stupid rumor of the day (.223 ammo)?


PDA






xsquidgator
April 23, 2007, 08:36 PM
I went over to Gander Mountain this afternoon to buy some supplies, and while I was getting my stuff started talking about reloading and guns with one of the gun area employees. It wouldn't have been polite to argue with him, but what he told rumor-wise just sounded really off. Just on the off chance that there's even a 1% chance of there being something to it, I thought I'd repeat it here and have everyone explain to me and reassure me why this can't happen.

We were talking about reloading, and this guy working at the store says "well, you'd better buy up a bunch of brass .223 and get set up for reloading, because 'they' are getting rid of it or changing it so that only the government can buy it, after a little while only the military and police are going to have .223". He claims that he was told internal to the company that this is coming down the pike.

Now, for starters I figure maybe he's confusing Gander Mountain discontinuing sales of .223 with what he said above. (and since GM sells all kinds of AR15s I have trouble seeing that) Secondly, I can't see how something like this could happen unless some sort of horrific new gun and ammo bans got passed. I don't think the government can just wave a wand and make the sale of .223 ammo illegal. And I can't see the government buying ALL of it up either, I know .223's gotten expensive but there will always be a sporting and commercial demand for it, it can't just all dry up.

Can it? Can it? Please explain to me why I'm stupid for worrying about this for more than 5 seconds. I'm pessimistic enough to start planning now just in case it does happen...

If you enjoyed reading about "stupid rumor of the day (.223 ammo)?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
doubleg
April 23, 2007, 08:40 PM
Reminds me of the time a Gander Mountain employee told me that "You better buy as much .45 ACP as you can now, because next months the Senate is passing a bill to raise the price to 25 for a box, minimum!" :rolleyes:

ArmedBear
April 23, 2007, 08:42 PM
.223 is and has always been a civilian varmint round.

JWarren
April 23, 2007, 08:43 PM
I don't think the government can just wave a wand and make the sale of .223 ammo illegal.

I suppose technically they could try. It would never happen, in my opinion. I can't see them pulling off banning a specific caliber like 5.56. I know they've pulled off .50 caliber bans and such, but they have painted that very different than they could pull off with a varmit caliber.

Please explain to me why I'm stupid for worrying about this for more than 5 seconds.

I wouldn't worry about it. Regarding that employee, I can't decide if my response would have been an amused smirk and silence, or to tell him "yep, and flying monkies are about to shoot out of my butt." It's a toss-up.


John

Rembrandt
April 23, 2007, 08:45 PM
Oh Poop.....I just bought another AR yesterday, and now it's going to be obsolete? For all you guys who are in the same boat, I'll take those obsolete .223's off your hands for 50 cents on the dollar.

Gander Mountain employees are not known for being the brightest lightbulbs on the tree. Rank right up there with the Walmart gun experts.

Titan6
April 23, 2007, 08:50 PM
Well given that they tried to ban .30-30 I wouldn't be surprised. Trying and succeeding are two different things of course... :p

Winter Borne
April 23, 2007, 09:03 PM
The following rant is just my oppinion...

Not that I would think it would ever pass the current political landscape, but I for one, a former resident of the socialist peoples republic of New York, could believe that in the near future if the dems control all three: Pres, house & senate, that a ban on private sales of all military rifle calibres could come to a vote and even possibly pass, for the common good...

I know, I know and can hear you already saying, "NO WAY, that would mean the .308 and 9mm too... there's just no way it could ever happen..." well I for one think you nay sayers should ask a Cook County resident what they think of the new sweeping govt. gun bans there.

Not to be an alarmest here, but the only reason these new "common sense gun laws" come to pass is control. They do nothing to prevent crime, or lesson actual threats and this is provable, but it makes no difference to the law makers becouse they're not passing them to fight crime... it's about controlling the way you live and conforming us to their standards becouse after all, They feel they know better than you do on how to run your life. I lived through it in NY as I am sure many of you in anti states have too. The only thing IMO that's stopping them at the moment is fear of the '08 election, but mark my word, if they win additional seats in both the house and senate, as well as the White House, they will call it a, " new mandate to enforce sweeping changs."



mk

Dave Markowitz
April 23, 2007, 09:14 PM
http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c340/davemarkowitz/onoz_omg2.gif

The BS that you hear in gun shops never ceases to amaze.

hksw
April 23, 2007, 09:18 PM
We were talking about reloading, and this guy working at the store says "well, you'd better buy up a bunch of brass .223 and get set up for reloading, because 'they' are getting rid of it or changing it so that only the government can buy it, after a little while only the military and police are going to have .223". He claims that he was told internal to the company that this is coming down the pike.

Oh crap that is funny.

