Chinese vs. Bulgarian 7.62x54R, which is better

[Ridolpho]

There are different vintages of Chinese surplus out there. I had good luck with some 2011 dated stuff that was rumoured to be non-corrosive (then found to be corrosive by some) but it worked very well in my SVT's. Now all I have is some 60's Chinese that seems dirtier but will do very good groups with both SVT's and Mosins. Had a comparison test against some Soviet silver tip and the Chinese stuff beat it hands down (the soviet stuff had occasional click-bangs which this particular version is known for). The Chinese stuff was doing repeat one inch three shot zeroing groups in a PU. The numbers on the head are 61/67 while the evil Russian stuff was marked 188/71.

Ridolpho

[PaulTT-33]

Well good to know, thanks Mr.R!

I've not had the best success with Chinese ammo in the past. It would shoot all over the place. And yes, it was very dirty stuff that smelled like FART. After I pulled a few bullets apart I noticed some projectiles were a different size. Hmmmm..I seem to remember something of a rumor about Chinese quality,....you know the rest. However this was in 7.62x39. Once I procured some 1973 7.62x39/Factory #539 surplus (Tula I believe) I discovered the soviet produced product was some of the best I've ever shot, with the Czech being just below that.

So thank you for the encouraging words on the Chinese. I've just purchased some 7.62x54r produced in 1957. I've yet to get out and fire any of it yet. So now I'm real curious and can't wait. Sure hope it still goes bang!
Paul

[browningautorifle]

it was very dirty stuff that smelled like FART.

Because...it was loaded with dung of their ancestors...

[PaulTT-33]

Yeah, maybe. (But didn't they invent gunpowder?) Pee yew...wonder how bad it smelled back then?

[browningautorifle]

wonder how bad it smelled back then

Like typical black powder I expect...

[fjruple]

When the Chinese stuff was available in the US. It was the ammo in 7.62x54R and 7.62x39mm but highly corrosive.

[PaulTT-33]

"The" ammo. Really. ? I'm a little surprised by that. But that's surplus for ya, some good, some not so good, and fortunately mostly all goes bang. Where the projectile goes?...results can vary. Just hope mine will still do the business..it was made in 1957. (I had a crate of 1958 that didn't all go boom.) So here's hoping.
As far as the corrosive thing..? I think too many people make corrosive ammo into some kind of boogeymen man. I just put the kettle on, the boiled water goes down the barrel, flushing out the salty primer residue, swab it out with Ballistol, nuttin to it. 5 years in and I do not, and have never had, a corrosion problem. Me likey that corrosive.

[PaulTT-33]

Little update for you Mr.Ridolpho. I've still not fired any of it, the dang wind chill kept things at a frosty -21C today. Maybe first of the week things will improve. I'll report back with my findings. Also the ammo lots are both Factory 61. With the one being produced in 1957 (61/57) and the second stamped 61/66. So far so good. I hope the powder burns just like the Soviet stuff. Makes for a nice Thunder an Lightning effect out of my M-44.

[Ridolpho]

PaulTT-33: We've had a super mild winter out west here. It was +12C at my range in the foothills last Friday. Was using my '43 PU which really seems to like the two different vintages of Chinese that I have. Also tried some silvertip Soviet stuff but every now and then one would give a noticeable delay in firing. Really throws you off. Hope you're weather improves and you are able to get out.

Ridolpho

[Lee Enfield]

...snip...
So thank you for the encouraging words on the Chinese. I've just purchased some 7.62x54r produced in 1957. I've yet to get out and fire any of it yet. So now I'm real curious and can't wait. Sure hope it still goes bang!
Paul

we chronographed some late 1950's (1955 or 1958 iirc) Chinese 7.62x54r from a sealed "sardine tin" and found the average velocity spread to be under 5 fps.

IIRC the highest deviation was 9 fps.

we chewed up a lot of the rounds just doing velocity testing as we had a hard time believing how consistent it was in a 91-30.

I do not recall the group sizes, just that they were fairly good...