Korean M2 Ball

While sorting through my friends ammo dump, I came across a supply of M2 .30-06 ammo in 8rd en-bloc clips for the M1 Garand.
A check of the headstamp tells me it was made in Pusan, Korea in 1972.
Now I know a lot of countries have made this ammo. For the last couple of years I've been shooting the CMP Greek stuff in my rifle.
But for the life of me, I just can't remember anything about the Korean ammo.
So how does this stuff rate? Good? Bad? Use it or scrap it?

KA marked Korean ammo has corrosive primers in them. The PS stamped Korean ammo has non-corrosive priming. I am talking, obviously, of the M2 ball ammo. A lot of this stuff was brought in around 12-15 years ago. It is starting to show up again now. I was very pleased with the function and results where were uniformly excellent. The brass has proven to be very good for reloading. The KA was corrosive without exception. The PS was uniformly non-corrosive.

found a list of PS lots to be weary of. I got this years ago off the forums from somewhere.

There are some very bad, dangerous lots of PS headstamp. Here is a list of known bad lots. Just because a particluar lot isnt listed as bad doesnt mean it isnt.

PS 2-033 (Bad - one report - unspecified problem)
PS 2-035
PS 2-088
PS 2-090
PS 2-093
PS 2-094
PS 2-097
PS 2-098
PS 2-100
PS 2-101
PS 2-104 (one positive report based on very few rounds fired)
PS 2-105 (one positive report based on a few hundred rounds)
PS 2-122
PS 2-124
PS 2-127
PS 2-128
PS 2-135
PS 2-144
PS 2-145
PS 2-146
PS 2-147
PS 2-148
PS 2-149
PS 2-151 (Maybe OK - based on VERY limited information)
PS 2-152 (VERY Bad - numerous reports of ruptured heads!)
PS 2-154 (Some positive reports / negative report [splits] based on sketchy info)
PS 2-155 (Bad - one report of splits 2 out of 250 rds)
PS 2-156 (??? - there are reports it's fine - one report of splits)
PS 2-157
PS 2-161
PS 2-165
PS 2-169
PS 2-171 (one negative report of blown primers)
PS 2-173
PS 2-177
PS 2-181
PS 2-183
PS 2-184
PS 2-185 (One negative report but only on hearsay)
PS 2-186
PS 2-187
PS 2-192
PS 2-193 (??? - some of this lot badly corroded)
PS 2-194
PS 2-195
PS 2-198
PS 2-204
PS 2-205

PS 2-152 (VERY BAD - DANGER - numerous reports of ruptured heads!)
PS 2-154 (VERY BAD - DANGER - multiple negative reports splits and ruptured head)
PS 2-155 (VERY BAD - DANGER - multiple negative reports splits and ruptured head)
PS 2-156 (BAD - multiple reports of serious splits)
PS 2-158 (VERY BAD - DANGER - Nasty split cases...all the way to the head of the case)
PS 2-161 (reports of leaking primers, one blown)
PS 2-165 (Bad – multiple reports of leaking primers and one report of serious split case from mid-case into head, but not through rim)

If you are interested in Korean ammunition manufacture, this is a brief discussion from another forum:

"The Poongsan Metal Manufacturing Co. Ltd. had a commercial plant at Pusan, South Korea, at the same time the ROK Army was producing some ammunition at their own plant near Pusan, sometimes called the Pusan Arsenal, but actually located at Dongrae, which is also on the southeast side of South Korea.

The PMC commercial plant made ammunition with the "PS" headstamp, while the Dongrae (Pusan) Army plant made ammunition with the "K A" headstamp, which I assume means "Korean Army" in English.

In 1978, the Army Arsenal at Dongrae (Pusan) was transferred from the ROKA to the PMC Co.
At this time, in 1978, the K A headstamp ceases to be used. The very first headstamps on ammunition (.30 Carbine and .223) made at Dongrae under PMC control had an interesting headstamp, originally thought to be poorly stamped in Western Alphabet letters, but found to be actually in Korean ideographs that translate to "First Production Lot 1978."

Subsequent production at the Dongrae plant under the control of PMC was headstamped "PSD"
to separate it from the commercial plant's production, headstamped simply "P S."

