AR Sponsor
Posted: 10/5/2005 8:33:45 PM EDT
|
Why is Lake City producing XM193? I thought the military only used M855. So why do they even bother with 193? I am glad that they do, but don't know why they do. |
| The way I understand it is the M16 A1 has a 1/12 twist and the M193 was designed for it. The M16 A2 has a 1/7 twist and needs a heaver bullet. With almost all the A1s replaced by A2s the need for the M193 is drying up. There are some in guard units with A1s and I am sure many A1s all over the world. |
|
So I guess that means we are supplying ammo to other countries? I am just trying to get a handle on why XM193 is so scarce. Is it because the military is actually using an abundance of it. Or is it just because it's not being produced in order to make it possible to produce more M855? |
|
|
XM193 is an overrun not seconds or rejects. Although likely it is not quality controlled post-production the way that X193 is. XM855PD does appear to be seconds. XM193 is also in short supply probably not because of increased M193 use but because resources previously devoted to XM193 production have been shifted to M855 production. A goverment study previously posted here stated that primer production was the first limiting factor on LC production. |
M193 is the full cartridge. I think your thinking of SS109 being the bullet in M855. Its a little confusing at first but just having a SS109 bullet does not make a completed cartridge a M855. The SS109 is just one component. |
|
Once again: M193 = Grade 1 ammo = passes all QC = contractually required to be delivered exclusively to the government, who cannot surplus it XM193 = Grade 2 ammo = minor issues cause it to fail QC = can be sold commercially by the contractor XM193PD = Grade 3 ammo = more serious QC issues = can also be sold commercially You can replace "193" with "855" and the same thing applies. M193 ammo is still being manufactured because there are STILL many 1:12-twist weapons used by the National Guard, Air Force Reserve, and foreign allies, though the former two are working to update the remaining inventory to the current 1:7 standard. M193 works JUST FINE from 1:7 barrels, but M855 does NOT work well from 1:12 barrels, as the slow twist cannot stabilize the longer bullet past about 90 yards. Thus, M855 is to be used in 1:12 barrels only in a COMBAT EMERGENCY situation, per the US Army field manual. Since 1997, US ammo contractors have been legally and contractually required to submit 100% of Grade 1 ammo to the US government, under a Klinton EO relating to his signing of the UN Small Arms Nonproliferation Treaty. Ammo that does not pass QC, and is therefore not suitable for military use, can be sold on the commercial market. -Troy |
ALL HAIL TROY!! 
|
Only ammo that is actually delivered to the military is restricted. Only Grade 1 ammo is (supposed to be) delivered to the military, and under their contract, 100% of Grade 1 ammo is to be delivered to the military. Once accepted by the military, it cannot be surplussed for civilian sales, and must be demilitarized before it can be sold on the civilian market. Demil'ing means that at least one of the components is returned to the military, and this is almost always the primer, though there is nothing particularly special about the primer other than its intentionally reduced sensitivity to prevent slamfires. Ammo that doesn't meet military specs isn't accepted, and the ammo manufacturer can do what they like with it. That's where XM193, XM855, and Q3131 comes from. Q3131A (IMI manufactured) is presumably Grade 1 ammo, as they aren't under the same restrictions. As a general rule, the military doesn't surplus GOOD (i.e., Grade 1) ammo, unless the load or caliber is obsolete. Surplussed ammo has virtually always been ammo that, in some way, has been found to be less than perfect. Yes, there has been an occasional exception, where, say, a pallet of ammo was sold to a police department, who later traded it in to their ammo vendor for other ammo, but we're talking very small numbers here. But don't listen to me. Markm is obviously the expert; just ask him.  -Troy |
And Troy has already posted that information before. But I'm not sure where. Oh, here-->www.ammo-oracle.com. 
|
And yet how many lots were released w/o the required sealants? If it didn't have the sealants they were not 'accepted' by the military, thus making them 'seconds' or 'rejects' by most anyone's definition. Still fine for shooting, but it wasn't 1st line ammo. |
AR Sponsor