Hornady Steel Match (223 and 308)

Steel-cased ammunition has been in use for many years and was probably invented by the Germans and or the Russians prior to or in World War II. It was originally an economy measure as steel is a lot cheaper than brass and is capable of being formed (drawn) into a cartridge case. The real problem is lubrication as brass is soft and can self-lubricate; not so steel, which needs some form of coating to improve primary extraction. Traditionally this was achieved with a lacquer and anyone who has seen a Communist Bloc (Com Bloc) 7.62x39mm round will recognise that smooth, greenish skin on the case.

RUSSIAN INFLUENCE

Today we mainly encounter steelcased ammo manufactured by countries from the old Warsaw Pact in a diverse range of calibres, in the UK the three most prolific are 7.62x54 R (rimmed) 7.62x39 and yes .223 Remington. Most are full metal jacket military ball-types and built for purpose, as in cheap fodder for blatting down the range. However, there was a small UK company who offered match ammo that they built with bought-in steel cases from Russia and the difference between that and their brass-cased ammo was insignificant.

This seems to be Hornady’s approach as they are now offering a product called Steel Match that addresses the twin demons of economy and performance. Currently there are three loadings – in 233 Remington 55 and 75-grain and in 308 Winchester a 155-grain. There are three bullets options boat tailed hollow point (BTHP) match, hollow point (HP) and FMJ, which from my experience are proven performers in terms of accuracy. A steel case supplies the economy and we are told it’s polymer-coated for reliable primary extraction.

 

BERDAN – WHY NOT?

The head stamp is simple with HMC (Hornady Manufacturing Company) with the calibre opposite. However, it seemed unlikely that Hornady would invest in making steel cases and what clinched this was the fact that this ammo is all Berdan-primed. Let me explain; there are two priming systems Boxer which uses a single, central flash hole with the anvil integral to the primer cup; and Berdan, which has the anvil integral to the primer pocket with twin, off-set flash holes and was mainly a military product. Com Bloc and PRC (Peoples Republic of China) ammo usually use corrosive primers, which do little for the bore if left un-cleaned.

My guess - primed cases are brought in, looking at the ammo I’d say they are made in Russia by Barnaul who produce a huge range of steel-cased ammo, they also use Hornady bullets in their own Centaur range of ammunition. The good news is primers are non-corrosive and I imagine the cases are as cheap as chips when bought in quantity, a saving that is passed on to the end user. Plus the rounds are assembled at the Hornady plant so quality is assured. Frankly I couldn’t care less; all I want the ammo to do is work properly and Hornady has never disappointed on that front from my experience!

This is not ammo for the reloader; yes you can re-cycle steel cases but the biggest issue is de-capping, which is a pain as you need either a hydraulic or mechanical claw system. I know as I used to reload steel 7.62x39 (pre-1988) for my semi-auto AK47 and I would not bother again! Plus re-sizing can wear away the lacquer coating and cause hard extraction!

 

50-COUNT

I was sent the 155-grain 308 Win and the 55-grain 223 Rem both in the BTHP loadings. Ammo comes in boxes of 50 in a polystyrene block. Pulling a cross section of the 223 Rem showed some good consistency with an average bullet weight of 54.7-grams with a maximum deviation of 0.6. The 308 Win went to 154.3-grains with a deviation of 0.8. Powder in both cases showed a fine grain with averages of 24.3 – 223 and 44-grains – 308 and deviations of 0.5 and 0.4 accordingly. Inspection showed a heavy roll crimp dead on the canellure of each bullet and both rounds proved a bugger to pull!

Testing was done with my 20” SGC Speedmaster straight-pull AR with a 1-8” twist and a Howa 1500 Varmint bolt-action, 1-10” twist and 24” tube. My 223 is a side cocker and proved reliable in this mode though and compared to a brass case; extraction was a tad firmer now and again, but not big deal either. I would say this: if you have a T-handle only gun then the Steel Match might cause some issues with primary extraction; bear in mind it was made for semi-auto rifles and not hybrids! There were no problems with the 308 at all! Accuracy was good with the 223 doing 0.5-0.75” and the 303 at a solid inch both at 100m.

 

NOT BAD AT ALL

Velocity; well I never expect any factory load will hit the numbers quoted as they always use long barrels for testing. Hornady always print the speeds and drops in 100 yard increments out to 500 yards on the box, which is useful. The 223 is quoted with a muzzle of 3240 fps, which is quick, the average was 2887 fps, with an extreme spread (ES) of 48 fps and a standard deviation (SD) of 27 fps. The 308 was nearer the money at an average of 2557 fps (quoted 2610 fps) ES 72 and SD 36. But as I said both shot well and I consider them two good and shootable examples of these calibres. Overall I like the Hornady Steel Match and for target shooting represents ammunition with potential and at the price I’d certainly invest in some for paper punching!