User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
KS, USA
|
Posted: 3/24/2011 6:42:20 PM EDT
[#1]
I do not think one is better over the other......this is just the route I am going with presently as I expand my working knowledge base of this wildcat.
From whom I was getting the barrel I was keeping to myself for a while on this forum for a reason........figured it was my business |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/26/2011 2:51:37 PM EDT
[Last Edit: wombat25]
[#2]
More 80-grain TTSX testing today.
While the results I've had with both H335 (2600-2700 fps) and H4198 (2700-2800 fps) have been good, and accuracy has been exemplary with both powders, I still wasn't satisfied. I felt more velocity was to be had with this bullet, and would be necessary from a terminal ballistics standpoint to compete with a 100-grain soft point at ~2540 fps. Looking at the powder burn charts, the results that 320pf and precisionpredators had on page 8 of this thread with Reloader 7, and knowing that Reloader 7 was the powder to use for the 6.8 SPC and the lighter Barnes bullets, I picked up a jug earlier this week. Here's what I learned: 80-grain TTSX w/ 23.5 grains R7 - avg. velocity of 2796 fps (ES - 36) 80-grain TTSX w/ 24.0 grains R7 - avg. velocity of 2860 fps (ES - 22) 80-grain TTSX w/ 24.5 grains R7 - avg. velocity of 2925 fps (ES - 26) Now we're talking! 
There were mild pressure signs at 24.5 grains. Accuracy with all loads was excellent. Conditions were far from perfect but I was keeping groups around an inch or slightly greater, with the 24.0-grain load putting all bullets but one through the same hole. Unfortunately, I did have occasional function problems with these loads. Failures to feed after firing, jams, and failures to lock the bolt back on an empty mag. The fired cases were only being thrown 3-4 feet, so it's pretty clear I need to upsize my gas port to reliably cycle loads with light bullets and faster-burning powders. Bottom line - a little more experimentation is necessary, but Reloader 7 seems like the go-to powder for this cartridge and the 80-grain TTSX. 
ETA: I opened up the gas port on my 18" midlength barrel to .0785 (#47 bit) and it now functions perfectly with all loads. Pressure signs increased with the hotter 80-gr TTSX loads I was putting together, so I'm backing down to around 24.0 gr R7 as max. Be careful out there. |
|
|
|
VA, USA
|
Posted: 3/26/2011 5:51:48 PM EDT
[#3]
Sharps rifle is saying their federal ammo is 87 gr bullet at 2900 fps. Didn't say what barrel length.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/26/2011 6:02:06 PM EDT
[#4]
Originally Posted By VaFish:
Sharps rifle is saying their federal ammo is 87 gr bullet at 2900 fps. Didn't say what barrel length. That always irritates me. Giving a velocity without a barrel length doesn't tell me much and companies do it all the time. Since I'm getting 2700+ from a 16" I'm guessing that is from a 20"-24" barrel. Hopefully I'm wrong and they have a better powder/bullet combo than I've tried. |
|
|
|
NY, USA
|
Posted: 3/28/2011 2:09:46 AM EDT
[#5]
I had a chance to work up some load using the new Sierra 90g BK. I used the H335 load at the 3-gun match this weekend.
Use these data at your own risk. Start low and work up carefully, 16-inch 1:10 twist barrel. A2230 24.0––2386 25.0––2506 26.0––2549 26.5––2629 27.0––2661 H335 25.5––2569 26.0––2604 26.5––2656 27.0––2650 320pf |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/28/2011 9:43:28 AM EDT
[#6]
Originally Posted By 320pf:
I had a chance to work up some load using the new Sierra 90g BK. I used the H335 load at the 3-gun match this weekend. Use these data at your own risk. Start low and work up carefully, 16-inch 1:10 twist barrel. A2230 24.0––2386 25.0––2506 26.0––2549 26.5––2629 27.0––2661 H335 25.5––2569 26.0––2604 26.5––2656 27.0––2650 320pf Hey 320pf, How does that bullet seat with the throat that you have in your rifle; are you able to seat these out to magazine length? How is the accuracy compared to the 90 HPBT that Sierra makes? I can't wait to give these a try! To rest of the crowd, Anybody out there try XBR 8208 yet? I've messed with it a little bit in Rem 700 in 223 (it meters like ball powder) it didn't do anything great out of the factory bbl, but then again, neither has any other powder I've tried in that rifle. If not, I guess I'll be the first one then once my bbl shows up. |
|
|
|
VA, USA
|
Posted: 3/28/2011 11:50:19 AM EDT
[#7]
Originally Posted By Altair:
Originally Posted By VaFish:
Sharps rifle is saying their federal ammo is 87 gr bullet at 2900 fps. Didn't say what barrel length. That always irritates me. Giving a velocity without a barrel length doesn't tell me much and companies do it all the time. Since I'm getting 2700+ from a 16" I'm guessing that is from a 20"-24" barrel. Hopefully I'm wrong and they have a better powder/bullet combo than I've tried. You are not wrong. 24" test barrel. They say that is saami standard. But they are supposed to have data from 16" rifle soon. |
|
|
NY, USA
|
Posted: 3/28/2011 11:59:43 AM EDT
[#8]
Originally Posted By Army03CRNA:
Originally Posted By 320pf:
I had a chance to work up some load using the new Sierra 90g BK. I used the H335 load at the 3-gun match this weekend. Use these data at your own risk. Start low and work up carefully, 16-inch 1:10 twist barrel. A2230 24.0––2386 25.0––2506 26.0––2549 26.5––2629 27.0––2661 H335 25.5––2569 26.0––2604 26.5––2656 27.0––2650 320pf Hey 320pf, How does that bullet seat with the throat that you have in your rifle; are you able to seat these out to magazine length? How is the accuracy compared to the 90 HPBT that Sierra makes? I can't wait to give these a try! To rest of the crowd, Anybody out there try XBR 8208 yet? I've messed with it a little bit in Rem 700 in 223 (it meters like ball powder) it didn't do anything great out of the factory bbl, but then again, neither has any other powder I've tried in that rifle. If not, I guess I'll be the first one then once my bbl shows up. Yes I can seat the 90 g Sierra BK to magazine length. I shot these at a 3-gun match this weekend and they shot very well. Before that match, I was able to put them into ~1" groups. I was able to successfully engage 10" steel at 100, 200 and 300 yrds. 320pf I have a box of Sierra 90 SPBT but I have not shot them yet. With the current throat, you not have to seat the Sierra 90 SPBT a bit shorter than magazine length. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/28/2011 12:19:28 PM EDT
