I've read people repeatedly say they won't reload "F C" American Eagle brass, due to
a thin web.  The "head stamp" link in the stickies says this could be either:

Federal Cartridge (possibly American Eagle... but not necessarily... I assume)
or
Prvi Partizan (apparently they use multiple head stamps... PPU being most familiar to me)

I was given several hundred of these cases.  2 distinct types, though the head stamps are
the same "F C" & a year code "08".  In both types the primers were crimped.  

The first type had a brass primer that was the toughest I've ever removed by a lot!!  
(based on the primer, the loads sure looked like they must have been ugly hot).

The second type, ALSO crimped, had a silver primer with a little blue ring in the crimp.
They processed easily like any other PPU, LC, or commercial brass.  My KNOWN PPU brass
has brass primers with a little RED ring in the crimp.  It is tougher to process than most, but
NOTHING like this "F C" stuff with the brass primers was.

Any ideas what this stuff is??  Also it seems that the issues with American Eagle were based on
old product before the plant was taken over by ATK?, and there is then only speculation that
this might no longer be an issue... then no more comments.  (it also suggests that the NEW stuff
is marked "L C" not "F C")  Does anybody KNOW?

AeroE,
First & foremost... thank you for your always thorough & thoughtful replies.

Just to be clear up front, the dimensional problem seems to be limited to .223 Rem cartridges sold in American Eagle packaging. Other Federal brass may be softer in the neck and shoulders than Winchester or Lapua or LC, but that does not mean it is inferior.

Sooo... is it ALL marked "FC"?  How do I know if it is American Eagle if I don't have the box?
The guys that gave it to me said it was "mostly Lake City", as it turns out there were only 200
LC, some marked Nato... some just "L C" w/ year.

I haven't bothered to measure an LC case that I know came from the AE packaging.

This comment is making me think... the "FC" cases are not American Eagle.  But instead, that
the "LC" case without the circle cross... should be suspect?

Some shooters have shown.223 Rem FC brass with head measurements that are similar to other brands. The evidence is overwhelming that the far greater majority of this brass has minimal thickness at the web. It's good enough for one shot with some safety margin, but it might not be so good for follow up hand loads because the primer pockets expand too much.

Do you know... is it marked this way ".223 Rem FC"?
Also,

but it might not be so good for follow up hand loads because the primer pockets expand too much.

The primers would be loose when I try to reprime some, right?  Or not enough that you would notice?

Sorry for all the "dumb" questions, but even though I've been reloading for years... I'm new to .223 &
reloading for AR's.  Up 'till now it's been all revolvers, pistols, bolt guns, & lever guns.  I've reloaded
pistol cartridges many, many more times than 5, and usually toss them when the neck splits... which
99% of the time is when the case is being resized or belled.

Seems a bummer to toss 'em there's like 500!!  Maybe I should cut some & check the web? That seems
to be the issue.

EDIT: also, American Eagle, I wouldn't think would be crimped would it?

If you're dealing with anything FC that has a military crimp, you likely have good brass.

I personally had problems with ALL commercial FC brass that I encountered from American Eagle, to the premium Gold Medal, as well as the Custom.   Expanded primer pockets that wouldn't even hold a primer after the first firing on factory ammo, trying to reload it the primer was EXTREMELY loose.  (mind you this was through 2 factory Bushmasters, 1 JP Enterprises custom build, AND an AR10 which were all in proper specs)

These experiences were probably a good 7-8 years ago by now, want to say it was 2000-2001 that I experienced the most of it and made the personal decision to avoid using any FC brass for reloading or even buying factory loads to shoot.

I would still hear reports of the issue for a number of years after my own personal problems with the stuff.   However now that ATK/Federal are in charge of the LC brass I will place faith back into the brass that is essentially LC brass and has the correct military primer crimp(don't view it as being FC brass).

Quoted: The primers would be loose when I try to reprime some, right?  Or not enough that you would notice?

Primers can be so loose that you can push them in with your thumb not even needing a priming tool.   That's too loose, way too lose.    You should meet some resistence when seating a primer to know it's going to be held in place after firing and not jar loose/spit out into your fire control group, bolt carrier, or chamber extension.

