View Full Version : My review of Wolf Gold. Edit: Post 83 batch testing pics
Eurodriver
06-08-19, 17:10
I've sworn by Wolf Gold for almost 5 years. It's been the exclusive round for SBRs at Swamp De Eurodriver for NV, long range, plinking, training, etc.
Recently, I got a new batch. I mix my ammo up so I cant tell lots without taking the actual boxes apart, but it coincided with a new BCM 16". I thought the rifle was broken, the groups were about 15" at 100 yards. It was terrible. But then I loaded a new mag (with a different box) and it shot acceptably. About 3" at 100 yards.
I made this thread a few weeks ago.
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?214973-All-anyone-needs-is-a-6920-(and-one-of-these)
https://i.imgur.com/YSyrAWX.jpg
In it I posted a 5 round group, and a video of me shooting steel at 200 & 300 yards.
Here it is again for post-whoring effect:
https://youtu.be/7YatbNN2ru8
As you can see, it shot pretty well. Afterward, I took it out to 600y and my buddy and I were shooting a full size steel silhouette with almost 100% reliability. Again, wolf gold.
Then, last weekend I brought that same rifle out with more wolf gold to do velocity testing with my Magnetospeed (will get the data up tonight. It's on the memory card still)
I decided to shoot at 300y, and out of 10 rounds could not hit the steel once. I wasn't barely missing. I was 2 feet off. It was bad. So I dragged my shit over to 100 and shot these groups. The pic is kind of hard to follow, as not all of those rounds are one shooter (I had 2 other known shooters give it a shot) and some of the rounds at target 6 actually were in the top right of the paper. Still, you can tell it isn't very pretty.
https://i.imgur.com/ZqgwYRC.jpg
I thought there was something wrong with the gun or optic. Then I thought back to this thread:
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?175095-Wolf-Gold-keyholing-in-Colt-M4/page2
So I went back to the range today with my Precision Rifle Handloads (https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?179387-600-yard-steel-shooting-with-5-56-9-2-2017-Sub-MOA-1000-(lol-but-for-real)) and shot 2 five round groups (it was pouring and the RSOs were rushing me to get done so they could close the range for lightning. I have no doubt these groups would shrink (they are 1.3 & 1.25 respectively) if I didn't shoot all 10 rounds in less than 30 seconds in a howling storm. Even still, 1.25" at 100 yards is a marked improvement from the 8"-10" nonsense I was getting with Wolf Gold. For what its worth, I am not comparing handloads to wolf gold. I just wanted to shoot a proven load to verify that there was nothing wrong with the rifle.
https://i.imgur.com/gmloGZp.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/5HpWosk.jpg
My conclusion is as follows: Wolf Gold is shit. I will never buy it again, and the ammo I have on hand will be used solely for close range drills and plinking. Obviously there are batches out there that are well made, but if I can't trust it I won't use it. It makes no sense to have a $6,000 firearm and shoot ammo through it that may or may not fail you.
I am very curious if anyone else has experienced similar situations. I will from now on only be buying IMI or LC stamped 55gr ammo.
My experience mirrors your previous. It's ok for the price. Nothing amazing but solid training ammo. However, I have a stash of it and was recently thinking about buying some more. I'll probably still buy another case at least..... maybe you got a bad batch? Either way, if I do, if you're interested I can send a few boxes to see if you see any difference.
The biggest lesson here is to never, ever. ever doubt or question LMT again.
mfw I told you so
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/f4/c8/3e/f4c83eec41a6b3a8395cde7ec9dc2a1e.jpg
:p
Eurodriver
06-08-19, 19:43
" I took it out to 600y and my buddy and I were shooting a full size steel silhouette with almost 100% reliability. Again, wolf gold."
You had good results on a torso target at 600 yards and you are whining about what is the cheapest 5.56 brass cased ammo available?
I don't understand.
I’ve been having issues with my image hosting site lately. Perhaps it didn’t come through on your end. Did you see the picture of the 100yd target from a different batch of the 600yd ammo that was used? It is showing up my on screen.
What about the paragraph about 15” groups at 100 yards with a 16” BCM? Or where I said it’s been my go-to ammo for 5 years?
The implied point of the OP is that Wolf’s QC must have some issues. It’s treated me well for years but looking back I’ve had some puzzling experiences and I have finally isolated one variable - Wolf Gold.
I’ll buy the IMI for $0.008 per round shipped more and avoid such headaches.
I shoot a lot of WG, but use it 100 yds and in.
It’s reliable range ammo that’s good for drills IME.
I’ve been having issues with my image hosting site lately. Perhaps it didn’t come through on your end. Did you see the picture of the 100yd target from a different batch of the 600yd ammo that was used? It is showing up my on screen.
What about the paragraph about 15” groups at 100 yards with a 16” BCM? Or where I said it’s been my go-to ammo for 5 years?
The implied point of the OP is that Wolf’s QC must have some issues. It’s treated me well for years but looking back I’ve had some puzzling experiences and I have finally isolated one variable - Wolf Gold.
I’ll buy the IMI for $0.008 per round shipped more and avoid such headaches.
That may not be the ammo.
RobertTheTexan
06-08-19, 20:10
" I took it out to 600y and my buddy and I were shooting a full size steel silhouette with almost 100% reliability. Again, wolf gold."
You had good results on a torso target at 600 yards and you are whining about what is the cheapest 5.56 brass cased ammo available?
I don't understand.
Well in spite of you must being from Texas - with the whole God’s country thing - I think it very possible the ammo the OP had success with was a different batch than ammo that he had issues with. That’s not a hard stretch to get a bad batch. So if that’s the case, I don’t get the point of plinking with any ammo you can’t get consistent hits with. Makes training rather pointless, I don’t care how cheap the ammo is.
I am a Federal/AE ammo guy and have been shooting their XM193 exclusively for years and have been extremely happy with it. Recently, though, I picked up a case of Hornady Frontier 5.56 55 grain HP and have gone through 300 rounds and it has been reliable and accurate, though it seems a little hotter than the Federal.
sidewaysil80
06-08-19, 22:09
I use it my plinking and “bay stages” match ammo. 62gr magtech is for midrange stages and shtf.
Eurodriver
06-08-19, 22:23
I use it my plinking and “bay stages” match ammo. 62gr magtech is for midrange stages and shtf.
I may do this as well going forward. It is just too inconsistent. Unfortunate because when it works it really really works.
The biggest lesson here is to never, ever. ever doubt or question LMT again.
mfw I told you so
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/f4/c8/3e/f4c83eec41a6b3a8395cde7ec9dc2a1e.jpg
:p
Amen. I feel stupid. But I am getting my LMT back fosho.
Did you pull any of the suspect ammo down? Measure the bullets or powder charges? I've shot about 4 or 5 cases of the stuff out of 3 rifles and have had zero probs. I find it very weird that you got such large groups yet none look like they keyholed.
Did you pull any of the suspect ammo down? Measure the bullets or powder charges?
Or can you tell us the lot # of the stuff that was shit?
I stockpiled four cases of Wolf Gold (in advance of California's ban on online sales), because I'd had good experiences with it.
(Good for the price: It's reliable and shoots 3-4" groups at 100yds.)
Eurodriver
06-09-19, 06:22
Did you pull any of the suspect ammo down? Measure the bullets or powder charges? I've shot about 4 or 5 cases of the stuff out of 3 rifles and have had zero probs. I find it very weird that you got such large groups yet none look like they keyholed.
I did pull the bullets down but didn’t measure anything. Just looked for deformities. Didn’t see anything unusual.
The velocities I was getting with my Magnetospeed were
Avg: 2889
Max: 2927
Min: 2861
SD: 21.6
Nothing unusual there, and this was a “bad” batch that shot the 100yd target in the picture.
BuzzinSATX
06-09-19, 07:39
Any commercially manufactured ammo batch can suck, from any manufacturer. Obviously, it happens less with some, and is less common these days.
Did you consider contacting the company for a refund or some type of action to compensate you? That may ask you to send it back for replacement. Can’t hurt...
Take care,
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
So, ammo you've used for years, doesn't shoot for shit out of a (one) brand new upper, and your conclusion is "Wolf Gold is shit"?:blink: :sarcastic:
Sounds like effed up bullets. Horrible jackets or something. I wouldn't run that stuff through a suppressor, Rico Suave!
RobertTheTexan
06-09-19, 12:15
I'm having a hard time understanding what the OP would want to take away from this thread.
Why is it so hard? If anything lacks understanding it me trying to figure out why you’ve posted the same question twice and still haven’t figured it out.
What does the OP hope to get out of the discussion?
He wants to know if other shooters have experienced similar issues with Wolf Gold, which appears to be getting a bad batch of ammo that he can’t hit the broadside of a barn with.
Are you offended by his criticism of Wolf Gold?
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190609/d5029631c4540a519b47d19097e5f397.jpg
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'm having a hard time understanding what the OP would want to take away from this thread.
Shoot much?
Eurodriver
06-09-19, 12:29
So, ammo you've used for years, doesn't shoot for shit out of a (one) brand new upper, and your conclusion is "Wolf Gold is shit"?:blink: :sarcastic:
Did you see the thread I posted about Colt keyholing with Wolf Gold? Did you pick up that I shot a BCM 16" and my 12.5" and they both shot the same batch poorly? I've made other threads that I didn't allude to in the OP with other known-brand uppers shooting poorly (namely, LMT. Firefly posted about it in the 2nd reply) and they all have one variable in common - Wolf Gold.