[#9]
Originally Posted By VaFish:
You are not wrong. 24" test barrel. They say that is saami standard. But they are supposed to have data from 16" rifle soon. Where are you guys hearing this info on the 25-45 Sharps? |
|
|
|
VA, USA
|
Posted: 3/28/2011 12:57:43 PM EDT
[#10]
Originally Posted By wombat25:
Originally Posted By VaFish:
You are not wrong. 24" test barrel. They say that is saami standard. But they are supposed to have data from 16" rifle soon. Where are you guys hearing this info on the 25-45 Sharps? |
|
|
AL, USA
|
Posted: 3/29/2011 11:11:16 PM EDT
[#11]
Have y'all tried A1680 Yet? I tried it today in the 6.5 Patriot and 120gr speer, and was impressed. It should be a great powder for the long bullets like the 100gr in the 25-223
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2011 11:37:30 PM EDT
[#12]
Originally Posted By 1-Wolverine:
Have y'all tried A1680 Yet? I tried it today in the 6.5 Patriot and 120gr speer, and was impressed. It should be a great powder for the long bullets like the 100gr in the 25-223 Check the very first page of the thread. Graycard apparently tried it and found it a little hit and miss with the pressures after 21.0 grains. I believe 320pf may have tried it as well. I think the general consensus is that H335 is the go-to starting powder for the 100-grain bullets, but I would love nothing more than for someone to identify a better one. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2011 11:43:41 PM EDT
[#13]
Originally Posted By wombat25:
Originally Posted By 1-Wolverine:
Have y'all tried A1680 Yet? I tried it today in the 6.5 Patriot and 120gr speer, and was impressed. It should be a great powder for the long bullets like the 100gr in the 25-223 Check the very first page of the thread. Graycard apparently tried it and found it a little hit and miss with the pressures after 21.0 grains. I believe 320pf may have tried it as well. I think the general consensus is that H335 is the go-to starting powder for the 100-grain bullets, but I would love nothing more than for someone to identify a better one. I also had early onset of pressure signs when I tried 1680. I know Kurt had good results with it in his .25x40 but it doesn't seem to like the .25-223 for whatever reason. |
|
|
|
NC, USA
|
Posted: 3/30/2011 8:21:25 AM EDT
[#14]
So far I can report that I have had my best results with H322 and H335. The 1680 works very well in the 7.62x40 but I was not pleased with the pressure signs in the 25/223. All of my loads have been based on the 100 gr. bullets. After all, that is the biggest advantage of the 25/223 over the .223. To me, going with the lighter bullets is just narrowing the difference between the two cartridges.
I have hit 2500 fps with the 100 gr. bullets and that is about the limit I can expect. Accuracy has been outstanding and function has been 100%. Overall I consider this a 150 - 200 yard rifle capable of taking anything I can come across on my land, two or four legged. What more can I ask? I set my goals before I started and the rifle has met them. It has even exceded my accuracy expectations which is the reason it is replacing my lever actions on my walks. |
|
|
NH, USA
|
Posted: 3/30/2011 10:58:17 AM EDT
[#15]
Originally Posted By Graycard:
So far I can report that I have had my best results with H322 and H335. The 1680 works very well in the 7.62x40 but I was not pleased with the pressure signs in the 25/223. All of my loads have been based on the 100 gr. bullets. After all, that is the biggest advantage of the 25/223 over the .223. To me, going with the lighter bullets is just narrowing the difference between the two cartridges. I have hit 2500 fps with the 100 gr. bullets and that is about the limit I can expect. Accuracy has been outstanding and function has been 100%. Overall I consider this a 150 - 200 yard rifle capable of taking anything I can come across on my land, two or four legged. What more can I ask? I set my goals before I started and the rifle has met them. It has even exceded my accuracy expectations which is the reason it is replacing my lever actions on my walks. Same here w/ my original 6.5mm AR-TCU wildcat, AA1680 seems to max-out @ around 22.0grs. w/ the 120gr. pills...After that I start to get pressure signs w/ primers starting to flatten. |
|
|
AL, USA
|
Posted: 3/30/2011 11:12:03 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1-Wolverine]
[#16]
Originally Posted By wombat25:
Originally Posted By 1-Wolverine:
Have y'all tried A1680 Yet? I tried it today in the 6.5 Patriot and 120gr speer, and was impressed. It should be a great powder for the long bullets like the 100gr in the 25-223 Check the very first page of the thread. Graycard apparently tried it and found it a little hit and miss with the pressures after 21.0 grains. I believe 320pf may have tried it as well. I think the general consensus is that H335 is the go-to starting powder for the 100-grain bullets, but I would love nothing more than for someone to identify a better one. I can see why you could get pressure problems with the 1680, it is a hot powder. I got the same speed with 1680 with four grains less powder than H335, and the case was about full with 335, but had plenty of room left with 1680, that is why I am thinking it may be a great powder for heavy bullets in these small case wildcats in the shorter barrels. I figured it would be good powder for the 25-223 also. So yes, I can see how you could be getting pressure signs after 21gr. Maybe I missed it, but did anyone chrono the 1680 against the 335? Just because you are seeing pressure signs at 21gr, does not mean you are not getting speeds equal to or better than the 335 with less powder. I will be doing a lot more testing with 1680, so far I really like what I am seeing in the 6.5Patriot. Before I tried 1680 I did not even think I would mess with the 123gr Scenar ,144 lupua or 125gr partition, thinking I could not get enough powder in the case to make them work, but with 1680, I do not think I will run out of capacity. I can't wait to test it in my 6x45 also. |
