Reloading .223 with pistol-powder for a short-barreled 5.56?

[WestKentucky]

I have been reloading now for twice as long as I lived before I reloaded my first cartridge, and I would not do the fast pistol powder thing for 2 big reasons. #1, short of finding a manual that lists such a load you really do t have much to go on for pressure estimation, so an over pressure is probable, or at least likely to happen. #2 if you load low enough to intentionally avoid #1 then there is a good chance that the rounds would not fully escape a long barreled AR and there would be too much tisk of mixing up the specific gun/ammo combo which could very easily yield a squib round followed by a kaboom. Risk v reward... injury/death/damage vs less noise. For that purpose, either buy a can or shoot an AR9.

 

[Grumulkin]

If this is an honest question, then this isn’t the place for it to be asked - if trolling, then this is irresponsibly dangerous when responding to a new reloader.

What is within the functional design of a short-recoil design pistol, at relatively MUCH lower operating pressures is NOT also within the functional design of a gas driven, rotating bolt design rifle, operating at relatively MUCH higher pressures. Suggesting a correlation there is an invitation to injury.

Faster powders may produce lower blast and flash in a short barrel, also sacrificing bullet speed as well, however, “faster” is a relative term. There’s a big difference between the speed of a sports car and the speed of a bullet - equally, there’s a big difference between a fast rifle powder and a slow pistol powder. We see an entire bridge of “revolver” powders, like H110, between rifle and semi-auto pistol powders which simply aren’t useful in short recoil pistol cartridges.

If you had read the WHOLE of the post you would have seen that NO recommendation was made that a new reloader should try it. In fact, quite the opposite was said.

 

[entropy]

Didn't come out that way......
This smilie goes a long way towards conveying tongue-in-cheek humor.

 

[Toprudder]

Also, there are very few direct impingement semi-auto pistols, The Steyr GB and Desert Eagle are the two I can think of.

Can’t speak for the Steyr, but the DE is not direct impingement. Gas operated, yes. (Piston).

Sure and if you wanted to do it safely, you will have a single shot AR pistol. Maybe get a custom mold and cast some really heavy bullets.

Problem with that idea is that, since the diameter is fixed, the only way to make heavier bullets from the same materials (lead) is to make them longer. Then you start getting into problems with mag length, and stabilization. Even at the fastest twist of 1:7 you can’t stabilze bullets over about 77-80 gn. Shorten the barrel and the problem gets worse. (Less velocity - slower resulting spin).

I have an 8.5” AR Pistol, and it is obnoxiously loud with normal loads. People accuse me of having a muzzle brake on something larger than 223. I have loaded ammo with H-4198 which helps a lot with noise and flash, but it is still loud. A min charge of 19.0gn with a 55fmj bullet works quite well. That load won’t cycle my mid-length Carbine, though.

 

[Swampman]

Below is the data you seek, fresh from the Hodgdon website.

No, it aint gonna cycle, but it will have a lot less flash and blast than regular. 223 ammo.
(This is for informational purposes only, I DO NOT recommend this type of loading for a beginner).


If you really want a safe, fully cycling, low flash load using fast burning powder in your .223 AR pistol, I recommend something like this:

 

[Varminterror]

I have been reloading now for twice as long as I lived before I reloaded my first cartridge

Interesting contextualization. I’ve never considered a relative reloading-to-non-reloading lifespan ratio.

This year marks a dead even 4:1 reloading to non for me.

 

[entropy]

6.2222:1 reloading to non for me.

 

[Kaldor]

IMR 4198, was ok in my 14.5" bbl M16, with 55 gr bullets. (not a pistol powder) But a fast rifle powder, with load data at hodgdon.

The ar15 and M16s need to have the correct port pressure to work the action. Gas operated guns. Some may not function with IMR 4198 & 40 gr bullets. The bullet exits the barrel to fast, producing low, short port pressure.

There are so many makes of ARs now and not all use the same size hole or location for the gas port. An adjustable gas block may help?

Above points are spot on

H4198 is the slowest powder that will reliably cycle an AR15. Anything slow than this, youre getting into magnum pistol powders. Ive used a rifle length gas system, with H4198, but it was a max load, and it cycled the action just barely. For shorter gas systems, H4198 is pretty decent other than being an extruded powder that doesnt flow well in powder measures, just dont expect to get higher velocities out of it.

 

[OrangePwrx9]

I'd try some TC Contender handgun starting loads and see how they fare in terms of flash, noise, and cycling the action. If they look OK in terms of pressure (takes an experienced eye) but don't cycle the action then up the load a bit, but stay below max.

I think you'll find that most Contender loads use a fast rifle powder. If they don't do the job for you, I'd drop the whole project. Going off the charts with Pistol Powders is a recipe' for disaster.

 

[CoalTrain49]

300 BO isn't a lot different than 30 carbine. Case is a bit larger with a shoulder and using 110 gr bullets, velocity is a few 100' faster. 30 Carbine can be loaded with magnum pistol powder ( I use 2400) so it stands to reason that 30 BO could use the same powder. But 2400 is listed as a magnum pistol powder by the mfg. and 300 BO is definitely a rifle cartridge. Similarly American Select is listed by the mfg. as a shotgun powder but I use it for all of my pistol loads. This sort of thing is not for the novice reloader unless the powder or bullet mfg. has load data for its use in a certain cartridge..... for obvious reasons.

Maybe I'm missing something here but SBR's are kind of like penguins. Birds that swim better than they can walk or fly. OK boomer.

 

[Typetwelve]

That 3.1g Tightgroup load is bonkers. 4000 CUP? I'm actually surprised that wouldn't squib. They also have 3.2g Clays (listed 1060 fps, 3700 CUP) and 4.0g Trail Boss (listed 1074 fps, no listed CUP) load for that same 55g Hornady projectile.

That's bonkers.

 

[CoalTrain49]

6.2222:1 reloading to non for me.

What's that in dog years?

 

[CoalTrain49]

That 3.1g Tightgroup load is bonkers. 4000 CUP? I'm actually surprised that wouldn't squib. They also have 3.2g Clays (listed 1060 fps, 3700 CUP) and 4.0g Trail Boss (listed 1074 fps, no listed CUP) load for that same 55g Hornady projectile.

That's bonkers.

Am I reading this correctly? Load data for .223/5.56?

Absolutely on a collision course here. 3 grains of powder in a case designed for 23 grains has to send a warning signal to anyone with any reloading experience.

 

[Typetwelve]

Am I reading this correctly? Load data for .223/5.56?

Absolutely on a collision course here. 3 grains of powder in a case designed for 23 grains has to send a warning signal to anyone with any reloading experience.

Yup...I'm not going to attempt something like that.

I have a S&W 15-22 for when I want light plinking in an AR'ish platform...I'll stick to that.

 

[Swampman]

Am I reading this correctly? Load data for .223/5.56?

Absolutely on a collision course here. 3 grains of powder in a case designed for 23 grains has to send a warning signal to anyone with any reloading experience.

My guess is that the ballisticians responsible for the data on Hodgdon's website probably have at least SOME reloading experience.

 

[entropy]

What's that in dog years?

43.5554:7

 

[CoalTrain49]

My guess is that the ballisticians responsible for the data on Hodgdon's website probably have at least SOME reloading experience.

You go ahead and use that data. I'll pass.

 

[CraigC]

IMHO, it's Hodgdon data, I think it's probably good.

I see no reason why it wouldn't be possible to use a powder like H110, Lil Gun, 300MP, AA #9 etc., for some loads that would be more efficient in a pistol length barrel. H110 is perfect in the .300BLK so it should be perfectly suitable for the task. That said, if no load data could be found, it's not something I'd want to play with. I suppose you could work up something in a bolt gun as a baseline but it's not something I'd do or recommend without a lot more information. I go off the reservation loading H110 in revolver cartridges but with a lot more information on hand. In the right guns, it's not really something I can screw up. In a bottlenecked rifle cartridge in a gas operated semi-auto, I just don't know enough about it.

 

[Swampman]

You go ahead and use that data. I'll pass.

I'm guessing that you've never done any reloading for subsonic high power rifle.

Personally, I never saw any reason for loading subsonics in .223, which is why I suggested a .22 LR conversion kit in my first post. A 60 grain Aguila SSS round will do about as well as a downloaded .223, with a lot less cost and trouble.

But I've used Hodgdon's Titegroup data in .308 with no problems.

 

[CoalTrain49]

I'm guessing that you've never done any reloading for subsonic high power rifle.

Personally, I never saw any reason for loading subsonics in .223, which is why I suggested a .22 LR conversion kit in my first post. A 60 grain Aguila SSS round will do about as well as a downloaded .223, with a lot less cost and trouble.

But I've used Hodgdon's Titegroup data in .308 with no problems.

You would be correct. I don't load any HP rifle cartridges other than .223/5.56. I'm not seeing any advantage to loading subsonic rifle cartridges. The military obviously felt they had a need but I ain't them. YMMV.

 

[Bfh_auto]

Above points are spot on

H4198 is the slowest powder that will reliably cycle an AR15. Anything slow than this, youre getting into magnum pistol powders. Ive used a rifle length gas system, with H4198, but it was a max load, and it cycled the action just barely. For shorter gas systems, H4198 is pretty decent other than being an extruded powder that doesnt flow well in powder measures, just dont expect to get higher velocities out of it.

There is cast bullet data data using IMR4227 that cycles a carbine length AR

IMHO, it's Hodgdon data, I think it's probably good.

I see no reason why it wouldn't be possible to use a powder like H110, Lil Gun, 300MP, AA #9 etc., for some loads that would be more efficient in a pistol length barrel. H110 is perfect in the .300BLK so it should be perfectly suitable for the task. That said, if no load data could be found, it's not something I'd want to play with. I suppose you could work up something in a bolt gun as a baseline but it's not something I'd do or recommend without a lot more information. I go off the reservation loading H110 in revolver cartridges but with a lot more information on hand. In the right guns, it's not really something I can screw up. In a bottlenecked rifle cartridge in a gas operated semi-auto, I just don't know enough about it.

I have used imr4227 cast bullet data in a carbine length gas system. It locked back the bolt.
I have tried 800x and bluedot. Neither one would cycle an AR.
Lilgun and H110 are erratic in a 7.62x39, so I highly doubt they're feasible in 223. There is too much empty space in both.

For the OP; Don't try anything faster than H4198. It has data that is safe and should give you the results you want.
Definitely don't try reducing rifle powder loads below the starting charges. Some work and some will cause an extreme pressure spike.

 

[CraigC]

My comment about the Hodgdon data was in reference to safety. Not whether it would cycle the action because it surely would not. No doubt that was intended for a manual repeater.

H110 should be near 100% density, that is probably the reason it was erratic.

 

[Pivot Dr]

I’ve shot more than just a few 222 and 223 loaded with 33 and 35 gr bullets and if I remember correctly 13 gr of Blue Dot. Never in an AR, didn’t even have one then, only bolt guns. I don’t recall the velocity anymore but it was hard on prairies dogs out to about 150 yd or so and was enough poop to kill a badger at 100 yd +- and that’s not always easy done! Where did I get the data? Randy Raab, very knowledgeable and if I recall was the operator of the Hunt Chat forum. We “talked” at some length before I decided to give it a go. Basically it turns either the 222 and 223 into a Hornet.