Military grade ammo?

[JonathanL 4]

They are diferent spec, true. The brass is thicker in certain parts and such like.

 

They don't actually produce different pressures. The differences come from the fact that different countries test the ammo in different ways.

 

The US manufacturers use the SAAMI test which gives a pressure of something like 55,000psi. However, people quote this against the NATO Evap test for 5.56mm, which shows something like 63,000psi, and then use that to "prove" that 5.56mm is a higher pressure round than .223 and is dangerous in .223 rifles.

 

The prolem is that the tests do not measure the same thing. The SAAMI test takes its reading just forward of the web of the case and the NATO test takes it at the throat. The throat is where you get highest pressure.

 

The other international standard test is the CiP one which all the European countries sign up to and their specs for .223 and 5.56 are actually identical (60 something thousand psi)as they measure the pressure at the same point on the cartridge for both rounds.

 

Long story short, 5.56mm is perfectly safe in a .223 rifle and vice-versa. Millions of rounds of 5.56 ammo are shot trough .223 rifles every year. This is why .223 is such a popular round - you can get cheap military ammo for it.

 

J.

 

 

So, Why does it say .223 on the rifle and not .223/5.56???

 

You do what you like, I am happier to accept this....

 

http://www.thegunzone.com/556v223.html

 

Extract...

SAAMI points out that chambers for military rifles have a different throat configuration than chambers for sporting firearms which, together with the full metal jacket of the military projectile, may account for the higher pressures which result when military ammunition is fired in a sporting chamber.

 

SAAMI recommends that a firearm be fired only with the cartridge for which it is specifically chambered by the manufacturer.

 

The .223 Remington and the 5.56mm NATO, when checked with a chamber ream from a reliable manufacturer of each, also have discernable differences in the areas of freebore diameter, freebore length (leade) and angle of the throat

 

The choice is yours..you simply have to ask...Do I feel lucky??

 

 

It's not about feeling lucky. The pressure specs for both are the same. Yes, they are slightly diferent cartridges but the differences are tiny.

 

If there were any problems then we'd hear about guns blowing up but we don't. Also, the only people warning you not to do this are SAAMI who are a sporting arms manufactrers respresentative group - a group who's members do no produce great amounts (or any?) of cheap militray ammo.

 

Like I've said, the whole reason why .223 rifles are so popular is because you can use military surplus ammo in them. They even make them with fast twist barrels so that modern heavy-bulleted military ammo can be used in them because they know that that is precisely whan people are going to shoot in it.

 

There are millions of rounds of surplus ammo sold in this country (weel, there was when you could get it) and very few rifles with 5.56mm stamped on them. How come these guns aren't all blowing up?

 

J.

[coldweld 65]

Hi Jonathan

 

I said a simular thing last year and agree with you ! But there are doom and gloom merchants on here.

Like you say where are all the blowups ? If there was a problem why would RFD's sell them to .223 owners they would be breaking so mamy laws both criminal and trade discription .

Fact is they are [were] available and legal to sell to .223 owners so in UK law are one and the same .

[HUnter_zero 58]

 

 

So, Why does it say .223 on the rifle and not .223/5.56???

 

 

 

As I said before, the same reason my .308 is stamped '.308' and not 7.62mm because it's a civilian rifle. Not sure why some P-H sporting rifles are stamped 7.62 tho

 

John

[Deker 3,478]

They are diferent spec, true. The brass is thicker in certain parts and such like.

 

They don't actually produce different pressures. The differences come from the fact that different countries test the ammo in different ways.

 

The US manufacturers use the SAAMI test which gives a pressure of something like 55,000psi. However, people quote this against the NATO Evap test for 5.56mm, which shows something like 63,000psi, and then use that to "prove" that 5.56mm is a higher pressure round than .223 and is dangerous in .223 rifles.

 

The prolem is that the tests do not measure the same thing. The SAAMI test takes its reading just forward of the web of the case and the NATO test takes it at the throat. The throat is where you get highest pressure.

