Thursday, September 6, 2012

MArooned Product Review: Pierce Ammunition

A while back (ahem; sorry about that!), the good folks at Pierce Performance Ammunition  were kind enough to send me some popular caliber ammunition to review:


115 grain 9mm FMJ, 230 grain .45 ACP FMJ, 55 grain .223 Remington FMJ, and 168 grain .308 Winchester HPBT ammunition, with several other brands for comparison.

I took all of the above ammunition plus their respective launchers out to the sooper seekrit range, where Doubletrouble was kind enough to set up his Competition Electronics ProChrono Digital chronograph (which I promptly shot. D'oh!). Calibers were tested in the same gun; each brand of ammunition was fired 10 times (except the .45 ACP, which was 8); and the average and standard deviation for each brand of each caliber was noted.

So onto the shootin'!


The 9mm was the first caliber tested. For this testing, we had the Pierce 115 grain 9mm FMJ as well as Blazer and Federal, which were also 115 grain FMJ:


Each manufacturer was shot ten times through a Kel-Tec SUB2000 carbine with a 16" barrel. Results are as follows in feet per second:

Pierce: 1297 ± 30 FPS
Federal: 1350 ± 23 FPS
Blazer: 1334 ± 24 FPS

No issues were observed with any of the ammunition tested, and all three came out statistically even in the velocity assessment.

Next up was the .223 Remington. All rounds were 55 grain FMJ:


These were fired through a Ruger Mini-14 with a 20" barrel. Results, again, in FPS:

Pierce: 3037 ± 30
PMC: 2943 ± 30
American Eagle: 2877 ± 41
Ball M193: 3051 ± 53

The Malaysian ball ammo was the hottest, which comes as no surprise; the Pierce was hot on its trail and nearly 100 FPS faster than the next closest ammo. All rounds fed, fired, and ejected with no issues.

The .45 ACP was next, and all were the standard 230 grain "ball" FMJ:


These were fired through a Colt Gold Cup National Match with a 5" barrel. Results in feet per second:

Pierce: 861 ± 10
Winchester: 824 ± 10
Federal: 829 ± 5

Again, the Pierce ammunition was hottest by a few percent. All three manufacturers ammunition showed little deviation over the eight rounds fired. The Pierce ammunition had one failure to go into battery, but when the magazine was removed and the round ejected and placed back in the magazine, it chambered fine.

The .308 Winchester was the last ammunition tested. Four different manufacturers with four different weights ranging from 145 grain to 168 grain were tested:


The Pierce ammunition was 168 grain hollowpoint boattail bullet; the MFS was a 145 grain FMJ; the S&B (round not shown because I used my last 10 in the test!) was a 147 grain FMJ, and the Winchester was a 150 grain jacketed softpoint hunting round. Results, again, in FPS:

Pierce: 2404 ± 24
S&B: 2689 ± 28
Winchester: 2697 ± 32
MFS: 2582 ± 43

All were fired through a VEPR with 22" barrel. The Pierce ammunition, being the heaviest and largest bullet, barely fit into the 10 round VEPR magazine - and showed the slowest velocity, although at an extra 18 grains over the next closest round, that's not surprising. All ammunition fed, fired, and ejected fine. Even a VEPR's handguard will get really hot after 40 rounds of .308 Winchester fired pretty quickly!


Conclusion: In all cases, the Pierce ammunition performed as well or better than all competitors. A variety of economy and standard ammunition was tested, as well as some hunting rounds for the .308 Winchester. All rounds were fired through the same firearms, with only one minor glitch which was immediately corrected being observed.

Pierce Performance Ammunition - MArooned Tested, MArooned approved!

That is all.



3 comments:

FrankC said...

Do you have any idea why the Pierce round failed to "go into battery" first time?
(I presume that means it didn't load properly. You can tell I'm not a gunnie.)

Ian Argent said...

Willing to share opinion on the SUB 2K? I'm thinking about buying one if it's still on the rack when I have the money.

Jay G said...

Frank,

I'm not sure why the round didn't load completely. It's possible I brushed the slide after releasing and that tiny bit of friction prevented it from fully loading the round into the chamber. Like I said, I removed the magazine, cleared the round, put it back into the magazine and tried it again and it worked fine.

Ian,

So far, after a rather unscientific round count of a little over 100 rounds, the SUB2000 has worked flawlessly. I haven't come across any issues that would make me not recommend it, but bear in mind I've only shot it twice.