• You are using the old Black Responsive theme. We have installed a new dark theme for you, called UI.X. This will work better with the new upgrade of our software. You can select it at the bottom of any page.

Question about winchester q3131

Status
Not open for further replies.
DustyGmt

DustyGmt

Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2016
Messages
4,013
Location
Green Mountains
I picked up a few cases of the winchester 180rd range packs and the box states it is Q3131USA and I was just wondering if this stuff was mil spec and if like the Federal (most of what I own) had the sealed primers and case necks. I was told that it was at the LGS but I don't actually see the sealant around the primer (usually blue or red). I was told it was good stuff and it seems to shoot on the hotter side (very loud).
Is Q3131a and Q3131USA the same thing? If someone could school me real quick on where this stuff falls in the pecking order of Most desirable-Least desirable mil spec ammo and anybody's individual thoughts or preferences I'd appreciate it. I have visited the Ammo Oracle and studied it it length a while back but I didn't happen to notice any specific notation about "Q3131USA"
Pretty much any notable/non-notable differences between the two and any other gems of what to look for as far as mil-spec ammo and what may be marginally better than the other will be welcome....... Thanks. -Dusty
 
Q3131A is made in Israel, and is considered good. Q3131USA ( I would guess ) is made in the US. It is sometimes called USA brand because of packaging. Q3131 is generally good, although I have not gotten any since the bad batch in the 90's, and there are so many other choices now.

Probably sounds "hot" because it is mil spec, which means 5.56 pressure instead of 223.

Federal and IMI (Israel) are both good for M193-ish ammo. I got some Igman once, never again, unless you like inconsistency and really hard primers. POI was the same as IMI and Federal, but a JP trigger would not set it off, and groups had trouble staying in a 6" group at 100 yds.
 
Now that I'm home I see that it actually says USA3131w and the box says made in USA by Olin corp.
I'm guessing from what I've just been told the prefix's more or less relate to packaging and that 3131 is M193 manufactured in israel....?
It says WMA on the cartridge itself and has the nato + stamp on it and is 2016 production.
I like it so far it's a lot prettier than the federal xm193 Brass and it could just be me but I think it prints a little tighter too, I suppose it could just be my gun that is partial to it than anything else........
 
Why all the cautionary warnings and disclaimers about shooting 5.56 ammo in .223 rem rifles? I was always given the impression that 5.56 was pretty much a +p .223 with higher pressure and in turn the higher pressure is consequential to the higher velocity. Does the slightly larger chamber dimensions make up for the presumably hotter 5.56 load?
 
DustyGmt said:
Why all the cautionary warnings
Click to expand...
A lot of it is "...as reported on the internet..." lore.* One very specific (and valid) caution is that the throat of military 5.56 chambers is deliberately more gradual/able to accommodate longer jump before the rifling is encountered.
The possibility of jam-fit/ogive interference can raise pressures.



*One of the most egregious internet "facts" is the hardness of the various cast alloys. Most are far softer than advertised.
 
Ya if what you say is true, and I have no reason to doubt that it isn't with a lil quick research then I guess you'd consider this a real gem: "you can extend the barrel life of your AR by shooting .223 vs. 5.56". ;)

I will say this, I'm sure you are right and are probably well experienced and researched but it's still kind of hard for me to take at face value because when I go from shooting PMC 55gr .223 to the Lake City 5.56 my shoulder would indicate more pressure because that LC stuff has some bark to it and my carbine definitely has a sharper jerk to it in comparison but I guess my shoulder would be wrong???
Sorry, not trying to be flip I'm just surprised, if the million dollar question on who wants to be a millionaire was "does a 5.56 operate at higher pressure than .223rem" I wouldn't even use a lifeline. lol.
 
Yes sir. the LC stuff I'm comparing to the 55gr .223 is 55gr 5.56.
like I said I wasn't trying to be flip I'm just wondering if not for higher pressure why the harder kick between to two cartridges of the same projectile weight?
 