|
|
NH, USA
|
Posted: 3/30/2011 11:30:41 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Dr69er]
[#17]
Originally Posted By 1-Wolverine:
Originally Posted By wombat25:
Originally Posted By 1-Wolverine:
Have y'all tried A1680 Yet? I tried it today in the 6.5 Patriot and 120gr speer, and was impressed. It should be a great powder for the long bullets like the 100gr in the 25-223 Check the very first page of the thread. Graycard apparently tried it and found it a little hit and miss with the pressures after 21.0 grains. I believe 320pf may have tried it as well. I think the general consensus is that H335 is the go-to starting powder for the 100-grain bullets, but I would love nothing more than for someone to identify a better one. I can see why you could get pressure problems with the 1680, it is a hot powder. I got the same speed with 1680 with four grains less powder than H335, and the case was about full with 335, but had plenty of room left with 1680, that is why I am thinking it may be a great powder for heavy bullets in these small case wildcats in the shorter barrels. So yes, I can see how you could be getting pressure signs after 21gr. Maybe I missed it, but did anyone chrono the 1680 against the 335? Just because you are seeing pressure signs at 21gr, does not mean you are not getting speeds equal to or better than the 335 with less powder. I will be doing a lot more testing with 1680, so far I really like what I am seeing in the 6.5Patriot. Before I tried 1680 I did not even think I would mess with the 123gr Scenar ,144 lupua or 125gr partition, thinking I could not get enough powder in the case to make them work, but with 1680, I do not think I will run out of capacity. I can't wait to test it in my 6x45 also. Paul, I just got a chance order the last box of Lapua 6.5mm 144 gr. FMJBT...As soon as I get them I will send some to you for testing. The 6.5mm 123 gr. Scenars are always back ordered...OH well... ETA: Sorry guys didn't me to go off topic on your thread... |
|
|
NY, USA
|
Posted: 4/9/2011 9:48:32 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 320pf]
[#18]
New Litter
A new batch of barrels came in this week. There are two stainless steel and two chrom-moly barrels. One each of 20-inches and 16-inches. The two 20-inch barrels will be shipped to their new owners on Monday. The two 16-inch barrels have the gas port in the mid-length position. Altair results from his experiment with increasing the buffer weight and spring tension which reduced the number of ejector swipes, seems to confirm what I have been reading about gas port positions. Which is that the carbine gas port position is best for the M4 carbine with a 14.5 inch barrel and that a 16-inch barrel will run smoother with a mid-length position. In addition, I had a chance to shoot a 14.5-inch barrel AR with a pinned comp. and it cycled much smoother than the 16-inch barrels with the gas port in the carbine position. So I thought that I would try an experiment make two barrels with the gas port in the mid-length position and see how they shoot compared to my 16-inch carbine gas port barrels. 320pf 
|
|
|
NC, USA
|
Posted: 4/16/2011 9:33:23 AM EDT
[#19]
320pf, have you had a chance to try out the mid-length barrels?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2011 11:02:51 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Army03CRNA]
[#20]
Originally Posted By 320pf:
New Litter A new batch of barrels came in this week. There are two stainless steel and two chrom-moly barrels. One each of 20-inches and 16-inches. The two 20-inch barrels will be shipped to their new owners on Monday. The two 16-inch barrels have the gas port in the mid-length position. Altair results from his experiment with increasing the buffer weight and spring tension which reduced the number of ejector swipes, seems to confirm what I have been reading about gas port positions. Which is that the carbine gas port position is best for the M4 carbine with a 14.5 inch barrel and that a 16-inch barrel will run smoother with a mid-length position. In addition, I had a chance to shoot a 14.5-inch barrel AR with a pinned comp. and it cycled much smoother than the 16-inch barrels with the gas port in the carbine position. So I thought that I would try an experiment make two barrels with the gas port in the mid-length position and see how they shoot compared to my 16-inch carbine gas port barrels. 320pf http://128.6.77.252/~ar/images/ar/newlitter3.JPG The Stainless 20" bbl is mine it showed up last week while I was at a Larry Vickers course. I spoke with 320pf on the phone briefly over the weekend and I was hoping to have time Monday to put it together––unfortunately that didn't happen  When I spoke with 320pf, I thought he said he made some brass and put them in the box for me. WHAT I FOUND was LOADED 100gn SMKs!!!
THANKS!! My plan is put it together and get some rounds downrange today––Saturday at the latest. Anyone volunteer to keep Mr Murphy busy for a while. . . 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2011 1:40:23 PM EDT
[#21]
Originally Posted By Army03CRNA:
The Stainless 20" bbl is mine it showed up last week while I was at a Larry Vickers course. I spoke with 320pf on the phone briefly over the weekend and I was hoping to have time Monday to put it together––unfortunately that didn't happen When I spoke with 320pf, I thought he said he made some brass and put them in the box for me. WHAT I FOUND was LOADED 100gn SMKs!!!
