Some "Advanced" Questions About Hand Loads

[LynnJr]

Jack Ellis.
You have to use good bullets to shoot small groups so start with factory match bullets.
Your seating depth will make the second biggest affect on your group size.
To measure your seating depth you need to use a comparator.
Your horizontal stringing is the shooter or the condition.
Vertical stringing is your powder charge.
Most people don't chronograph correctly so skip that for right now but keep monitoring it.
Primers are a tuning tool so try as many brands as needed when looking for more accuracy.
On the powder you want the case as full as you can get it while maintaining your smallest possible groups.

[JackEllis]

I took Rockdoc173's advice and tested four factory .223 loads today. There was a bit of wind that might account for a bit of the differences I observed but the results were pretty interesting nonetheless.

The four loads were, Fiocchi 40 grain VMAX, Fiocchi 50 grain VMAX, Aguila 55 grain FMJ, and Remington 55 grain FMJ. The following table shows round, average measured muzzle velocity, standard deviation, extreme deviation, group size, vertical spread.

VMAX 40 3519 96 227 1 1/2 1/2
VMAX 50 3175 24 54 7/8 13/16
Aguila 55 FMJ 3151 28 63 3 1/2 3 1/2
Remington FMJ 3120 30 88 2 2

I will probably run this test again with 10 round groups instead of 5 round groups and include PMC, Federal and Australian Defense Industries.

The average out of my rifle for all four ammunition samples runs about 120-130 FPS slower than the advertised speed

It was cool with a breeze and I shot no more than three at a time. The barrel was never more than about lukewarm to the touch. I was quite surprised that even my worst hand loads were better than both the Aguila and Remington ammunition.

It turns out the Fiocchi and Aguila appear to use once-fired cases. About once third of the Aguila cases would not chamber in my rifle (Tikka T3 lite).

At some point I need to work up a load for some Hornady 55 grain FMJ bullets that just arrived in the mail. We'll see how those compare to the Aguila and Remington rounds.

[LynnJr]

Jack Ellis
Your own groups show your gun doesn't like the FMJ bullets but you want to keep using them?

[JackEllis]

Lynn,

The way I interpret my test results is, two different manufactures of factory ammunition that use FMJ bullets don't group well whereas both factory ammunition and hand loads made with ballistic tips do group well. I haven't tried hand loading the FMJs just yet. I'm not ready to conclude my my gun(s) don't like FMJs until I can hand load and test to see whether I can improve upon the factory ammunition results.

My experience thus far hand loading for two Tikka T3s is that they tend to group best with charges that are somewhat below the maximums shown in powder or bullet manufacturer data (I have the Hornady and Lyman books). Since I don't know how the factory FMJs were loaded, it's entirely possible I could get better results with hand loads than I could with factory loads, even though Tikkas are supposed to shoot any factory ammunition well. According to muzzle velocity data in both of my load books, the factory FMJ charges are about as big as they can be so slightly milder loads might work a lot better.

I bought the FMJs about a week ago to make practice rounds and did the test with factory ammunition yesterday. If I end up with buyer's remorse, someone is going to get a good deal on 900 FMJ bullets.

[LynnJr]

Jack Ellis
You should definitely get them to shoot better by hand loading them but they will never group like good quality bullets will.
I myself bought 6000 FMJ bullets at a great price but i already knew they would never shoot small groups.
Seat them 0.018 - 0.022 off the lands and work up your powder charge in small increments and they will work for plinking ammo.

[JackEllis]

You should definitely get them to shoot better by hand loading them but they will never group like good quality bullets will.

Understood. I'd like to get them down to an inch at 100 yards. Anything better than that is in the realm of science experiments. The FMJs were intended for practice. I'm saving the more expensive stuff for squirrels.

[LynnJr]

Jac

[W.R.Buchanan]

Here's what I would do, and I have to say that most all of the info above is very good advice once you get past a certain point.

You're not there yet,,,, because 4198 is not a particularly good powder for either one of those rounds.

For the .223 try BL-C2 or W 748 or H335 or CFE223 or any of the powders normally associated with that round.

Depending on the twist rate of the barrel on your gun 1:9 or 1:7 will determine which weight bullets will shoot the best.

For the .243 IMR 4320 was always the magic powder for 100 gr bullets in my Sako Forrester. Wish I never sold that gun!

There is a great article in the current Handloader Magazine (Apr 17) by Brian Pearce on loading the .243 with every bullet from 55 gr to 105 gr. Many powders to choose from and I don't think 4198 was on the list. I suggest that you go buy a copy as they are on the bigger news stands right now.

Try Barnes and Nobel.

Both of your guns, as they are, should be < MOA with good loads easily.

Randy

[JackEllis]

Randy,

I've used W748 in the 223 with 55 grain VMAX bullets. It shoots 50 grain VMAX bullets almost as well with the 55 grain charge, but I intend to do some more tests with the slightly lighter round since the recommended charges are a bit bigger for the lighter bullet.

I did some testing in the .223 with IMR 4198 and NTX 35 grain bullets. One load was good enough for squirrels. I'm looking at the test target as I write this with a group that's 1 1/4", with four of the five holes in a 7/16" group.


For the .243 I'm hoping to be able to stick with IMR 4064. Results are good enough for coyotes but I think I can do better.