How many shares of Wolf do you and Killick own? :sarcastic:
I've sworn by Wolf Gold for almost 5 years. It's been the exclusive round for SBRs at Swamp De Eurodriver for NV, long range, plinking, training, etc.
Recently, I got a new batch. I mix my ammo up so I cant tell lots without taking the actual boxes apart, but it coincided with a new BCM 16". I thought the rifle was broken, the groups were about 15" at 100 yards. It was terrible. But then I loaded a new mag (with a different box) and it shot acceptably. About 3" at 100 yards.
I made this thread a few weeks ago.
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?214973-All-anyone-needs-is-a-6920-(and-one-of-these)
https://i.imgur.com/YSyrAWX.jpg
In it I posted a 5 round group, and a video of me shooting steel at 200 & 300 yards.
Here it is again for post-whoring effect:
https://youtu.be/7YatbNN2ru8
As you can see, it shot pretty well. Afterward, I took it out to 600y and my buddy and I were shooting a full size steel silhouette with almost 100% reliability. Again, wolf gold.
Then, last weekend I brought that same rifle out with more wolf gold to do velocity testing with my Magnetospeed (will get the data up tonight. It's on the memory card still)
I decided to shoot at 300y, and out of 10 rounds could not hit the steel once. I wasn't barely missing. I was 2 feet off. It was bad. So I dragged my shit over to 100 and shot these groups. The pic is kind of hard to follow, as not all of those rounds are one shooter (I had 2 other known shooters give it a shot) and some of the rounds at target 6 actually were in the top right of the paper. Still, you can tell it isn't very pretty.
https://i.imgur.com/ZqgwYRC.jpg
I thought there was something wrong with the gun or optic. Then I thought back to this thread:
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?175095-Wolf-Gold-keyholing-in-Colt-M4/page2
So I went back to the range today with my Precision Rifle Handloads (https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?179387-600-yard-steel-shooting-with-5-56-9-2-2017-Sub-MOA-1000-(lol-but-for-real)) and shot 2 five round groups (it was pouring and the RSOs were rushing me to get done so they could close the range for lightning. I have no doubt these groups would shrink (they are 1.3 & 1.25 respectively) if I didn't shoot all 10 rounds in less than 30 seconds in a howling storm. Even still, 1.25" at 100 yards is a marked improvement from the 8"-10" nonsense I was getting with Wolf Gold. For what its worth, I am not comparing handloads to wolf gold. I just wanted to shoot a proven load to verify that there was nothing wrong with the rifle.
https://i.imgur.com/gmloGZp.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/5HpWosk.jpg
My conclusion is as follows: Wolf Gold is shit. I will never buy it again, and the ammo I have on hand will be used solely for close range drills and plinking. Obviously there are batches out there that are well made, but if I can't trust it I won't use it. It makes no sense to have a $6,000 firearm and shoot ammo through it that may or may not fail you.
I am very curious if anyone else has experienced similar situations. I will from now on only be buying IMI or LC stamped 55gr ammo.
I have had crazy variability, but it is usually the mount / scope issues. I shot some 308 surplus that shot 6-8 inch groups with no idea the cause. I agree with no mas' WG, "burn me once your fault, burn me twice my fault".
PB
Maybe I missed it, but this has been verified across multiple cases, if not lot numbers? Or could this all be from the same 1k round case?
ETA - never mind, I just found the linked post from 2015.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I had some similar results from early TAP. They were visibly non-concentric. I also had more stoppages with them, but admittedly, this was with a Bushy that already had a lot of stoppages.
So, if I understand correctly, those of us who have shot a metric shit ton of WOLF Gold are somehow supposed to be persuaded otherwise by the OP's comments, which do not take into account: his shooting skills, his gear, etc. etc. etc.
I'm out. I'm not playing this game.
This doesn’t carry much oomph when you’re talking about snap shooting with vis lasers
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I just tried Wolf Gold for the first time back in like February or March, since then I've gone through about 1200 rounds of it. I've found the accuracy to be pretty much comparable to Federal XM193, which makes sense, since it allegedly loaded to M193 specs, although I can actually perceive a difference in felt recoil between the two rounds when shooting one right after the other, and the Federal definitely seems to be hotter.
I'll keep buying it for range ammo.
Its training ammo. I have shot at least 10k of it without issue but im not using it to shoot groups other than playing around. Its ammo for classes. If I am looking for accuracy I will uses the ammo that best suits the rifle. Its generally 2-3 moa ammo unless its out of my Larue which likes the stuff.
It's also very likely that your rifle hates that ammo.
Wolf Gold is just fine. One guy, One problem. No big deal.
I hope you're right that's it's no big deal (I use a lot of WG), but it is a bit troubling. If what happened to ED happened to me I wouldn't be too happy either. What I really would like to know though is why this happened. Maybe I don't get to know that.
"but it is a bit troubling."
Why? One person alleges he had ammo problems with one box of it, out of a case of it, out of ... who knows how many hundreds of thousands of rounds received from the plant in Taiwan where it is made? It's one guy. One opinion. Unsubstantiated fact. Blaming the ammo...why is this of any concern? Sorry, I've shot a metric shit ton of the stuff, never an issue. It's cheap brass cased commercially produced ammo. "Good enough" ... who would think it is good enough for 600 yards groups?
Because I've been on this board for a while, and you get a feel for where people are coming from. I don't think ED is lying that's all. And I think at minimum he's a pretty fair shot.
I don't plan on stopping the use of WG either, but like I said I would like to know why this happened. Are we only here to reject out hand someone's experience or to try to get to the bottom of the issue? You seem to be taking this personally.
Nobody is saying anyone is lying. Not me. Is it an ammo problem? I don't know. I don't care.
Just one guy. One incident.
Nothing to cause any alarm.
I didn't think you thought he was lying. It's just me reflecting on the nature of his original posts.
Eurodriver
06-09-19, 18:53
"but it is a bit troubling."
Why? One person alleges he had ammo problems with one box of it, out of a case of it, out of ... who knows how many hundreds of thousands of rounds received from the plant in Taiwan where it is made? It's one guy. One opinion. Unsubstantiated fact. Blaming the ammo...why is this of any concern? Sorry, I've shot a metric shit ton of the stuff, never an issue. It's cheap brass cased commercially produced ammo. "Good enough" ... who would think it is good enough for 600 yards groups?
Trolling is fun.
Don’t you shoot with visible lasers? I wouldn’t have noticed the accuracy problem with my Wolf Gold if I was into such elite shooting like that either. Even with my several problem cases of ammo over several years with several rifles with several shooters - all in the OP but you continue to continue to harp on things that aren’t true, like that it was only with one rifle or one box or because it grouped well at 600 yards every single round made by them is automatically quality stuff.
Thanks for bringing some entertainment to the thread. Are you really in TX? I can meet you near DFW/Waco in a few weeks and give you every round I have for $0.265/ea.
I just tried Wolf Gold for the first time back in like February or March, since then I've gone through about 1200 rounds of it. I've found the accuracy to be pretty much comparable to Federal XM193, which makes sense, since it allegedly loaded to M193 specs, although I can actually perceive a difference in felt recoil between the two rounds when shooting one right after the other, and the Federal definitely seems to be hotter.
I'll keep buying it for range ammo.
If Federal feels hotter, then how could wolf be loaded to 193 specs? In fact, Wolf Gold is .223 ammunition, and by definition isn’t M193 or loaded to M193 specs as M193 is a 5.56 round that exceeds SAMI pressure for .223 Remington. They couldn’t legally label it .223 if it were loaded to M193 specs.
They both features a 55 gr bullet and can be fired out of a 5.56 rifle. That’s about as far as they go as to being “the same”.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If Federal feels hotter, then how could wolf be loaded to 193 specs? In fact, Wolf Gold is .223 ammunition, and by definition isn’t M193 or loaded to M193 specs as M193 is a 5.56 round that exceeds SAMI pressure for .223 Remington. They couldn’t legally label it .223 if it were loaded to M193 specs.
They both features a 55 gr bullet and can be fired out of a 5.56 rifle. That’s about as far as they go as to being “the same”.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Actually, Federal doesn't claim that XM-193 is really M-193. Very few companies claim true M-193 specs. Maybe IMI and CBC, but I haven't kept up with it. WG doesn't claim M-193 specs either, but it comes close in practice. It seems to have a close to the right pressure and curve, it has sealed bullets and primers, it 55 gr, and I chrono'd it at 3215 at about 10 ft from the muzzle out of a 20".
Actually, Federal doesn't claim that XM-193 is really M-193. Very few companies claim true M-193 specs. Maybe IMI and CBC, but I haven't kept up with it. WG doesn't claim M-193 specs either, but it comes close in practice. It seems to have a close to the right pressure and curve, it has sealed bullets and primers, it 55 gr, and I chrono'd it at 3215 at about 10 ft from the muzzle out of a 20".
