What is wrong with this 223 Rem load?

StoneHorse

StoneHorse

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
61   0   0
Location
Cascadia
I have been using Gordon's Reloading Tool for only a short time so there is much I don't know. I plugged in some data on a load that I have used in the past with good results, velocity and accuracy wise. I was a little surprised to see this message on the screen: "Low Burn Rate! Inconsistent combustion and increase error rate of the simulation very likely." So what is wrong and what I am not seeing here? Screen shot:

20211209-165135.jpg


25.0 gr of H335, 55 gr Campro FMJBT, OAL = 2.245", Nosler case, Rem 7-1/2 primers.
 
I'm not sure how much faith I have in Gordon's Reloading Tool. In some calibers, with some powders, it seems reasonably accurate, but running the numbers for some others, .458 WM for example, loads that I've used and are listed as safe in published manuals, come up as grossly overpressure in GRT. I've gotten wonky results from other calibre/powder combinations as well.
 
Ganderite said:
Ball powder does not burn very well at a pressure lower than the design intended.

That said, 25 is not very light. It is what I would call a "standard" load.
Click to expand...
One of the reasons I picked H335 because its seems to be a popular choice for the 223 Rem. Besides from the fact I was able to pick up 3 pounds of it for a very good price. I realize Gordon's RT, like reloading manuals are tools/guides. Not a be all, end all, absolute. Regardless, I have been enjoying plugging in different bullet/powder, OAL combinations and looking at the changed results.
 
I shoot that load 25 gr H335 with a 52 grain sierra..no problems and very accurate.
Buy a reloading manual.
I have absolutely no confidence in programs not made but out of reliable source - meaning powder or bullet manufacturers.
The rest is just garbage.
 
9.3mauser said:
I'm not sure how much faith I have in Gordon's Reloading Tool. In some calibers, with some powders, it seems reasonably accurate, but running the numbers for some others, .458 WM for example, loads that I've used and are listed as safe in published manuals, come up as grossly overpressure in GRT. I've gotten wonky results from other calibre/powder combinations as well.
Click to expand...
I have a pet .308 Win load that a couple of reloading manuals list as near maximum. Gordon's warns me a possible over pressure load do to component variables. That load is safe and very accurate in my rifle. But I wouldn't just toss those loads into another rifle or give out the recipe to just anyone.
 
Janeau said:
I shoot that load 25 gr H335 with a 52 grain sierra..no problems and very accurate.
Buy a reloading manual.
I have absolutely no confidence in programs not made but out of reliable source - meaning powder or bullet manufacturers.
The rest is just garbage.
Click to expand...
I have three reloading manuals. I have just started to explore Gordon's. Also .223 Rem is new to me cartridge to reload. Did you look at my post #5?

I have my answer. Thanks to all that replied.
 
Last edited:
I enjoy the Gordon Reloading Tool. Allows me to play with some different powders to give me a starting load. Like N570 in the 264 and 300 PRC.
 
+1 on a tried and true reloading manual get one from each manufacture Hornady, Sierra, Nosler, Lyman etc and read read read - I do not trust programs or electronic loading scales.
 
IvoB said:
+1 on a tried and true reloading manual get one from each manufacture Hornady, Sierra, Nosler, Lyman etc and read read read - I do not trust programs or electronic loading scales.
Click to expand...

I have no experience with GRT software but this ^ is a foolish statement. Properly used, programs like Quickload are light years ahead of generic data from a manufacturer. Electronic scales are used in laboratories , much more precise than your average reloading balance beam scale
 
IvoB said:
+1 on a tried and true reloading manual get one from each manufacture Hornady, Sierra, Nosler, Lyman etc and read read read - I do not trust programs or electronic loading scales.
Click to expand...
See post #8 and #5.
Electronic scales are in widespread use around the world in a multitude of critical industries including research and medical labs. Programs are fine to use and educational; just cross reference with other sources for piece of mind. Also ask questions in places like reloading forums.
;)
 
Last edited:
Estimation/modelling programs like Quickload and even Load Manuals that publish real-world results (in other people's guns) are guides - your own results with your own powder, primer bullet, brass and barrel will always vary.

I trust my scales and my chronograph.
 
223, although it seems like a pretty simple and straightforward cartridge to load for, does have it's idiosyncrasies.

After a few issues I began to use a CCI 450 Primer, at least until I had determined my load. Especially important with starting loads, and with ball powders. I don't think the powder itself is the issue, it's the fact that the balls inhibit the primer flame or something like that, just my WAG. After I'd reached the velocity i wanted, or the pressure was nearing max, then i'd test other primers.

