Why do some Milsurp Firearms Come in with no Surplus Ammo?


PDA






Crawfish141
July 27, 2009, 02:54 AM
It seems strange that a country would sell off warehouses full of arms, but not the accompanying ammo.

An example would be the Austrian M95
8x56R

http://www.surplusrifle.com/steyrm95/index.asp


Or the Nagant Revlover
7.62x38R

http://www.surplusrifle.com/pistolm1895/index.asp

If you enjoyed reading about "Why do some Milsurp Firearms Come in with no Surplus Ammo?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
General Geoff
July 27, 2009, 03:03 AM
It's not so much supply that's the problem, it's customs and import laws that vary between firearms and ammo.

Clifford
July 27, 2009, 03:04 AM
Surplus ammo for the m95 isn't cheap for sure and hard to find. I gave up on surplus ammo for mine and buy Hornaday ammo for it. At $25-$27 for 20 rounds it ain't cheap but it's available online.

As for the Nagant, I feel your pain mine is a Swiss model chambered in 7.5x22. That's a hard round to find.

Crawfish141
July 27, 2009, 03:08 AM
I'm especially curios about the Nagant, because I know we can get Russian surplus ammo.

everallm
July 27, 2009, 06:36 AM
You're surprised it's getting harder to find, obscure, no longer manufactured in bulk, limited supply, surplus ammunition ?

fatelk
July 27, 2009, 12:06 PM
When they first started bringing them in, 15 years ago or so, ammo for the 8x56R was cheap; 10 to 15 cents a round, IIRC. Some folks would buy it by the crate and go through a couple hundred rounds at a time.:what:ouch.

TexasRifleman
July 27, 2009, 01:37 PM
It seems strange that a country would sell off warehouses full of arms, but not the accompanying ammo.

The United Nations has in place many restrictions on the export of ammo. Some countries can sell some old arms without any problems but face being cut off from UN money if they sell ammo.

everallm
July 27, 2009, 03:31 PM
Errrrr BS.

Unless a nation is specifically a named one under a UN or Security Council arms embargo, such as North Korea there are NO binding or enforceable penalties.

Don't try and make the UN a bogeyman on this it isn't, the ACTUAL possible one you are probably reaching for is ITAR which is purely home grown.

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

TexasRifleman
July 27, 2009, 04:34 PM
Don't try and make the UN a bogeyman on this it isn't, the ACTUAL possible one you are probably reaching for is ITAR which is purely home grown.

No, ITAR really doesn't have anything to do with this.

I never said there were penalties or embargoes, I said that the UN has been known to withhold certain money from countries that export small arms. Some countries don't care, some need the money. Refusal to "voluntarily" participate in the PoA has financial impacts.

http://disarmament.un.org/cab/poa.html

Read the fine print about what the UN considers "illicit trade". Also note that the PoA has pretty significant record keeping and tracking requirements that many countries don't want to fool with for ammo.

"Disarmament" to the UN means much more than getting rid of nukes and landmines.

http://disarmament.un.org/CAB/salw.html


Read up on the South African ammo and ARMSCOR debacle for examples of this. SA put laws in place in accordance with the PoA and ARMSCOR violated them, which was almost impossible not to do given the wording of some of that stuff. Now there is no more SA ammo.

Publius1688
July 27, 2009, 04:36 PM
Have you considered handloading? One of the reasons I'm getting into that part of our hobby is the scarcity and expense of obscure rounds.

everallm
July 27, 2009, 07:16 PM
Still BS, the POA you point to has squat to do with any non existent UN banning on surplus ammunition,

The POA has not been ratified, accepted, signed off etc for the last 7 plus years and is still going nowhere so I fail to see how it has any effect, in any case.....

This is a non binding, no penalty, memorandum around a specific goal, to whit the ILLEGAL trafficking of weapons. No enforcement, no fines, NOT applicable to LEGAL importation, in other words, nada.

Avenger
July 28, 2009, 06:49 PM
Well, the M95 ammo became pretty much obsolete in 1940, and was never produced in huge quantities (by Mosin and Mauser scales, at least) before that. A lot of it was poorly stored and ruined. Some was pulled down and recycled during the war. There was no reason to produce it after WWII, since the rifles that fired it were obsolete.

Nagant revolver ammo was used up after the war, Mak production had caught up with demand, and since the revolver was obsolete.....It wasn't the easiest ammo to produce either.

Nicodemus38
July 28, 2009, 08:52 PM
for a while now certain factions in the political arena have been trying to ban all military grade bullets from civilian purchase and ownership. Hence they have been putting road blocks up on importation and thus civilian purchasing.

At the same time, certain ammunition has not been made by a government in a long itme. For example 8x56 hasnt been officialy made by a military since the Nazis made in in the 1930s.

TexasRifleman
July 28, 2009, 09:01 PM
The UN has a well known and long history of being anti gun.

Not sure why anyone would argue that, but whatever.

cchris
July 28, 2009, 09:30 PM
I think that's the answer to the reason the Nagant revolver is so cheap. It's inexpensive enough that just about anyone could afford one, but it seems like it'd be more suited as a gun to show off than a gun to shoot regularly, due to the lack of available ammo.

Hardtarget
July 29, 2009, 12:09 AM
I wonder about this too. Think of the K-31 rifles imported to the U.S. I've read there is plenty of ammo as surplus. I wonder if any of it will ever make it into the U.S. There is no reason to not import this ammo. This rifle just cannot be considered a real assault rifle. Just like several other rifles...their time has passed. They (we) deserve range time. Time is wasting and fun is lost! :fire:

Mark

Proinsias
July 29, 2009, 02:07 PM
The Nagant shoots .32 S&W, .32 S&W Long, and .32 H&R Magnum just fine. Not as nice as 7.62x38mmR, but well enough.

DMK
July 29, 2009, 02:19 PM
When you see a surplus gun you like, you look around for ammo. If it is expensive or not available then you skip it. If ammo is cheap, you stock up.

If you are one of those folks who buys a box or two of ammo, just enough to last a day at the range, and you don't reload, then collecting surplus guns isn't for you. Not if you plan to shoot them for any length of time anyway.

Think of the K-31 rifles imported to the U.S. I've read there is plenty of ammo as surplus. I wonder if any of it will ever make it into the U.S. When the K31s were all over the place, there was a ton of GP-11 around. I was buying a case every month. Glad I did.

Sunray
July 29, 2009, 02:53 PM
"...The United Nations has in place..." The Third World Debating Club has no mandate, jurisdiction nor authority to put any legislation in place for any member country. Any ammo importation laws are those of a particular country. Has nothing to do with the UN.
"...The UN has a well known and long history of being anti gun..." As long as the member dictatorships aren't inconvenienced.
The Austrian M95 is a pre-war rifle. Milsurp ammo hasn't been made since W.W. II.

If you enjoyed reading about "Why do some Milsurp Firearms Come in with no Surplus Ammo?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!