What is your definition of reliable ammo

[warbirdlover]

All my factory ammo (and handloads I used to put together) go bang when I fire them and most all gave decent accuracy.

And all the ammo fired in my cheapo Hi-Point 45 ACP pistol have gone bang also. You don't need an expensive handgun as many say.

When I was first learning how to handload and not to swift I overloaded some .243's that went "phffft" when I shot them. I only shot one (had neck cracking, primer flattening and all the other nasty signs) and pulled all the bullets on the others to restart all over again. It was totally my error. I was very careful after that.

[Metal god]

Now Im hearing and read some of the reports linked earlier .

Does all this have more to do with older military ammo ? Or are we all just useing mil-surp cus that's were the reports originated ?

Are the newer powders of today just as likey to be compromized long term as the older powders .( all things being equal )

Do all manufacurers of NATO ammo use the same gun powder and are the powders used today the same as the powders in older NATO lots .

ALL things being the equal . If I had 60 year old mil-surp ammo and 60 year old commercial ammo . Would each one be just as likely as the other to be compromizied . Same question but looking in to the future . If I bought new production Federal lake city and Reminton UMC today ( I just picked some brands not sure If it matters ) . In 60 years would it be just as likely they both would be compromized the same .

Can all of the above questions have one answer . ( Generally all gun powders are made up of the same properties there fore they are all subject to the same issues ) .

[RedBowTies88]

Ive shot thousands of rounds of .223 through my Saiga 98% of which is steel cased and I've never ever had a failure of any kind in that weapon other then one issue of case head seperation using that reloaded ammo they sell at dicks.

I have had failue of winchester 12ga target loads from walmart (in several 12ga guns). and a few failures of .38 spl here and there in my model 37 (mostly remington).

Ive never had a failure from cheapo russian 9x18 with somewhere around 1500 rounds downrange.

Never had a failure to fire from 9x19 of any kind

never had any issues whatsoever with surplus 7.62x54r or any other centerfire rifle round

[Slamfire]

Does all this have more to do with older military ammo ? Or are we all just useing mil-surp cus that's were the reports originated ?

I put this out as a warning for all old ammunition. There is a lot of ignorance on this topic. Industry does not want you to know about powder shelf life because from a profits viewpoint, consumer knowledge is bad. You might get picky, you might not buy old stock. I am putting this out to inform that old ammunition has its risks. There will be the willful ignorant who dismiss the warning signs of hangfires, misfires, and high pressure, but for those who are wondering if those signs are indications of potentially unsafe ammunition, then hopefully this will validate their suspicions .

The only information in the public domain, for the time being, are the old military reports.

Are the newer powders of today just as likey to be compromized long term as the older powders .( all things being equal )

Yes. Nitrocellulose is the same now as when it was invented back in the 1846. The Wiki article shows the evolution of it as an smokeless propellant. You can look up single base, double base, and triple based powders, and I don’t have the slightest idea how triple based powders age.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smokeless_powder

I am certain there are differences to the “herbs and spices” of modern powders compared to older powders, but the base is the same “chicken”.

http://www.firearmsid.com/Feature%20...wder/index.htm

Do all manufacurers of NATO ammo use the same gun powder and are the powders used today the same as the powders in older NATO lots .

No they do not and I would not expect it to be so. When you disassemble foreign ammunition and inspect the powder, it can be flaked, ball, whatever. Sovereign nations preferentially use domestic manufacturers. Keeps the money in country and keeps their people employed.


Lake City is a Government owned and contractor operated facility. Whatever American contractor wins the bid uses whatever powder, primer, they want, be it from within their company, or from a foreign supplier, as along as the source is not forbidden. There are "buy American clauses", but what is "American" has been manipulated by Corporations. Military specifications are now performance specs, not the product specs used way back when. As long as the pressure curve, velocity, shelf life, etc, meet the performance requirements, it is up to the contractor to figure out which propellants and primers to use. This was not true back in the days when the Army ran their own Arsenals. There were a limited number of propellants used in US ammunition , all of domestic manufacture, and the product specification could require a specific propellant.

Briefings on NATO ammunition can be found on the web, basically the ammunition is to be interchangeable between countries. What powders NATO countries use is up to them.

http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2011smallar...Pellegrino.pdf


Newly manufactured ammunition by commercial outfits, such as Federal, Winchester, Remington, powders they use is determined by what maximizes their profit. These companies will purchase out sourced powders if it is cheaper than buying from their powder division. These companies change powders and suppliers all the time.

But, military ammunition and commercial ammunition is the same basic chemistry of nitrocellulose (single base) or nitrocellulose with nitroglycerine (double base).

ALL things being the equal . If I had 60 year old mil-surp ammo and 60 year old commercial ammo . Would each one be just as likely as the other to be compromizied . Same question but looking in to the future . If I bought new production Federal lake city and Reminton UMC today ( I just picked some brands not sure If it matters ) . In 60 years would it be just as likely they both would be compromized the same .

Given the same storage conditions they will deteriorate at the same rate. There will be little differences between lots, based on manufacturing variances, based on stabilizer chemistry, and there will be differences in the rate of deterioration of single based powders and double based powders, because nitroglycerine increases the reduction-oxidation of nitrocellulose.

Can all of the above questions have one answer . ( Generally all gun powders are made up of the same properties there fore they are all subject to the same issues ) .

Yes.

[Metal god]

Thanks alot for the detailed answers . Seeing those corroded bullets you posted got me thinking . Man , you would never be able to tell that was happening inside the case .

You may not understand the chemistry but you will remember the effect.

I love that line . Thats what put me over the top and wanted to know as much about this issue as posible

Thanks again

Metal

[Picher]

I believe that the Hodgdon Powder Company started by selling WWII surplus bulk powder stored in boxcars for 25+/- years. They re-packaged it and it was about as good as the day it was made. It probably wasn't exposed to extreme heat, however.

I have a few cans of powder that I bought more than 25 years ago and it's still good, but it's been stored in cool, dry conditions.

[coyota1]

I store my ammo in my home, and it never gets over 90 degrees let alone 150 degrees. I have shot lots of surplus 06 ammo probably from Korea, or WWII with out any issues other than cleaning up after using corrosive primers.