I purchased a partial case of LC 97 pull down ammo from a large, reputable ammo dealer in the South. This ammo feeds into my AR just great, but I play heck getting it to eject (dry loading, not firing). I really need to pull hard on the charging handle to eject this stuff. In your learned opinions, should I try to shoot this ammo?
Thanks
This post would look really good in the Reloading and Ammunition area.
Why are you “dry loading” live ammunition into the weapon without shooting it? Think safety here.
What type of weapon is it specifically? DPMS, Colt, BM, RRA, etc…
I wouldn’t be concerned until I properly lubricated the weapon and then took it to the range. My guess is if you have an AR with the correct specs you shouldn’t have any issues.
You are correct about the safety issue of course, I just put this gun together and was making sure all functioned properly before shooting it for the first time. The upper came from J & T from KY. The lower is a DPMS. The rifle shoots very well with new PMC bronze (.223), and is very accurate. It just seems to me that any round I want to eject (unfired), should not require both hands on the charging handle to come free. If this is not an uncommon problem, then I want to shoot this LC97 stuff. I’ve put several AR 15’s together for friends, but this is my first to own and shoot. 20" A2. As far as lube goes, I got the lube specs. off this great forum. Thank you very much for getting back to me so fast. BTW, I’ve run about 100 round through it to date. Many Thanks.
I want to eject (unfired), should not require both hands on the charging handle to come free.
sounds to me as though you have a .223 Remington chamber and feeding 5.56mm NATO ammo.
The rifle barrel is clearly marked 5.56 NATO. What are the chances the chamber is wrong? I did ask at the time of purchase and was told 5.56 NATO and .223 would work fine. Only other markings on the barrel are DSC 1/9. Thanks for tryng to clear this up for me.
Yes I had a colt 6721 that was marked nato but was blowing primers. I them “dry loaded/ejected” live rounds to check with all the ammo that I and the dept used. Had to mortar many out, and several left bullets in the leade or pushed the bullets into the casing.
Dry loading and ejecting a method I now used before firing anything. Rounds should extract and eject easily. this one was sent back to colt for a new barrel.
Did Colt acknowledge that there was a chamber/barrel problem? Any time I’ve had this happen it’s been an ammo issue. I.E. improperly sized cases.
A case guage is a better way to eliminate the ammo as the issue in this guy’s scenario. Although I have no doubt that a case guage would reveal a problem with the ammo.
I strongly advise against using LIVE AMMO as a function check on ARs too. It’s asking for trouble and doesn’t really tell you much more than my gun will strip a round from a magazine. Manual cycling a round through an AR tells you NOTHING about what the gun will do in live fire.
markm, I know there’s a safety issue about dry running live ammo, but the need to see if all is in order before firing is something I’ve always done. I may be wrong in my approch, thanks for the warning and concern.
Mike240, I’m going to a gunsmith to have the chamber checked out. With any luck, it’s just the ammo, and not something more. I’d hate to send a gun to the manufacture with times being what they are.
Thanks guys
First of all, I ground down a firing pin to prevent any accidental firing from BCg impact and always use a safety tube. Colt did not initially acknowledge the bad chamber until…
I sent them many rounds of ammo with a legend. Each round was numbered and dropped through a gauge to double check the factory deminsions. Each original factory round was then measured with micrometer. Each chambered round was was “painted” with a perm. marker prior to chambering. This way, contact points within the chamber and with the rifling could be seen with the naked eye as scratches. The round was re measured for OAL to see if early or too much contact with the rifling was causing the bullet to push into the casing. I used many quality brands of factory ammo both Nato spec and 223 SAAMI.
Colt got some 40 rounds from me with a data sheet. Some bullets stayed in the chamber/leade area upon extraction, dumping powder into the FCG.
After see all this, Colt replaced the barrel (I know because I permanently marked the one on the carbine I sent them.
I do disagree with manual cycling telling you nothing. When rounds have to be fed and locked using the forward assist, they should not be there. When you have to buttstroke the weapon to get them out of a clean chamber, they should not be there. These instances will can overpressure upon firing and weapon damage or shooter injury. At the least, they will cause inconsistent pressure curves that will have a negative impact on consistent accuracy. Just one blown primer can take an AR out a fight when it locks up the FCG.
Mike240, it sounds like you did a lot of research. I think I would have tried to get S.A.W. to take a look at it if you had eliminated any kind of ammo problem. Even if they said it had to go back, at least you would have ammo against any resistance that Colt gave you.
So they did replace the barrel though… That’s an interesting case. Glad it worked out.
You may have an issue with the chamber, ammunition, or both. You need to check the chamber with definate in-spec 5.56 and check the ammo in a known 5.56 chamber, if proper measuring tools are not available.
J&T is not well known for adherance to spec, and just because a barrel says 5.56 NATO does not mean that it really is. A couple of years ago I was in a Dean Caputo Operator’s Course in which anyone that wanted could could have their “as good as” chamber reamed with Ned Christiansen’s 5.56 chamber reamer. Every chamber it touched (except for Colt M4s) removed some amount of metal, the only question was how much would come out.
See THIS THREAD about a massively out of spec Oly chamber (can’t believe I beat MarkM on this one). Not only was the chamber NOT 5.56, it wasn’t even .223!
Anyway- an incorrect chamber can lead to all kinds of issues, not the least of which is exactly what you are experiencing.
The M855 PD can also be an issue. PD, as you know, means it should be pulled down into it’s basic components and started over. Trust me anything the military rejects you don’t want. The M855 we get is about as far from match grade as you can imagine. From dents, dings, massively varying seating depths, off-center projectiles, tarnished brass, weird primer depths, I have been issued it all. If those made it through the inspection process I can’t imagine what issues there will be with the rejects. Yes I am aware that some of it looks great, but without real purpose-built measuting instruments you are simply stuck with a visual inspection. Who knows what issue it is that caused a bunch of good-looking cartridges to be rejected- but I bet it isn’t because it’s too perfect.
Hope you can get to shooting again soon.
Huh? I was the first to reply in that thread. 
I meant to bring it up in this one ;).
OK, not to scientific but I think I’ve found my problem with my LC 97 pull-down ammo. When I paint the loaded shell casing with felt pen ink and chamber the round, the only area that has wear is the shoulder of the casing. Every round I tryed had the same wear and was hard to eject. Is this just a “break-in” problem? Or should I take it to a gun smith and have him ream the chamber? Thanks to all whose expressed an opinion.
I am of the opinon that any serious use AR should have a 5.56 chamber, so I think you should have it reamed with the correct 5.56 reamer, of which the only one I have faith in is Ned Christiansen’s.
However- it sounds like the brass is out of dimension if the only wear is on the shoulder. Try the ammo in a gun that has proven its ability to operate with 5.56 ammo (M855, M193, or if for some reason you have it- Mk 262 Mod 0 or 1).
What the hell is pull down ammo anyway? It doesn’t sound good. I doubt I’d buy it… let alone shoot it in my guns.