Sorry for all the "dumb" questions, but even though I've been reloading for years... I'm new to .223 & reloading for AR's.

 

Yeah, that's the issue that we were all learning when we found this FC brass issue.   Was fine for bolt guns really, but the semiauto nature and timing of the AR action made for some ugly ejected primers.

Seems a bummer to toss 'em there's like 500!!  Maybe I should cut some & check the web? That seems to be the issue.

That or carefully notice how much tension is being needed to hold a primer in place, if it's much less than what you would normally use to seat a primer for your other cartridges, use that as an indication of the brass probably being problem brass.

EDIT: also, American Eagle, I wouldn't think would be crimped would it?

Federal has supplemented their own production with some LC made brass from what some folks have posted, also there's a black box American eagle which is essentially XM193 if I recall correctly.

I have had a sudden, catastrophic case head failure with 1999 era Federal American Eagle brass, the first reload.

The load was not anywhere near maximum and had been used in LC, Winchester and Remington brass with no signs of excess pressure.

I sectioned cases from this lot and found many to have thin webs, some dangerously thin.  The failed case had a web to head thickness of less than 0.156"  Otherwise undamaged cases had web to head thickness from a relative safe 0.171" to 0.159".  

Here is the case.  Note the head is still attached to the body, the chamber entrance radius is about 0.010" from the web.




Here are the cases I sectioned:

Quoted: If you're dealing with anything FC that has a military crimp, you likely have good brass. .

This turns out not to be true.  I have shot recent FC crimped brass. This is Red Box American Eagle f.m.j. or 50 grain hollow point.   Most of it I could reload once.  There were a few where the new primer fell out after that first firing.   There were a few that had extremely tight primer pockets.  Once fired FC just seems to be all over the place dimensionally.  I'd suspect that they don't anneal the cases including the case heads.  

With FC I will do one reload and then decap it and put it in the to-be-recycled can.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: If you're dealing with anything FC that has a military crimp, you likely have good brass. . This turns out not to be true.  I have shot recent FC crimped brass. This is Red Box American Eagle f.m.j. or 50 grain hollow point.   Most of it I could reload once.  There were a few where the new primer fell out after that first firing.   There were a few that had extremely tight primer pockets.  Once fired FC just seems to be all over the place dimensionally.  I'd suspect that they don't anneal the cases including the case heads.   With FC I will do one reload and then decap it and put it in the to-be-recycled can. I suspect that was mistyped.

Me too.  Brass can only be hardened by cold work.  Now they MIGHT have had an interdraw anneal that was over-done.  Yes, annealing happens in stages as does work hardening.  And an over-annealed case would likely be drawn (mechanically) too much as its yield strength is lower.

We COULD be onto the root cause here. VERY interesting.  Now that I have the means to non-destructively measure web thickness, I should see if head hardness (my home-shop micro Vickers hardness tester) has any significance to web thickness...

Now just to keep everything confusing...

I found 3 cases that were in my "mixed misc. brass" range pick-ups, that are marked:

 "FC 223 Rem"

Quoted: Now just to keep everything confusing... I found 3 cases that were in my "mixed misc. brass" range pick-ups, that are marked:  "FC 223 Rem"

ONly good for one reloading.

Quoted: Quoted: Now just to keep everything confusing... I found 3 cases that were in my "mixed misc. brass" range pick-ups, that are marked:  "FC 223 Rem" ONly good for one reloading.

I'm good with that... actually I just set them aside, maybe I'll cut'em up like Keith did, just to see.

I also found 1 "FC 05" case in that mixed bunch, I primed it to see what the tension was like.
It's plenty snug.  I'm REALLY curious about the pictures Keith posted.  I can't grasp why the
head separated like that.  When you say the "web" we are talking about the bottom thickness,
right?  That failure seems to be from wall thickness.  Like when a casing develops a bright ring
at the base... indicating imminent head separation.

