John Flanagan of Sabot Designs, a manufacturer known for his flechette-loaded shotgun shells, pointed out that the usual culprit was solvent in the powder doing what solvents do, reacting with other chemical compounds, in this case the primer, rendering the round a dud. As a contractor making ammunition for the government, Flanagan is well aware of this problem and how to deal with it. Flanagan also helped me get the relevant government documents I’ll reference in this story.

THE SOLVENT ISSUE

To begin with, nitrocellulose powders require a solvent to gelatinize them so that they can be formed into balls, flakes, cylinders, or strips. Single base powders are typically an ether-alcohol colloid of nitrocellulose. Double base powders are made from nitrocellulose and nitroglycerine and use ether, ethyl acetate, or isooctanol, as processing solvents. Much of this solvent is lost in processing. The solvent must remain at the minimum level to keep the propellant from becoming brittle and losing plasticization causing the powder grains to turn to dust which will raise pressure dangerously as the smaller the fuel the faster it burns. Just look at how much faster a pile of wood shavings burns than a big log does. Without a certain amount of solvent, you cannot keep the dimensional stability of the powder grains.

This solvent will also act on primer compounds, rendering them incapable of detonation. Because of this, the mil-spec limit for residual solvent in the dried powder is 0.25 weight-% (0.25% of the powder weight). If this limit is exceeded, the life of the primer will be shortened accordingly. These solvents off-gas from the powder and are what you smell when you open a powder can. Back in the days of the Army Coast Artillery, the powder magazines contained so much ether that many thought it was put there deliberately to somehow preserve the powder when, in reality, it was just massive amounts of off-gassing in a confined area.

STUDIES HAVE BEEN DONE

To give you an idea of how much gas can come out of the powder, here is the results of a U.S. military test. A 75-liter drum was filled with 150 pounds of propellant powder containing residual solvent content of 0.25 weight-% (the mil-spec limit for dried propellant). There were approximately 70 grams of solvent. 12 grams of solvent were in the vapor phase and of these, 7 grams were in the space above the propellant and 5 grams occupied the space between the powder grains. The remaining 158 grams of solvent were trapped in the propellant grains.

The 12 grams in the vapor phase were in the form that can act as a solvent on the primer compound. When you add a solvent to primer compound you interfere with its performance, as you’re breaking down the explosive mixture.

This information came from a several government studies I found including:

• 1951, Great Britain’s Ministry of Defense study, Interior Ballistics authored by F.R.W. Hunt (pages 1-7)
• 1966, Julian S. Hatcher, Hatchers Notebook (pages 353-360)
• 1970, E.R. Lake’s Percussion Primer Design Requirements. (pages 2-5)
• 1994, U.S. Army Research Laboratory LOVA Propellant Aging: Effects of Residual Solvent study (pages 1-2, 6, 11, 13)
• 1980, U.S. Army Armament Research and Development Command study titled A Compilation of Hazard and Test Data for Pyrotechnic Compositions (pages 57, 62, 63.)
• 2019, Joint Ordnance Test Procedure (JOPT)-022 Safety and Suitability for Service Assessment Testing for Small Caliber Ammunition Less Than 20MM (appendix A.1-A.5)

WHY IT HAPPENS

Everyone knows not to store ammo at high temperatures, but few know the real reason why. High temperatures drive the solvent into the vapor phase and the solvent vapor kills the primers.

Nitrocellulose itself deteriorates over time yielding acidic byproducts such as nitric acid which can also attack primers. Some powders contain calcium carbonate to neutralize these acids. To absorb the decomposition products of nitrocellulose and nitroglycerine-based powders and prevent their buildup and catalyzing the decomposition stabilizers are added such as diphenylamine, mineral jelly, carbamite, pictrite, and calcium carbonate. These may also act as cooling agents and gelatinizers. These stabilizers can be a health hazard in large quantities and the military has been doing studies on their effect on artillerymen who encounter massive amounts of smoke and chemical residue when firing their artillery.

The combination of all these solvents, acids, and chemicals reacting together results in a complicated combination of solvent gasses with multiple compounds present to interact with your primers. Even the oxidation of lead bullets can spread to the primer and result in a dead primer.

Among the escaping solvent gasses are ether, ethyl acetate, acetic acid, oxalic acid, nitric acid, carboxlic acid, isocatanol, and isoctanoic acid. Ingredients may vary due to the different chemicals initially present in the powder.

All of this volatile chemical cocktail residing in a cartridge case is injurious to primers and over time, when stored improperly, can turn them into duds. If the powder contains more residual solvent content than the mil-spec previously alluded to then the primer will go bad much faster. This seems to be the case with some of the recent lots of commercial ammo that has quickly gone bad in 10 years or less.

From a manufacturing perspective, it’s clear that too much solvent will kill the primer. J. J. Reich of Federal Ammunition says that this is, indeed, why high heat will cause ammunition to go bad. The heat drives the solvent out of the powder and sets it loose to attack the primer. Reich also pointed out that some of the current powders (not those used by Federal) are so hydroscopic that they will absorb enough water in a normal humidity house for the powder fail to ignite.

Joel Hogdon of Remington Ammunition says his company avoids this issue by storing its powder where ventilation can prevent the buildup of gasses coming off the powder and spoiling it by sticking around. He advised that any powder that is discolored, causing a powder can to bulge, or producing a bad smell, should be discarded. Primers, he said, should not be unboxed and left out to absorb moisture before loading into cartridges.

Interestingly, some bullets are now made of porous, powdered metal that can admit moisture to the powder within the cartridge case. The solution to this is a liquid sealant, says Jonathan Langenfeld, the head of R&D engineering at Remington Ammunition. But some types of modern primers must be able to breathe, so you apply the sealant to one side of the primer on some and both sides on others… as well as the bullet. Vacuum seal-finished ammo is another a surefire way to beat moisture absorption by certain hydroscopic gun powders and primer compounds.

OTHER CAUSES

There is one other compound that can sometimes attack primers. Years ago, I had some lead-bullet 38 S&W ammo go bad while the Winchester Lubaloy-coated bullets of the same vintage all fired. The Montana state chemist at the time, John Buchanan, told me that sometimes lead oxide from old lead bullets can react with primers and kill them.

Another thing to consider is that primers require a fast, hard strike penetrating a minimum of 0.017-inch depth to go off. Seth Swerczek at Hornady Ammunitionpoints out that if improper headspace puts the primer out of reach, or there is a slow lock time as can occur with dirt or with congealed lubricant in cold weather, then the primer may not be indented fast enough to fire. He also said that it was sometimes possible for 1-3 primers out of a million produced to be incomplete, lacking anvil or primer compound and thus incapable of firing, though he stressed this was very rare.

THE SOLUTION

The solution is two-fold, depending on how you get your ammo.

For handloaders, use powder that does not exceed the mil-spec limit for solvent in dried propellant. Then, when making your cartridges, shield the primer from the solvents and acids. This was done in the past by the military as shown in the Army’s production drawings of the .45 ACP and 30-06 ammo. Note the part labeled “Seal, case vent” between the primer and the powder charge. That seal is a ten thousandth of an inch thick celluloid plug. It was installed by inserting a strip of ten thousandth of an inch thick celluloid over the primer pocket before seating the primer. The primer punches out the celluloid plug when it is installed, and it stays in place. Ammo thus sealed does not go bad. This is a very cheap and simple solution that anyone loading ammunition can employ regardless of whether you have a big factory with giant plate loaders turning out millions of rounds or a simple Lyman tong tool for reloading.

Handloaders can source these celluloid strips from Flannigan at Sabot Designs LLC, who I previously mentioned above. Flannigan has agreed to sell these strips to any individual handloader or ammunition manufacturer that wants them. Once in place, the primer is protected from the solvents and acids from the propellant powder, so things always go bang when they are supposed to.

For those buying commercially loaded ammunition, look for fresh ammunition lots and store your ammunition away from heat, humidity, and gun cleaning solvents, as these solvents can also attack and kill primers, especially those solvents with an ammonium base.

In the past people blamed the primers but blaming the primer after chemically attacking it is not right. You must put the blame where it belongs. On the chemicals that neutralized the primer.

“Following its initial release, Federal Fusion ammunition quickly gained a reputation for its exceptional performance and reliability,” said Eric Miller, Federal’s Centerfire Product Line Manager. “Over the past 18 years, we have expanded Fusion into a large list of calibers and bullet weights, now totaling more than 50 product offerings across three different product families. This has allowed hunters and shooters to experience the benefits of bonded-core technology across a broad spectrum of firearms and game species.”

