Debating 223 powder switch

S

Shadow9mm

New member
I'm debating a powder switch or pushing my current loads for 223/5.56. My rifle is a 16" modern sporting rifle... chambered 5.56 1:7 before you jump me :) . Velocities are coming in lower than I would like at max 3014fps, was hoping for closer to 3200fps at max and maybe a accurate load between 3100-3200. Current max only has moderate primer flattening with win primers, no flattening with cci. Running mixed brass, but I separate 223 and 5.56 brass. I can't decide whether to push charge weight since it is 5.56 and i am using 223 data, or try switching powders, the load shoots really well.

Any suggestion on keep the load or switch. If switch, any recommendation on temp stable powders and loads to look into would be appreciated.

current load
24.8g benchmark
hornady 55g sp bullets, seated way long, to max mag length, but the base of the bullet goes the full length of the neck. still about 0.50 off the lands if i remember right.
winchester primers
velocity 2927fps
es 29fps

note: max charge with exact bullet listed at 25.6g gave me 3014fps with an ES of 42fps. The 24.8g was just accurate. Was re-zeroing my scope today, not really trying and I came in just over 1MOA with my current load, 50yds sight in.
attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • Group.jpg
    Group.jpg
    170.6 KB · Views: 565
Last edited:
Jim Watson said:
You are right at .223 factory velocity for 16".
Could you explain what a little higher velocity would do for you.
Click to expand...
Mostly drop. Going from 2927 to 3127 for example, saves me 10in of drop (2moa) at 500. That in addition to the fact that I know I can hit 3200fps with factory 5.56 in my rifle. I feel like I should be able to, at the minimum meet factory performance with my hand loads, and work down from that to find an accurate load. But currently I can't match factory performance by 273fps.
 
Accurate has a separate section for 5.56 loads. They have some that will do 3400 fps 55 gr from their 24" PV barrel at 62000 psi.
 
I feel like I should be able to, at the minimum meet factory performance with my hand loads,...
Click to expand...

Do you know what powder is used in the factory load? Not what it LOOKS like, but what it actually is??

Big ammo makers buy powder by the boxcar load, and can, and often do have it made/blended to their specs, often not what we can buy as "cannister grade" for reloading.

Simply put, you might not be able to duplicate factory performance, because you can't get the same powder the factory is using.

Considering that the original GI ammo was a 55gr listed as 3250 (+/- 40) from a 20in (M16) barrel, and you're getting 3200fps with a 55gr from a 16" barrel, (with factory load) I wouldn't complain. But, that's just me...;)
 
ok, I know what you want. But if you want 3100-3200 those are 5.56 pressures. no way with 16" to get that under 55k PSI.

benchmark is OK powder, but tis not high velocity.

What you want, exactly, is this:

AA2230. MAx 5.56 load is 26.3, but in my experience, accurate load is 26.0 grains.

My colt 16" shoots that over 3200 FPS, barely.

That is the load you want. That is a top tier velocity load in 55 grain bullet.
 
Thats what i am talking about. I had looked at Accurates load data but never used any of their stuff, mostly hodgdon and alliant so so far. that looks promising, i will have to pic up a lb to try. thanks!
 
While you can certainly do you, and there’s nothing wrong with it, I don’t stress an extra 10” holdover at 500 yards with the hornady 100 yard line range fodder projectile. I shoot a ton of those don’t get me wrong. But were I to frequently shoot at that range and beyond with .224 projectiles I would take advantage of that 1:7 twist and look to a projectile with a ballistic coefficient better than .235. A 75 gn eld match projectile at a tame 2800 FPS would drop less at 500 than that 55gn sp would at 3200 FPS. The difference at 600 and 700 would be even more dramatic.

I would not be afraid to load to c.i.p. 5.56 pressures in a quality rifle. I don’t know how much over max it takes to go from 55k to 62k. I would bet not much. If the velocity is really that important to you I personally wouldn’t be afraid to ladder up .2 gns at a time.

I have a friend who constantly sets velocity preferences at the high end of what a cartridge is capable of. He hasn’t converted me to his line of thought yet, nor have I converted him to mine. I feel he is safe in how he does it at least. To each their own.
 