 

The other international standard test is the CiP one which all the European countries sign up to and their specs for .223 and 5.56 are actually identical (60 something thousand psi)as they measure the pressure at the same point on the cartridge for both rounds.

 

Long story short, 5.56mm is perfectly safe in a .223 rifle and vice-versa. Millions of rounds of 5.56 ammo are shot trough .223 rifles every year. This is why .223 is such a popular round - you can get cheap military ammo for it.

 

J.

 

 

So, Why does it say .223 on the rifle and not .223/5.56???

 

You do what you like, I am happier to accept this....

 

http://www.thegunzone.com/556v223.html

 

Extract...

SAAMI points out that chambers for military rifles have a different throat configuration than chambers for sporting firearms which, together with the full metal jacket of the military projectile, may account for the higher pressures which result when military ammunition is fired in a sporting chamber.

 

SAAMI recommends that a firearm be fired only with the cartridge for which it is specifically chambered by the manufacturer.

 

The .223 Remington and the 5.56mm NATO, when checked with a chamber ream from a reliable manufacturer of each, also have discernable differences in the areas of freebore diameter, freebore length (leade) and angle of the throat

 

The choice is yours..you simply have to ask...Do I feel lucky??

 

 

It's not about feeling lucky. The pressure specs for both are the same. Yes, they are slightly diferent cartridges but the differences are tiny.

 

If there were any problems then we'd hear about guns blowing up but we don't. Also, the only people warning you not to do this are SAAMI who are a sporting arms manufactrers respresentative group - a group who's members do no produce great amounts (or any?) of cheap militray ammo.

 

Like I've said, the whole reason why .223 rifles are so popular is because you can use military surplus ammo in them. They even make them with fast twist barrels so that modern heavy-bulleted military ammo can be used in them because they know that that is precisely whan people are going to shoot in it.

 

There are millions of rounds of surplus ammo sold in this country (weel, there was when you could get it) and very few rifles with 5.56mm stamped on them. How come these guns aren't all blowing up?

 

J.

 

 

You are entitled to your opinion but the facts are....

 

... Big Military suppliers such as Remington, Barnaul, PPU, etc make ammo marked .223, why don't they simply make 5.56...AND why isn't the rifle marked .223/5.56 if they are interchangeable?

 

SAAMI don't make rifles, Sako, Remington, Browning etc etc do, and none of them are marked up 5.56 OR .223!

 

Do what you like and believe what you like, I feed my rifles what is says on the barrel!!

[Deker 3,478]

Hi Jonathan

 

I said a simular thing last year and agree with you ! But there are doom and gloom merchants on here.

Like you say where are all the blowups ? If there was a problem why would RFD's sell them to .223 owners they would be breaking so mamy laws both criminal and trade discription .

Fact is they are [were] available and legal to sell to .223 owners so in UK law are one and the same .

 

 

 

Wrong..if it ONLY says .223 on your FAC it is ILLEGAL to sell 5.56.

 

And if they were available, why are they not now, and why does that make them the same in UK law???

Edited May 3, 2010 by Deker

[JonathanL 4]

 

 

So, Why does it say .223 on the rifle and not .223/5.56???

 

 

 

As I said before, the same reason my .308 is stamped '.308' and not 7.62mm because it's a civilian rifle. Not sure why some P-H sporting rifles are stamped 7.62 tho

 

John

 

It will be because they had their chambers cut with a 7.62mm reamer. Lots of target rifles are actually 7.62mm because that's what was used at Bisley in the likes of the Queens comp. They use military ammunition so cut the chambers to miliary (7.62mm) specs.

 

J.

[Deker 3,478]

 

 

So, Why does it say .223 on the rifle and not .223/5.56???

 

 

 

As I said before, the same reason my .308 is stamped '.308' and not 7.62mm because it's a civilian rifle. Not sure why some P-H sporting rifles are stamped 7.62 tho

 

John

 

Oh dear...John, for someone who has his head burried in a book (Computer Programme) most of his life I would have though you could come up with something better than that!!

