That's a interesting idea. I don't know of a pressure calculator that can accommodate the degree of compression. If it was the correct charge, but the charge was compressed to perhaps 60% of its original volume because a large bug crawled into the case. Or something.
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Safety Warning for Berger 77 grain OTM: Pressure Testing Update
- Thread starter Molon
- Start date
I got nothing to add just a big thanks for taking the time for the updates showing us all the work you did researching this. Very well documented and explained.
I've run into problems with the same lot # (p002745-1). Although my problems were on the other end. I had two rounds, during a match, with 200fps less in velocity than the others. Not counting those two rounds, my SD was in the teens. The two rounds were almost off paper.
1.Maybe a problem with the brass? I know Lapua makes good brass, but nobody is perfect.
2. Any chance when the round was chambered it was pushed back into the case, raising pressure? I have set a couple bullets about too deep and the difference between the other rounds with the same charge weight was noticeably louder and more recoil. But I don't think it would be enough to cause that bulge.
2. Any chance when the round was chambered it was pushed back into the case, raising pressure? I have set a couple bullets about too deep and the difference between the other rounds with the same charge weight was noticeably louder and more recoil. But I don't think it would be enough to cause that bulge.
Molon, thanks for the data -- and thank God you're still upright and airtight with all fingers, toes, and eyeballs!
My experience with Berger bullets and Krieger barrels has always been good. Reading folks' experience here that their standard factory match ammo loads run warm gives me pause.
Absolutely no idea what may have caused this without just spit-balling guesses. A few National Match shooters are tending to 8208 for the pressures and velocities with lower bulk (compression) than Varget. A compressed load of a double-base (like VV N540) and a tight Krieger bore could also up your pressures some. The smaller grained powder (against the grid) than N140 -- could it be 8208 or N135?
Berger said they changed powder (or charge) between previous runs and yours. Maybe there are clues there? Dunno.
I've used Sierra blems from the outlet store that had mixed bullets in the box (77 cannelure Match Kings in 77 boxes, and 40-cal bullets in boxes of 9mm), so an errant 80 is a rare possibility, but would make a very different-looking cartridge (at the case mouth to seat to magazine-length).
My experience with Berger bullets and Krieger barrels has always been good. Reading folks' experience here that their standard factory match ammo loads run warm gives me pause.
Absolutely no idea what may have caused this without just spit-balling guesses. A few National Match shooters are tending to 8208 for the pressures and velocities with lower bulk (compression) than Varget. A compressed load of a double-base (like VV N540) and a tight Krieger bore could also up your pressures some. The smaller grained powder (against the grid) than N140 -- could it be 8208 or N135?
Berger said they changed powder (or charge) between previous runs and yours. Maybe there are clues there? Dunno.
I've used Sierra blems from the outlet store that had mixed bullets in the box (77 cannelure Match Kings in 77 boxes, and 40-cal bullets in boxes of 9mm), so an errant 80 is a rare possibility, but would make a very different-looking cartridge (at the case mouth to seat to magazine-length).
Last edited:
Hmmm... so they did issue something after all. Huh? I guess I should request replacement since I have about 10 boxes or more of it with those lot #'s??? I hate to give it up though because it shoots so fantastic in my gun... what do you guys think?
Molon's shot fine until the moment it didn't....you willing to chance it?
I wouldn't in an AR for sure, but obviously I'm not all that sure about shooting it in my bolt gun. I guess you're right, not something to take a risk on. I guess I will need to make arrangements to have it replaced.
Lot's of knowledge being shown here, and thanks to all the serious posters.
I suspect a detonation with an under charged case. This is an extremely rare but known possibility with centerfire ammunition. I have also read that it is difficult to recreate even in ballistic labs.
That said if I had any of these cartridges I would be weighing each and every one of them, for curiosity's sake.
Molon, please do not let the occasional anal pore wear you down.
I suspect a detonation with an under charged case. This is an extremely rare but known possibility with centerfire ammunition. I have also read that it is difficult to recreate even in ballistic labs.
