Winchester Ammo Recall | TigerDroppings.com

Posted byMessage
hashbrowns
LSU Fan
Shitholeastan
Member since Nov 2011
2380 posts

Winchester Ammo Recall



As if it wasn't hard enough to find as it is.

LINK

quote:

Through extensive evaluation Winchester has determined the above lot of 5.56mm M855 ammunition may contain incorrect propellant. Incorrect propellant in this ammunition may cause firearm damage, rendering the firearm inoperable, and subject the shooter or bystanders to a risk of serious personal injury when fired. DO NOT USE WINCHESTER® SYMBOL NUMBER ZGQ3308 LOT NUMBER WCC10M106-004 5.56mm M855 62 GRAIN PENE AMMUNITION. The ammunition Symbol Number and Lot Number are ink stamped on the outside of the 900-round shipping container, and on the outside of the 30-round carton as indicated here:







Back to top
Share:
wickowick
LSU Fan
Head of Island
Member since Dec 2006
24840 posts

re: Winchester Ammo Recall


Shit, they need to swap out 2 for 1...





Back to top
  Replies (0)
KingRanch
LSU Fan
The Ranch
Member since Mar 2012
57215 posts

re: Winchester Ammo Recall


As fast as these manufacturers are pumping this out there's going to be some QC concerns.





Back to top
hashbrowns
LSU Fan
Shitholeastan
Member since Nov 2011
2380 posts

re: Winchester Ammo Recall


Winchester hasn't changed their production at all. They were already going 24/7





Back to top
  Replies (0)
bapple
LSU Fan
Capital City
Member since Oct 2010
7522 posts

re: Winchester Ammo Recall


quote:

As fast as these manufacturers are pumping this out there's going to be some QC concerns.


Hash, as true as that may be, I'm with KR here.

Ammo manufacturers are in panic mode right now. This was bound to happen and I don't really blame them for it. They couldn't have foreseen the Newtown fiasco.






Back to top
  Replies (0)
Nascar Fan
LSU Fan
Columbia La.
Member since Jul 2011
15465 posts

re: Winchester Ammo Recall


quote:

As fast as these manufacturers are pumping this out there's going to be some QC concerns.






Back to top
  Replies (0)


Back to top