 

So it's Ok to use .308 in a 7.62 on that basis is it???

[JonathanL 4]

They are diferent spec, true. The brass is thicker in certain parts and such like.

 

They don't actually produce different pressures. The differences come from the fact that different countries test the ammo in different ways.

 

The US manufacturers use the SAAMI test which gives a pressure of something like 55,000psi. However, people quote this against the NATO Evap test for 5.56mm, which shows something like 63,000psi, and then use that to "prove" that 5.56mm is a higher pressure round than .223 and is dangerous in .223 rifles.

 

The prolem is that the tests do not measure the same thing. The SAAMI test takes its reading just forward of the web of the case and the NATO test takes it at the throat. The throat is where you get highest pressure.

 

The other international standard test is the CiP one which all the European countries sign up to and their specs for .223 and 5.56 are actually identical (60 something thousand psi)as they measure the pressure at the same point on the cartridge for both rounds.

 

Long story short, 5.56mm is perfectly safe in a .223 rifle and vice-versa. Millions of rounds of 5.56 ammo are shot trough .223 rifles every year. This is why .223 is such a popular round - you can get cheap military ammo for it.

 

J.

 

 

So, Why does it say .223 on the rifle and not .223/5.56???

 

You do what you like, I am happier to accept this....

 

http://www.thegunzone.com/556v223.html

 

Extract...

SAAMI points out that chambers for military rifles have a different throat configuration than chambers for sporting firearms which, together with the full metal jacket of the military projectile, may account for the higher pressures which result when military ammunition is fired in a sporting chamber.

 

SAAMI recommends that a firearm be fired only with the cartridge for which it is specifically chambered by the manufacturer.

 

The .223 Remington and the 5.56mm NATO, when checked with a chamber ream from a reliable manufacturer of each, also have discernable differences in the areas of freebore diameter, freebore length (leade) and angle of the throat

 

The choice is yours..you simply have to ask...Do I feel lucky??

 

 

It's not about feeling lucky. The pressure specs for both are the same. Yes, they are slightly diferent cartridges but the differences are tiny.

 

If there were any problems then we'd hear about guns blowing up but we don't. Also, the only people warning you not to do this are SAAMI who are a sporting arms manufactrers respresentative group - a group who's members do no produce great amounts (or any?) of cheap militray ammo.

 

Like I've said, the whole reason why .223 rifles are so popular is because you can use military surplus ammo in them. They even make them with fast twist barrels so that modern heavy-bulleted military ammo can be used in them because they know that that is precisely whan people are going to shoot in it.

 

There are millions of rounds of surplus ammo sold in this country (weel, there was when you could get it) and very few rifles with 5.56mm stamped on them. How come these guns aren't all blowing up?

 

J.

 

 

You are entitled to your opinion but the facts are....

 

... Big Military suppliers such as Remington, Barnaul, PPU, etc make ammo marked .223, why don't they simply make 5.56...AND why isn't the rifle marked .223/5.56 if they are interchangeable?

 

SAAMI don't make rifles, Sako, Remington, Browning etc etc do, and none of them are marked up 5.56 OR .223!

 

Do what you like and believe what you like, I feed my rifles what is says on the barrel!!

 

They won't supply military ammo marked .223.

 

No, guns aren't marked .223 OR 5.56mm beacause the two aren't identical (as I've pointed out above) although some reamer manufacturers do make hybrid reamers. They are so close as to make virtually no difference though. Lots of guns are marked in different ways when they actually use the same ammo - for instance, European companies tend to use metric designations for Imperial rounds.

 

SAAMI is the Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers Institute. They represent ammunition and firearm manufacturers and are not independent - nor do they actually fulfill a legally enforcible regulatory duty.The CiP are independent and are charged with a legal duty to regulate arms and ammo.