“Rifle ammunition featuring polymer tips is nothing new. Yet it has revolutionized the shooting industry with its innovative design and exceptional performance,” said Jake Burns, Federal’s Centerfire Rifle Engineering Manager. “The aerodynamic properties of polymer-tipped rifle ammunition contribute to improved flight characteristics and stability. This feature is especially valuable for long-range shooting, where maintaining stability and accuracy over varying environmental conditions is essential.”

According to Miller and Burns, the all-new Fusion Tipped design offers the same great terminal performance as the original, but with a polymer tip that reduces wind drift and drop, as well as delivering more energy downrange. Paired with a skived nose cavity, the polymer tip also helps initiate consistent, lethal expansion. All this increases ballistic coefficient, flattens trajectories, and boosts energy for better accuracy and extended effective range.

The all-new Fusion Tipped initial offerings will include 300 BLK 190-grain, 6.5 PRC 140-grain, 6.5 Creedmoor 140-grain, 270 Win. 150-grain, 7MM Rem. Mag. 175-grain, 7MM PRC 175-grain, 308 Win. 180-grain, 30-06 Sprg. 180-grain, and 300 Win. Mag. 180-grain. Its 20-count boxes range in price from $44.99 to $81.99 depending on cartridge choice.

For more information on all products from Federal or to shop online, visit www.federalpremium.com.

Uppercut’s 22 LR, 32-grain, jacketed hollow point bullet features nose skiving that initiates full and reliable expansion through 2.5- to 4-inch semi-auto pistols, while retaining the weight needed to hit critical penetration depths needed for self-defense. Plus, CCI ’s legendary priming ensures it will always be ready if ever required.

The new Hevi-Bismuth pest control centerfire handgun shotshells are loaded with the Catalyst lead-free primer and HEVI-Bismuth pellets. At 9.6 g/cc, the shot carries nearly the same density and downrange energy of lead but adheres to all non-toxic ammunition requirements. Available in 9mm Luger, 38/357 Mag., 40 S&W, 44 Spl/Rem Mag., 45 Auto, and 45 Colt.

The new 10mm Auto 105-grain No. 9 pest control centerfire handgun shotshells produce consistent patterns that make it easier to knock down nasty critters such as snakes and other pests in tight quarters. Packed in reusable boxes of 10 shotshells.

New 9mm Luger Blazer Brass handgun ammunition features reloadable brass cases, quality primers, and clean-burning propellants. The new lower-recoil, 100-grain load offers consistent, reliable, accurate performance for target shooting.

Attendees of the 2024 SHOT Show are encouraged to stop by Booth No. 11838 for a first-hand look at these new products and more. For more information on all products from CCI Ammunition, go to www.cci-ammunition.com.

Gold Dot Carbine | Speer

“With a surge in popularity of pistol-caliber carbines, and an end user desire to use them for personal protection, we’ve designed and optimized Gold Dot,” said Speer’s Handgun Product Manager Chris Laack. “The Gold Dot’s construction and Uni-core bonding creates a very robust bullet that performs well at the higher velocities that come from carbine-length rifle barrels.”

Gold Dot Carbine produces ideal velocities through carbine-length barrels and cycles flawlessly. The Speer Gold Dot G2-style, elastomer filled bullet nose is tuned to produce extremely effective penetration and expansion through common barriers.

“Gold Dot G2-style bullet has been updated for optimized terminal performance, accuracy, and function in carbine platforms,” continued Laack. “We’ve also made sure it’s still a capable load in full-size handguns, to allow for flexibility in use.”

This new product is available in 50-count boxes; MSRP: $76.99.

Speer Ammunition can be found at dealers nationwide. For more information on all products or to shop online, visit www.speer.com.

In ammunition manufacturing, daring is rare. The ammunition industry in the U.S. is staid. Many popular cartridges and weapon designs are more than 100 years old: look at the .50 BMG, .30-06, and .45 ACP cartridges and the M2 machine gun, Garand rifle, and 1911 pistol. Therefore, when you see something novel, you are taken a little off guard. I had the opportunity to visit with a group of ammunition component-making dynamos at First Breach of Hagerstown, MD. They definitely caught me off guard.

What Makes First Breach Different

First Breach is cupping from brass and copper strip to make their 9mm and 5.56/.223 cartridge cases and bullet jackets. Second, they are molding their lead ingots. Third, they are extruding their lead wire.

For the layman, this means they’re starting with raw materials that are common across all manufacturing industries, so they are not beholden to anyone that is part of the ammunition industry base. In addition, making their own cups allows them to control quality. It also prevents them from being stuck with so-so-quality cups. Multiple times in my days manufacturing brass cartridges, I received cups that did not match the engineering drawing. We had the choice of accepting the product or waiting another six months for a reworked part. Unfortunately, we were often forced to take the poorly made product and fight it all the way through the manufacturing process.

I’m going back in the mental file cabinet to try to remember the last time something so bold was undertaken in ammunition. I can’t think of anything in the last 50 to 60 years. The nearest effort is SIG Sauer’s venture into ammunition in the 2014 timeframe. However, that started as a partnership with another company and expanded slowly. It took around three years to break off into their own facility in Arkansas. On the other hand, this venture getting off the ground and jumping into so many areas at once is quite bold. Cupping is a difficult and challenging operation and makes some of the other manufacturing aspects seem simplistic. One can make a mistake in the cupping process and not understand the full implication of the mistake until it’s on the ammunition testing range days later. The good news is they seem to have the right equipment designs, tooling designs, fabrication equipment, gaging, and support staff to successfully pull off this massive endeavor.

But Wait – There’s More

They are also going to make primers! They will make these from the strip and other basic raw materials. To the best of my knowledge, there has been no one in the last 50 years that has started with this level of commitment or investment in small-caliber ammunition. This facility is so impressive that I’m certain it will be here for decades to come. It’s almost too big to fail. All the other names in the industry that have become industry mainstays (ex. Hornady, Barnes, Sierra) have started much smaller and slowly grew their business over time. I had the opportunity to visit Barnes bullet in the early 1980s when it was a very small operation in an outbuilding on the Brooks family farm. It grew slowly over time. First Breach is trailblazing a path an ammunition manufacturing path in the U.S.

Modern Machines

To make things even more interesting and rare, they are doing it all with brand-new equipment made in Turkey. They have partnered with Atesci, a 20-year-old company with a great reputation and a long history of success. I have been aware of this company for the better part of those 20 years; however, I have never seen their equipment stateside. I can now say that I have seen their equipment firsthand and it is impressive. The equipment appeared to be well-made and designed. The presses are very stout and with excellent fit and finish. First Breach is so new that their cupping, 9mm case, 9mm bullet, lead ingot, and lead wire lines were all set in place but were idle during my visit as they waited on an electrical transformer to power up the machines. Apparently, supply chain issues affecting us at the retail level also have an impact on industrial power transformers, as well. As I am wrapping up this article, my point of contact informs me that the machines are running, and product is flowing.

The lines saw many of the modern items one would expect to see in modern manufacturing. They have Siemens LCD touchscreen control panels and individual fault detection sensors on each tooling station on the 9mm case machine to instantly stop the machine should a part not transfer. When a part does not transfer, it means that it most likely is stuck in the die and/or the tooling has broken. If the machine continues to run, it will insert the next part on top of another part and cause even more tooling damage. These types of crashes are typically catastrophic. It’s an important consideration when each of the 16 tooling stations cost over $2000 each.

The equipment stations also had an array of gages to measure the parts coming off the machine. This is also a world class thing First Breach and Atesci are bringing to the table. The operator can inspect parts coming off the machine, as they are built. This will ensure that they will not make scrap. It will also help identify when tooling is wearing or in need of adjustment. When this is done correctly, product quality is assured. They are also planning an underground ballistics lab to test the products in-house, even though finished ammunition is not on the radar at the moment.

Room to Grow

First Breach is doing nothing small and simple. They are leasing space in an old Fairchild aircraft manufacturing complex. Space is massively abundant the company’s existing lines talking up about a quarter of the building’s total 882,575 available square feet. I believe they used to manufacture the A-10 Warthog in this complex. For a size comparison, the entire building’s comparable to 15 football fields. I don’t think I have ever been in buildings so large in terms of square feet or so tall with an amazing amount of ceiling clearance – 46 ft! Needless to say, the production lines were spaced out and the company has plenty of room to grow.

More to Come

There are many more great things to come from the First Breach team. The team I met with included First Breach CEO Jeffrey Low, COO Jordan Low, Director of Operations Ben Donivan, and Senior VP of Business Development CJ Dugan. All are all professionals that can, and will, do great things. I’m excited about this company’s prospects. Standby for more on First Breach, as I intend to write a follow-up article once their primer lines are running.