So, the summary is:

KA - Product of Dongrae (Pusan) Army Plant before 1978
PSD - Product of Dongrae (Pusan) plant after PMC took control in 1978
PS - Product of the original commercial factory at Pusan owned by PMC Ltd.

I am not sure when PMC first built or acquired their commercial factory. However, the earliest date of which I am aware that appears on PMC military-headstamped ammunition is "73" (1973) on .30-06."

I bought 1200 rnds. of the PS stamped Korean ammo for $75.00 per 400 about 15 or so years ago. It came in ammo cans with 20 rnd. boxes. I've shot and reloaded some of it several times I've never had any problems.

Can't say if it is true or not, but I have read claims that "some" PS was loaded with corrosive primers and "some" KA with non-corrosive.

Why take the chance - assume it is all corrosive & clean accordingly - cheap insurance for a small investment of your time.

I;ve shot and still have several 50cal ammo cans of the Korean stuff packed on M1 clips on bandoleers.
Some is KA and some is PS headstamped.
Never had a problem with any of it in the M1 Garand where most of it went through. Some shot up in a couple '03 Springfl'd sporters and even some in a 95 Winchester.
++I always clean the rifles as if the ammo was corrosive primed..why guess.

The brass of either headstamp reloads nicely and I've also used it to form other calibers such as 35Whelen, 9.5 M/Schoenauer and even some 256 Gibbs Magnum. Thought the latter was more easily made from commercial 7 & 8x57 so to avoid neck turning.

I had heard that certain
'lots' of some of the ammo was NG,,but no lot#'s on the repackaged(?) ammo in the 50cal cans that I could find.

Thanks for the info .
This stuff is KA stamped. I guess its good to go. Just need to remember to clean it when I get home.

The CMP forums has a bunch of info regarding both the KA and PS ammo, probably have to go into the ammo section and scroll back about 7 or 8 pages to get the info if anyone is interested. Frank

"Never had a problem with any of it in the M1 Garand where most of it went through. Some shot up in a couple '03 Springfl'd sporters and even some in a 95 Winchester."

There used to be warnings about the old Model 95s in .30-'06 that the action was not strong enough to withstand .30-'06 pressures and could stretch over time. I had a .30-'06 M95 quite a few years ago and always fired only light-end handloads in it for that reason.

Quite a bit of dated chatter on various sites about different headstamps for the Korean stuff. Some good, some bad. My limited experience with it (MG's, Garand, etc) has been good.

DWalt said:

"Never had a problem with any of it in the M1 Garand where most of it went through. Some shot up in a couple '03 Springfl'd sporters and even some in a 95 Winchester."

There used to be warnings about the old Model 95s in .30-'06 that the action was not strong enough to withstand .30-'06 pressures and could stretch over time. I had a .30-'06 M95 quite a few years ago and always fired only light-end handloads in it for that reason.

Click to expand...

I'm aware of the headspace problems told about in the '06 versions of the M95.
The face of the bolt itself sets back a few .000 in the imprint of the case head. The bolt itself does not set back against the locking lug nor the action stretch on any I've seen and I've only encountered a couple '06 versions with excess headspace.

Excess headspace is not that uncommon in a leveraction rifle anyway if you were to go around and randomly check a bunch.
Many of the '06 95's have been converted to 35Whelen and 9.3 versions w/o any problems.
Even the 7.62Russian cal works in the area of 52/55K psi and that was chambered in the M95. No problems there with set back bolt faces that I ever heard of. Maybe the larger area case head spreads the pressure around better.

I still keep high pressure loads to minimum use, hat's good advise for anyone shooting the oldsters.
The rifle is 102yrs old this yr. It gets mostly a wimpy cast bullet diet. It's a John Oberlies, Dayton, Oh (re)stocked rifle that just sees range duty.

When I had my .30-'06 M95, on several occasions I entertained the notion of having it re-barreled to .444 Marlin. But I never did it, or even checked to determine if it was even practical. It would have been my version of the M95 .405 Winchester. It would have been a rather dumb idea anyway, as mine was all original and in fairly high condition. I eventually sold it or traded it, but I don't remember the circumstances. One of those I wish I had kept.