That said if I had any of these cartridges I would be weighing each and every one of them, for curiosity's sake.
Molon, please do not let the occasional anal pore wear you down.
The recall states not to use in AR's, but it's safe in bolts. Does that point to any clues as to the primary cause of the malfunction? Or are they simply saying that a bolt action can handle the malfunction without damage/injury?
The info is at TFB as well.
https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2021/08/20/berger-safety-recall-223-otm-tactical/
I wonder.. since it is mentioned that it is ok in bolt guns, but not gas guns... if bullet setback was an issue ?
Pure speculation on my half.
https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2021/08/20/berger-safety-recall-223-otm-tactical/
I wonder.. since it is mentioned that it is ok in bolt guns, but not gas guns... if bullet setback was an issue ?
Pure speculation on my half.
Last edited:
Thats what I was wondering, as a bolt gun is not nearly as violent as a gas gun? Pure speculation.
Could you explain this a little further in detail or link any literature relating to this. I am new to reloading and have wondered. In a low charged case the powder can move around especially in the violent bolt cycle of a semi auto and how the position of powder and air pocket inside would effect the burn/ pressure.
Superformance in Gas Operated Firearms - Hornady Manufacturing, Inc
Background Superformance ammunition was developed in the Hornady ballistics lab utilizing state of the art test equipment in accordance with SAAMI (Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers Institute) guidelines for pressure, velocity and accuracy ut...
Superformance in Gas Operated Firearms - Hornady Manufacturing, Inc
Background Superformance ammunition was developed in the Hornady ballistics lab utilizing state of the art test equipment in accordance with SAAMI (Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers Institute) guidelines for pressure, velocity and accuracy ut...www.hornady.com
Interesting read. Ironic that I gave up 75gr superformance 223 because it was laughably slow in my guns...
This ammunition is a heavily compressed load, so bullet set-back is highly improbable. Since it was a compressed load, I was unable to use my custom K&M compression gauge to obtain an accurate measure of neck tension, however, it required quite a bit of force to pull the bullets from the cases using a press-mounted, collet bullet-puller. Also, using the custom K&M compression gauge, I applied 90 pounds of force to one of the factory-loaded cartridges that had a cartridge overall length of 2.253". After applying the 90 pounds of force, I again measured the COAL. It was still 2.253".
...
Using a bullet pulled from this lot of ammunition, I determined the cartridge overall length that would be necessary for the bullet to be seated to the lands of this barrel. That distance was 2.322" and since the factory loaded ammunition was loaded to magazine length, the bullet was nowhere near the lands of my barrel.
Last edited:
This is the latest email that I've sent to Berger . . .
"Dear Mr Praslick,
I assume that you’ve seen the pictures of the blown case that I’ve posted on-line, but on the off-chance that you haven’t, here’s a few of them.
The case head of the blown case flowed into the recess in the barrel extension between the barrel and the bolt. Here’s a cutaway picture of an AR-15 chamber for comparison.
Notice how the brass flow of the blown case matches the recess in between the barrel and the bolt. It would have taken a chamber pressure of over 70,000 PSI to cause that kind of deformation.
The nominal case-head/web diameter of the Lapua brass from this lot of ammunition is 0.3750”. The diameter just above the extractor groove for the blown case is 0.414”. That’s an expansion of 0.039”. That didn’t happen because of a mis-matched pressure curve at the gas-port.
The average rim diameter for the brass from this lot of ammunition is 0.376”. The diameter of the case rim of the blown case is 0.423” at the broadest diameter. That’s an expansion of 0.047” and that didn’t happen because of a high gas-port pressure.
The nominal diameter of the primer pockets for the brass from this lot of ammunition is 0.173”. The primer pocket of the blown case has a diameter of 0.222” at the broadest diameter. That’s an expansion of 0.049” and that didn’t happen because of a progressive propellent producing a larger volume of gas “under the curve” at a different rate than standard powders.
The graph below shows the weights of the Lapua cases from 20 rounds of this ammunition plus the case that blew-out.
