.223 loads.....with j words

[newton]

Ok, one more thing I am wondering.

As far as book loads are concerned, I realize that different length barrels - different lots of powder/primers - different types of bullets(even if they are the same weight) - different cases - all come into play when they test their loads and list velocity.

My question is how pressure relates to velocity. Lets say that the book lists one load, and I have matched everything to a T with what they said they used, of course except for the actual gun. But my loads are 200fps slower than theirs. Does pressure equal the velocity for the given bullet? Or is it a factor of the rifle they used that accounts for the lower velocity in mine, and could the same amount of pressure be present in my gun - just not reaching the same velocities?

I should have paid more attention in my physics class, but it seems to me that it would take the same amount of pressure to reach a certain speed if the barrel lengths are the same etc. But at the same time I realize there is probably more at play here. Anyone dove off into the deep end with this kind of contemplation?

[Larry Gibson]

If you have matched everything to a "T" and are getting 200 fps less with the same length barrel the difference is the test barrel they used was probably a SAAMI minimal spec chamber, bore and grove depth. That makes the same load in their test barrel produce a higher psi. You "actual gun" has a commercial chamber and barrel which are probably larger than the SAAMI minimum spec. The atmospheric conditions, set up of chronograph, conversion to muzzle velocity (if done) and different "lot" of components can make some difference but not 200 fps. The main difference is your rifles chamber and bore dimensions are slightly larger than the test chamber/barrel they used.

Larry Gibson

[vzerone]

Newton on the squirrels I once tried some of the fast 22 ammo, you know, like Stingers, Yellow Jackets, etc. I remember shooting a squirrel with the Yellow Jacket ammo and it was a head shot. The hydraulic shock ruined a good portion of the front mean in the shoulder and it also caused much of the internals to eject. I said no more of that. I can only imagine what a high velocity centerfire would do. I would think it would be more. I know what you mean they are a nuisance. I watched a Youtube video where someone had a squirrel problems which a bird feeder that was on a steel support pole. They greased the pole and the fun begin. Squirrel comes along jumps up on the pole, then slides down. This went on and on and on. He would jump up as high as he could, then slide down slowly. It will bring tears to your eyes laughing. The squirrel tried everything there was, but it was no use. It was equally amazing as how persistent he was.

Gabby, I think H335 being an older ball powder may be little harder to ignite, but there is such a small amount of it in the 223 case. I guess i would just experiment with different primers and see which gave the best performance with that powder. As too Wolf primers myself have found them to be quite good. Certainly quite good for the price too!

Larry, like I tell people when they compared their velocity to the book is that you could pick a manufacturer, go to their plant, watch them make 100 rifles same model and caliber, then take they out and shoot them and more then likely not find many that are exactly the same in velocity. You are very right about the equipment, chambers, components that the testers use being different from what the end user uses. The weather conditions and elevation come into play too. I always took the approach that the book is giving you an example of what you should be getting.

[newton]

I have a high suspicion that it could just be the Chrony. I try not to take much stock in it, and just use it for a reference. I am contemplating building a complete shade for it and adding LED lights. That way I can shoot in the shade or sun and hopefully have the same amount of light over the sensors.

[vzerone]

My chronograph instruction say that cloudy days are preferable. They said something about bright sunny days aren't good and something about sun reflections off the bullet. I know some people have tried florescent lights and that they don't work well because it's a different type of light. Will be interesting to see how your LED lights perform.

The Mag-Tech isn't dependent on light. It's just too bad they affect your barrel harmonics as they clamp to the end of the barrel and are solely for velocity readings not accuracy too.

The member to ask here is Larry Gibson. He uses one of the best chronographs out there and has extensive experience with it and he will probably comment as he's in this thread.

[newton]

My chronograph instruction say that cloudy days are preferable. They said something about bright sunny days aren't good and something about sun reflections off the bullet. I know some people have tried florescent lights and that they don't work well because it's a different type of light. Will be interesting to see how your LED lights perform.

The Mag-Tech isn't dependent on light. It's just too bad they affect your barrel harmonics as they clamp to the end of the barrel and are solely for velocity readings not accuracy too.

The member to ask here is Larry Gibson. He uses one of the best chronographs out there and has extensive experience with it and he will probably comment as he's in this thread.

yea, fluorescent don't work because of the, unseen by human eye, light oscillation. Same with halogen and such. Even some LED's flicker, but with a DC power source most are constant.

