I have a few thousand 55 grain CX. I want to develop a load for them in LC brass to be fired from a late-model Mini-14. This Mini has shown to be accurate, shooting 1.5" 5-shot groups at 100 yards with WWB M193, so I bought nice dies and bullets for 223 and I got the gas bushings so I can adjust for different port pressures. I'll be using 55 grain Hornady SP for targets and long-range plinking. Those loads will burn up whatever powder doesn't work out for the 55 grain CX. I chose the CX for all-purpose terminal effectiveness and because I could afford a great quantity from a source that was available to me last summer.
I know there are a lot of powders that will work for 223.
At the moment, I only have H335.
To break this down, there are ball powders and extruded powders, and there are temp sensitive powders and less sensitive. Then there is the gamut of burn rates and progressivity. There is also availability to consider.
I sort of understand that with 55 grain bullets in .224" caliber, the slower burn rate powders like CFE223 might be inconsistent and produce high ES and SD's. I suppose that the bullet is light enough that it's inertia is not resisting pressure enough to build pressure in the combustion chamber and get a heavily-deterred powder to combust at the pressures needed for consistency over the time the bullet is in the bore. So while CFE223 has the highest published velocities for this bullet and similar bullets, it may be disappointing.
Velocity and accuracy are both important to me. Because the rifle has only a 16.5" barrel, a really wimpy velocity from a fast burn rate powder like LT-32 or Reloder 7 might just be ineffective. On the other hand, if I were able to get screamin' velocities from CFE223 but I was stringing 12" vertically at 500 yards, then that's also useless.
I'm probably going to try a few different powders because I can use whatever doesn't work out the best to shoot my Hornady SP's. I also realize I won't be the first person to try a few powders with 55 grain bullets in 223. There must be dozens of "favorite 223 powder for 55 grain" threads. I also watched Johnny's Reloading Bench videos testing at least a half-dozen different powders with 55 grain FMJBT. Besides that, there must be like 23 different powders tested with 55 grain bullets over at http://www.natoreloading.com/556/
Some people must think that reloading for accuracy in a Mini-14 is a fool's errand. I don't have their experience. Mine is quite accurate with factory loads and while I'm not going to take it to PRS competition and shoot 1/4 MOA groups, I think I can expect to be able to shoot Coke cans at 300 yards.
Some advice I've received has been to shoot faster burning powders for accuracy in the Mini-14 -- powders like H322. I think we can group a bunch of powders under the T32 umbrella - H322, LT-32, 4198, 8208... there may be more. Why might these powders be more accurate? Because I think I could only expect lower velocities from these, I'm tempted to skip them, but I would hate to pass over a chance to find what might be the most accurate powder.
WC844 is what is supposed to be in the LC-sourced WWB I've been shooting so far. H335 is supposed to be like it. I have some H335 on-hand that I used in a different cartridge, so I'll be trying it. Some other powders I believe to be similar are 2230 and TAC. Those powders might be better than H335 for various reasons (flash suppressant, copper fouling reducer), but I'm not sure I'd get a breakthrough in velocity or accuracy. A very different powder that's similar in burn rate is Benchmark. This temp-stable extruded powder might be the ticket for my 55-grain bullet weight. While I don't expect a lot more velocity from Benchmark, it might be as accurate as I can get without giving up a lot of fps.
The story goes that WC844 was originally faster batches of WC846 which BL-C(2) is supposed to be like. I don't particularly want to try BL-C(2) or W748, but if StaBall Match works for me, it might be the best in that burn range. It might be the slowest burning powder that I can hope to get some consistency from, though it would have to be proven.
So if I were to try Benchmark, H335, and StaBall Match, have I pretty well got my bases covered or do I really need to approach this differently?
I know there are a lot of powders that will work for 223.
| LT-32 | H335 | 2495 |
| 4198 | 2230/Xterm | 2520 |
| N120 | 2460 | Reloder 15 |
| Power Pro 1200 | 8208 XBR | N140 |
| N130 | AR Comp | Varget |
| H322 | Tac | Win 748 |
| 2015 | Power Pro Varmint | StaBall Match |
| Reloder 10 | H4895 | BL-C(2) |
| IMR 3031 | N530 | N540 |
| Benchmark | Reloder 12 | CFE223 |
At the moment, I only have H335.
To break this down, there are ball powders and extruded powders, and there are temp sensitive powders and less sensitive. Then there is the gamut of burn rates and progressivity. There is also availability to consider.
I sort of understand that with 55 grain bullets in .224" caliber, the slower burn rate powders like CFE223 might be inconsistent and produce high ES and SD's. I suppose that the bullet is light enough that it's inertia is not resisting pressure enough to build pressure in the combustion chamber and get a heavily-deterred powder to combust at the pressures needed for consistency over the time the bullet is in the bore. So while CFE223 has the highest published velocities for this bullet and similar bullets, it may be disappointing.
Velocity and accuracy are both important to me. Because the rifle has only a 16.5" barrel, a really wimpy velocity from a fast burn rate powder like LT-32 or Reloder 7 might just be ineffective. On the other hand, if I were able to get screamin' velocities from CFE223 but I was stringing 12" vertically at 500 yards, then that's also useless.
I'm probably going to try a few different powders because I can use whatever doesn't work out the best to shoot my Hornady SP's. I also realize I won't be the first person to try a few powders with 55 grain bullets in 223. There must be dozens of "favorite 223 powder for 55 grain" threads. I also watched Johnny's Reloading Bench videos testing at least a half-dozen different powders with 55 grain FMJBT. Besides that, there must be like 23 different powders tested with 55 grain bullets over at http://www.natoreloading.com/556/
Some people must think that reloading for accuracy in a Mini-14 is a fool's errand. I don't have their experience. Mine is quite accurate with factory loads and while I'm not going to take it to PRS competition and shoot 1/4 MOA groups, I think I can expect to be able to shoot Coke cans at 300 yards.
Some advice I've received has been to shoot faster burning powders for accuracy in the Mini-14 -- powders like H322. I think we can group a bunch of powders under the T32 umbrella - H322, LT-32, 4198, 8208... there may be more. Why might these powders be more accurate? Because I think I could only expect lower velocities from these, I'm tempted to skip them, but I would hate to pass over a chance to find what might be the most accurate powder.
WC844 is what is supposed to be in the LC-sourced WWB I've been shooting so far. H335 is supposed to be like it. I have some H335 on-hand that I used in a different cartridge, so I'll be trying it. Some other powders I believe to be similar are 2230 and TAC. Those powders might be better than H335 for various reasons (flash suppressant, copper fouling reducer), but I'm not sure I'd get a breakthrough in velocity or accuracy. A very different powder that's similar in burn rate is Benchmark. This temp-stable extruded powder might be the ticket for my 55-grain bullet weight. While I don't expect a lot more velocity from Benchmark, it might be as accurate as I can get without giving up a lot of fps.
The story goes that WC844 was originally faster batches of WC846 which BL-C(2) is supposed to be like. I don't particularly want to try BL-C(2) or W748, but if StaBall Match works for me, it might be the best in that burn range. It might be the slowest burning powder that I can hope to get some consistency from, though it would have to be proven.
So if I were to try Benchmark, H335, and StaBall Match, have I pretty well got my bases covered or do I really need to approach this differently?
