wolf ammo statement retraction
A couple of weeks back, I meet a gentlemen shooting at the range with some wolf 9mm. It did not look like the same ammo I had tested before with very bad results. I bought a box from him and cut open several of them, scrapped the coating, miked it all, with the results being that case walls, steel, and coating was different from what I had tested before. It was enough to warrant trying it again.
I have been no fan of Wolf, not even an impartial observer due to the damage their previous variant did to some of my firearms.
However; I pride myself on keeping an open mind, so I performed the same round of test this week as I had done before with markedly different results.
Test parameters (tools, standards, and firearms) were as follows:
Glock 17 20 33 round factory mags loaded to capacity, 40 standard factory magazines loaded to capacity. 1,340 rounds total, 10 rounds used for dimensional etc test.
The remainder of the two cases of 1K (650 rounds)used in one of the 33 round glock stick mags.
To give an idea of what the nature of the 'test' were, here are 'some' of the tools utilized. This is not a standard shoot em up bang test.
Optical Pyrometer utilizing ASTM E639-78(1996)Standard Test Method for Measuring Total-Radiance Temperature of Heated Surfaces Using a Radiation Pyrometer
DFT Gage (dry film thickness) of my own design, calibrated to NIST SRM 1358B
Stylus profilometer calibrated to NIST SRM2071b
starrett series 221 micrometer
About a dozen more various tools and apparatus unique to metallurgy and micro dimensioning.
I think you get the idea.
First the rounds;
In previous test, the dimensional quality of the lacquer coated rounds left a lot to be desired. The polymer variant was another story. The DFT was in my opinion exceptionally uniform. The Ra and Rt values of the surface roughness was also markedly improved, improved to the point that they barely exceeded the value of some brass cases. standard diameter, inside and out was well within spec for a 9mm nato round.
It was almost as if this was not manufactured on the same machinery, as the previous variant of wolf.
There is not enough meat on a 9mm case that is stamped on the end to get a proper hardness detent to measure, so the value is inferred from the feed lips of the 33round mag, and lack of striations in the chamber typically found after shooting a large quantity of rough hard cases.
Over all, that area was a vast improvement over the previous round.
As for shooting performance;
200 rounds rapid fire back to back.
On the 201st round, firing ceased until the barrel temperature dropped back down to ambient with a round still in the chamber.
Slow fire for 100 rounds.
then cool to ambient.
300 rounds, rapid fire. Barrel temp was measured at 278F.
Cooled to ambient again.
Process was then repeated with the exception that after the 300 round cooling, the remainder of the loaded rounds were shot in 100 round increments (except for the last one which was 140) with 5 minutes inbetween.
In the middle of each large sample (300 rounds) a 10 round average velocity shoot was made. Average deviation was less than 39fps.
By this time, any of the previous reported stuck cases should have happened. The latest variant of polymer coating held it's form without melting and jamming the firearm. No significant residue of the coating could be found in the chamber. The spent cases retained their appearance, but did measure rougher than the unfired cases.
Reliability of fire was 100%, no Failure To Feed's or Failure To Fire's. Group size grew by 35 Percent at maximum temperature measured. (some human performance issue there that I cannot quantify, It's been a while since I shot that much.)
I enlisted some help for the remainder of the session loading 1 magazine over and over to assess the potential for feed lip wear.
No change was discernable in the feed lip dimensions.
After all was said and done, spring tension for the extractor was measured, dimensions taken on the claw itself. No change from previous known values.
Summary:
Wolf has apparently gotten their quality issues well under control at least so far as the 9mm is concerned.
Therefore I have to retract my earlier statements in regards to the wolf ammo and state that at least the batch of 9mm tested this last week was indeed of a lot higher quality and reliability than the previous lacquer coated variant.
I have been no fan of Wolf, not even an impartial observer due to the damage their previous variant did to some of my firearms.
However; I pride myself on keeping an open mind, so I performed the same round of test this week as I had done before with markedly different results.
Test parameters (tools, standards, and firearms) were as follows:
Glock 17 20 33 round factory mags loaded to capacity, 40 standard factory magazines loaded to capacity. 1,340 rounds total, 10 rounds used for dimensional etc test.
The remainder of the two cases of 1K (650 rounds)used in one of the 33 round glock stick mags.
To give an idea of what the nature of the 'test' were, here are 'some' of the tools utilized. This is not a standard shoot em up bang test.
Optical Pyrometer utilizing ASTM E639-78(1996)Standard Test Method for Measuring Total-Radiance Temperature of Heated Surfaces Using a Radiation Pyrometer
DFT Gage (dry film thickness) of my own design, calibrated to NIST SRM 1358B
Stylus profilometer calibrated to NIST SRM2071b
starrett series 221 micrometer
About a dozen more various tools and apparatus unique to metallurgy and micro dimensioning.