Actually, according to my friend who is an engineer at the Lake City plant, the only difference between M193 and XM193 is the packaging. “X” means it’s sold to the public. “M” means it was going to government. They come off the same line are aren’t designated until they are packaged.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What I said was is that Federal/ATK doesn't "claim" that it makes the spec. There have been threads about what the X means, and no doubt your engineer is hopefully in the know, but...if they are coming off the same line, is the military getting the final tumbling whereas the civies aren't. That's one difference, maybe small, but a difference. Are there other minor differences...I don't know.
Put yourself in my shoes...if a guy comes up to me and says...is XM-193 really M-193, am I going to say a guy on M4C knows a Federal engineer who said that it is or am I going to say...Federal isn't saying, but it's decent ammo, try it for yourself.
I would also point out that the Taiwanese may or may not be loading to 193 specs, probably not because it chrono's ever so slightly low. They may have their own specs. I know, and of course you don't have to believe me, that I have shot genuine M-193 at 3300 fps out of a 20"...that's seems out of spec.
According to him, no other QC measures. Same line. It’s a legal thing is what he told me...if a NATO government doesn’t by that actual round it’s not M193. Take it for what you will. Or better yet, chronic some side by side. Measure powder, throw them on a runout gauge. Doesn’t really matter to me.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
According to him, no other QC measures. Same line. It’s a legal thing is what he told me...if a NATO government doesn’t by that actual round it’s not M193. Take it for what you will. Or better yet, chronic some side by side. Measure powder, throw them on a runout gauge. Doesn’t really matter to me.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I have chrono'd XM-193 and it was about 3170 out of a 20", but that was some time ago, like years. I generally won't use it because it looks like crap. I like my stuff to look like somebody cared. I do use other Federal ammo though, SG shells. 22's and HST 9mm.
Did a little research...it looks like no branch of the military uses M-193 anymore (could be wrong though). So that means that there is no military vs. civy...it's all civy.
RobertTheTexan
06-09-19, 21:56
Trolling is fun.
Don’t you shoot with visible lasers? I wouldn’t have noticed the accuracy problem with my Wolf Gold if I was into such elite shooting like that either. Even with my several problem cases of ammo over several years with several rifles with several shooters - all in the OP but you continue to continue to harp on things that aren’t true, like that it was only with one rifle or one box or because it grouped well at 600 yards every single round made by them is automatically quality stuff.
Thanks for bringing some entertainment to the thread. Are you really in TX? I can meet you near DFW/Waco in a few weeks and give you every round I have for $0.265/ea.
Oh hell no, he ain’t from Texas. That was me being a smartass about his God’s Country location because we all should know that there is ONLY ONE state in the Union (God rest her soul) That has had the privileged status of bring a recognized country - a Nation. That’s with a big ‘N’. I haven’t met many Texans who would read your post (which apparently he still hasn’t done.) and arrive at the conclusion of “I just don’t get it.” Being a conscientious ambassador of M4C and as the MoY (damn I love me some acronyms) I tried to help explain. But apparently failed. But in my pondering of this situation I believe have solved this conundrum.
Killick states that he and his posse have shot tens of thousands of Wolf Gold with zero issues. Therefore, Euro, it is IMPOSSIBLE within this physical and metaphysical plane is existence that we may or may not abide in, to experience any issues with WG ammo. Because Killick himself has shot the hell out of it and has experienced zero issues - so I’m sorry but you’re not allowed to have any issues.
Because Killick said so.
It’s basically the ammo of the gods. (Little ‘g’)
So you need to change your mind (and post) and go buy a bunch more of WG ammo that never has issues. :sarcastic: :jester: [emoji1787][emoji1787][emoji1787][emoji1787][emoji1787][emoji1787][emoji1787][emoji1787][emoji1787]
So let it be written. So let it be done.
Yul Brenner - Ramases
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
To be fair, Killick didn't say ED situation was impossible, just that it was an anomaly that didn't matter.
RobertTheTexan
06-09-19, 22:18
To be fair, Killick didn't say ED situation was impossible, just that it was an anomaly that didn't matter.
You read it your way. I’ll read it mine.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
RobertTheTexan
06-09-19, 22:21
To be fair, Killick didn't say ED situation was impossible, just that it was an anomaly that didn't matter.
And besides shame on you for trying to ruin my fun.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
its Taiwanese ammo....what did you expect?
also infinite lulz for visible lazers
You read it your way. I’ll read it mine.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Oh...ok
If Federal feels hotter, then how could wolf be loaded to 193 specs? In fact, Wolf Gold is .223 ammunition, and by definition isn’t M193 or loaded to M193 specs as M193 is a 5.56 round that exceeds SAMI pressure for .223 Remington. They couldn’t legally label it .223 if it were loaded to M193 specs.
They both features a 55 gr bullet and can be fired out of a 5.56 rifle. That’s about as far as they go as to being “the same”.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I don't have chronographs or methods of gauging chamber pressure etc. I've just shot a bunch of it, during the same range sessions where I've shot Federal XM193, and noticed a difference in felt recoil and ejection pattern in a few different guns. I've heard WG is pretty much M193, but have no way of confirming that. I just shoot the stuff, not delve into SAAMI specifications and whatnot.
I've only shot WG in conjunction with Federal XM193, not any of the other M193 I've used (Prvi, IMI, Hornady Frontier) so I don't know how recoil/ejection compares to those other loadings.
The difference in recoil/ejection I noticed could also be due to Federal being on the hot side as well. Sometime back I seem to recall thinking it seemed a bit hotter than Prvi M193 as well, however it's been awhile since I've shot any Prvi.
I have chrono'd XM-193 and it was about 3170 out of a 20", but that was some time ago, like years. I generally won't use it because it looks like crap. I like my stuff to look like somebody cared. I do use other Federal ammo though, SG shells. 22's and HST 9mm.
Did a little research...it looks like no branch of the military uses M-193 anymore (could be wrong though). So that means that there is no military vs. civy...it's all civy.
The US military quit using M193 in around 2015, but there are other NATO nations still using it. It is still M193 when they buy it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Actually, according to my friend who is an engineer at the Lake City plant, the only difference between M193 and XM193 is the packaging. “X” means it’s sold to the public. “M” means it was going to government. They come off the same line are aren’t designated until they are packaged.
Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkI'd have to dig to find it, but I recall an official explanation (from Federal?) that the XM-193 met saami, was safe to shoot, and was good ammo comparable to their civvy ammo. But did not meet NATO specs in variability, which was pretty tight (+-10 fps) or something similar.
So my understanding is that it is not M-193, just close to it.
This was back when it first surfaced, maybe there is newer info.
I'd have to dig to find it, but I recall an official explanation (from Federal?) that the XM-193 met saami, was safe to shoot, and was good ammo comparable to their civvy ammo. But did not meet NATO specs in variability, which was pretty tight (+-10 fps) or something similar.
So my understanding is that it is not M-193, just close to it.
This was back when it first surfaced, maybe there is newer info.
No way was NATO requiring a 20 FPS extreme spread.
I believe NATO M193 is either a 40 or 80 FPS ES.
Three things effect ES. Powder charge, primer, and bullet straightness.
So let’s assume that M193 and XM193 are loaded to a different specification, but on the same line...which they obviously are (or were), the runout/bullet straightness will be the same because it is the same bullet, same case, same equipment. That’s not debatable.
M193 was loaded using the same primer as ATK sells commercially, the M41. It is no cheaper and likely more hassle to change the primer than to keep using the same primer. Additionally, commercial Federal and CCI primers are silver, while M41 primers, M193, and XM193 have brass colored primers. So the same primer is being used.
That leaves us with propellant. The difference in speed is due to variability or a difference in the pressure curve. Federal 100% weighs every charge on all their ammunition. That’s a fact. Additionally, the same equipment is (was) used for M193 and XM193. Therefore it is not reasonable to assume that Federal is somehow disabling their measuring capabilities when running XM193 vs M193.
Visual inspection suggest both have crimped and sealed bullets, crimped and lacquer sealed primers. We’ve established the case is the same, the primer is the same, and the bullet is the same.
The only difference, if there is one, could be within the propellant. Propellants are proprietary and each lot must be tested extensively for pressure and velocity, even if it is the same formula. This shipment of propellant may require a greater charge than the last shipment, etc. Therefore breaking down cases can only determine if visually the same type of powder is used. A chronograph would be the only way an individual could determine differences as proof testing isn’t possible with most individuals.
If I had any M193 to break down and compare, I would, but it’s been illegal to be in civilian hands because for a box to be M193 it has to be sold to a NATO government. The last time I had any actual M193 in my hands was years ago. I’ll likely never see any again and most on this forum won’t either unless they attained it illegally or are currently serving with a unit that has some old stock available.
So where does that leave us? When I asked him about it, around 2016/2017, he said there is no difference between boxes marked XM and boxes marked M. M boxes are sold to governments. Our military doesn’t use M193 anymore so we can only assume they are selling M marked boxes abroad. However, we do know that XM193 meets NATO pressures, exceeds .223 Rem pressures, has a crimped and sealed M41 primer, has a crimped and sealed 55 gr FMJ, and a published velocity of 3125-3205 FPS with a 20” proof barrel. It is descent ammunition.
What do we know about Wild Gold? It’s Tawaines ammunition that meets .223 Remington specs per SAMI. Beyond that, we have no information.
Which is a better buy? I think the answer is obvious.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
WG isn't Russian...it's Taiwanese.