Not doubting you Keith, I've read a lot of your postings and you seem to know a lot.
Just trying to understand what happened.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Now just to keep everything confusing... I found 3 cases that were in my "mixed misc. brass" range pick-ups, that are marked:  "FC 223 Rem" ONly good for one reloading. I'm good with that... actually I just set them aside, maybe I'll cut'em up like Keith did, just to see. I also found 1 "FC 05" case in that mixed bunch, I primed it to see what the tension was like. It's plenty snug.  I'm REALLY curious about the pictures Keith posted.  I can't grasp why the head separated like that.  When you say the "web" we are talking about the bottom thickness, right?  That failure seems to be from wall thickness.  Like when a casing develops a bright ring at the base... indicating imminent head separation. Not doubting you Keith, I've read a lot of your postings and you seem to know a lot. Just trying to understand what happened.

"FC 0n" is a milspec lot, unlikely to be suspect.  

On the FC .223 Rem line, that is SAAMI spec.  With thin webs, and quite possibly softer heads, the base of the case becomes unsupported at the entrance radius of the chamber.  Take a look at your rifle, under bright light.  There is a chamfer and a radius at the mouth of the chamber.  Take a look at the bolt face, it is counterbored to a depth of 0.115", that is the primer depth.  The additional 0.0550" in web thickness bridges the gap between the front of the bolt lugs to the end of the chamber radius.  

The case that ruptured clearly shows the radius of the chamber as a burr.

Quoted: Quoted: Now just to keep everything confusing... I found 3 cases that were in my "mixed misc. brass" range pick-ups, that are marked:  "FC 223 Rem" ONly good for one reloading.

I've heard this a lot.  However, I have a lot that I am testing now.  I'm on the fourth firing.  You do have to pay attention to the primers, and I double check them to be sure they are seated, only a couple so far have just fell out.  I have not had a primer leak that burned the bolt face.  This lot is FC 223 with no crimp.  The crimped FC does have tighter pockets after removing the crimp.

Does the same go for the American eagle .308? How about the Federal Power Shok ammo? Its all I have.... and I just loaded 50 rounds of it.

In 308 and 338 WM, I have had FC brass that the primer pockets loosened after 1 reload.

I prefer WW Super brass in these calibers.

In 223 I have a batch of FC brass that has 3 reloads on it and is going strong.

In both of the above examples the FC brass is fired in bolt action rifles.

The loads are 1/2 to 1 grain below max listed.

I do not use 223 FC brass in my AR loads.

I prefer Win and LC for AR use.

I have almost a thousand AE (red box) FC .223 brass that was bought between2002 and 2006.  Pretty much all of it has been good for only 1 to 2 reloads before the primer pockets become to loose to reuse.  A few have been OK for 3 reloads.  A very few have survived for more than 3.

My .02: reload 'em once, maybe twice if you feel lucky, then recycle....

Quoted: I have almost a thousand AE (red box) FC .223 brass that was bought between2002 and 2006.  Pretty much all of it has been good for only 1 to 2 reloads before the primer pockets become to loose to reuse.  A few have been OK for 3 reloads.  A very few have survived for more than 3. My .02: reload 'em once, maybe twice if you feel lucky, then recycle....

That's right, except I still say you should reload 'em once period. I don't believe in "luck" when it comes to ammunition reloading.   Assaulter   above is taking his chances to save a few pennies in brass.  You do NOT want to find out the hard way what happens when 55000 psi gas at 3000 degrees centigrade (6000 F.) escapes from that FC case.  Load it once, decap it, sell it to the scrap man, go get you some LC, Win., R-P or other quality brass.

But hey, would you listen to a guy named "Assaulter," or one named "Uni-Vibe," whatever that is?

ouch!

Got a question for you guys who have actually seen the ATK / Federal that uses LC brass - what color is the primer?

I found a few LC 08's two days ago at the range which had a silver primer, and the same light-blue ... dye or ink or sealant that looked like it was used in seating the primer (could have just been someone's marker though - but it sure did look like it was coming from under the primer, then a little on top of the primer).

Quoted: Got a question for you guys who have actually seen the ATK / Federal that uses LC brass - what color is the primer? I found a few LC 08's two days ago at the range which had a silver primer, and the same light-blue ... dye or ink or sealant that looked like it was used in seating the primer (could have just been someone's marker though - but it sure did look like it was coming from under the primer, then a little on top of the primer).

All LC brass uses brass primers.  No nickel.  It is a CCI #41 or equalivalent.

Those that think it is just "rejects" are fooling themselves.