THANKS!! My plan is put it together and get some rounds downrange today––Saturday at the latest. Anyone volunteer to keep Mr Murphy busy for a while. . .
Sounds good. Be sure to take a picture of your finished build. It would also be very interesting to get some velocity readings from the 20" barrel for comparison with the 16" barrels. |
|
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 4/20/2011 10:40:58 PM EDT
[#22]
Originally Posted By Graycard:
I stand by my convictions.....It can't do anything more than the 6x45.............we will have to agree to disagree.........
Nothing wrong with that. The .25-.223 does "ring my chimes" and that alone is all I ask of it. I was looking for a 150 yard carbine that was easy to carry and had enough power for anything on my land (I have no desire to shoot any of my bears.) There are a lot of calibers and a lot of other firearms that would fill that need but this is the choice I made and at least I know I'll be the only one in my woods with one. my current load in 6x45 from a 20" 1:9 twist barrel: 100g Sierra SBT # 2650 FPS puts 1,559 Ft/lbs of energy at the muzzle and holds 1,070 ft/lbs at 200 yards. 6mm bullet selection is tremendous. Just my .02. Nice 25/223! I like seing wildcats!. I gave the 25 some thought in the past, but couldnt find anyone that offered, much less knew how to cut a proper chamber. A lot of people have the right idea with the .223 case functionality in AR's. There are a bunch: .204 ruger, .223, 6x45, 25/223, 6.5mm x45, 270/223 (fail), 300/221 whisper/blackout/fireball/tom and jerry, 7.62X40 ISRC. I think I forgot one. |
|
|
NC, USA
|
Posted: 4/21/2011 9:05:09 AM EDT
[#23]
Originally Posted By GGGBeo50:
Originally Posted By Graycard:
I stand by my convictions.....It can't do anything more than the 6x45.............we will have to agree to disagree.........
Nothing wrong with that. The .25-.223 does "ring my chimes" and that alone is all I ask of it. I was looking for a 150 yard carbine that was easy to carry and had enough power for anything on my land (I have no desire to shoot any of my bears.) There are a lot of calibers and a lot of other firearms that would fill that need but this is the choice I made and at least I know I'll be the only one in my woods with one. my current load in 6x45 from a 20" 1:9 twist barrel: 100g Sierra SBT # 2650 FPS puts 1,559 Ft/lbs of energy at the muzzle and holds 1,070 ft/lbs at 200 yards. 6mm bullet selection is tremendous. Just my .02. Nice 25/223! I like seing wildcats!. I gave the 25 some thought in the past, but couldnt find anyone that offered, much less knew how to cut a proper chamber. A lot of people have the right idea with the .223 case functionality in AR's. There are a bunch: .204 ruger, .223, 6x45, 25/223, 6.5mm x45, 270/223 (fail), 300/221 whisper/blackout/fireball/tom and jerry, 7.62X40 ISRC. I think I forgot one. You have the right idea. Pick one you like and enjoy it. Too many want to compare this round to that round as if there is a prize for the winner. The only prize is the fun we have playing with the different combinations. Right now I'm playing with my 25/223 and at the same time working with a 7.62x40WT. They aren't like a girlfriend and they won't get jealous if I take one out and not the other. It sounds as if your 6x45 is working out for you and any success story is good to hear. No matter what someone else says, only you can say which cartridge is the best for your needs. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2011 1:10:14 AM EDT
[#24]
Originally Posted By GGGBeo50:
Originally Posted By Graycard:
I stand by my convictions.....It can't do anything more than the 6x45.............we will have to agree to disagree.........
Nothing wrong with that. The .25-.223 does "ring my chimes" and that alone is all I ask of it. I was looking for a 150 yard carbine that was easy to carry and had enough power for anything on my land (I have no desire to shoot any of my bears.) There are a lot of calibers and a lot of other firearms that would fill that need but this is the choice I made and at least I know I'll be the only one in my woods with one. my current load in 6x45 from a 20" 1:9 twist barrel: 100g Sierra SBT # 2650 FPS puts 1,559 Ft/lbs of energy at the muzzle and holds 1,070 ft/lbs at 200 yards. 6mm bullet selection is tremendous. Just my .02. Nice 25/223! I like seing wildcats!. I gave the 25 some thought in the past, but couldnt find anyone that offered, much less knew how to cut a proper chamber. A lot of people have the right idea with the .223 case functionality in AR's. There are a bunch: .204 ruger, .223, 6x45, 25/223, 6.5mm x45, 270/223 (fail), 300/221 whisper/blackout/fireball/tom and jerry, 7.62X40 ISRC. I think I forgot one. What powder and how many grains for your load? |
|
|
|
VA, USA
|
Posted: 4/22/2011 6:17:21 AM EDT
[Last Edit: VaFish]
[#25]
Originally Posted By Graycard:
Originally Posted By GGGBeo50:
Originally Posted By Graycard:
I stand by my convictions.....It can't do anything more than the 6x45.............we will have to agree to disagree.........
