7,62x51 FN MATCH empty box id

Hi Guys,

Today I found this empty box, inside I found a fired case with the hdst. FN Nato Cross 64 as you can see in the pictures, Does the case match the box ? No year indications in the box. Besides that, this type of ammo is intended for military matches like the CISM ones ?, Thanks in advance.


Just a thought from a former competitor, 144 grains seems a might light for a .30 caliber match bullet.
Anyone have any idea why, like a short range round, becuse at 800~1,200 yards the smallest puff of air would send that thing skittering sideways.

When all have to use the same ammunition, its not really a drawback. At the annual Imperial Meeting held at Bisley in the UK (300 to 1000 yd), the competitors over decades were issued selected lots of British Army 7.62 mm NATO.

PALMA had (or has) a 155gr max weight.

O.K., but what is the weight of those rounds?
Match shooters help at MCB Quantico, (back when I was shooting), were given/using the 168 grain BTHP ammo.

I am not quite sure what you are getting at, but average round weight is 23.7 g (366 gr). If you want to know bullet weight of the British Army ammunition issued at Bisley, it was 144 grains.

The 168 gr BTHP you mention is probably the M852 round. The late Roy Meketa wrote about it:

“The long awaited M852 proved to be somewhat of a disappointment. The 168 grain bullet, with its short 13-degree boat-tail, was a modified International Hollow Point that gave very good accuracy out to 600 yards but was found lacking at longer distances where velocity went trans-sonic and suffered a significant reduction of accuracy”

William C. Davis Jr. reported similar observations in the American Rifleman. A heavier bullet is not automatically superior at longer ranges.

Edit: The loss of accuracy is due to a loss of stability, due to aerodynamic effects. Every bullet behaves a little different, suffers different drag and consequently the consistency from shot to shot suffers. The 144 grain FMJ remain more consistent from shot to shot and show better accuracy.

I am not aware of any competitor- when I was shooting .308 & .30-06- who did not use a 168 grain bullet going out to 800~1,200 yards.
Granted there greater drop at those distances, but the “wind bucking” ability is much greater than with lighter bullets.
If you were not shooting the military ammo, you shot the equivalent Federal Match load with the Sierra 168 gr BTHP bullet.
Interesting to note that the Federal was a more consistent [accuracy] load than the Military load, and my BEST handloads with Sierra or Hornady bullets shot no better than the Federal.

Jack, in your first message in this thread you brought up 800-1200 yard as the range to consider and debunked the European 144 gr as a “short range round”.
I tried to point out that for example the British with their relatively large long range community may have a different perspective. Let us leave it at that.

I am sorry you misunderstood my question, not a statement.

I was not “debunking” anything, I was simply asking if this was a short range round, hence the reason I asked, (emphasis added), “Anyone have any idea why, like a short range round, …”, because all of my experience over 45+ years of competition was with the heavier 168 grain bullet.