coosbaycreep
Member
Is there some reason that so many countries used corrosive ammo and berdan primers for so long?
I know militaries don't worry about being able to reload, especially since a lot of the commie surplus stuff isn't brass cased anyway, but is there any other reason to go with berdan priming over boxer primers? Is it cheaper, more reliable, etc?
How about corrosive ammo? Is it cheaper to produce than non-corrosive? You'd think that whatever cost savings there is (if any at all) of corrosive over non-corrosive would be offset by the extra cleaning required, or damage to the bore of their guns. I'm sure most gun barrels are just shot out during war time, instead of rusted out from a lack of cleaning after corrosive ammo, but I still don't see why any military would use corrosive ammo when they don't have to.
I know militaries don't worry about being able to reload, especially since a lot of the commie surplus stuff isn't brass cased anyway, but is there any other reason to go with berdan priming over boxer primers? Is it cheaper, more reliable, etc?
How about corrosive ammo? Is it cheaper to produce than non-corrosive? You'd think that whatever cost savings there is (if any at all) of corrosive over non-corrosive would be offset by the extra cleaning required, or damage to the bore of their guns. I'm sure most gun barrels are just shot out during war time, instead of rusted out from a lack of cleaning after corrosive ammo, but I still don't see why any military would use corrosive ammo when they don't have to.