Guys I don't care if xm193 is good or not, better or not than wolf gold, etcetera.
There are many threads on federal xm193 including multiple on this site with very specific figures about what m193 has to meet and how that's much tighter then commercial specs which are primarily pressure oriented with no variability or accuracy requirement.
There are also multiple screenshots from federals website when the ammo was first introduced and even now the website basically says this is budget a most suitable for blasting and is loaded to commercial specs.
There are a couple dozen reasons that lake City could reject ammo and it still be viable for commercial usage. people have talked to Federal and gotten that same information from technical lines in the past. It meets saami and should not be construed as m193 specifications.
For all we know wolf gold could be calls from taiwan's lake City equivalent.
You guys can go back to arguing whether wolf gold is crap or not, but it's pretty clear to me that xm193 is not just cheaper m193 and we do ourselves a disservice perpetuating that myth.
the only way to know otherwise is if Federal was the issue a statement defining exactly how xm193 is different. And they won't do that because there's enough people that's a it's good enough or don't understand the difference. and if you look at their current website it's very clear how they're positioning this ammo: budget blasting.
somehow we believe that identically marked barrels from the same manufacturer will magically have different specs if it's sold from a more expensive vendor. But then don't believe that differently labeled ammo could be different?
WG isn't Russian...it's Taiwanese.
Fixed it for ya. The point remains, we don’t know much about their processes.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
WG isn't Russian...it's Taiwanese.Yep, and most of the other wolf gold is private label PPU.
Wolf is a marketing label and the ammo is made that typically large commodity plants. To my knowledge only some of their steel is actually made in ex-Soviet plants.
I guess you could argue PPU is ex Soviet as well
As to the variability in the lake City XM ammo, informed conjecture is that its temperature variability or similar in the blended powder lots used. It also appears that there's physical culls just based on what I've seen and similar reports.
I've shot it and still have some to shoot, but it's not my favorite.
Doc Safari
06-10-19, 09:49
It makes no sense to have a $6,000 firearm and shoot ammo through it that may or may not fail you.
.
You took a $6,000 rifle out and shot it in the pouring rain? Mister, you're a braver man than I. :jester:
Guys I don't care if xm193 is good or not, better or not than wolf gold, etcetera.
There are many threads on federal xm193 including multiple on this site with very specific figures about what m193 has to meet and how that's much tighter then commercial specs which are primarily pressure oriented with no variability or accuracy requirement.
There are also multiple screenshots from federals website when the ammo was first introduced and even now the website basically says this is budget a most suitable for blasting and is loaded to commercial specs.
There are a couple dozen reasons that lake City could reject ammo and it still be viable for commercial usage. people have talked to Federal and gotten that same information from technical lines in the past. It meets saami and should not be construed as m193 specifications.
For all we know wolf gold could be calls from taiwan's lake City equivalent.
You guys can go back to arguing whether wolf gold is crap or not, but it's pretty clear to me that xm193 is not just cheaper m193 and we do ourselves a disservice perpetuating that myth.
the only way to know otherwise is if Federal was the issue a statement defining exactly how xm193 is different. And they won't do that because there's enough people that's a it's good enough or don't understand the difference. and if you look at their current website it's very clear how they're positioning this ammo: budget blasting.
somehow we believe that identically marked barrels from the same manufacturer will magically have different specs if it's sold from a more expensive vendor. But then don't believe that differently labeled ammo could be different?
M193 is also budget blasting ammunition with a set of specific requirements. You, or anybody else, hasn’t provided any specific specifications it fails to meet.
Yes, XM193 exceeds SAAMI specs and is not .223 Remington.
SAAMI doesn’t require an accuracy standard, very true. That doesn’t mean a round does or does not meet the standard imposed by NATO M193. Why would commercial ammunition, be subjected to NATO proofing when there is nothing to gain?
The Wolf Gold meets requirements for .223 Remington per SAMI. The XM193 does NOT as it is loaded above .223 Remington pressure.
Back to your argument that it is marketed as “cheap blasting ammunition”. What makes it cheap blasting ammunition?
Simple. The bullet. FMJs are the cheapest bullets available safe to shoot in an AR15. Compare to “not cheap blasting ammunition” such as the Federal Fusion. Is the Fusion better? It lacks crimping of primers, sealant, lack of crimping and sealing of bullets, and uses a much lower quality case than the LC. The pressure is also significantly lower. So what makes the Fusion not “cheap blasting ammunition”? The bullet. Would a round with the case, crimping, and sealing of XM193 but with a Fusion bullet be superior to Federal .223 Rem Fusion? Absolutely. The traits of XM193 are overall pretty good.
Perhaps there is a difference in powders...however powder has been changing since M193 was introduced. No two lots are identical as outlined above. Guess what? There are tons of powder capable of meeting 193 pressure and I’ll bet there are NATO countries using them.
Despite our military (formerly) using the same bullet, it doesn’t somehow make it inferior. It’s the same projectile. That isn’t debatable.
XM193 is a known STANDARD. It isn’t a Gucci bonded bullet. Nor is M193. It isn’t a copper solid. Nor is M193.
We have a round made in the same plant, with the same equipment, with the QC, and each powder charge is weighed. Primers are all sealed and crimped, bullets are all sealed and crimped.
What more could you ask for?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Pinzgauer, what is your preferred ammunition and why? What testing have you don’t to prove it is a superior round for your intended purpose? What ways has the performance of Wolf Gold or XM193 proven to fall short for your purposes?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Pinzgauer, what is your preferred ammunition and why? What testing have you don’t to prove it is a superior round for your intended purpose? What ways has the performance of Wolf Gold or XM193 proven to fall short for your purposes?
Easy answer: 1) RUAG Einhorn GP-85 you should get some, it's the best! 2) a swiss buddy told me it's the same as what they use, and 3) I don't like the way Wolf Gold smells.
I have a bunch of Wolf Gold, will still shoot it. (and will) I have some Federal XM in stripper clips, not actively using it. But will, one day. But I don't find Fed XM to be a compelling value. Have and buy some IMI. Probably will try some Magtech, etc.
Shot a bunch of PPU over the years, and way back, a bunch of vintage brown box PMC (pre-bronze days) and also recent Bronze when it was the only affordable one I could get. Have a good bit of vintage Winchester white box, and some Q3131, and some PMC X-TAC.
I've got Hirtenberger 7.62x51 older than I am that I still shoot from when it was cheap. And I have shoes older than you.
Point being, I'm not going to argue/debate. Really don't care. Euro's a pretty serious shooter, so I suspect something is up. I've not seen it with Wolf Gold, nor have others, but hard to argue with pics. He would not admit to being that bad of a shot for fun! :-)
I'm bummed as I kindof liked the idea that WG was reliable, clean, affordable, etc. I did not expect match accuracy. But would be bummed if I was seeing what Euro saw, especially if confirmed across a couple of rifles.
For accuracy at range I shoot 6.5 Grendel with handloads. 5.56 is mainly for fun & training, though I keep and practice with fusion for HD. probably will convert over to Gold Dot at some point.
If WG has changed (it may have), I'd be curious to do some mexican match. PPU wolf gold in Grendel was pretty bad accuracy wise. Put in decent bullets and all the sudden it was as you'd expect. (though not as good as Hornady AMAX). Funny, the same is true of Grendel steel case (Barnul?). So bullets make a huge difference, even comparable FMJ's.
What's also interesting is that PPU headstamp ammo is dirty and underpowered, but the brass is quite good for reloading.
I unironically trust Soviet ammo over Taiwanese anything
To further derail the original topic, here is some information based on my experiences in the ammo & shooting industry:
-ATK doesn’t exist anymore. Federal does not manage Lake City (nor have they ever). The management contract was held by ATK until the spin off with Vista Outdoor, and then became Orbital ATK. Orbital ATK was then purchased by Northrop Grumman, who is now managing LC.
-Engineers from Federal do not have a say in anything at Lake City. Federal purchases ammunition from Lake City to resell, as is allowed by the management contract for LC.
-Per a friend who is an engineer at Federal, the “X” designation is also used to denote any ammo that would be built close to a contract spec but with some type of variation (i.e. lower velocity, different packaging, etc.).
-SAAMI spec is not a law. Ammunition companies are not required to build ammo to SAAMI spec by law. It is an agreed-upon industry wide standard for cartridge & chamber measurements, test procedures, and safe performance characteristics. Having this standard reduces risk and liability for firearms and ammunition manufacturers.
-5.56 NATO is not a formally recognized chambering by SAAMI. As such, SAAMI has no pressure specs for it.
-M193 is not a “Standard”. It is a specific set of contractual requirements laying out how the ammunition is to be built (specifies case, powder, primer, bullet, etc.), how it is to perform (P&V, dispersion, function, etc.) and how it is to be packaged and labeled.
-Federal does not check weight on 100% of their ammunition. LC might but Federal does not.
-I am fairly certain it is not illegal to sell M193, but the contractual agreement may not allow it to be sold in the exact configuration that the DOD purchases commercially.
-Velocity for M193/XM193 is measured at 78 feet from the muzzle. SAAMI testing is much shorter (15 feet).
-CCI manufactures and sells the #41 primer, available commercially for reloading and sold to LC for ammunition.
-LC would not change primers on the line due to the possibility of building ammunition that would not pass a Lot Acceptance Test by the DOD, thus leading to a rejection of the lot.
