loading old 5.56 steelcore into 22-250

J

johnwilliamson062

Moderator
If I pull the bullets from old steel core surplus and put it into a 22-250 cartridge would that qualify as manufacturing armor piercing ammunition?

I was originally planning to do this, but I realized it may be illegal.
 
The definition of AP ammo is at 18 USC sec. 921(a)(17):
"(B) The term `armor piercing ammunition' means-

(i) a projectile or projectile core which may be used in a handgun and
which is constructed entirely (excluding the presence of traces of other
substances) from one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper, or depleted uranium;
Click to expand...

According to the law, it is if it can be used in a handgun.
 
I have some Ranger LE stuff. I believe it is the SS109, but it is not marked so.
You are correct in that it is a "penetrator" ammunition technically.

I did not realize the AP limitations were for handguns only.

Why is it I can not find any AP bullets to reload with?
 
I have some Ranger LE stuff. I believe it is the SS109, but it is not marked so.
You are correct in that it is a "penetrator" ammunition technically.
Click to expand...

There is nothing "technically" about it. BATFE has specifically and officially stated that M855 and SS109 is NOT armor piercing.
 
Ok, so the BATFE has laid out technical specifications defining what armor piercing is. Technically(according to those specifications) ss109 is not. Does not change the fact it will turn body armor into swiss cheese.

How about my question as to why I can not find any bullets of this design? Would save me having to pull them all.
 
Ok, so the BATFE has laid out technical specifications defining what armor piercing is. Technically(according to those specifications) ss109 is not. Does not change the fact it will turn body armor into swiss cheese.
Click to expand...

Could be because "armor piercing" usually had in mind the piercing of steel or aluminum armor on armored vehicles, not the soft wearable body armor. If they used the latter definition, any rifle cartridge is suddenly "armor piercing" and therefore illegal, and that's just a ludicrous position- one you won't find even mild anti-gun folks taking.
 
Does anyones opinion change if this is M995?
My understanding is this is not the standard round issued to soldiers. I am not sure though.
Like I said these are not labeled with military designation, in fact I have not opened the boxes yet.

I have put M855 through steel fence posts, so it can definitely go through some steel and aluminum.
 
Last edited:
Does anyones opinion change if this is M995?
Click to expand...

The M995 round utilizes a tungsten core to give it armor piercing ability. I still think you are OK to load 22-250 rounds to be used in a rifle, but they will be armor piercing rounds, by definition. Shoot them from a Thompson Contender or Encore in a pistol configuration, and you are probably illegal.
 
My understanding is that the term "manufacturing" means a lot more than your casual reloader assembling a cartridge from components. Manufacturing is meant as a person or facility that creates the projectile to be used in the cartridge... making a penetrator, wrapping it in lead and then jacketing it.

I've seen TC's in .30-30 that have used projectiles from old WWII .30-06 blacktip AP. Still isn't manufacturing according to most folks I've asked about it. Just assembly from existing components.
 
I don't know if the same principle could be applied specifically to armor piercing, but reloading from used components can be considered to be manufacturing by the BATFE:

Reloading of used shells or cartridges
is considered manufacturing for
purposes of excise tax. Sale of such
shells by the reloader is subject to the
excise tax. However, if the reloader
merely reloads shells belonging to a
customer and is paid for labor and materials,
the reloading service is not a taxable
sale, as long as the reloader
returns the identical shells provided by
the customer to that same customer. In
such instances the customer is the
manufacturer and would not be liable for
tax if the shells are manufactured for
personal use. If the customer sells reloaded
shells or uses them in a business,
e.g., shooting range, the customer
would be liable for the tax.
Click to expand...

That's on page 165 of P5300.4
 
Well, I think the end solution to this is I am going to pull one bullet and dremel it to see what is inside. If it is ss109 I am just shooting them in my CMP shoots this summer(out of my untuned 580 series mini-14:) .) If it is tungsten I will just sit on them unless I someday find myself in that good ol' SHTF situation, in which case pulling the bullets and loading them in my 22-250 will have to be put on the to do list if there is time.

I did not pay over market price for SS109 for them, so maybe that is all they are.
I was under the impression they were not and I was getting one heck of a deal on some surplus LE ammo, but maybe I am a sucker.
 
Last edited:
Not sure where to find it in law....

But I believe it is not legal to sell "armor piercing ammuniton" to the public. You can buy the pulled military AP bullets, but loaded ammuntion, no.

So, if you bought the ammo from a reputable dealer, odds are in your favor the bullets do not meet the legal definition of armor piercing, no matter what they may be called.

You can own AP ammo. You can shoot it (where allowed), but you cannot buy it, sell it, or even give it away, except to a licensed dealer.

I could be in error, and if so, I hope some of our legal eagles here will correct me, (and give the reference), but I believe this is the law, currently.
 
I bought it from one of the online dealers regularly mentioned on here. It was some time ago and I do not remember which but I am not concerned about my present situation being illegal. It was someone pretty well known and if they were publicly offering them illegally I think someone would take notice.
 
How soon we forget

Could be because "armor piercing" usually had in mind the piercing of steel or aluminum armor on armored vehicles, not the soft wearable body armor. If they used the latter definition, any rifle cartridge is suddenly "armor piercing" and therefore illegal, and that's just a ludicrous position- one you won't find even mild anti-gun folks taking.
Click to expand...

But you will find the rabid anti-gun folks taking that position, including the esteemed Senator from Mass, so recently diagnosed with a brain tumor (something we could have told them years ago, based on his actions)

The fight in Congress back in the days of the "Cop Killer Bullet" hysteria was what lead to the regs as they now are. As originally introduced, the bill would have banned all ammo capable of penetrating soft body armor vests. Kennedy was a big supporter. This bill would have outlawed virtually every single centerfire rifle cartridge, along with many pistol loadings.

The NRA fought hard, but it was an uphill fight against considerable political pressure. Something was going to be passed. What the NRA got as a compromise was the law we have today, preserving nearly all common ammo, as falling outside the written definition of "armor piercing" as finally adopted.

Not a real win, but a hell of a lot better than the loss we were facing had the bill been passed as originally proposed.
 
But you will find the rabid anti-gun folks taking that position, including the esteemed Senator from Mass, so recently diagnosed with a brain tumor (something we could have told them years ago, based on his actions)
Click to expand...

Oh, certainly. There's no stance too unreasonable, no position too illogical. Hence my use of the term "mild." :D I was referring to the majority of the people who think "common sense gun regulations" are a good idea and aren't interested in complete citizen disarmament.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top