ejector swipes, primers normal?
- Thread starter Shadow9mm
- Start date
stagpanther
New member
OK--I see by the rim face markings those are Nato cases, so you're filling the nato case with a recipe for .223 rem, nonetheless, QL returns a rather low-pressured max pressure and a velocity within 30 fps of the results you had and a compression factor of 5.8%. I'm not saying compression is a bad thing, I just get a little spooked by what could happen in an autoloader if there is an inadvertent bullet set-back on chambering.
stagpanther
New member
Do you use case gauges and trimmers?
I trim all my cases with a worlds finest trimmer. Fairly consistent. I am transitioning over to RCBS x-series dies. after the first resize and trim, no more trimming, with no neck growth.
I have a case gauge. I usually check at random intervals after resizing and trimming to make sure they are in spec.
I agree, set back could be an issue but I try to mitigate that issue. The Hornady bullets I use, along with Hornadys COL, as it puts the cannelure right in the middle of the neck. Then a medium crimp with the lee factory crimp die. So far I have not had an issue with set back and everything has run well. Been loading for this rifle for a few years now, but switching powders due to the shortage has not been a fun experience.
I have a case gauge. I usually check at random intervals after resizing and trimming to make sure they are in spec.
I agree, set back could be an issue but I try to mitigate that issue. The Hornady bullets I use, along with Hornadys COL, as it puts the cannelure right in the middle of the neck. Then a medium crimp with the lee factory crimp die. So far I have not had an issue with set back and everything has run well. Been loading for this rifle for a few years now, but switching powders due to the shortage has not been a fun experience.
stagpanther
New member
If you want I can replicate your load and try it in my 16" ARs and see if I get similar results?
Not much of a chance of setback with a 2.20 COL unless it smacks a lug or chamber face on the way in.
CFE223 is the worst powder, bar none, for temp sensitivity. That max charge under a 55gr will give you 3000+fps in the summer. I'm not a fan of that powder. I don't think a fellow should have to do "winter" and "summer" loads nowadays.
I don't understand why folks hype CFE223 when there are so many better alternatives. IMO as someone who has only burned one pound of it, so I'm not an expert.
I don't understand why folks hype CFE223 when there are so many better alternatives. IMO as someone who has only burned one pound of it, so I'm not an expert.
stagpanther
New member
I think all I have is a pound or two--and I never use it either. I also have loads of 55 gr Vmax's which I rarely use either, which is why I'm willing to do a test. ; )
much appreciated.
I'm clear now. I have had several people tell me how much they dislike CFE223 and how bad the temperature sensitivity issues are.
I also have 10lb of it so I'm going to have to make it work.
Yes it is over hyped.
I usually shoot Benchmark. It works decently well and is temperature stable, but I was looking for something better and decided to try CFE23 and bought 1lb to try. Results were ok, on par with benchmark, nothing special. The shortage hit and my small town gun shop only had 2lb of benchmark on the shelf, it was not a powder they sold a lot of. They had cases of CFE223, said it was a popular powder and always stocked a lot. I bought 9 more lb....
I will grant you its not the best, it definitely has its issues. But I'm glad I have 10lb of it, rather than 2lb of benchmark with little hope of getting more as it is all sold out for now.......
As far as winter/summer loads. That's not happening. I'm putting the loaded ammo in a well insulated cooler with a water bottles full of tap water that is as hot as it will get (about 105f) to help simulate a warmer temp and make sure my loads are safe in the summer. If its slower in the winter, so be it....
Last edited:
jetinteriorguy
New member
Yup, been there done that. That’s why I asked. I have since culled brass with previous swipes for working up loads. I just use them once my load is determined.
stagpanther
New member
So, just got back from doing a quick test of your load--or to be fair, a load as close to your's as I could get. I used the 55 gr vmaxs which didn't allow me to seat the bullet to the col of 2.2; instead I did 2.24. The brass was old 5.56 nato; I'm not sure how many times it's been reloaded, but that's the reason it looks very well-used, because it is.
By the time I got set up a surprise snow squall came out of nowhere--wasn't anything about that in the forecast but it did make it hard to see, so I set up the target at a close 81 yds.
Quickload forecasted a velocity of 2874 fps which was almost exactly on the money, the SD probably would have been better if it were not for the one cartridge I have highlighted in blue. Even at over 8% compression the pressure, velocity and KE was on the anemic side, so that leaves me to believe you have something else going on unrelated to the powder if your getting pressure signs. I've included a shot of the cases and there's nothing unusual (the dark pin points in the primer hits is just a shadow).
By the time I got set up a surprise snow squall came out of nowhere--wasn't anything about that in the forecast but it did make it hard to see, so I set up the target at a close 81 yds.
