Does the "grain" rating refer to the amount of powder in the shell or the weight of the projectile? Please no flames. Regardless of the answer why would a higher grain of the same ammo (9mm in this case) cost less than the lower rated grain amount? I see CCI 115-grain Blazers listed at $21.16 and 124-grain of the same ammo, at the same store, listed at $14.96

The grain listed on factory ammo is the weight of the bullet. 115gr projectile versus 124gr. Sometimes heavier bullets are more costly due to more raw materials going into it, but there are lots of factors involved. Maybe they have an overstock in 124's and are trying to move them for instance.

OK, thanks Dan.

Perhaps the 115grain bullets were higher quality self defense ammo. That is always pricier than regular range ammo.

Heavier bullets are going to be more expensive becusae they use more lead, but that is only one factor affecting the final price.

Like Frank said we did this once this week already but while many of us know this I was really suprised at how many people didnt know this. Hopefully a few more who didn't know this or we're afraid to ask now know. Remember we aren't borne with this knowledge.

I must have missed that thread, sorry. I usually quickly look at each subject line even if I don't read the thread.

 

As far as the pricing question, here's the example I was using.

 

http://www.sears.com/shc/s/p_10153_12605_SPM5848810101P?sid=IDx20101019x00001a&ci_src=14110944&ci_sku=SPM5852508901

 

http://www.sears.com/shc/s/p_10153_12605_SPM5021364101P?sid=IDx20101019x00001a&ci_src=14110944&ci_sku=SPM5021364101

 

Same store, same ammo with the exception of 115 vs. 124 grain, however the higher grain is less expensive. I'm not advocating the price in general or the fact that Sears is selling ammo. I'm just questioning why would a heavier projectile be cheaper?

You also have to consider inventory turn. They might be well stocked on 124 gr ammo and sold out of 115 gr ammo that was purchased in the same time frame. When they go to replenish their 115 gr inventory, they find there was a price increase and mark the new stock up accordingly.

 

BTW - either one of those prices are ridiculous for aluminum-cased ammo. And what the heck is Sears doing carrying ammo? They are owned by K-Mart, who Rosie O'Donnell convinced not to sell firearms (and, one would assume ammo) some time ago.

 

Adios,

 

Pizza Bob

You also have to consider inventory turn. They might be well stocked on 124 gr ammo and sold out of 115 gr ammo that was purchased in the same time frame. When they go to replenish their 115 gr inventory, they find there was a price increase and mark the new stock up accordingly.

 

BTW - either one of those prices are ridiculous for aluminum-cased ammo. And what the heck is Sears doing carrying ammo? They are owned by K-Mart, who Rosie O'Donnell convinced not to sell firearms (and, one would assume ammo) some time ago.

 

Adios,

 

Pizza Bob

 

 

That's exactly why I added this to my reply.

 

I'm not advocating the price in general or the fact that Sears is selling ammo. I'm just questioning why would a heavier projectile be cheaper?

Sears sells ammo????

You friggin' guys are killing me .

Sears sells ammo????

 

holy over priced.

Nascar, don't buy ammo from Sears. Why would you even order that!

 

j/k'ing

Please do not post telling people to use the search function...

This a community..... Either answer your fellow members question or just move onto another thread

I find it rude and I will just delete your post

Please do not post telling people to use the search function...

This a community..... Either answer your fellow members question or just move onto another thread

I find it rude and I will just delete your post

 

 

What are you referring to?

Nascar, don't buy ammo from Sears. Why would you even order that!

 

j/k'ing

 

 

Guess you can buy a dryer, microwave, circular saw and ammo all at the same time. If they sold food, cigarettes, condoms, beer and Viagra, we wouldn't never have to go anywhere else.

 

 

 

What are you referring to?

 

I already deleted the post

Please do not post telling people to use the search function...

This a community..... Either answer your fellow members question or just move onto another thread

I find it rude and I will just delete your post

 

It is perfectly reasonable to ask a person to use the search function. Not everone is going to be as nice as VladTepes and make a canned response for a question that has been asked 100 times before. Knowledgeable folks are just going to stop responding. I think it is common courtesy to use the search function before you submit something like that. If you didn't, having another member POLITELY ask you to search is not rude so much as instructive.

 

 

It is perfectly reasonable to ask a person to use the search function. Not everone is going to be as nice as VladTepes and make a canned response for a question that has been asked 100 times before. Knowledgeable folks are just going to stop responding. I think it is common courtesy to use the search function before you submit something like that. If you didn't, having another member POLITELY ask you to search is not rude so much as instructive.

 

Let's not hijack this thread Chris but thank you for coming to my defense. I PM'd Troy.

We can agree to disagree on this

 

Many times other points of view can brought up on a subject when a question is even reasked

 

It is ok to even answer the question and then post links on past threads that dealt with subject