Difference between Wolf, Brown Bear, Tula Cartridge Works and Ulyanovsk ammo.


PDA






stchman
October 28, 2009, 05:45 PM
I am starting to agree with a friend of mine that a lot of that Russian ammo is actually the same.

I have some 7.62x39 in Wolf, Brown Bear, Ulyanovsk, and Tula Cartridge and they all appear to be the same polymer coated steel case ammo.

Does anyone else agree?

Now in .223 Brown Bear is lacquer while Wolf is polymer.

If you enjoyed reading about "Difference between Wolf, Brown Bear, Tula Cartridge Works and Ulyanovsk ammo." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Kurt_D
October 28, 2009, 07:05 PM
The Russian are switching to poly coat on all their ammo.

There is a difference in manufacturers. 1) Wolf blackbox = Tula, which always seems under powered and inconsistant. 2) Wolf Mil Classic used to = Ulyanovsk, which used the 8M3 bullet that fragged. Ulyanvosk tends to be hotter and more consistant that the Tula/BB offering. Now it's been rumored there's no difference in BB and MC so it's probably all Tula. 3) All Bear ammo and Monarch = Barnual (with zinc and copper washed as an option), which I have found again to be more consistant and hotter than Tula/BB. Their .223 have actually been chronoed at 5.56 velocities.

So in summary:
Wolf = crap/blasting ammo if nothing else is available, IMO, unless you can find Uly/MC
Uly = with 8M3 bullet is a good SHTF round
Barnaul = better than Wolf at at about the same price, is usually available so a good practice round.

nalioth
October 29, 2009, 12:12 AM
Their .223 have actually been chronoed at 5.56 velocities. Isn't this the same as saying "Scientists have discovered that water is wet." ?

meytind
October 29, 2009, 12:59 AM
.223 is not the same as 5.56x45. 5.56 is generally loaded to higher pressures than standard .223 and thus goes faster.

stchman
October 29, 2009, 02:10 PM
I have heard some people say that Wolf black box ammo is underpowered when compared to "better" brass cased ammo. I have not found this t be true from my shooting.

In actuality I have found the Wolf .223 Remington to feel a little hotter than the more expensive brass cased ammo I own. I have some Remington and Fiocchi .223 brass cased ammo that feels positively wimpy compared to the Wolf and it costs quite a bit more.

I consider Wolf and Brown Bear to be about the same in feel in my Mini. The only way I know I am using Brown Bear is their .223 is lacquer coated.

In the 7.62x39 realm I can tell no difference between all of them. They even look the same. I have to look at the box.

Kurt_D
October 29, 2009, 05:01 PM
My experience with Wolf BB was a poly coated 2005 lot of 62gr copper jacket. It functioned fine in my Bushmaster and Mini14 however accuracy was crap. It was definitely down on power compared to Win 55gr .223 and todays Bear ammo.

I've never used Fiocchi but Remington UMC 55gr .223 is also very weak; probably on par with that lot of Wolf.

In 7.62x39 I can't tell a difference other than Wolf always tended to be less accurate than the Barnual. My SGL-20 loves Monarch from Academy and my SLR-107's groups did improve with it.

There was a rumor a couple years ago Wolf was supposed to have their .223 warmed up some. Maybe they did. I just always stuck with the Bear ammo b/c it was a known.

Publius1688
October 29, 2009, 09:47 PM
For 7.62x39, shot out of an SKS or AK47, I can tell no difference between the major low-end Russian rounds.

If you enjoyed reading about "Difference between Wolf, Brown Bear, Tula Cartridge Works and Ulyanovsk ammo." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!