The red flakes you are seeing, is NOT the same lacquer that the case is coated in. The lacquer the case is coated in, is to prevent it from rusting and/or corroding. The red you see, is the sealant around the primer pocket and at the throat of the case where the bullet sits. It's designed to keep the moisture out of the bullet, where the powder is. You will ALWAYS get the red flakes in your gun. No way around this. Except on the "Newer Ammo", they simply don't seal the primer pocket or throat of the case. This has absolutely nothing to do with the lacquer on the case itself. As for taking care of it; that's simple: "CLEAN THE RIFLE AFTER USE".
As for the steel ammo not fitting fitting in a 5.56 chambered weapon properly, this is simply wrong. No, steel cases don't seal like a brass case. But this has nothing to do with a "Proper" 5.56 chamber. Explain that to the saiga, galil, ak74, and numerous other rifles chambered in military 5.56 that shoots steel ammo almost 100% exclusively. Yes, american rifles tend to be tighter tolerances; this however has nothing to do with the steel case ammo. You are also incorrect that the carbon build up will "EVENTUALLY" cause malfunctions. No it won't. Not cleaning the rifle will; but not the carbon buildup. The bottom line is: If you use steel case ammo; clean the damn thing. I've had quite a few .223/5.56 rifles that have shot in the 10's of 1000's of steel case ammo.
Now; where some people complain about short stroking and similar, is usually on mil-spec rifles with a heavy buffer. Mil-spec means 5.56. The military doesn't shoot .223. 5.56 has higher gas pressure. That, plus the right heavy buffer/spring, and it operates properly. If you are shooting .223 that happens to be significantly less pressure than the 5.56, and you have a heavy buffer/spring, you may have issues with short stroking and not ejecting/feeding properly. Many weapons like the S&W M&P15 have given up on "Some" Mil-Spec standards, because they prefer that the weapon work properly with what it's going to shoot. Most people shoot .223 ammo; not 5.56. So many manufacturers of weapons, will over-gas the gas system. This allows the rifle to chamber with damn near any ammo that you shoot through it. And because the majority is .223 ammo and not 5.56, this is perfect.
Anyway; each weapon is unique. Some don't like a particular brand of ammo. "Steel or Brass is irrelevant". I've seen some weapons that don't like certain brass ammo. Anyway; if your rifle can shoot steel case ammo, then there is absolutely no reason not to shoot it. Simply clean the rifle when you're done shooting it. There is going to be more carbon deposits in the chamber area than with brass ammo. It will not cause any problems or lead to any malfunction if you clean the gun.
The flakes I saw were the lacquer (actually kinda more brownish looking but red enough). I know what the sealant looks like, that is expected for this brand of ammo. This was not the sealant. You wern't there, so please don't tell me what I saw. I've been doing weapon testing, selection, and tactical use for the last 30 years almost now, with government/military/and now civilian law enforcement. I know unacceptable/defective ammo when I see it. I am not incorrect that the carbon build up can cause malfunctions, you are incorrect in assuming that it can't. You do not need to lecture me on cleaning weapons, i've tested and used literally thousands of all types over the years both american and foreign, some under the most critical of conditions, I think I know a little about cleaning. I even acknowledged that if you clean on a regular basis you should be fine with the steel cased.
This was the lacquer, it was defective, it was acknowledged by the manufacturer as being defective and being the lacquer. Chemical testing revealed it as the lacquer. I'm pretty sure it was the lacquer. Yet your going to tell me that what I saw was not the lacquer?
The issue with steel cases has been tested time and again, the issue exists plain and simple, and trying to wish it away by saying lots of people do it does not mean its not there. You can use what ever ammo you want, i'm not disputing your right to do so. But please don't tell me what I saw and the results of the testing, you wern't there and you don't know.
There is a big difference between using steel case ammo exclusively simply because you want to do so, and it meeting specs. Any weapons manufacturer can say or recommend that, its popular to do that with some grades of weapons. It does not mean that simply because a bullet goes down the bore that everything is all peaches and cream. The mil-spec 5.56 chamber was intended to shoot brass, simply using steel case in it and it working does not mean all the specs are met, because they aren't. The fact that someone can make a steel cased ammo and it works doesn't mean anything. The 5.56 can shoot the SAMMI spec'd .223 but even though you might get away with it you really should not shoot NATO 5.56 in a .223 SAMMI spec'd only weapon, that is enough in its self to outline there is a reason for specs. The steel cased ammo, wolf for example, meets SAMMI specs but it does not meet NATO 5.56 specs and thats what the mil-spec 5.56 chamber is toleranced for - NATO 5.56. Simply because a SAMMI spec steel cased round happens to work also does not mean it meets the mil-spec NATO 5.56 specs. So no, the steel cased round might appear to "fit", and it does physically based upon size, but not firing characteristics for which the mil-spec 5.56 chamber tolerances are intended.
