How many rounds of ammo are in a British sealed tin of 303 ammo. I have one loose bandolier marked RG27-4-55-8 on strippers in bandoliers. I do not want to open it to find out. Is it good quality? Is it corrosive?
Printable View
How many rounds of ammo are in a British sealed tin of 303 ammo. I have one loose bandolier marked RG27-4-55-8 on strippers in bandoliers. I do not want to open it to find out. Is it good quality? Is it corrosive?
That should be a bandoleer of 60 rds of Radway Green. Should all go bang. Is there no marking on the case at all?
How many rounds are in the sealed tin? It has numbers pressed onto the tin that are the date of 1955.Quote:
Originally Posted by browningautorifle
Depends on which "Can" you have, I've seen 288 and 300 rds. One case was bandoleers of 50 rds not 60... Perhaps you can tell us whether it's a top lid ammo box or a ham can with a key? Or exactly which...maybe a pic? Is this it? https://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=30887
It is in 50 round bandoliers in a sealed spam can.
When did the Brits stop making 303?
When did they stop making corrosive 303?
The VAST bulk of British-made .303 ammo is corrosive.
If it has a big, (1/4 inch diameter), copper-coloured primer, it is corrosive and Mercuric primed.
In fact, as discussed hereabouts on a few previous occasions, regard ANY ammo from ANY source with a copper primer cup as Mercuric and almost certainly corrosive.
Most of the ammo loaded with these primers is filled with Cordite propellant, which is erosive because of the extremely high burning temperature. Some specialist aircraft gun ammo has granulated nitrocellulose propellant; this was intended to reduce muzzle flash; a useful improvement, especially for gunners in bombers fighting at night..
HOWEVER, if you are not engaged in heavy, continuous combat, you are unlikely to "burn-out' a good barrel in a lifetime of club shooting.
Fail to clean it after a range session with that "classic" ammo and you can wave good-bye to your nice shiny bore.
Basic rule: treat ALL "surplus ammo" of any calibre as corrosive and thoroughly clean your hardware immediately (or near to) after shooting and preferably a couple of days later as well.
This practice kept millions of Commonwealth-owned rifles and machine-guns in good shooting condition for decades.
I believe Radway Green stopped producing it in 1973, there after for cadet use Greeek HXP was supplied. IIRC some of this came in sealed tins of 6 bandoleers = 300 rds.Quote:
Originally Posted by scharfschutzen63
He refuses to open it so we'll never know...Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce_in_Oz
If the outer case / can / liner is all original and has not been over-painted, information about the origin of the ammo (manufacturer's code and date, type, etc.), should be stenciled there in white paint.
Any advances?
I'd absolutely endorse what Bruce says. Following from the comments about primer diameter, if you look at US contract WW2 303 ammo, or rounds produced in Canada, they generally have noticeably smaller primers, & are boxer primed non-corrosive. I don't know what all Canadian WW2 303 ammo was loaded up with (suspect both Mk7 & 7z produced), but the US contract stuff is definitely loaded with cooler burning nitrocellulose powder. This is presumably why you see Winchester contract ammo in packets marked 'For RAF Synchronised guns', (or similar wording).
Here's the RAF ammo Roger mentioned. Does anyone know why it was not suitable for the Bren gun?
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../pHWw5Qi-1.jpg
Winchester also loaded some in the early 80's. Wonder who it was for?
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../uXX6pQc-1.jpg
It was rumored to be for Afghanistan at the time.
re "Not For Use In Bren" this ammo was weaker in head than standard and gave case separations.
I wouldn'tsay that the case was weaker. The bren has a distinct primary extraction phase during bolt unlocking whereas the Browning extraction is most ferocious. I'd say that the full patch was the reason.
300 total in a sealed can for 50 -round bandoliers, 288 for 32- round cartons. 250 for a Vickers belt.
I know the WW2 contract 303 from Winchester was loaded with ball powder but is it a non corrosive primer? Full patch is just another way of saying Full Metal Jacket back in the old days. Winchester would use that wording on just about all of it's FMJ ammo from just before WW1 up into WW2.