JLelli
April 23, 2007, 09:23 PM
Just a few weeks ago, a clerk at Cabela's claimed that ammo prices were going up 300% this year. It seems like gun store employees are trained to say these things to drum up ammo sales.

Cesiumsponge
April 23, 2007, 09:44 PM
Not to mention .223 Remington is SAAMI spec loaded stuff, which is different than true military contract M193 or M855 5.56mm NATO spec ammo. Buy Wolf and Sellier & Bellot before the M16's get them!

Sometimes I don't get the point of gunshop rumors. They're their own worst enemies when they say stuff like that.

repo
April 23, 2007, 09:47 PM
I'll just wait for them to start making .224 uppers and ammo then, like when they banned .50 in california.

NM234
April 23, 2007, 10:34 PM
There were just some dems on TV whining about how the party as a whole isn't pushing for any new gun control.... and these were insiders. Also there were some of the democrats on TV speaking against gun control. One democrat from Texas said "gun control is I'll control mine and you control yours." Its important to remember that alot of the newly elected democrats are from red states or battleground states where people take their 2a rights seriously.

As a democrat I hope the party is smartening up.... not only am I against gun control but they will never win the pres. or maintain their power if they push it. There are alot of folks in places like New Mexico and Arizona (both close states) who will vote for dems, but only if they don't touch 2a rights.

NM234
April 23, 2007, 10:38 PM
also one question, I'm assuming this isn't true. A friend of mine that hunts told me that sometimes .22 and other low calibers cause more damage than high calibers because instead of blowing right through they bounce around inside? I've heard this to be true to some extent with weapons with alot of velocity but I'm calling BS on this one for the most part unless some other board members correct me.

Neo-Luddite
April 23, 2007, 10:38 PM
No, It'll be .222 rem mini-14's ala Mexico (no military cals, I understand).

Buy ammo though catalog sales. GM is (mostly) for window shopping in my book.

NM234
April 23, 2007, 10:39 PM
I meant that high velocity, full metal jackets may travel all the way through w/o transfering all their energy to be the possibly true part.

john1911
April 23, 2007, 10:54 PM
Might be good for us if they try it. Most everybody I know around here owns a .223 rifle for varmints. Most aren't active in the fight to preserve our 2A. Might serve as a wake-up call to a lot of hunters.

Neo-Luddite
April 23, 2007, 10:55 PM
(nm 234)

Hyper-velocity small bores can 'overpenetrate' and, yes, when the moon is just right and the stars lines up--little .22's and .32's and such can bounce about and do more actual tissue damage than a more powerful round might have having followed the exact same trajectory into the body and exiting without imparting all of its energy. Physics is wonderful like that-- very predictable and yet--still that area for 'English' and the pool hustlers will attest to this.

This is just a once-in-a-blue-moon thing. Now, the 'tumbling' of the 5.56 is a different idea and one that--does have some merit and physics behind it. That said, and I own a 5.56 rifle, it will NEVER out do a .30/06, .308, 7.62 x 54, 8mm etc. for performance. If anyone wanted to ban a 'lethal' military bullet in the U.S. they would ban .30/06 Springfield or 7.62 NATO. Either of those (and many others) will tear things up with gusto.

So, yeh, I call BS and sell-more-ammo, too

alucard0822
April 23, 2007, 11:20 PM
Funny, the last time I was at GM they were telling me that lead use in bullets were going to be banned. But then again the same guy told me that in a couple years m193 would be $10 a box, and 9mm would cost as much as 45 did then (about 2 years ago):uhoh:

Cesiumsponge
April 23, 2007, 11:29 PM
Its all down to probability. A .22 can get deflected by a rib or spine and change trajectory to enter the heart in an otherwise less-lethal wound. You can fire 10,000 rounds and not have that happen once.

Higher energy rounds, when they properly stop as designed, will almost always do more damage than a .22LR because they have so much more energy to transfer.

Its those few exceptions where .22's managed to deflect off a bone (or several) and do more damage than it's original trajectory that people seem fixated on, but the exception doesn't discount the rule.

hotpig
April 23, 2007, 11:30 PM
My original 2007 Winchester price list only shows 223/5.56 avaolible for government purchase this year. Maybe this is what he is talking about.

Fburgtx
April 23, 2007, 11:39 PM
My local Gander Mountain actually has little signs up in front of the .223 ammo stating that Winchester (and I believe Remington) will not be producing any more .223 this year for commercial use (Gov gets the rest). Maybe that's what he means...

hotpig
April 23, 2007, 11:51 PM
As of mid February Winchester was considering one production run of 3130 for the civilian market. When they told the distributors what the price was going to be, my distributor would not order any.