Author’s Note: Regarding terminology, some will argue that because the term “assault rifle” (or rather, Sturmgewehr, which literally translates as “storm rifle” in the sense of “storming a defended position”) was devised for the StG 44, no earlier weapon can be called an assault rifle. To avoid such a debate, I will clarify that in this article I am only using the term “assault rifle” as a convenient, well-understood shorthand for “selective-fire military rifle designed around a cartridge intermediate in power between pistol/SMG and full-power rifle/MG rounds.”

The development of the assault rifle, and in particular the relationship between the AK-47 and the StG 44, is always a popular subject for argument. Such debates usually pay little attention to the development of the ammunition and, when they do, they often contain inaccuracies and misunderstandings. This article is an attempt to redress the balance by focusing on the development of the assault rifle cartridge, leading up to the StG’s 7.92×33 Kurz and the AK’s 7.62×39 M1943.

The concept of such a rifle goes back to the start of the 20th century. The Italian Cei-Rigotti was developed between 1900 and 1905 around the 6.5×52 Carcano cartridge. A decade later, the Russian Colonel Federov produced his Avtomat, originally in his own purpose-designed 6.5mm caliber. However, as the Great War was then underway there was no chance of a new cartridge being adopted, so he modified his gun to use the Japanese 6.5x50SR Arisaka cartridge; large quantities of the guns and ammunition having been acquired by Russia to meet a shortfall in their supply of rifles. A few thousand Federov Avtomats were produced and entered service, and these reportedly saw action as late as the Winter War with Finland in 1939-40.

It can be argued that neither the Cei- Rigotti nor the Federov Avtomat used “intermediate”cartridges, as the 6.5mm Carcano and Arisaka were the front-line rifle/MG rounds in the Italian and Japanese armies respectively. This is true, but it is worth bearing in mind that, in terms of caliber and muzzle energy, they were in the same class as the present-day 6.8×43 Remington SPC and 6.5×38 Grendel, which are today regarded by many as ideal cartridges for assault rifles.

An equally early attempt to produce a carbine firing an intermediate round was the Austrian Mannlicher Self-Loading Carbine in 7.65×32 caliber. This was an improved and enlarged version of their Model 1901 pistol carbine chambered for a lengthened version of the 7.65×25 pistol round, and was made in about 1904. It never went past the prototype stage and its ballistics are not known. However, the cartridge case is similar in length, as well as calibre, to the US .30 M1 Carbine’s, but slightly fatter as it is bottle-necked.

The next country with a claim to contributing to the development of the assault rifle is France. During the Great War they made some use of Winchester self-load-ing carbines: the Model 1907 in .351 SL and the Model 1910 in .401 SL. In 1917, France placed an order for 2,200 of an automatic version of the Model 1907 for arming special assault soldiers. At the same time, they were modifying the .351 case by necking it down to accept the heavy 8mm bullet from the Lebel rifle/MG round, thereby creating the 8mm Ribeyrolle – arguably the first purpose-designed intermediate military cartridge. The war endedbefore anything came of this, but it is not hard to see that had it lasted for another year or two, French troops would have been equipped with an assault rifle. As it was, neither the Ribeyrolle, nor a 7mm version designed in the 1920s, made further progress.

Next in the frame is Switzerland. Their prolific gun designer Furrer produced a short-recoil carbine with a new bottlenecked 7.65×35 cartridge in 1921. We are now getting very close to the concept – except that the cartridge had a round-nose rather than pointed bullet. A year later a modified 7.65×38 appeared which did have a pointed bullet. Swiss sources indicate that data from the tests of these rounds were passed to DWM in Germany, where they may have influenced later developments. Other pre-Second World War Swiss short-case ammunition designs included a different and rather mysterious 7.65×38 round for which unloaded components were made in some quantity, for an unknown destination, just before the war.

In 1925 Kynoch of the UK proposed a “7mm light automatic rifle cartridge” intended for BSA. The factory drawing shows a bottle-necked case with a length of 41mm and a round-nosed bullet. It is not clear whether the cartridge or gun were ever built.

In Russia, Federov continued to argue for the adoption of a smaller cartridge than the 7.62x54R. In the late 1920s he recommended adoption of the 6.5mm “if not even smaller” and a rimless or semirimmed case with a length shortened by about 20% (to 40mm). His ideas were supported in 1930 by V.E. Markevich, of the Red Army’s Weapons Scientific and Research Range, who pointed out that an ideal cartridge already existed – in the .25 Remington. The .25’s bigger brother based on the same case, the .30 Remington, was of course used as the starting point for the development of the 6.8mm Rem SPC.

The US Army did indeed experiment with a .25 cartridge in the 1920s – although this was a much more powerful round than the .25 Remington – before focusing on the .276 Pedersen. This was a 7×51 cartridge that was similar in power to the 6.5mm Arisaka, and to the modern 6.8mm Rem. However, the army was still thinking in terms of long-range semiautomatic fire (a mindset which did not change until the 1960s). The .276 cartridge was rejected in 1932, partly for cost reasons but also because it did not offer sufficient longrange performance.

In the early 1930s, Denmark made limited numbers of the delayed-blowback Weibel (or Danrif) assault rifle in a 7×44 caliber. Also in the early 1930s, the US Frankford Arsenal tested an Italian Terni semiautomatic rifle in 7.35×34, but nothing seems to have survived apart from a drawing of the round, which shows it with a pointed bullet of 134.5 grains. In 1939, a light automatic weapon was advertised in Greece in 7.92×36 caliber, the cartridge apparently being based on a shortened and necked-out 6.5mm Mannlicher case.

We now turn to Germany, where in the aftermath of the Great War a Hauptmann Piderit of the Rifle Testing Commission advocated a short-cased cartridge and a suitable rifle to fire it. His was a lone voice, however. It wasn’t until 1927 that DWM (actually, the “Berlin-Karlsruher Industriewerke A.G.” as DWM was known between 1922 and 1936) carried out the first tests of short-cased cartridges, possibly as a result of the data they had received about the Swiss rounds. This had no immediate result, and the direct line of development which led to the 7.92×33 Kurz commenced in the mid-1930s. Over the next ten years, no fewer than five German companies were involved in developing short-cased cartridges suitable for assault rifles: Geco, DWM, RWS, Rheinmetall- Borsig and Polte.

Geco was the first in the field, cooperating with the gun company Vollmer- Werke Maschinenfabrik, to produce the Vollmer SL Model 35 self-loading carbine in a nominal 7.75×40 caliber (the caliber was actually 7.9mm, with a bullet 8.05mm in diameter). This was officially tested with good results, but led to no orders. In 1942 Geco produced a new cartridge also intended for a Vollmer carbine, the 7x45SR. This used a wider case and was far more powerful, with a muzzle velocity of 1,000 m/s. Another cartridge, measuring 7.92×33.5, was designed at Geco and attributed to an H.G.Winter, a director of the firm, but the date and the gun for which it was intended are not known. DWM designed a 7×39 cartridge in the mid-1930s, for which a Walther self-loading carbine was reportedly made. It was appreciably more powerful than the 7.92×33 Kurz. However, the interest of the Heereswaffenamt (HWA) was by then focused on Polte developments, so the DWM round also failed to progress further. RWS produced several short-cased rifle rounds in the 1930s, including an 8×45, 8×46 and 7×46, but these developments were taken no further. Rheinmetall- Borsig were involved in a number of prewar experiments concerning 7mm rounds in various case lengths, some of them very long, probably for high-velocity aircraft gun projects. One drawing has been found of a 7×36 cartridge which would obviously have been suitable for assault rifles, but there is no evidence that it was made. The design work may have been done by Polte on behalf of Rheinmetall-Borsig.

This brings us to Polte Patronenfabrik of Magdeburg, who made by far the most significant contribution. The HWA awarded them a contract, probably in 1938, for the development of a short-cased infantry cartridge. This resulted in several different designs of cartridge; 7.9×45, 7.9×30, two different 7.9×33 and a 7×45, all by 1940. In all of these, Polte retained the head and rim diameters of the standard 7.92×57 rifle/MG round, and in all but the 7mm the same caliber as well. This kept production costs to a minimum and no doubt helped to account for the success of their proposals. The final 7.92×33 design (which had less case taper than the first or “transitional” effort) was approved in December 1940, the only subsequent change being to the angle of the extractor groove, which was altered from 45 to 60 degrees in May 1942.