In all cases the chosen loads were based on tests with 1/2 grain steps and book recommendations for OAL. Not exactly precisely tuned loads and I intend to do more load development that incorporates some of the suggestions in this thread.

I don't understand what you mean when you say IMR 4198 isn't a particularly good powder for the.223 (I'm not planning to use it in the .243). Is it not consistent enough, too temperature sensitive, meters poorly, doesn't fill the case enough? It's in both the Lyman and Hornady load books for some of the bullets I plan to load. I did quite a bit of searching and the only real knock on 4198 I can find is the way it meters (like all stick powders). Irrelevant for me since I weigh each charge. One nice thing about IMR 4198 is you can get about 20-25% more rounds per pound than the other powders.

[LynnJr]

Jack Ellis
IMR4198 is on the fast side for 223 ammo unless your loading really lightweight bullets.
If you look in any reloading manual the powders burn rate slows as you go heavier in weight on the bullets.

[JackEllis]

If you look in any reloading manual the owners burn rate slows as you go heavier in weight on the bullets.

Thanks Lynn, that's very helpful. I also notice maximum recommended charge weights decrease as bullet weights increases

Hornady shows IMR 4198 for all of their Rem 223 loads up to 60 grain projectile except for their 50 and 55 grain GMX, probably because the all gilding metal bullets are longer and pressure becomes the limiting factor. Lyman shows IMR 4198 for projectiles as heavy as 62 grains.

Test Win 748 and IMR 4198 with the three .223 projectiles I plan on using seems to be in order.

[W.R.Buchanan]

Randy,


I don't understand what you mean when you say IMR 4198 isn't a particularly good powder for the.223 (I'm not planning to use it in the .243). Is it not consistent enough, too temperature sensitive, meters poorly, doesn't fill the case enough? It's in both the Lyman and Hornady load books for some of the bullets I plan to load. I did quite a bit of searching and the only real knock on 4198 I can find is the way it meters (like all stick powders). Irrelevant for me since I weigh each charge. One nice thing about IMR 4198 is you can get about 20-25% more rounds per pound than the other powders.

Jack: typically .223's are loaded in quantity, and Stick powders cause problems both in Metering and in Dropping thru the rather small neck. This creates extra work for the person loading and opens the possibility of under/overcharged rounds.

Of course it will work,,, the same as IMR 4895 and 4064 and others will work in that cartridge,,, it just that there are better powders that are easier to use and produce better and more consistent results.

I weigh Charges of IMR 4895 when loading 50 to 100 round batches of larger rifle cartridges like .30-06, .308 .303 etc. Then I dump the powder thru a Lee Rifle Charging Die with a funnel on top and it falls thru just fine. Still I toonce the die with my hand every round to insure all the powder has dropped thru.

It doesn't fall thru just fine with a .223 case as the neck is so small that powder bridges occur way too frequently. The result is having to manually check the powder level on every round which gets old pretty fast. You can't see down in them very well so I had to make a probe to check powder level. PITB!

I load 5.56/.223's on a Dillon 550B with BL-C2 or W748 and get 25 gr +/- .1 gr powder drops consistently with no fuss or muss. 55gr bullets and use a Lee Collet Crimp Die.

So I say use the ball powders, which meter well and flow freely which is the reason they have been the mainstay of that round since very early on.

Another example is 5744 powder was originally designed specifically for that 5.56/.223 round. It was called 4475 back then. The reason it was dropped from production is because the granules were too large to run smoothly in automated reloading machines. Those granules are about half the size of normal Stick Powders so you can see why they are not considered the best powder for the job at hand.

4475 was sold off and resold and now is back as 5744 which is one of the best and most popular powders out there for Cast Boolit Loads. It falls into a .45-70 case neck pretty easily.

Hope this helps

Randy

[JackEllis]

Randy (and others), thanks for your thoughts.

I did a little number tumbling over the weekend to better understand the cost/benefit tradeoff using IMB 4198 vs. W748 for .223 rounds assuming max charges of both with Hornady 50 grain VMAX (for squirrels) and and Hornady 55 grain FMJ (for practice) rounds. The total difference in cost over a thousand round run of hand loads is less than the cost of a hamburger lunch so I'll probably stick with W748 for those loads.

The Hornady NTX bullets I'll need to use for squirrels starting in 2020 are a different story. W748 isn't listed in the Hornady book so working up a load using that powder would take some guesswork. For the time being I'm going to load the NTX with the IMR 4198 I have on hand and check out other ball powders.

I'm a bit old school in that I weigh each charge and use a single stage press. Slow, but it works and other than .22lr for practice or a squirrel hunt, I don't shoot enough to justify a faster production method. At least not yet.

[CSACANNONEER]

Since you mentioned switching barrels, yea, that could work. Every BARREL is different and will like a different load so, once you switch barrels, you'll have to start all over. Also, barrels wear, this causes them to like different loads at different points in their usable life.

Changing or properly bedding a stock will help a great deal.

[JackEllis]

Since you mentioned switching barrels, yea, that could work

That was someone else, not me. Both rifles (.223 and .243) have less than 500 rounds apiece through them so they're barely broken in. It's possible I could shoot out the .223 barrel in this lifetime if I can find enough "pest control" opportunities.