Is .223 worth it?

[Parabuteo]

I've used several brands of ammunition in my Sako 85 (1:12 twist) but home loads have proved to be considerably more accurate at 300-400 yards. The brass seems to live forever, and I get good results with 52gr SMK or 52gr A-Max (but you cannot get these any more) and 23.5 - 23.8gr N133.
It is also OK with lighter (40gr V-Max) but didn't like the 69gr projectiles, which I believe are better-suited (as others have said above) to a faster twist.
Definitely worth giving it a go!

Yea, most of ours are built to work with 77grainers. It helps a bit at the longer distances, then a lot of folk will use cheap stuff at 100. When you think that the standard for the L85 is 36mm at 30yds for acceptance.....I would be worried if I was that large at 100, mag rested with a 4x scope.

I dont spend ages chasing it to be honest, a reliable 1MOA is fine for our targets and you are stuck with mag length anyway, although I know some that have had excellent results at 1000yds with JLKs hand fed.

Actually I would say that a half decent handload is still cheaper than a lot of surplus, and dont forget that GGG 62gn is 5.56x45 NATO in effect, so the standards will be just that. 77s have jumped from near 21p to 30 odd, and the 75gn PPU came in at 14p and is now 19p......wish I had bought several thousand to be honest as they are still a better and cheaper proposition for practice.

[Ranyhyn]

It's a slippery slope to another addiction.
Don't do it.
Fair warning

[Black Beard]

Don't forget, military 5.56 is externally the same as .223 but is designed for a different chamber. It will give higher pressures in a .223 chamber than a military rifle. It will probably also be designed for maximum velocity at minimum cost, so expect pressures to be high anyway.

BB

[Parabuteo]

Don't forget, military 5.56 is externally the same as .223 but is designed for a different chamber. It will give higher pressures in a .223 chamber than a military rifle. It will probably also be designed for maximum velocity at minimum cost, so expect pressures to be high anyway.

BB

Our rifles are chambered/proofed accordingly by probably the most knowledgeable chap in the UK. You are smack on though. Many will get a couple through a bog .223 standard AR then wonder why it starts sticking when it gets warm.

Not all military ammo is SS109 in any event. MOD262 is also produced in brown boxes and used in matches and operations along with stacks of other variations.

[tacfoley]

Our rifles are chambered/proofed accordingly by probably the most knowledgeable chap in the UK. You are smack on though. Many will get a couple through a bog .223 standard AR then wonder why it starts sticking when it gets warm.

Not all military ammo is SS109 in any event. MOD262 is also produced in brown boxes and used in matches and operations along with stacks of other variations.

^ This.

tac

[Black Beard]

Nice to hear you are way ahead of me. I think 7.62 is the other way around with 308 in a 7.62 being the problem combination.

[sarge4318]

Back to the original question:
Shooting any reasonable quantity per year and don't just plink at 100, it will be better to reload - it won't be cheaper (especially if you factor in your time) but you will get a much more consistent round. I find the cost of components to be about the same as the cost of milsurp. Generally the worst reload* will out perform a good factory load for consistency, and that's what it is all about - consistency.

And besides, it gives me a good excuse to forget to do the chores and have few hours of peace on my own in the workshop. That is worth it even if the components double in cost and is better than yoga at relaxing me.

*by 'worst' I mean making the best you can on the cheapest equipment with average or better components - not some fool filling the cases with a spatula and levelling off, etc.

[tacfoley]

Nice to hear you are way ahead of me. I think 7.62 is the other way around with 308 in a 7.62 being the problem combination.

.308Win, in general, operates at around 2000 psi higher than the usual 7.62z51 NATO 150gr round. SAAMI figures.

Also, AFA UK proof houses are concerned, this is borne out by the proof stamps -

1. 7.62x51 = 20 TPSI.

2. .308Win = 21 TPSI.

tac

[223AI]

Don't forget, military 5.56 is externally the same as .223 but is designed for a different chamber. It will give higher pressures in a .223 chamber than a military rifle. It will probably also be designed for maximum velocity at minimum cost, so expect pressures to be high anyway.

BB

I thought the chamber was identical but the leade is different?

[Parabuteo]

I thought the chamber was identical but the leade is different?

Chambers differ Scott. Mine has been reamed a tad slacker so it will take NATO and not stick with the hot stuff, it cycles nicely with most ammo. The NATO chamber should be a tad longer in terms of headpace IIRC to deal with any available NATO spec SS109 etc, and hot/dirty chambers.

[223AI]

Chambers differ Scott. Mine has been reamed a tad slacker so it will take NATO and not stick with the hot stuff, it cycles nicely with most ammo. The NATO chamber should be a tad longer in terms of headpace IIRC to deal with any available NATO spec SS109 etc, and hot/dirty chambers.

So i mean chamber spec's are the same, clearly not though, every day's a learner . . .

[Parabuteo]

So i mean chamber spec's are the same, clearly not though, every day's a learner . . .

Mate, truth is even the experts argue about it. Some reckon that the figures quoted for 7.62x51 NATO (The NATO bit is important) and .308 Win are iffy anyway (near identical) but are just measured in different ways. Yes the 5.56x45 chamber does have a longer leade but there are other chamberings, Rock River (Wylde Chamber) and Armalite, along with others.

One of the real UK issues used to be people sticking factory 155gn .308 loads through the old enfield actioned target rifles. A lot of these were designed for .303 with a single rear locking lug, and tight bored to deal with the 144/6/7 grain FMJ .306 bullets in issues L2A2 ammo, so they shot better but were weak to start with. The enfield action as was is weak, like it or not.

Stick a full spec .308 up one and you may well get a nasty surprise down the line. On the other hand my old M67 had a chunky 3 lug Mauser action in it and took abuse. I used it for FTr and it is still shooting 1MOA off the elbows.

The main idea was that the mil spec chamber would take and fire anything with the NSN mark on it to a required performance (the little circle with the cross in it). If it does not have that, it is not designated 7.62x51 or 5.56x45 NATO....officially. SS109 spec. The yanks have muddied the water with the M855A1 that has a steel core and copper jacket, goes like stink, would be banned at Bisley (as it does not break up) and is a barrel burner as it has to be blown along like stink. Then there is the Mk318 that is more lethal from a short barrel and better for penetration, looking like a match round but isnt, then you get the BH Mod262 match round with its 77gr bullet, that is being used in the field....and so it goes on.

Even our chambers get hot and can be a bit sticky so imagine the fun with an M16A2 or a Minimi. I am just about to have a .308/7.62x51 NATO rifle built. I have a 7.62x51 slot, but will be putting .308 Win and 7.62x51 through it (all handloads as it goes and possibly some surplus). I have a 7.62x51 slot so go figure. I am told it will be .308 Win proofed anyway.

Chambering in the military stuff is usually to allow for the same dimension ammo but possibly with slightly more generous tolerances for dust, oil and dust, oil, heat, water, friday afternoon on the ammo plant, captured local non spec ammo....moths...camels....bricks....yanks having good ideas.....all the usual shite that gets in chambers and shouldnt...and keep firing