Notice the case weights of 98.5 grains and 99.0 grains at the far right of the graph. Those are the heaviest Lapua Match cases that I’ve ever seen and I’ve been using 223 Remington Lapua Match brass since it first became available on the commercial market. The 99.0 grain case is the one that blew-out in my rifle.
The next graph shows the weights of the powder charges from 22 rounds of this ammunition.
That’s a powder charge variation of 1.8 grains. You and I both know that is abysmal quality-control for “match grade” ammunition with a price tag of over $1.60 per round. More importantly, the heaviest charge of 23.6 grains is 1.2 grains heavier than the mean powder charge of 22.4 grains. I doubt that you would have let your soldiers in the AMU shoot an important match with ammunition that had such poor quality-control.
I’m not looking for compensation from you/Berger, but I do appreciate the fact that you are the first person from your company that has had enough integrity to express a concern for my rifle. I’m just looking for the truth of what happened with your ammunition in my rifle.
Why don’t you guys give this a try. Find 10 cases of the Lapua Match brass that weigh 99.0 grains. Charge those cases with 23.6 grains of the same lot of powder that was used in this ammunition Seat your 77 grain OTM bullet to a length of 2.254” and fire those rounds in a new, minimum spec, SAAMI 223 Remington barrel and let me know what the pressures were. (My Krieger barrel has a true 223 Remington chamber, not a 223 Wylde chamber that was designed to handle NATO pressure ammunition.)
Have a good evening,"
...
"Dear Mr Praslick,
I assume that you’ve seen the pictures of the blown case that I’ve posted on-line, but on the off-chance that you haven’t, here’s a few of them.
The case head of the blown case flowed into the recess in the barrel extension between the barrel and the bolt. Here’s a cutaway picture of an AR-15 chamber for comparison.
Notice how the brass flow of the blown case matches the recess in between the barrel and the bolt. It would have taken a chamber pressure of over 70,000 PSI to cause that kind of deformation.
The nominal case-head/web diameter of the Lapua brass from this lot of ammunition is 0.3750”. The diameter just above the extractor groove for the blown case is 0.414”. That’s an expansion of 0.039”. That didn’t happen because of a mis-matched pressure curve at the gas-port.
The average rim diameter for the brass from this lot of ammunition is 0.376”. The diameter of the case rim of the blown case is 0.423” at the broadest diameter. That’s an expansion of 0.047” and that didn’t happen because of a high gas-port pressure.
The nominal diameter of the primer pockets for the brass from this lot of ammunition is 0.173”. The primer pocket of the blown case has a diameter of 0.222” at the broadest diameter. That’s an expansion of 0.049” and that didn’t happen because of a progressive propellent producing a larger volume of gas “under the curve” at a different rate than standard powders.
The graph below shows the weights of the Lapua cases from 20 rounds of this ammunition plus the case that blew-out.
Notice the case weights of 98.5 grains and 99.0 grains at the far right of the graph. Those are the heaviest Lapua Match cases that I’ve ever seen and I’ve been using 223 Remington Lapua Match brass since it first became available on the commercial market. The 99.0 grain case is the one that blew-out in my rifle.
The next graph shows the weights of the powder charges from 22 rounds of this ammunition.
That’s a powder charge variation of 1.8 grains. You and I both know that is abysmal quality-control for “match grade” ammunition with a price tag of over $1.60 per round. More importantly, the heaviest charge of 23.6 grains is 1.2 grains heavier than the mean powder charge of 22.4 grains. I doubt that you would have let your soldiers in the AMU shoot an important match with ammunition that had such poor quality-control.
I’m not looking for compensation from you/Berger, but I do appreciate the fact that you are the first person from your company that has had enough integrity to express a concern for my rifle. I’m just looking for the truth of what happened with your ammunition in my rifle.
Why don’t you guys give this a try. Find 10 cases of the Lapua Match brass that weigh 99.0 grains. Charge those cases with 23.6 grains of the same lot of powder that was used in this ammunition Seat your 77 grain OTM bullet to a length of 2.254” and fire those rounds in a new, minimum spec, SAAMI 223 Remington barrel and let me know what the pressures were. (My Krieger barrel has a true 223 Remington chamber, not a 223 Wylde chamber that was designed to handle NATO pressure ammunition.)
