That is the problem; people think one, apparently strong, case is good enough. How thick was the copper layer on that ammo vs another brand or caliber? Was it thinner to get the price down. BTW the Germans have been using steel jackets for decades on their NATO 7.62. I don't think they would give up a 200% increase in barrel life for a penny or 2 per rd?
Norinco .223 ammo keyholing
- Thread starter d1ce
- Start date
I have had a number of students show up on courses with this stuff and found it to be very inconsistent. Blown primers, gas erosion on bolts, split cases, key-holing, excessive fouling, failure to lock and dud rounds. I've since included a note to not bring this for courses where they use our rifles. I brought home a dozen boxes from the last course to check them out. I had never looked at the different products.
I pulled 20 rounds from a box picked at random and checked them out. The case head stamp is CJ 93. No lot numbers were on the yellow box which was labeled: 223 Remington.
First I weighed every cartridge on a Hornady electronic scale and measured COAL and bullet diameter just forward of the cannelure.
Next I used a Wilson Case Gauge to measure cartridge headspace.
Then I pulled the rounds using a Kinetic puller so as not to swage the bullet. I weighed the charge, the projectile and measure the diameter behind the cannelure.
The bullets had sealant applied and were standard FMJ with an exposed core at the base. The propellant was much flatter than standard St Marks ball.
I checked every projectile with a magnet and none were attracted.
This particular box compared favourably with M193 or AE that I have checked, except the projectiles are undersized.
COAL was fairly inconsistent. 3 rounds were .001 over max chamber headspace size and would likely have chambered with a tiny amount of crush up.
Overall weight was also not bad, varying from 179.5 gr to 182.2 gr.
The bullets at first appeared to be VERY undersized - likely due to an aggressive crimp. Measuring the bullets AFTER pulling showed that while they were undersized, it was only by about 1-2 /1000". I could not find a single round in my loading bench that measured smaller than .224, yet only one Norinco round was that large (#18). Bullet weight averaged 55 gr, but varied from 54.6 to 55.7 gr. I suspect this would affect accuracy.
The charge weight was quite good except one round that was .5 gr low.
It would be nice to compare these measurements across different lots and with a bigger sample, but I thought it was interesting anyway.
I'm going to take another box and shoot some chrony data through a barrel I don't care all that much about after x-mas.
I pulled 20 rounds from a box picked at random and checked them out. The case head stamp is CJ 93. No lot numbers were on the yellow box which was labeled: 223 Remington.
First I weighed every cartridge on a Hornady electronic scale and measured COAL and bullet diameter just forward of the cannelure.
Next I used a Wilson Case Gauge to measure cartridge headspace.
Then I pulled the rounds using a Kinetic puller so as not to swage the bullet. I weighed the charge, the projectile and measure the diameter behind the cannelure.
The bullets had sealant applied and were standard FMJ with an exposed core at the base. The propellant was much flatter than standard St Marks ball.
I checked every projectile with a magnet and none were attracted.
This particular box compared favourably with M193 or AE that I have checked, except the projectiles are undersized.
COAL was fairly inconsistent. 3 rounds were .001 over max chamber headspace size and would likely have chambered with a tiny amount of crush up.
Overall weight was also not bad, varying from 179.5 gr to 182.2 gr.
The bullets at first appeared to be VERY undersized - likely due to an aggressive crimp. Measuring the bullets AFTER pulling showed that while they were undersized, it was only by about 1-2 /1000". I could not find a single round in my loading bench that measured smaller than .224, yet only one Norinco round was that large (#18). Bullet weight averaged 55 gr, but varied from 54.6 to 55.7 gr. I suspect this would affect accuracy.
The charge weight was quite good except one round that was .5 gr low.
It would be nice to compare these measurements across different lots and with a bigger sample, but I thought it was interesting anyway.
I'm going to take another box and shoot some chrony data through a barrel I don't care all that much about after x-mas.
Have. Not recently. Not much better or worse.
Over the last ten years of running carbine courses I've seen a lot of it. Some lots are very good. Some okay. Very few malfunctions. We have had a few lots that shooters could not qualify with and we substituted C77 and they passed.
I wouldn't use white box either for what it's worth.
Over the last ten years of running carbine courses I've seen a lot of it. Some lots are very good. Some okay. Very few malfunctions. We have had a few lots that shooters could not qualify with and we substituted C77 and they passed.
I wouldn't use white box either for what it's worth.
How do you know what they produce when it seems like every case is different?
All I know is that after about 3000 rounds of American Eagle 55gr run through 5 different semi auto 223's I haven't had a single failure to feed, failure to extract, failure to fire, blown primer, or any other problem. It may not be the most accurate ammo out of every barrel but I've never needed to take my gun apart to pull pieces of primer out of my trigger group and I have never seen a keyhole in a target.
Good enough for me.
I'd like to know more.
That is the first time I've heard of anyone having any issues with it. I know there are a few rifles out there that don't group well with it but that's about it.
I just measured a few rounds from my crates.
Lot 14 - 1995
CJ95 headstamp
bullet diameter just forward of the cannelure
0.220
0.222
0.220
0.221
0.222
0.222
0.222
0.220
0.222
0.222
so quite the variance, but most are 0.222.
I have not experienced any keyholeing with mine, but they are definitely not as consistent as I am used to.
I got these cheap rounds just for plinking anyways, so I am not worried about it.
Lot 14 - 1995
CJ95 headstamp
bullet diameter just forward of the cannelure
0.220
0.222
0.220
0.221
0.222
0.222
0.222
0.220
0.222
0.222
so quite the variance, but most are 0.222.
I have not experienced any keyholeing with mine, but they are definitely not as consistent as I am used to.
I got these cheap rounds just for plinking anyways, so I am not worried about it.
Since it was obviously an ammo issue because they replaced his rifle. Did it result in a recall of any lots of ammo or anything? Must have had more bad rounds in the batch to prove it was an issue with the ammo. That really sucks but at least they replaced his rifle. Like to see anyone get Norinco to replace a damaged rifle if it happened.
Hope the guy wasn't hurt.
abbynormal
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- West Coast
Ya get what ya pay for ....
There's a reason the PMC and Federal ammo is the price it is.
There's a reason the PMC and Federal ammo is the price it is.
Yep… I have never, ever had one failure to feed or failure to eject or light primer strike or any other failure with the American Eagle ammo in my 223's over the years ...never
It's pretty accurate, very accurate in some rifles especially my AR's... For me, it's worth every penny!
It's pretty accurate, very accurate in some rifles especially my AR's... For me, it's worth every penny!
Clobbersauras
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Waaay out west.
because if have tested hundreds of lots of this ammo from the beginning of production to current, spoken to the manufacturer at their plant as well as reviewing details of it as sold in the US and Canada since the late 80s/early 90s. I have yet to see any evidence of a bimetal jacket used in their 223.
That's strange, I wonder how it wore out the barrel in SteveJanes Swiss Arms in around 6000 rounds then? He said the rifling was toast and he shot pretty much exclusively Norc ammo, the barrel was also bulged from him shooting it full of water.
Either way, there has been way too many people having problems with it for me to run it in any of my rifles, I won't even buy a used rifle if the previous owner will admit to using it. I spend too much for my rifles to risk shortening their lifespan just to save a couple dollars.
I'll stick to AE, PMC and my handloads thanks.
Are the Canadian SAN rifle's barrel not the same as in the one issued to the Swiss Army, meaning firearms with the fun-switch on it???!!!
There goes the rapid 5-round a mag fire theory over 6,000 rounds because the SAN issued to the Swiss Army would wear out in half that, which doesn't make any sense whatsoever.