5whiskey said:
While you can certainly do you, and there’s nothing wrong with it, I don’t stress an extra 10” holdover at 500 yards with the hornady 100 yard line range fodder projectile. I shoot a ton of those don’t get me wrong. But were I to frequently shoot at that range and beyond with .224 projectiles I would take advantage of that 1:7 twist and look to a projectile with a ballistic coefficient better than .235. A 75 gn eld match projectile at a tame 2800 FPS would drop less at 500 than that 55gn sp would at 3200 FPS. The difference at 600 and 700 would be even more dramatic.

I would not be afraid to load to c.i.p. 5.56 pressures in a quality rifle. I don’t know how much over max it takes to go from 55k to 62k. I would bet not much. If the velocity is really that important to you I personally wouldn’t be afraid to ladder up .2 gns at a time.

I have a friend who constantly sets velocity preferences at the high end of what a cartridge is capable of. He hasn’t converted me to his line of thought yet, nor have I converted him to mine. I feel he is safe in how he does it at least. To each their own.
Click to expand...
I have looked into heavier BC Bullets. Over all its a no go. My rifle is set up for defensive use. I can't justify having 2 different loads and having to re-zero the gun all the time. Also I cant justify the bullet cost/lost training, for $100 in bullets I would lose about 388 bullets going from the 55g Hornady to 77g SMKs.

As far as not stressing 10" at 500yds its a 2moa difference in hold over, I would rather have the flatter trajectory and less margin for error.

I apologies in advance, soap box issue. As far as the idea of range fodder, its bad philosophy. The guys overseas rely on so called range fodder. Range fodder is an excuse you use to justify poor performance at the range, and not really push yourself in your drills and training, its just training, and just range fodder ammo. Ammo should be based on intent hunting, defensive, target, or competition, and you should train with what you intend to use, the way you intend to use it as much as you can. I am set up primarily for defensive use and I believe the 55g Hornady SPBT will perform adequately in that role God forbid I should need it. I believe it will perform better than FMJ and it was the same price at the time. It should also be adequate for my target and training needs as it seems to be holding 1 moa and trying for 1/2, quite reasonable for an AR platform rifle paired with my skills. It should also be adequate for coyote and varmints. I don't believe in range fodder, that's why I reload, I want good ammo that shoots well in my guns.

Over all for my use, and philosophy of use, I need one round that will perform as well as possible, with no chance of a ka-boom, and that I can train with as regularly as I am able.

I will probably push my benchmark a little bit. I did get some slightly flattened primers when I worked up to max previously. No ejector marks or cratering, but I don't think there is much room left and definitely not 150-200fps. I am going to grab some AA2230 to try, it seems like a decent powder, and there is 5.56 load data for it that seems like it will get me where i am wanting to go.
 
Last edited:
There are pressures, and there are pressures. When NATO adopted the 5.56, they found the penetration and range of M196 inadequate and came up with the SS109, which ran at 5.8% higher peak pressure. The U.S. matched it with M855. The specs are messy. I discussed this with Western powders (Accurate distributor) in their booth at the 2018 NRA Annual meeting but did not get a really satisfactory explanation.

So here's the deal:
M196 was loaded to 52,000 CUP. When SAAMI measured it with their conformal pressure transducer, they got 55,000 psi.

M855, copying SS109, was loaded to 55,000 CUP (the military tech manuals call it 55,000 psi, but that is determined by a copper crusher, so don't get their copper crusher psi confused with their transducer psi which are different numbers). If we assume the conformal transducer measures M855 with the same psi/CUP ratio as it did M196, the conformal transducer reading expected would be:

55,000 CUP × 55,000 psi / 52,000 CUP = 58,173 psi.

So, that last number is what we might expect to be a match to NATO's 62,366 psi measurement as done on their channel transducer system which appears to read higher with this round than the conformal transducer does. The absolute numbers are a disagreement of 6.7%, but when you look at SAAMI's past published pressure reading samples, you see that sort of disagreement is not unusual. In particular, I've found one declassified military document calling for pressure of 58,200 psi on a round of 5.56 ammunition and saw mention of a Federal employee recollecting they loaded contract M855 ammunition to that number.

