Ammo Hunt Thread

[C-bus]

Just ordered S&B brass 9mm from Cabelas. $12.99 for box of 50. Free shipping if you spend over $150. I've shot S&B before and they'll do just fine for targets and zombies.

[speedytriple]

Wally world by me had some new stuff in yesterday. RSW 9mm anyone every shoot this stuff? kinda pricey. Was 16 bucks for 50 rnds of 124gr fmj. I have seldom seen 124gr fmj mostly it is 115gr fmj in 9mm. I might try one box to see how it shoots but at that price I will get something else most likely.

[ReconRat]

What brand of ammo is the military using these days?

The military manufactures it's own ammunition at Lake City, everything up to 20mm. They contract ammunition manufacturers to run it. They produce 1.4 billion rounds annually. Federal/ATK had the contract in ~2001-2009. Military brass will have an "LC" head stamp on it, followed by xx, the year of manufacture (09 = 2009)

The mil spec for M855 (5.56mm) ammo is MIL-C-63989C(4). Average horizontal standard deviation shall be no greater than 6.8 inches at 600 yards, or no greater than 1.8 inches at 200 yards using an indoor range.

Note: I don't recommend using military (5.56) ammunition in a civilian rifle (.223). If your barrel is marked .223, don't use 5.56mm.

Yes they are both the same size, but 5.56mm is basically machine gun ammo, and is of a different design and function.

[Todd#43]

Yes they are both the same size, but 5.56mm is basically machine gun ammo, and is of a different design and function.

Got anything to back that up?

If ya don't, I'm callin bullshit.

[ReconRat]

Got anything to back that up?

If ya don't, I'm callin bullshit.

figured you might say that. But if you want to ram a mil spec round into your bolt action rifle, you go right ahead.

[Todd#43]

figured you might say that. But if you want to ram a mil spec round into your bolt action rifle, you go right ahead.

If the rifle is chambered for the 5.56 there's no problem running a "mil spec" round in it.

Show me that the 5.56 is a "machine gun" round and isnt to be used in a rifle chambered for it. While you're at it what's "different" about the "design" and what's the intended "function"???

[ReconRat]

For anyone that wonders what the difference is.

If it says 5.56 on your barrel it's fine for 5.56 ammunition. Including ammunition of military specification. No one ever said it wasn't. If it says .223 and 5.56 on the barrel, it can fire either ammunition. If one or the other marking is missing, it's possible that it's an older rifle or that the manufacturer declined to validate the use of one or the other.

Skipping over any possible differences in bullet shape, weight, aerodynamic ballistics, CG (center of gravity), and material/construction. And skipping over the shell shape and material/construction (hardness, heat treat and annealing). and the type of primer design and hardness (Berdan for military use). And skipping the type of powder, corrosive properties, energy, velocity, and chamber pressures. All of which can be or are different but still fit the same rifle chamber.

And going straight to the "function", and then skipping over the concept that mil-spec 5.56mm is actually designed to function flawlessly in fully automatic squad and vehicle mounted belt fed weapons...

The function of modern 5.56mm military ammunition of the M855 variety is meant to operate in a one in seven rate of twist barrel on up to a one in ten rate of twist. (1:7 ROT to 1:10 ROT). Even then, different military weapons will vary the rate of twist for best performance from the M855 ballistics. The original M855 design was optimized for penetration of a Kevlar helmet at ranges of over 400 yards.

Rifles bought by civilians might have a 1:7 ROT or 1:8 ROT or 1:9 ROT or 1:10 ROT or 1:12 ROT or 1:14 ROT. Even a 1:8.3 ROT. One in twelve is very common. And there are newer commercial rifles designed for using M855 type ammunition. M855 was not even sold commercially when it was first used for the military. Actually, M855 is not generally sold to the public now. It's a carbide core penetrating bullet. One in twelve is what was used for the older M193 military specification, and is what is found on the older .223/5.56 rifles. The problem, is that M855 ammunition has very poor performance when fired from a one in twelve rate of twist barrel.

If you're wondering what works for both old and new ammunition specifications (M193 and M855). It is a one in ten rate of twist barrel for both, but even that will vary with different rifles. But is not optimized for either specification. Commercial ammunition is basically a variation of either the M193 or the M855 type. And I'll bet mostly M193. Edit: one in seven twist will fire both types.

The result in general, is poor performance from rifles of the .223/5.56 caliber, unless the ammunition is chosen and tested very carefully.