-The primary reason that XM193 is cheap (in comparison to Fusion or other .223 ammo) is volume, not the bullet. LC kicks out millions of rounds per day on high speed loading equipment that is dedicated solely to XM193. The only time it shuts down is likely if it breaks. Rounds like Fusion (or Gold Medal or anything else) are built on loaders that are slower and used to make multiple rounds, necessitating shutdown for changeovers.
To tie BACK into the original topic, ED may have just gotten a bad lot of Wolf Gold based on his previous experiences with it. I have a similar experience with XM193 (legit 6 to 8 inch groups at 50 yards out of multiple guns that are MOA capable when I do my part). That lot is relegated to dirt shooting and close range stuff. It happens.
Fusion, TSX, bonded bullets, Matchkings cost more to manufacture than do 55 gr FMJs. Whether it be through processes or economies of scale. This is especially true of bullets with more physical material or more steps to each process. Lake City could not load Gold Medal Match, Fusion, etc for the same price as XM193. PERIOD.
Nobody said Federal weighed each round. What I said was specifically charges were weighed. Which is true; at least of all ammunition designated XM193.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Eurodriver
06-11-19, 09:28
This is all very interesting stuff and I’m learning a shit ton. But I do wish we could keep it civil so the thread isn’t shut down.
I feel both are true - Fusion is more because the bullets are more. But also LC cranks out literally millions of rounds weekly so there is an economy of scale there as well.
I have received requests for the lot # in PMs. When I get home I will open a few boxes and post all of the lot #s I have. Unfortunately I can’t tell with certainty which one(s) are bad but I have an educated guess. (It should be on top!)
Fusion, TSX, bonded bullets, Matchkings cost more to manufacture than do 55 gr FMJs. Whether it be through processes or economies of scale. This is especially true of bullets with more physical material or more steps to each process. Lake City could not load Gold Medal Match, Fusion, etc for the same price as XM193. PERIOD.
I agree that TSX, bonded bullets and Matchkings would cost more as they either have a higher degree of copper, secondary operations (machining, the physical act of bonding the jacket) or additional quality checks (i.e. likely SMK). My point was that Fusion has a very similar ratio of lead to copper in its construction and the coating/plating process is likely not that much more difficult or time consuming than the steps to swage an FMJ together. However, neither that process nor the equipment involved is geared to make a high number of bullets, which drives the cost up. 55gr soft point bullets (an arguably more useful bullet) could be loaded just as easily as FMJ and cost should be identical.
Nobody said Federal weighed each round. What I said was specifically charges were weighed. Which is true; at least of all ammunition designated XM193.
Admittedly, I may have misinterpreted the quote from post #54:
That leaves us with propellant. The difference in speed is due to variability or a difference in the pressure curve. Federal 100% weighs every charge on all their ammunition. That’s a fact. Additionally, the same equipment is (was) used for M193 and XM193. Therefore it is not reasonable to assume that Federal is somehow disabling their measuring capabilities when running XM193 vs M193.
I was initially responding to the bolded statement above. Federal doesn't weigh every charge on all of their ammunition. And doesn't physically control anything at the Lake City plant. In a high-speed loading environment individual charges usually aren't weighed. Cases would be check weighed before charging and then after charging and an escapement would kick over/undercharged cases off the line w/o slowing things down. It would actually be pretty easy to turn that feature off by the operator if necessary. Checking individual charges would take too long.
With respect to Euro: I will absolutely do my part to stay civil. I just want to make sure folks have accurate information for their decision making (or to satisfy curiosity).
Perhaps it’s a case of poorly wording things.
Measuring pre/post charging is, essentially, measuring charges. Would you not agree?
When saying “Federal”, it is clear that Federal is the largest brand of a conglomerate. Said conglomerate manages Lake City, but often, gun industry people say “Federal” when speaking of management of LC. It’s semantics and not something to get caught up on. Federal is a brand name; a brand name which the loaded ammunition is sold under. Wouldn’t you agree that the company managing Lake City and has ownership of the Federal brand, is therefore in control? And therefore, semantical to feel need to repeatedly correct the previous post?
And it seems you agree, the bullet is a major source of savings and that even in bulk, LC couldn’t manufacture Fusion or any other .223 Remington at the same price point we XM193. I wish they could. I wouldn’t need to reload. Seems I’ve been told or read that Hornady provides the FMJs for LC and the same bullets can be purchased in bulk, not commercially packaged for far less than other bullets in their class.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Charge weight variations are not the cause of 15" groups at 100y.
Charge weight variations are not the cause of 15" groups at 100y.
I don’t believe anyone asserted that that is the case. We are discussing Federal ammunition produced at Lake City.
However, I don’t think it is likely it could be solely the problem, it is possible with drastic variation. Try loading 15 gr. and 28 gr. Of something like TAC and see what happens. It won’t be pretty.
It’s likely a host of problems and multiple instances of crummy QC at every level. I don’t think I’ll be buying and Wolf Gold, that’s for sure. Myself, I load most of my own ammunition with LC brass, 41 primers, and either Sierra second FMJ or MKs or whatever specialty bullet for the task at hand. I load mostly on a Hornady LNL AP and get +/- 0.1 gr. charge weight variation and runout less than 0.005”. It’s not hard to make descent ammo at home.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I think this a baby and the bath water situation. Not to discount ED's trouble, this is the first time I have heard of a problem with WG. I did some net surfing and couldnt find a bad word about this stuff. Like pinzgauer who had a wonkie batch of XM and didnt completely reject it forever, I dont think I'll completely reject WG. Millions, if not billions, of both have been produced, and it seems in extremely rare occasions, some are jacked up.
May I suggest to ED that he get a hold of Wolf and see about a return of product. I did that once with 10-20k of flakey SR primers.
Well said, Mr. TomMcC...
I'm entirely unconvinced by this person's experience that I should stop using WOLF GOLD ammo. It has served me well, and many more. I've shout countless thousands of rounds of it in training and have been entirely satisfied. If the goal of the OP's post was to persuade us to stop using it, he has failed.
Respectfully offered, speaking to the issue, not to the person.
I don’t believe anyone asserted that that is the case. We are discussing Federal ammunition produced at Lake City.
However, I don’t think it is likely it could be solely the problem, it is possible with drastic variation. Try loading 15 gr. and 28 gr. Of something like TAC and see what happens. It won’t be pretty.
It’s likely a host of problems and multiple instances of crummy QC at every level. I don’t think I’ll be buying and Wolf Gold, that’s for sure. Myself, I load most of my own ammunition with LC brass, 41 primers, and either Sierra second FMJ or MKs or whatever specialty bullet for the task at hand. I load mostly on a Hornady LNL AP and get +/- 0.1 gr. charge weight variation and runout less than 0.005”. It’s not hard to make descent ammo at home.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
, r
My guess is badly effed up bullets, either due to defective manufacturing or maybe over crimping. Realistic variations in concentricity, case volume, neck tension, headspace, charge weight, primer pockets, flash holes, primers, ect don't cause 15MOA.
, r
My guess is badly effed up bullets, either due to defective manufacturing or maybe over crimping. Realistic variations in concentricity, case volume, neck tension, headspace, charge weight, primer pockets, flash holes, primers, ect don't cause 15MOA.
They certainly F’ed up something good.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Perhaps it’s a case of poorly wording things.
Measuring pre/post charging is, essentially, measuring charges. Would you not agree?
My explanation was meant more as a clarification and I should have prefaced it accordingly. I apologize for adding confusion. My point was more that Federal does not measure every charge on every round produced. Lake City (wrt to M193/XM193) likely does though some documentation that I found online indicated that it may be a only a visual check but I can't speak definitively as I've never been to their line.
When saying “Federal”, it is clear that Federal is the largest brand of a conglomerate. Said conglomerate manages Lake City, but often, gun industry people say “Federal” when speaking of management of LC. It’s semantics and not something to get caught up on. Federal is a brand name; a brand name which the loaded ammunition is sold under. Wouldn’t you agree that the company managing Lake City and has ownership of the Federal brand, is therefore in control? And therefore, semantical to feel need to repeatedly correct the previous post? It's not semantical, it's incorrect. Federal is owned by Vista Outdoor. The current management contract is held by Northrop Grumman. The two locations haven't been managed by the same parent company in over 4 years. Just because some gun industry people say "Federal" runs LC doesn't make it true or correct. Ask your friend who pays his salary. Federal is not just a brand name, it is a company with a manufacturing site and employess that are all it's own. Federal is a customer of LC, no more and no less.
And it seems you agree, the bullet is a major source of savings and that even in bulk, LC couldn’t manufacture Fusion or any other .223 Remington at the same price point we XM193. I wish they could. I wouldn’t need to reload. Seems I’ve been told or read that Hornady provides the FMJs for LC and the same bullets can be purchased in bulk, not commercially packaged for far less than other bullets in their class.
I didn't agree per se. My point was that with equipment that is set to run at the rates needed for M193 production, Fusion (or any other bullet that takes roughly the same amount of raw material) could be loaded just as cheaply. It would require the same level of capital investment and dedication that LC gave to FMJ production. I would be very surprised if Hornady supplies bullets for M193 production. In-house production of bullets would allow LC a much tighter control over quality and production schedule. Anything is possible, though. Hornady does supply their own projectiles for the Frontier line of ammo that is loaded at LC, as far as I know.
