TexasCHLforum.com

So I tested out all my load workups, and got significant improvement in grouping from a couple of the powders. I've got a full evaluation over on my blog, and I'll post some highlights here. All groups were shot at 50y.

I was braced for disappointment with the IMR 3031 with the 55 grain FMJ-BT bullets, and the lower end of the workup met my expectations. I'd done some adjustment of the tightness of my riser rail and sight before I hit the range, and found my POI was a little low and left. Before the last string int this workup I did some adjustment, and ended up over-adjusting. I pulled the second shot in a string of 5, and ended up ricocheting the bullet off the bottom of the steel rail above and behind the target. This made a mess of the target, and put tears all over it. I finished out the rest of the string, and moved on to the other workups. I got home and started looking at the chronograph data and found that the last set of 3031 charges had a nice and tight velocity spread. Average velocity was 3089.05 fps with an ES of only 53.33 and a SD of 20.17. I pulled the target out of the stack, and holy cow! The other 4 shots were in a 1/2" group!



This particular charge was a compressed load at 24.8 grains and an OAL of 2.230", and the grouping difference between it and that lower charges was quite pronounced. This 3031 load, in fact, outperformed all others that day. Data for the load was from the Lee manual.

I also got decent results with Benchmark at 24.9 grains and an OAL of 2.235. I got this data from Hodgdon, and adjusted this from 2.220" to 2.235, as their data only lists soft point bullets in 55 grains. I ended up getting a grouping of 1" for that load, though there was considerable lateral deviation, so part of that may have been me.

On to the 70 grain Speer Semi-Spitzer bullets that I'm using to develop a hunting load, I tried 3 different powders: IMR 3031, Hodgdon Benchmark, and Ramshot TAC.

I tested the 3031 loads first. These gave very good velocity spreads, with the best spread at 9.77 fps and a standard deviation of only 4.35. Unfortunately, grouping wasn't nearly as good, with the best being around 1 1/2". I realize this might by improved by adjusting OAL (I had these at 2.150"), but these loads are being developed for hunting, and I don't think 3031 can give me the velocities I'm looking for. The hottest load out of the group at 21.1 grains (max listed by IMR is 21.2) only came out to a velocity of 2503 fps.

Next up was Benchmark. I actually got some pretty decent grouping with the low end load at about 3/4", but this was somewhere under 2300 fps. The higher the velocities went, the more the groups spread out, until the last string, where it tightened back down some at 22.6 grains at a velocity of 2650 fps. The top end of the data from Hodgdon uses 22.8 grains. At some point, I may see if I can find 5.56 NATO-spec data for Benchmark and see if it tightens down some more at higher velocities. OAL was also set at 2.150", so OAL adjustment may make a difference here as well. Either way, the loads need faster velocities for hunting. Velocity spreads were also very good with Benchmark, and were similar to what I saw with the 3031.

Finally, I tested my Ramshot TAC loads. This was actually the second time around with TAC. 3 weeks ago, I went to try out all these loads and arrived at the range only to realize I'd left them all at home except for the TAC. I'd done a workup from the data published by Ramshot. It seems to me that Ramshot may be subscribing to the Hornady method of overstating load velocities, because the .223 spec loads had such a disparity in velocities that I don't think the barrel length difference was enough to explain it away.

So... I did some googling and found a fellow who corresponded with Ramshot about 68 grain load data for the 5.56 NATO spec. Working from the lower end of these (picking up just above where I'd left off with the .223 spec loads), I worked up a new set of TAC loads using LC NATO brass instead of the PPU and Federal .223 I've been using for everything else. Ramshot's 5.56 data starts at 23.5 grains and goes up to 26.2 grains. Unfortunately, I'd run myself out of bullets, and only had enough for 20 rounds. I started at 24.0 grains and incremented by 0.3 grains up to 24.9 grains, with OAL at 2.155". I got good results from the 24.9 grain string, with an average of 2814.45 fps, a spread of 20.15 fps and a standard deviation of 9.53. Grouping was about 1", mostly lateral deviation so the load will probably peform better than that. Once I get a hold of more of these bullets, I'm going to do another workup, probably starting at 24.8 and incrementing up by 0.2 grains up to 25.6 and see how those do.



I stopped by McBride's today in the hope that they carried the 70 grain Speer bullets, but apparently they do not. What I did find was the fable IMR 8208 XBR powder that I've heard all kinds of good things about, so I picked up a pound, along with some Sierra 69 grain HPBT bullets. I'll have to do some workups with this stuff and see what they can do.

I stopped by Cabela's and picked up a Caldwell Lead Sled Solo to provide a steady platform for testing out my loads. I almost picked up some Accurate 2230 and/or Winchester 748, but figured I should see what I can do with the 3 new powders I've got first.

I've got my loads finished up, but it rained all day today, and word is it will be raining at least some of tomorrow as well. I should have bought some rubber boots while I was there. Maybe I'll hit Academy on the way over.

Anyhow, some observations on the new powders:

3031 looks just like Varget, except it's charcoal grey instead of OD greeen (which looks like tiny turtle food to me). Also, it seems to have a very slick surface, as it will flow out of a hand powder measure with the slightest tilt.

