bigfatdave
Member
Some do, some don't ... you'll have to test your own.Does the MkIII have any cycling or feeding issues specific to Remington Thunderbolt ammunition?
Mine likes CCI and Federal (pretty much every type except CCI Blazer, that may have been a bad batch from a scummy shop that I later learned had flooded, and damn if the boxes didn't look faded and stick together some ... not the gun's fault) is OK with some Winchester, and seems to hate anything from Remington, particularly the cheap stuff. I've read reports from other owners talking about using the cheapest crap from Remington and cleaning "every couple thousand rounds", so you never know.
If it has lots of waxy lube on the lead, it can gum up parts pretty bad, there are a number of places in the feeding and ejecting mechanisms that don't do well with waxy buildup.
Let's see...
5000 rounds for $200 comes to 4 cents per round
5000 rounds for $150 comes to 3 cents per round
I feed the cheap Federal 550 bulk packs to my Rugers most of the time
550 rounds for $18.?? (call it $19, I guess) comes to about 3.5 cents per round ... I admit it, I get 3-6 duds per 550 bulk box, but it makes for cheap shooting
So, the thunderbolts are an OK deal, assuming you have a gun that will eat them if your new Ruger chokes on them. Not such a monumental deal in that quantity if this will be your only .22LR gun.
I have read a lot of reviews calling for a break-in with high velocity clean-burning ammo, CCI minimags being the most popular choice ... that's what I did, for the first 500 rounds or so, I only ran into problems with dirtier ammo and that poorly designed loaded chamber indicator, which in the end I pulled and left out around the same time I was making internal tweaks and deleting the magazine interlock to improve the already pretty good trigger (disclaimer, removing useless devices some people think are useful "safety devices" from a gun can lead to bickering, and more importantly can disqualify you from some shooting sports)