ETA: I fear that this exchange has derailed the purpose of the thread somewhat. If you would like to continue the discussion, please feel free to PM me.
Nobody else can seem to sell a fused or bonded bullet for the same price as FMJs but hey, you seem to be in the know. Develop a process where it is as easy.
When he and I had the conversation ATK paid him and he constantly referred to them as “Federal”; this conversation was somewhat around the time of the “controversy” where everybody called XM193 low-QC junk. As you said, ATK is no longer managing them. Sorry if my information is outdated and I was unaware than ATK formed and owned Vista Outdoors just before it merged with Orbital Sciences later in 2015 who later merged with Northrop Grumman in 2018. Geebus! But at the end of the day, the same people that own Vista and thus Federal own ATK and manage LC.
And as I said, last I talked to him he was accepting a position with Sierra. I don’t know when his last day at LC is or was.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Eurodriver
06-11-19, 20:51
I think I’ve found the lot numbers. They are on the back of the box on the bottom left side. The lots I’ve found so far are:
WOLF 2017-18
WOLF 2014-17
WOLF 2016-16
WOLF 2018-03
2014-25
2016-42
...I have so much of this garbage. I might pull the bullets and reload them with Tac and Hornady 55grs
I’m not 100% sure which (or all, or none) is the problem child but I will search my stash for more lots and do some testing probably next weekend when I get my Krieger back from cerakote.
Because this is a relatively new development ( I wouldn’t have used Wolf for so long if it gave me problems) my guess is 2017/2018 lots will be it. But who knows.
When he and I had the conversation ATK paid him and he constantly referred to them as “Federal”; this conversation was somewhat around the time of the “controversy” where everybody called XM193 low-QC junk. As you said, ATK is no longer managing them. Sorry if my information is outdated and I was unaware than ATK formed and owned Vista Outdoors just before it merged with Orbital Sciences later in 2015 who later merged with Northrop Grumman in 2018. Geebus! But at the end of the day, the same people that own Vista and thus Federal own ATK and manage LC.
I give up on the whole bullet thing.
ATK did not form Vista nor did they own them. Vista was a spin off company and took all of the commercial facilities and brand names (including Federal) and became its own publicly traded company (VSTO). ATK merged with Orbital right after the spin off and took the defense and aerospace business and also became its own publicly traded company (OA). Orbital ATK was acquired by Northrop Grumman in 2018, not merged. OA became Northrop Grumman Innovation Systems at this point. The LC contract has stayed with ATK, NOT Vista.
I worked for both ATK Defense and Federal in various capacities during that time frame and of all the people that I worked with, nobody referred to LC as "Federal". Just my experience.
You should give up on the “bullet thing” as somebody who is an insider you should know that the “fused” bullet requires additional steps and thus would induce more expense than a FMJ. Is that unreasonable?
Did you work at Lake City?
Have a good evening.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You should give up on the “bullet thing” as somebody who is an insider you should know that the “fused” bullet requires additional steps and thus would induce more expense than a FMJ. Is that unreasonable?
Did you work at Lake City?
Have a good evening.
I don't know what to tell you, man. It certainly is true that the FMJ is a cheap bullet to make. It's just as reasonable to assume that the FMJ also requires an additional step for adding a cannelure and the Fusion does not and also uses a gilding metal jacket which should be cheaper than the the copper used to form FMJ jackets. Would that even out production costs between the two? Who knows? You seem to be stuck on the Fusion projectile but something similar to the 55gr Hornady SP projectile would be made just as cheaply and likely be just as useful for AR shooters, especially those who want good terminal ballistics without affecting POI. My point was more that an FMJ is not the only option for a cheap bullet that can be loaded into blaster ammo.
Nope, didn't work at the Lake City facility.
For the sake of this thread, please feel free to PM me if you would like to chat further.
Have a good evening as well.
Euro, do you have another rifle to test the ammo with?
contax_shooter
06-12-19, 07:51
My recent case of Wolf Gold dated "WOLF-2017-24" was just fine. Zeroed both a 16" and cut/pinned to 16" barrel at 200 yd with under 2 MOA 5-shot groups. I'll be sure to document the groups next time I'm out at known distances.
...I have so much of this garbage. I might pull the bullets and reload them with Tac and Hornady 55grs.
You'd sink a lot of time into that project...Time that could be better used doing pretty much anything else.
Here's what I would do instead:
1) Set the suspect lots aside
2) Buy a metric shitload of something better, while the ammo market is still way down. IMI or whatever you like better.
3) Wait for the inevitable next panic. I'm thinking handsy Uncle Joe will be polling pretty high this time next year and the frenzy will be on.
4) Unload the suspect Wolf Gold on some unsuspecting schmuck with a shiny new DPMs for like $0.50/rnd. He'll have money to burn and won't know any better anyway.
5) Spend the profit on something nice.
So do unto others before they do it to you? How about just call Wolf about a return.
Eurodriver
06-12-19, 13:57
Euro, do you have another rifle to test the ammo with?
Yeah I have several. At the end of the month I’ll be testing all the lots with one 5 round group each out of the 12.5” in the OP and 20” Krieger.
the 12.5” in the OP and 20” Krieger.
You're going to run that crap in a Krieger?? :blink:
Eurodriver
06-12-19, 18:06
You're going to run that crap in a Krieger?? :blink:
Yeah why not? (Not sarcasm)
Mark cringes every time I run shit ball powder in my nice rifles.
Testing all the lots is a good idea, be cool to narrow it down to 1 or 2 lots.
PB
Yeah why not? (Not sarcasm)
It's like filling up a Ferrari with gas purchased in Mexico.
Lot 2017-9 is looking good.
Eurodriver
06-27-19, 08:39
I got to the range today and tested 7 batches of mine (one was DocSherm’s he let me have) I used a BA 12.5” with a Poortex 1-6 optic shot from the setup below
https://i.imgur.com/R1rCOn3.jpg
I did consider using my Krieger but in hindsight it doesn’t really matter how well or poorly it shoots in that. This ammo will never see a Krieger in real life.
Batches were shot in round robin format (I knew the WG investors would complain if I didn’t) it looks like the 2014 batches shoot pretty consistently. There are some outliers 2016-16 shoots very well, and the 2017 and 2018 batches shoot very poorly. I’d like to get more 17&18 batches and test them to see if as time has gone on their ammo has gotten worse. The POI shift in both is pretty terrible, and would be in keeping with the theme of this thread. Recent batches are not very good.
https://i.imgur.com/3PlO6mi.jpg
I got to the range today and tested 7 batches of mine...
Are those 5-shot groups at 100yds? If so, then you're right: They're terrible.
I'm overseas and can't check my stockpile, but I record what ammo I have in Excel (yes, I was potty-trained too young), and I'm glad to see that I haven't bought any Wolf since 2016.
Luck or intuition: I thought I had enough Wolf, so I switched to buying PMP, MagTech, and HornadyFrontier then.
Eurodriver
06-27-19, 09:05
Are those 5-shot groups at 100yds? If so, then you're right: They're terrible.
I'm overseas and can't check my stockpile, but I record what ammo I have in Excel (yes, I was potty-trained too young), and I'm glad to see that I haven't bought any Wolf since 2016.
Luck or intuition: I thought I had enough Wolf, so I switched to buying PMP, MagTech, and HornadyFrontier then.
Yes. Should have noted that. They are 5 round groups at 100y
Yes. Should have noted that. They are 5 round groups at 100y
How big are the circles?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Eurodriver
06-27-19, 10:13
How big are the circles?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
2 inches
Eurodriver
06-28-19, 05:09
Still waiting for the “It’s not precision ammo I’m gonna keep using it” replies...
Your 2018-3 POI shift is extreme. At 300 yds. you'd be lucky to catch a "D" zone without optic correction.
That is disappointing.
I have 5 unopened cases in my gun room, so here's your; "I'm gonna keep using it" comment.
A couple years ago was last I remember checking the WG for groups, your 2014-3/2016-16 groups are what I've seen from my guns.
I will remember to verify zero with this stuff next time I'm out.
I will add that my use of this ammo has been 90% 50 yds. and in, anything past 100 yds. I've used different ammo for a couple years.
I wouldn't have noticed a major degradation of precision with the WG ammo, but would have assumed it was operator error.
You have me questioning now. I will check on it next range trip.
Eurodriver
06-28-19, 06:30
Your 2018-3 POI shift is extreme. At 300 yds. you'd be lucky to catch a "D" zone without optic correction.
That is disappointing.
I have 5 unopened cases in my gun room, so here's your; "I'm gonna keep using it" comment.
A couple years ago was last I remember checking the WG for groups, your 2014-3/2016-16 groups are what I've seen from my guns.
I will remember to verify zero with this stuff next time I'm out.
I will add that my use of this ammo has been 90% 50 yds. and in, anything past 100 yds. I've used different ammo for a couple years.
I wouldn't have noticed a major degradation of precision with the WG ammo, but would have assumed it was operator error.
You have me questioning now. I will check on it next range trip.