At the same time as the German work was reaching its conclusion, the USA was developing the .30 M1 Carbine, a light rifle chambered for a new 7.62×33 straightcased round based on the .32 Winchester Special case. This was not intended as an assault rifle but as what would now be called a “personal defence weapon” for troops who would not normally carry a rifle. However, its handiness meant that some front-line troops carried it in preference to the much bigger and heavier .30 M1 Garand rifle. The M2 version of the Carbine introduced selective fire and was close to the specification of an assault rifle, but the cartridge with its round-nosed bullet was really too small and weak to reach out to 300m (330 yards), considered the desirable effective range as some 90% of fire-fights took place within that distance. Attention now switches back to the USSR. The key date was 15th July 1943 when a meeting was held of the Technical Council of the People’s Commissariat for Armament (NKV). They had met to consider “New foreign weapons firing lowerpowered rounds” and studied examples of both the US .30 M1 Carbine supplied by the USA, and the German MKb 42 (H) in 7.92×33, which had been captured while undergoing troop trials. The meeting con tridge were important developments and decided that a new reduced-power round must be designed. Responsibility for this was handed over to the OKB-44 design bureau, which produced the first prototype of what became the 7.62mm M1943 round only a month later, with the first batch of ammunition loaded with flat-based leadcored bullets being range-tested that December. This kept the same caliber as the 7.62x54R rifle/MG round for production convenience, but adopted a new case which was slimmer than that used by the 7.92×33. A pilot series-production run began in March 1944, and before the end of the war the round was combat-tested in prototypes of the Degtyarov RPD light machine gun and Simonov SKS carbine. At that time the case had a length of 41mm, but development work continued, resulting in a boat-tailed bullet shape being adopted and the lead core being replaced with mild steel. The case neck was reduced to the final 38.7mm to keep the overall round length the same despite the longer bullets.

The story was not yet over. The old pioneer Federov, now “Doctor of Services, Professor Lt. General (Technical Engineering Branch) V.G. Federov” and serving as a senior member of the Technical Council of the NKV, continued to argue for a smaller-caliber cartridge. As a result, between 1946 and 1948 several different rounds were made and tested in 6.75mm as well as 7.62mm caliber. Despite this,the 7.62×39 M1943 cartridge was finally selected in 1948, when the AK-47 was already undergoing pre-production troop trials. One of the reasons for retaining the 7.62mm caliber was said to be that the Soviet manufacturing plants did not at that time have the equipment to mass-produce smaller-caliber ammunition and gun barrels with the necessary precision.

Some sources claim that the 7.62×39 was no more than a copy of a German Geco cartridge for the Vollmer M 35 carbine, designed in 1934/35 by the aforementioned H.G.Winter. However, as we have seen, the cartridges designed for that gun were quite different, having larger case diameters. The round often cited as the model for the M1943 is the 7.62×38.5 Mittelpatrone, but the diameter of that case is also larger than the M1943’s and, according to Dynamit Nobel (Geco’s post war parent company), it dates from 1960. There is therefore no known German cartridge of which the 7.62×39 M1943 could have been a copy. The authors of a Russian history of the M1943, who had access to Soviet archives, were unable to find reliable information as to whether the USSR had any previous knowledge of the development of intermediate rounds in the West.

In summary, it is clear that the concept of a selective-fire rifle using a purpose-designed intermediate cartridge pre-dates the Second World War, and was not invented in Germany. Several countries were involved in developing ideas along those lines, from the Great War onwards. However, the German Army were the first to put such a weapon into service, and it was this example which led to the modern military rifle. It is also clear that while the development of the Russian 7.62×39 M1943 round was inspired by the 7.92×33 Kurz, it was not a copy of any other cartridge. Finally, the true father of the assault rifle concept was Col. V.G. Federov. As well as designing the Avtomat he consistently argued, over a period of three decades covering both world wars, for the adoption of a short-cased reduced-caliber cartridge in a selective-fire rifle. If he could have seen a modern assault rifle in 6.8mm Rem or 6.5mm Grendel he would doubtless have exclaimed: “Yes! That’s what I wanted all along!”

(Anthony G Williams is editor of “The Cartridge Researcher” (the bulletin of the European Cartridge Research Association), co-editor (with Leland Ness) of “Jane’s Ammunition Handbook” and coauthor (with Maxim Popenker) of “Assault Rifle: the Development of the Modern Military Rifle and its Ammunition”. He maintains a website you can visit at www.quarry.nildram.co.uk.

With the ongoing War on Terror, weapons and their operators have become frequent topics in the media. Words like “snipers”, “silencers” and “confirmed kills” have become fodder for discussion by people well outside our industry. It will only be a matter of time before Hollywood brings their version of “fact” into the mainstream even more. For many people involved with military firearms, all this late attention is certainly interesting but those “new” buzzwords have been part of their daily existence for years. Far outside the limelight and away from the television cameras, numerous people inside the firearms community have been active participants in this new battlefront, filling the need for special requests due to this new and ever changing fighting environment. One such company is Engel Ballistic Research of Smithville Texas.

Engel Ballistic Research (EBR) is a Type 10 Firearms Manufacturer and Type 20 High Explosives Manufacturer with a focus in specialty ammunition. With a product line that starts with 9x19mm subsonic and frangible ammunition and goes all the way up to specialty 40mm loads, excellence and attention to detail remain their number one priority.

Whit Engel, President of EBR has been involved in the ammunition manufacturing business for almost 25 years. Upon completing a gunsmithing course by McBride’s of Austin in the early 1980s, Engel immediately opened his first gunshop. He continued to stay active in the custom gunsmithing field until he was asked to research specialty ammunitions, primarily for military and law enforcement applications in the early 1990s. Initially doing business as Southern Armory, Engel Ballistic Research was founded and incorporated in September of 1997, picking up the Southern Armory business and shifting the focus to the manufacture of consistent and accurate subsonic ammunition.

Recently, their research and development has included an emphasis in specialty shotgun ammunition. Three new rounds are currently being unveiled, including a new “entry” round. A big concern of operators when they make entry into populated areas is ammunition over-penetration. This new entry round allows the full energy of a 12-guage slug (1,625 ft./lbs.) to be completely expelled in the intended target with no concern of residual damage. As a demonstration of this amazing feat, there is a video you can watch on the EBR website where they shoot one of these slugs into a watermelon placed directly in front of a piece of cardboard. While the watermelon is completely destroyed and turned into a red mist, there is no damage to the cardboard other than a few small dings. The dent from the wad causes more of a dimple than anything left from the projectile.

Principals of Subsonic Ammunition

Subsonic ammunition has the immediate advantage of being much quieter than standard, supersonic ammunition. The sonic crack heard when firing supersonic ammunition can be as loud as the noise caused by the expulsion of the gasses from the firing itself. In the absence of this supersonic crack, especially when combined with the use of an effective sound suppressor, the signature, or residual noise, caused by the shooter is drastically and dramatically reduced.

The combination of a silencer and effective subsonic ammunition has obvious advantages for use in a military application such as sentry neutralization and sniper initiated assault. This combination also has several other uses that may not be as obvious. For police tactical teams, the use of suppressed firearms can include taking out a motion sensor light prior to crossing the path of an otherwise dark driveway so as not to announce a presence. They are also effective in dispatching menacing, sick or injured animals in populated areas where the sound of a gunshot would create additional problems.

Many people also like to shoot with suppressed firearms in a recreational setting just to have the convenience of the absence of unnecessary noise, and in many cases hearing protection is no longer necessary. The use of sound suppressors are extremely beneficial in teaching new people to shoot. The loud noise of a firearm is often a major source of intimidation to a new shooter and, in its absence, the shooter will typically not have to overcome a flinch and will shoot better right away. This has often been the case when dealing with women and children who have not had any experience in handling firearms in the past.

Subsonic Ammunition Performance

The threshold where ammunition will remain subsonic is generally referred to as being less than 1,050 feet per second (fps), although this is affected by temperature and atmospheric conditions. While this may be the case at the temperature of 0ºF, it can increase to as high as 1,160 fps at 100ºF. Refer to the simple table created by Dr. Phil Dater of Gemini Technologies in Boise Idaho.

The use of subsonic ammunition is immediately noticeable on the range by the lack of residual noise upon firing. It is, however, far from the only important characteristic. Consistency is a key factor to achieve the accuracy to actually have the round impact where it is intended. Without this accuracy, the operator might as well not bother to shoot at all as the desired effect of neutralizing a dangerous threat could not consistently be accomplished. Another important factor is that the round should actually stay as close to the speed of sound as possible without going over it, to insure the highest amount of terminal energy with the least amount of noise.

Even though every firearm and ammunition combination can result in different results, minor differences when dealing with subsonic ammunition are often magnified and exaggerated. A rough bore, an out of spec chamber, minor barrel blemishes and other abnormalities can create larger problems than typically apparent when using standard, supersonic ammunition. With the understanding that every gun is different, it is wise for the owner of a firearm that will be used with subsonic ammunition to spend a lot of time with it and learn exactly how it will perform well before the actual performance is a necessity.