Hie thee to a chronograph and let's find out.
Velocity is objective, while felt recoil -- especially when muzzle bark is significantly different -- is subjective)

The real data is a bit more complex, and highly powder/bullet-design dependent given a standard pressure ceiling.
Take a look at the chart about 3/4 down this webpage for some apples-apples:
https://www.ocabj.net/55gr-5-56-nato-and-223-remington-ammunition-comparison/
Winch Q3131 (5.56 NATO): 3,070 fps
Wolf Gold (223 Remington): 3,098 fps

While the LC/XM193 ammunition is running 50 fps (1.6%) higher than either, I'd have a hard time ascribing that to significantly higher design pressures (2,500psi at most), or measured energy/recoil (3% at most)
 
Last edited:
DustyGmt said:
Ya if what you say is true, and I have no reason to doubt that it isn't with a lil quick research then I guess you'd consider this a real gem: "you can extend the barrel life of your AR by shooting .223 vs. 5.56". ;)

I will say this, I'm sure you are right and are probably well experienced and researched but it's still kind of hard for me to take at face value because when I go from shooting PMC 55gr .223 to the Lake City 5.56 my shoulder would indicate more pressure because that LC stuff has some bark to it and my carbine definitely has a sharper jerk to it in comparison but I guess my shoulder would be wrong???
Sorry, not trying to be flip I'm just surprised, if the million dollar question on who wants to be a millionaire was "does a 5.56 operate at higher pressure than .223rem" I wouldn't even use a lifeline. lol.
Click to expand...

I'm guessing you don't reload.

Powder choice can and does make a difference in recoil impulse with no difference in velocity or muzzle energy.

Even minor things like sealant around the bullet can increase recoil impulse.
 
https://www.ocabj.net/55gr-5-56-nato-and-223-remington-ammunition-comparison/

^^^Compensated, Midlength gas, 16 inch barrel...

How does that correlate to felt recoil in say, a 20 inch barrel SP-1? I think not much. Noticeable difference felt with Q3131 Nato over most commercial 223, Yes it is subjective somewhat, but I do get deeper craters on my steel plates which can only be attributed to higher velocity of the Q3131...in my opinion. And my ammo was purchased in the mid-80's. Let's see some data on that.

M
 
Last edited:
MEHavey said:
Hie thee to a chronograph and let's find out.
Velocity is objective, while felt recoil -- especially when muzzle bark is significantly different -- is subjective)

The real data is a bit more complex, and highly powder/bullet-design dependent given a standard pressure ceiling.
Take a look at the chart about 3/4 down this webpage for some apples-apples:
https://www.ocabj.net/55gr-5-56-nato-and-223-remington-ammunition-comparison/
Winch Q3131 (5.56 NATO): 3,070 fps
Wolf Gold (223 Remington): 3,098 fps

While the LC/XM193 ammunition is running 50 fps (1.6%) higher than either, I'd have a hard time ascribing that to significantly higher design pressures (2,500psi at most), or measured energy/recoil (3% at most)
Click to expand...
 
get deeper craters on my steel plates which can only be attributed to higher velocity
Click to expand...
Chronographs don't produce subjective data. The two velocities were the same.

Differing terminal performance at that point is a matter of differing bullet design -- which hunters experience (and depend on) every every day.
;)
 
Crater depth in a known grade of steel is indeed measurable and objective. Has Winchester changed the bullet profile, composition, jacket thickness, and velocity of their Q3131 over the years? Winchester needs to weigh in. Not likely.

Someone was talking (at least at one point) about subjective felt recoil not velocity, and you present a 16-inch, midlength, compensated carbine as your proof criteria. Invalid to the argument. That was my point.


M
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

B
  • Locked
Garand Questions
Replies
12
Views
1K
RTFM
R
T
  • Locked
M1 Garand questions
Replies
10
Views
729
rondog
R
T
  • Locked
New Rem 700SS 5-R Mil-spec Question
Replies
3
Views
443
TC66
T
TomJ
  • Locked
Wolf Ammo Question
Replies
8
Views
537
Speedo66
Speedo66
C
  • Locked
Surplus 7.62x54R origin question
Replies
6
Views
530
collateral
C
Back
Top