Is .223 worth it?

[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.