I have some british surplus ammo, it's very pretty and so is the bandoleer it came in. I was wondering the performance specs of this type of ammo. I read somewhere their ammo is loaded less hot then American stuff because of the SA80 being finicky... There is purple sealant on the primers, and tar sealant on bullets.

-How "hot" is British surplus? Anyone chrono it?
-The bullets it shoots are SS109 right?

Is this stuff from Cheaper Than Dirt?  I saw they're selling the exact same thing you're describing and wondered if it's worth the price.

More than likely, the head stamp says RORG

Royal Ordance Radway Green


Decen stuff, do a search though, there was a problem with some Kabooms goin on with it.

KABOOMS?!

Uh oh...

Yeah, I was wondering WTF "RORG" meant... I have just 38 rounds of this stuff left, hopefully it won't blow up my relatively new rifle...

I have put over 1000 rounds of the radway through a couple of my ARs and the stuff is great. It would not surprise me at all to find that the "kabooms" were firearm related and not ammo related.

I've gone thru 4 bandoleers of this stuff. No kabooms here, seems a bit weaker but no short stroking in my 6920. I just keep it well lubed.

I've shot about 500 rounds of it and love it.  Still have a full sealed & locked can for a rainy day.

Runs excellent through my Colt 6920 - no problems at all.

If they've got a good price on it at the next show I'll most likely get more.

I think the "kaboom" story turned out to be NON AMMO related IIRC.

There is some for sale in the EE.  :)
www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=7&f=25&t=299468

I have gone through 900 rounds of it and am still alive.

It's not weaker, it has a different pressure curve that's all.
If it's stamped RORG then it's newer spec too. What date??

It will be in the same velocity range as other NATO spec SS109

Mark

Quoted: It's not weaker, it has a different pressure curve that's all. If it's stamped RORG then it's newer spec too. What date?? It will be in the same velocity range as other NATO spec SS109 Mark

All mine are RORG stamped. Mine is all 89-90 dated. Was $149.00 per 900 round can in strippers and bandoleers. I like it, works good for me.

Quoted: Quoted: It's not weaker, it has a different pressure curve that's all. If it's stamped RORG then it's newer spec too. What date?? It will be in the same velocity range as other NATO spec SS109 Mark All mine are RORG stamped. Mine is all 89-90 dated. Was $149.00 per 900 round can in strippers and bandoleers. I like it, works good for me.

Actually, a slight mistake on my part...the newer stuff had L2A2 stamped on it.
RORG is older

Mark

Quoted: It's not weaker, it has a different pressure curve that's all. If it's stamped RORG then it's newer spec too. What date?? It will be in the same velocity range as other NATO spec SS109 Mark

It's 1992 dated on the bandoleer. It's much prettier then Lake City stuff, and with it being sealed at the primer and at the bullet I may just want to buy another bandoleer and test it versus American stuff.


PS: What do you mean it has a different pressure curve? Is it as deadly as American M855 is my question

Does it have GF or GL stamped at the base of the bullet?

Quoted: Quoted: It's not weaker, it has a different pressure curve that's all. If it's stamped RORG then it's newer spec too. What date?? It will be in the same velocity range as other NATO spec SS109 Mark It's 1992 dated on the bandoleer. It's much prettier then Lake City stuff, and with it being sealed at the primer and at the bullet I may just want to buy another bandoleer and test it versus American stuff. PS: What do you mean it has a different pressure curve? Is it as deadly as American M855 is my question

It's made to the less stringent SS-109 standard, rather than the more stringent M855 standard (which specifies minimum velocity of the ammo). As I recall, the Brits load their ammo a bit light for their rifles. Some folk have problems with it in their ARs - short stroking and fail to feeds, because of the lighter recoil. You might have no problems, or you may have constant problems - it's hard to say.

Quoted: [ It's 1992 dated on the bandoleer. It's much prettier then Lake City stuff, and with it being sealed at the primer and at the bullet I may just want to buy another bandoleer and test it versus American stuff. PS: What do you mean it has a different pressure curve? Is it as deadly as American M855 is my question

It's just as deadly....if M855 dan be called "deadly".