Quoted: Quoted: Got a question for you guys who have actually seen the ATK / Federal that uses LC brass - what color is the primer? I found a few LC 08's two days ago at the range which had a silver primer, and the same light-blue ... dye or ink or sealant that looked like it was used in seating the primer (could have just been someone's marker though - but it sure did look like it was coming from under the primer, then a little on top of the primer). All LC brass uses brass primers.  No nickel.  It is a CCI #41 or equalivalent. Those that think it is just "rejects" are fooling themselves.

Who said anything about rejects?  I don't read anyone bringing that up in this thread.

Quoted: ouch!

Hey, I'm not beating up on anybody.  There are various kinds of reloaders.  I know guys that know exactly  what they are doing, who push it to the limit.  Flat primers, coined heads, you name it--they're on the edge of performance.  Now for me, I'm a conservative kind of guy.  Work up carefully, watch for pressure, come up with factory-pressure loads or even a bit milder.  .223 / 5.56 runs around 55,000 psi.  Gas is around 6000 degrees Farenheit.  I don't want to take a chance on letting the djinn out of the bottle.  So I reload FC once, and the good stuff 5 times.

On the other hand, .45 ACP gets loaded God knows how many times--when the mouth splits, I figure I got my money's worth and recycle.  Is there a contradiction there?  No, because I know that .45 at 18,000 psi behaves differently, and you can treat .45 brass differently.

I knew what you meant.  I have been watching this batch of about a hundred.  I haven't seen any signs of stretching or imminent failure.  Some of the pockets do get loose.  I load these fairly conservatively with W748 @ 25 grains if I remember correctly.  No flat primers, nice recoil, nice ejection.  This is not something I plan on doing large scale, just sort of a test, and I doubt I'll go past the fourth firing.

I loaded some FC once fired, with 25.1 grains TAC under 55 grain bullet.  Mild losd.  No problems.

I did notice that a couple of the once fired ones had primer pockets so expanded that the new primers wouldn't stay in.  Defeinitely substandard brass.

Quoted: Got a question for you guys who have actually seen the ATK / Federal that uses LC brass - what color is the primer? I found a few LC 08's two days ago at the range which had a silver primer, and the same light-blue ... dye or ink or sealant that looked like it was used in seating the primer (could have just been someone's marker though - but it sure did look like it was coming from under the primer, then a little on top of the primer).

THIS is what partly prompted this thread...

Part of the batch is as you describe above... silver primer blue ring, marked "F C 08"

The other part is brass primer (heavily flattened) and tough to deprime... also marked "FC 08"

... unless I misunderstood Keith, he said "FC 0n"  is milspec "not suspect" in his opinion.

There is other brass out there marked "FC 223 rem"... most agree this is likely not good.

THIS IS THE DILEMMA that started this whole conversation.

Some guys Just play it safe... if it is "FC anything" they don't reload.

I primed an "FC 05" case (not the batch in question) it seated snugger than some "LC" brass.
I don't know enough about brass companies' marking logic to know the answer... but why would
they mark things differently if it wasn't different?

Quoted: Quoted: Got a question for you guys who have actually seen the ATK / Federal that uses LC brass - what color is the primer? I found a few LC 08's two days ago at the range which had a silver primer, and the same light-blue ... dye or ink or sealant that looked like it was used in seating the primer (could have just been someone's marker though - but it sure did look like it was coming from under the primer, then a little on top of the primer). THIS is what partly prompted this thread... Part of the batch is as you describe above... silver primer blue ring, marked "F C 08" The other part is brass primer (heavily flattened) and tough to deprime... also marked "FC 08" ... unless I misunderstood Keith, he said "FC 0n"  is milspec "not suspect" in his opinion. There is other brass out there marked "FC 223 rem"... most agree this is likely not good. THIS IS THE DILEMMA that started this whole conversation. Some guys Just play it safe... if it is "FC anything" they don't reload. I primed an "FC 05" case (not the batch in question) it seated snugger than some "LC" brass. I don't know enough about brass companies' marking logic to know the answer... but why would they mark things differently if it wasn't different?

Keith_J is never wrong if we are to take his tone seriously.