I feel the same way about the magnetic sensors. I think they are a great idea, and probably the best if you are wanting straight velocity readings, but not going to be best for load development - or at least I couldn't put my trust in them.

My thought is just to try and maintain near the same amount of light during all conditions. I know that even if you put the chrony in a box, during bright sunny days there is going to be a tad more light than dawn/dusk. But I think the jist of it is just to have enough light for the sensor to read, and not too much to cause the bullet "shadow" distortion. I may be wrong, but I don't think the chrony has to have X amount of light as much as it just has to have a discernible difference between what light is available and the "shadow" of the projectile flying over it.

I am going to try it. Of course, I think that you would have to be careful in what material you use to cover the chrony as it would tend to move in the wind more, maybe a dark cloth that was very porus. Or, it might do better with a light colored cloth.

Just one more thing to play around with I guess. I just have limited amount of daylight/time during the winter months to shoot and generally its not going to be in the best lighting conditions.

[newton]

Checking my old records on the M700V before setting the barrel back and velocities only measured with an Oehler chronograph with the 55 gr SX bullet 26 gr H4895 ran 3240 fps. 27.5 gr BLC ran 3205 fps. The 26.5 gr H335 was running 3205 fps with consistent .5" or less 5 shot groups. The accuracy load (.2 - .3 moa with 5 shot groups) was 21.7 gr H4198 at 3087 fps.

Might add just for info that my match load in the Savage Comp M112 with 26" barrel is the Sierra 69 MK over 26 gr Varget (close to 100% load density). That runs 2960 fps at 52,300 psi. I also use the 75 gr Hornady Match over the same load. It runs 2945 fps but I have not pressure tested it yet.

Larry Gibson

So do you feel that Hodgdon is rather "conservative" on their max loads with the 25.3 max load for 55gr SP with H335? It looks like their pressure for that is a lot less than what you have tested, even though they measured in CUP vs your PSI. Do they just keep this conservative for insurance sake, or powder changes over the years? Just curious if you have used new lots of H335 with the same load.

I have a coupon for Cabelas tomorrow. They show limited stock in the store near me and if they have some I am gonna get a lb. Thought about getting H4198 also.

[newton]

I experienced the woes of handloading/shooting yesterday afternoon.

I had cleaned my gun pretty well from the other nights shooting so I figured that it would take a few rounds to foul the barrel yesterday. However, I guess other things were at play also because I got groups twice the size of the previous days load of 25.5gr H4895. I loaded up a few with 25.8gr and they tightened up some. Ran out of light after that.

I know that H4895 is supposed to be temp insensitive, but I think that it still is to a degree. It was 15-20 degree's cooler yesterday than before, and on top of that the barrel was a lot cooler this go around. The last, and best, load tested the other day was with that 25.5 - but I had shot 35 rounds previous to it in around 40 or so minutes. The gun was a LOT warmer the other day than the almost cold to the touch temp of it yesterday. It was a lot dirtier also, primarily because of the 25 loads tested with IMR4320 which did leave the barrel pretty dirty. I have to say that the H4895 is exceptionally clean burning with this load, in fact it does not even look like I had shot anything right now.

I'll be working on up as the 25.8gr load did not show any signs of pressure. I also wont normally be shooting so much so quickly, so I need to test like I would normally be shooting. I had never thought of this being a factor before, but I think it is. I have to wonder if working on up to the 26gr mark wont shoot as good as the 25.5gr load did with the warm barrel the other night.

You all ever encountered this before?

[vzerone]

Temperature certainly does affect your powder burn performance as you just found out. I would have expected the 4320 to burn a little more dirtier then the 4895 as it's a slower powder. It's not a powder I use in the 223.

I read somewhere the Marines, possibly the Army, saying something about not cleaning your rifle bore perfectly clean because they said they found it would shoot better fouled some.

[newton]

Temperature certainly does affect your powder burn performance as you just found out. I would have expected the 4320 to burn a little more dirtier then the 4895 as it's a slower powder. It's not a powder I use in the 223.

I read somewhere the Marines, possibly the Army, saying something about not cleaning your rifle bore perfectly clean because they said they found it would shoot better fouled some.

I just thought H4895 was supposed to be a little more temp stable than that. There could be other things at work here, but I did find it interesting.

I dont plan on cleaning the bore again for a while, unless it becomes very fouled/wet for some reason. I'm going to load up some more and see if the groups start to tighten as I shoot more. May do a quick 5 round string, followed by another 5 round string to see if that effects anything.

