BLUF: The results of the budget ammo are fairly impressive.
Comments
On October 17, 2021 at 9:19 pm, Ratus said:
Yes.
Because I can’t afford to train with expensive ammo enough to learn how it performs in my firearms at anything but close range.
On October 17, 2021 at 10:36 pm, X said:
Cheap .223 for home defense? Hell, yeah. Anything that goes “bang” in an AR at home defense range is going to be VERY effective, no matter how cheap it is.
The original M193 that the government was buying for the Vietnam-era M16s was dirt cheap. I think I read somewhere that FedGov was paying about two cents per bullet. Probably less, actually; until the panic of 2020 Hornady 55 grain FMJ component bullets could be had for 7-8 cents each when purchased in bulk.
You absolutely do not want to get shot by a 55 grain FMJ doing 3000 fps from across the living room when you’re trying to burglarize some guy’s house, for sure. A 55 grain soft point will blow your guts (or your brains if it’s a head shot) all over his living room sofa.
On October 18, 2021 at 12:08 am, Bradley Suhr said:
5.56 NATO/.223 AR’s don’t need premium anything to function well. For most civilian purposes, I don’t see barrier penetration as particularly important. Reloadable, brass cased, soft point ammo is a good choice for civilian use. M193 or M855 spec ammo are also reasonable choices. Buy this ammo cheap and stack it deep. IMI looks like a pretty good option these days.
On October 18, 2021 at 1:58 pm, LatigoMorgan said:
If lowest bidder is good enough for our military, it’s good enough for me.
This article is filed under the category(s) Ammunition and was published October 17th, 2021 by Herschel Smith.
If you're interested in what else the The Captain's Journal has to say, you might try thumbing through the archives and visiting the main index, or; perhaps you would like to learn more about TCJ.
On October 17, 2021 at 9:19 pm, Ratus said:
Yes.
Because I can’t afford to train with expensive ammo enough to learn how it performs in my firearms at anything but close range.
On October 17, 2021 at 10:36 pm, X said:
Cheap .223 for home defense? Hell, yeah. Anything that goes “bang” in an AR at home defense range is going to be VERY effective, no matter how cheap it is.
The original M193 that the government was buying for the Vietnam-era M16s was dirt cheap. I think I read somewhere that FedGov was paying about two cents per bullet. Probably less, actually; until the panic of 2020 Hornady 55 grain FMJ component bullets could be had for 7-8 cents each when purchased in bulk.
You absolutely do not want to get shot by a 55 grain FMJ doing 3000 fps from across the living room when you’re trying to burglarize some guy’s house, for sure. A 55 grain soft point will blow your guts (or your brains if it’s a head shot) all over his living room sofa.
On October 18, 2021 at 12:08 am, Bradley Suhr said:
5.56 NATO/.223 AR’s don’t need premium anything to function well. For most civilian purposes, I don’t see barrier penetration as particularly important. Reloadable, brass cased, soft point ammo is a good choice for civilian use. M193 or M855 spec ammo are also reasonable choices. Buy this ammo cheap and stack it deep. IMI looks like a pretty good option these days.
On October 18, 2021 at 1:58 pm, LatigoMorgan said:
If lowest bidder is good enough for our military, it’s good enough for me.