Have a good evening,"
...
Hmmm. I like Berger stuff and bullets a lot, but this whole thing just isn't looking good... I also talked to Berger when @Molon started this thread or the day after because I have a lot of this ammo. I have not had a problem in my bolt gun but I have a .223 wylde chamber. The ammo is 223 Winchester ammo. With such a large amount of specific information given to them, I would expect a little more out of Berger honestly. This isn't some small thing imo.This is the latest email that I've sent to Berger . . .
"Dear Mr Praslick,
I assume that you’ve seen the pictures of the blown case that I’ve posted on-line, but on the off-chance that you haven’t, here’s a few of them.
The case head of the blown case flowed into the recess in the barrel extension between the barrel and the bolt. Here’s a cutaway picture of an AR-15 chamber for comparison.
Notice how the brass flow of the blown case matches the recess in between the barrel and the bolt. It would have taken a chamber pressure of over 70,000 PSI to cause that kind of deformation.
The nominal case-head/web diameter of the Lapua brass from this lot of ammunition is 0.3750”. The diameter just above the extractor groove for the blown case is 0.414”. That’s an expansion of 0.039”. That didn’t happen because of a mis-matched pressure curve at the gas-port.
The average rim diameter for the brass from this lot of ammunition is 0.376”. The diameter of the case rim of the blown case is 0.423” at the broadest diameter. That’s an expansion of 0.047” and that didn’t happen because of a high gas-port pressure.
The nominal diameter of the primer pockets for the brass from this lot of ammunition is 0.173”. The primer pocket of the blown case has a diameter of 0.222” at the broadest diameter. That’s an expansion of 0.049” and that didn’t happen because of a progressive propellent producing a larger volume of gas “under the curve” at a different rate than standard powders.
The graph below shows the weights of the Lapua cases from 20 rounds of this ammunition plus the case that blew-out.
Notice the case weights of 98.5 grains and 99.0 grains at the far right of the graph. Those are the heaviest Lapua Match cases that I’ve ever seen and I’ve been using 223 Remington Lapua Match brass since it first became available on the commercial market. The 99.0 grain case is the one that blew-out in my rifle.
The next graph shows the weights of the powder charges from 22 rounds of this ammunition.
That’s a powder charge variation of 1.8 grains. You and I both know that is abysmal quality-control for “match grade” ammunition with a price tag of over $1.60 per round. More importantly, the heaviest charge of 23.6 grains is 1.2 grains heavier than the mean powder charge of 22.4 grains. I doubt that you would have let your soldiers in the AMU shoot an important match with ammunition that had such poor quality-control.
I’m not looking for compensation from you/Berger, but I do appreciate the fact that you are the first person from your company that has had enough integrity to express a concern for my rifle. I’m just looking for the truth of what happened with your ammunition in my rifle.
Why don’t you guys give this a try. Find 10 cases of the Lapua Match brass that weigh 99.0 grains. Charge those cases with 23.6 grains of the same lot of powder that was used in this ammunition Seat your 77 grain OTM bullet to a length of 2.254” and fire those rounds in a new, minimum spec, SAAMI 223 Remington barrel and let me know what the pressures were. (My Krieger barrel has a true 223 Remington chamber, not a 223 Wylde chamber that was designed to handle NATO pressure ammunition.)
Have a good evening,"
...
This week, Mr Praslick did offer to compensate me for any damage that may have occured to my rifle from this ammunition. As I stated in the above email, I'm not looking for compensation, but I am looking for the truth of what happened with their ammunition in my rifle. To date, the other employees that I've communicated with at Berger have refused to provide me with any of the specific data that I've requested pertaining to the powder, intended powder charge, chamber pressures etc. used in this lot of ammunition.
...
I understand why they are kind of closed lipped with this because every business is constantly afraid of getting sued by some fast talking lawyer. If ya say anything, it can be used for a big settlement. I own a business and I really do get it.
