[marktwain]

The most dangerous thing for storing ammunition is the age of the ammo, how it was loaded (reloaded), and what the humidity in storage is.

There are three separate issues in your statement.

From what I have read, age produces little degradation if the ammunition is stored in a cool, dry place.

How the ammunition was reloaded can be critical for how safe the ammunition is, but that is the safety of the ammunition, which is a related by separate issue, IMHO.

Humidity is very important, but it does not make the ammunition more dangerous, just less reliable.

Heat, humidity, and petroleum products seem to be the biggest enemies of ammuniton for long term storage.

I do not recall anything about long term storage of conventional ammunition that would make it subject to detonation.

This is common with the storage of dynamite, where the nitroglycerin in the dynamite slowly separates form the filler and creates an incredibly dangerous situation. The nitroglycerin can be set off very easily by friction or shock.

IMHO, small arms ammunition is far less dangerous to store than gasoline or propane.

[Gaffer]

You have to consider a whole range of things. How corrosive is the propellant? Were the primers sealed/coated? (Humidity can degrade coatings.)

Have the primers bulged? Is is a Berdan or Boxer primer?
Storing ammo with leather and copper can cause the copper to corrode. Acid or veg tanning in the leather can give that green patina very very quickly...I have several examples of this. Storing ammo in a leather cartridge belt or pouch isn’t a good idea, no matter what the tanning process.

Lastly, I don’t store dynamite so I don’t know...I only know about the rounds I have from 1942 and some from before that and what I’ve seen over 30 years of storage. The best thing I did was cool dry basement and the humidifiers...

[Buffalo Head]

Very good response. Each of your comments was accurate and spot on. There is very little of that with respect to ammunition topics on FR. Too many of the ill informed gun nuts here spread their nonsense with such certainty.

The amateurs are easy to spot. The first clue is when they describe cartridges as "bullets", but the most revealing are those that use incorrect cartridge designations. They are happy to use layman invented cartridge names or one that has been obsolete since prior to World War II.

But then, their entire 'education' about ammunition and guns was acquired by reading the gun magazines. Little do they know that the gun writers educated themselves by reading each other's tripe. Ignorance is bliss.