AR Sponsor
Posted: 9/9/2003 7:25:38 PM EDT
|
Almost every day, there are questions which come up about certain kinds of ammunition (Wolf, S&B, Olympic, etc.). There hasn't been one unified source which could be referenced to obtain input from lots of users about the particular ammunition. This post will contain links to reviews for each popular ammunition type for quick reference. Although AR's come in many calibers, I would like to limit the discussion mostly to .223/5.56 chamberings since those are the most sensitive to the ammo they're being fed. In the interest of a fair review: There are some ammunition types which are, ahem, controversial. Please do not slam them based on hearsay, only on personal experience. In the end, it's possible that all the information gathered can be redacted and added to the actual ammo FAQ. As always: read the AR15.com Ammunition FAQ first. The following ammunition reviews are available. The numbers in parantheses list (in order): the number of responses, percentage of people WITHOUT problems, percentage of people with MINOR problems, percentage of people who won't use it. The table is ordered to rank the ammunition based on the lowest percentage of people of have no major problems. In case of a tie, the number of responses and the amount of people experiencing minor problems will be used as a tie breaker. PLEASE NOTE THAT THERE ARE TWO TYPES OF XM193 and XM855 AMMO. Make sure you vote/add your comments to the correct one (PD and non-PD marked ammo) PLEASE NOTE THAT THERE ARE TWO TYPES OF Q3131: Q3131 and Q3131A 1) 829 responses (94.7% / 3.9% / 1.5%) FEDERAL/LC XM193 NEWS ==== 6/9/2006: Just as quickly, Guatemalan frops from 7th to 9th 5/22/2006: Guatemalan M193 jumps from 11th to 7th spot. I will make a blanket statement here by adding one ammo manufacturer which hasn't been rated: American Ammunition (AMERC headstamp). There have been many reports of this ammo, and the brass itself being substandard. Please avoid it at all costs. Please participate and add to the knowledge by clicking on the ammunition you have experience with. Click on the link for the ammo you have experience with, fill out the poll, and add your comments to the end of that thread. This is especially important if you have a negative experience with that particular kind of ammo. |
|
Sounds like a good idea to me Zhukov. While I have absolutely nothing against people asking questions that have likely been answered before (mainly due to the limited search options we have here), it would be nice to have something in place that people could look at. That way there won't be a new Wolf or Olympic thread each day that asks the exact same questions. It won't completely eliminate the questions, but it might be able to reduce the volume somewhat. Good luck in your project. -Charging Handle |
|
I got through all of the "controversial" ammo, so now it's time for more benign stuff. In the pipeline: Igman HotShot Santa Barbara SS109 Q3131A LC M193 PMC/UMC/Winnie white box, etc. are next, maybe at a slower pace. Are there any others which are of particular interest ? |
|
Quoted: I got through all of the "controversial" ammo, so now it's time for more benign stuff. In the pipeline: Igman HotShot Santa Barbara SS109 Q3131A LC M193 PMC/UMC/Winnie white box, etc. are next, maybe at a slower pace. Are there any others which are of particular interest ? I know you are going to be looking at Winchester White box, but I want to be specific about which one. I would be interested in the 62gr. model number USA223R3, as I just picked up a couple of boxes yesterday for $3.99. (Not a great price, but actually here in Illinois it is pretty good. Although if I drive a little bit, I can get Q3131a for $4.25) |
|
Chemtw asked the exact same question I was going to ask. I understand Main .223 consists of a new rem. bullet, new winchester primer, and a once fired military case. Is this true ? anyone out there every use this stuff? What are your opinions on performance and quality?????? |
|
Quoted: Chemtw asked the exact same question I was going to ask. I understand Main .223 consists of a new rem. bullet, new winchester primer, and a once fired military case. Is this true ? anyone out there every use this stuff? What are your opinions on performance and quality?????? I've fired about 500 rounds of [b]Maine Cartridge Co.[/b] 55 grain and had only 1 blown primer. That was all. Seems pretty accurate but I don't have a chrono to test velosity. Let's see a POLL added for this ammo. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Chemtw asked the exact same question I was going to ask. I understand Main .223 consists of a new rem. bullet, new winchester primer, and a once fired military case. Is this true ? anyone out there every use this stuff? What are your opinions on performance and quality?????? I've fired about 500 rounds of [b]Maine Cartridge Co.[/b] 55 grain and had only 1 blown primer. That was all. Seems pretty accurate but I don't have a chrono to test velosity. Let's see a POLL added for this ammo. I read here on AR15.com that Maine Cartridge Co. doesn't redo their charge weights with each batch of powder. So if they get a fast batch of powder, it can cause problems. 500 rounds and one blown primer. Sorry, I don't care how cheap that ammo is, I wouldn't use it with a failure rate like that. And yes, I do consider a blown primer a failure. I prefer that All of my guns go bang, eject, feed, and bang again with no mishaps for suprises. And along that note, I found out yesterday that my PA-63 will go bang, eject, feed, and bang again UNDERWATER! My PA-63 is a bit of an odd duck though, not for firing underwater, but because it is all black, doesn't have those shitty "target grips" and has no import markings or really any serial numbers. Not bad for an off paper gun that was given to me! |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Chemtw asked the exact same question I was going to ask. I understand Main .223 consists of a new rem. bullet, new winchester primer, and a once fired military case. Is this true ? anyone out there every use this stuff? What are your opinions on performance and quality?????? I've fired about 500 rounds of [b]Maine Cartridge Co.