The 2018-3 shift would be especially bad with a 2017 batch zero. That’s a shift of over 6” to 7:30 (not to mention the 5 MOA group size.) In my OP I mentioned being 2 feet off from an IPSC at 300y. A 6 minute shift at 300y is 18” which leads me to believe I had zeroed with the 2017 batch (it’s the only one with a “center” that is zeroed) and shot the 18” stuff and wondered wtf was going on.
The 2014 lots seem pretty consistent and no worse than what I would expect from this type of ammo.
Point being - if you were shooting the 2016-16 batch and then went to the 2018 batch you’d be rightfully confused.
I don’t know what variations there are between lots of LC or XM193 or Magtech but I doubt it’s that extreme. For now I will zero and use the 2014 lots for my long distance (101yd+) play time and the other stuff for closer range stuff.
Precisely.
I'm one of those- "gotta have confidence in your equipment" guys.
I'll be checking my stockpile and making notes on rather "GTG" or CQB Range Use.
Appreciate the heads up.
Your 2018-3 POI shift is extreme. At 300 yds. you'd be lucky to catch a "D" zone without optic correction.
That is disappointing.
I have 5 unopened cases in my gun room, so here's your; "I'm gonna keep using it" comment.
A couple years ago was last I remember checking the WG for groups, your 2014-3/2016-16 groups are what I've seen from my guns.
I will remember to verify zero with this stuff next time I'm out.
I will add that my use of this ammo has been 90% 50 yds. and in, anything past 100 yds. I've used different ammo for a couple years.
I wouldn't have noticed a major degradation of precision with the WG ammo, but would have assumed it was operator error.
You have me questioning now. I will check on it next range trip.
Not only that, but aside from the one 2014 group, all of those look to be 3-4 MOA at very best.
It got me wondering since I’ve done so much grouping lately so I’m comparing some bulk stuff on Sunday. Most of the stuff I had stashed here while I was in Hawaii was Freedom reman, so I really won’t be surprised if it keyholes at 100. Then I have a little bit of the AE MSR stuff (red, white, and blue packaging), and then the Winchester 62gr OTM. Unfortunately, unless KAC overnights my upper back to me, this will all be done out of my beater gun and my newly rebarreled BCM, so small sample size. But I have FGMM 77gr on hand to establish a base line of how the new one shoots.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Eurodriver
06-28-19, 07:40
Not only that, but aside from the one 2014 group, all of those look to be 3-4 MOA at very best.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The internet is a weird place. Everyone is convinced <1.5” groups at 100y are the norm for any gun, when in fact they are not (especially for a chrome lined barrel shooting bulk ammo).
M855 issued to the .mil has a 5 MOA accuracy requirement. No doubt it can do better, and often does, but it says a lot about the expectations.
Molon did a review of Wolf Gold a few years ago and through his 20” Stainless got an average of 2.4” for 10 shot groups.
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?167745-Range-Report-Wolf-Gold-55-Grain-FMJ
The group sizes for the 2014 batches don’t bother me nearly as much as the POI shift between years. You might as well not even be zeroed at all.
The internet is a weird place. Everyone is convinced <1.5” groups at 100y are the norm for any gun, when in fact they are not (especially for a chrome lined barrel shooting bulk ammo).
No doubt. Especially with cherry picked groups of meaningless sample size, shot off a benchrest with 14x scopes.
I seem to remember you having a problem with a wandering zero or something with a suppressor a few months ago. Was that you? Any chance you z’d unsuppressed with one lot of this stuff, and then later shot a different lot through the muffler?
The internet is a weird place. Everyone is convinced <1.5” groups at 100y are the norm for any gun, when in fact they are not (especially for a chrome lined barrel shooting bulk ammo).
With 77 gr OTMs, almost any gun we shoot will 1.5"
With blaster ammo.. No way.
All of this proves something I have believed forever, Lot's matter. IMO better to have a large amount of less accurate ammo than mixed lots that will group in different places.
With 77 gr OTMs, almost any gun we shoot will 1.5"
With blaster ammo.. No way.
Exactly! But if you are doing a 50 yard and in drills or your going out with nephews who are just blasting for fun why the hell would you pay for or use 77s.
Exactly! But if you are doing a 50 yard and in drills or your going out with nephews who are just blasting for fun why the hell would you pay for or use 77s.
You wouldn't. And wouldn't know if you were getting 1 moa or 5 moa.
You wouldn't. And wouldn't know if you were getting 1 moa or 5 moa.
Exactly. And just like knowing what weapon to bring to the party, (based on use case) you should know what ammo to bring to the party (based on use case). Wolf gold was never intended to be sub moa ammo. It was intended to be cheap brass training ammo. Hence why I'm confused with all the bitching
I agree. However I'd still have concerns about firing ammo that's outside of 5 MOA... especially if some might get fired through a can.
I agree. However I'd still have concerns about firing ammo that's outside of 5 MOA... especially if some might get fired through a can.
I agree with that but as I said previously I have shot at minimum of 10k of WG and 80% of that was suppressed = no issues. But I am also not seeing 5 moa out of any of the cases I have gone through. I have not purchased a case in a while so maybe it has all gone to crap but that is not my impression.
Eurodriver
06-28-19, 12:56
Same here. Never had any issues with a can. I’m also not seeing 5 MOA except for in the worst group. The average seems to be around 3.5.-4.0
A far cry from the “sub MOA all day” crowd
It is certainly a far cry from the “sub MOA all day". I generally get around 3 moa. I have an LMT that hates the stuff and a larue that loves it. I have gotten sub moa groups out of it with the Larue but they were 5 or 6 round groups. If you try to go 10 I always get a high flyer.
I seem to remember you having a problem with a wandering zero or something with a suppressor a few months ago. Was that you?
That might have been me. I was asking how everyone was getting all these small groups I was hearing about. It's starting to make a lot more sense now that I see those groups. Now I was shooting some different ammo but WG 2013 was some of it and I would POIs that jumped all over the place. I'm not sure what I was doing would be classified as groups. They looked somewhat like a worse version of that target above. There was some operator error involved with me though. But at least I know now the ammo is suspect as well.
I have since had someone else tell me, that is a good shooter, that I simply need to bite the bullet and buy a box or two of good match ammo to set a benchmark. Then work with the cheap stuff from there.... not to mention learning to actually shoot properly.
That might have been me. I was asking how everyone was getting all these small groups I was hearing about. It's starting to make a lot more sense now that I see those groups. Now I was shooting some different ammo but WG 2013 was some of it and I would POIs that jumped all over the place. I'm not sure what I was doing would be classified as groups. They looked somewhat like a worse version of that target above. There was some operator error involved with me though. But at least I know now the ammo is suspect as well.
I have since had someone else tell me, that is a good shooter, that I simply need to bite the bullet and buy a box or two of good match ammo to set a benchmark. Then work with the cheap stuff from there.... not to mention learning to actually shoot properly.
I’m glad I did. I’ve had a whole bunch of uppers and never actually tested to see what they could do until recently. I also assumed problems were because of me but I’ve been able to produce decent groups with good barrels and ammo so it helps to get that baseline. Finally, I’m also much happier with my zeros after getting a good bipod and rear bag. Not necessary, but it makes sense to use every advantage when zeroing.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I need a better rear bag for sure. All the benches are different where I shoot too. I did get a nice bipod and it is a major help but I am still trying to figure what I need for a rear bag. I have a wedge but it's slick and not quite big enough.
I generally run out of height on the rear. I keep pulling back and next thing I know I'm looking for a 2x4 or something to raise it up. Then that slides around.
Defaultmp3
06-30-19, 17:13
Just for some data, 2017 vintage Wolf Gold, gathered using a MagnetoSpeed V3.
Out of my Centurion Arms 11.5" with a Surefire SOCOM556-RC2, was about 4 MOA at 100 yards (front and rear rest, using an Aimpoint CompM5 with a G33, usually gets 1 to 1.5 MOA in a 10 shot Speer Gold Dot 75 gr at 100 yards); POI shift from Gold Dot 75 gr was about 1 mil up and to the left. In a 10 shot group, the average velocity was 2823 FPS, high of 2943 FPS, low of 2751 FPS, SD of 68.1 FPS.
Out of my Centurion Arms 14.5" (cut down of a 16") with a Surefire SOCOM556-RC, was also about 4 MOA at 100 yards (front and rear rest, using an Kahles K16i, usually gets 1 MOA in a 10 shot Speer Gold Dot 75 gr at 100 yards); POI shift from Gold Dot 75 gr was about 1 mil low. In a 10 shot group, the average velocity was 2885 FPS, max of 2922 FPS, low of 2837 FPS, SD of 28.5 FPS.
So, yeah, the 11.5" was really weird. Had two readings that were >2900 FPS in that string of ten, and 3 readings <2800 FPS. Ammo was stored indoors; didn't sit in the sun or anything that day, really, although ambient temperature was >100 °F (wind was minimal). I'll probably rerun the 11.5" when I get a chance, although I've never had the MagnetoSpeed act up before.
TH76251556
06-30-19, 17:56
Cheap range ammo produces results one would expect from cheap range ammo.
Surprising!
Eurodriver
06-30-19, 18:12
Cheap range ammo produces results one would expect from cheap range ammo.
Surprising!
I think expectations are the entire point of the thread. Do you have anything quantifiable and/or objective to add or did you post just to be a smart ass?