That said, there has to be some transparency when it comes to gun powder and ammunition manufacturing issues. In the current climate that we have in this nation, it's a very difficult thing to navigate for sure. At minimum, it seems to me that some berger would provide the data of what that ammo is supposed to be, especially since its extremely obvious that they are talking to someone who knows what they are looking at, and has extensive equipment and ability to do so. "The b.s. stuff isn't going to work here"
I would like answers as well.
I would appreciate the repaired firearm... but some kind of answers, would be preferred as well.
Frankly, the various powder charge weights you recorded, doesn't say anything good to me concerning QC in "high quality" ammo manufacturer.
Thank you for re-stating about the lack of room for bullet setback... I was grasping at anything pertaining to self loading , since Berger says it is still ok in a bolt gun.
I was hoping that Mr. Praslick was going to do the right thing and provide us all some transparency on this issue. Alas, it's been over a month since I sent him that last email posted above and I haven't heard a single word from him.
Without notifying me Berger just delivered 5 new boxes of this ammunition to my residence. It looks like Berger is just going to stick with their BS story about semi-automatic cycling issues.
...
Without notifying me Berger just delivered 5 new boxes of this ammunition to my residence. It looks like Berger is just going to stick with their BS story about semi-automatic cycling issues.
...
That's really disappointing to hear. I had hoped that more information would have been given about this. Given that they put out a notice about the ammo but still believe it to be 100% safe in bolt guns (and my experience has supported that), Berger obviously doesn't think they a serious issue here. I am certainly not an expert by any stretch of the imagination but I can't see any scenario concerning operation of a semi auto that would create that level of pressure without some issue with the ammo.
There may not be any way to get further information about what happened. I really don't know what other info could be had to help determine the cause but some transparency and communication can be done and should have. Honestly I expected more from Berger
Interesting thread. My theory is, its not the powder charge alone, its probably the brass too. 99 grains is a very heavy piece of Lapua brass. I have thousands of New Lapua brass from different lots, and the heaviest one "in thousands" is 98.xx. And that is on the heavy, low capacity side for brass, as only Starline 223 is heavier than that, that I have, and I have about ~12 brands of new brass. Starline 223 brass is 101-102 grains ballbark, and will give significant more FPS with same load, much higher pressure.
Also, looking at the powder charges, I do not think this is N140, as a charge of 22.7, or 22.0 would not yield even near 2750 out of even a 24" barrel with N140, that would require 24.5+++ to get near 2750 like the box says.. The max charge for SAAMI pressure with that bullet is going to be around 22 grains. So if they made a NATO pressure round, with slightly lower capacity brass and its supposed to be around 22.7 grains, then N135 would get one up to that velocity VERY near it. With N135, that brass would not pop like like even using that HORRIBLE quality control at like 23.6. So what I think happens is that piece of brass has some issue with capacity or some flaw, in addition to a higher charge, like 23.6.
I shot a brand new batch of brass from a major manufacturer, and it cracked over 1 INCH long all the way down the case, and the crack was wide. IT was because the brass was not heat treated properly.
This guy just did review trying to clone this load, and they said it was 24.66 grains in the case. And that is less than 1 year after Molon got some. So apparently the powder type and charge has CHANGED recently.
Those guys are FUNNY. They think you can just pull bullets and then figure out what powder it is. I guess nobody told them, you can't...lol
I can't get over how bad the quality control was on Molon's batch. That is horrendously awful.
Also, looking at the powder charges, I do not think this is N140, as a charge of 22.7, or 22.0 would not yield even near 2750 out of even a 24" barrel with N140, that would require 24.5+++ to get near 2750 like the box says.. The max charge for SAAMI pressure with that bullet is going to be around 22 grains. So if they made a NATO pressure round, with slightly lower capacity brass and its supposed to be around 22.7 grains, then N135 would get one up to that velocity VERY near it. With N135, that brass would not pop like like even using that HORRIBLE quality control at like 23.6. So what I think happens is that piece of brass has some issue with capacity or some flaw, in addition to a higher charge, like 23.6.
