HKPRO Forums banner
1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
I have read quite a bit about the dangers of using Tula ammo in any rifle chambered for 7.62 NATO, but have also been told that Tula and Brown Bear will work well in a CETME, G3, HK 91, PTR 91 etc. Of course there is always someone who claims that TUla is dangerous in an HK91 and that case head separations are common, but could any issues such as the round failing to fit properly and the mag blowing out of the gun, damaged receivers etc be caused by shooting it while filthy? Also, has anyone had issues shooting Tula from a clean! HK91? Not trying to rehash what has been discussed on other forums, but I wonder if cleanness has something (everything) to do with it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,409 Posts
The only 91 that I've had a problem with was a PTR91 that was chambered in American Eagle. Wouldn't extract Wolf or Tula. Had to use a rod and hammer to get them out. A bit later they came out with a correctly chambered barrel version and called it the GI.

That's all I got for you.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,194 Posts
I shoot plenty of Tula in my PTR91 GI and haven't had any issues with it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,194 Posts
The only 91 that I've had a problem with was a PTR91 that was chambered in American Eagle. Wouldn't extract Wolf or Tula. Had to use a rod and hammer to get them out. A bit later they came out with a correctly chambered barrel version and called it the GI.

That's all I got for you.
The tight chambered PTRs weren't incorrect. They had tried to make the rifles more accurate with a tighter chamber but the problem was the buyers still wanted to be able to use cheap ammo in their more accurate rifles. Thus the issues and PTR went back to the looser spec.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
89 Posts
My ptr91 gi r DOES NOT like steel cased ammo. I had issues with all ammo when I got it and Ptr took care of the issue. It shoots now except with steel cased ammo. I like my rifle, had a paddle mag installed as well.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
883 Posts
That's weird. My PTR91 GI runs fine with brass, steel, and plastic DAG training ammo (with the UB bolt), and does it in full auto.

The only thing I've doing to it, other than swapping out the green skinny stock set for a black wide stock set with a bipod, was to replace the semi-auto bolt carrier for a full auto one (also made by PTR, I believe).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,194 Posts
My ptr91 gi r DOES NOT like steel cased ammo. I had issues with all ammo when I got it and Ptr took care of the issue. It shoots now except with steel cased ammo. I like my rifle, had a paddle mag installed as well.
Sorry but the current GI models should be able to shoot every kind of ammo, so if yours wont shoot steel cased then PTR did not fix the problem. I also thought all the GI R rifles already came with a paddle mag release?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
101 Posts
I have an older spec PTR with the tighter flutes and I shoot almost nothing but Hornady steel match through it. I have never had an ammo related related malfunction with it. Steel cases are fine in PTRs. Tula ammo on the other hand may be another story but I don't subject any rifle I own to that so I cant comment.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
754 Posts
10 flutes, 12 flutes, tighter american eagle spec chambers, standard factory spec chambers, , , , , Its all been extensively covered previously (search function). Not all PTR's are created equal. They have come a long way and make a good product. I would not recommend shooting any type of bi-metal projectile through the guns due to accelerated barrel wear but it is your choice. As far as bullets detonating out of battery and blowing mags out of the gun, I dont think so..... The way the bolt head and the carrier engage and lock would prevent out an out of battery detonation if everything is in spec. If a projectile was mashed back into the case and a high pressure detonation occurred, I could see that damage and excessive pressure exiting the mag well. I would recommend staying with a NATO spec round or a quality manufacture.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,409 Posts
The tight chambered PTRs weren't incorrect. They had tried to make the rifles more accurate with a tighter chamber but the problem was the buyers still wanted to be able to use cheap ammo in their more accurate rifles. Thus the issues and PTR went back to the looser spec.
Yeah, that was their story at the time, and I guess still is. Kept them from having to fix them. At the time, there were too many people with insider information who admitted that it was a mistake. But it seems that usually gives way to revisionist history. At some point, even I will die (or at least lose interest) and there will be no one to tell the real truth about what happened. Even if this special feature story were true, you'd think they would have been a little (ok, a lot) more open about it in their advertising and description of the barrel, other than just printing the typical disclaimer about steel case and cheap ammo.

Not sure why they'd put that "feature" in a short barreled rifle anyway. I wasn't thinking PSG-1 accuracy when I bought a 16" PTR-91. I was thinking sear host battle rifle. I guess I was thinking wrong.

But congradulations for dragging me into an age-old debate and making me relive the pain. I see you benefitted from those of us who bought this defective rifle and got yourself a GI version. Well good for you. But you might want to work on how you show your appreciation. :biggrin:

In any case, regardless of what the basis is for the rifle's limit... it is still a valid limitation and noteworthy to the purpose of this thread. CYA stories and subsequent arguements are irrellavent. I just want people to know they shouldn't buy one of these "special" rifles and expect it to shoot a very wide variety of ammo, typically useful in a real HK91.