What strikes me as odd is all the stuff I have been reading on the web in regards to people using H4895, they all stay around 25.5(which I do not find odd), but they consider that a "hot" load. I felt, and the chronograph also gave the indication, that the Remington Factory loads were much hotter than the 25.5 grain load. I suppose they could be loading top end, but I would think they wouldn't get too close for liability reasons.

[Larry Gibson]

So do you feel that Hodgdon is rather "conservative" on their max loads with the 25.3 max load for 55gr SP with H335? It looks like their pressure for that is a lot less than what you have tested, even though they measured in CUP vs your PSI. Do they just keep this conservative for insurance sake, or powder changes over the years? Just curious if you have used new lots of H335 with the same load.............
.

All ".223" loads these days are "conservative" in my opinion. They established the SAAMI MAP at 55,000 psi (transducer and strain gauge) for some unknown reason. The rifles the .223 has always been chambered in are fully capable of 60 - 62,000 psi they are chambered in with other cartridges. The original load data in the first few manuals for the .223 (before it was SAAMI established) loaded it up to the NATO and CIP PMAP of 62,000 psi. Some newer manuals still load it that way. Look in Lyman's #49 Reloading Manual and you'll find 27 gr of H335 is the max load for 55 gr bullets.

I have been using H335 for about 30 years and other than normal lot to lot variation I have found no reason to alter my favorite load of 26.5 gr under a 52 - 55 gr bullet. I shot some not too long ago with new H335.

Larry Gibson

[Larry Gibson]

Back when Speer was still making their 52 "Gold" HP Match bullet I used 27 gr H4895 under it. The M700V would shoot 5 shots into the .3s" quite regularly. Not quite as accurate as with H4198 but about 250 fps faster. The old Hornady 53 gr Match HPs ran .5 - .75" over 26.5 H4895 at 3350 fps. Those are old loads pre Oehler M43 so I never pressure tested them. Shot a lot of them though.

Larry Gibson

[vzerone]

Larry, Sort of like the Europeans load their ammo much hotter then the Americans. I have heard the new specialty Hornady 223 ammo is sizzling hot. One thing about the ball powders they meter a lot better through powder measures.

[Larry Gibson]

Remington 50 gr HP factory having 26.8 gr ball powder ran 3280 fps at 52,900 psi out of my 21" TC Contender test barrel.

The Speer 52 gr HP over 26.5 gr H335 ran 3158 fps at 52,000 psi out of the same Contender test barrel.

The Speer 52 gr HP over 24.5 gr H4895 ran 2977 fps at 46,100 psi out of the same Contender test barrel.

Larry Gibson

[newton]

I checked, then double checked, then tripled checked my load OAL tonight. With the bullet I'm using, mid south rebranded Hornady 55 SP with cannalure, in order to get the bullet off the lands I would have to seat less than 2.180". That puts the entire cannalure in the neck. I realized it had a short throat, but didn't fully realize till last night when I ejected a round without firing it. Saw the land marks on it.

I tested it with factory Remington High Velocity 55 SP. you don't see the land marks clearly unless you put magic marker on it. The OAL on them is 2.185" ish.

So I've been actually jamming my rounds .030" into the lands. No pressure signs though?

[newton]

Thanks for all the info Larry, does help

[newton]

Got to thinking last night. I guess one upside to this is I'll be able to watch how my throat gets worn, and I'm guessing that it will be a long time before it gets too long for a bullet to jump too far for accuracy......

I might mess with reducing the charge and seating deeper. It shoots fine I guess, but about 99% of the things I read all talk about the .223 having better accuracy with some bullet jump. I find it interesting because 99% of what you read about larger calibers always talk about the bullet being set just into the lands producing the best accuracy.

I guess when I first tried measuring the OAL, whenever I worked the bolt it was actually pulling the bullet back out of the case some. I never chased it much further because I figured I better stick with what all the load/online manuals say about the OAL being 2.200". I have an old hornady manual, that lists this bullet(unless the design has changed), it has the same 2.200" OAL.

I think once I go through these I'll get some 50 grain bullets.

[vzerone]

Newton if you've been seating against the lands all along throughout your load development....that is why you haven't seen pressure signs. If you worked up to a maximum load seating off the lands and then all you did was seat the bullet tight against the the land, then you would see pressure! We've always heard that it's dangerous to seat tight against the lands. Not if you start with a low load and work up.

BTW on the lands and off the lands is some of the difference between 5.56 NATO and 223 ammunition. Remember I just said some. That why they say not to shoot the 5.56 ammo from a rifle with the 223 chamber because the bullet "may" be up against the lands.