.cheese.
April 23, 2007, 11:51 PM
Why would the government buy .223? They use 5.56.... .223 and 5.56 are not the same. 5.56 is essentially a .223 +P+

.223 is really considered a sport and varmint round. So unless the government has a varmint problem - I high doubt the validity of this guy's claims.

hotpig
April 23, 2007, 11:56 PM
The brass does not matter. Machinery time is the issue.

distra
April 23, 2007, 11:59 PM
If helps any, I talked with the owner of a local shop and his Federal primer order will not be filled for 6 months. The Sand Box is using up their current run of primers. My guess is the factories will be tooled up for 5.56 and just halt the production of .223 until they fill the .gov orders.

thexrayboy
April 24, 2007, 12:41 AM
Could Big Brother wave a magic wand and make .223 disappear? I suppose, it is a possibility and I am sure that there are a measurable number of commies masquerading as dems who would have no problem with that. The real issue for availability of .223 etc is competition with the sandbox. We are chewing through vast quantities of ammo over there and it is starting to put a crimp in supply for the military. That will have inevitable consequences for civilian supply. Gun store commandos get things wrong more than they get them right. Take everything they say with an enormous helping of salt.

For up to date talk about the milsurp ammo regarding .223/5.56 visit our friends at AR15.com. They are fairly well connected in terms of supply and availability for that caliber.

For NM234....if you are curious about small caliber high velocity terminal ballistics and how they function in terms of lethality visit the ammo oracle.
They can explain things very well for you. www.ammo-oracle.com

Two Cold Soakers
April 24, 2007, 02:22 AM
I heard similar rumblings in February.

Didn't take note of the specifics, but upon purchasing a box (50rd) of match
.223 for use at the range/shop, the guy said there will be no more of this until next autumn.

Tinmancr
April 24, 2007, 03:03 AM
Sounds like bs .223 is a respected varmint/small game round.
Another interesting rumor on the subject is that .223 is not compatible with, 5.56 it's military designation or close cousin supposedly.
I put at least 200 rounds through my mini14, it did not blow up or jam more, the info I got was from wikipedia which I do not trust.
But a gun store clerk warned me about the ammo, I promptly ignored him in childish ignorance but he seemed to be wrong anyway.
It was ancient bulk ball ammo so maybe new stuff is different, also I am aware of many "different" kinds of 5.56 rounds ap, incendiary, tracers.
hmm ArmaLite says the same thing about it being close, sound cool to me though.
http://www.armalite.com/library/techNotes/tnote45.htm
http://www.thegunzone.com/556v223.html
oops this ground has been covered here already.
http://www.thehighroad.org/archive/index.php/t-46621.html

thexrayboy
April 24, 2007, 03:25 AM
.223. and 5.56 nato are very very close dimensionally. The difference is in the pressure generated. 5.56 generally generates higher pressure than commercial .223 and will usually chronograph 200 or more fps faster. The Ruger Mini14 is designed to handle and safely shoot both .223 and 5.56. Most AR recievers are designed for one or the other with most stamped for 5.56. One manufacturer makes a compromise called a Wylde chamber which can easily handle both. Where you can really get your heinie handed to you is shooting milspec 5.56 out of a .223 bolt. The tolerances are less and overpressures can easily damage your gun. If you are really interested in the actual differences between these two very similar but not identical loadings visit the ammo-oracle or AR15.com. These two sights are amont the more definitive and comprehensive regarding this caliber and the guns they were intended for.

Fulcrum of Evil
April 24, 2007, 04:51 AM
"yep, and flying monkies are about to shoot out of my butt."

That's what you get for eating at taco bell...:neener:


My local Gander Mountain actually has little signs up in front of the .223 ammo stating that Winchester (and I believe Remington) will not be producing any more .223 this year for commercial use (Gov gets the rest). Maybe that's what he means...

Yeah, 4 years of occupation will do that.

Chui
April 24, 2007, 05:58 AM
The white box M193 is currently made in Israel. The Feds could then ban the importation of it (due to it being classified as an assault rifle cartridge) and we'd then be paying $400 per 1k rounds or more...

"They" can do anything they choose... as long as we sit on our collective arses and not hold them to the oaths they took.

Again.... keep in mind their desire is to have you totally disarmed by their own admission.

BobTheTomato
April 24, 2007, 07:30 AM
Well I am glad wel have only 1 ammo plant for the military in the US (lake city) and I am sure it is a 8 day a week 30 hr day run time.

Sleeping Dog
April 24, 2007, 08:02 AM
Cheaper Then Dirt seems to be out of most .223.

Conspiracy? Do they know something?

Or are they just bad at keeping stuff in stock?