Subsonic ammunition is going much slower than standard, supersonic ammunition. This means several things. The slower speed creates a longer time interval from the time the trigger is squeezed to the time the target is impacted. With gravity retaining the same amount of force regardless of the speed of the projectile, bullet drop is much more pronounced. The point of impact is going to be much different with subsonic ammunition and the rifle must be sighted in specifically for the ammunition you will be using. The use of a good Mil-Dot scope can take some of the guesswork away and even allow the shooter to use the same settings with both types of ammunition. In the case of the EBR rifle ammunition, it is suggested that a rifle zeroed for high-velocity ammunition at 100 yards can (in many guns) use the aiming point of 3 Mil-Dots down from the crosshair as a 50-yard zero and 4 Mil-Dots down at 100 yards. This certainly varies slightly depending on the platform used but it is a good starting point and surprisingly accurate. This was found to be the case when SAR tested the EBR .308 Thumper. After firing only one shot at 100 yards with the rifle sighted in for M118 Lake City Special ball, the new zero was recorded on the graduation scale of the BW Optic Y-TAC scope and bulls eyes were then immediately recorded with no manual scope adjustment at all. After conducting this test on the advice of Engel Ballistic Research, it makes sense to have a multi-use firearm with the assistance of a Mil-Dot or similar scope.

Range Time

EBR provided Small Arms Review with samples of their 5.56x45mm Ultra Stealth and 7.62x51mm Thumper for evaluation. The test rifle used for the 5.56x45mm ammo is a custom AR-16 type rifle built by Small Arms Research for use as a test platform. It has a free-floating, 14-inch barrel rifled 1 in 7 to stabilize heavier loads and is equipped with a TAC-ORD MS-556 stainless steel sound suppressor. The optics are an original Tasco 3×9 rubber armored DELTA Elite scope as offered by Colt. The test rifle utilized for the 7.62x51mm ammo is a DPMS LR-308 with a 20-inch stainless, free-floating bull barrel rifled 1 in 10; the recommended rifling for dual use with both subsonic and supersonic loads. The optics are a BW Optic Y-TAC 4×10 power scope. Both rifles perform very well with standard ammunition.

The outside temperature during the test was 32º F at an altitude of 165 feet above sea level. The humidity was at 52% with a barometric pressure of 29.20 Hg.

The first test was to measure muzzle velocity. In order to have some idea where the EBR ammunition stood in relation to standard Hi-Velocity ammunition, several strings with several types of ammo were fired. The results are listed in accompanying charts but, in summary, the EBR Ultra Stealth 63-grain 5.56x45mm averaged 1,042 fps, with factory high-velocity ammo averaging 2,843 fps. The EBR Thumper 180-grain 7.62x51mm averaged 968 feet per second with standard high-velocity ammo averaging 2,642 fps.

The second test was to measure accuracy. 3-round groups were fired with no barrel warming prior to the first shot. As both rifles are semiautomatic black-rifle variants, and with the outside temperature at the freezing mark, bench-rest accuracy was not expected. The results, however, were pleasantly surprising. The first round tested was the 7.62x51mm Thumper. This heavy 180-grain round-nose averaged groups of around an inch at 50 yards with some under an inch. At 100 yards the average group was closer to 2 inches with some closer to 1.5 inches. While this performance with a projectile so heavy and traveling so slow was certainly impressive, what happened with the 5.56x45mm Ultra Stealth was nothing short of amazing. The first group at 50 yards measured only .300 inches. It was immediately followed up with a group at 100 yards. This next group measured only .330 inches. That was far below the typical 1 MOA group which should be average under good conditions. Several more groups were fired with similar results and all averaged well under the 1-inch mark. A string was then fired at the 100 yard target using the 50 yard zero to observe the drop. With a 50-yard zero, the 5.56x45mm Ultra Stealth had an average drop of 4.5 inches at 100 yards. The 7.62×51 Thumper had an average drop of 6 inches at the same distance.

The third test was to measure penetration. At this point we knew the rounds were consistent and accurate, but did they have the stopping power necessary to neutralize a typical situation? It was calculated that the EBR Ultra Stealth has approximately 152 ft/lbs of energy at the muzzle with 127 ft/lbs left at 100 yards. The Thumper came in at 374 ft/lbs at the muzzle and 323 ft/lbs at 100 yards. Being so cold, using any wet medium like ballistic gel or wet paper was out of the question to help determine penetration capability, so pine boards were used. Two pine boards (1″x12″x24″) were placed back-to-back and fired on at 100 yards. Both rounds easily penetrated both of them. A stack of 12 boards placed back-to-back and taped together was then used. The 5.56x45mm Ultra Stealth had an average penetration of 5.3 inches into the pine boards with all rounds traveling halfway through the 7th board and into the 8th before coming to a stop. The 7.62×51 Thumper did a little better averaging a little over 7 inches of pine and traveling through 9 pieces, coming to rest in the 10thh piece. One round even went completely through a knot about 4 boards into the stack and traveled 5.695 inches through 7 boards and into the 8th.

Shhhhhhhhh!

Not only does the EBR Ammo perform well in the areas of accuracy and penetration, as the subsonic designation would lead you to believe, it does it with an impressive amount of stealth. Without the electronic equipment available to accurately measure sound at our test range that day, we called on Doug Melton of SRT Arms to check the numbers from some of his past testing. He found that the EBR 7.62 Thumper averages 152db from an unsuppressed platform and 123db when using the SRT Shadow suppressor. For comparison he also measured Remington 180 Grain CoreLokt ammunition and recorded 164db while unsuppressed with 133db when using the same SRT Shadow suppressor. In the case of the EBR .223 Ultra Stealth it came in at 150db unsuppressed and 113 through an SRT Hurricane suppressor. Just for reference, an average Pellet rifle at 10 pumps is in the 122db to 123db range so you may start to get the idea how quiet this ammo really is.

Summary

If you have never used quality subsonic ammunition in the past, you owe it to yourself to indulge a little. With good quality comes a reasonably heavy price so this is not for those who want to expend thousands of rounds in the course of an afternoon. If you are in a line of work where the safety of you and that of your teammates depends on your capability with a rifle, then you may want to consider the EBR line of ammunition. If your intended targets are typically the size of a golf ball (or larger) at 100 yards, than this is the ammunition for you. With a silent delivery and surgical accuracy made possible, whether you use your firearm for special operations to basic animal control tasks, there should be some serious consideration given to the procurement of this ammunition for evaluation. At the time of this writing the 7.62x51mm Thumper ammunition was priced at $450 for 500 rounds. The 5.56x45mm Ultra Stealth was only available to military with no pricing available. Complete pricing and availability of the entire EBR product line can be obtained by visiting their website.

Subsonic and Specialty Ammunition
E.B.R., Inc
Dept. SAR
544 Alum Creek Road
Smithville, Texas 78957
Website: www.ebr-inc.net
E-Mail: sales@ebr-inc.net

SRT Sound Suppressors
SRT Arms
Dept. SAR
1739 E. Broadway Rd. #1-161
Tempe, AZ 85282
Phone: (480)967-6218
Website: www.srtarms.com
E-mail: nac15@springmail.com

Panther LR-308 Rifle
DPMS, Inc
Dept. SAR
3312 12th Street SE
St. Cloud MN 56304
Phone: (320) 258-4448
Fax: (320) 258-4449
Website: www.dpmsinc.com

E-Mail: dpms@dpmsinc.com

Y-TAC Scopes
BW Optic
Dept. SAR
P.O. Box 355
Simpsonville, SC 29681
Phone: (864) 297-4137
Fax: (864) 458-8324
Website: www.bwoptic.com
E-mail: bwoptic@aol.com

PACT Timers
PACT, Inc.
Dept. SAR
P.O. Box 535025
Grand Prairie, TX 75053
Phone: (800) 722-8462
Website: www.pact.com

For the last few decades, the American 5.56x45mm and the Russian 5.45x39mm has dominated the small-caliber high-velocity (SCHV) rifle ammunition of the world. Surprisingly, in the mid-1990s, the Chinese military introduced a new indigenous 5.8x42mm SCHV assault rifle round of their own. Like the Russians, the advantages of SCHV assault rifle ammo observed in Vietnam War battle reports did not go unnoticed by the Chinese military. In March, 1971, the Chinese military logistic department commenced a small arms research meeting known as the “713 Conference” in Beijing to develop the design criteria for an indigenous SCHV assault rifle cartridge. The design criteria called for a cartridge of approximately 6mm caliber, 1,000 meters per second muzzle velocity with the goals of reducing recoil and ammo weight while improving accuracy and terminal ballistics over the Type 56/M43 7.62x39mm full-caliber intermediate round. The following “744 Conference” narrowed down the calibers under consideration to 5.8mm and 6mm caliber. The cartridge case was to be selected from seven designs with overall cartridge lengths ranging from 56mm to 59.5mm. However, the new small caliber cartridge development was mostly a “paper project” for the initial eight years. The actual initiation of the project didn’t begin until late 1978 after most of the Cultural Revolution turmoil had died down. By 1979, the 5.8mm caliber and the 42mm case were chosen as the final design for the new SCHV round. The project completed its development in 1987 and the new SCHV assault rifle cartridge was officially designated as the DBP87.

