User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 6/4/2005 2:16:51 AM EDT
[#1]
Not based on definitive info, only a guess ...
Winchester Olin and Israeli Military Industries were both given contracts several months ago for 5.56 ammo by our DoD because Lake City (run by Federal for Uncle Sam) can't meet its needs in spite of added production lines and running 24x7. You may have pre-Mil-inspection QC rejects from Winchester's lines, just like the XM193 and XM855 Federal has made available to the civie market. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/4/2005 4:51:57 AM EDT
[#2]
Thanks for the reply. I suppose that could be the case. Also, these rounds are dated '05 on the rim, but they look like their from the 70's. Any explanation for the pin dings on almost all the primers?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/4/2005 4:56:56 AM EDT
[#3]
its part of the manufacturing process. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/4/2005 5:52:57 PM EDT
[#4]
Pin dings on the primers should not be a problem. Military-grade primers are harder than commercial ones. They have to be, especially since the AR15/M16 has a free-floating firing pin, and just chambering a round will put a ding on the primer because the firing pin will come forward when the bolt locks. And dings on the cases are OK as long as the case wall integrity hasn't been compromised. Hard to describe the difference, kinda like the judge who said he couldn't define pornography, but knew it when he saw it. Just give them all a good look. Dirty cases are OK too, they will look a lot worse after you fire them. As long as there isn't grunge thick enough on the case to keep the round from chambering, they'll be OK. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/4/2005 6:08:21 PM EDT
[#5]
I understand how the pin comes forward when a round is chambered, but how do the primer dings get there if the round is not chambered?? These are supposed to be new bullets.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2005 12:18:58 AM EDT
[#6]
Bullets have nothing to do with primers. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2005 3:22:33 AM EDT
[#7]
I am sure you know exactly what I meant, why bother with the wiseguy answer. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2005 4:48:59 AM EDT
[#8]
HI ya SAFETYHIT!
Military ammo has some Dings and Black specs from selant and looks yucky but its Okay! As Far as the Primer Ding without being Chamberd has Got ME? Send a 1 Round to Winchester and tell them about the cocern about the primer. +I on JERKS I get it all the Time? I asked for 7.62x39 FPS and was TOLD I was on a WRONG FORUM BY A MOD????? There are Several AR15 that shoot the 7.62x39!! And even Handgun ammo Question on the Forum! I guess it makes them feel BIG  !
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2005 5:11:55 AM EDT
[#9]
I know what you mean. I had a thread closed because I asked if Hakko was anywhere in Aimpoints league. I knew that Aimpoint was probably the better scope, but you never know what might be new and improved out there today. I also did't know Hakko and Tacpoint were the same, but I sure do now!! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/11/2005 2:55:58 PM EDT
[#10]
Safetyhit, I found these photos online. The ammo looks pristine. Does this accurately represent what you have? Or did this seller cherry pick the best ones for the photo?
  
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/11/2005 6:26:08 PM EDT
[#11]
If it's rag ass looking, you know it's real military ammo, Cleatus!
Don't worry about it. You gots the good stuff. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/11/2005 6:45:30 PM EDT
[#12]
Most military ammo isn't as "pretty" as commercial ammo because the final polishing stage is usually eliminated. The mil reckons that it doesn't have to look good to be effective.
That being said when I bought my very first case of Lake City M193 I was pretty surprised at how the ammo looked. At first I thought it was actually remanufactured instead of new, until someone set me straight 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/11/2005 6:54:51 PM EDT
[#13]
The pics posted above are of QC-failed ammo, likely "Grade 3", but perhaps "Grade 2". ALL Grade 1 ammo is going to the military, but ammo that fails QC (and therefore can't be sold to the military) is being sold on the commercial market.
You need to understand that you will probably NEVER be able to buy Grade 1 military ammo made by a US military contractor, because 100% of it is contractually going to the military. Remember that there is a shortage of (Mil-Spec/Grade 1) ammo, with both ATK and Winchester failing to meet their requested quotas. -Troy |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/11/2005 7:02:26 PM EDT
[#14]
Mil spec ammo will be dinged and "tarnished" looking at best. There is no need to polish said rounds as it does not affect reliability. It is most likely not 1st tier ammo as it is so new, IMI used to have 1st tier M855 ammo for sale here a couple of years ago and it looked no different.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/11/2005 8:21:35 PM EDT
[#15]
Definitely cherry picked. The ones I have are generally much more beat up. Some do look okay, but they are the minority. I have fired 200-300 rounds of them with no problem, though. By the way, that is exactly the same type of box that mine are in. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/12/2005 6:37:45 AM EDT
[#16]
Well if it is "Grade 3", the ~$300/k price is not justified (unless you really like cardboard boxes.) Several merchants offer "Grade 3" Federal XM855PD for ~$200/k. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/12/2005 7:04:40 AM EDT
[#17]
I've purchased the exact same type of ammo (Olin/ Winchester mfg.) from a local dealer at $5.50/20rds IIRC. If anybody wants any, i'll email you the address. I think he's only got 2 more cases left.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/12/2005 8:17:05 AM EDT
[#18]
$275 for a case of ammo w/o inlcuding shipping? Sorry thats a really bad deal. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/12/2005 8:32:02 AM EDT
[#19]
Especially for M855. I don't know why anyone would pay any kind of premium for one of the least effective 5.56 rounds available. It must be the magic power of the green paint! |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/12/2005 10:14:02 AM EDT
[#20]
The price I quoted is per 20 rounds. Price per case would obviously be lower.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/12/2005 5:31:24 PM EDT