Benchmark looks like shrunken and faded varget, more of a light sage green. Also, it is the best-metering powder I have ever used. Once I had a powder charge set, it was dead on from then on. It also seems to be designed with .223-like loads in mind, as the higher end of the load data for it is right around the optimal 90% case fill. By contrast, the higher end of the 3031 and Varget charges are compressed.

TAC is the prettiest powder I've ever worked with. It looks like tiny obsidian pebbles, very dark and shiny.

Hopefully I can get these all shot at the range tomorrow, and I can report back.

So I stopped at Cabela's the other day and picked up some Benchmark and TAC.

I'm working up 55grn loads with Benchmark and 3031 and 70grn loads with Benchmark, 3031, and TAC. I'll get them finished in the next couple of days and will have them out to the range on Sunday for testing.

So I worked up loads for both the 55grn FMJ-BT and 70grn semi-spitzer using Varget and have not been able to get accuracy that satisfies me. On top of that, the loads that I arrived at with either bullet don't hold the bolt back on the last shot. It seems that the pressures just aren't right to cycle the bolt all the way back for the bolt catch to operate properly. At first I thought something on the gun may be out of adjustment, but I stuck some Monarch factory loads in the same mag I'd used, and the bolt catch operated perfectly each time I tested it.

I wish I would have gotten the chance to read over this thread again before I rushed to the gun shop after work before they closed today. I would have added WW748 and AA2230 to my wishlist. I'd planned on picking up some Hodgdon Benchmark or Ramshot TAC, but they were out of the first and didn't carry the second. The store was closing, and the fellow at the counter suggested IMR 3031 for an AR in .223. I didn't have a lot of time to discuss it further, so I picked up a can and got out of there. Getting home, I found that data for this powder is not quite so plentiful as with others. It appears that it's only suitable for my 55 grainers, as I don't find data for anything above 60 grains in either my books or online.

So, my question is, have any of you used IMR 3031 for a .223 load? As usual, Hornady's numbers are way lower than most other sources. Their max load matches closer to the starting loads in my other books for 55 grain bullets.

I'm going to give the powder a chance and do a workup this week, but I think I'll try to make a trip down to Cabela's and see if I can get a couple of other powders on my wishlist to try out as well.

I just realized that I didn't check the Hodgdon load data for Varget loads. Lo and behold, they've got a load for that exact bullet using Varget powder.

Perfect!

ghostrider wrote:WW748 for bullets 55-70gr.
I've heard Varget works well also, but I haven't tried it yet.

Varget is one of the powders I'm interested in. The Lyman manual lists it as the powder of their accuracy loads for 55, 69, and 75 grain bullets, so it may be the right choice to go with.

Additionally, it's also an accuracy load powder for 3 out of the 5 loads listed in the Lyman manual for 7.62x54R, which I'll eventually be loading for as well.

I've also read some good things about Ramshot TAC, especially with heavy .224 bullets. Only my Hornady and Sierra manuals list loads for it - Lee and Lyman are silent about it.

If I'm going to be loading the Speer bullet, I guess I ought to get a Speer book. None of my manuals have data for that particular bullet, so I'll have to pick up a copy this week sometime.

O6nop wrote:Here and here are a couple that might be OK

Thanks.

That first one would work, though I'm trying to find something with a boat tail for better accuracy over distance. I have found lots of reports of good success with deer using that bullet in both .223 and 22-250. I may end up making some batches using both this bullet and the Sierra 65grain SBT and see how they perform at 100+ yards.

The second is .227, which is only good for the .22 Savage High Power, not .223 Remington.

O6nop wrote:

MoJo wrote:Accurate 223. It meters accurately, gives good performance, I have a lot of it.

I'm sure that's Accurate 2230. From what I have researched, Accurate 2230 is designed for the lighter bullets mostly - up to 60gr.
I don't have a favorite but I've had good results with BLC(2) and heard that it is closer to military powders. In my data books, it is recommended for bullets up to 80gr and down to 53gr. Sounds like what you need.
I have also heard that twist rate has a lot to do with accuracy. Lower ratios, like 1:7,1:8,1:9 do better with the heavier bullets where 1:12 is good for the lighter bullets.
I have a standard 1:9 RRA HBR and have yet to do any serious loading with the heavier bullets. The BLC(2) works well with 55gr.

This barrel will be also be from RRA, and will be 1:9.

According to Sierra, the 65/59 grainers need 1:7" to 1:10" twist, so the barrel should be fine for what I'm doing. I've also had 2230 recommended elsewhere. I'm not opposed to trying more than one powder, so feel free to make more than one suggestion.

It's strange, neither hornady nor sierra seem to offer anything above 60/65 grain in a soft point. Then again, lots of states do not allow the use of .223 for anything other than small game, so I can see how there would be a lack of demand. I'll have to look around to see if anyone makes one.

Hey everyone,

I'm about 6 weeks out from finishing my AR build, and want to get ready for reloading .223. I'm looking to load mainly 55 grain bullets, but want to try the 65/68/69 grainers as a potential hunting round for whitetail and hog. My rifle will use a 16" heavy barrel with a mid-length gas system, and carbine-length buffer.

So my question is this: what are your favorite .223 powders, and why do you like them? There are so many options out there, that I'm not even sure where to start.