Nothing wrong with that. The .25-.223 does "ring my chimes" and that alone is all I ask of it. I was looking for a 150 yard carbine that was easy to carry and had enough power for anything on my land (I have no desire to shoot any of my bears.) There are a lot of calibers and a lot of other firearms that would fill that need but this is the choice I made and at least I know I'll be the only one in my woods with one. my current load in 6x45 from a 20" 1:9 twist barrel: 100g Sierra SBT # 2650 FPS puts 1,559 Ft/lbs of energy at the muzzle and holds 1,070 ft/lbs at 200 yards. 6mm bullet selection is tremendous. Just my .02. Nice 25/223! I like seing wildcats!. I gave the 25 some thought in the past, but couldnt find anyone that offered, much less knew how to cut a proper chamber. A lot of people have the right idea with the .223 case functionality in AR's. There are a bunch: .204 ruger, .223, 6x45, 25/223, 6.5mm x45, 270/223 (fail), 300/221 whisper/blackout/fireball/tom and jerry, 7.62X40 ISRC. I think I forgot one. You have the right idea. Pick one you like and enjoy it. Too many want to compare this round to that round as if there is a prize for the winner. The only prize is the fun we have playing with the different combinations. Right now I'm playing with my 25/223 and at the same time working with a 7.62x40WT. They aren't like a girlfriend and they won't get jealous if I take one out and not the other. It sounds as if your 6x45 is working out for you and any success story is good to hear. No matter what someone else says, only you can say which cartridge is the best for your needs. Some are worse then acting like there is a prize, they take it to the level of a religious fervor. The only way you are getting to heaven is if you adopt their caliber. |
|
|
NC, USA
|
Posted: 4/22/2011 8:51:39 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Graycard]
[#26]
Originally Posted By VaFish:
Originally Posted By Graycard:
Originally Posted By GGGBeo50:
Originally Posted By Graycard:
I stand by my convictions.....It can't do anything more than the 6x45.............we will have to agree to disagree.........
Nothing wrong with that. The .25-.223 does "ring my chimes" and that alone is all I ask of it. I was looking for a 150 yard carbine that was easy to carry and had enough power for anything on my land (I have no desire to shoot any of my bears.) There are a lot of calibers and a lot of other firearms that would fill that need but this is the choice I made and at least I know I'll be the only one in my woods with one. my current load in 6x45 from a 20" 1:9 twist barrel: 100g Sierra SBT # 2650 FPS puts 1,559 Ft/lbs of energy at the muzzle and holds 1,070 ft/lbs at 200 yards. 6mm bullet selection is tremendous. Just my .02. Nice 25/223! I like seing wildcats!. I gave the 25 some thought in the past, but couldnt find anyone that offered, much less knew how to cut a proper chamber. A lot of people have the right idea with the .223 case functionality in AR's. There are a bunch: .204 ruger, .223, 6x45, 25/223, 6.5mm x45, 270/223 (fail), 300/221 whisper/blackout/fireball/tom and jerry, 7.62X40 ISRC. I think I forgot one. You have the right idea. Pick one you like and enjoy it. Too many want to compare this round to that round as if there is a prize for the winner. The only prize is the fun we have playing with the different combinations. Right now I'm playing with my 25/223 and at the same time working with a 7.62x40WT. They aren't like a girlfriend and they won't get jealous if I take one out and not the other. It sounds as if your 6x45 is working out for you and any success story is good to hear. No matter what someone else says, only you can say which cartridge is the best for your needs. Some are worse then acting like there is a prize, they take it to the level of a religious fervor. The only way you are getting to heaven is if you adopt their caliber. Man, are they going to be surprised when they get there and find me sitting behind the check-in desk at the front gate! I got a chance yesterday to go down to my range for a couple of hours. My Oehler chronograph had gotten to be an on again-off again proposition so I broke down and ordered a new chronograph. I did manage to get the old one working enough to compare readings to the second and everything was just a few fps difference so I'm go to go. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2011 1:36:46 PM EDT
[Last Edit: LtBlue425]
[#27]
Originally Posted By 320pf:
New Litter A new batch of barrels came in this week. There are two stainless steel and two chrom-moly barrels. One each of 20-inches and 16-inches. The two 20-inch barrels will be shipped to their new owners on Monday. The two 16-inch barrels have the gas port in the mid-length position. Altair results from his experiment with increasing the buffer weight and spring tension which reduced the number of ejector swipes, seems to confirm what I have been reading about gas port positions. Which is that the carbine gas port position is best for the M4 carbine with a 14.5 inch barrel and that a 16-inch barrel will run smoother with a mid-length position. In addition, I had a chance to shoot a 14.5-inch barrel AR with a pinned comp. and it cycled much smoother than the 16-inch barrels with the gas port in the carbine position. So I thought that I would try an experiment make two barrels with the gas port in the mid-length position and see how they shoot compared to my 16-inch carbine gas port barrels. 320pf http://128.6.77.252/~ar/images/ar/newlitter3.JPG The 20" chrom-moly should be mine. Can't wait to start experimenting with this caliber as it's the first wildcat cartridge I've ever used. Got my Oly 25WSSM recently but the weather is just crap, don't like shooting in the freezing mud. I have been trying to come up with some different powders for the 25-223, especially with the newer powders on the market like LeverEvolution. Maybe my logic is off but the 6x45 is the closest cousin so it seems logical to me to use it as guidepost. Am I off track here? And a big thanks to 320pf for all his help in getting me to spend more money on my gun hobby.