Shortly afterward, in 1988, Chinese small arms engineers started work on a long-range heavy load version of the 5.8mm cartridge to be used with the corresponding developments of a 5.8mm sniper rifle and 5.8mm lightweight General-Purpose Machine Gun (GPMG). The 5.8mm heavy load variant was created as a replacement for the obsolescent Type 53/Mosin-Nagant 7.62x54R rimmed full power cartridge. Development of the 5.8mm heavy load cartridge was completed in 1995.

The Chinese military has since developed a variety of small arms chambered for the new 5.8mm cartridge. The first was the QBZ87 assault rifle, an updated Type 81 chambered for the new 5.8mm round, was primarily used as the test bed for further 5.8mm ammo development. Next came the QBZ95 assault rifle family comprised of the QBZ95 assault rifle, QBB95 squad automatic rifle/light machine gun and the QBZ95B carbine. The QBZ95 (Qing, Bu-Qiang, Zi-Dong, 1995 Si or Infantry Rifle, Automatic, Model 1995) is a modern looking 7.1 pound (3.25kg) assault rifle in a “bullpup” configuration. The QBU88 sniper rifle, also a bullpup, became available in 1997. A lightweight belt-fed general-purpose machine gun known as the QJY88 was also developed. Both the sniper and the lightweight GPMG were specifically designed for the 5.8mm heavy load cartridge but were also backward compatible with standard 5.8mm rifle ammo. Recently another member of the 5.8mm weapon appeared as the QBZ03 assault rifle. Instead of the bullpup layout, the QBZ03 is in the “traditional” configuration with its magazine and action in front of the trigger and pistol grip like the American M16.

The 5.8mm standard rifle load has a 64 grain (4.15g) bullet with a full metal jacket made of steel and copper-washed coating. The 24.2mm long projectile has a very streamlined external shape with a sharp bullet ogive and a sizeable boat-tail. The 5.8mm bullet has a composite core that consists of a pin shaped hardened steel penetrator located near the base of the bullet, with lead as the filling material between the penetrator and the jacket as well as the tip cavity. The steel penetrator is 16mm in length, 4mm in diameter, and weighs 23 grains (1.5g).

The 5.8mm heavy load has a completely different bullet design than that of the standard rifle load. Its bullet features a slightly smaller hardened steel penetrator at the tip of the bullet. This allows the use of more lead to increase the bullet’s mass and the front penetrator acts as a ballistic tip to help in attaining a higher ballistic coefficient for the 5.8mm heavy load. The overall bullet length is a little longer with a marginally rounder bullet ogive and a deeper boat-tail to improve aerodynamics in the near-subsonic velocity range. The bullet weight is increased to 77 grains (5g).

The 5.8mm cartridge has a 42mm long case with a 1 degree taper in the body from its 10.5mm diameter base. The bottle-neck shoulder and the neck are both 4mm long. The tapered case design also helps both ammo feeding and extraction. However, the straight wall case design of the 5.56mm has better accuracy. Steel is used as the primary material for the 5.8mm case likely because of the cost. The steel case is less expensive and lighter than the brass case of the 5.56mm but it requires extra corrosion protection in the form of a brownish color lacquer coating, which causes many other problems in itself. A harder and more brittle metal, steel tends to form a less than perfect seal in the chamber and more easily develops case ruptures that could lead to weapon malfunction. To ensure high extraction reliability, the 5.8mm case has a thick rim and a good size extractor groove.

The 5.8mm cartridge uses a silvery dual-base propellant in small dish shaped pellets. The propellant load is approximately 28 grains (1.8g), which is more than the 5.56mm’s 26 grains (1.7g) and the 5.45mm’s 25 grains (1.6g). Due to cost cutting measures, the 5.8mm’s propellant is of the corrosive powder variety. In contrast, NATO and other western nations have not used corrosive propellant since the end of World War II. The 5.8mm’s corrosive powder is not particularly hot either. It only generates a 41,500 psi (284 MPa) chamber pressure which is marginally higher than that of the old single-base propellant used by the vintage 7.62x39mm and much lower than the 5.56mm M855/SS109’s 55,000 psi (380 MPa). A non-reloadable Berdan primer is used to prime the 5.8mm cartridge’s propellant.

Chinese ammo designers claim the 5.8mm cartridge outperforms both the 5.56mm and 5.45mm in ballistics and penetration. The 5.8mm has more muzzle velocity and energy, a flatter trajectory with better velocity and energy retention down range.

The 5.8mm and the 5.56mm have similar ballistic performances out to 400 meter range. After 400 meters the 5.8mm with its superior ballistic coefficient moves ahead. The 5.45mm cartridge and the 5.56mm fired from the short barrel of the M4 carbine are simply no match for 5.8mm’s ballistics. The 5.8mm heavy load and the Mk262 5.56mm cartridge have roughly the same ballistic coefficient but the 5.8mm heavy load’s higher muzzle velocity gives it a higher velocity across the board. Both of these heavier bullets lose their velocity much slower than their lighter assault rifle counterparts.

The author had the opportunity to shoot the QBZ95 with the 5.8mm standard load, achieving an average 3 MOA (minute of angle) grouping at 100 meters. With a shooter more comfortable with the bullpup layout and a proper zero, a 2.5 MOA or better accuracy should be achievable with the same 5.8mm ammo and rifle combination. From my experience in the Marine Corps, the M855/SS109 5.56mm round has an average 2 MOA or better accuracy when fired from the M16A2. The newer M16A4 with its heavier and higher quality barrel should be even more accurate. The AK-74 and 7N6 5.45mm pairing can do 2.5-3 MOA up to 300 meters but the accuracy deteriorates rapidly once past 300 meters. The 5.8mm heavy load fired from the QBU88 sniper rifle is claimed to be capable of 1.2 MOA grouping at 100 meters. In actual service, the QBU88’s accuracy is around 1.5-1.6 MOA with non-match-grade regular 5.8mm heavy load ammo. In comparison, the United States Marine Corps’ (USMC) new M16A4 SAM-R (Squad Advanced Marksman Rifle) can easily achieve sub-MOA accuracy when using the Mk262 5.56mm ammo. As a whole, the 5.8mm’s accuracy is a substantial improvement over the older 7.62x39mm cartridge. Furthermore, it beats out the 1970’s era 5.45mm and approaches the accuracy of the 5.56mm and M16A2/A4 combination.

Information on the 5.8mm ballistic test was published in the August, 2003 issue of Small Arms, a Chinese language gun enthusiast magazine from mainland China. Additional test data was available from American small arms writer David M. Fortier’s research. The results of hard and soft target tests are shown in the charts.

The first three tests demonstrated the 5.8mm indeed out-penetrates both the 5.56mm and the 5.45mm as Chinese engineers stated. However, the test was manipulated to make the 5.8mm look good. A long-barrel QBB95 squad automatic rifle was used instead of the QBZ95 assault rifle for the test. The 5.8mm rounds fired from the QBB95 have a 164 feet per second (50m/s) muzzle velocity advantage over the 5.56mm fired from the Fabrique Nationale FNC assault rifle. Nevertheless, the 5.8mm’s 100% penetration rate of the 10mm steel plate at 300 meters is very impressive.

Realistically, the penetration performance difference between the 5.56mm and the 5.8mm is much closer. Contrary to the rigged Chinese ballistic test, unbiased tests done by the USMC and US Army’s Aberdeen Proving Ground show the 5.56mm M855/SS109 fired from the M16A2 rifle with the longer 20-inch (508mm) barrel has no problem penetrating the 3.5mm A3 steel test plate at 700 meters. Even so, the 5.8mm is still a better AP round than the 5.56mm. The 5.8mm bullet’s construction resembles the APHC (Armor-Piercing Hard Core) projectile design more common to dedicated AP ammo. The 5.8mm penetrates better because it was designed like AP ammo to begin with. The only known AP performance data of the 5.8mm heavy load is that it penetrates 15mm of mild steel at 85 meters and 1.3mm of hardened steel at 1,000 meters. The 5.8mm heavy load is said to out-penetrate the old 7.62x54R at any range. Many official and unofficial Chinese sources frequently mention how important the 5.8mm’s AP performance is. One possible explanation for the Chinese obsession with AP performance is that the 5.8mm’s AP ammo-like core was specially designed for use against opponents that are wearing heavy body armor – like the US forces.

