jjacob said:I read that 556 NATO ammo is less corrosive than 223 commercial ammo. Anyone know anything about this? Ar 556 barrel is not chrome lined.
That's correct. As I understand it the major ammo problem was the switch from "stick" powder to "ball" powder early in the service life of the M16. The new ammo wasn't tested adequately. Its pressure curve changed and the "timing" of the gun was thrown off causing feed and extraction problems. Gas operated semi-autos require a predictable pressure profile and minor changes can alter it significantly.DGW1949 said:As 9X19 said, there were many documented failures of the early M-16 during combat, a lot of which turned out to be related to the ammo being issued at the time. Exactly none of them however, had anything to do with "corrosive 5.56 ammo", because there has never been such a thing, not even way back then.
Mobuck said:"I read that 556 NATO ammo is less corrosive than 223 commercial ammo"
The only "corrosive ammo" issues I'd connect with the .223 is the particularly nasty powder fouling left by European steel cased ammo. The fouling builds up and makes cleaning difficult and most likely holds moisture to boot.
blume357 said:I have to admit I have a good bit of commie block ammo, I even have a couple thousand rounds of corrosive Chinese stuff... but it's all stored down deep in my ammo stock for WTSHTF or I just need to sell the crap to buy food or something...