|
|
|
|
NY, USA
|
Posted: 4/25/2011 8:29:10 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 320pf]
[#28]
This puppy is on it's way to it's new owner (20-inch chron-molly medium-light weight barrel). It has been fully accessorized with 400 pieces of new Lapua brass. I made up some 25-223AR brass from brand new Lapua 5.56 match brass. Laupa brass is VERY nice. If you are shooting in an environment where you are not likely to loss your brass or using a brass catcher, I would go for it. Originally Posted By LtBlue425:
Originally Posted By 320pf:
New Litter A new batch of barrels came in this week. There are two stainless steel and two chrom-moly barrels. One each of 20-inches and 16-inches. The two 20-inch barrels will be shipped to their new owners on Monday. The two 16-inch barrels have the gas port in the mid-length position. Altair results from his experiment with increasing the buffer weight and spring tension which reduced the number of ejector swipes, seems to confirm what I have been reading about gas port positions. Which is that the carbine gas port position is best for the M4 carbine with a 14.5 inch barrel and that a 16-inch barrel will run smoother with a mid-length position. In addition, I had a chance to shoot a 14.5-inch barrel AR with a pinned comp. and it cycled much smoother than the 16-inch barrels with the gas port in the carbine position. So I thought that I would try an experiment make two barrels with the gas port in the mid-length position and see how they shoot compared to my 16-inch carbine gas port barrels. 320pf http://128.6.77.252/~ar/images/ar/newlitter3.JPG The 20" chrom-moly should be mine. Can't wait to start experimenting with this caliber as it's the first wildcat cartridge I've ever used. Got my Oly 25WSSM recently but the weather is just crap, don't like shooting in the freezing mud. I have been trying to come up with some different powders for the 25-223, especially with the newer powders on the market like LeverEvolution. Maybe my logic is off but the 6x45 is the closest cousin so it seems logical to me to use it as guidepost. Am I off track here? And a big thanks to 320pf for all his help in getting me to spend more money on my gun hobby. |
|
|
NC, USA
|
Posted: 4/25/2011 9:23:08 PM EDT
[#29]
A new lesson on load development. I posted a load a few days ago (I just deleted the information from that post) and went down to the range yesterday to run it again. Although the first try went great, yesterday was the exact opposite. The temperature was 15 degrees hotter and it made a hugh difference. Primers were either flattened or completely blown.
Needless to say I have backed off of that load and will re-shoot in the next day or so. I also decided to re-test a few of my othrs loads and powders to see what type of effect the temperature can have on them. I'll take 50 fps less in velocity to maintain reliability. Now I just need to find the load that is safe 365 and maintains the accuracy I've seen in this cartridge.. |
|
|
NY, USA
|
Posted: 4/25/2011 10:02:56 PM EDT
[#30]
That load was H335, right? I have found that ball powders tend to be temp sensitive.
I have started to like the extruded powders like IMR 8208, Benchmark, and H322 more and more. With the exception of IMR 8202, I think that these are all Hodgdon Extreme powders and are less temperature sensitive. IMR 8208 is supposed to be very temperature stable. Brent |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2011 9:57:32 AM EDT
[#31]
Is anybody willing to be the guinee pig and try Hornady's new Superperformace or LeverRevolution powders? They claim 150-200 fps faster than conventional powders. It they work in this cartridge that would take it to a whole new level.
|
|
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 4/29/2011 10:43:08 AM EDT
[Last Edit: GGGBeo50]
[#32]
Originally Posted By 320pf:
That load was H335, right? I have found that ball powders tend to be temp sensitive. I have started to like the extruded powders like IMR 8208, Benchmark, and H322 more and more. With the exception of IMR 8202, I think that these are all Hodgdon Extreme powders and are less temperature sensitive. IMR 8208 is supposed to be very temperature stable. Brent 8208 is "the sauce". I gave up my reliable H335 for 8208 in .223 and 6x45. My deviation in velocity averages 2-20fps. Thats how stable it is. I use a Hornady L&L Auto Charge Powder Dispenser and its gets the weight very precise. Of course all conditions remain the same. I load in series of 100's to keep the bullet batches matching, new LC brass, CCI Primers, all loaded inside my home set at 72 deg. Originally Posted By chewbacca:
Is anybody willing to be the guinee pig and try Hornady's new Superperformace or LeverRevolution powders? They claim 150-200 fps faster than conventional powders. It they work in this cartridge that would take it to a whole new level. I need to read about this. They figure out a way to make the powder burn on a time release schedule? ha! |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2011 11:01:36 AM EDT
[#33]
Originally Posted By GGGBeo50:
Originally Posted By 320pf:
That load was H335, right? I have found that ball powders tend to be temp sensitive. I have started to like the extruded powders like IMR 8208, Benchmark, and H322 more and more. With the exception of IMR 8202, I think that these are all Hodgdon Extreme powders and are less temperature sensitive. IMR 8208 is supposed to be very temperature stable. Brent 8208 is "the sauce". I gave up my reliable H335 for 8208 in .223 and 6x45. My deviation in velocity averages 2-20fps. Thats how stable it is. I use a Hornady L&L Auto Charge Powder Dispenser and its gets the weight very precise. Of course all conditions remain the same. I load in series of 100's to keep the bullet batches matching, new LC brass, CCI Primers, all loaded inside my home set at 72 deg. Originally Posted By chewbacca:
Is anybody willing to be the guinee pig and try Hornady's new Superperformace or LeverRevolution powders? They claim 150-200 fps faster than conventional powders. It they work in this cartridge that would take it to a whole new level. I need to read about this. They figure out a way to make the powder burn on a time release schedule? ha! Have you tried the 8208 with 100 gr in the 6x45? What charge weight? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2011 1:18:49 PM EDT
[#34]
Originally Posted By chewbacca:
Is anybody willing to be the guinee pig and try Hornady's new Superperformace or LeverRevolution powders? They claim 150-200 fps faster than conventional powders. It they work in this cartridge that would take it to a whole new level. I would be happy to give them a try, but they appear to be way too slow (in terms of burn rate) for the .25-223. Leverevolution (the faster of the two) is slower even than Varget. I believe we've more or less determined that the optimal range of burn rates for this cartridge seem to be at around Reloader 7 on the fast side and H335 on the slow. This is of course, hardly written in stone though and I would love to find another fairly slow burning powder that works better than H335 for the 100-grain bullets. 8208 is a likely good candidate. Another might be the new Alliant Power Pro Varmint, which is (like Superperfomance and Leverevolution) supposed to be a high-velocity powder, but one better suited for small-capacity rifle cartridges. Burn rate is supposed to be about the same as Reloader 12. Burn Rate Chart |
|
|
|
NY, USA
|
Posted: 4/29/2011 2:04:31 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 320pf]
[#35]
The powders that I would like to see tried are:
NORMA 200 Accurate 2015BR and 2200 Alliant Reloder 10X VihtaVuori N130 and N133 Accurate 2200 has my interest right now. It is supposed to be a bit faster than 2230 and a bit slower than 1680. I have seen is listed on various burn rate charts very close to IMR3031. Accurate 2200 is a ball powder so you should be able to get higher loading densities than you can with IMR3031 (and extruded powder). But I have also had my eye on Alliant Power Pro Varmint as well. Tisk-tisk some many powders and so little time to try them all. |
|
|
NC, USA
|
Posted: 4/29/2011 3:20:17 PM EDT
[#36]
VihtaVuori N130 and N133
I have some loaded up with the N133 now and plan to test it out later today. It falls between the H322 and H335. The H322 is giving me the best accuracy and the lowest SD while H335 is giving the velocity. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2011 3:37:48 PM EDT
[#37]
Originally Posted By wombat25:
Originally Posted By chewbacca:
Is anybody willing to be the guinee pig and try Hornady's new Superperformace or LeverRevolution powders? They claim 150-200 fps faster than conventional powders. It they work in this cartridge that would take it to a whole new level. I would be happy to give them a try, but they appear to be way too slow (in terms of burn rate) for the .25-223. Leverevolution (the faster of the two) is slower even than Varget. I believe we've more or less determined that the optimal range of burn rates for this cartridge seem to be at around Reloader 7 on the fast side and H335 on the slow. This is of course, hardly written in stone though and I would love to find another fairly slow burning powder that works better than H335 for the 100-grain bullets. 8208 is a likely good candidate. Another might be the new Alliant Power Pro Varmint, which is (like Superperfomance and Leverevolution) supposed to be a high-velocity powder, but one better suited for small-capacity rifle cartridges. Burn rate is supposed to be about the same as Reloader 12. Burn Rate Chart But the Superperformance is loaded in factory 223, so shouldn't it be useful for the 25AR? with heavy bullets? Is there any specific reason why slower powders are not used? |
|
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 4/29/2011 4:04:22 PM EDT
[#38]
Originally Posted By chewbacca:
Originally Posted By GGGBeo50:
Originally Posted By 320pf:
That load was H335, right? I have found that ball powders tend to be temp sensitive. I have started to like the extruded powders like IMR 8208, Benchmark, and H322 more and more. With the exception of IMR 8202, I think that these are all Hodgdon Extreme powders and are less temperature sensitive. IMR 8208 is supposed to be very temperature stable. Brent 8208 is "the sauce". I gave up my reliable H335 for 8208 in .223 and 6x45. My deviation in velocity averages 2-20fps. Thats how stable it is. I use a Hornady L&L Auto Charge Powder Dispenser and its gets the weight very precise. Of course all conditions remain the same. I load in series of 100's to keep the bullet batches matching, new LC brass, CCI Primers, all loaded inside my home set at 72 deg. Originally Posted By chewbacca:
Is anybody willing to be the guinee pig and try Hornady's new Superperformace or LeverRevolution powders? They claim 150-200 fps faster than conventional powders. It they work in this cartridge that would take it to a whole new level. I need to read about this. They figure out a way to make the powder burn on a time release schedule? ha! Have you tried the 8208 with 100 gr in the 6x45? What charge weight? pm sent |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2011 4:20:06 PM EDT
[#39]
Originally Posted By chewbacca:
Originally Posted By wombat25:
Originally Posted By chewbacca:
Is anybody willing to be the guinee pig and try Hornady's new Superperformance or LeverRevolution powders? They claim 150-200 fps faster than conventional powders. It they work in this cartridge that would take it to a whole new level. I would be happy to give them a try, but they appear to be way too slow (in terms of burn rate) for the .25-223. Leverevolution (the faster of the two) is slower even than Varget. I believe we've more or less determined that the optimal range of burn rates for this cartridge seem to be at around Reloader 7 on the fast side and H335 on the slow. This is of course, hardly written in stone though and I would love to find another fairly slow burning powder that works better than H335 for the 100-grain bullets. 8208 is a likely good candidate. Another might be the new Alliant Power Pro Varmint, which is (like Superperfomance and Leverevolution) supposed to be a high-velocity powder, but one better suited for small-capacity rifle cartridges. Burn rate is supposed to be about the same as Reloader 12. Burn Rate Chart But the Superperformance is loaded in factory 223, so shouldn't it be useful for the 25AR? with heavy bullets? Is there any specific reason why slower powders are not used? Yes, but Hornady uses different 'formulas' of Superperformance powder for their factory-loaded cartridges. The particular formula which Hodgdon has released as a reloading component is not one which is well-suited for cartridges with case capacities similar to that of .223. Even in Hogdon's promotional materials, they note that "Because this propellant is tailored for specific applications, the number of cartridges and bullets is limited, but where it works, it really works! " The reloading data they've given is primarily for cartridges in the .22-250-.243-.300 Short Magnum range, which seems to generally conform to it's position on the burn chart. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2011 5:20:01 PM EDT
[#40]
Wombat, what happens if you use a powder that's "too slow"? I'm just guessing, but with the small case, 25 bore and long 100 gr bullets taking up a lot of that case space, then wouldn't a slow powder be preferred? Would barrel length matter?
