Don't curse people by suggesting imr4064 in a 22 caliber. It's accurate enough they'll pull their hair out fighting to get it in the case.
I do that with my 22-250 and heavy 223 loads.
"Best" powder for .223 Hornady bullets?
- Thread starter BullHeadedGideon
- Start date
- Status
I do that with my 22-250 and heavy 223 loads.
entropy
Member
With 60 gr., it gets tight in there, but 55's weren't a problem. But you are definitely right about accuracy.Don't curse people by suggesting imr4064 in a 22 caliber. It's accurate enough they'll pull their hair out fighting to get it in the case.
I do that with my 22-250 and heavy 223 loads.
If you don't hear a crunch. You didn't fill it full enoughWith 60 gr., it gets tight in there, but 55's weren't a problem. But you are definitely right about accuracy.
lordpaxman
Member
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2011
- Messages
- 2,433
So many choices, so little time. The Nosler information is pretty cool with the “most accurate” pointed out but you have to understand that’s in their test environment. And they don’t say if powder X that was most accurate measured .256MOA and the next one listed that wasn’t the most accurate measured .257MOA.
There are other powder attributes like availability, meter-ability, cleanliness, cost, and a bunch more. The other thing I look at is if the powder is applicable in other calibers that I load. I’d bet coffee you end up with more than one powder before too long.
For my 15’s I load H335, 8208, and IMR4895. But that’s only because I haven’t yet experimented with all the other powders mentioned in the other posts. For your bullet weights any of them will work just fine. Good luck!
Don't bother testing the other ones. I tried 8 powders in my 556 and found they all shoot so close to the same it's ridiculous.
If I went back, I would have kept my powder locker stocked with CFE223, IMR4064, and H1000.
Now I have partial jugs of random powders that don't give much advantage over my first choices.
I'm not saying the other powders are junk. Just that you will be eating time if you already have a great load.
entropy
Member
Everybody has 'the load'. It takes some time, money, and a lot of fun finding it, but once you do, you'll be buying 8# jugs of that powder instead of 1#.
I have two, one with BL-C(2), the other with Varget. When Varget was scarce for a while, I was fine with the BL-C(2) load.
I have two, one with BL-C(2), the other with Varget. When Varget was scarce for a while, I was fine with the BL-C(2) load.
Toprudder
Member
That is how Varget has been for me.If you don't hear a crunch. You didn't fill it full enough
Average Joe
Member
I use WC846 when I can find it, or W748 .
Shawn Dodson
Member
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2002
- Messages
- 3,194
I've been using H322 with Hornady 55gr FMJ for years. I've had good performance with it. I chose H322 over H335 because I wanted a single powder I could use in both 5.56 and 6.8 SPC. Good luck!
Hooda Thunkit
Member
Usually the testing doesn't include shooting for groups. There is also usually a note somewhere in the beginning of the data section of the manual where that is stated.
What the testers are looking for is what is called internal ballistics. This is the behavior of the powder inside the case and barrrel, the pressure curve, and the projectile velocity.
This info will be expressed (with the exception of the pressure) in chronograph info as the spread and deviation numbers.
Generally, they consider the most consistency as the most "potentially accurate".
FROGO207
Member
Another vote for TAC with lighter than 65 grain bullets most accurate in my rifles. I even found one load that is close to MOA in all of them.
Waterboy3313
Member
I use TAC with 55gr Hornady SPs. It's the only powder and bullet combo I have tried for 223 so far. I haven't seen any reason to try anything else.
jmorris
Member
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2005
- Messages
- 24,139
The one your barrel likes the most, if “best” is defined by accuracy.
Low flash, the faster powders seem to be better, same for suppression.
I prefer to not use extruded powders with progressive powder measures and there are lots of ball powders that work great with .223 a number of extruded ones too though.
Low flash, the faster powders seem to be better, same for suppression.
I prefer to not use extruded powders with progressive powder measures and there are lots of ball powders that work great with .223 a number of extruded ones too though.
