Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 2/12/2002 8:01:50 AM EDT
How good is this ammo? I see it advertised at the ammoman's website and for 1000 rounds the price definately seems right.
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 8:58:50 AM EDT
It's good gunner-1.
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 9:13:07 AM EDT
There are 2 different versions. Both are good. There's Q3131 and Q3131A. Q3131A is made by IMI for Winchester. Generally it is preferred over Q3131 because it is cleaner, has less flash, and (I think) is supposed to be slightly "hotter" or more "mil-spec."

I have used only Q3131 and it seems fine to me, but it does have much bigger flash compared to the South African (Denel M193 and PMP brown box)stuff I was shooting in the same session.
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 10:12:06 AM EDT
I use the Q3131A, very close to mil-spec.

Although Q3131 would be my next choice. You can't go wrong with it.

Av.
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 10:55:00 AM EDT
I've seen this flip back and forth several times already. Q3131 and Q3131A are both good ammo choices. With the price Ammoman is advertising for Q3131 it's a good buy.
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 11:31:09 AM EDT
I’ve shot quite a bit of 1999 headstamped Q3131 and I can unequivocally state that it is the worst ammunition of any caliber that I have ever seen.

Granted, I may have simply gotten from a bad lot.

The biggest problem is that it seems a little oversize, often preventing the bolt from going fully into battery. It also frequently blows primers, which is pretty surprising since they are crimped in.

Q3131A, on the other hand, functions absolutely flawlessly in my AR’s (as does everything else I’ve put through them, except the 99 Q3131).

My understanding is that recent Q3131 is not a problem. I have used a limited amount of 98 Q3131 with no problems.

Also, while I’ve never dealt with Ammoman myself, based on his excellent reputation here I don’t think he’d be selling bad ammo. As long as it’s not 1999 manufacture, you should be OK.
Link Posted: 2/12/2002 7:33:06 PM EDT
199,

Was that you that was blowing primers in the Armalite a few weeks ago at the NRA range?
Link Posted: 2/13/2002 1:57:15 AM EDT
199
What lot # did you have?
I have fired over 18,000 rounds of Q3131 from 1999.
6 bad rounds in the 18,000.
I have heard bad stuff about 1999 Q3131 but have been very happy with mine.
There were some bad lots but I have not seen them.
I only have 7800 left before I go to the newer stuff.
cpermd
Link Posted: 2/13/2002 2:13:35 AM EDT
is your rifle chambered in .223 or 5.56? the longer bore can make all the difference!its good to go ammo,but what i hear from eric is its still not ready to go deal. i'm in when its a go deal...
Link Posted: 2/13/2002 2:53:02 AM EDT
My 18,0000 have been fired in OLY,Colt,BM barrels,and have used 6 bolts that all HS at less than NG.
I only use Chromelined barrels but I have shot the shit of many lowers.
Barrels seem to last 5000-9000 rounds and I fire about 25,000 rds a year.
cpermd
Link Posted: 2/13/2002 3:23:00 AM EDT
no cpermd i was asking 199 if his rifle was chambered for .223 or 5.56 that might explain the over-sized cases as the 5.56 may be a little longer than the .223.
Link Posted: 2/13/2002 6:07:19 PM EDT
Well – let me bore you with the details.

I have had occasional but fairly consistent problems with 99 Q3131 failing to properly chamber in a couple of Colt AR’s with 5.56 chambers. Maybe one failure for every 50 or 100 rounds, though this is a really a wild guess. I’m not sure if I ever had a blown primer in these Colts.

I’ve had substantially more problems with a .223 chambered Armalite. On one or two occasions, literally every other round would not chamber. I’ve also had quite a few blown primers in this rifle. For whatever reason, the blown primers seem to happen as a bunch – I went to the range and had either several blown primers or none.

Obviously, the difference between the Colts and the Armalite is almost certainly due to the chamber differences. As we all know, .223 chambers have shorter throats than 5.56 chambers.

Further, I’ve noticed that Clymer’s chambering reamers for a .223 chamber are definitely tighter than their reamers for a 5.56, pretty much all the way around. I assume these differences would be found in the Colt and Armalite chambers.

And maybe there’s the additional difference due to headspace variables, though I hate to bring that up (hopefully Dave G and Chuck are doing something else right now, maybe their taxes).

In short, as bobbyjack suggests, the .223’s tight chamber may be causing the more frequent chambering problems. Further, the .223’s tight chamber and short throat may be jacking up the pressures and blowing the primers.

I’m also wondering if chamber fouling might be an issue when the round won’t fully chamber. I’ve had a couple of rounds that wouldn’t chamber in the Armalite that, upon removal, had fairly thick splotches of carbon on the case shoulder. However, I scrupulously cleaned the Armalite and still had about the same problems.

I don’t have lot numbers. Most of the ammo has been shot (when necessary, by chambering it a second or third time – which in hindsight was probably a good way to have a Ka-boom).

What I’ve got left is in stripper clips or has been removed from stripper clips and returned to whatever box I had lying about. Rooting through my boxes, I’ve found the following lot numbers: PK72, GE81, and MM40. PK72 would be my best guess, but to be honest, it could be none of these.

(Memo to self: when repackaging ammo, identify and segregate by lot number.)

While I’ve had far more problems with a .223 chambered barrel than the 5.56 barrel, I don’t consider the ammo trustworthy with either. 99 Q3131 is the only .223/5.56 ammo I’ve ever had a problem with.

Please note that the Armalite .223 functions absolutely flawlessly with Q3131A.

Ok - I mixed my Q3131 ammo up, I’ve only used maybe three AR’s in shooting it, much of this happened in the past, and I haven’t kept any records. Also, until joining this site, I thought all Winchester white box was the same, as were all the chambers they were fired in. I freely admit that much of what I’m saying here is conjecture based on vague recollections.

Hoplophile: That was probably me! I’ll send you an e-mail after I’ve given my poor, tired typing fingers a little rest.
Link Posted: 2/14/2002 3:34:39 AM EDT

Originally Posted By gunner-1:
How good is this ammo? I see it advertised at the ammoman's website and for 1000 rounds the price definately seems right.



IMO, if you are going to spend $189 why not spend an extra $10 and get the lake city ammo. Or buy the loose can of 1k rounds for $179 if you can wait a bit.That stuff is much better then the Q3131A ammo. I bought and shot a few cases of the Q3131A from ammoman over the past few months before the XM193 was available and had no problems at all with it. Matter of fact I still have a few hundred rounds left that have been shelfed while spoiled using the Lake City. Q3131A is not as accurate in my M4 as the XM193 but when the Lake City is no more I will be back to shooting the Q3131A because it is the best cheap stuff imo.
Top Top