The Speer Manual is WRONG!

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

mugsie

Member
Joined
May 8, 2006
Messages
727
I was loading .223 the other day and the Speer manual says 24 - 26 grains of H335 with a 55g SP bullet and a magnum primer. I worked up from 24 to 25 to 26 and at 26 grains, with a CCI 400 small rifle primer (not magnum like they suggested) was blowing primers out, destroying the head of the case because of severe imprints of the ejector, flattening primers, cratering primers, virtually everything one sees when looking for high pressure.

I went home, double checked the manual and my powder was right where it says it should be, 26 grains. I then checked the canister and Hodgdon says MAX 25.3 grains of H335! Amazing difference. I reduced the charge to 25.3 and everything looks normal. Hodgdon also recommends small rifle primers and not magnum. If I was to have used magnum primers I am positive I would have had a KABOOM! BTW - these were fired in a Bushmaster AR. Luckly the gun was fine through all this. I will write to Speer later today and ask why the are so faroff from the manufacturers recommendations.

Just wanted to let everyone know to check at least two sources when working up loads.

Later guys....
 
It bears saying once again, "a Max load in one rifle is not a Max load in another rifle". Reloading manuals are merely guides - start low and work up.

Don
 
Just out of curiosity . .is the bushmaster a varmint model or a standard type of AR with 5.56? My next door neighbor has similiar issues when he tries to fire 5.56 Nato ammo in the tighter chamber of his "varminteer". (24 inch fluted barrel, match trigger, etc.)

FWIW
 
The manual is not "wrong". The load published is safe in their(Speer) rifle or test barrel. Load data is not a recipe and should not be treated as such. It is impossible to follow load data to the letter, it can't be done. To do so you would need the same powder, primer, brass and bullet along with the same lot #'s. You would also have to have the same weather conditions, altitude and the exact same rifle or test barrel. Not one just like it, the exact same one. As we know this is impossible. Just because a load is published in a manual does Not mean that it is a recipe and it will be safe in your rifle. That is why we have "Start" and "Max" listed, so we can work our way up to the "Max" in our rifles. Speer lists Mag Primers with almost all loads using "Ball" powders.
 
OAL length is a big factor too. This is one of the reasons I like the "one caliber" books. Glad you and the rifle are ok.
 
To clear up any misconceptions - the Bushy is a standard 5.56 AR (someone said they have a reputation for blowing primers? Why is that?). The bullets were Remmington and Midway, 55g with a cannalure. Speer also shows a cannalured bullet albiet a Speer manufacture. The COL was (and I'm doing this from work and memory so don't jump on the numbers) 2.168? I don't remember the exact number but it was seated right where the cannalure begins (actually a little ways into it). COL was well within spec. I worked up from 24 grains to 26. I typically, when trying anything new, work up from min to max. 5 at 24 grains, 5 at 24.5, 5 @ 25, 5 @ 25.5, 5 @ 26. Then I shoot 5 shot groups, benched, and look for the tightest grouping. After each string of 5, I police up the brass and check the primers for any signs of overpressure before going on to the next string. At 25.5 they were fine, but at 26 there was a tremendous difference. Two had primers blown out, and the other three had cratered and severely flattened primers. What else am I leaving out? BTW - the 26 grains did appear to have the best grouping - go figure!
 
I use 25.0gr of H335 and 55gr FMJ bullets in my Bushmaster AR. No problems or issues. I've fired close to 2k of these handloads in my rifle.

Its up to the handloader to determine what load is good for him. Some people may have no issues with 26.0gr of powder. Doesn't mean the manual is wrong.
 
Unfortunately bud, your reloading practice is what bit you. In the small cases base on 223/222/222Mag, you should NOT be jumping a full grain of powder when working up. At most, 0.3 grain jump at a time. You would have and should have stopped way before the max load.
 
"Reloading manuals are merely guides - start low and work up."

Roger that. And even that is no help if you just do it by rote and move up blindly while ignoring pressure signs just because you haven't reached the book "max."
 
