MILITARY SPECIFICATION AMMUNITION FOR CIVILIANS?

Paul Bradley works in the defence sector — previously as a ballistician and now as a portfolio director. He looks after several Beretta-owned ammunition manufacturers, such as Swiss P, Norma, RWS and MFS. After visiting all the plants to look at their process and quality procedures, here he poses an interesting question… Is military small arms ammunition “better” or “worse” than its civilian equivalent?

We hear the term mil spec mentioned in all kinds of advertising but few understand what it pertains to and how it may either help or hinder them.

Firstly, there is some misunderstanding in the UK regarding small arms ammunition made for military use. I have heard some say (including some FEOs) that civilians are prohibited from using mil-spec ammo. This has some truth to it. Civilians are prohibited from using AP (armour piercing) and Incendiary. These items would fall within the section 5 category and even the projectile alone cannot be owned by anyone without the right section 5 credentials. Some have been confused as to whether enhanced penetration ammunition such as 5.56 SS109 would be considered “armour piercing”. Currently it is not as it does not meet the legal specification for AP and was originally designed to defeat barriers, not armour.

Given that AP and API form a pretty small volume of all the mil-spec ammunition out there that leaves civilians free to use FMJ and the enhanced penetration types like SS109/M855. It also allows civilians to use BTHP/OTM products which have been specifically made for military use.

So, what are the benefits? Well the main difference are the standards that military ammunition must meet. The Manual of proof and inspection procedures (MOPI) defines in detail the tests which must be conducted on ammunition lots. The document is vast and makes interesting reading for those of the nerdier ilk! Dimensional spec, pressure, drop tests, environmental testing, waterproofing, velocity spread, and precision are among the specifications. Although some of these may not have vast importance to all sporting shooters it is rather nice to know that the ammunition you are using is of a robust enough nature to pass such rigorous testing. And the companies do take this very seriously because the ammunition lots are often tested at random in front of the military consumer (known as a FAT/LAT, factory/lot acceptance test). Failure to pass these tests would result in the entire lot being refused.

The standards above far exceed those required of civilian grade ammunition which in legal terms, in the UK, would be to meet CIP standard. This would define only dimensions, safe pressure and basic function testing. That is not to say that a manufacturer may have their own rigorous set of tests, but that will differ depending on who you buy from. Generally speaking civilian ammunition is not waterproof as it will not have been sealed at the primer and neck. Most companies will have a minimum velocity requirement, a velocity spread requirement and a precision requirement. One should always bear in mind that most precision requirements are performed using a proof barrel. This will not necessarily mean that it will transpose to your specific rifle. It would be a case of try it and see. On the other hand, military ammunition is often required by the customer to provide a certain precision standard in a rifle and this would be considered a strict pass or fail situation. Again, that is not to say that civilian manufacturers do not do this through self-regulation, but it is not a strict requirement.

The other positive aspect of military ammunition is often cost. Economy of scale can reduce the price considerably. A military manufacturer may only produce a handful of calibers with a few natures of each. They can run those machines 24/7 to meet yearly contractual obligations. On the sporting side you might be expected to make 50 or more different calibers. Each caliber will get its turn on the production line which means downtime whenever there is a change. I certainly remember purchasing ammunition at Bisley where “Milsurp” (military surplus) brown boxes of 7.62x51 and 5.56x45 represented the most cost effective purchase.

So, what are the downsides to using military ammunition as a civilian? Well, the first is availability. You can generally find it if you try but it will often be from old batches (sometimes very old!). Although it is sealed from water ingress, this will not prevent propellant from becoming degraded by temperature change over time. This will not likely be dangerous but is likely to effect things like minimum velocity, velocity spread, and precision. Regarding precision, the military spec is usually wider than would be deemed acceptable by a competent target shooter. This is mainly due to the limits of the firearm it will be used in. Why spend the extra money building 0.5moa ammunition when it will be fired from a 2moa carbine, you would never realise its potential. What about Sniper grade? It does exist but in different forms. Some military manufacturers will simply mark out exceptional lots from their standard production. Others such as Swiss P, RWS, and Norma will manufacture specialist extreme precision ammunition for this specific purpose. Sub MOA in these cases is the norm and I have seen sub 0.5MOA consistently from some lots in the right rifle.

What should a civilian consumer take from this article? Well on a personal level I like to purchase from companies who have competency in both military and civilian markets. They will often carry over the stringent performance and quality testing protocols to their civilian range as the structure already exists.

If I were shooting a discipline where extreme precision was not a requirement such as CSR, then I would try to locate some of the cheaper milsurp ammunition. This is because I do not require anything more than that. For precision target shooters and hunters, military ammunition would probably not be a benefit. Expanding military grade is rare due to the Hague convention, it is used in small volumes by specialist Police and CT units. So very little out there for hunters. The same can be said of the Sniper grade lines. In theory it would be good for the target shooter but there is not a surplus of it so it just does not end up on the civilian market place.

We’d love to hear your thoughts on this topic. Email your views to editorial@twsgroup.com.