool shown in the pics, the measurement in appeared perceived thickness would change as the angle of the case powder material thickness area to primer case web area would change. I haven`t been in any ammo manufacturing plants. I know those guys surely must have QC personnel that could verify what goes out the door and what doesn`t. Aero has gotta be around somewhere on this one. Aero, you ever been near an ammo plant or ever been in one or 2 or 5? This is not a "bash your fellow shooter question". I am only curious for what others know. First, I don't think anyone has seen any of the really thin FC brass in 4 or 5 years. That junk ran to 0.145 inches thick, and Keith_J's blow up showed one example that it was not only annoying, but dangerous. I have not been in the LC plant. The Lapua plant assembled cartridges. I have the drawing number for US 5.56X45 brass, but I have not been able to dig up a copy. We have a member here that works in the Lake City plant and I expect he has access to the government drawing, and I hate to say it, I haven't asked him for a copy. The drawing of the case head and transition to the case wall should be controllable in a tight range of tolerances without too much drama until someone tries to scrimp on lube, change the lube, form improperly annealed slugs, or use worn out dies. The quality tolerance on cartridge performance is tight enough that I can't see how they can let poorly conforming cases through the process. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2012 10:38:05 AM EDT
[#48]
Quoted:
Ok so I measured some more cases this morning. It occurred to me that this method is missing a step. One must subtract the primer pocket depth from the overall measurement described in this thread. I measured several primer pockets and actually had some variance. ... Both dimensions have to be considered. The total thickness speaks to the radial strength and stiffness of the case head. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2012 11:01:35 AM EDT
[#49]
just found a PMP with a 119 pocket an overall of .206 for a head thickness of .087. that about 30% thicker than min.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2012 2:58:23 PM EDT
[#50]
Quoted: just found a PMP with a 119 pocket an overall of .206 for a head thickness of .087. that about 30% thicker than min. Which is why I warn people to reduce loads 2 grains when using PMP cases. High quality but heaver cases. |
|
|
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.
