Depleted Uranium 7.62

After seeing a few sales on the gun auction sites for an Argentine Depleted Uranium (DU) Incendiary 7.62x51, which I’m sure is fake, was just wondering how many countries have or had made a DU round in 7.62?
The only one I’m aware of is the US black saboted version with LC/70 head stamp. Anyone ever throw a Geiger Counter on one?
Could I humbly ask to possibly see a sectioned one?
Thanks kevin

Apologies if you already know this, but for anyone reading this, do not try and section any DU round. The dust that will be produced is in small enough particles to be inhaled, which is very dangerous.

I believe it could also lead to the workshop (or house) that you do it in being sealed off as a radiation contaminated site.

The U.S., Pacific Technica version has a 72 gr. proj. with a 56 gr. penetrator, made by DARPA and TRW, I believe

& yes they make a Geiger counter sing.

DU is radioactive but only about 60% as radioactive as naturally occurring uranium.

[quote]Depleted uranium (DU; also referred to in the past as Q-metal, depletalloy or D-38) is uranium with a lower content of the fissile isotope U-235 than natural uranium.[2] (Natural uranium is about 0.72% U-235—the fissile isotope, and the DU used by the U.S. Department of Defense contain less than 0.3% U-235). Uses of DU take advantage of its very high density of 19.1 g/cm3 (68.4% denser than lead). Civilian uses include counterweights in aircraft, radiation shielding in medical radiation therapy and industrial radiography equipment and containers used to transport radioactive materials. Military uses include defensive armor plating and armor-piercing projectiles.



Falcon, There has been a lot of hype on how terrible DU is, but it doesn’t even make the list of “toxic metals” on Wikipedia. in fact they say specifically

Cadmium probably tops the list of toxic metals and is considered “extremely toxic” with very low acceptable exposure limits.

There has been a lot of effort to ban the use of DU, but the science to support that is pretty thin on the ground. A British Army report found that chemical toxicity of Uranium was low. The risk was radiation but that requires inhaling significant quantities of DU dust. Another case like Agent Orange where it is more hype than science.

Still it is wise not to create DU dust, though it is probably significantly lower risk than Cadmium or Lead dust, or at least that is what I understand and what Wikipedia seems to say.


The guy selling the “Argentine DU API” knows they are fake, and is a scammer in that regard, with prices of $450.00 for 10rds, and some people have bought it. I’m certain that it is nothing more than Russian API, resized and loaded into 7.62 cases.

Of course it´s a fake, Argentina never produced depleted uranium AP ammunition, neither as experimental level. Our AP cores are steel or tungsten. BTW wolfgangross your sectioned cartridges are amazing !!!.

Here’s a picture of a sectioned one:



Is this a joke? … d5c9d0ac00


Is this a joke?[/quote]

The company is getting ready for Amazon’s delivery drones… I personally find it quite comical!

To Dutch: You may get a chuckle out of this article…

[quote=“Lew”]Falcon, There has been a lot of hype on how terrible DU is, but it doesn’t even make the list of “toxic metals” on Wikipedia. in fact they say specifically

I know it is probably not as dangerous as some of the hype makes out. However I thought that fine dust caused by cutting or sanding it when sectioning could be a problem as it could be easily inhaled. I hae also heard that the dust will ignite on contact with air, although I am not sure if this is correct. I certainly wouldn’t want to cut into a piece of DU.

I’m sure it was on this forum that I read that DU dust could lead to an area being sealed off while it was decontaminated. In today’s world, think of the chaos that would be caused if someone was found to be cutting into DU in a city house.

In my opinion Wikepedia is a poor source for scholarly, accurate material, especially assesment of dangers. It is not that it never contains scholarly, well-documented and well-researched material. It is simply because anyone can add to it. That includes self-styled experts that really don’t know the subject matter.

I would suggest that you read the IAA Article appearing in the IAA Journal Issue 434, Nov/Dec 2003, pages 20 and 21, entitled “Denal” - “DE”-“Depleted Uranium”: A Warning," by Fred Davis. I actually submitted this article on behalf of Fred, who indicated he had broached the subject with IAA before with no reply nor any mention in their publications, and felt that he might be sending it to the wrong people.
I submitted this to Chris Punnett on August 13, 2003, with the following opening paragraph to my letter of submittal:

“Enclosed herewith is a letter addressed to you, but sent to me for review, by my dear friend Fred Davis, on a matter of much concern to him. It is also of concern to me, after reading his letter and enclosures, and reviewing my own, fairly substantial file on DU munitions.”

