Noticed on the Winchester website today, “Active Duty” M1152 9mm. Seems a lot of hype for flat-nose FMJ 115gr 9mm.
Marketing my friend… marketing! A lot of folks will buy it just because it must be the “best”.
They are ignorant of LPTA product selections/procurements.
‘*’ = Lowest Price Technically Acceptable
“Active Duty”. How about inactive reserve???
In the case, it isn’t ALL hype. Of course, the names are picked to influence the potential buyer to purchase it. But in truth, judging from the picture of the cartridge, that is the current US military version of the 9 mm, so I suppose “Active Duty” is as good a trade-name as any for this ammo.
Does anyone know if this is actually on the market already? This is basically the cartridge that was already sold in the “wood-box” commemorative 9mm sold with those other WWII commemorative calibers by Winchester, even though that particular caliber is not in WWII commemorative-marked packaging.
I received my 100 rd box and was pleased t see this headstamp with very small letters! Has anyone seen other headstamp variations on thew M1152 round???
The bullet looks very similar to the early bullet design by the AF Armament Lab at Eglin AFB in the late 1970s before they contracted for the “R&D” headstamped rounds.
Lew - are you talking about the 100-round box that is wooden, with two 50-round boxes (see below) inside? Or are you talking about the box shown above on this thread, which holds 150 rounds?
I have the wood box, and both of the cardboard boxes shown below held the standard circular primer crimped M1152 ball rounds with flat nose bullet. The headstamp is the same you show, except the date is “18.” You will see that box takes a more sensible name of “Service Grade.” I have not yet found a place to buy the 150 round “Active Duty Box.” I want one because I want the box. I will shoot up all be a few rounds.
Mine is just a Tan box, slightly speckled and not like either of the boxes shown here. I have to run but will post an image later.
Now that I see it again, it looks to be the same thing as this recent Winchester line called USA Ready -
Lew was the AF test bullet not heavier? like 124-125 grain? Agree its similar shape. As an aside, as an active reloader/shooter, I always liked flat nose bullets. Seemed more stable in pistol vs RN. Think its has something to do with center of pressure vs center of mass location. Same experioence in rifle bullets Longer ogove spitzers are more stable at distance.
Lew - nice box. Hope I can find one. Interesting that it seems in recent years, perhaps just short of simultaneously, Winchester has had at least three different boxes for this round, under two different Names. The references on your box to “Modular Handgun System” and to "Selected to service the U.S. Warfighter are “known facts” but interesting to be included on the box none-the-less. Thanks for posting the picture.
I found my order and I got it from www.cheaperthandirt.com. The item is at: https://www.cheaperthandirt.com/ammunition/handgun-ammo/9mm-luger-or-9x19mm/
Winchester may be selling their excess production and trying out a series of boxes to see what best attracts the market.
Thanks Lew. I will try that source. Unfortunately, due to general confusion about the new California Ammo law, effective July 1, 2019, many of these companies either quite dealing completely with California, or won’t ship ammo to California. I don’t know about Cheaper Than Dirt, as I have never dealt with them, or at least for a very, very long time.
Your box code, NG11, is 11 July 2018. I have an identical box, but mine has code PK31K (13 Sep 2019) but it has a W M A 1 9 headstamp.Interesting to have two box styles with the same ammunition!
I recently picked up a box of this ammo. The headstamp is WIN 9MM LUGER. The box code is PD62 which is 26 Apr 2019. The primer is copper whereas the rounds from the other boxes pictured here have brass primers.
Interesting that they do a commercial version of this load with a different box, case & primer, and call it “USA READY”.
Sounds like the marketing guys are running wild!
Thanks Joe. Age and a lack of proof reading! Mistake corrected.