Like most AP ammo, the test showed the 5.8mm bullet left a rather unimpressive wound cavity in the ballistic soap block. The 5.8mm’s wound cavity is one-third smaller than that of the 5.56mm’s and close to one-half smaller than the 5.45mm’s cavity. The thick steel jacket and the absence of a cannelure on the 5.8mm bullet prevent any fragmentation. The more balanced weight distribution of the solid lead tip with the steel core in the back also prevents the 5.8mm bullet from tumbling early and erratically. Nevertheless, Chinese sources claim the 5.8mm has 60 percent increase in lethality over the old 7.62x39mm it replaces.

How will the 5.8mm perform in combat? According to China’s Xinhua news agency, the 5.8mm round scored its first combat kill recently in Haiti during a firefight between Chinese United Nations peacekeepers and the local rebels. The performance of the 5.8mm in urban combat operation will likely be a mixed bag. On one hand, its superb penetration will be suitable for punching through tactical obstacles like brick wall, metal doors, automobile bodies, and masonry debris. On the other hand, the 5.8mm’s unimpressive terminal ballistics may require multiple hits to neutralize an opponent. The 5.8mm will fair better in open environments like desert and mountainous terrain with its longer effective range.

The 5.8mm heavy load may look good as an extended range small caliber rifle round, but as the replacement for the full-caliber high power 7.62x54R it is a miserable failure. It is just physically impossible for the SCHV round to produce anything close to the same amount of hitting power and bullet energy as the larger 7.62mm caliber. This is probably the main reason why the Chinese military didn’t want the 5.8mm general-purpose machine gun. The claim of the 5.8mm heavy load out-penetrating the 7.62mm is true but misleading. The higher penetration comes solely from the 5.8mm’s hardened steel penetrator that the all-lead core 7.62mm lacks.

I would like to acknowledge Capt. Stephen Miles, USA, Zhang Yuxing, David M. Fortier, Anthony G. Williams, Stanly Crist and Jon Cohen for their generous help.

DBP87 Specifications

Caliber: 5.8x42mm
Overall Length: 58mm
Total Weight: 192.5 grains (12.5 grams)
Cartridge Case Length: 42mm
Cartridge Case Taper: 1 degree
Cartridge Case Base Diameter: 10.5mm
Cartridge Case Material: Steel with Lacquer Coating
Propellant: Dual-based corrosive powder t type
Propellant Weight: 28 grains (1.8 grams)
Primer: Berdan Type
Projectile Type: FMJ-BT, Composite Core
Projectile Diameter: Approximately 6mm
Projectile Length: 24.2mm
Projectile Weight: Standard Rifle Load – 64 grains (4.15 grams), Heavy Load – 77 grains (5 grams)
Penetrator Material: Hardened Steel
Penetrator Length: 16mm
Penetrator Diameter: 4mm
Penetrator Weight: 23 grains (1.5 grams)
Muzzle Velocity: Assault Rifle – 3,050 fps (930m/s),
Squad Automatic Rifle – 3,181 fps (970m/s),
Carbine – 2,581 fps (790m/s),
Sniper Rifle and GPMG – 2,936 fps (895/s)
Status: In service with all branches of People’s Liberation Army of China, People’s Armed Police of China (Paramilitary), and the Chinese Police Forces.

Since the beginning of time, human beings have had an instinctual desire to create, and then to try and improve on their creations. Firearms and ammunition are notable examples of this quest. Early firearms were loaded with loose powder from a flask or container. The projectile was then loaded separately after the powder charge. This method was slow and tedious and eventually evolved into wrapping the powder and projectile in a paper “cartridge” to be loaded simultaneously; but this system still had no contained method of ignition.

Several designs combining all of the components of what we consider to be a modern cartridge were fielded with little success until the introduction of metallic cases. With the introduction of copper cases (and later brass) in the mid 1800s, several new cartridge loading and ignition techniques were introduced, including the Pinfire cartridge, the Rimfire cartridge and finally the Centerfire cartridge that we commonly use today. Not including shotgun shells, the brass cased, boxer primed cartridge is by far the most common ammunition type available and used today in the United States.

While there have been several experimental types of ammunition developed in the years since the turn of the 20th Century, none have really caught on in the commercial or mass produced military markets. One of the more interesting and radical ammunition designs includes the Gyrojet. The Gyrojet was a rifle and pistol designed by MBA in the late 1950s that fired a small rocket. They were most commonly manufactured in 12mm but were produced in smaller quantities in several other calibers as well. Many factors led to the end of the program without ever gaining a large following in the firearms market. Ammunition was costly to manufacture primarily due to the small quantities being produced and that ultimately hindered the popularity of the retail value of the firearms themselves. The Gyrojet rifles and pistols were documented in great detail in two previous issues of Small Arms Review (Vol. 5 No. 10 and Vol. 6 No. 4).

Another radical ammunition design to be experimented with on a large scale is Caseless ammunition. In this design, just as its name would suggest, there is no case. The propellant is formed into a “case” securing the projectile and the ignition system and is almost entirely utilized upon firing with a minimal amount of combustion material remaining. The best-known caseless ammunition program to date has been the German 4.7x21mm introduced during the 1978 NATO trials. It was an entry from the combined effort of H&K and Dynamit Nobel. It has been tested in several charge shape variations, weighing in from 3.4 to 5 grains. It has been tested as ball, tracer, plastic practice and blank ammo. This ammunition was designed for use in the experimental H&K G11 assault rifle and has never been adopted in a commercial or military capacity.

Fast forward to the 1990s. NATEC Ammunition (then Armtech, Inc.) CEO, Dr. Nabil Husseini, set out to establish the effectiveness of a high pressure, polymer-cased ammunition. Enlisting the services of DuPont, a world leader in manufacturing polymers, Dr. Husseini initiated the advances to engineer a polymer that would withstand the high pressures and temperatures associated with rifle ammunition. The result is NATEC’s PCA-Spectrum ammunition.

PCA (Polymer-Cased Ammunition) from NATEC is currently available in .223 Rem. and .308 Win. with several other calibers to follow, including .50 BMG. These new cartridges utilize standard projectiles, primers and propellants. The polymer cases are injection molded and the base is cold formed from brass. At the heart of the PCA ammunition is the unique manufacturing process that includes insert injection molding of the projectile into the polymer casing. No crimping is necessary and the cartridge is self-sealing to ensure this relationship is waterproof. After loading the propellant through the open base, the primed brass base cap is attached using an interference fit.

The Polymer Cased Ammo appears to have a few advantages over traditional brass cased cartridges. The most notable difference is a significant weight reduction in the loaded ammo. In comparing the weight of the PCA against a selection of traditional brass cased 55-grain ammo, a weight reduction of almost 34% was measured. Where the standard ammo averaged 39 rounds per pound, it takes 52 rounds of NATEC PCA to reach the same weight. To someone watching his gear in ounces, a 34% reduction in ammo weight may not be nearly as attractive as a 25% increase in ammo capacity with no additional weight burden.

Another attractive advantage of the PCA is that the cases are generally color coded to the ammo type. With this ammo it is immediately clear what kind of round is in your magazine or is loose to be loaded. The entire case being colored rather than a small portion on the tip of the projectile makes identification much easier and faster. The color codes are as follows:

• Red – 55gr. Tracer
• White – 55gr. & 62gr. FMJBT*
• Blue – 55gr. HPBT
• Green – 55gr. Sierra Blitz King
• Tan – 55gr. FMJ
• Black – 69gr. Sierra Match King
• Grey – 55gr. PSP
(*The White casings also indicate military grade ammunition.)

The transfer of heat is important in several aspects of shooting. Most noticeable at the range when using traditional brass cased ammunition is the heat transferred from a newly spent casing to the skin of the shooter. That is no longer a concern with NATEC PCA. Due to the unique insulating capabilities of this special polymer, the ejected cases are only lukewarm. No more burns resulting from the shooter to your left dropping a hot “brass rainbow” on your back when you are not expecting it. This “polymer rainbow” not only looks much more colorful but is more courteous to the other shooters.

The greatest advantage regarding heat is when discussing heat transfer in relation to the chamber area. In closed bolt systems, a chamber that is too hot can cause a cook-off with traditional brass cased ammunition that is left in the chamber. The excessive ambient heat causes the powder or primer to ignite creating a dangerous situation resulting from an unintended discharge. Primarily due to the insulating properties of the special polymer casing, less heat is transferred to the chamber than with traditional brass cased ammunition. This translates into a much better RBC (Rounds Before Cook-off) for all systems using these cases. Typical of the M16 system is an RBC of 180 rounds. Using the PCA ammunition allows for a greater sustained rate of fire.