The ONLY "service ammo" that was "non-corrosive" before about 1950, was .30 Carbine, and the only reason that happened was because of the "non-user-serviceable" gas piston setup. (Beware of the odd batches of Chinese Carbine ammo made in the last couple of decades; definitely corrosive. Come to think of it pretty much ALL "Eastern Bloc / Chinese" and "client" sourced ammo is corrosively primed, but it works fine and your guns won't rot away if you use it, unless you fail to perform correct cleaning practices.
If you are in a very dry place, like Northern Canada in mid winter, or the middle of the Atacama Desert, not a problem. If you live in places like Florida, coastal Queensland or similar, you will hear the rust forming overnight.
The stuff is NOT mercuric primed, thus it is reloadable brass. Better to sell it as "collector" ammo and buy nice new commercial brass and primers with your winnings.
Got the info about the weaker case and not use it in Bren from a WW2 vet who had a long career as a SA instructor in reg force. Otherwise he liked it as it was noncorrisive.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Laidler
I have found this ammo separates after only few reloads in comparison with DI which lasts must longer which indicates a weak case.
Full patch Means full jacketed like other MkVII ctgs.
Hi Bruce. I'm interested in your comments in post #17 above. You mention that no 'service ammo' was non-corrosive before 1950 (I'm only interested in 303, so the exception of .30 carbine doesn't matter to me personally). Does this mean that the WW2 US contract ammo by Winchester WAS corrosive? If so, this means that we cannot equate a boxer (smaller) primer with what the primer is actually filled with. I had always assumed, perhaps erroneously, that, at least with WW2 contracts, the smaller boxer primer equated with being non-corrosive.
And to take it a step further; I spend a lot of time each year on the Somme where I regularly come across WW1 US contract 303 ammo. Again, even 1915 dated rounds by Peters & The US Cartridge Company (for example) bear the smaller boxer primer. Being of such vintage, would these definitely be corrosive?
TIA.
Roger:
The Germans were among the first to go away from mercuric primers way back in the early 20th. Century. I recall that the Swiss and the Swedes were keen on the same thing. If the primer cups are "copper" it is almost certainly Mercuric primed, as the mercury does evil things to brass, as every potential and actual reloader of once-fired military .303 brass that originated in Britain, Australia, India, etc will attest.
All primers had the chlorate component to extend the "brissance" of the initial "flash" from the mercuric or lead-based "initiator". It is the "chlorate" reducing to "chloride" during that process that causes the problem.
Early "non-corrosive" priming brews were tried in many sporting cartridges, but military uptake was slow. This seemed to be partly because of the old, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" mindset; in a military situation, the Sergeants would be supervising weapons cleaning and especially that carried out before returns to the armoury. Civilian users? Not quite the same degree of "adult supervision".
Secondly, early "con-corrosive" brews were found to be "unreliable" in extreme heat or cold and it took a fair while to do "aging" tests to see what happened in long-term storage, even under ideal conditions.
Somewhere around here I have a bit of data on the various service primer recipes: To the Bat-Cave! There is no way anyone should be contemplating "rolling their own" primer mixtures and "re-filling" primers unless their insurance is VERY comprehensive.
There were several attempts to introduce "non-corrosive" primers to various military systems, but until it could be ascertained that it was worth the effort, not much changed.
Universal fielding of gas-operated rifles and machine guns post WW2, saw rapid adoption of not just non-corrosive ammo, but the parallel rise in the extensive use of hard-chromimg of barrels, gas pistons and cylinders, and so on. The hard-chroming was not just to ward off corrosion, but to reduce wear and particularly, erosion in barrels. Stainless steels are useless in machine-gun barrels because they erode even faster than Moly steel at the high temperatures that develop, especially during "sustained" fire. The "Green Machine'" can be fairly profligate with replacement of "critical" parts like barrels when the need arises. Those of us without such lush, tax-payer-funded budgets need to be a little more circumspect and resist the urge to send next month's family food budget down-range whilst burning out an irreplaceable barrel.
And even when shooting within sane budgets, "cleanliness is next to ..... " and all that jazz.
Thanks for that Bruce. I'm grateful. Many years ago (as a teenager & in my twenties, so it's ages ago!) I used to be quite a keen collector of both 303 & 7.92mm cartridges. Somewhere in the dark recesses of my loft I think I still have copies of both '.303 Inch' by the late Peter Labbett, & '7.92mm' (not sure if that's the exact title of the latter) by Daniel Kent. I think I'll try to dig them out & see if there's anything in them specifically relating to this topic. It's proving quite fascinating.