[newton]

Newton if you've been seating against the lands all along throughout your load development....that is why you haven't seen pressure signs. If you worked up to a maximum load seating off the lands and then all you did was seat the bullet tight against the the land, then you would see pressure! We've always heard that it's dangerous to seat tight against the lands. Not if you start with a low load and work up.

BTW on the lands and off the lands is some of the difference between 5.56 NATO and 223 ammunition. Remember I just said some. That why they say not to shoot the 5.56 ammo from a rifle with the 223 chamber because the bullet "may" be up against the lands.

Yea, I have no doubts that I am not safe at this point, but I did find it interesting. I would "think" that when Hodgdon or Hornady develops their load data, given powder charge with given OAL, that the OAL would not be jamming the bullets into the lands. So if they list a max charge of 26gr H4895 producing 49,000 CUP, I would think that it would be higher in my gun with the bullet being significantly up into the lands. However, I am just starting to load this round so I have VERY little knowledge of all the ins and outs. I know every rifle is different as far as this is concerned, a little research turned up that a lot of guys with M700 in .223 have long throats actually.

One of the first things I learned about is the difference between 5.56 and 223. I like to have as much knowledge about a new to me cartridge as possible. I could see where shooting some mil spec 5.56 ammo in this gun would create some significant pressures, especially if it was loaded for the relatively longer throat of the 5.56 guns.

I do not plan to change anything really. No pressure signs, decent accuracy, all is well. It is one reason to start low and work up though. I guess when things slow down around the house I might play around some more with it, but it would involve starting over with powder charge and all. Right now I just want to get a good load that I feel confident with and try my hand at this coyote hunting that everyone seems to enjoy. They are about as thick as squirrels around our place. I have taken a few over the years, but only when I have been out deer hunting or the occasional one decides to venture too close to my house.

I'd be interested if anyone else has found that seating deep into the lands with the 223 was better with their gun. Like I mentioned before, when I first started researching I found most people had their accuracy loads listed with the bullet having a slight jump. Its hard to specifically research bullet jump/into lands with the 223 because most of it focuses on using 5.56 ammo in the 223 and how its dangerous. You have to weed through a lot just to find the ones that specifically talk about the .223 Remington with .223 ammo.

[GabbyM]

For my Remington 700 VLS. I use three common methods to center the case and bullet to the bore axis. For starters I just neck size the case. Then I leave a short portion of the neck unseized. this helps pick up the case. Holding it snug in the chamber. I believe it's my Redding die that leaves this short section by default even with die against the shell holder. Lastly I load to a length which snugs the bullet up into the rifling. I seat bullets with a Forester Bonanza bench rest die with floating chamber or a Wilson hand die. Goal is always sub 1/2 MOA groups off a bench. It's a prairie dog rifle weighing in around ten pounds with a 24x scope. I hasn't seen a dog town in ten years or so. but the last time out throat was moved forwards .017" in three days. Only took around 500 rounds. It's right at the edge of being worn out. Chamber is so wallowed out that a neck sized case won't even chamber in a 5.56mm NATO. Still shoots a 3/8" 100 yard group however. I measure for bullet seat using one of those tools from Sinclair with a rod and two stops. You lightly pus a bullet into the rifling then bump the rod against it's base. Then remove bullet and chamber a sized case. Slip on the other bump and measure base of case. Measurement is from rear of receiver. Think that's correct. I keep the directions wit tool. You can do the same thing with a calipers long enough to reach and a straight edge to lay across back of receiver then pencil and paper. Another way is to just ink marker up a bullet black. size about 1/16th inch of neck and seat a bullet. Measure with a bullet comparator. Chamber round. When you get marks on the ink check to see your bullet has not been set deeper. Then measure the length of the marks and decide how hard into the lands or how far off you wish to go. I use the comparator sold by Sinclair. It's a hex bar with bored holes for six calibers. On a light rifle with a 3x9 scope most of that is way overkill as you'll never see the 1/8th inch it may give you.

Good accuracy check for a heavy varmint rifle. Set eight chicken eggs up on a 2x4 board at 200 yards. Set up on a bench. When you can clear all eight with eight shots as fast as you can load and shoot you are pretty close. Then you can set the eggs out at 400 yards in front of a contrasting paper target with printed dog on it. Steel knock downs are cool if you have them. Eggs and cans of soda pop give a nice mist which yields a strange satisfaction.