I shot a brand new batch of brass from a major manufacturer, and it cracked over 1 INCH long all the way down the case, and the crack was wide. IT was because the brass was not heat treated properly.
This guy just did review trying to clone this load, and they said it was 24.66 grains in the case. And that is less than 1 year after Molon got some. So apparently the powder type and charge has CHANGED recently.
Those guys are FUNNY. They think you can just pull bullets and then figure out what powder it is. I guess nobody told them, you can't...lol
I can't get over how bad the quality control was on Molon's batch. That is horrendously awful.
Last edited:
You aren't wrong, and most factory ammo powder isn't stuff you can buy on the shelf.
But they tore it down, rebuilt it, and tested it... the results were good?
They determined it was 24.6 grains of N140. But when they tested it, FPS was WAY different. So it was probably not straight N140, as 24.6 grains is a SUPER hot load with Berger 77's. Super hot.
Hmmmm, looks like they just pulled one round, and weighed the charge that is my impression.….. I would have done 10 samples and used the avg. if it came out the same weight as the first then I would have said ok that was a waist of my time.
Well if there was any doubt about @Molon 's findings there won't be anymore.
I am at the range and doing seating depth test on a CLE -AR223. I wasn't as sighted in with the 75gr bullet I was shooting as I thought, and my few sighters I loaded weren't enough. The only other ammo I had was the Berger otm (which shoots lights out in my bolt gun), so I decided to use a few rounds to dial in before starting the seating depth test.
I had my crono on and you can see the speed. This is what happened on the 3rd shot with that ammo. I have shot my handloads, (MV of 2907) which run faster and are 2 gr lighter bullet without any pressure signs. I did a pressure check last week and went with 24.2 gr of TAC. Not sure what's in these Berger but I obviously didn't shoot anymore of that and will be calling them to swap out all of this ammo.
I am at the range and doing seating depth test on a CLE -AR223. I wasn't as sighted in with the 75gr bullet I was shooting as I thought, and my few sighters I loaded weren't enough. The only other ammo I had was the Berger otm (which shoots lights out in my bolt gun), so I decided to use a few rounds to dial in before starting the seating depth test.
I had my crono on and you can see the speed. This is what happened on the 3rd shot with that ammo. I have shot my handloads, (MV of 2907) which run faster and are 2 gr lighter bullet without any pressure signs. I did a pressure check last week and went with 24.2 gr of TAC. Not sure what's in these Berger but I obviously didn't shoot anymore of that and will be calling them to swap out all of this ammo.
Attachments
.
Glad you're not hurt. What length is your barrel?
.....
Yeah I feel kind of dumb now. I was sketchy doing it but thought it would be ok after shooting one round and seeing the velocity.
My barrel is 18" and I had my 8-1/2" can on it with a qd break.
I don't really understand why that happened given the velocity. (Edit to clear this up.. i meant "given the velocity of the first round if it that i shot) .Happy to measure anything you'd like to maybe shed more light on it.
Last edited:
From the first post of this thread . . .
Pulled-down powder from this Berger ammunition.
Pulled-down powder charge weights . . .
I pulled-down a couple more rounds after compiling the above data and found a round with a charge of 23.6 grains. The puts the powder charge variation at 1.8 grains.
28.6 grains of this pulled-down powder filled a randomly selected pulled-down case to the case mouth. The longest cartridge overall length that I measured from this lot of factory loaded ammunition was 2.262". I was able to load 26.0 grains of the pulled-down powder into a pulled-down case and seat a pulled-down bullet to a cartridge overall length of 2.262".
This ammunition is a heavily compressed load, so bullet set-back is highly improbable. Since it was a compressed load, I was unable to use my custom K&M compression gauge to obtain an accurate measure of neck tension, however, it required quite a bit of force to pull the bullets from the cases using a press-mounted, collet bullet-puller. Also, using the custom K&M compression gauge, I applied 90 pounds of force to one of the factory-loaded cartridges that had a cartridge overall length of 2.253". After applying the 90 pounds of force, I again measured the COAL. It was still 2.253".
