Does the tiny nature of 223 components make reloading difficult?

[Offfhand]

I have rather large hands but have no problem with any of the .22's, 20's and .17's I load for. But getting powder, literally kernel by kernel, into the case neck a .14 I once had required a lot of patience and I soon decided it wasn't worth the effort.

 

[spitballer]

Never really thought about it but I think you have something here. All I've ever reloaded is .223 and I ended up with a 5mg weight to make adjustments with which is rather light by reloading standards, from what I understand. Nevertheless I continue to enjoy the challenge of reloading this great cartridge.

 

[Laphroaig]

IME once you get used to it, it seems pretty natural.

But I do remember after loading a bunch of .223, then switching over to 30-06 it was like handling sections of sewer pipe. I guess its about what you are used to.

Laphroaig

 

[Bart B.]

Regarding stick powders and small case mouths and accuracy issues.

Benchrest competitors reloading the .222 Rem fired cases with mouths the same size as the .223 Rem had no problems getting 1/4 MOA average accuracy in 100-yard matches metering charges with a 2/10ths grain spread into those cases.

Same thing with larger 22 PPC cases today; hole in their case mouth's the same size.

None of them used ball powders because they knew it doesn't produce accuracy as good as stick powders.

 

[saitek]

reloiading 223

i use rcbs x dies for sizing and rcbs competition seater die forseatins ,as noted earlier boat tail is not a big challenge to seat but flat base bullets seat better buy just dropping them through the opoen window of the die and no crushed cases the flat base bullets are better for target shooting because a boat tail dosent stabilize till after 200 yds .

 

[Bart B.]

If flat base bullets are better for target shooting because a boat tail doesn't stabilize untill after 200 yds, how come Sierra Bullets' best boattail match bullets in 22, 24 an 30 caliber made in their California plant tested 1/10th to 2/10ths inch for ten shot groups in their 100 yard test range?

Current benchrest records for 100 yard aggregate groups shot with 22 and 24 caliber bullets are in the 2/10ths inch average range. All 5- or 10-shot groups are under 3/10ths inch or thereabouts.

 

[Hardtarget]

I load both BT and flat base for .223. Just need to use your fingers to feed the bullet into enters the seat die...and don't let it pinch you!...'cause it will! The powders I use are H-335 and Tac because they both meter very well. My AR likes the Hornady 55 gr. BT and the 55 gr V-max pretty good . I have tried several other weights just to make myself happy...and a new bullet is a great "reason" for another range trip!

Mark

 

[yugorpk]

I load both BT and flat base for .223. Just need to use your fingers to feed the bullet into enters the seat die...and don't let it pinch you!...'cause it will! The powders I use are H-335 and Tac because they both meter very well. My AR likes the Hornady 55 gr. BT and the 55 gr V-max pretty good . I have tried several other weights just to make myself happy...and a new bullet is a great "reason" for another range trip!

Mark

Try the Lyman M die. It flare the case mouth just slightly. Not like in a V shape like a normal expander. It just opens the top 3/16 a bit more than the neck and allows you to set the bullet in place straight. Keeps fingers out of the works,

 

[Offfhand]

Quoted from post on this thread:
"None of them used ball powders because they knew it doesn't produce accuracy as good as stick powders."

Au contraire, during the heyday of the .222 Rem. in benchrest competition, which prompted above quoted post, Hodgdon's BLC, a spherical powder, was by far the most widely used propellant in benchrest competition. Specifically, it was the first lot of BLC available and proved ideal for the .222 and some other cartridges, and even generally preferred over IMR-4198 another popular powder for the .222. Both BLC and 4198, lost favor with the introduction of Reloader 7, especially after BLC-1 was replaced by BLC-2. Nowadays there are bench shooters who still pine for BLC-1. Two years ago at the SuperShoot, someone offered an original, unopened 5lb cardboard container of BLC-1 for $250. It was gone in fine minutes, so go figure.


__________________

 

[HOWARD J]

I loaded about 1800 rds .223 so far this winter
I use Military brass---it kills a lot of time for me.
Clean it---resize it-take out the primer crimp--trim the cases--drop H223 or H 335 with a uniflo--use 55 gr FMJ w/c w/ BT on a Lee turret press.
If I was not retired I would be using my Dillon
Have fun
H

 

[Kaldor]

I'm just getting started with reloading 223. Regarding the flat base vs boat tail bullets, I had a friend suggest getting a Lee universal expander die for flaring the case mouth slightly. Not really necessary, but makes the flat base bullet easier to seat.

That works, but I use an M die instead on station 1 in my LnL

 

[Bart B.]

What I've gleaned from Sierra Bullets back in the '70's regarding what one of their tool and die shop machinist (Ferris Pindell; one of the PPC cartridge designers) said about ball powders was the original BLC powder was favored mostly because it metered most consistent from measures. But IMR4198 typically produced the best accuracy but not by much.

Winchester used the original BLC formula in their W846 ball powder used in 7.62 NATO M118 match ammo when Olin/Winchester operated the Lake City Army Ammo Plant. While it met the 3.5" mean radius accuracy spec, extreme spreads were some 20% or more greater than what Remington got using IMR4895 powder when they run the LCAAP.

 

[spitballer]

I still think it's about matching propellant and barrel length, bullet hardness notwithstanding. Running a 30" barrel with a little .223 case of powder means you're going to need density, and a lot of it. I found that out.

 

[hdwhit]

Does the tiny nature of 223 components make reloading difficult?

In comparison to the 17 caliber components, 223 looks huge.