Very valid question. Yes...Federal won out with overall performance but who in their common gun sense abuses or can even afford to abuse a rifle like that. If the rifles...chambers and bores had been even reasonably maintained and not overheated would the Russian ammo had the listed failures. Did the overheated barrels react to the powder...bi-metal bullets? I'm not arguing...seriously...just asking. This test is like saying Brand A tire showed less wear than Brand B tire when driven at 150 miles an hour on the family sedan. So who cares...Momma doesn't drive at a 150 miles an hour.
That's exactly what I was trying to say, just not as well haha. I want to know if people can expect that kind of wear (keyholing, etc) if they shoot 6,000 rounds under extremely normal conditions, i.e. shooting 100 rounds at the range here and there, maybe a class thrown in. Not what the ammo does when rapid fired all at once.
You need to update your information regarding the cost of steel cased ammo. If you are talking about steel cased WOLF ammo, it is .29 cents a round. That works out to over $290 for a thousand rounds. It is still cheap, but I can reload cheaper and I am saving some life on my barrels. If you are talking about surplus, you are correct about the price, but that is not the ammo I am talking about. The old Soviet block milsurp ammo (at least what I have been playing with in 7.62 x 54R, and 7.62 x 39) has more gilding metal and steel doesn't come in contact with the rifling. That is a finite supply, however. It is not the steel case that is casing the problem and the test by and large supports that, it appears to be the bi metal projectile that the three manufacturers are using. I found another article on the bimetal projectiles used by WOLF and Herters and why they might create a problem.
I can reload 9mm for $12.56 per hundred. It takes me less than 20 minutes...
I don't know if you missed it, but the article said if that is the case, you are being a wise consumer by purchasing and shooting steel cased ammo. I would agree. I shoot in volume and I shoot a lot of rounds every year. Given how much I do send down range, it made sense to pick up reloading equipment. I bought much of it used, so initial cost was much lower. When you consider that my progressive cost me $399 new, I got 500 bullets with the purchase and I reload various calibers in rather large lots, it didn't take long to pay for even my new press. Using the price of .308 and 5.56, Current prices for .308 are .72 cents a round for WOLF. I can reload it for .49 cents a round using current market prices and 4 reloads for brass. Per 1000 of .308, I saved $230 on my first 1000 rounds of .308. Using the price of 5.56 of WOLF at .29 cents a round and my reloaded cost of .22 cents a round, I save $70 per 1000. Factor in the savings in 9mm of $125 for 1000, subtract the 500 free bullets and just those three calibers paid for my new press in cost savings of a combined total of 3000 rounds. I didn't include the savings in .45, 9mm Mak, 30-06 or .357 in there, which are the other calibers I shoot and have reloaded. If I decide I don't want to reload anymore, I can sell the equipment and still make back some of my investment. That is after enjoying a cost savings that is greater than shooting WOLF, Tula or Brown Bear. My argument is that people shoot this ammo in volume to save money and they really aren't saving anything because the cost per round of this ammo is more expensive than reloading and the information presented indicates that they wear a barrel out much sooner. I say that as a guy who can re barrel an AR in 10 minutes in my garage, so rebarreling doesn't worry me. Using the information presented in the article, the three rifles that shot the bimetal projectiles wore out the barrels in a little over half the round count of the Federal. They didn't just wear out, they wouldn't even stabilize the bullets and were key holing. For crying out loud they put a throat erosion gauge in the muzzle and it ate it. Do you know how whipped a barrel has to be to do that? I am sure accuracy was suffering at probably half that round count.
I gave a cost analysis earlier. I guess you must have missed it. I even mentioned how much I paid for my progressive (Hornady Lock n Load, a quality press.) and that that investment was covered with the first 3000 rounds combined of .223, 9mm and .308 I rolled out and that included the price of brass (by far the most expensive component). I purchase once fired and milsurp brass. That doesn't include the 2000 rounds of .45 I loaded, the 500 rounds of 06' the 200 rounds of mak (trimmed down 9mm brass to 9 x 18 size) or the 100 rounds of .357 during the first year I owned the press. The kabooms I have read about are due to over charges or someone using the wrong powder (example, pistol powder in a rifle). I have reloaded thousands of rounds and have yet to have an over charge. You watch your brass and check for signs of it wearing out. Pistol brass lasts a very long time. Not to mention I have had people give me several thousand spent pistol cases and I have found plenty more. If you don't want to reload, that is up to you. That leaves more brass and compounds in the market for me to scoop up. For me it didn't make financial sense and it really doesn't now that I have some evidence that the bimetal projectile the above mentioned manufactures use wears barrels out in 6000 rounds at least in those rifles chambered in 5.56.
San Diego, one of the most expensive God awful places to live in the world.