Quickload forecasted a velocity of 2874 fps which was almost exactly on the money, the SD probably would have been better if it were not for the one cartridge I have highlighted in blue. Even at over 8% compression the pressure, velocity and KE was on the anemic side, so that leaves me to believe you have something else going on unrelated to the powder if your getting pressure signs. I've included a shot of the cases and there's nothing unusual (the dark pin points in the primer hits is just a shadow).
Attachments
stagpanther
New member
ammo temp maybe? I know CFE23 is supposed to be temp sensitive. I kept mine in a well insulated lunch cooler right up until I was ready to shoot it so it would have a more middle ground temp, rather than freezing cold, going to hot in the summer.
What primers, winchesters? I was using CCI at the time. I have some winchesters, perhaps giving them a try is warranted next outing to see if they perform differently.
What primers, winchesters? I was using CCI at the time. I have some winchesters, perhaps giving them a try is warranted next outing to see if they perform differently.
stagpanther
New member
CCI 41 for 5.56.
Or 450s per cci. I'm clear, as of about 1 week ago, on the issue, but I cant exactly get 41s at the moment. I called CCI, the main issue the the possibility of slamfires. They said to drop the bolt and check the bird peck (obviously while pointed down range). Tiny mark from my rifles, never had a slamfire using them in several years. I plan to switch over if and when primers become available again..
jetinteriorguy
New member
I’ve shot thousands of CCI SRP and SMRP’s in my AR’s over the years without a single slam fire. Just my experience.
Unfortunately, on primers and slamfires, the only way one person's experience can translate to another's is if you have matching firing pin protrusion and chamber headspace and buffer spring strength and so on. Where those are unknown, I would follow CCI's advice.
The #41 and the Federal GM205MAR primers as well as the Tula 5.56 (good luck finding any even when the primer crunch isn't on) are designed to meet the military's H-test sensitivity level. The H-test is based on dropping a weight from different heights onto the back of a floating firing pin that is pointing down and touching a primer. When you drop a weight from a distance short enough that air resistance in the speed of fall isn't a factor, the energy it picks up is just the weight in pounds times the height of the fall in feet to give ft-lbs of energy. The military specifies the heights in standard deviation limits, with zero standard deviations being the height at which 50% of the primers should fire.
The CCI 450 is more sensitive than the H-test. The CCI #41 with its greater anvil spread falls within the military specification. Both are magnum primers. The Federal GM205MAR has the same anvil their GM205M primer does, but the cup is thicker, as an alternative way of achieving the lower military spec sensitivity. That has the bonus of providing better piercing immunity. It is not, however, a magnum primer. It is the same priming compound as their standard match primer.
Shadow9mm,
From the 60-grain max number, I am assuming for your 30-06 you were running H414 or Win760 (same powder). That's kind of slow for a 150-grain bullet. I think you'll like Varget or 4064 or 4895 better with that bullet weight. IME, H414/760 does better in the 30-06 with heavies at 180 grains and up.
The #41 and the Federal GM205MAR primers as well as the Tula 5.56 (good luck finding any even when the primer crunch isn't on) are designed to meet the military's H-test sensitivity level. The H-test is based on dropping a weight from different heights onto the back of a floating firing pin that is pointing down and touching a primer. When you drop a weight from a distance short enough that air resistance in the speed of fall isn't a factor, the energy it picks up is just the weight in pounds times the height of the fall in feet to give ft-lbs of energy. The military specifies the heights in standard deviation limits, with zero standard deviations being the height at which 50% of the primers should fire.
The CCI 450 is more sensitive than the H-test. The CCI #41 with its greater anvil spread falls within the military specification. Both are magnum primers. The Federal GM205MAR has the same anvil their GM205M primer does, but the cup is thicker, as an alternative way of achieving the lower military spec sensitivity. That has the bonus of providing better piercing immunity. It is not, however, a magnum primer. It is the same priming compound as their standard match primer.
Shadow9mm,
From the 60-grain max number, I am assuming for your 30-06 you were running H414 or Win760 (same powder). That's kind of slow for a 150-grain bullet. I think you'll like Varget or 4064 or 4895 better with that bullet weight. IME, H414/760 does better in the 30-06 with heavies at 180 grains and up.
First note is barrel length only 21.6. I though it was 22 but either way on the shorter end so velocities will be a touch slow.... This rifle has been a learning curve for me.
Sorry, I forgot to list the powder Ramshot Big Game. As I understand it, it is fairly similar to H4350, according to another forum member. According to the label it is listed at designed speifically for 30-06.
I have tried varget I have just over 1lb left and don't know if I can get more. Same oal, same casings, with the SP, 53.3g max load, 3040fps... no pressure signs other than flattened primers, which are normal with this rifle no matter what.
I have 4lb of big game, It was not my first choice, but it was available when I needed it. Will be looing for a new powders when things (hopefully) normalize in a year or so....