Ball vs Stick powder for 223 2022

[JimSC]

I use both ball & stick powders...for different purposes and different calibers and both on some cartridges. Ball powders are generally faster ..alot faster in some cartridges...stick powder slightly more accurate in some cases.

same here, different tools for different jobs. My .223 loves TAC and give groups comparable to Varget. My Grendel loves LeverEvolution, and gives me better velocity than any stick I have tried.

 

[David Milisock]

I shoot bolt actions, and accuracy is what I'm after. Ball powders don't make the grade in accuracy. Speed and ease of metering? Sure. They make sense when volume loading for an AR. There are 4 problems with ball powders.

1. The powder column is too dense for consistent ignition which kills accuracy.
2. It's very rare to get a load that has a good case fill volume, at safe pressures that delivers top speed and accuracy. Either you have a powder that's on the fast side with too much air space in the case that's always on the tightrope of knocking a primer out, or it's a slow powder that has slow velocity, burns dirty, and has a huge fireball out of the barrel.
3. The burn rate is controlled by coatings. How much is applied, and how evenly. That's asking a lot from the manufacturer.
4. Some of them are very temp sensitive, to the point of hardly being worth using.

I don't know of a single rifle competition where the go-to load involves a ball powder, in any cartridge being used at any range.

It's very difficult to argue against any of your points against ball powders in this situation. I find them touchy in terms of case volumes, in cases of nearly any size finicky with ignition and dirty. I don't compete, to me competition is when the target shoots back, I varmint hunt and ony shoot targets to work loads.

However there are situations where it works for me, in 22"+ barreled 30-06 with 150 to 165 grain, Winchester 760, large rifle magnum primers. In 6MM ARC with AR pressures LeverEvolution and 105 to 108 grain projectiles, small rifle standard primers and in 30 Carbine, LilGun, small rifle magnum primers and 110 grain projectiles. In the Carbine load it delivers superior velocities in all weather but requires that you use dry lubricants for reliable long shot strings in cold weather, it's still dirty.

 

[Doom]

As with most things in life there is no absolute answer. Most of the OP's information listed is correct. When I originally started reloading, for 223 bolt action, I went with H335 and was happy and had good groups. But in SC we shoot in 20 degree weather and 95+ degree weather. When I shot at 95+ a load developed in the 60's, it required a 2x4 and a mallet to extract the case. From there I went to Varget and then to IMR8208. Never tried ball powder originally in the 308. Settled on IMR 4064. Since I weigh all charges ball/spherical versus extruded is not an issue. I did try 2000MR in 308 but found it too slow but it did give higher velocities.

I read where ST. Marks powder had refined their spherical powder process so that the burn rate deterrent is now distributed throughout the powder grain as opposed to only on the surface. I'm speculating that some of the newer powders like CFE223 and 2000MR are probably being manufactured with this process and that is contributing to the higher velocities.

One nice thing about the 223 is there is 60+ years of powder development concentrated on that cartridge in numerous rifle configurations, both spherical and extruded, single and double base; so there are both types that are optimized to the cartridge. Most people that I encounter choose between the two types based on one of three properties. Progressive loaders prefer spherical for its metering, Year round shooters prefer the less temperature sensitive extruded powders. Almost all shooters seeking highest accuracy/precision shoot extruded as this seems to be a more consistent powder.

 

[BobbyJ]

First of all, the 223 Rem is capable of long rifle life regardless of which powder you use. As long as you don't shoot a large volume of sequential shots where the barrel become overheated, barrel life is not something you need to be concerned about with the 223 Rem.

I used ball powder in the 223 Rem, namely H335 and BLC2. The former yielded excellent groups with 55 grain bullets in 12" twist bolt rifles. Yes, it meters very consistently if that is important to you. My main difficultly with ball powders is their temperature instability, especially varmint hunting in 90+ temperatures, Also I experience considerable POI changes from early spring to mid-summer.

This was more pronounced in the 22 250 with H380 than the 223 Rem but enough that it caused me to move away from ball powders all together for rifles.

I stopped using ball powders many years ago. I found, at least for me, that "stick" powders are more consistent. In the 223 Rem, H4895, IMR 4895, Benchmark, and Varget all performed very well for me.

PS: Ball powder did not burn cleaner or produce higher velocities for me as you asserted in your post.

Good to know thanks!
I'm on the look out for V n133 or XBR to try.

 

[Bronsin]

Some good points to think about.
I found H110 did the best compressed no air space in my 450 BM. And CFE is such I can't get enough in the case to case any pressure issues. But a faster powder with some air space seem it would not be ideal for ball powder.
If you had a AR Varmint gun with 24" 1/9 and had to make the best of it it what powders would you use for lighter bullets 40-55gr?
I want to try a stick powder some have smaller sticks that might meter good enough.

Even in a bolt rifle, the best powder for 40's won't be the same for 55's, but LT-32 and N133 both fit the bill. Benchmark does too, if you can find any of it. Many shooters really like H322 as well. H322 is the fastest, then LT-32, N133, and Benchmark would be the slowest of these.

 

[BobbyJ]

Even in a bolt rifle, the best powder for 40's won't be the same for 55's, but LT-32 and N133 both fit the bill. Benchmark does too, if you can find any of it. Many shooters really like H322 as well. H322 is the fastest, then LT-32, N133, and Benchmark would be the slowest of these.

Well I went out to the range today with my New Varmint AR 24" E Aurthor Brown 1/9" stanless bull match barrel.
I shot from range brass 55gr CFE 27.1gr reloads to 69 gr HMR and Sierra MatchKings. Some Hornday Factory 53 gr.
Paid no mind to the lands etc just loaded off the book. It shot everything from .4 to 1 MOA.
The cheap 69gr RMR were better than that 3x the price 69gr MK. Below is a 200 yard group.

I did not even do a ladder workup yet. Just random loads that worked ok in my Colts. All CFE 223 some with new starline some with mixed on sorted range brass. Worst group was 1.2 MOA most around .6 MOA.

I think I can do better my table was not that sturdy so the spread is probably me moving. I would have to say that barrel is the key. None of my loads were made with stick powder just CFE and did not even think How much jump to the lands it was. Its worked ok in my 16" Colt 6920s.

I'm pretty happy with those results I think its more the barrel than the powder or bullet. the 55 and 53gr Horndays shot almost as good. One was unsorted brass the other was factory 53.

For those that are curious on how fast the Honady Factory 53Vmax shoots out of a 24"wylde 1/9 twist.
Ave 3351
SD 25
ES 70fps

I want to try to improve on Factor Hornady with my reloads.
N133
Benchmark
Win 748 (much longer barrel life, low temp) Depends if i'm going to be shoot it a ton. Might pay off in the long run.



25.5gr CFE 223 69gr RMR 2900 fps.