Fred is a retired professional chemist, who was with the Port of San Francisco U.S. Customs Laboratory. He had military service in Germany during the cold war, I believe in the Medical Core. He has a degree in Chemistry, and as he said in his letter, which was published as an article, forty years of hands on experience in the field, including dealing with known and potentially radioactive materials. He is, in short, a professional in the field, and agree or not. his article is a scholarly review of the hazards involved with, among other things, the sectioning of DU cores.

aAnyone interested in a professional view of the dangers inherent to DU should read this article. If so requested, and approved by Chris Punnett, I will scan the article and have it put onto the forum.

Falcon - you are correct about DU being pyrophoric. Finely divided Uranium can ignite spontaneouly in air. That is briefly covered in the cited article.

1 Like


“I would suggest that you read the IAA Article appearing in the IAA Journal Issue 434, Nov/Dec 2003, pages 20 and 21, entitled “Denal” - “DE”-“Depleted Uranium”: A Warning,” by Fred Davis"

the “denal” is depleted uranium ?
because i know an existence of a 5.56x45 french round with “denal” core but some people think is another version of tungsten ? and for others is DU

lacquered steel case ,bullet with black tip and magenta annulus
the other round but with tungsten core had a bright red annulus

on this site “denal” maybe a variation of tungsten

The Safety Datasheet of Denal is found here:

As far as i can tell, it’s no DU (but it does contain Cobalt)

It’s classification specifies “not hazardous material pursuant to Regulation (EC) no. 1272/2008 EC or
EC Directive 67/548/EEC *Compact Metal / Alloy with no Risk to Human Health or the Environment”

The interesting article by Fred Davis originates from the assumption that Denal really refers to the material more commonly known in the U.S. as “DU - Depleted Uranium”. However, this is not correct, as the materials known as DENAL are not depleted uranium but tungsten based alloys containing reinforcing elements. These are widely used for many different applications, but only one specific alloy with a density of 17.5 g/cm3 is used for penetrators, that is half between tungsten carbide (15.6 g/cm3) and DU (19.1 g/cm3). Also, cobalt-free DENAL is used for environmentally friendly projectiles (green ammo), for example.

These alloys were developed by CIME Bocuze of Saint-Pierre-en-Faucigny, France, which since 1999 was separated from GIAT and is mostly owned by the Austrian group Plansee.

Regarding the meaning of DENAL explained as “Denuclearized Alloy”, I don’t think that this is correct and it seems that this is the main reason that created this confusion. Based on other trademarks used by this company, it seems that this is an acronym that combines the words “Dense” and “Alloy”.



Is this a joke? … d5c9d0ac00[/quote]
I have had a theory going for a while that there is some entity, or group that has been engaging in making these phony viral ammo products as part of some sort of contest or prank, and it might be all the same person(s). It began with “Seasonshot”, and then “Flower shot”, and now this “Tacnition”. They make the product and promote it on some sort of cheap web page in such a way as to be perfectly packaged for outlets such as Huffington Post, “Before-its-news”, and others, and from there the viral phenomenon starts. When I first came across “Jihawg ammo” I was sure they were in that category, but they turned out real. The annoying thing is that the news outlets who cover these products report them as if they are 100% real.

Another product which followed this exact same M.O. was “Glow Bar” - a glowing crow-bar intended for use as a weapon.

I cannot comment, other than from what I have read here, about the correctness of the assumption that “Denal” is not depleted Uranium. Even Mr. Davis, in his article where he mentions Denal primarily as simply another term for “DU,” qualifies his sentence with the caveat that “He assumes” that it is what is commonly called “DU.” Evidently, they are not one and the same.

However, let us not lose sight of the fact that the article is about Depleted Uranium and the hazards involved with it in its various forms, including the dust caused by cutting into it.

The feasibility of a 7.62mm DU flechette cartridge was explored by the Air Force Armament Laboratory in the late 60’s. The final version consisted of a 28.5gr DU flechette with a lightweight plastic sabot loaded into a standard 7.62x51mm case. Velocities in excess of 4000fps were achieved. Interestingly, concerns were expressed about in-flight ignition due to aerodynamic heating although this did not appear to be a real world problem. The details can be found in AFATL-TR-69-53 dated April 1969.

With regard to the potential hazards involved with DU particularly dust created by sectioning, it is extremely difficult to find objective information due to vested interests. Unfortunately even scientific peer reviewed articles are not immune from bias.

So saying, a WHO monograph on the health effects of DU exposure states “Potentially depleted uranium has both chemical and radiological toxicity with the two important target organs being the kidneys and the lungs.” With regard to the latter, the monograph states “…. inhaled uranium particles, 1-10 µm in size, tend to be retained in the lung and may lead to irradiation damage of the lung and even lung cancer if a high enough radiation dose results over a prolonged period.” This is an extremely good reason NOT to cut DU penetrators.