 

If this is so dangerous then where are all the blown up guns?

 

Do you feed your rifles reloads, by any chance?

 

J.

[Deker 3,478]

They are diferent spec, true. The brass is thicker in certain parts and such like.

 

They don't actually produce different pressures. The differences come from the fact that different countries test the ammo in different ways.

 

The US manufacturers use the SAAMI test which gives a pressure of something like 55,000psi. However, people quote this against the NATO Evap test for 5.56mm, which shows something like 63,000psi, and then use that to "prove" that 5.56mm is a higher pressure round than .223 and is dangerous in .223 rifles.

 

The prolem is that the tests do not measure the same thing. The SAAMI test takes its reading just forward of the web of the case and the NATO test takes it at the throat. The throat is where you get highest pressure.

 

The other international standard test is the CiP one which all the European countries sign up to and their specs for .223 and 5.56 are actually identical (60 something thousand psi)as they measure the pressure at the same point on the cartridge for both rounds.

 

Long story short, 5.56mm is perfectly safe in a .223 rifle and vice-versa. Millions of rounds of 5.56 ammo are shot trough .223 rifles every year. This is why .223 is such a popular round - you can get cheap military ammo for it.

 

J.

 

 

So, Why does it say .223 on the rifle and not .223/5.56???

 

You do what you like, I am happier to accept this....

 

http://www.thegunzone.com/556v223.html

 

Extract...

SAAMI points out that chambers for military rifles have a different throat configuration than chambers for sporting firearms which, together with the full metal jacket of the military projectile, may account for the higher pressures which result when military ammunition is fired in a sporting chamber.

 

SAAMI recommends that a firearm be fired only with the cartridge for which it is specifically chambered by the manufacturer.

 

The .223 Remington and the 5.56mm NATO, when checked with a chamber ream from a reliable manufacturer of each, also have discernable differences in the areas of freebore diameter, freebore length (leade) and angle of the throat

 

The choice is yours..you simply have to ask...Do I feel lucky??

 

 

It's not about feeling lucky. The pressure specs for both are the same. Yes, they are slightly diferent cartridges but the differences are tiny.

 

If there were any problems then we'd hear about guns blowing up but we don't. Also, the only people warning you not to do this are SAAMI who are a sporting arms manufactrers respresentative group - a group who's members do no produce great amounts (or any?) of cheap militray ammo.

 

Like I've said, the whole reason why .223 rifles are so popular is because you can use military surplus ammo in them. They even make them with fast twist barrels so that modern heavy-bulleted military ammo can be used in them because they know that that is precisely whan people are going to shoot in it.

 

There are millions of rounds of surplus ammo sold in this country (weel, there was when you could get it) and very few rifles with 5.56mm stamped on them. How come these guns aren't all blowing up?

 

J.

 

 

You are entitled to your opinion but the facts are....

 

... Big Military suppliers such as Remington, Barnaul, PPU, etc make ammo marked .223, why don't they simply make 5.56...AND why isn't the rifle marked .223/5.56 if they are interchangeable?

 

SAAMI don't make rifles, Sako, Remington, Browning etc etc do, and none of them are marked up 5.56 OR .223!

 

Do what you like and believe what you like, I feed my rifles what is says on the barrel!!

 

They won't supply military ammo marked .223.

 

No, guns aren't marked .223 OR 5.56mm beacause the two aren't identical (as I've pointed out above) although some reamer manufacturers do make hybrid reamers. They are so close as to make virtually no difference though. Lots of guns are marked in different ways when they actually use the same ammo - for instance, European companies tend to use metric designations for Imperial rounds.

 

SAAMI is the Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers Institute. They represent ammunition and firearm manufacturers and are not independent - nor do they actually fulfill a legally enforcible regulatory duty.The CiP are independent and are charged with a legal duty to regulate arms and ammo.

 

If this is so dangerous then where are all the blown up guns?

