BLC-2 in the 223

H

Hunter Customs

New member
I wanted a load using a powder that would load consistent charges from a RCBS Uni Flow powder measure.
So I started experimenting with some BLC-2 as it flows through my powder measure like water and the loads at a rarity may vary 1/10th of a grain.
I settled on 26.7 grains of BLC-2 topped off with Sierra's 55 gr Blitzking bullet, both of my AR's and my Savage bolt gun love this load.
My Savage bolt gun with it's 20 inch barrel shoots this load the fastest and most accurately.
Speed from the Savage is 3124 fps shoots consistent 5 shot 5/16th inch groups at 100 yards, this is the load I'll be loading for my 223's from now on.

Best Regards
Bob Hunter
 
I use that powder some, but I get somewhat better accuracy with H335. Naturally, that doesn't say that one is superior to the other. It could just be my rifle prefers one over the other, but there is a difference with my loads.
 
Love me some BL-C(2) for the .223 Rem (and the .204 Ruger BTW)...almost exactly your same load with Sierra 53MKHP is sub-MOA in my 20" ARs as well. What are you priming with? I found CCI 450 magnum primers gave me a little bit more consistent velocities than standard 400s.
 
something I've never thought of. I have used it in my 243 and got mediocre results, but load cast in my 3006 and get good results. There's nothing wrong with it. I keep wondering why it always seems to be the red headed stepson.
 
I used a fair amount of it some time back. Then when it was tough to find powder, there was no BLC2 to be had, so I found and bought a few pounds of H335, it's good enough for what I do, would like to run some benchmark and try it also.
 
Good success here too with 40 grain ballistic tips in my bolt gun. Very accurate. In the absence of BLC-2 I picked up some Benchmark and am starting a load development.

Anyone compare BLC-2 to Benchmark?
 
I've never used any Brenchmark but I have loaded IMR 4320 in my 223 bolt guns.
Using the same Sierra 55 gr Blitzking bullets I was getting 3300 fps and pretty much the same groups from my Savage 20 inch barrel bolt gun, however 4320 does not flow so well through my powder measure.

Best Regards
Bob Hunter
 
I'm another BL-C2 user. Using 27.5 grains under a 55 grain hornady softpoint I'm getting just under 3,000 FPS from the 18.5" barrel of my mini 14. It is also working well in my .308 under a 150 grain PSP.
 
27 gr. Win 748 for me. In the 1990's was using BLC2 but bought some that was able to achieve only 2700 fps, where my buddies was getting 3100 fps with his BLC2. Giving him a little of my powder to try out for me, he could only get 2700 too. Called Hodgen, the old man himself answered the phone and after explaining it to him he said it should still kill prairie dogs and wouldn't send me a 5lb replacement. I ain't wasting any more money with them.
 
Given the choice between accuracy and velocity, with a few exceptions, I'll pick the most accurate. For example, load A turns in .5 moa groups at 2700 fps while load B gets 2950 fps but only manages 1moa. I'm happy with load A unless I'm working up a pure hunting load for tough game at "normal" ranges where 2 to 3 moa will be plenty good to put a bullet in the vitals out to 200 yards.

If you can have both, that's great, but given the likely uses for a 223 I would personally focus on the very best accuracy first and worry about velocity second.
 
Many years ago I used Blc2 in both my Mini14 and Mini30 and could consistently get sub 2" groups no problem. Now for the 55 gr I use H335 and in the heavier bullets am getting MOA with either Reloader 15 or Benchmark, but prefer the Reloader 15 because it feels like a slightly lighter recoil. I really get nice Sub MOA groups at 100 with Hornady 75 gr BTHP, but can't attest to any long range accuracy since I don't have access to a longer shooting range.
 
Checked out some Benchmark loads today comparing them to some known good BLC-2 loads. In both cases all the bullet holes were touching at 100 yards.
 
Bob,

BL-C(2) is canister grade WC-846, the ball powder developed for 7.62 Ball ammo originally. When the original WC-846 was found too slow for 5.56 Ball in the Armalite design, they found a lot of it that was faster burning than usual and tried that out. It worked fine. So they ordered more fast WC-846, which Olin agreed to make for them at the St. Mark's plant they then owned, but which they gave a new name to, WC-844, to keep the target burn rates separate. The canister grade WC-844 is sold as H335.

As bullets get heavier, the slower powder comes into its own. But with 50-55 grain bullets the H335 is really more speed appropriate. Both these powders are 1960's chemistry, which Hodgdon tells me is unchanged. Hodgdon revamped their quality controls around 2000 and both powders are now more consistently produced than they were back when Cemo had his problem with them. At that time, a lot of Hodgdon powders were still surplus rather than made to order as they are now, so they were bulk grade rather than canister grade, and bulk grade has much wider burn rate variation.

A consequence of going too slow with light bullets with the old, hard-to-light deterrent chemistries is the light bullet can scoot forward fast enough to drop pressure enough that the powder burn slows and fails to keep gas pressure up. As the bullet slows, the gas pressure catches up and accelerates the remaining gas and powder mass forward, which catches up with the bullet, causing an effect similar to firing powder into a barrel obstruction (see Hatcher's Notebook, Chapter VII), but an obstruction that is already in motion, so it's not normally dramatic enough to burst the barrel. It can, however, ring a barrel. The momentary high pressure that occurs at the location of the bullet base is local and does not register on a standard pressure transducer, but it is visible as a reflected surface wave on a strain gauge that is being used to measure pressure, looking for all the world like a stiff pressure spike at the chamber. It's not. But it can ring AR barrels with repetition (see the second half of this article), and in one very extreme case, Texas gunsmith Charlie Sisk found he could blow the muzzles off 338's on demand with about 10 rounds of a load that caused an especially bad spike of this sort.
 
As usual UncleNick you provide the definitive explanation. I knew that there was a relationship between these powders but couldn't remember just what it was. I really appreciate knowledgeable people and their insights.
 
Glad to clear it up. I should have said it in my post, but part of the point is that H335 will, because of that common origin, meter the same as BL-C(2). It is the same powder with a little less concentrated deterrent penetration into the surface.
 
Unclenick,

Thanks for the info I always appreciate your thoughts.
Darn just when I thought I was on to some good loads it looks like a change might be in order, and all three of my 223's shoot this load so well.
I was about ready to order 16 more pounds of BLC-2, it looks like I may need to reconsider that.

Best Regards
Bob Hunter
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top