White Tipped 7.62 NATO (+) WRA 67


I first thought this (+) WRA 67 headstamped round was a XM256 type loading but it weighs 372.8 grains which puts it in the M80 weight range.

The tip marking material looks like it might be lithographic ink so it may be a target marking round.

Has anyone seen anything similar?



There is no doubt that you have something different. Exactly what, I can’t say. Every so often on the auction sites you find color tipped 7.62mm that are obvious fakes, or reloads, because the average guy likes the colors. Maybe that’s what it is? There are silver-tipped 7.62 with that same headstamp even though I’m not sure WRA made API as late as 1967. But yours is obviously white. It doesn’t look like factory applied white paint so maybe it is a target marker. But why would they use white as a marker?

Interesting. I hope someone else will know. Maybe NATO Dave?



Could it be, WRA also made these cartridges?



I don’t know if WRA loaded the XM256 types or not but if they did this is not one of them. It has the wrong bullet and the cartridge weighs too much.


After studying this round some more I think it is probably a M80 Ball that someone has tried to make look like a XM256 type by painting the tip white and by seating the bullet deeper into the case to hide the knurled cannelure. The XM256 rounds have a smooth cannelure. What do you think?



WRA did not load the XM256 cartridges. As Phil said, it’s a completely different cartridge.


I noticed the deep seated bullet but it didn’t fit with any cartridge that I knew. You may be correct about it being a fake XM256. For some reason, if you show a colored tip cartridge on the auction sites you’ll get a lot of bids. Non collectors love them. And many of them are fake.

Have you checked the bullet with a magnet? It almost looks like a 7 ogive. If no one else can come up with an explanation you may have to pull it.

Ask Bill Woodin. I understand that he now has one of every cartridge ever made and maybe he can ID it.




Hmmmm. The white tip (+) WRA 67 apparently has a GMCS jacket (equal attraction anywhere on the bullet) but the other (+) WRA 67 has a GM jacket (no attraction anywhere on the bullet). I would go back to step #1 and start over on this one if I could remember what step one was!!



The M80 was supposed to have a lead core GM bullet but you’ll find a lot of them with GMCS, including the earliest FA. But all of them should have the 10 ogive bullet. If that’s a 7 ogive on yours it would indicate an earlier bullet such as an M2 or, something else such as a tracer, etc.

It looks as though the crimp has been ironed out so you probably won’t lose a lot by pulling it, but I didn’t tell you that. If it turns out to be some experimental you may not want to pull the bullet.

Good Luck with figuring out what to do.



Phil, Interesting cartridge. Ray, good eye for spotting the different ogive. I doubt this was made up for the auction. That tip was painted some time ago, based on the different color of the jacket where the paint is worn and further down the jacket. The tip of the bullet is different, but I don’t know the degree of variation in the M80. Interesting cartridge.


Dutch & others

Yesterday I posted a comment that said WRA developed and loaded XM256 cartridges. That is not correct. My brain was still on the T314 and M198 from the earlier thread. As far as I know, XM256 and XM256E1 were loaded only by FA and it was an FA undertaking from the beginning.

Thanks to Frank Hackley for spotting the error and pointing it out to me.

Sorry if I led anyone onto a wrong track.