S&W marks the barrel of the OR model weapon with 5.56, not 5.56/.223 or just .223 (maybe they have barrels marked both ways for the OR model, I have not checked into it to make sure but mine is marked 5.56). They mark it that way for a reason, and not just for liability reasons. Its because the weapon was spec'd for 5.56. Sure, you can shoot .223 in it, but its not a recommended practice to shoot NATO 5.56 in weapons marked only .223. In other words, one does not imply the other, and its incorrect to assume it does. Some manufacturers mark their weapons '5.56/.223' but thats not really saying anything, all it says is what we already know, that you can shoot .223 in a 5.56 mil-spec chamber but that does not mean steel cased ammo meets the tolernace specs on firing in the mil-spec chamber regardless of how many people use the steel cased. And of course the manufacturer is going to say the steel cased is recommended, especially with weapons that have their origin with foreign based companies in countries where steel cased ammo is plentiful, or if the steel cased ammo is popular, why wouldn't they as they need to market also to make sales, and part of that is appealing to those that want to do it on a budget and the steel cased just happens in many cases to be cheaper. So yeah they are going to recommend it, but it doesn't mean its in firing specs for a mil-spec 5.56 chamber, it just happens to work. There is one reason, among many, why the majority of ammo for 5.56 on the market is brass cased, its because the manufacturers know the 5.56 mil-spec chamber was intended to use brass. Sure, it could be made specifically for steel, but it isn't. Even the east block countries acknowldge the difference in the steel cased ammo, and as a result their military weapon tolerances are not as tight as american tolerances to account for that difference and the carbon build up, they even know the issues that excess carbon build up between the chamber and the round can cause from steel cases because they know they don't seal that well so they have looser tolerances to account for it so the weapon keeps working. Yet your trying to tell me that the whole east block was wrong, that their whole arms industry for military small arms was wrong?
I never said that my rifle could not shoot steel case, i'm sure it would, I said that I would not use it in my weapons. We don't use it in 5.56 spec'd tac weapons because of legal liability issues. If the ammo is outside the specs for the weapon then the weapon is legally considered not in spec, and if a shooting happens with it and the out of spec ammo is used then the shooting, although justified, could be ruled as "unlawful" because the weapon was technically not in spec at the time with the steel cased ammo. The reason it would not be in spec is because its a known fact that the steel cased ammo does not seal properly per the specs for the 5.56 tolerances and that is backed by years of lab testing that proves it.
Wolf ammo, for example, added the polymer coating in an attempt to solve the sealing issue with the steel case. The ploymer, in theory, is supposed to tighten up the seal some (although it doesn't really make it all the way). If there was not an issue then why does the manufacturer acknowledge it with changing the coating? Its just not corrosion because the lacquer would take care of that and be eaiser and cheaper to use. Its because they knew the issue existed, and they had to market to the american market, and to those who posess american made weapons in other parts of the world as well, so this is their solution to do that. Wolf even acknowledges that the polymer coating is their solution for this issue.
These were test weapons we tested with and I gave the results of that testing, no i did not give all the pictures, pressure tests, charts, emails back and forth with the manufacturer, record of phone calls with the manufacturer, their letter of acknowledgement and their own test results confirming, and test results from the lab, but yeah, i'm pretty sure it was lacquer. It was defective lacquer like I already said. I believe a weapon should be in spec when it fires and the ammo should match the platform in all respects, that goes for every thing from the shooter to the ammo. When I resource a weapon I expect everything to be in spec, i've learned the valuable lessons from the past of what happens when its not. I could probably run 50% ethanol in my vehicles too, but it it would not meet the specs for a gasolene only engine even if it did work and does not mean its correct for the vehicle just because it runs.
I'm not debating if the ammo should or should not be used, just stating fact born out by testing by not only myself but many others as well over the years, and every time substantiated by new testing that shows the same results, and acknowldged by manufacturing practices in countries that developed the weapons to specifically use the steel case (the soviet and east block), and in a way the steel cased ammo manufacture for the subject ammo their self when they say it meets SAMMi specs and in some cases going to the expense and cost of changing the coating just to solve the issue. You sound like I hurt your feelings or something. Go and shoot steel cased to your hearts content.