Mine is marked LC, so that's what I'm sticking with.  My crimped primer pocket don't seem altered, but I don't see annealing marks, either, and it is really clean brass.  The primers were tough to take out, but still, this isn't typical LC brass.  I just can't see someone reloading while taking the time to put in that blue stuff... I guess some people do it though?  I'd like to see a picture of one of those FC with the blue stuff to see if it was applied the same way the LC I found were.

Some of the FC and American Eagle headstamps and variations I have run across:

FC 223 (upper case)
fc 223 (appears lower case compared to the above)
FC 05
FC 07
LC Various years, silver primers with either red sealant, purple sealant or bluish green sealant

For me it will have to have LC stamped on it for me to consider it Military brass, I have treated the FC 05 and FC 07 like I do the rest of the FC stamped brass... at most load it once and either leave if a match or scrap after the first reload. Too many loose primer pockets for me.... I HAVE loaded some of the FC brass more than once, and the majority of the primer pockets will still be snug, but the frequency of random loose primer pockets goes up significantly in my experience.

Here is a photo of the various head stamps in question

Like I said earlier the 1st (w/ brass primer) were the toughest cases I EVER deprimed/resized

The second "F C" w/ silver primer were like any other crimped brass to process

The last  "F C 223 Rem" ... well I just tossed those few in the recycle can.

The first to types, I "test primed" a few cases after swaging... they seated good & snug.


SO....... Keith, you consider the 1st 2 Milspec (in your opinion) correct?

Quoted: If the case has an FC headstamp it is suspect.  None of the rest of the stuff on the case head with it matters. How the hell did you guys get the thread so far out of whack? I went back to re-read the post that started this confusion.  Keith_J commented that cases with a "FC 0n", meaning FC 08 or FC 07 and so on, is likely mil-spec.  My opinion is that it's "maybe mil-spec", and more likely not. I wish the hell Federal would publish a letter clearing this up.  It's hard to believe that they don't know about the controversy, but way stranger things happen every day.  Just because they manufacture loaded ammunition doesn't mean anyone at ATK knows much about how its used or its life after the first shot.

All SAAMI-spec ammo sold in the US must be positively identified by the headstamp.  So any FC that does not have ".223 Rem" came from non-SAAMI ammo.  This comes from a different line.  From what I have seen, this brass has visible annealing, meaning it was not batch tumbled/polished after forming.

Back to the American Eagle line...I still have that 1999 lot of AE brass that failed in my rifle.  I ran measurements of web thickness using my non-destructive measurement method.  I found 5 of the thinnest and 5 of the thickest webs from this lot. Using an automatic center punch, I made indents in the head for hardness comparison.  No, it isn't a real Vickers/Rockwell hardness test but it is enough.  Yes, the thin webs also were measurably softer, judging from the indent diameters (machinist's microscops, nothing fancy).

So my hypothesis that these batch-produced cases were over-annealed in the interdraw process might have a bit more merit.  Brass can only be work-hardened.  To make final head forming possible, some manufacturers partilally anneal cases.  This is highly temperature sensitive, had the cases been over-annealed, the final drawing would not have restored case head thickness AND the subsequent draw would leave the head thinner than allowable.

OK THEN...

Who HAS a box of RECENT AMERICAN EAGLE that THEY BOUGHT NEW??

American Eagle is COMMERCIAL ammo...

So if this is the case:
"All SAAMI-spec ammo sold in the US must be positively identified by the headstamp.
So any FC that does not have ".223 Rem" came from non-SAAMI ammo."

Then it WILL be marked "FC  223 Rem".  It will NOT be marked "FC 0N".

Who has some RECENTLY purchased that can tell us all WHAT it says?

I wish the hell Federal would publish a letter clearing this up. It's hard to believe that they don't know about the controversy, but way stranger things happen every day. Just because they manufacture loaded ammunition doesn't mean anyone at ATK knows much about how its used or its life after the first shot.

I just figure that Federal wishes that we "re-loaders" not exist at all.  

That way, they sell more factory loaded ammo at ridiculous prices and make beaucoup profits for their bottom line.

If they could produce a cartridge case, that was only good for one shot.........humm, what a theory.