What I mean is it was designed initially to operate the SA80 rifle, and for that, it works very well.
In fact it works very well in all types of piston operated rifles.
The AR is a little different though, as it's open gas system is not very efficient and this is why you need a relatively high port pressure to cycle. Radway Green's ammo doesn't give this. That's probably due to the type of powder used (Muiden from Holland).
It still gives velocities of 3100fps or so, so the performance is on par with other NATO spec ammo, but it's just not compatible with some AR type rifles, and this is possibly due to AR std port sizes.

This isn't to say that RG is bad, or that AR's are crap, It's just that sometimes they aren't compatible.
I've experienced the short stroking myself with RG, and I've seen it function flawlessly in Steyr Aug's, Galil's, Sig's and HK's.

Because of the problems that were associated with RG and M16 type rifles, the ammo was withdrawn from NATO's list of approved ammo.
Also it must be said that the original SA80 was a POS and couldn't operate reliably with other types of SS109 styled ammo. This has been rectified with the SA80A2 program and the ammo has been redesigned to take advantage of this. It is now approved for all weapons.
See pics below.
This is some '02 I have on hand.
You can see 3 symbols at the bottom of the box. The first one is a black dot, this means "Ball"
The second one is a cross within a circle, this denotes NATO.
The third one, the cloverleaf meand "All weapons interoperability"



I'll try and get one of our other UK board members, ACR26, to post here.
He's more up to speed on RG ammo than me

Mark

Posted before, but for you........

The British round uses Cut Tubular (NNN from Muiden Chemie International, Dutch). It is loosely akin to V135 in burning rate. This loading develops low chamber and port pressures to match the dwell time of the British service rifle, longer than the AR15, which requires a shorter sharper punch of gas pressure. Therefore it potentially feels less 'powerfull' to the shooter..........

L2A2 62gr SS109 BALL = 3100 fps 50F 500' 20" 1:7 AR15

FROM YOUR OWN US MILITARY :-
UK 5.56MM CONFIGURATIONS WAS COMPARED AGAINST THE CORRESPONDING US 5.56MM CONFIGURATION FOR PERFORMANCE, SAFETY, AND RELIABILITY BY THE SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS AT ARDEC TO ASSURE INTERCHANGEABILITY. BASED ON THIS REVIEW IT WAS DETERMINED THAT ALL THE REQUIREMENTS, STATED BY THE UK AND NATO SPECS, WERE MET AND THAT THE ONLY CRITICAL ISSUE IDENTIFIED WAS A UK FINDING THAT STATED A PROBLEM WITH FAILURE TO CYCLE MALFUNCTIONS EXPERIENCED WITH CARBINE, 5.56MM, M4 (1005-01-231-0973) RIFLES DUE TO DIFFERENCE IN RIFLE DESIGN BETWEEN THE M16A2 5.56MM RIFLE AND M4 5.56MM CARBINE. UK AMMUNITION SHALL NOT BE USED IN THE M4. THIS AMMUNITION WAS RELEASED FOR FULL USE IN THE M16A2 RIFLE AND M249 SQUAD AUTOMATIC WEAPON (SAW) AND IS ACCEPTABLE FOR USE IN WEAPON ZEROING AND QUALIFICATION FOR THE M16A2 AND THE M249. THE UK 5.56MM AMMUNITION IS A BALLISTIC MATCH FOR THE 5.56MM: M855, BALL ROUND (THE UK AMMUNITION DOES NOT HAVE A GREEN TIP, BUT IT SHOULD NOT BE CONFUSED WITH THE M193, 5.56MM BALL ROUND).