[/b] 55 grain and had only 1 blown primer. That was all. Seems pretty accurate but I don't have a chrono to test velosity. Let's see a POLL added for this ammo. I read here on AR15.com that Maine Cartridge Co. doesn't redo their charge weights with each batch of powder. So if they get a fast batch of powder, it can cause problems. 500 rounds and one blown primer. Sorry, I don't care how cheap that ammo is, I wouldn't use it with a failure rate like that. And yes, I do consider a blown primer a failure. I prefer that All of my guns go bang, eject, feed, and bang again with no mishaps for suprises. And along that note, I found out yesterday that my PA-63 will go bang, eject, feed, and bang again UNDERWATER! My PA-63 is a bit of an odd duck though, not for firing underwater, but because it is all black, doesn't have those shitty "target grips" and has no import markings or really any serial numbers. Not bad for an off paper gun that was given to me! Dang, a 99.8% success rate isn't good enough for you eh? [rolleyes] Well then, DON'T BUY IT! Leaves more ammo (and $$) for me. |
|
Quoted: BTT. Why was this taken off of TACKED status? It wasn't technically removed, but consolidated with Charging_Handle's "Better Loads for Self Defence" or whatever it's called. Check the top of the forum. brouhaha hates tacked posts. His momma must have punished him with thumbtacks or something after he did ballistics tests on his cap guns. I told him not to combine it, but nooooo. The man obviously has no appreciation for how long it took me to semi-align the results in tabular format using HTML. [;D] |
|
What is the difference between Barnaul and Wolf? Aren't they the same lacquer coating and bullet/primer sealer as Wolf? I don't see how Barnaul can have 89% 'no issues' and Wolf 68%. Now, I've never used Wolf in anything other than my SKS (perfect reliability) but maybe there is still some Wolf-bashing going on? [img]http://www.barnaulammunition.com/images/556x45/5.56x45photo1.jpg[/img] Somebody clue me in? Edited for spelling...as usual. I type at about 80 words per minutes, unfortunately I think at only 70. |
|
Quoted: What is the difference between Barnaul and Wolf? Aren't they the same lacquer coating and bullet/primer sealer as Wolf? Now, I've never used Wolf in anything other than my SKS (perfect reliability) but maybe there is still some Wolf-bashing going on? I've often wondered about that myself. Not only does Barnaul have lacquered cases, but it has the red sealant around the case neck. In all fairness, the experience a lot of people had goes back a long way, so there could have been some quality control problems with Wolf early on and that jaded a lot of people. That, and I'm sure there's a lot of people with superiority complexes about their ammo. It's all water under the bridge. Wolf doesn't make lacquered anymore, and the new stuff appears to be doing well. I'm just happy because I like cheap ammo for plinking.... |
|
i've got 400 rounds of the 62gr. polymer coated wolf for sale. i bought 500 rounds at the show last weekend hoping it would work fine. i had 4 failures to feed in the 100 rounds i shot. always on the last round. dirty also, mucked up the chamber. needless to say, i'm disappointed. i ran 200 rounds of winchester Q3131A 55gr with the same mags before the wolf and had no problems whatsoever. i don't think i'll be using the wolf for plinking anymore. i'm going to stay brass. let me know if your interested. [email protected] |
|
that Barnaul looks like some of the JSC that I had shot also its laquered and oily and turns my fingers greeen but it shot well fairly and accurately too seemed hotter loaded than Wolf and had a significantly larger muzzle flash but not like XM193...Wolf to me seemed a little inconsistent in loading as some had much larger booms but then again thats not a scientific way to test ammo |
|
A new kid on the block is C&R Ammo. I just got 1000 rds of 69gr HPBT match WITH a cannalure. After a couple of hundred rds, I'd say it shoots as good as (or better than) Black Hills blue-box and cheaper. Not in the same price league as Wolf, but this is high-quality match grade ammo - not blasting trash. They also have some cool frangible ammo that they say can be used on steel at CQB distances without worrying about penetration or splashback. Check out their web site http://www.candrammo.com/ BTW - I'm not getting paid for saying any of this - I just think these guys may have a better product at a better price. I've bought 5000+ rds of Black Hills in the last couple of years, but unless something changes my mind, it'll be C&R from now on. |
I have used "american ammo" in both .45acp and .30carbine had no problems with it so far, the diffrence in thier ammo at least according to what Ive been told is that they use a bullet that is electroplated with copper rather than traditional bullet manufacture methods. In addition they are new to the market and are trying to establish themselves. Locally one place has .30carb @$7.50 box/50rounds which for new production is pretty darn good --Win/Rem/UMC running $13.50 a box/50. edited to add:
I found it at Gander Mtn in Greensburg --You might try your local store, but they have old stock mxed in with the new stuff so you have to open every box and check wether or not its polymer or laquer coated. Also wanted to pick up a few boxes of Wolfs 5.45 to try out while I was there but they say (employees) that its not a "sporting round" and therefore they dont carry it. |
|
Important Note: For those of you keeping up with the ammunition review thread, please be aware that some reviews have not had new posts in three months. Subsequently, these posts are automatically moved to the archive server. This is really a bum deal, as it prevents you from looking up information on the ammunition type you're interested in. Goatboy is supposed to bring tha archive server on line eventually, so I'll update again if the happens. |
I've started doing that. If I had been paying attention, the other ones wouldn't have fallen off the face of the earth. What I might do is create a NEW post for the archived ones, at least those which are popular, and start the post off with the previous results. That way, we can at least get new contributions to roll in. |
AR Sponsor