Aloha, Mark

Quoted: OK THEN... Who HAS a box of RECENT AMERICAN EAGLE that THEY BOUGHT NEW?? American Eagle is COMMERCIAL ammo... So if this is the case: "All SAAMI-spec ammo sold in the US must be positively identified by the headstamp. So any FC that does not have ".223 Rem" came from non-SAAMI ammo." Then it WILL be marked "FC  223 Rem".  It will NOT be marked "FC 0N". Who has some RECENTLY purchased that can tell us all WHAT it says?

I have about 2K left, made up of 2 lots... One lot consists of the headstamp FC 223 Rem and the other is LC either 05 or 06, and both lots were purchased new about 2-3 years ago at the same retail location...

Edited for more detail.

I have 5 boxes of American Eagle--purchased about 9 months ago.

The head stamp is FC 223 REM.

Nickel primer, crimped, blue sealant.

All SAAMI-spec ammo sold in the US must be positively identified by the headstamp.

As I  recall, the MilSpec for M193, etc. says the ammo must also carry a "DATE" stamp.
The "DATE" stamp on the casing may be one or two years out from the time the ammo was produced and sold, as casing preparation is not necessarily simultaneous with final assembly.  With the newer automatic total mfg. machines, it will be in sync with final assembly.

When I pointed out on the ammo forum that American Eagle in the black box was a marketing stroke of genius, I was told in no uncertain terms that American Eagle in the black box was exactly the same as XM193 in the brown cardboard.  It was just packaged differently.   I am now satisfied that is correct.

As far as the NATO cross in the circle for 5.56 LC, it is not there, then there, then not there again along the time line as M193, apparently,  went in and out of NATO official ammo.

One can measure the web thickness of a casing with an open set up like this:
With the probe resting on the surface plate, zero the depth gage.  Insert the probe in the casing and slide under the depth gage.  The end of the probe should be concave or hollow to clear any primer hole burrs on the inside surface.  Web thickness is defined on this forum as just the difference between inside depth and outside depth.



As Keith_J points out, there are two factors of concern.  One is geometric thickness of the web, that can result in excessive unsupported length of casing wall when the round is chambered.  The other is hardness or yield strength of the web itself.

I also have invested in a 15T microhardness scale testing device, and am trying to correlate web hardness measurements with the problem.  Just getting the specimens to the point where they are testable according to the MilSpec drawing map has been problematic to date.  Surface roughness under the penetrator should be at least 10X better than the probe indent dia. for a good repeatable reading.  

As Aero_E says, why doesn't Federal send out a letter and put us out of our misery?  Now they have further obfuscated by apparently putting "DATE" stamp on commercial ammo.  

I know why he needs the work order number for the testing lab.  It is to pay to prepare the specimens.  Anybody with a few minutes to spare can run the testing machine and record the results.

Do yourself a favor if you want to use "FC 223 Rem" brass.  Make a measuring gage that is .220" in diameter and 2.000" long.  Drill a shallow 3/16" hole, about 1/8" deep in each end, centered axially.  This is relief for flash hole burrs.  Insert this into an empty case.  If the overall measurement with calipers is less than 2.175", that is a weak case and should not be used.  That indicates a web less than 0.176".

The lot of "FC 223 Rem" brass that caused my KB had 3% that were under 0.168", 68% that were between 0.169" and 0.175" and 29% that were over 0.176".

The KB happened on the first reload, using data that had been proven with the same lot of bullets, primers and powder in LC cases.  I had fired 4 rounds, with no problems.  That brass had loose primers but they stayed in the cases until I removed them for inspection.  The 5th round KB.  As the destruction of the case caused significant material reduction, accurate measurement of the web is impossible.  Sectioning of measured thin cases showed there was significant lack of chamber support ahead of the very thin web, enough to be the cause of the problem.

Other brands of domestic brass measure 0.180" and over.  Even .222 Rem cases, a lower pressure round, measure over 0.180".

Good job, CCW with the measurement setup.  SAAMI ammo has different requirements than military.  They are not interchangable and SAAMI points this out with unsafe combinations to include use of 5.56 NATO in .223 Remingtion.  

Now there are those packages which are iffy, namely .223 Rem boxed using LC cases.  This isn't anything but Federal using scrap cases produced at Lake City using the SCAMP machinery which is government owned but operated currently by ATK, the parent corporation of Federal.  This is an oversight and in slight violation of SAAMI standards of proper identification of ammunition, not unlike the blue box from Black Hills.  But it is for all practical purposes, reloads even though the cases were never fired.