 

Do you feed your rifles reloads, by any chance?

 

J.

 

Chap, I have already said you can believe whatever you like, they are different..even you agree with that!!! Sturm Ruger Mini-14 has been (not sure if it still is) offered in both specifications, not .223/5.56, .223 OR 5.56 two different guns!

 

CIP insist .223 spec guns (in their jurisdiction countries) are higher pressure rated than SAAMI, that doesn't mean 5.56 are Ok to shoot in them!

 

Where does CIP say SAAMI is WRONG, and it is fine to shoot 5.56 in a .223???

 

(dare I say..who believes a word they hear from Brussels anyway )

 

I can fire a .22lr down a .22WMR hole, not clever, even worse I can let go a .22lr down a .17HMR with a bit of effort, just how close, or different, do you want the ammo before you decide it isn't safe?? A guy on the range next to me actually let go a .243 down his .308 barrel about 9 weeks back as well...

 

If you want to let go 5.56 down a .223 or even .308 down a 7.62 then you are welcome!

 

I'll stick to what is says on the gun/ammo.

 

ATB!!

[RicW 67]

Gentlemen, there is a point here which I think a lot of people have missed. There is a difference between "chance" and "risk".

 

Jon.L's arguments are, it seems to me, about chance. It may well be the case that the chance of a mishap as a result of using Mil.Spec ammo in a civilian weapon is very low. If you use 5.56mm in a gun proofed for .223 the chance of anything going amiss is very small.

 

On the other hand, the arguments from Deker, Mr Logic, and myself are based on risk. If that very unlikely chance were to happen, you risk getting your head blown off. I won't call the choice a no brainer cos people are fed up with my lousy puns anyway!

 

Ric

[coldweld 65]

Hi Jonathan

 

I said a simular thing last year and agree with you ! But there are doom and gloom merchants on here.

Like you say where are all the blowups ? If there was a problem why would RFD's sell them to .223 owners they would be breaking so mamy laws both criminal and trade discription .

Fact is they are [were] available and legal to sell to .223 owners so in UK law are one and the same .

 

 

 

Wrong..if it ONLY says .223 on your FAC it is ILLEGAL to sell 5.56.

 

And if they were available, why are they not now, and why does that make them the same in UK law???

 

 

 

I'm afraid it is you that is wrong Decker MY fac says Accuracy International 7.62 x 51 . It also states that for the ammo and guess what when i do buy factory ammo i have no problem buying .308 ammo

 

 

5.56 is still avalable but since the two wars on the go not in the quantity it was.

[Deker 3,478]

Hi Jonathan

 

I said a simular thing last year and agree with you ! But there are doom and gloom merchants on here.

Like you say where are all the blowups ? If there was a problem why would RFD's sell them to .223 owners they would be breaking so mamy laws both criminal and trade discription .

Fact is they are [were] available and legal to sell to .223 owners so in UK law are one and the same .

 

 

 

Wrong..if it ONLY says .223 on your FAC it is ILLEGAL to sell 5.56.

 

And if they were available, why are they not now, and why does that make them the same in UK law???

 

 

 

I'm afraid it is you that is wrong Decker MY fac says Accuracy International 7.62 x 51 . It also states that for the ammo and guess what when i do buy factory ammo i have no problem buying .308 ammo

 

 

5.56 is still avalable but since the two wars on the go not in the quantity it was.

 

 

 

If your dealer wants to break the law and you want to put .308 down a 7.62 do I care! Fortunately I had the brains to request .308/7.62x51, that's the ONLY legal way you can buy both! Exactly the same applies with .223/5.56.

 

You know fully well if it doesn't say you can do it on your FAC then you can't.......

 

We also both know it happens sometimes, and hopefully the police will turn a blind eye if they ever check, but that doesn't make it legal!

Edited May 3, 2010 by Deker

[JonathanL 4]

 

Chap, I have already said you can believe whatever you like, they are different..even you agree with that!!! Sturm Ruger Mini-14 has been (not sure if it still is) offered in both specifications, not .223/5.56, .223 OR 5.56 two different guns!

