7.62mm m198


#1

The 7.62MM M198 (multi ball) was a short lived cartridge. But, even during it’s short existence it spawned at least one offspring, the Low Recoil XM 256, and a lot of questions.

Maybe someone can tell me:

When was the M198 officially adopted?
Was the M198 a NATO cartridge?
Has anyone ever seen an FA M198 with the NATO (+)?

Those 3 questions will do as starters.

Ray


#2

Ray

In regards to your question #3.
E. L. Scranton in his work “Small Arms Ammunition Identification Codes” lists M198 rounds (+) 65 FA and (+) 69 WRA on page 521.6. He also lists Ball, Duplex T314E3 (which became the M198) with headstamp (+) 58 WRA on page 521.3.


#3

You’re supposed to start with easy ones Ray!


#4

Phil

Interesting, and thanks.

Interesting in that most FA that you see are FA65 and FA66 without the (+).

WRA 58 (+) would seem to pre-date the E3 and be more in line with the E2. But, since WRA tended to use whatever brass they had on hand it’s hard to classify them based on hs. Jim has a later WRA without the NATO (+).

And the XM256 and XM256E1 can be found with both FA 66 and FA 66 (+).

What does it all mean???

Ray


#5

I have a T314E3 with this headstamp - unusual in that there is no Nato symbol. Ray and I debated whether this might indicate it to be another version (a T314E4 perhaps?) but Bill Woodin has concluded that it is just a T314E3. He explained that as the T314E3 was not an approved round the ‘correct’ headstamp would be without the Nato mark. He went on to explain that many of Winchester’s rounds do have the Nato mark but this was due to their tendancy to utilise any available brass.

Jim


#6

The information I have is that M198 ammunition was produced by Frankford Arsenal from 1964 to 1967 and by WRA from 1964 to 1966. I don’t believe the M198 was used outside of US miliatary field testing.

Dave S


#7

An interesting variation of the M198. The bullet has red paint over the regular green tip - I assume for target marking when looking at bullet dispersion.

Box label (very faint - I can’t read the powder #) reads

CARTRIDGE DUPLEX 7.62MM T314E2
PROPELLANT WC ??? Lot 42
PRIMER REMINGTON No 39
LOT FA-X7 62-2619
FRANKFORD ARSENAL

Headstamp is (+) WRA 64.

Dave

Now certain that cartridges and box do not belong together - sorry for any confusion.


#8

Dave,

A very interesting cartridge but the box label has thrown me into total confusion! T314E2?? Surely that’s the version with the short 77gn bullets and an o.a.l. of 2.5".
The cartridge pictured looks like the longer length T314E3/M198 at 2.79".

Jim


#9

Whilst we are discussing the M198 Duplex series can anybody offer any explanation for the rough finish on the surface of this Winchester-made T314E3 bullet? These bullets were made by copper-plating the steel jacket but the majority have the usual smooth and polished finish. I’ve also found the same finish on some of the 6.35mm/.25 Winchester cartridges which I believe also have copper-plated bullets.

Jim


#10

Jim

I think NATO Dave simply hit the wrong key. It is the E3. Either that or it throws another monkey wrench into the discussion.

This thread has only continued the confusion surrounding this series of cartridges. And possibly made it worse, if that is possible. I still don’t know when the M198 was adopted and whether or not it is a NATO cartridge. There does not appear to be any rhyme or reason to the headstamps. We still don’t know what ever happened to the T314E1. The cartridge between the E2 and E3 in size has no documentaion, as far as I know. Your question about the rough WRA bullets has gone unanswered for the past couple of years.

It’s time to appoint someone to find the answers. I nominate Slick Rick. ;)

Ray


#11

Can’t believe y’all have never heard the story on why the T314E3’s bullets have such an unfinished finish (No offense to the Norwegians or Swedes among us).
Well, here’s the answer, and I quote:

So, hope that settles that issue.

Glad I could be of service. You’re welcome.


#12

SlickRick,

I concur, thats about the most definitive answer I’ve read.


#13

Unfortunately, I didn’t make a typo - the box is labeled T314E2.

Dave


#14

I just found in my junk room this canvas bag with a cardboard box inside (empty).

The belt should be 4 green tip + 1 orange tip, right?

Does the lot number LOT FAPL462 sheds any light? FA must be Frankford, but PL?

Cheers,

Schneider.


#15

Very nice item! I was aware that belts of duplex and tracer were used in M60’s for ground defense in Vietnam but I’ve not seen the cloth bags before. The belt should be 4 green tip duplex to one orange tip tracer as you suggest.

NATO Dave