Edit to add: Oh, and for the record, I have a Coharie CA53AR that uses AR mags. That particular feature is nice, but not nearly nice enough to make up for the fact that it will only use steel case ammo reliably. The chamber on it is too tight and brass cases will get stuck in it. I've even had it tear cases in half when trying to extract them. The steel cases seem to be the only thing strong enough to keep them in one piece when extracting from the gun. I had to buy a special case extractor to get the front part of a broken case out of the chamber. They only good thing about the defect is that the residual case ring will keep a new round from inserting far enough into the chamber for the gun to go into full battery. So no chance of an explosion when the event occurs. I've put a few hundred rounds of Wolf and Tula through it in full auto though. I guess the brass on Federal 193 stuff just expands too much and gets torn apart during extraction. Very weird. Maybe the flutes are cut deep enough.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,409 Posts
And another thing, in the spirit of full disclosure, I still think the PTR rifles are beautiful, and very well built. I'd probably buy a GI if I felt I needed one, or could remotely justify getting it. I bought a PTR 32 and it works well. Also shoots any kind of ammo.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,194 Posts
Yeah, that was their story at the time, and I guess still is. Kept them from having to fix them. At the time, there were too many people with insider information who admitted that it was a mistake. But it seems that usually gives way to revisionist history. At some point, even I will die (or at least lose interest) and there will be no one to tell the real truth about what happened. Even if this special feature story were true, you'd think they would have been a little (ok, a lot) more open about it in their advertising and description of the barrel, other than just printing the typical disclaimer about steel case and cheap ammo.

Not sure why they'd put that "feature" in a short barreled rifle anyway. I wasn't thinking PSG-1 accuracy when I bought a 16" PTR-91. I was thinking sear host battle rifle. I guess I was thinking wrong.

But congradulations for dragging me into an age-old debate and making me relive the pain. I see you benefitted from those of us who bought this defective rifle and got yourself a GI version. Well good for you. But you might want to work on how you show your appreciation. :biggrin:

In any case, regardless of what the basis is for the rifle's limit... it is still a valid limitation and noteworthy to the purpose of this thread. CYA stories and subsequent arguements are irrellavent. I just want people to know they shouldn't buy one of these "special" rifles and expect it to shoot a very wide variety of ammo, typically useful in a real HK91.

Edit to add: Oh, and for the record, I have a Coharie CA53AR that uses AR mags. That particular feature is nice, but not nearly nice enough to make up for the fact that it will only use steel case ammo reliably. The chamber on it is too tight and brass cases will get stuck in it. I've even had it tear cases in half when trying to extract them. The steel cases seem to be the only thing strong enough to keep them in one piece when extracting from the gun. I had to buy a special case extractor to get the front part of a broken case out of the chamber. They only good thing about the defect is that the residual case ring will keep a new round from inserting far enough into the chamber for the gun to go into full battery. So no chance of an explosion when the event occurs. I've put a few hundred rounds of Wolf and Tula through it in full auto though. I guess the brass on Federal 193 stuff just expands too much and gets torn apart during extraction. Very weird. Maybe the flutes are cut deep enough.
I remember their advertising clearly mentioning the tighter chamber for increased accuracy. I would venture your "insider" probably meant it was a "mistake to try the tighter chamber since people still wanted the cheap ammo capability", more so then it was a "mistake in which the chambers were cut wrong".

As to why offer it even in a 16" rifle, increased accuracy is always a selling point, as long as it doesn't come with a loss in reliability.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,409 Posts
I remember their advertising clearly mentioning the tighter chamber for increased accuracy. I would venture your "insider" probably meant it was a "mistake to try the tighter chamber since people still wanted the cheap ammo capability", more so then it was a "mistake in which the chambers were cut wrong".

As to why offer it even in a 16" rifle, increased accuracy is always a selling point, as long as it doesn't come with a loss in reliability.
Nope, still alive. Try again later.

Now who wants to trade me a GI for a much more accurate version? I'll even throw in a couple of boxes of Tula ammo for your other rifle.

:biggrin:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,194 Posts
Nope, still alive. Try again later.

Now who wants to trade me a GI for a much more accurate version? I'll even throw in a couple of boxes of Tula ammo for your other rifle.

:biggrin:
No idea what you mean. You are obviously free to believe whatever tin foil hattery you like. I said they were attempting to increase accuracy...I never said they accomplished it. Done here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,409 Posts
No idea what you mean. You are obviously free to believe whatever tin foil hattery you like. I said they were attempting to increase accuracy...I never said they accomplished it. Done here.
Tin foil hattery? Next I'll be a nazi. You need to work on the originality of your personal insults.

I'm not denying they were trying to make a more accurate rifle. I think they just got unwittingly carried away with how they attempted it and left many customers stuck with something less than desirable.