A residual function of the PCA is that it retains shape during firing and is not formed to the chamber creating the tight fit typical of metal casings. This greatly reduces friction and eases extraction without adding to chamber wear and accelerating normal temperature gains. According to the manufacturer, the US Army has tested this ammunition in chamber temperatures of over 400 degrees without the typical ill effects. While the casing did start to lose rigidity over long periods of time at these high temperatures, it did not typically cook off or disconnect from the brass base cap and was allowed to eject normally.

Range Testing

At the opposite end of the temperature spectrum, SAR tested the ammunition in a cold weather environment. With the temperature below the freezing mark during all of our range time, cold weather failures would become very obvious. The ammunition was tested in four different firearms; an M16, a STAG-15L, a Ruger Mini-14 and a Robinson Armament M96 Expeditionary Rifle. The first test was a basic function test. It fed and fired in all test guns without malfunction of any kind. Several 55-grain brass cased rounds were fired in each firearm immediately followed by an equal number of NATEC rounds. The ejection distance was noticeably shorter in each firearm with the NATEC ammunition, as was the recoil impulse. When magazines were loaded with both types of ammunition it was immediately obvious to the shooter when the change took place.

After function testing was complete, several groups were fired with each rifle, with both types of ammo at 50 yards and 100 yards with open sights. All groups were similar in size and all were within the critical areas of a standard B27 silhouette target. The point of impact was the same with both types of ammo.

Using a PACT MKIV Timer and Chronograph, muzzle velocity was measured from each firearm. The 55-grain NATEC ammo averaged a speed 2,927 feet per second (fps) from a 16-inch barrel and 2,574 fps from an 11.5-inch barrel. The brass-cased ammo used for comparison was Norinco 55-grain FMJ and averaged 3,105 fps from a 16-inch barrel and 2,709 fps from an 11.5-inch barrel. Both types of ammo were extremely close in consistency. The NATEC ammo averaged 47 fps variance from high to low and the Norinco averaged 51 fps in variance.

A common question asked about Polymer Cased Ammunition from within our shooting community is, “Does it run in full auto?” At the end of the initial testing, two 20-round magazines were loaded with PCA ammo and the M16 with the 11.5-inch barrel was chosen for a full auto test. For the first magazine, the selector was first set to “semi” and two rounds were fired. The selector was then placed on “full” and the magazine was emptied in 3 to 4-round bursts. No problems were encountered. The second magazine was then inserted and emptied in a continuous 20-round burst. Again, no malfunctions occurred.

The M16 fired noticeably slower with the PCA ammo so the PACT MKIV Timer and Chronograph was used again, this time to measure rate of fire. Several strings with both types of ammo were recorded. Each string was measured by shooting a continuous 20-round burst. With a factory buffer, the Norinco ammo averaged 1,001 rounds per minute (rpm) and the NATEC PCA averaged 877 rpm with an average difference of 124 rpm. Again, as previously noted while firing the ammo in semiautomatic, the PCA empty cartridges were ejected almost one half the distance of that of the brass cased ammo and the felt recoil was noticeably less.

After recording these initial results, both types of ammo were tested again using an MGI Rate Reducing Buffer. In this round of testing, the Norinco ammo averaged 776 rpm and the NATEC ammo averaged 733 rpm. The interesting thing I have found with the MGI Rate Reducing Buffer is that it varies in rate reduction depending on the initial rate of fire; never allowing a drop below a certain point to affect reliability. While the decrease in rate of fire on the Norinco ammo averaged an incredible 225 rpm, the reduction with the NATEC ammo, which was initially considerably slower, was only 144 rpm. The initial rate of fire that was once separated by 124 rpm only averaged a difference of 43 rpm with the felt recoil and muzzle rise greatly reduced with both. No malfunctions of any kind were recorded while shooting in full auto, regardless of length of burst.While there were no failures to feed or extract during this testing, it was noted that after sitting in sub-freezing temperatures for several hours, the Robinson M96 started to experience failure to eject problems with the NATEC ammo. It is suspected that the culprit was the heavy lubricant previously used in the M96 and, due to the extreme cold weather, the action was operating much slower than usual and that, combined with the lighter residual energy in the ammo, prevented it from operating correctly.

No Fluted Chambers!

NATEC PCA has a warning NOT to use their ammunition in any fluted chamber. This is not a frivolous warning. It has meaning and should be strictly adhered to. But we did not know why or what would happen if we do. It was assumed that it would cause extraction problems. A decision was made, for the greater good of this article and the curiosity of everyone who ever wondered, to try it in a fluted chambered gun to see exactly what the problem would be. A Vector Arms V53 was chosen as the test weapon and a round was loaded into it and fired. Big mistake! The bolt came back and the brass base cap was seen flying through the air. Upon inspection, a beautifully fire-formed and now deeply fluted, baseless, polymer case could be seen in the chamber. On initial thought, it was nothing a broken shell extractor shouldn’t be able to remedy. But that was not the end of the story. The case, badly mangled, was finally removed and the chamber was cleaned thoroughly. The barrel was inspected, a fresh magazine of standard brass cased 5.56x45mm FMJ ammo inserted and the bolt was slammed home. Ca-chunk. The round stopped short and the bolt was far from battery. There was something in the chamber we could not see that was preventing the round from seating. The chamber needed to be cast several times with Cerrosafe, a metal with a low melting temperature that is frequently used for chamber castings by gunsmiths. Each casting would retrieve a little of the polymer that had become embedded into the flutes and eventually all was removed. Please learn from this hands-on, goofball testing method and relay it to all your friends when they ask, “What does it do if you fire it in a fluted chamber?” Now you know – heed the warning!

Summary

The ammo ran perfectly in every normal circumstance it was tested in and performed even in sub freezing temperatures. It performed well in both semiautomatic and full automatic modes of fire. The groups were almost identical when compared to traditional brass-cased ammo of the same weight. The lighter overall weight of the loaded ammo is a huge advantage in the opinion of the author, and has the potential to provide more safety to our men and women in uniform if accepted by the US Military. (Testing is currently underway.) The color-coded polymer casings make round identification fast and easy under any conditions. The manufacturer’s claims about the casings not being hot when ejected were right on the money as well. They could be immediately picked up without fear of being burned and they were barely warm at best.

There is also a “cool factor” that will be recognized by many recreational shooters and that has to count for something. The reaction from people not familiar with it is always one of curiosity and amazement. I’ll keep shooting it and keep watching the surprised faces of the shooters next to me picking up “brass” and wondering out loud what they just stumbled across. At an attractive price with an increasing availability, I think NATEC Polymer Cased Ammo will soon be showing up on firing lines nation wide. After more testing, readers can expect to see more information from the military community as well.

Sources

Polymer Cased Ammo
NATEC, Inc
Dept. SAR
11 Arkansas Street
Plattsburgh, NY 12903
Ph: (518) 324-5625
Fax: (518) 324-5627
www.natec-us.com

Rate Reducing M16 Buffers
MGI Military
Dept. SAR
102 Cottage Street
Bangor, Maine 04401
Ph: (207) 945-5441
www.mgi-military.com

PACT Timers
PACT INC.
Dept. SAR
P.O. Box 535025
Grand Prairie, TX 75053
Ph: (800) 722-8462
www.PACT.com

High Explosive

The most common HE rounds were the M406 and M433 . The 406 contained a spherical bomblet with a lethal radius of 5 meters. The 433 contains a shaped charge of RDX, with a lethal radius of 5 meters but a penetration capability of up to 2 inches of armor.

Pyrotechnic Rounds

Pyrotechnic rounds were used for signaling and illuminating.

The cluster type was made in white, green and red. It contained 5 stars that burst at 550 feet and burned for 7 to 11 seconds.

The parachute star type came in white, green, red, and orange. Its single candle ignited at 550 feet and burned for 40 seconds.

Smoke Rounds

These rounds were typically used for spotting targets, locations and conditions of landing zones.

Ground marker smoke was produced in red, green, yellow, and violet. These had a range out to 400 yards and ignited on impact with a burn time of 20 to 40 seconds depending on type.

Canopy smoke rounds were used when jungle cover would hide a normal ground burn. These were fired up through the trees to burst above them.

Gas and Shot

Two additional rounds that saw limited tactual use were the M651 CS gas and the XM576E1 shot (designated multiple projectile)

The CS gas had a range of 400 meters, and burn time of 25 seconds. It did not arm itself until it reached 10 to 30 meters.

The XM576E1 shot round contained 20 buckshot sizes pellets in a plastic sabot. Its maximum range was 50 yards and effective range of 35 yards.