A friend who was an Olin engineer said it was part of an 8 million round contract for South Africa. When Congress expanded the arms embargo the WCC 81 headstamped started showing up on the market. The Vickers loved it!!Quote:
Originally Posted by no4mk1t
My general experience with British military surplus ammunition, and .303 in particular, regardless of where in the Commonwealth it was manufactured once it was 20-25 years old or older "click BOOM" hangfires were not uncommon. Radway Green from the early Fifties or POF from the Seventies are equally suspect. On the other hand US cal. 30 M2 ball and German 8x57 and 8x56R loaded during WW2 fire as reliably as if they were made last week.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce_in_Oz
Has anyone else found that to be the case?
The '43 date Winchester .303 Mk.7z is loaded with non corrosive primers. Canadian Mk.7z loaded in the same time frame also has non corrosive primers. The Canadians manufactured normal cordite/corrosive primed Mk.7 up until the changeover in 1943. I still have some very clean '42 date Canadian Mk.7 that is not click-bang as it must have been stored well. It's temperature extremes that cause the primers to go bad.
All U.S. mfg. WW1 production .303 ammo was loaded with corrosive primers as far as I know.
Here is the "recipe" for the priming mixture in a typical British Mercuric primer for .303 ammo:
Taken from Textbook of Small Arms, 1929 Edition. Page 233
Total mass of mixture; 0.6 grain
Eight parts by weight of fulminate of mercury
Fourteen parts ............. of chlorate of potash
Eighteen parts .............. of sulphide of antimony
One part .............. of sulphur
and One part ............... of mealed powder
The "mealed powder" is not defined anywhere I have looked so far, but could it be black powder milled to a fine dust, to increase the amplitude and duration of the "flash"?
Your basic non-corrosive primers use lead styphnate, barium nitrate, antimony trisulfide, powdered aluminum and tetrazene to do the job.
Note, whilst each of the basic mixture components are relatively "harmless", several of the combustion products are quite nasty, metallic lead vapour, for starters, hence the need for proper ventilation on indoor ranges and a warning about not regularly sniffing the muzzle after shots are fired.
This problem of toxic residue / "smoke" has given impetus to the rise of "non-toxic" primers. If you see cartridge cases with "NT" as a part of the headstamp, that is "Non Toxic' ammo. The primers and cases ARE different. All of the stuff I have seen uses a "Small" sized primer cup, BUT the flash-hole is slightly bigger than one sees in "normal" ammo. On first encounter, it was a bit of a mystery why a range pick-up .45ACP case would have a "small pistol" primer until I did a bit of searching online.
Some of the interesting things to be found in NT primers include compounds like potassium dinitrobenzofuroxane as a primary explosive and diazodinitrophenol as a secondary sensitization explosive.
Whilst there seems to be a fair bit of this NT ammo around, there is a lack of loading data AND the "proper" primers for reloading, so the brass just accumulates in storage boxes under the reloading bench.
Regarding Canadian manufactured .303, the WW2 boxer primed is deemed to be all non-corrosive, the Berdan Primed is usually deemed to be corrosive.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Dick
Having said that, there is no guarantee that they didn't obtain US manufactured corrosive primers during the pressure of the war.
One of the more confusing aspects is that while the Dominion Arsenals & Defence Industries Limited were crown corporations, the Dominion Cartridge Company (DCCO) was a private company owned by CIL (Canadian Industries Ltd.), which was owned by ICI (Imperial Chemical Industries)...
DI/Z (Defence Industries Limited) WW2 headstamped ammo is boxer primed Non-Corrosive. DIL was a "war industry" crown corporation set up with assistance of Dominion Cartridge Company [DA, DAC^ headstamped] (a private company) which went to non-corrosive primers before WWI for their commercial loadings.
DAC^ (Dominion Arsenals) is usually NC boxer primed,
DI/V (Dominion Arsenals Verdun) ??
The Government Arsenals, and wartime factories used Berdan Primers - well into the 1950s (I have some 1958 dated Berdan primed Canadian .303 Mk7 ball). All Berdan primed .303 manufactured in Canada is "probably" corrosive primed.
Interesting. I've never seen Canadian mfg. Mk.7, (cordite, Berdan primed), dated later than 1942. I think DI/V is Valcartier? Not sure on that one.