Okay I know that Steel cased cartridges are generally 4-8 dollars less than brass cartridges in most cases. So obviously they're cheaper for a reason, but what exactly are the big disadvantages of steel casings? I recently decided to purchase three boxes of 50 rounds at WalMart of .40 S&W FMJ Tul Ammo (made in Russia) for $12.00 a box for target practice at the range. This was a great deal because I usually buy the Winchester white box for around $15-16 in most places. However after purchasing and examining the cartridges I also noticed they have smaller primer caps than my JHP rounds I keep loaded for CC. (Unsure if this will make any difference, probably not.)
Either way. I am not one to reload my spent ammunition for reuse since I don't have the materials/tools to do so. Therefore I look for the cheapest deal and Tul Ammo by far has been it.
I just want to know why such a discount. Are they really that much worse?
I have not had any problem with the Wolf steel case ammo really. Feeding and function are flawless. I use them in older licensed sub machine guns and the M-16 rifle (which is old version too) and they work fine. Some feel the steel is hard on the weapon but I have not seen evidence of this as yet Even if it was replacing and extractor is not that big a deal or expensive on any wepon I use it in,but that has not been needed. The AK-47 uses this ammo no problem too, then again almost nothing jams an AK,can't say that for the M16 though but it still fired steel cases fine if kept clean.
I am glad that you have had good results with Wolf ammo. Unfortunately I have not. A few years ago I remember purchasing some 9mm for a Ruger P85 that I had and it did not like it at all. I jammed every third round. I even tried tweaking the extractor some but it did no good. I have not used them since. I have not tried any rifle rounds though.
Brian I have heard this from another Ruger P85 owner too.Two cases are not a large sample space for sure but perhaps this Ruger pistol can't digest this ammo? It woeks fine in my 92F .
Not all bikers are vets but lot of bikers are vets.At alocal watering hole where I am known I talk to the soldiers coming back from the Big Sandbox. I get spotty report on the relibility of the M4, I know back in 69 the A1 jammed a lot really and had to be kept clean which was not easy in that enviornment at all.
What's your feeling on thne new version of the M16 platform Sir as far as relibaility and jamming?
First and foremost I need to thank you and your kind. More specifically the men and women of the group know as Rolling Thunder. The reason for my gratitude is because in 2006 I was stationed at Ft. Bragg, NC with 7th Special Forces Group. During a funeral ceremony some of those individuals from the Westboro Baptist Church showed up and were preparing to make a scene, as they are known for doing. Well there were a few members of the local Rolling Thunder chapter who were attending the funeral to pay their respects to my buddy (the reason why we were there that day) who was a very enthusiastic biker. They proceeded to exit the JFK Chapel and walk across the street to apparently ask the “nice people” to leave. Well needless to say a “discussion” ensued and some where during that “discussion” a phone call must have been made. No, not to the Provost Martial, but to more members of the local chapter, so within ten minutes the “nice people” from the Westboro Baptist Church were being escorted by a host of chapter members, back to their vehicles and away from the chapel, parishioners, and grieving family. So, I am in your debt, whether or not you are a member of Rolling Thunder. It is you and your kind of red blooded, hard working, patriotic Americans (who also like to ride) who I would truly like to thank. Thank you
Now to get off of my soap box. As far as my Ruger digesting ammo, it is usually very good at finishing off whatever I give it to eat. For some reason it just did not like that Wolf stuff. As far as the reliability of the M4 carbine, it is great. With that being said, it will only be as reliable as you let it be. In other words, yes, you do have to clean your weapon. The M4 is a highly effective rifle that is accurate out to 400m but you do have to keep it cleaner than an AK. But both of those weapons we made with two different mindsets. The M16 was made to be a potent killing machine in the hands of a trained rifleman out to 300-400 meters, while an AK’s effective range is much shorter, yes it is your proverbial “bullet hose”. Their construction is quite different as well. Cast and machined parts vs. stamped. So, while the M16/4 may have had a bad rap as being unreliable, you should consider the source.
I hoped this helped. Thanks again for your support.
SFC Brian Dinges
The steel expands differently than the brass cases. Brass is softer than steel, so if you ran a lot of ammo through it, you might wear your chamber out quicker. I run both, most of my guns run fine on either, but i did have a Galil that just would not feed Wolf steel stuff.
OK I understand that idea. I can whip another barrel on an ar15/16 in not time and for lessssw than $100. I would save that expense in the cheaper steel ammo.
But if I had a Steyr Aug, or Gallil, or a finee HK I might discover that I would not feed it steel case too.
A good ar15 can actually be built on AR-15 recievr (from $79 to avg of $139) for maybe $400 to $450 in addiotnal parts. A Cnetruty Arms AR-15 in the old nam era triangualr handguards and 20' bbl cna be had for $679 to $720) Not insignifcant money but no the cost of real Galial or KK or Aug eiher.
AR chambersbbls/chambers are fairly low cost and easily replaceable. I wonder if steel really wears them down a lot too, it well might but how much is an unknown really.I see both sides to this one really.
I believe that most of the issues with Wolf & Tula is due to the ammo being lightly loaded and the poor seal from insufficient case expansion causing improper cycling.
I've seen ARs with tens of thousand of round of the cheap Ruskie stuff run through them with no appreciable wear on the chamber or extractor. The cases are still much softer than the steels used in a quality firearm. I wouldn't sweat the wear thing. If the gun cycles then I would use the Wolf/Tula for some low cost plinking.
I don't use Wolf/Tula in my defensive handguns too often only because I like having the gun perform approximately like it will feel with defensive loads for training purposes.
I fired Wolf in SKS, Mak-90, Ak-47rifles and really have not one failure to feed or extract. Also in the AR -15 and M16 and no problems. If the wear is not a factor since I go through some rounds in my training school I see a benifit cost wise to the Russsian ammo.
Here are the downsides to the Ruskie ammo:
- It's loaded light. The powder charge is less powerful than most quality range ammos.
- It's dirty; the Wolf and Tula charge leaves a lot of carbon and residue in your gun.
- It's steel. Steel generally cannot be reloaded. Also when the round goes off the steel casing does not expand as well as brass in the chamber so you don't get as good of a seal between the chamber and the barrel. Consequently you get less bullet velocity and more fouling in the gun.
If you only use the Wolf & Tula for the range and If you clean your gun after every trip to the range it's generally no problem. I think the premise that steel cases ruin extractors is a myth. If the manufacturer doesn't prohibit steel and the ammo feeds well enough, rock the range on the cheap. Just clean the gun and save the good stuff for CC.
I was shooting Tula .45s a few weeks ago and if anything they seemed pretty hot.
Which might be another downside... lack of consistence. I've heard people say they're light, and others say they're hot.
Brian, thank you sir, for your dedication and service.
You are welcome and thank you for your support. As I tell everyone who bestows praise upon me and my service, "Without your support back here we can't go do what we need to do over there. Thank you."
SFC Brian Dinges
P.S. I like your hat.