5.56/.223 boxes sometimes mismarked or misleading?

Status
Not open for further replies.

JimJD

Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2003
Messages
729
Location
USA
The big thread on 5.56/.223 reminded me about this.
I have one rifle (AR Carbine) that has a 5.56 chamber, so I'm good to go with 5.56/.223 Remington. Ok, sounds good.
Then, I recently purchased a Remington 700 SPS Varmit that states on the barrel ".223 Remington". Ok, fantastic. I'm sticking with pure .223 Remington, no problems or worries.

But this is what I'm really wondering about, for instance I have two boxes of Hornady "Varmit Express" in .223. Box and Headstamps clearly state ".223 Remington". I just got a few boxes of PMC in the same. Headstamps state .223 Remington.
Then I thought about the Sellier & Bellot I have lying around (which is only used in the carbine)....
On the right side of the box it states in big letters: ".223 REM.", then in smaller letters on the left it states: FMJ/M193 3.6g 55grs. Headstamps state 5.56x45. Oh. That's nice.
I mean yes, on one hand they're stating it's really not .223 Remington. But those big letters on the right side can be misleading. Especially to one that doesn't know the difference and/or is new to firearms. Does any other ammunition manufacturer do this?
What gives? Shouldn't the industry not allow this or change something slightly? I'm not talking about Ruger style safety "chapters" on the sides of their barrels (I love my Ruger's by the way) but something letting the buyer beware? I don't consider this "hand holding", I think of it more as a courtesy and a good human thing to do.
 
Do you really think that your closed bolt 700 will fail from presure before a semi auto AR?
 
No, but I don't want to have possible problems. I'll be reloading my own soon by the way. :)
 
This kind of cross-labeling and headstamping is very common in the US and elswhere. Which is why I firmly believe that the 223/5.56 and .308/7.62 controversies are a waste of time and band-width. If there was a REAL difference or problem between the rounds, do you think any litigation-conscious manufacturer would make that mistake? I don't believe the issue is anything more than differences in manufacuter tolerances.
I'm sure others will disagree with me, but that's OK.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top