NOT UNDERLOADED

Quoted: It's not weaker, it has a different pressure curve that's all. If it's stamped RORG then it's newer spec too. What date?? It will be in the same velocity range as other NATO spec SS109 Mark

Streetfighter has summarized it well. I've chronoed it out of an AR with a 16" barrel and it was running around 2970 fps, which if you extrapolated (30 fps per inch) to a 20" barrel, might be going 3100 fps or so (within spec). My experience with it is that it runs perfectly fine in any of my M4-style rifles (carbine-length gas system), occasionally short strokes my 16" Recon rifle (mid-length gas system), and I'm lucky to get 4 out of 5 rounds to cycle reliably in my 20" ARs.

It also occasionally gives problems to my SL8 (G36 conversion), but I attribute that to the fact that I had the barrel shortened to 16" while maintaining the SL8 length gas system and didn't shorten it to G36 length.

I also find it noticeably more accurate than Q3131A or AE223 out of barrels with 1:7" or 1:9" twist.

ETA: Just read ACR26's post, and find it interesting that my experience differed from US DoD findings.

MP5_guy

A lot of people have commented on the M4 working well and the A2 not! I have found both worked fine with the post 98/99 L2A2 Ball.

It is as you say, all due to the gas system setup on the individual AR/M16/Rifle in question.

With regard to some people having problems with RG in their AR's on this site, I am guessing that they  have  rifles slightly out of the 'MIL Spec' tested tolerances, or perhaps ina few cases badly a fitted or worn gas system.

Quoted: Posted before, but for you........ The British round uses Cut Tubular (NNN from Muiden Chemie International, Dutch). It is loosely akin to V135 in burning rate. This loading develops low chamber and port pressures to match the dwell time of the British service rifle, longer than the AR15, which requires a shorter sharper punch of gas pressure. Therefore it potentially feels less 'powerfull' to the shooter.......... L2A2 62gr SS109 BALL = 3100 fps 50F 500' 20" 1:7 AR15 FROM YOUR OWN US MILITARY :- UK 5.56MM CONFIGURATIONS WAS COMPARED AGAINST THE CORRESPONDING US 5.56MM CONFIGURATION FOR PERFORMANCE, SAFETY, AND RELIABILITY BY THE SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS AT ARDEC TO ASSURE INTERCHANGEABILITY. BASED ON THIS REVIEW IT WAS DETERMINED THAT ALL THE REQUIREMENTS, STATED BY THE UK AND NATO SPECS, WERE MET AND THAT THE ONLY CRITICAL ISSUE IDENTIFIED WAS A UK FINDING THAT STATED A PROBLEM WITH FAILURE TO CYCLE MALFUNCTIONS EXPERIENCED WITH CARBINE, 5.56MM, M4 (1005-01-231-0973) RIFLES DUE TO DIFFERENCE IN RIFLE DESIGN BETWEEN THE M16A2 5.56MM RIFLE AND M4 5.56MM CARBINE. UK AMMUNITION SHALL NOT BE USED IN THE M4. THIS AMMUNITION WAS RELEASED FOR FULL USE IN THE M16A2 RIFLE AND M249 SQUAD AUTOMATIC WEAPON (SAW) AND IS ACCEPTABLE FOR USE IN WEAPON ZEROING AND QUALIFICATION FOR THE M16A2 AND THE M249. THE UK 5.56MM AMMUNITION IS A BALLISTIC MATCH FOR THE 5.56MM: M855, BALL ROUND (THE UK AMMUNITION DOES NOT HAVE A GREEN TIP, BUT IT SHOULD NOT BE CONFUSED WITH THE M193, 5.56MM BALL ROUND). NOT UNDERLOADED

This is interesting. I'm not saying you're wrong, but I've never seen that before. What is your source, so I might get better educated? Thanks in advance.

UK MIL / USMC

Ah, that's really good to know that British Military surplus isn't bad if it works for one's rifle!

I'm gonna buy some more bandoleers of it. I pulled a round out, and comparing it to XM193, it's much better sealed... Is it because of the British weather?

:)

Gordon,

The 'specs' for the sealant are to be able to withstand 50kpa vacuum in 50mm of water for 30 secs. So we should be okay this side of the pond

Don't know the LC (USA) specs?


+ For those port pressure geeks the L2A2 round delivers a port pressure of 880 bar (minimum)