There are the other lines, produced entirely at Federal and have bunting "FC nn" where "nn" is a year code.  This is equivalent to the "WC nn" and "WCC nn" produced by Olin as part of their military readiness.  While some civillian plants are contracted to fill in shortages, the combined civillian plants produce but a fraction of Lake City's capacity as only Olin in Israel has SCAMP machinery.

ATK is most likely using startup and shutdown brass at its Federal Plant in Michigan instead of selling it on the scrap market.  When Olin ran Lake City AAP, often virgin brass was sold for recycling and some showed up on the reloading market.  The value Federal could add selling it as loaded ammo is clear.  It is all about profit.

The GOCO Army Ammunition Plants operate under strict rules, namely ALL production is property of the government.  Ammunition that does not conform must be broken down with acceptable salvage of bullets and powder.  Primers must be deactivated.  Scrap and acceptable salvage is at the contractor's decision.  

Quoted: I wish the hell Federal would publish a letter clearing this up.  It's hard to believe that they don't know about the controversy, but way stranger things happen every day.  Just because they manufacture loaded ammunition doesn't mean anyone at ATK knows much about how its used or its life after the first shot.

Actually, they do.   Was at a department range demonstration by ATK doing a comparison of various LE loads and I discussed it with the guy at length regarding my headaches with FC from around 2000-2001 and loose primers.

He recognized/admitted that there was a problem, however couldn't provide anything to really say what to expect from brass from certain lines.   Other than that what was once LC brass is "the good stuff" which we already knew.

Quoted: Some of the FC and American Eagle headstamps and variations I have run across: FC 223 (upper case) fc 223 (appears lower case compared to the above) FC 05 FC 07 LC Various years, silver primers with either red sealant, purple sealant or bluish green sealant For me it will have to have LC stamped on it for me to consider it Military brass, I have treated the FC 05 and FC 07 like I do the rest of the FC stamped brass... at most load it once and either leave if a match or scrap after the first reload. Too many loose primer pockets for me.... I HAVE loaded some of the FC brass more than once, and the majority of the primer pockets will still be snug, but the frequency of random loose primer pockets goes up significantly in my experience.

Alrighty now, seems like you've seen the LC with the silver primers as well.

Here are a few pictures of tumbled and deprimed LC cases that I found with silver primers.  Would FC or American Eagle load NATO-marked LC brass, or would the LC brass have no other markings?

LC brass is made in Lake City Army Ammunition Plant in Missouri on Small Caliber Ammuntion Modernization Program machinery that is owned by the US Government.  It is not made by Federal's antiquated machinery located in MN-St.P Michigan.

But if the ammo has been loaded with nickel-plated primers, it is not SCAMP ammo but is made with brass overruns from SCAMP machinery.  This machinery CANNOT use formed brass, it makes the brass as needed.  Since this and bullet forming are the most intensive stages of the operation, they are frequently run seperate, without priming or charging with propellent.

Back when Olin ran LC AAP, such scrap brass was frequently sold to reloaders.  This is allowed under operation contract as the operator, either Rem-UMC, Olin or now ATK, purchased raw material and was responsible for disposal of scrap.  Since all brass under .50 caliber can be scrapped without mutilation, selling INERT brass, pulled or scrap bullets and the like is authorized.

ATK modified this upon securing the operation contract and diverted unprimed cases to their Federal Ammunition plants.  Since these plants use batch processing, they are amenable to using such brass.  On clear indication is the lack of anneal marks and highly polished cases.  This indicates bulk tumbling, something not possible on SCAMP.

Some other LC brass comes from rejected lots.  This too is subject to the full breakdown and inerting of the primer.  These may or may not have sealant.  Sealant may only be present on the case, indicating (in addition to the nickel-plated primer) they had been reloaded.  

What about "FC nn" cases where nn is a two-digit year code?  That is a special line of non-SAAMI spec ammuntion that is upgradable to meet Military specifications.  Winchester has such line, one example is their Q3131a line which is made on SCAMP machinery in Israel.  Federal and Remington-UMC do not have SCAMP machinery.  