Eurodriver
06-30-19, 18:15
So, ammo you've used for years, doesn't shoot for shit out of a (one) brand new upper, and your conclusion is "Wolf Gold is shit"?:blink: :sarcastic:
Can you read the rest of the thread and post your thoughts now?
What happened to Killick’s posts? I love when idiots post and then bounce when data is present.
TH76251556
06-30-19, 18:24
My point is simply that inexpensive range ammo is not to be used if one is looking for great results at 100 yards. I do regret this hurts anyone's feelings.
Euro, what does your 12.5” BA barrel do with known good quality 75-77 gr. match ammo? Also, is it the Gov profile or their Hanson series?
I had a 12.5” gov profile version that wouldn’t shoot my 77 gr. OTM handloads or factory Hornady 75 gr. OTM under 2.5”. I tested it back to back with a chopped down Noveske CL 11.5” and was just under 1” with the same ammo.
Has anyone ran this head to head with regular wolf steel cased? I wonder if steel cases would be about the same.
Euro,
Any input on my question above?
Eurodriver
07-22-19, 19:42
Euro, what does your 12.5” BA barrel do with known good quality 75-77 gr. match ammo? Also, is it the Gov profile or their Hanson series?
I had a 12.5” gov profile version that wouldn’t shoot my 77 gr. OTM handloads or factory Hornady 75 gr. OTM under 2.5”. I tested it back to back with a chopped down Noveske CL 11.5” and was just under 1” with the same ammo.
It’s their gov profile. It will shoot about 1.25” with 69gr. It didn’t like my 77gr TMK handloads.
Oddly, my 12.5” Noveske SS don’t shoot 77gr TMK handloads well either. But they’re 0.3 MOA in my 20” Krueger
It’s their gov profile. It will shoot about 1.25” with 69gr. It didn’t like my 77gr TMK handloads.
Oddly, my 12.5” Noveske SS don’t shoot 77gr TMK handloads well either. But they’re 0.3 MOA in my 20” Krueger
Thanks Euro.
That’s interesting about the SS Noveske not liking your 77gr handloads. I had a 16” SS Noveske that shot the same handloads I referenced above pretty consistently into 3/4” 5 shot groups (MarkM’s load - 21.8gr H322, Wolf SRM, & 77gr Nosler CC)
For what it's worth, I think the Wolf brass cases are out of spec.
I picked up a couple dozen once fired from the ground at the range. I didn't make any measurements, but most of them didn't want to size down properly at the head and wouldn't fit into the case gauge.
Also, on every one, the new primer (CCI # 41) refused to seat down to the proper depth.
I threw them all out and won't use them again.
For what it's worth, I think the Wolf brass cases are out of spec.
I picked up a couple dozen once fired from the ground at the range. I didn't make any measurements, but most of them didn't want to size down properly at the head and wouldn't fit into the case gauge.
Also, on every one, the new primer (CCI # 41) refused to seat down to the proper depth.
I threw them all out and won't use them again.
That sounds like a chamber issue with whatever gun fired them. I've loaded WOLF Gold brass with no sizing issue. The do have a stout crimp and primer pocket which is nice if you want to run a hot load. That said, I've never used them for precision or anything. Mostly 62 gr HP target loads. So I've never checked the brass for accuracy/consistency.
That sounds like a chamber issue with whatever gun fired them. I've loaded WOLF Gold brass with no sizing issue. The do have a stout crimp and primer pocket which is nice if you want to run a hot load. That said, I've never used them for precision or anything. Mostly 62 gr HP target loads. So I've never checked the brass for accuracy/consistency.
I was just getting ready to ask could that be the chamber of the rifle they were fired from.
Bold: So doesn't that go away when you reload them? How do you keep the crimp?
I was just getting ready to ask could that be the chamber of the rifle they were fired from.
Bold: So doesn't that go away when you reload them? How do you keep the crimp?
The crimp is removed to reload, but they still have a tight primer pocket AFTER crimp removal. That's what I meant.... I kinda wrote it as though the crimp remains.
For what it's worth, I think the Wolf brass cases are out of spec.
I picked up a couple dozen once fired from the ground at the range...
To be clear: Did these come out of your gun? Or did you just pick up random brass?
If the latter, then God only knows how many times it was fired, or in what...
If the primer pocket is still tight, perhaps you’ve not fully removed the crimp. I’ve seen people do that. Additionally, a uniformer can make them much smoother.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
To be clear: Did these come out of your gun? Or did you just pick up random brass?
If the latter, then God only knows how many times it was fired, or in what...
No idea.
But it's like Hornady .45 ACP brass. Every one I run across has a too- tight primer pocket. And only Hornady.
So I suspect the same story with Wolf .223.
I reload my ammo but even with a 650 I get sick of it at times & will buy a case or 2 of commercial ammo to supplement. So there are several cases worth of Wolf Gold brass in my mix that was all 1x fired by me. There is nothing wrong with their brass.
I run all my military brass thru a Dillon 600 SS so maybe that's the difference, but it does nothing to uniform pockets - just swages crimp. I use CCI #41, Wolf SRM, & Fiocchi SRM primers - none of those seem to feel any different in the pocket vs LC or WCC brass.
I never saw any of the issues from this thread with it - as good as any other 55gr FMJ factory ammo to me. Only ran thru 6 cases of it so maybe just got lucky, but have a very favorable opinion of it. Not even qualifying "for under $300 case it's good ammo for the $".....my experience was it's good ammo period. Had no ammo related failures that I remember and didn't notice any accuracy degradation vs other commercial ammo...not that i shoot FMJ for groups or precision @ longer ranges.....
Eurodriver
01-03-20, 14:36
I shot more wolf gold today out of a different rifle. There is absolutely a difference in the lots, but it is by year than by lot itself. Lot to lot consistency seems ok as long as the year is before 2017.
Lot #s that begin with 2016 and older are significantly more accurate than 2017 and later. I stopped buying the stuff and now just buy federal XM193 which is about on par accuracy wise with the <2017 stuff.
I’d be curious if anyone else can confirm.
Re-reading this thread I must say that I am terribly sorry for upsetting some of you by bringing actual data to the forum. I can’t believe guys are actually all like “muhhh it’s just plinking ammo”. Way to prove you don’t shoot challenging targets. Anyone who feels that way should go back to arguing about lubricants.
I completely agree. Definitely pre 2016 ammo is more accurate as I purchased a bunch of cases pre election that I have burned through.
The newer cases are 2.5 to 4 moa depending on the gun. My current case has been consistent 2.5 to 2.75 moa out of a Hodge 12.5. Same with my Larue. Those have been the two guns I have been shooting the most lately besides 300 black & ak74s.
PS some people dont have access to challenging targets so they use it for 50y and in drills.
I shot more wolf gold today out of a different rifle. There is absolutely a difference in the lots, but it is by year than by lot itself. Lot to lot consistency seems ok as long as the year is before 2017.
Lot #s that begin with 2016 and older are significantly more accurate than 2017 and later. I stopped buying the stuff and now just buy federal XM193 which is about on par accuracy wise with the <2017 stuff.
I’d be curious if anyone else can confirm.
Re-reading this thread I must say that I am terribly sorry for upsetting all of you by bringing actual data to the forum. I can’t believe some of you idiots are all “muhhh it’s just plinking ammo”. Way to prove you don’t shoot challenging targets. You bitches should go back to arguing about lubricants and VP9s.
Guess I'm just a bitch who likes his VP9, but I'm not shooting FMJ at "challenging targets" in the first place.....
You are so freaking abrasive.......
Eurodriver
01-03-20, 17:35
Guess I'm just a bitch who likes his VP9, but I'm not shooting FMJ at "challenging targets" in the first place.....
You are so freaking abrasive.......
Did you not see the many abrasive posts written by others? Or do you have Eurodriver Derangement Syndrome like so many?
It’s not like I just woke up out of nowhere and wrote that bro.
I’m telling you guys though, CBD oil is the next wonder lube.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Did you not see the many abrasive posts written by others? Or do you have Eurodriver Derangement Syndrome like so many?
It’s not like I just woke up out of nowhere and wrote that bro.
I'm not disagreeing with your findings. Or your opinion. Or your work. But your delivery is extremely abrasive. You contribute good stuff, but it gets so diluted by the name calling and belligerence. That's what most would call it....you can call it EDS if you wish.
Eurodriver
01-03-20, 18:40
I'm not disagreeing with your findings. Or your opinion. Or your work. But your delivery is extremely abrasive. You contribute good stuff, but it gets so diluted by the name calling and belligerence. That's what most would call it....you can call it EDS if you wish.
I am still young. I haven’t yet learned to let the trolls be trolls and carry on with my day. It looks like Killick’s posts were deleted so my abrasiveness was uncalled for this time.
I’m telling you guys though, CBD oil is the next wonder lube.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I had a dream that someone made me drink CBD oil.
C’mon guys. Its standard ribbing, only its on the internet. Dont tell me y’all and your friends dont make fun of each other.
I am still young. I haven’t yet learned to let the trolls be trolls and carry on with my day. It looks like Killick’s posts were deleted so my abrasiveness was uncalled for this time.
I had a dream that someone made me drink CBD oil.
Nightmare? Sounds horrible.
Wolf gold has always been good to me, but a case from a while ago would not group. I thought it was me, but Ill have to do more testing. I have some left and can look up the manufacturing date.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.