If the polymer cased ammunition is non-reloadable, shouldn’t it be 1/3 the price of brass-cased ammo?
Plus, isn’t polymer cases ammunition a poor idea because (if it’s non-reloadable) the Federales could limit future firearm use by denying manufacture of brass case ammo, so folks couldn’t reload, if an ammo shortage happens?
Or, am I just looking for conspiracy theories under every rock, these days.
Back about 30 years ago when the US military first tried this idea, it worked okay as long as they didn’t use it for full-auto fire. In full auto the cases would start to deform from the elevated temperature after a mag or so was fired. So the idea was shelved.
I have some old .38 plastic-case ammo from Back In The Day.
So the basic idea isn’t new, though I’m sure it’s much improved.
1) No, because the cost of the brass isn’t 2/3 of the cost of making a round – and also until the polymer stuff gets to high production quantities, it won’t have economies of scale to compete.
2) They’re not that clever, and frankly not that wicked, either. (Also, if they could get a law to “deny manufacture” of brass cases, they’d have the votes for Massive Gun Control Legislation anyway.)
If anything, the Government would be the first to adopt workable plastic ammo just to save weight in the Armed Forces, thus ensuring a plentiful supply of the most useful calibers – and dropping the price of all the brass stuff because there’d be a new massive oversupply of cases and loaders, assuming the loaders didn’t work without change on the new polymer casings.