Again to clarify, this is my first wildcat; up until now, I have strictly followed the reloading manuals. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2011 11:08:37 PM EDT
[#41]
Originally Posted By chewbacca:
Wombat, what happens if you use a powder that's "too slow"? I'm just guessing, but with the small case, 25 bore and long 100 gr bullets taking up a lot of that case space, then wouldn't a slow powder be preferred? Would barrel length matter? Again to clarify, this is my first wildcat; up until now, I have strictly followed the reloading manuals. Someone can give you a more technical answer, I'm sure, but generally when a powder is 'too slow' you can't get enough powder in the case to get to max velocity. 
|
|
|
|
VA, USA
|
Posted: 4/29/2011 11:23:09 PM EDT
[#42]
Leverlution is right next to BLC2.
Were't some folks getting decent results with BLC2? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2011 11:10:27 AM EDT
[#43]
BLC-2 looks a little slow. The top powders I see here are W748, H322 & H335 in that order.
|
|
|
|
VA, USA
|
Posted: 5/2/2011 2:25:54 PM EDT
[#44]
What magazine are you all using with your .25-223?
Mine seems to work well with most gi spec aluminum mags, but they really scratch the bullets and case mouths. I took a 20 round mag and touched the corners with a file and mi more scratched cases. I tried a 20 round pmag yesterday and could not get 2 rounds in a row to feed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/2/2011 2:48:29 PM EDT
[#45]
Originally Posted By VaFish:
What magazine are you all using with your .25-223? Mine seems to work well with most gi spec aluminum mags, but they really scratch the bullets and case mouths. I took a 20 round mag and touched the corners with a file and mi more scratched cases. I tried a 20 round pmag yesterday and could not get 2 rounds in a row to feed. That's odd. I've used GI magazines, 20-round PMAGs, and 30-round PMAGs without any trouble. I find I can load just a little longer with the aluminum magazines. All of mine, though, are blocked to 10 rounds to comply with California law. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/2/2011 5:40:10 PM EDT
[#46]
Originally Posted By VaFish:
What magazine are you all using with your .25-223? Mine seems to work well with most gi spec aluminum mags, but they really scratch the bullets and case mouths. I took a 20 round mag and touched the corners with a file and mi more scratched cases. I tried a 20 round pmag yesterday and could not get 2 rounds in a row to feed. I use 20 and 30 round Pmags with no problems. I don't load past 2.25" though. |
|
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 5/2/2011 9:07:00 PM EDT
[#47]
I bet those mags they are selling for the 7.62 x 40 : Lancer® L5 AWM magazines modified by Wilson Combat will do the trick. Just my .02
|
|
|
NY, USA
|
Posted: 5/3/2011 1:23:17 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 320pf]
[#48]
I have used several different types of mags... standard Al 30-round STANAG mags, 30-round Pmags, Bushmastetr 5-rounders and a Beta-C mag. I have not had any problems getting my 25-223AR gun to feed. Im March, I shot a 300 round match without any problems.
The key to getting the rifle to feed reliable is not to exceed that C.O.L. of 2.26. I load my ammo to 2.250" to 2.255". I do not worry about the scratches on the cases from going in and out of the mags. The same thing (scratches) happens to standard 5.56 ammo. 320pf |
|
|
NC, USA
|
Posted: 5/3/2011 8:04:11 AM EDT
[#49]
So far I have tried the USGI 20s & 30s, PMAG 20s and the Wilson modified Lancer 20's. No problems at all with any of them but I do load about 2 rounds under capacity by habit. I have noticed that with the PMAG the last shot will not keep the bolt back. The Lancer set up by Wilson for the 7.62x40 works great with the 25/223 and seems to be the smoothest.
Did a little shooting yesterday and I'm still playing with different powders. These are the max. loads I have worked up to without any signs of pressure. I shot 2 five shot groups with each load. 79 degrees, 1-3 mph wind at 7 o-clock, humidity 28.73 and steady, alt 1225 ft. H322 23.8 gr. 2402 avg fps (groups sub-MOA, single digit SDs) H335 25.3 gr. 2524 avg fps (groups around 1 1/2", SD of about 20-25 ) These are the two powders I've worked the most with over the past few months. The H322 is the most consistant and by far the best acurracy but 2400 fps is about as good as it will go without any pressure signs showing up. The H335 gives me the best velocity but acuracy suffers a little. But since I consider my rifle to be a 200 yard weapon so either load would work. Today I started working with N133 but again the velocity only about matched the H322. Working with .2 grain increments I only got 12 & 17 fps increases. The 23.2 load gave me a SD of 2 and groups of about 5/8' to match the H322 but I saw no advantage over the H322. N133 23.0 gr. 2372 avg fps N133 23.2 gr. 2389 avg fps N133 23.4 gr. 2401 avg fps All of these loads seemed safe in MY rifle but I would consider them as the max. loads. Start lower and work up. Unless one of you guys come up with better results with another powder, I'll stay with the H322 since I am a bit of an accuracy snob and I don't think my deer, coyotes, etc. will know the difference of 100 fps. |
|
|
VA, USA
|
Posted: 5/3/2011 9:08:40 AM EDT
[#50]
Overall length is 2.255", I have not modified the gas system since I got the barrel from 320pf, wonder if maybe I need to open up the gas port to get reliable feeding with the pmag?
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