I think you get the idea.
First the rounds;
In previous test, the dimensional quality of the lacquer coated rounds left a lot to be desired. The polymer variant was another story. The DFT was in my opinion exceptionally uniform. The Ra and Rt values of the surface roughness was also markedly improved, improved to the point that they barely exceeded the value of some brass cases. standard diameter, inside and out was well within spec for a 9mm nato round.
It was almost as if this was not manufactured on the same machinery, as the previous variant of wolf.
There is not enough meat on a 9mm case that is stamped on the end to get a proper hardness detent to measure, so the value is inferred from the feed lips of the 33round mag, and lack of striations in the chamber typically found after shooting a large quantity of rough hard cases.
Over all, that area was a vast improvement over the previous round.
As for shooting performance;
200 rounds rapid fire back to back.
On the 201st round, firing ceased until the barrel temperature dropped back down to ambient with a round still in the chamber.
Slow fire for 100 rounds.
then cool to ambient.
300 rounds, rapid fire. Barrel temp was measured at 278F.
Cooled to ambient again.
Process was then repeated with the exception that after the 300 round cooling, the remainder of the loaded rounds were shot in 100 round increments (except for the last one which was 140) with 5 minutes inbetween.
In the middle of each large sample (300 rounds) a 10 round average velocity shoot was made. Average deviation was less than 39fps.
By this time, any of the previous reported stuck cases should have happened. The latest variant of polymer coating held it's form without melting and jamming the firearm. No significant residue of the coating could be found in the chamber. The spent cases retained their appearance, but did measure rougher than the unfired cases.
Reliability of fire was 100%, no Failure To Feed's or Failure To Fire's. Group size grew by 35 Percent at maximum temperature measured. (some human performance issue there that I cannot quantify, It's been a while since I shot that much.)
I enlisted some help for the remainder of the session loading 1 magazine over and over to assess the potential for feed lip wear.
No change was discernable in the feed lip dimensions.
After all was said and done, spring tension for the extractor was measured, dimensions taken on the claw itself. No change from previous known values.
Summary:
Wolf has apparently gotten their quality issues well under control at least so far as the 9mm is concerned.
Therefore I have to retract my earlier statements in regards to the wolf ammo and state that at least the batch of 9mm tested this last week was indeed of a lot higher quality and reliability than the previous lacquer coated variant.
0
-
Wolf is just a Trade Name. in the past I run into Wolf ammo made in Russia and Germany. Who ever actually owns the Wolf brand wised up because they got so much bad press regarding their steel case handgun ammo. I personally had so much trouble with the crap, I quit using it.
Thanks for the heads up! It must of cost you a bundle to buy two cases of 9mm, the way ammo prices have been for the last 8 months.0 -
What is your question?
CP0 -
quote:Originally posted by rufe-snow
Wolf is just a Trade Name. in the past I run into Wolf ammo made in Russia and Germany. Who ever actually owns the Wolf brand wised up because they got so much bad press regarding their steel case handgun ammo. I personally had so much trouble with the crap, I quit using it.
Thanks for the heads up! It must of cost you a bundle to buy two cases of 9mm, the way ammo prices have been for the last 8 months.
Actually It was cheap compared to what I've seen lately. 200 a case.0 -
quote:Originally posted by cpermd
What is your question?
CP
No question involved, it was a clarification as I had previously stated my earlier findings of the wolf with the lacquer coating which was none to kind. I like to be as accurate as posssible with information I put out, therefore this post in form of a retraction of the previous statements, and a statement of the current in hand data.0 -
Thank you very much for taking the time gathering then share this information. Have you done any recent testing with wolf steel cased .223 Remington ammo? 0 -
I have been using wolf in .32, 9mm, .45, and .223 for some time and I have never had problem with it. Great practice ammo. 0 -
Wolf works pretty good. Sometimes the laquer dirties up your AR quickly. But I have had good luck with every other caliber except .223. The 7.62x39 is great, .40 S+W, 9x18 Makarov, 9MM Luger, heck even their .45's work decent. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by quickmajik
Thank you very much for taking the time gathering then share this information. Have you done any recent testing with wolf steel cased .223 Remington ammo?
I have not had the opportunity to do that one yet. .223 in an AR, .45 in a glock, and .308 in an HK will be next when I have the time.0 -
Thanks for the post cwi555.
As a possible explanation/answer to your question. I know Prvi Partizan has been making the Wolf 'Gold' line. It wouldn't surprise me if they were contracted to produce new ammo. Some of the old Wolf ammo I know, was Russian surplus. Other companies are finally getting their stuff out of Russia and selling it. Bear ammo for one, new and surplus 7.62x54.0 -
I appreciate your time and efforts and cash even if cpermd doesn't. I am not planning on switching to Wolf however. 0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
10 comments