I put my 223 away at the request of the government, so I'm going from memory, but IIRC, the CCI 450 is the only real Magnum primer for small rifle. The 7 1/2 Rem is a harder or thicker cupped version of their regular primer.

I did buy a brick of Federal AR Match primers but testing has been on hold for over a year.

My H335 load was with a 50 gr bullet and 27.3 grains, but with the 450 primer.

I did seem to favor BLC-2 and CFE 223 later on, not sure why I abandoned H335.

I like the 223, and once you have a decent load, it's a joy to load. It is one of those calibers that weighing charges, cleaning primer pockets, trimming cases and that sort of stuff doesn't seem to matter much. However, I did do extensive case prep initially. Weight sort, flash hole uniform, trim and deburr with a Lyman VLD (22º) tool. After that, just load. I also avoid top loads, the 223 seems to be at home with a middle of the chart load.

I got a bit annoyed with paying up for bullets, so settled on Hornady bulk, 55 gr WC. With 26 gr of CFE 223, a Rem 7 1/2 gave me a bit better group in a cheap prohib.
 
nitro-express said:
223, although it seems like a pretty simple and straightforward cartridge to load for, does have it's idiosyncrasies.

After a few issues I began to use a CCI 450 Primer, at least until I had determined my load. Especially important with starting loads, and with ball powders. I don't think the powder itself is the issue, it's the fact that the balls inhibit the primer flame or something like that, just my WAG. After I'd reached the velocity i wanted, or the pressure was nearing max, then i'd test other primers.

I put my 223 away at the request of the government, so I'm going from memory, but IIRC, the CCI 450 is the only real Magnum primer for small rifle. The 7 1/2 Rem is a harder or thicker cupped version of their regular primer.

I did buy a brick of Federal AR Match primers but testing has been on hold for over a year.

My H335 load was with a 50 gr bullet and 27.3 grains, but with the 450 primer.

I did seem to favor BLC-2 and CFE 223 later on, not sure why I abandoned H335.

I like the 223, and once you have a decent load, it's a joy to load. It is one of those calibers that weighing charges, cleaning primer pockets, trimming cases and that sort of stuff doesn't seem to matter much. However, I did do extensive case prep initially. Weight sort, flash hole uniform, trim and deburr with a Lyman VLD (22º) tool. After that, just load. I also avoid top loads, the 223 seems to be at home with a middle of the chart load.

I got a bit annoyed with paying up for bullets, so settled on Hornady bulk, 55 gr WC. With 26 gr of CFE 223, a Rem 7 1/2 gave me a bit better group in a cheap prohib.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the informative writeup Nitro. You are the first to mention primers which most certainly can affect pressure. I started with Remington 7-1/2 primers because that was recommended in my reloading manuals(s) and online resources. But now that I have exhausted my supply of Rem 7-1/2; I just picked up 500 CCI #450 small rifle magnum primers to try out. I have not mentioned this earlier but I am reloading for a bolt action, not a semi-auto.
 
StoneHorse said:
See post #8 and #5.
Electronic scales are in widespread use around the world in a multitude of critical industries including research and medical labs. Programs are fine to use and educational; just cross reference with other sources for piece of mind. Also ask questions in places like reloading forums.
;)
Click to expand...

They are fine, as long as they are calibrated; the average home-loader will not calibrate their electronic scales, so if they get out of whack, how do they know. Zeroing is not calibrating. A mechanical balance either works or it does not.

If you are using an electronic scale, you need a set of standard weights for the full range of the scale, and these can cost as much as a scale.
 
Meroh said:
They are fine, as long as they are calibrated; the average home-loader will not calibrate their electronic scales, so if they get out of whack, how do they know. Zeroing is not calibrating. A mechanical balance either works or it does not.

If you are using an electronic scale, you need a set of standard weights for the full range of the scale, and these can cost as much as a scale.
Click to expand...
The scale came with calibration weight. Periodically checked and tested against a balance beam scale. Never varied more than +/- 0.1 grain in years.
 
I've been thinking about this thread for days. I wasn't going to post, but I can't resist!

I've loaded hundreds of wolf 55gr and 20-21gr (dipper for bulk fast loading) of h335. They cycle in everything I've tried so far.

Hodgdon has a starting load of 21.6gr listed for 55gr
 
Four different sources list a maximum load of 25.0 (1), 25.3 (1) and 27.0 (2) grains of H335 with a 55 gr bullet. Start 10% under maximum and move up or down from there. H20 case capacity and OAL seem to be the two biggest variables when it comes to pressure, along with the powder charge. Am I wrong?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom