M4 .223 loads

[kestak]

Greetings,

I made a few researches and I am looking for a load that will use less powder for cost efficiency and still keeping accuracy.

Here is a picture of Hodgdon loads for .223. I see loads that need 19 grains of powder. I use 25.1 TAC in my usual loads. Anyone tried those in a M4?

Anything bad about those loads for an M4?

 

[JimKirk]

You'll have to do like the rest of us, pick a powder that gives the velocity you need and see if it shoots in your rifle. What shoots <.75" in my rifle may not shoot worth a hoot in yours or it may be the opposite way. That is the reason if you were to look in most reloader's powder storage bin, you'd find a mix of different powders, a many left over from trial loads that did not work, but may work well in another gun/load. Once you find "that load" then it time to buy in bulk. If there were "one magic load" then all the other powder/bullet companies could close their doors as there would be no desire for their products.

From what I have read, TAC is one of the best as far as cost/accuracy ratio, I don't know because I never shot any of it.

Reloder 10X & 55 gr bullets is working good for me right now. I may find something better as the supply gets better.

The cost of the bullet and primer(mag may cost more) are same in a load, so you have the powder cost. Take the Reloder 10X load for example: 7000 grains / pd.... 7000 divided by 23.5 grains per load = 300 rounds/ pd. At $26/pd ... 300 Rds will cost $.0866/load for the powder. Find the powder that will give you the Accuracy you need, the cost you need and you're set to go.

But then you have a shortage like the last 1.5 years and you have to shoot what you can find. You learn to make do with what ever you can find.

Jimmy K

 

[Walkalong]

If you are looking strictly at economic blasting/plinking loads, and accuracy is secondary, X-Terminator is more efficient than TAC. H-322 is as well.

 

[cougar1717]

It will just take trial and error working up a load for your firearm. I have used IMR 3031 in 223 Rem and the results were good, however, it is a relatively long cut extruded powder and didn't meter very well for me and it is a pain to trickle every charge when H335 is available.

 

[kutter]

You could get some WC844 since it is very similar to H335, just start low and work your way up. I think Pat's is out of it right now but it might be worth tracking down since it goes for about $12.50/lb in 8lb jugs without the hazmat fee.

 

[Hondo 60]

From the chart, it looks like titegroup would be the most economical.
(I use titegroup in my revolvers, but don't think I'd try it in my AR)

Otherwise it looks like H4198 only uses 18 gr as a starting load
http://data.hodgdon.com/cartridge_load.asp

 

[ants]

Those Titegroup and Clays loads will not cycle 99% of all AR rifles out there.
Not enough gas for the gas operated action.

When you say M4, we assume you mean an AR-15 with a 16" barrel with M4 contour. A true M4 is a full auto military rifle, if you have one I'm certain you're not worried about low cost ammo.

 

[ants]

Keeping powder cost low: Buy your favorite powder in 8 pound kegs and use it for all your 223 rifles. Cost per round drops dramatically. Bullets are still the most expensive components.

 

[rcmodel]

Using fast powder in a gas operated rifle to save .01 cent a shot is false econemy.

You paid big bucks for an AR-15, so spend the money for the correct powder to operate the rifle without beating the snot out of it by using fast burning powder the gas system wasn't designed to use.

rc

 

[matrem]

X-Terminator is more efficient than TAC. H-322 is as well.

And H-322 doesn't give away much at all in the accuracy department from my experience. Spent six hours last Saturday with two other experienced shooters, dozens of combinations, & four ARs (only one M4 though) at a 200yd range,H-322 turned in the best 5 shot group of the day.