Mr White
April 24, 2007, 08:10 AM
My cousin is a gunsmith at a Gander Mountain. I'll call him this evening and see if he's heard anything about this.

qajaq59
April 24, 2007, 08:12 AM
The BS that you hear in gun shops never ceases to amaze.Amen to that....... Their info is right up there with UFO sightings in Georgia swamps. :evil:

And if you HAVE seen a UFO in a Georgia swamp, don't write me, because I don't care. ha ha ha

Man With A Gun
April 24, 2007, 08:17 AM
YOU, my friend, have witnessed one of the GREAT MINDS OF THE 15th CENTURY in action.

Sell the fear.

Seven High
April 24, 2007, 08:24 AM
I am concerned that the dems will treat ammunition the same way that tobacco is treated. Tax the hell out of it and it will no longer be affordable to the average citizen.

NM234
April 24, 2007, 10:05 AM
First off, thank you to everyone for answering my question about the .223 and other low calibers lethality. Also, thank you for the link to the ammo oracle.

Second, I talked about this with my father (about the "ban") and he did help me contact the US rep. for our area (my father has been a lifelong dem, as was his father etc., and its really not that hard to get into contact with your US rep.) and his staff said that to their knowledge gun control is not currently on the democrats agenda for the party as a whole. Now a year from now that could be a different story (they didn't say that, thats my opinion).

I would say the best explanation is that if we are going through the military's ammo to quickly their could be rationing restrictions as stated above. but like others said a .223 is diff. from a 5.56.

NM234
April 24, 2007, 10:06 AM
well I wouldn't say that tobbacco is out of range for the average citizen, I pay 3.75 a pack and usually smoke 3/4's of a pack a day (I am trying to quit, for health reasons). But that is in NH.

hotpig
April 24, 2007, 12:28 PM
I looked up my Winchester price list for 2007. This was current as os 2-5-07

USA223RF Not availible
USAR1 Not availible
USAR3 Not availible
Q3130A Not availible
Q3269 (Limited supply on hand)

Dr. Dickie
April 24, 2007, 12:42 PM
NM234.
First, believing politicians can get you committed:neener:
Though, I am sure that is correct. The Liberals want to ban guns in a bad way, but they are not stupid, they know it is not viable right now.
Second, while $3.75 a pack may seem in range for the average person, the cost of a pack was $0.25 when I was a teen. And MOST of that price increase is from taxes. Taxes that were levied under the idea that it would reduce smoking, and it has.
Something similar for ammunition is just evil enough to be tried.

Im283
April 24, 2007, 12:48 PM
As if my ammo addiction was not already bad enough, now I have to run out and convert all my cash into bullets, great.....

ctdonath
April 24, 2007, 12:59 PM
are they just bad at keeping stuff in stock?Something about supply being significantly less than demand might have something to do with that, especially when they're in the business of selling stuff.

They exist to sell as much stuff as possible.
They are not in the precious metals investments business.

.cheese.
April 28, 2007, 12:51 PM
Posted by Tinmancr:

Sounds like bs .223 is a respected varmint/small game round.
Another interesting rumor on the subject is that .223 is not compatible with, 5.56 it's military designation or close cousin supposedly.
I put at least 200 rounds through my mini14, it did not blow up or jam more, the info I got was from wikipedia which I do not trust.
But a gun store clerk warned me about the ammo, I promptly ignored him in childish ignorance but he seemed to be wrong anyway.
It was ancient bulk ball ammo so maybe new stuff is different, also I am aware of many "different" kinds of 5.56 rounds ap, incendiary, tracers.
hmm ArmaLite says the same thing about it being close, sound cool to me though.
http://www.armalite.com/library/techNotes/tnote45.htm
http://www.thegunzone.com/556v223.html
oops this ground has been covered here already.
http://www.thehighroad.org/archive/i...p/t-46621.html
__________________
Joh:3:15: That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
Joh:3:16: For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Joh:3:17: For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
Just another red blooded Alaskan gunnut :<

Tinmancr - .223 and 5.56 are different.

while I know that the 5.56 will fit in a .223 rifle..... it's not considered safe to do so. Sure, you got away with it..... but it's not a good idea and can lead to major problems.

.223 can go in a 5.56 chambered rifle no problem
5.56 should not go in a .223 chamered rifle unless the manufacturer says it can.

here is more info (you even posted it yourself): http://www.thegunzone.com/556v223.html

win71
April 28, 2007, 01:30 PM
He may have been thinking about surplus brass sales.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=272207&highlight=scrap+brass

El Tejon
April 28, 2007, 01:36 PM
If it starts out "I heard it in a gun shop" it is incorrect.

It's one of Kirk's Laws of the Internet.:)

If you enjoyed reading about "stupid rumor of the day (.223 ammo)?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!