 

They are different, it doesn't necessarily mean that the difference is going to cause any damage. They have different throats and rifling leeds - big deal. Like I've asked, where are all the blown up guns?

 

CIP insist .223 spec guns (in their jurisdiction countries) are higher pressure rated than SAAMI, that doesn't mean 5.56 are Ok to shoot in them!

 

Not of its self, no. However, we know the history of these things and know damn well that they are basically interchangable. There is very little difference, they both shove a .223/4 bullet down a .223/4 barrel and have pretty much the same powder capacity.

Where does CIP say SAAMI is WRONG, and it is fine to shoot 5.56 in a .223???

 

I've never said they have. I said they don't issue the samwe warning as SAAMI and, to be honest, I don't know if SAAMI still issue that warning. It is 31 years old, after all.

 

Where are all the blown up guns?

 

I can fire a .22lr down a .22WMR hole, not clever,

 

I'm not sure that you could given that they have different diamater brass but I'll take your word for it. No, not clever but, equally, not that dangerous, I wouldn't have thought.

even worse I can let go a .22lr down a .17HMR with a bit of effort,

 

I doubt that even more - will it even chamber?

 

just how close, or different, do you want the ammo before you decide it isn't safe?? A guy on the range next to me actually let go a .243 down his .308 barrel about 9 weeks back as well...

 

I've seen that too. I still have the brass around somewhere. Didn't cause an unsafe situation though.

If you want to let go 5.56 down a .223 or even .308 down a 7.62 then you are welcome!

 

I've done both - lots of times and I'm still here to tell that tale. I have a carrier bag full of empty 7.62mm brass which I put through a .308 sporter years and years ago and that wasn't even marked 7.62 or .308, or at least I don't think it was not being able to read Arabic.

 

Can you point me to all the blown up guns?

 

I'll stick to what is says on the gun/ammo.

 

ATB!!

 

Like I've asked, where are all the blown up guns?

 

Do you shoot relaods through your guns?

[JonathanL 4]

Gentlemen, there is a point here which I think a lot of people have missed. There is a difference between "chance" and "risk".

 

Jon.L's arguments are, it seems to me, about chance. It may well be the case that the chance of a mishap as a result of using Mil.Spec ammo in a civilian weapon is very low. If you use 5.56mm in a gun proofed for .223 the chance of anything going amiss is very small.

 

On the other hand, the arguments from Deker, Mr Logic, and myself are based on risk. If that very unlikely chance were to happen, you risk getting your head blown off. I won't call the choice a no brainer cos people are fed up with my lousy puns anyway!

 

Ric

 

The main point is that people are saying that this is a horrendously dangerous practice but aren't offering any actual evidence as to why. The main thrust seems to be that it's because 5.56 is a far higher pressure round than .223 but when you actually compare specs from the same source and which are derived from the same testing method you see that they are actually the same.

 

So what is it that makes firing 5.56 in a .223 rifle dangerous? Yes, there are slight differnces in the chamber specs but they are really slight. Rifles don't run so close to the point of blowing up that a slight difference in the throat or rifling leede is going to spontaneously dismantle them. Okay, military brass is slightly thicker at the base but so what?

 

I'm just not seeing the danger here and the distinct lack of blown up guns tends to suggest that this just doesn't happen. It is, after all, a very common practice and is the whole reason why .223 rifles are so popular - you can shoot cheap military ammo in them. Same with .308/7.62. I have an SSG with .308 stamped on it and through which the previous owner shot nothing but military 7.62.

 

J.

[RicW 67]

J - ironically enough, SAAMI say that there is no problem firing 7.62x51 through guns marked as .308. The civilian ammo is loaded to higher pressure than milspec. Ex forces guns should be ok with .308 "with the possible exception of elderly weapons". Seems sensible enough.

Ric