View Full Version : Ammo lot number question (Federal, Winchester, American Eagle)
My department has issued a mixture of 500 rounds for an upcoming rifle class.
Most of the 500 rounds are Winchester 5.56 (white box, 55gr FMJ,
"lot TD 11," Q3131A, '02 production) and American Eagle (red box .223, 55gr FMJ BT, AE223, Lake City '04 production).
I was also given 40 rounds of Federal XM193 (5.56, brown carboard boxes containing 20 rounds in each box, "lot 20," Lake City '02 production).
Has anyone heard about any problems with the XM193 "lot 20" or Winchester "lot TD 11" rounds?
I recently shot Federal XM193 (lot numbers 170 and 149) at another training class without any issues. I'm simply curious about the lot numbers - I still plan on shooting it (it's free ammo, don't have to tell me twice! LOL).
This was surplus ammo kept in a large safe at my department. The ammo appears to be anywhere from 4 to 6 years old. Thoughts, questions, comments? Thx!
Pictures below :D
Boxes:
Winchester:
American Eagle:
Federal XM 193, lot# 20
Winchester Q3131A, lot # TD 11
American Eagle "AE223"
The Q3131A as a very good reputation. It's made in Israel for Winchester and I have never heard of any problems ever with this ammo. The Q3131 however, which is made by Winchester, there were some problems I believe back in 90 or 91. I have a bunch of the Q3131A but with a different lot #.
if it's been kept cool and dry , I would say -It' good to go.
Can't comment on the XM193 or the AE.
The Q3131A as a very good reputation. It's made in Israel for Winchester and I have never heard of any problems ever with this ammo.
There's one prominent loud mouth who says Q3131a is low quality/problematic. But that contradicts every other account I've ever heard or read on the ammo. :confused: My guess is that this person is mixing it up with Q3131, the American made stuff that is famous for excessive pressure.
I have 500 or 1000 rounds of it... I keep forgetting to take a couple of boxes out to try.
All of those ammos are top quality for training purposes. I'd shoot any of them in my guns.
FWIW - they all went downrange just fine at training. :D
Cool!
Send me the brass for independent verification of these claims!
Send me the unfired cartridges for independent testing. :p
Seriously, any of us non-LEO/Industry Professionals would be glad to have those flavors for practice/match/zombie attacks. Some guys have all the luck.
American Eagle is Federal's bottom of the barrel stuff..........reliability is spotty.
XM193, is Federal's Military reject stuff............that's what the X stands for. It's generally good stuff, but is rejected based on the Military's stringent requirements. But I've not had or heard of a problem with it.
American Eagle is Federal's bottom of the barrel stuff..........reliability is spotty.
A gazzillion rounds of this stuff have been shot up by AR owners. I've never experienced or heard/read of any quality issues with AE. :confused:
XM193, is Federal's Military reject stuff............that's what the X stands for. It's generally good stuff, but is rejected based on the Military's stringent requirements. But I've not had or heard of a problem with it.
Since when does the military field M193 with NATO head stamped brass? I would guess that NON-NATO ammo couldn't be loaded in NATO crossed brass for military use. I could be wrong, but if we agree on that point, then the premiss that the military rejected ammo that they never would have taken in the first place it bunk.
There's been a lot of theories on the origin of XM193... none of which are confirmed. The best info was posted on thegunzone.com, but ATK wouldn't give the specifics. Military requirements can often be quite silly from what I've read.
I wonder if it isn't because of the light primer crimp. A few reloaders, including myself, have noticed what a light primer crimp XM193 brass has on it. In other words, the primed brass was rejected for loading into military ammo. Then ATK could have taken the functional primed brass and loaded it with M193 projectiles for commercial sales. Just another theory.
I've had many conversations with Ernest Durham, one of the engineers for the ammo side of things at ATK, the maker of Federal, CCI, and Speer ammo, this info. comes from him.
I have experienced and have heard of spotty performance from Am. Eagle ammo, as well as Durham telling me it's bottom of the barrel stuff. When it comes from the horses mouth, I tend to believe it.
As for the XM193 stuff, it could be rejected for the smallest of reasons, the few test samples from the lot didn't make the water proof standard, bad primers etc. so the whole lot gets rejected. But it's more than good to go for the rest of us.
I've had many conversations with Ernest Durham, one of the engineers for the ammo side of things at ATK, the maker of Federal, CCI, and Speer ammo, this info. comes from him.
I have experienced and have heard of spotty performance from Am. Eagle ammo, as well as Durham telling me it's bottom of the barrel stuff. When it comes from the horses mouth, I tend to believe it.
I'd love to pick his brain on a few topics. I agree that the AE is the baseline economy round... but I've just never heard anything negative about it.
As for the XM193 stuff, it could be rejected for the smallest of reasons, the few test samples from the lot didn't make the water proof standard, bad primers etc. so the whole lot gets rejected. But it's more than good to go for the rest of us.
I agree completely. My guess would be that the reasons for kicking out a lot or lots of primed brass would be of no significant concern for 99% of us. But people get a little nutty with the assumtions when they hear "mil rejects".
As Durham told me, the rejected stuff is for very nit-picky things.........I've never had a problem with it.
The Am eagle stuff, has reject brass from their other ammo lines, but still within spec to be used.
The Am eagle stuff, has reject brass from their other ammo lines, but still within spec to be used.
I'd love to learn what the difference in the LC brass is for AE and XM193. They're both LC, but they're worlds apart in characteristics... even with the same headstamp year.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.