[#21]
How can it be one of the least effective rounds available if it is standard military issue? I know the knocks (doesn't fragment well, may wobble in flight), but overall it must do something better than most other rounds, or it wouldn't be so popular. |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2005 6:05:40 AM EDT
[#22]
Yes. It gives improved range and longer-range penetration capabilities to the M249 SAW (compared to M193). That was M855's design goal, and that goal was achieved. It was NEVER designed or intended for use in the AR or from short barrels. The decision to adopt it for all 5.56 weapons was made later, by people with NO concern about its performance in standard (or short) rifles, primarily to simplify logistics. It is "popular" in the civilian market primarily because it is the current standard military issue, not because of its performance, which most buyers know little about. It is just *assumed* to be good since the military uses it, despite years of test results and the known history of its adoption. -Troy |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2005 6:19:35 AM EDT
[#23]
I won't doubt what you say, Troy, but couldn't they have just stayed with the 55gr ball? Why take the time to switch if it wasn't preforming well in M16's? |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2005 10:26:53 PM EDT
[#24]
Q:
A:
Somewhere, a General got another star for this idea. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2005 4:48:25 AM EDT
[#25]
Exactamundo! I wouldn't cry if I had to use this ammo, but It's one of my last choices. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2005 8:13:21 PM EDT
[#26]
I suppose this could all be true, but what about the Israeli military? They are known to have stringent requirements. Don't they also use M855 as standard?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2005 6:58:48 AM EDT
[#27]
Israel is a NATO country, so, yes, they use the NATO-standard ammo in their military rifles. For their reservists, they often use M193, as many of those rifles are old 1:12 barrels.
-Troy |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2005 3:33:47 PM EDT
[#28]
I know it is NATO spec, but so is XM193 and other ball 55gr as you mention. Assuming that is true, I still wonder why the M855 is prevalant if it is supposed to be infierior. Is the fragmentation really that bad? Most agree the 55gr shoots fine in a 1/7 twist. Look, I have shot lots of both. I can shoot groups with IMI M855 as well as I can with any Lake City 55gr ball in a 14.5" Bushmaster. I'd rather have the round that has greater penetration. But that is only my opinion. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2005 5:17:45 PM EDT
[#29]
No, it isn't. M855 was the first and only "standard" or "ball" round in 5.56 adopted by NATO. M193 was never a NATO standard. Don't be confused by the NATO stamp on current M193; it's only there because someone decided to save money by loading all military 5.56 ammo into M855 brass. -Troy |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2005 3:35:07 PM EDT
[#30]
Now I am really getting confused. Nothing is what it seems.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2005 8:26:39 PM EDT
[#31]
I have some of each, but wish I had more M193-Q-----------------------!----------MT6601C -1/7 likes both for me!
GTD |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/18/2005 5:30:13 AM EDT
[#32]
That great penetration was a big ass ache for some of the soldiers in Somalia. If you READ the accounts of the incident, you'll see that some of the SAW gunners as well as some of the M16 shooters were often frustrated at having to take follow up shots. They would score solid hits on the thinly built Somalians, yet the would have to fire follow up bursts or shots to put the enemy down for good. The M855 zipped right through the enemy much of the time with no Fragmentation. I've always wondered what the reports would have been had all of the 5.56 fired in that battle been M193 instead. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/18/2005 6:05:16 AM EDT
[#33]
M193 is indeed milspec. It just was never NATO Spec. Back in the days when we had M-16A1's, many of the NATO nations were armed with FAL's and H&K .308 weapons. By the time they started transitioning to 5.56mm, the SS109 bullet had come along and that's what they all went to. That explains why many foreign nations don't use the green paint on the tip of their SS109 bullets. It was the first 5.56mm load they had used, therefore they weren't concerned about it getting mixed up with M193. Troy mentioned the XM193 getting loaded into cases intended for M855. The XM193 is still loaded to milspec velocities. It's just that the NATO stamp on the cartridges is meaningless, being M193 was never a NATO standard. They use M855 brass for the simple reason that it's cheaper and easier to do. I mean why produce two types of brass when one type will work just fine? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/18/2005 3:56:55 PM EDT
[#34]
I have read this, and I am sure it is valid to a degree. I say that because the somali's were so thin, as you noted, but most men are not built like that. Also, often you will have to engage a target who is attempting to utilize his own cover. For that possibility, as well as an open shot, I'd rather have the penetrator. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/18/2005 4:00:33 PM EDT
[#35]
Since you and Troy both say the same thing, I believe it is true. I had no idea of that, though. As long as it is mil spec, I guess it doesn't matter. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/19/2005 10:05:56 AM EDT
[#36]
As the Ammo Oracle explains in detail, M193 and M855 are US MILITARY ammo designations, and have nothing to do with NATO. The NATO standard for 5.56 "ball" ammo is "SS-109" (it's named after the projectile used). M855 is the US Military's spec for SS-109. The M855 specs are much more detailed and specific than the NATO SS-109 specs, as the US military is concerned with many things beyond just the bullet design.
There can be fairly substantial variations in SS-109 loads from different countries, yet still comply with the NATO SS-109 requirements. -Troy |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2005 9:42:14 PM EDT
[#37]
I thought WIN Q3131A was mil-spec/grade 1; Made by IMI for WIN. It's scarce, but available. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/21/2005 7:03:55 AM EDT
[#38]
Q3131A is a commercial round. It's M193 for civilian use. |
|
|
|
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.