Now as to the Federal American Eagle brass of late 1990s-2000 lots?  My experience and analysis is tending to the probable over-annealing during interdraw processing.  In the batch system, the brass is first blanked from strip into "coins" about 3/16" thick.  This is progressively drawn into a cup, then a case.  In some processes,  cases are partially annealed to further reduce diameter of the case before the extractor rim is cut.  An excessively soft case could be drawn too thin in the web by such a lapse in quality control.  

The thin web and soft case heads all point to this.  Since final neck annealing happens after neck swaging, this anneal would not influence the web thickness.  In my experience, the suspect brass has an extreme spread in web thickness of over 0.031".  Measuring LC brass with the same equipment indicates an extreme spread of 0.006".  Furthermore, LC brass has web thickness that is a mean of 0.184" where the mean of suspect FC American Eagle is 0.173".

What about FC pistol brass?  Does it have the same problems as the rifle brass?
thanks

Polytech

IMHO........Federal pistol brass is OK.  It's usually not subjected to the high pressures that you see with rifles.  

But.......what do I know?   I haven't purchased brass (rifle or pistol) in a long while.  

Hey, I'm not picky about FREE brass.

A mfn can have a bad day, lot or other problem (as I've mentioned above about FC rifle brass).

I'll put on my tin hat at this point.  OK........so, IF a mfn could make a cartridge case to last only one shot..........think of all of the profits they could make.

So, as with any product YMWV.

Aloha, Mark

Quoted: What about FC pistol brass?  Does it have the same problems as the rifle brass? thanks Polytech

I've been shooting Federal .45 brass for 30 years.  It reloads as well as any other and seems to last as long.  Only .45 brass I will not use is the infamous A-MERC.

After reading all the responses here, I think I will just eat it and shelf the "FC" brass. I saw Grafs have 1k of new Lake City for $179. I assume this is the good stuff and not like Federal FC crap. I've only reloaded Winchester and have no experience with other brass. Am I OK with the "Lake City" brass from Grafs? I appreciate any input--Tnx

Quoted: After reading all the responses here, I think I will just eat it and shelf the "FC" brass. I saw Grafs have 1k of new Lake City for $179. I assume this is the good stuff and not like Federal FC crap. I've only reloaded Winchester and have no experience with other brass. Am I OK with the "Lake City" brass from Grafs? I appreciate any input--Tnx

From your previous post:

Quoted: I guess I must be hosed. I just bought 1k of "mixed headstamp once fired military" brass off the net  of which 100 were LC with NATO stamp and the other 900 were "FC 07". Load em once and throw away or not st all. What say you?  I feel like a chump. I've never bought anything but new brass until now. I've been trying to stockpile brass ,bullets ,primers and powder each month, but with the cost of things, I thought I would buy some once fired brass. Now I feel like I wasted $75

Did you buy this here or somewhere else? If this was listed on the EE I would request a refund... even if it wasn't purchased here I would still try for a refund.

Some think that FC 07 may be military brass, others do not. You might  do a comparison using some of the above methods to compare the FC 07 to LC or other FC brass. If you need some different FC brass to compare measurements with I would be happy to send you a couple of cases.

Find someone here on the EE offering once fired LC brass with good feedback and save some money over new would be my choice, your needs may be different.

Best of luck.

Dave

I got the brass online from : http://www.tjconevera.com/1000-once-fired-223-military-processe.html  . I knew it was mixed headstamp, but 10% junk not 90%!!

After reading this thread I am very happy I buy and reload Lapua brass.  Yes, it is a bit expensive initially, but the amount of times you can safely reload it brings the price down significantly.  Even more if you anneal properly.

Before reloading I had bought some Black Hills match factory ammo.  Reloading this also showed loose primer pockets after one or two reloads as well as an occasional split neck.

My own safety as well as the condition of my rifle is worth a few cents a round more.

ok. How about the Federal XM80 brass. FC with year code and Nato Cross.

I just bought some Federal XM193 brown box ammo.  From what I gather, this brass is not the type in question correct?

It is stamped  LC  06 and has the NATO stamp also.

Am I correct in thinking this brass should be ok for several reloads unlike the brass in question?