Is .223 worth it?

[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.

[junkyard dog]

Hand loading all the way in my opinion. Factory ammo is ok but if you want accuracy you have to tune a round to suit your rifle.
I get 1/2 moa at 100M (If I do my bit) using 69g SMK with 22.2g of N140 loaded 15 thou off the lands. Rifle is a .223 Browning A bolt tactical varmint with a 22" barrel and a 1-9 twist.

[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

[Parabuteo]

.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

Spot on although there are still arguments over what is what.

7.62 NATO also generally has thicker brass and the chamber will have several more thou headspace. 7.62 NATO is circa 146gr although M118 is chucking 175gr. Also be aware that some older 7.62x51 chambered rifles may be tight bore to get the best out of the 7.62x51 NATO that was issued for NRA competitions. The bullets are circa .306

I have a 7.62x51 AR on order Tac, it will have to be that as it is what it says on my ticket, but it will be more than capable of shooting .308. Oddly because of the way my licensing authority work I have sold my .308 but kept .308 Win and 7.72x51 NATO on the ammo allocation as I will hand load cases stamped .308 Win, but also shoot the occasional surplus round through it. Same goes for my BAR15, I have allocations for 5.56 NATO and .223 Rem, just in case Mr Plod gets confused by headstamps.

[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

[223AI]

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

There we go then, PS hope you're well

[Parabuteo]

There we go then, PS hope you're well

Smoke and mirrors often quoted by folk who dont reload Scott.

The bottom line is that for most bullet and powder combos there is a safe starting point that should not blow anything up. The more experianced you get the less time it takes you to develope a safe, accurate load.

Many beginners dont get this and wonder why because a pet load works in one rifle, it is not safe to simply bung it in an identical rifle and crack on.

I have given up on the quest for velocity above and beyond, I just need something that chambers perfectly each time, ejects smoothly and does 1MOA or better out to 600....reliably. I dont think many people understand what effect a simple small change in load will cause in terms of harmonics and group size.

I reckon every handloader should shoot a ladder test at least once, it gives a real insight into nodes and ideal load starting points with minimal ammo use.




And then there is F class