DPMS LR-308 and SA Surplus 7.62 NATO

[JWarren]

This has probably been covered on related threads, but I thought I'd attempt to get a nuts-and-bolts answer.

What experience has anyone had with a LR-308 and SA Surplus 7.612 NATO ammunition?

My LR-308 with 24" fluted stainless steel barrel came in today. The insert says regarding SA Surplus (and PMP):

PMP
South African produced surplus

We have used this ammuntion in the past for testing purposes and found that the brass is extremely soft and can "flow" into microscopic pores and grooved in the chamber, creating "sticky" extraction. This had been reported in many types of rifles, but is more prevalent in semi-auto weapons.

So what gives? I see that it will "void" my warranty if I use any of the following ammunitions:

Reloaded Ammunition

Israeli ammunition
Korean ammunition
Chilean ammunition

PMP
South African produced surplus

Wolf
Norinco
Silver Bear
Any other steel-cased lacquer coated ammunition



And next question...

If I reloaded for this rifle-- barring something like double-charges, light-charges, or no-powder charges, how would DPMS know if reloads were used in the rifle?

I'm sitting on some SA surplus that I was already considering getting rid of, but I have heard many shoot it with no problems.


Any comments or advice would be much appreciated.



-- John

 

[AndyC]

Well, it's their rifle and they can say whatever they want.

However, SA surplus is quite fine in my FAL, and PMP is the SA commercial ammunition manufacturer (Pretoria Metal Pressings) - I used to shoot that stuff all the time in SA and it's good quality

 

[JWarren]

Thanks for the input, Andy.


Anyone have anything else to add?


-- John

 

[TexasRifleman]

Anyone have anything else to add?

Not much to add but maybe a question. DPMS says "This had been reported in many types of rifles, but is more prevalent in semi-auto weapons." but I have never seen that complaint with SA anywhere.

I've got tons of the stuff and I run it through a Fulton M14, DSA FAL, and a PRT91 all the time and never experienced a single problem.

I've fired probably 4000-5000 rounds of SA surplus and not a single issue.

So I question DPMS's data here and maybe even their motive. Are the just trying to get out of warranty issues by being so restrictive or is there a genuine problem with the ammo? No one complains about SA and it's always listed as one of the best surplus rounds on the market so where's the disconnect?

No Wolf allowed, most of the surplus that's available is not allowed?

These are the types of ammo that are actually available on the market so it just strikes me as odd they would do that.

 

[JWarren]

TexasRifleMan,

I concur with your assessment, and with the questions you have. SA has had a very good reputation from all of my reading, and for the rounds that I've fired.

-- John

 

[LeibstandarteAdH]

Not much to add but maybe a question. DPMS says "This had been reported in many types of rifles, but is more prevalent in semi-auto weapons." but I have never seen that complaint with SA anywhere.

+1, and its been all i have shot for a while in such arms.

 

[Mainiac]

Huh, I've run thousands of rounds through a DSA SA-58, 2 AR-10's and an M1A. Never a hitch or hiccup to speak of. It's really good stuff. Don't understand their issues with it. Maybe CYA.

 

[kcmarine]

Yeah. I've never heard as much as a whisper of things being wrong with South African ammo. In fact, I've heard is the best of the surplus. Too bad there isn't more coming.

 

[Bailey Guns]

I've fired a variety of surplus .308 from Radway, Australia and SA in DPMS rifles and (gasp!) even lots of Wolf polymer coated...no problems with any. The DPMS chambers I've had experience with are very tight and like to be frequently cleaned, as often as every 20 rds on some rifles, to function properly and smoothly. Accuracy is always stellar.

 

[Johnny B]

If I reloaded for this rifle-- barring something like double-charges, light-charges, or no-powder charges, how would DPMS know if reloads were used in the rifle?

I've often wondered the same thing. I'm devote meticulous attention to what I do when I reload, and I can say that I do everything in my power to see to it that nothing goes wrong with my ammo. So, how would they know, barring one of the aforementioned snafus, what I was shooting? In short, I doubt that if something unrelated to my handloads were to go wrong with a gun and I sent it in for warranty service it would be rejected on account of my use of reloaded ammunition.

 

[JWarren]

Johnny B,

I think you and I are thinking alike. I bought this rifle with the intention of reloading for it.

Considering how meticulous most of the reloaders on THR are, I think I'd trust their reloads over some commercial stuff.

Someone on a seperate thread said something about DPMS voiding a warrenty because it was determined that they were shooting some kind of surplus ammo in theirs. There was a discussion as to whether or not a spectral analysis or such would have indicated the surplus powder or something.

But I suspect that-- even if this unlikely case were true-- quality reloads would use powder comparable with domestic commercial ammunition.

In short, I don't see how in hell they would ever know.


-- John

 

[Bowfishrp]

I had some problems with SA ammo in my DPMS 308AP4 when I first got it. It would not kick the bolt back far enough on 1-2 rounds out of a 19 round mag. My buddy's AR-10 had no problems with the same battlepack.

I found a couple loose allen bolts on the bolt that might have been part of the problem though.

I also reload all my 308 and have not had a problem. I dont know how they would know unless you blew yourself up. Personally I think they say this because they are trying to cover their buts with lawsuits and people upset because their rifle might not shoot SA ammo.