Edited March 8, 2010 by ReconRat

[ReconRat]

One more for the math geeks.

The correct combination of twist rate and ammunition is based mostly on the length of the bullet, and can be found with the formula:

Twist = 150 x D squared / L

D = Bullet diameter in inches

L = Bullet length in inches

[Todd#43]

For anyone that wonders what the difference is.

If it says 5.56 on your barrel it's fine for 5.56 ammunition. Including ammunition of military specification. No one ever said it wasn't. If it says .223 and 5.56 on the barrel, it can fire either ammunition. If one or the other marking is missing, it's possible that it's an older rifle or that the manufacturer declined to validate the use of one or the other.

Skipping over any possible differences in bullet shape, weight, aerodynamic ballistics, CG (center of gravity), and material/construction. And skipping over the shell shape and material/construction (hardness, heat treat and annealing). and the type of primer design and hardness (Berdan for military use). And skipping the type of powder, corrosive properties, energy, velocity, and chamber pressures. All of which can be or are different but still fit the same rifle chamber.

And going straight to the "function", and then skipping over the concept that mil-spec 5.56mm is actually designed to function flawlessly in fully automatic squad and vehicle mounted belt fed weapons...

The function of modern 5.56mm military ammunition of the M855 variety is meant to operate in a one in seven rate of twist barrel on up to a one in ten rate of twist. (1:7 ROT to 1:10 ROT). Even then, different military weapons will vary the rate of twist for best performance from the M855 ballistics. The original M855 design was optimized for penetration of a Kevlar helmet at ranges of over 400 yards.

Rifles bought by civilians might have a 1:7 ROT or 1:8 ROT or 1:9 ROT or 1:10 ROT or 1:12 ROT or 1:14 ROT. Even a 1:8.3 ROT. One in twelve is very common. And there are newer commercial rifles designed for using M855 type ammunition. M855 was not even sold commercially when it was first used for the military. Actually, M855 is not generally sold to the public now. It's a carbide core penetrating bullet. One in twelve is what was used for the older M193 military specification, and is what is found on the older .223/5.56 rifles. The problem, is that M855 ammunition has very poor performance when fired from a one in twelve rate of twist barrel.

If you're wondering what works for both old and new ammunition specifications (M193 and M855). It is a one in ten rate of twist barrel for both, but even that will vary with different rifles. But is not optimized for either specification. Commercial ammunition is basically a variation of either the M193 or the M855 type. And I'll bet mostly M193. Edit: one in seven twist will fire both types.

The result in general, is poor performance from rifles of the .223/5.56 caliber, unless the ammunition is chosen and tested very carefully.

Nice cut and paste job, but what you're really comparing there is the difference between cored (steel or carbide) ammo and non-cored ammo as opposed to the difference between the .223 Remington and the 5.56 NATO Round.

The main difference between the two is case pressure, and has little to do with the barrel and everything to do with the chamber.

You can get into discussions between Berdan and Boxer primed, corrosive or non-corrosive powder, etc., but your point is moot. Commercially available (and even military surplus) 5.56 ammunition will cause no ill effects to weapon chambered for it.

By the way The AR (as designed by Stoner for Armalite) was DESIGNED SPECIFICALLY AROUND THE 5.56 NATO Round. That's right genius, the round came BEFORE the rifle, and the rifle was designed to fire that round.

[bandit12]

I probably should stay out of this but the problem with the two rounds are that the .223 Rem. has a shorter throat or lead to the riflings. The .223 can be safely shot thru a rifle with a 5.56 NATO chamber.

The 5.56 NATO round has a longer throat or lead, the rifles chamber in the neck area is actually longer than a .223 chamber. Thus when a 5.56 NATO round is chambered into a .223 Rem. chamber the bullet can engage the riflings before the bolt is closed, then in order to completely close the bolt, the bullet can be pushed into the case neck a little farther. When shoved in farther the bullet is solidly in the riflings and the bullet will take up more space inside the case and the pressure of the firing round could be dangerously elevated causing a rifle that could blow out thru the bolt.

Hopefully the pic below works, it shows that the throat on the 5.556 NATO is .164 long and the throat on the .223 Rem. is .045. Without burying the bullet into the riflings the pressure of the 5.56 can be 15,000 psi higher than .223.

A lot of folks have shot 5.56 NATO in .223 chambers without incident but they are at least sending out the invitation for it. Hope this clears up at least a little bit of the actual difference.