And by the way, as far as having no idea what my "still alive" was in reference to, go back and read the first paragraph of my post that you quoted. If you can't remember something like this for 10 minutes, or correlate the reference, why the hell would anybody have any faith in what you remember from something happening years ago?
Yeah, that was their story at the time, and I guess still is. Kept them from having to fix them. At the time, there were too many people with insider information who admitted that it was a mistake. But it seems that usually gives way to revisionist history. At some point, even I will die (or at least lose interest) and there will be no one to tell the real truth about what happened. Even if this special feature story were true, you'd think they would have been a little (ok, a lot) more open about it in their advertising and description of the barrel, other than just printing the typical disclaimer about steel case and cheap ammo.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
89 Posts
Sorry but the current GI models should be able to shoot every kind of ammo, so if yours wont shoot steel cased then PTR did not fix the problem. I also thought all the GI R rifles already came with a paddle mag release?
My ptr gi-r was bought before the paddle was installed. When I sent mine back to get fixed they polished the bolt head. It works like it should except it does not work with steel cased ammo. It does the same thing before I sent it in. Now if I take my other hk bolt carrier group and put it in this rifle the. I am back to not working again. So I am thinking its a barrel trunnion issue. Because they polished the sides of the bolt head were it seats in the trunnion. I just have not talked to them about it. It shoots with brass cased ammo. That is why I haven't complained so much. I reload and I reuse my Ptr cases.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,194 Posts
Tin foil hattery? Next I'll be a nazi. You need to work on the originality of your personal insults.

I'm not denying they were trying to make a more accurate rifle. I think they just got unwittingly carried away with how they attempted it and left many customers stuck with something less than desirable.

And by the way, as far as having no idea what my "still alive" was in reference to, go back and read the first paragraph of my post that you quoted. If you can't remember something like this for 10 minutes, or correlate the reference, why the hell would anybody have any faith in what you remember from something happening years ago?
So you are in agreement with my comment then, yet you still say I am wrong. You just admitted there was "no mistake" made in the parts for the rifles just that, like I said, they did it on purpose and their attempt didn't turn out like they thought it would.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,194 Posts
My ptr gi-r was bought before the paddle was installed. When I sent mine back to get fixed they polished the bolt head. It works like it should except it does not work with steel cased ammo. It does the same thing before I sent it in. Now if I take my other hk bolt carrier group and put it in this rifle the. I am back to not working again. So I am thinking its a barrel trunnion issue. Because they polished the sides of the bolt head were it seats in the trunnion. I just have not talked to them about it. It shoots with brass cased ammo. That is why I haven't complained so much. I reload and I reuse my Ptr cases.
The sides of the bolt head don't seat in the trunion at all. The only parts that touch the sides of the trunion are the rollers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,409 Posts
So you are in agreement with my comment then, yet you still say I am wrong. You just admitted there was "no mistake" made in the parts for the rifles just that, like I said, they did it on purpose and their attempt didn't turn out like they thought it would.
I'm sorry. I thought we were debating if they did anything wrong. Not that they intentionally did something wrong when making the gun. I guess I'll make my points more clear to avoid confusion:

1. They goofed up the design by sending the wrong dimensions to Thompson for manufacturing the barrels.
2. They claimed they did it on purpose to make a more accurate rifle.
3. They claimed that the initial disclaimer was clear enough to make the problem the fault of the buyer.
4. They offered no resolution to unsatisfied customer.
5. They created a new model called the GI to re-enforce their story and capture the part (majority) of the market that wanted the traditional capabilities of a battle rifle.
6. People are reporting problems with the new design working correctly with surplus ammo.
7. Their disclaimer, at the time, was almost exactly worded like every other gun manufacturer's statements, making it seem just as meaningless, thereby misleading.maybe not in court, but certainly in the real world.

Ok, I added 5 and 6 and 7 because that stuff is going on but I just hadn't brought it up previously. Just figured that since I was listing my points of displeasure with them, I might as well list them all.

Even with all that, I'd still buy a gun from them. As I stated before, I think they make some very good ones and don't mind supporting them. So all in all, I guess they got away with it. But I still reserve my right to bitch about it from time to time. Especially when a new shooter shows up and asks about shooting certain types of ammo in one of these guns. And that's what happened in this thread.

Just remember also that an undisclosed number of these "special" guns are floating around out there. People are buying them and then learning that they won't do what they think they should. I'm here to warn them, so they don't get told by PTR that they are dumb after the purchase. Ok, not so much told as greatly implied. If anything, I'm keeping people from getting pissed off at PTR, in my own self-therapeutic way.

I guess I also don't approve of the design in this gun to some level. A barrel should only be chambered like this on an obvious target rifle, like a PSG-1 clone, or something similar, and then have a very detailed marketing description stating that it has a high precision chamber with tolerances too tight for surplus or steel case ammo. IIRC the tar sealed stuff is a problem also. It all turned my gun into a bolt action.
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Top