This is why I use data from the powder manufacturer only.

Also, like said above, the data in all books is a guideline, not law. You should always be careful when using any published data.
 
Interesting, back about 20 years ago when I was loading .223 for the Mini 14's I owned I found 26 grains of H335 behind a 55 grain bullet was the load that gave the best accuracy (and the older loading books show a max of 26 to 27.8). I didn't have a chrono then and all I can say is the 26 grain loads functioned the rifles perfectly and were more accurate (and I hate to use the words "accurate" and "Mini 14" in the same sentence) than factory or milsurp rounds and showed no signs of overly high pressure.

About 3 years ago when I started loading for AR's I first chrono'd both Wolf loads and M193, both out of my 16" carbine and my 20" rifle. With this as a starting point I started with the Hodgson's recommended load of 23.5 and found it produced a slightly lower velocity than the Wolf loads but did function well in both guns. I had to go to 26.5 to equal M193. The 26.5 grain loads show a minor flattening of primers but no signs of severe over pressure. In fact, the primer flattening in my spent cases resemble the flattening in M193 cases exactly. Amazing how that works.

My conclusion is that while loading manuals may have changed it seems likely to me that the reason for the change is one of liability, not changes in the powder itself.

And another thing that hasn't changed is the wisdom of starting at or near the minimum and working up in small increments.
 
H335 is a 'funny' powder...

The burning rate has changed considerably over the years.

Back in the 1970s, I purchased a couple of hundred pounds of Hodgdon H335 in one pound containers in 10 lb cases. Every case had a different lot number (with all ten cans inside having the same lot number). What I found was that most of the lots were about the same in burning rate, but with one or two considerably slower. Generally, 26.0 grains was about perfect with most of these lots...

Currently, I am using some H335 purchased in 8 lb kegs about twenty years ago. The load that I use with M193 (55gr) bullets runs 26.0 to 26.3 grains (producing about 3180fps (same as LC75 M193 ball) out of a 20 inch barrel in an AR...

Current lots of H335 are considerably quicker than older stuff. Just taking a look at loading manuals over the past several years will demonstrate this...

My point is simply that, like others have mentioned, the Speer manual (and I'm assuming that you're working with #13) isn't 'wrong.' But you're absolutely right that checking a number of different manuals is a good idea when working up any load...

Forrest
 
Goes to show the danger of substituting a component. Even small changes like that can make a difference so your experience is actually a good lesson/reminder for the rest of us. Thanks for being willing to share.
 
dcloco - I believe he said he was increasing the loads in .5 grain increments (clarified in post #8).

mugsie - any chance you might have been a little off in weighing the 26.0 grain group? I don't think I've ever seen or heard of such a dramatic difference with only a .5 grain increase of rifle powder if the load is within any published range for the same weight bullet and powder. I don't suppose your weighing apparatus (scale and/or powder dispenser) is still set for the 26 grains loads by any chance?
 
Mal H,
You're right - I was increasing in .5 grain increments. When I load a new bullet I work up 5 shot loads then take em' to the range to try. The scale is always left on the last weight I threw as is the powder drop. I was loading on a 550B and after coming home I threw another couple of loads to see if it was off and no it wasn't. I also zero the scale before any loading session. I use the RCBS single poise scale 5.5 I think it is (memory is poor and I don't want to walk down the steps for an accurate number). There was a large difference in the primers from 25.5 to 26. Incidently, the day was extremly hot, about 95 degrees. I was shooting in a CMP competition and was in the second round, so the ammo was sitting in my range bag, in the shade, for approx an hour or so. I would guess the temp of the ammo was in the high 80's by the time I was shooting.

Fortunately there was no damage. I took all the brass from the session, crimped them shut, and threw them in the range bucket (didn't want someone else scrounging them when they might already be weakened). for what it's worth - my scores were abysmal! Great day all around - at least I get to do it all over again next month and this time with 25.3 grains!:D
 
Goes to show the danger of substituting a component. Even small changes like that can make a difference so your experience is actually a good lesson/reminder for the rest of us. Thanks for being willing to share
Click to expand...