Edited March 8, 2010 by bandit12

[flounder]

The main difference between the two is case pressure, and has little to do with the barrel and everything to do with the chamber.

+1 this is the reason.. Firing .223 in 5.56 is ok.. Firing 5.56 in .223 is recommended as a no no due to possible pressure issues.

Everyone who shoots should use this page..

http://www.saami.org/

Edited March 8, 2010 by flounder

[curby]

i like guns...

[ReconRat]

I probably should stay out of this but the problem with the two rounds are that the .223 Rem. has a shorter throat or lead to the riflings. The .223 can be safely shot thru a rifle with a 5.56 NATO chamber.

The 5.56 NATO round has a longer throat or lead, the rifles chamber in the neck area is actually longer than a .223 chamber. Thus when a 5.56 NATO round is chambered into a .223 Rem. chamber the bullet can engage the riflings before the bolt is closed, then in order to completely close the bolt, the bullet can be pushed into the case neck a little farther. When shoved in farther the bullet is solidly in the riflings and the bullet will take up more space inside the case and the pressure of the firing round could be dangerously elevated causing a rifle that could blow out thru the bolt.

Hopefully the pic below works, it shows that the throat on the 5.556 NATO is .164 long and the throat on the .223 Rem. is .045. Without burying the bullet into the riflings the pressure of the 5.56 can be 15,000 psi higher than .223.

A lot of folks have shot 5.56 NATO in .223 chambers without incident but they are at least sending out the invitation for it. Hope this clears up at least a little bit of the actual difference.

Correct. Most semi-auto and full auto will have that long throat and loose chamber to slop brass and lead at a high rate. Bolt action, lever action, and single shot will usually not have that, for improved accuracy. And even though mil-spec ammo is made with reduced chamber pressures to facilitate feed and function, that same round in a tight bolt action rifle can and will increase chamber pressures.

This is also true for any cartridge that the bullet has been knocked loose, either out farther, or into the brass shell casing. Out can make pressures higher when engaging the throat, and in makes pressures higher because there is less volume in the shell casing. Don't fire them.

I didn't want to bring up the chamber pressure thing, I really didn't think anyone would understand it. I am corrected.

edit: and oh yeah, I wrote that. It's not a cut and paste.

Edited March 8, 2010 by ReconRat
moar

[Gump]

Is there such a thing as gun nerds?

Which round is cheaper? They market them as a .223 or 5.56x45mm?

Edited March 8, 2010 by Gump

[ReconRat]

Is there such a thing as gun nerds?

Which round is cheaper? They market them as a .223 or 5.56x45mm?

Gun nerds? Yes... yes there are...

I buy both. I try to avoid Russian made ammo. I absolutely avoid ammo made in Pakistan. Right now 200 round packs of Remington .223 are low priced. And there is some Lake City 5.56 in boxes of 20 that are low cost. I think I saw some Federal that wasn't too expensive either. But I'm too lazy to go back and look the Federal up. I try to find NATO battle packs of 5.56, the ones sealed up in metal or thick plastic. They might cost a little more, but the ammo isn't all banged up and dented. I strongly suspect that a lot of cheap ammo has been bounced around in the back of a truck, out in the field. Not used, it gets packed back up in boxes of twenty and sold. It looks... well... it looks used.

I've been thinking... I'm one of the unfortunate to experience the early early M-16, the original as first used. I never had a problem if it was nice and clean, but I sure experienced a lot of bum magazines that would cause jamming and mis-feeds. And that Vietnam introduction of the M-16 malfunctions, was traced to a last hour change in propellant by the ammunition manufacturer (per the spec, but wrong), that caused more than normal fouling. Fixed by introduction of an improved propellant.

[Gump]

Thanks for the intel RR!

[that dude]

twin glock fortys. todd still gotta meet up with you man. i will be taking my truck in soon to fred martin dodge. if i remember you are right there, or no?

[Todd#43]

twin glock fortys. todd still gotta meet up with you man. i will be taking my truck in soon to fred martin dodge. if i remember you are right there, or no?

Yup....pretty much right around the corner.

[speedytriple]

Thatdude will forget your cell number and ghost ya LOL! I have to get back to fred martin soon also for my free oil change.

[Todd#43]

Thatdude will forget your cell number and ghost ya LOL! I have to get back to fred martin soon also for my free oil change.

If he does, he does. Doesnt really matter though - I'm not out any $$ if he does.