How dependable are 223 loads in Hornady's 7th edition?

[bigben]

I use h4895 and get nice groups. 5 shots at 100 yds
55 gr sierra

 

[Trickymissfit]

if the bullet weight is up to 75 grains or so a 223 will like 4895 a lot. Tac is a strong second.

except for my Bushmaster, all the guns I have are 1:14 twist so I never bothered with anything heavier than 55 grain bullets. I have tried a few loads with H335 and 322 in the past, but like I said always came back to the other two. I do kinda want to try N133 one of these days.

Anyway my next serious .223 project is to get a certain Lo-Wall up to speed.
gary

 

[ajhardle]

Bigben, my favorite part of that pic it's the wonderful patina on that brass.

 

[bigben]

Yeah i havent got a case tumbler yet. Im thinking an ultrasonic cleaner here soon. I use lake city brass in .223.

 

[timmay]

I have Hornadys book and noticed that a lot of their load data is weak. Its a liability thing.
I use H335 for all my 55gr 223 loads and load them all at 25g. That seems to be the best velocity/accuracy combo for me in all 55gr bullets.
If I remember correctly Im getting around 3100 over my chrono out of a 20" 1/7 AR15

 

[Trickymissfit]

I have Hornadys book and noticed that a lot of their load data is weak. Its a liability thing.
I use H335 for all my 55gr 223 loads and load them all at 25g. That seems to be the best velocity/accuracy combo for me in all 55gr bullets.
If I remember correctly Im getting around 3100 over my chrono out of a 20" 1/7 AR15

I use four basic manuals most of the time. But seem to use the Accurate and the Hogdons most. In the Hogdon manual (#26) the listed load for H335 is a max of 25.3 grains of powder under a 55 grain bullet. They get 3203 fps out of a 26" barrel. This is the same chart that I pulled the BLC2 load out of. Now their max load for BLC2 is 27.5 grains of powder at 3313 fps. Interestingly Hornaday shows the same powder maxed at 28.1 at 3300 fps with a 26" barel in a Remington rifle. Barrels will vary all over the place, so I'll never question their load. In my Remington rifle that has the barrel cut back to 20", I see 3274 fps rather consistently (has a single digit ES). Now my barrel still has some tight spots and still a couple loose ones as well. My Bushmaster has either a 20" or a 22" barrel (don't remember), and have never shot it thru the chronograph so I can't say what velocity changes take place here. I did run a remington Mod.40 thru my chronograph using these same loads, but with a 23.5" barrel length (Shilen I think), and saw 3350 fps out of it with a single digit ES again. I should have bought that rifle by the way! The load I shot was a 55 grain Hornaday Vmax over 27.5 grains of BLC2. I think the Hogdon manual was pretty much right on the money here, and in the end I'd say Hornaday was pretty close as well. Add to this the factoid that I was probably using a different lot # of BLC2 than Honaday and Hogdons used. The same factor holds true for the H335 data as well. My brother loads H335 rather consistently and swears by it. But upon looking at his powder stash the lots of powder are completely different than anything I have on hand.
gary

 

[Lefty7mmstw]

I use four basic manuals most of the time. But seem to use the Accurate and the Hogdons most. In the Hogdon manual (#26) the listed load for H335 is a max of 25.3 grains of powder under a 55 grain bullet. They get 3203 fps out of a 26" barrel.
gary

Aint that the truth... I've never really used accurate other than their powder flyers, but hogdgon # 26 has got to have the least BS data of any of the more modern manuals. It's my oldest manual, and I will cross reference to it if the powder was manufactured when the manual was put out.
The only problem I see with #26 is it is still crusher data, so some of the rounds that were dumbed down a bit for PSI guaging are still going full steam. Not usually a problem, but they were dumbed down when the switch was made for a reason, such as varying throating or chamber dimensions for a couple of the rifle rounds or lightweight pea shooters for a couple of the pistol rounds.

 

[Trickymissfit]

Aint that the truth... I've never really used accurate other than their powder flyers, but hogdgon # 26 has got to have the least BS data of any of the more modern manuals. It's my oldest manual, and I will cross reference to it if the powder was manufactured when the manual was put out.
The only problem I see with #26 is it is still crusher data, so some of the rounds that were dumbed down a bit for PSI guaging are still going full steam. Not usually a problem, but they were dumbed down when the switch was made for a reason, such as varying throating or chamber dimensions for a couple of the rifle rounds or lightweight pea shooters for a couple of the pistol rounds.

somewhere around the house I have an old white powder manual from Hogdon. It's smaller than the current manual (the old man was still alive and well). I like the Accurate manual as they were the first to do service rifle loads and BPMC stuff with modern powders. Plus their powders often bridge gaps and have slightly different burn rates even though they have similar numbers (example is IMR 4350, H4350, and AA4350). I have found that some of the loads that come out of the #26 manual are pretty hot without getting upto near max!. My only complaint about it is that they don't throw in the AA powders. Probably has the best hand gun data I've ever seen.
gary