It is impossible not to substitute components. The biggest and most important component of all is the firearm. What is safe in one firearm may or may not be safe in another. Powder, primer, bullet and brass lot #'s can also affect pressure. Load data is not a recipe and should not be treated as such. When your powder supply runs out and you get a new jug with a different lot number you have just substituted a component. Time to drop back and work back up.
 
1st you changed primers.
2nd you used the load in another chamber then Speer.
3rd Speer used IMI cases, you used?
4th The powders you used likely were of a different lot then Speer.
The industry std, I have been lead to believe, is a max variance of 10% in burn rate with canister powders between lots. The lot Speer used may have been at the slow side of the allowable variance while your lot could have been on the fast.
This difference is the big reason the books tell us to start low and work up. You don`t know until you try it which way your powder lot will burn.
 
"And....you changed primers". You might find the Magnum primers to show LESS pressure than the Standard version in those cases.

Ammo can do funny things that seems to defy logical explanation. For example, using magnum primers in some shotgun loads will show LESS velocity than the standard version. Why? It looks like the added oomph of the primer opens the crimp earlier in the powder burn which increases the chamber volume and results in less pressure.

Perhaps Speer knew what they were doing when they recommended the Magnum primers? Just for educational purposes, why don't you run off a few loads using the Magnums and see if the primers look the same? I really, really doubt that you will hurt anything.

I have a Bushy Varminter and run 26grn H335's through it all the time, with Magnum primers. Like many have found, this seems to be the 'sweet spot' for 335 in 5.56.
 
Another shooter using 26gr. of H335. Except I use a 45gr. bullet, which will generate less pressure than a 55 gr. bullet.

And I shoot it in a NEF Ultra-Varmit, not an AR.

Still, that 26gr. of H335 does seem like the sweet spot to me, too. Best accuracy I have found was right there.
 
Hmm, this thread is of interest to me because I plan on starting loading .223 with H335 for Savage Model 12. Hodgdon lists 23gr. as the starting load for the OP's bullet. Think I'll start there.
 
I've been using 26.0 grains of H335 in both a Colt and Bushmaster for many years. I worked up to a higher charge in the Colt without pressure signs, but 26.0 was more accurate, and plenty fast enough. I use only Remington 7 1/2 primers and MilSurp cases.
 
Keep in mind that it's somewhat irrelevant what loads you and I have been using...

I, also (as I stated above), have used 26.0 gr of H335 for many years.

However, current lots of H335 are faster than in the past, and it's important for everyone using it to start low and work up (which, of course, is the technique that should always be used except with a few powders (like H110 and really slow rifle powders) that shouldn't be decreased beyond fairly constrained limits...

Be safe...

Start low...

:)

Forrest
 
mugsie- you were using a 5.56 chambering and a 223 load/brass. it has been my experience w/ ar-15's that that makes a pretty big difference in itself.

my own ar-15 w/ a 5.56 chamber is loaded w/ quite bit less powder than the books call for w/ 223's. my 223 chamber ar-15 is spot-on w/ the book reccomendations.

not speer's fault...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
  • Locked
An apology - Speer was right after all!
Replies
5
Views
784
Handloading and Reloading
Ol` Joe
O
W
  • Locked
primers for .223/5.56 and H335
Replies
27
Views
2K
Handloading and Reloading
Reloadron
Reloadron
jhansman
  • Locked
.223/H335/55gr. FMJ data?
Replies
9
Views
10K
Handloading and Reloading
rg1
R
M
  • Locked
Need some help figuring out what's going on
Replies
8
Views
600
Handloading and Reloading
cpttango30
C
L
  • Locked
Magnum Primed .222 rem
Replies
5
Views
2K
Handloading and Reloading
Afy
A
Top Bottom
Back