Toprudder
Member
That is why I like H4198 for my 8.5" AR pistol. Less flash and bang. That short barrel is obnoxiously loud with slower powders, most people accuse me of having a muzzle brake.
2ndtimer
Member
I buy Ramshot TAC in 8 lb kegs. It is my number one powder for .223/5.56 for bullets from 40 to 77 gr. Recently bought some Benchmark and Reloder 10x just to see if they might beat TAC with bullets 55 gr and under. Nope, although they do work fine. Might use them up in the .308, or just with 55 gr Wolf FMJ plinking loads.
Charlie98
Member
Top, you think IMR4198 would work well for standard 55 and 62grn ammos fired in a 16" carbine? I love IMR4198 for cast bullets, but I've never really considered it for high-velocity cartridges... like the 5.56mm.
Toprudder
Member
Being a fast burning powder, it won't generate as much gas as slower powders, which is why I liked it for my AR pistol. The min charge of 19.0gn of H4198, 55fmj bullets, operated the pistol just fine. I have used it for 55fmj loads in my mid-length 16" carbine. It has to be at the top of the charge range to reliably cycle and lock open, though. The max charge was listed as 21.0gn, and at 20.5 it operated reliably. Soft shooting load. I think it would be worth a try, just to see if you like it. I don't know how much difference there would be between IMR4198 and H4198, though.
BullHeadedGideon
Member
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2019
- Messages
- 75
Does a faster burning powder make a big difference in loudness & flash?
& what about ballistics? I ruled out a short barreled .223 a while because it seemed like the obnoxiousness was too much to deal with. Especially coupled with weak ballistics.
BullHeadedGideon
Member
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2019
- Messages
- 75
What does this mean? "Easy to meter in a powder throw." I don't understand the lingo yet haha
Charlie98
Member
Most ball powders (H335, TAC, the W's, etc...) are small, spherical granules that meter and flow better through a measure; the downside is they are rarely temperature stable. Most extruded powders (IMR's, Varget, many of the H-powders...) are little 'sticks' of powder... they do not meter as well, nor flow particularly well through a measure because of the shape, and particularly into a small neck cartridge like the .223/5.56mm. The key words are 'ball' and 'extruded' in description and packaging lingo...
Toprudder
Member
In this case, yes, it was noticeably less.
Depends on what you mean by weak ballistics. External ballistics will not be as good, obviously, due to lower velocities, but you would not be using this powder for long range shooting. Terminal ballistics depends on the bullet selection, and there are plenty of bullets available that were designed for lower velocities, but you might have to look for projectiles intended for for other cartridges, such as 22 Hornet. I don’t know how effective these would be for self defense loads, though.
Just as a comparison, the velocities I recorded were as follows:
Xtreme 55 FMJ, min charge of 19.0gn H4198, CCI #41 primer.
8.5” AR pistol - 2196fps, cycled fully and locked open.
16” AR carbine - 2490fps. Did not fully cycle.
At a charge of 20.5gn in the carbine, I got 2779fps. No data for the pistol.
For a self defense application, I think a different caliber, such as 9mm, would make more sense in a short barrel AR when you consider noise, flash, and terminal ballistics.
entropy
Member
It means a powder measure, whether on a progressive loader or a separate one used with a singe stage loader. I circumvent the whole "I want to use this powder but it doesn't meter well" problem by using Lee Dippers;
https://www.midwayusa.com/product/101284828?pid=943305
and a good scale. Mine is an RCBS 505, a good basic scale. The Lee Dipper set has a reference chart with most available powders and their volumetric measurements for each dipper. You select the one just below your desired load, fill a whole scoop, dump it in the pan, scoop up a little more, then 'shake' (like salt from a spoon) it into the pan until the arm reaches '0'. After a while, you get a good feel for how much you need to 'shake' , and it goes fairly fast. You also are getting exact weight charges, not close volumetric "throws". Granted, most measures vary only .1 grain or so, but I can have 0 variance, from a measure set that costs $13, with only a little more time spent.
The newer electronic measure/scales are precise, but spendy. Maybe I'll get me one for my birthday.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