 

[TexasRifleman]

Personally I think they say this because they are trying to cover their buts with lawsuits and people upset because their rifle might not shoot SA ammo.

Which sort of brings things full circle. I don't own one of these, and don't mean to offend those that do, but is there something wrong with the rifle to the point where it won't shoot the most widely available ammunition on the market and has to be fed only specific loads?

 

[JWarren]

I do think this is a CYI move on their part as some have said.

That said, once I get through break-in tomorrow, I may put a few rounds of SA down the pipe.

Thanks guys!


-- John

 

[asknight]

Bowfishrp said:

I found a couple loose allen bolts on the bolt that might have been part of the problem though.

That was exactly your problem. Those gas key screws should be STAKED! I don't mean dimpled, I mean STAKED! Check google for MOACKS or P-MOACKS tool to properly do the job. I don't know why so many AR manufacturers are forgoing this critical and safety related step in their production.

Here's an example of a properly staked gas key...

 

[JWarren]

TexasRifleMan wrote:

Which sort of brings things full circle. I don't own one of these, and don't mean to offend those that do, but is there something wrong with the rifle to the point where it won't shoot the most widely available ammunition on the market and has to be fed only specific loads?

No offense taken. The point is valid.

I'll try to give my reasoning for getting one.

I've got other "MBR" oriented firearms. Those would be my go-to when something hit. I doubt this one would be.

I've been using .308 MBR military firearms since I was 16 years old (36 years old now) and I have noticed a pattern about myself:

I ALWAYS try to make them as accurate as possible. And no matter how well it works out, I find myself trying for more. And then it keeps me up at night knowing there is another one out there more accurate.

I have a unique ability to make a moderately heavy MBR into a gawd-aweful hernia-waiting-to-happen. Then I lug this monstrosity into the woods and climb a 25 foot deer stand with it. ( You guys will read about the "hunting accident" one day.)

Two decades prior to Zumbo, I was trying to show the hunters around here that the MBR DID have sporting application.

At any rate, around here people take accuracy seriously. Its a point of pride. You have no idea the riding a guy can get for a poor shot on a deer.

Upon a brief conversation, you will discover that the mill worker who watches his pennies still found the luxury of slapping a Swavorski optic on his rifle. Don't get me wrong... we aren't about the 800 yard shots around here. There is nowhere you could shoot that far where you wouldn't hit a pine tree. But what we do is make the shorter shots as precise as we can.


So anyway...

My choice for going this direction was understanding what I do to MBR's. I KNOW I'm going to try to make a percision rifle out of it, so I may as well start with the most accurate platform I can get. I understand the concept that you can choose accuracy or reliability or various compromises between the two-- but you can't have both absolutely. I'm OK with that on certain rifles.

Many people would ask why I'd make such an effort with a MBR and not just do what I do with a bolt action-- which IS the better platform most likely. I don't know how to answer that. I LOVE bolt actions. And I can't say that a nice turn-bolt doesn't give me a thrill. It's just that this does as well.

Frankly, I think when I was younger the HK PSG-1 ruined me. This was before I realized that it wasn't all it was cracked up to be-- especially for the price. But the idea that a military-style rifle could be made into such inspired me. That was when I bought my HK-91 at 16 years old. Aftermarket parts just were not available like they are today. I was thrilled when I found a claw-mount for optics on the rifle, but I never could find the PSG-1 style furnature. Now they have it for everything.

So that may be it....

I think for 20 years I've been questing to make the MBR percision rifle that the HK PSG1 tried to do, but only reached what one would really consider DMR capability. This ought to irk the HK PR guys... I want overcome their shortcomings.

Based upon my reading of the experiences of others, the LR-308 or AR10 platform seems to be the absolute best choice for such a project.

But if I need something that won't choke when dragging it through mud, I'm pull out the ole' Vector AK-47.


Sorry for rambling... I just thought that I'd make an attempt to explain the logic of some guys who go the route I did. I believe that it is crucial that one goes into any project with their eyes open knowing the strengths and limitations of that project.


-- John

 

[Cesiumsponge]

They probably put the reloaded ammo clause for liability purposes. Several ranges here have "no reloads" signs to cover their butt.

Most places I've read up on say the DPMS LR-308 is more of a match-chambered rifle for accuracy than a battle rifle like the FAL, so the comparison isn't exactly apples-to-apples.

I just put an LR-308 w/ options on order myself How long did yours take? Or did you order one in stock?

 

[JWarren]

I ordered mine from R Guns. I ordered it on Monday, and it was in on Wednesday. Not bad service.


-- John

 

[TexasRifleman]

No offense taken. The point is valid.

I'll try to give my reasoning for getting one.

Oh you don't have to justify getting one, I think they are great looking rifles and I've seen nothing but good reports on them, I just wondered if there might be more to the severe ammo restrictions but I think most people are right when they say it's probably just a CYA move to avoid liability or warranty work from all the different ammo types out there.

 

[Magnuumpwr]

For an answer to the surplus ammo question, how many people have to clean the primer sealer remnients from the case head portion of their rifles after shooting surplus ammo? This primer sealer also gets in with your firing pin, so upon disassembling your gun this evidence would be visible to the naked eye. This is only my deductive opinion.