But Accurate isn't using the CIP type nor the NATO EVPAT type of channel transducer. They are using the SAAMI type conformal transducer for their measurements, as was confirmed to me by one of their ballistic techs over the telephone. So the question is, did they get CIP reference loads and calibrate their transducer to that, or did they just calibrate to a SAAMI reference load and then multiply up to 62,366 psi? In that case they could be listing loads that run 6.7% higher than the actual NATO and CIP spec ammunition (the CIP doesn't have a lower number for 223 Rem, as we do; they use the SS109 pressure for both).

Also, does it matter?

Even if Western were publishing loads 6.7% over European-produced ammunition, that is not enough over to cause a hazard. It is nowhere near enough to constituted NATO or CIP proof load levels, for example. The worst effect is likely to be added throat wear that makes you change your barrel earlier. And, in Western's favor, I looked at RWS and couple of other European loads and found Western's high pressure loads are very close in vlocity. That's not proof of anything by itself, as the powders are different, but it may be a clue that Western did calibrate to match the European measurements.
 
I apologies in advance, soap box issue.
Click to expand...

You do not have to apologize I am a big boy and not offended. You want what you want... a do all load with cheap readily available projectiles. There is nothing wrong with that. You are asking a tall order to get that velocity out of a 16” barrel in most cases. And an even taller one hoping that bulk projectiles will group at 1/2 moa. I have no doubts your rifle is capable, heck many ARs these days are... just not with the cheapest bulk projectiles.

Maybe check a manual to find the highest velocity powder for that projectile? Varget appears to give good velocity, along with R15 and BLC-2. Admittedly I am deployed currently and only have a downloaded copy of modern reloading 1st edition available. And again, if the 500 yard line and beyond is going to be common I highly recommend you develop another load more suitable. Muzzle velocity fades; B/C, like diamonds, is forever. It will also help significantly with the much more difficult part of long range shooting to master... wind calls and adjustments.
 
I'll agree Benchmark works well with lighter bullets.But I still prefer heavy bullets.The 60 gr Nosler Varmint Ballistic tip with Benchmark is a good expanding bullet option.

IMO,a 1 in 7 twist might compromise accuracy with 55 gr bullets.

When I had a 1 in 9 16 in HBAR,I got excellent results with Varget and 69 gr Match bthp.

Then I went with 18 in 1 in 8 bbl

For good BC and value price in 600 bullet pkgs,I've gone to 75 gr Hornady Match bthp.(NOT Amax.The 75 gr Amax will not load to magazine length) Powder experimentation led me to select RE-15.Looking at a Hornady load manual under the AR-15 Match load page will give you data.

I live in wide open spaces with wind. I just don't even load whiffle bullets with the BC of a potato chip

At 50 or 100 yds,it just doesn't matter. I've read tests where they determined the 75 s yaw,bend and break into about 3 pieces in SD use. I would not assume they drill ice pick holes.

My point is ,if you shoot 300 to 500 yds...buy a couple hundred 75 gr Hornadys and a pound of RE-15. Do your load incremental step up.but try Hornady book max with RE-15 .Just shoot them at 300 to 500 yds,and make your own choice. I've done that,and IMO,there is no question between the 55s and the 75s,IMO.

I'll tell you what I have found to be the practical upper limit for 5.56 pressure. The brass is limited in the strength around the primer pocket.

Loose primer pockets are the weak link in the chain.

A zippy load might be satisfying for one range session.
"Those shoot good and my gun didn't blow up!"
Till you go to load it again and your brass has loose pockets. Scrapping 500 brass is a bummer.
Load the 75s at max magazine friendly length.
 
Last edited:
I have to agree with 5Whiskey, you are asking for a tall order from a 16" barrel. I've have noticed that I can get the velocity you seek on one of my AR's but it has a 20" barrel and I have to shoot a light bullet which my rifle does not like, so I can't get the accuracy I want. On the other AR I've tried several powders and the same issue as before. I cannot get over 3000 fps with the 16" barrel and my groups patterns like a shotgun.

I gave up chasing speed a long time ago and went for accuracy and after testing all kinds of bullets and primers all my AR's shoot only 75 grainers and I use RL 15. I don't notice the bullet drop when both hit the dingers at 500 yards. If I were you I would buy a good scope that would give you the elevation adjustments required for whatever distances you like. In the end at least for me I reload for accuracy now not for speed and over 50 years of hunting it has worked.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top