MFS steel case vs Norinco non-corrosive for black rifles
- Thread starter knock-knock
- Start date
I can't say what's better. But I've shot 1000's of rounds of MFS .308, 7.62x39, and .223. I've been very happy with it and will continue to buy more. It's suprisengly accurate for steel case ammo, and I'm yet to have a issue from using it. It is however very dirty.
onetwentyish
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- East Central AB (AKA Northern Texas)
Mfs is bi metal jacketed, it will wear out your barrel faster then say federal, norc commenly has undersized projectiles, which results in them "skipping" down the barrel. That is obviously hard on barrels as well.pick your poison!
Exactly!
onetwentyish
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- East Central AB (AKA Northern Texas)
Well in all honesty, you did not say what firearm you are planning on useing it in.
If its something high end like a tavor which currently does not have replacement barrels, hell no, dont use it. But AR's for plinking, why not?
I won't run it in my rifles because my PWS AR does not use a standard AR barrel from what I can tell and I wouldn't replace it with anything other than a PWS barrel since it is isonite treated and button rifled which appears to make it more accurate than most standard barrels. Ordering one of those is not going to be fun.
As for barrels being a consumable part of an AR or ACR. No thanks, I'll get as much life as I can out of mine since I don't buy $200 barrels but instead opt for $400-$600 custom built barrels which actually are capable of good groups.
As for reliability it sounds like MFS is definitely more reliable. Wanna know more about Norinco ammo just search the many many many many many posts on this site with guys complaining about keyholing, undersized projectiles, primers falling out and jamming up the trigger group, and pierced primers.
Everyone is free to run whatever they want and tolerate different levels of performance for their money.
I've watched a buddy with his XCR shoot 5-6 inch groups with Norc ammo and then I gave him 10 rounds of dirty bird to try and the groups shrank to 3-4 inches.
To me it just isn't worth the risk of getting one of the off-spec cases or buying ammo that is only good for making noise rather than actually hitting targets.
Bi-metal jacketed bullets will ruin your barrel no matter what anyone says. Think about it. Copper jacket in steel rifling, copper is much softer and will be the material to deform and wear. Bi-metal means steel/alloy which will be almost as hard as the rifling and both the barrel and the bullet will wear.
I've posted links to a test I found in the past where they compared the two and the barrel shooting bi-metal was ruined after around 6000 rounds and the barrel shooting copper jacket was like new after 10000 rounds.
I'll try to find it again and post it for you.
Edit,
Was easier to find than I thought.
http://www.luckygunner.com/labs/brass-vs-steel-cased-ammo/
Last edited:
If you dig a little deeper in that article they are basically championing the use of cheap ammo because you could replace your barrel twice within the 10000 round period and still come out ahead financially. So, there's multiple advantages of shooting low quality ammo 1) Cheaper 2) Don't have to worry about babying your gun 3) Can have 2 brand spanking new barrels in the same time frame for equivalent investment.
false actually. norinco is bimetal jacketed as well. Can't speak for the undersized projectiles though i've never measured them. As for bimetal wearing out your barrel that's a myth. the US Army funded a test back during the second world war to compare copper jacketed vs bimetal/steel jacketed rounds. results were the same from both types, the steel jackets did not increase wear at all. actually a lot of the ammo fired by US troops throughout the war was copper washed steel jacketed rounds.
steel core is a different story as the reason the soft steel jacket (although not as soft as copper) doesn't wear the barrel is because it's still no where near as hard as the steel used to make the barrels and because the steel can be pushed into the lead. add the steel core and we MAY have a culprit. Other tests i've read about seem to suggest that barrel wear doesn't even come from the bullets, rather it comes from the pressure and heat generated by different powder burn rates. barrel wear from the projectile only begins when the barrels get hot to the point where the metal is beginning to soften.
i can't find a link to the actual frankford test results but heres a trust worthy source that mentions it
https://www.facebook.com/militaryarms/posts/516101628401641
Last edited:
on norc 556 i has a few primers blow out and a little smoke show after each time primer blew the norc 556 that comes in 20 round white boxes i find it more accurate out of my tavor then the norc 556 that came wrapped paper
mfs 223 dirtier then the norc but more accurate and reliable although i had few cases split on me both the mfs and norc are good plinking ammo thats about it
mfs 223 dirtier then the norc but more accurate and reliable although i had few cases split on me both the mfs and norc are good plinking ammo thats about it
Really? You'll replace a barrel if people shoot enough CanAm product to wear it out? That's a pretty awesome stance.