....
Last edited:
2985 FPS from an 18" barrel! Two Thousand Nine Hundred Eighty-Five Feet Per Second.
That's 137 FPS faster than Black Hills 5.56mm MK262 Mod 1 when fired from a 20" Colt barrel with a 5.56mm chamber. Berger clearly labeled this ammunition as "223 Remington" "Match Grade Ammunition"
The Berger box lists this ammunition as having having a muzzle velocity of 2750 FPS fired from a 20" barrel. So that 2985 FPS is 235 FPS FASTER THAN BERGER'S OWN STATED VELOCITY.
...
Yeah that's pretty fast from an 18" barrel, I did have the can on it but that's right at the speed I get out ofbmy bolt gun and it's another 4" longer and has the same suppressor on it. I'm kind of used to 3000fps but I'm also used to my bolt gun. My load that I determined to be safe pressure was 24.2 (TAC) which is a grain under what I shoot in my bolt gun. That's a different bullet as well. 75 gr vs 77gr. But the MV for my hand loads are right at 2900 with that same barrel. That's my highest speed avg with very hot temp btw.
Last edited:
So @Molon , you think its just a ton of powder in some of these then correct? That's the cause and only cause of this very high pressure and the resulting superspeed. I did re-read your findings that you posted and had forgotten the amount of powder you were talking about being in some of these. It's just hard to imagine that big of a powder difference in match factory ammo??? I of course think you are right, just don't understand how that would happen in a production of ammo...
Last edited:
2985 for a 77 from an 18” is nuts!!
Ran my 18” proof on the Magneto today with 3 different factory 77’s X-tac 223 was 2551, 5.56 IMI Razor cor 77 was 2706, & Sig 223 match 77 was 2509. Proof barrels tend to be on the faster end of the spectrum. You were 276 fps faster then my 5.56. Hard to beleive the case didn’t let go completly.
There seams to be a common theme on several running threads.
Lack of QA/QC! I certainly see it in my industry now. No one has loyalty, as soon as someone is 60% trained they leave & you have to start all over with another noob. Now consider this is happening on 20-30 different 100m - 800m projects at the same time. There are only 3 of us to go around for all the training & QA/QC oversight.
I haven't called berger yet because work is so crazy right now and they aren't open when I can get 10 minutes to call. I know I need to call them so I will just have to make it happen Monday, I don't want to put it off because they have a problem here, though they didn't want to admit it last time I talked to them.
If they haven't identified a problem, I'm not sure I want replacement ammo from them. I guess it depends on what they do but I still don't understand how this could happen. That's a huge difference in charge weight and I don't see how they could have a system where that happens, especially with match grade ammo. I'm kind of scared to shoot any of that ammo, even a different lot until I know more about how each lot is done ect... I guess all manufacturers have issues at times but it would be really nice to know how this happened and what will keep it from happening again.
If they haven't identified a problem, I'm not sure I want replacement ammo from them. I guess it depends on what they do but I still don't understand how this could happen. That's a huge difference in charge weight and I don't see how they could have a system where that happens, especially with match grade ammo. I'm kind of scared to shoot any of that ammo, even a different lot until I know more about how each lot is done ect... I guess all manufacturers have issues at times but it would be really nice to know how this happened and what will keep it from happening again.
I can't really wrap my head around them calling this 223 ammo when it's clearly loaded to mimic MK262.
All the 223 77 OTM match I've checked speeds on are at least 150fps slower than the Berger.
Speed = pressure. There is no way they're getting MK262 speed with 223 pressure.
2985 FPS from an 18" barrel is 137 FPS faster than Black Hills 5.56mm MK262 Mod 1 when fired from a 20" Colt barrel with a 5.56mm chamber. Berger clearly labeled this ammunition as "223 Remington" "Match Grade Ammunition"
The Berger box lists this ammunition as having having a muzzle velocity of 2750 FPS fired from a 20" barrel. So that 2985 FPS is 235 FPS FASTER THAN BERGER'S OWN STATED VELOCITY.
...
Similar threads
