• This Forum is for adults 18 years of age or over. By continuing to use this Forum you are confirming that you are 18 or older. No content shall be viewed by any person under 18 in California.

Magnum primers in .223 F/TR???

I'm developing two 600 yard, F class rifles, one .223 for F/TR and the other 6mm BR for F-Open, both with Savage target actions, Shilen Select Match barrels, etc. etc. Both guns shoot bullets on the heavy end of the spectrum, but within their capability. The 6mm is 1:8 twist, 28" and shoots Berger Hybrid 105gr bullets rather well. The .223 with a 1:7 twist 26" barrel shoots Berger VLD 80gr bullets OK but not as well as it should.

I am happy with the 6mm load. Yesterday, during a recipe confirmation test, it shot an average MOA at 100 yards of .350 with a worst group of .379, all 5-shot groups. The average SD was 7.25 and one group showed an ES of 4 fps with an SD of 1.79, which made me giggle.

After lots of fiddling, my brass preparation and loading routine is apparently refined enough to give my fellow belly floppers a run for their money, at least when it comes to ammo. Today I'll load enough rounds for the next couple of matches before I switch my reloading equipment over to .223 caliber.

Unfortunately, the .223 F/TR rifle is not yet as good as required and it exhibits erratic performance. During load development the best 5-shot MOA at 100 yards was .167 with a decent number of groups in the "twos", so there is some hope. Unfortunately, this is definitely NOT the norm and the same recipe which puts 5-shots in the twos will shoot the next five well outside 1/2 MOA and then do poorly again with the following five shots. In addition the SD figures are all over the place too, sometimes single digit but often in the 30's and 40's.

I hate to enter even a low-key F/TR match with a rifle which I cannot guarantee will shoot sub 1/2 MOA, especially since my Howa 1500 "fun gun" will do that every time without fuss.

The entire reloading and load development process is identical for both guns except that I use CCI 450 (magnum) primers in the 6mm and CCI BR primers in the .223.

If anyone has seen a performance increase, especially in the area of consistency, by using magnum primers in their .223, please give me the details.
 
What do you use to weigh your charges. The 223 needs its powder charges to be as precise as possible. Its touchy in that regard due to small case capacity. Also the 7T can be finicky. Try the 90gr smk or 90gr VLD instead of the 80gr. That could be an issue.

Whats your powder charge and brass mfg used?
 
What do you use to weigh your charges. The 223 needs its powder charges to be as precise as possible. Its touchy in that regard due to small case capacity. Also the 7T can be finicky. Try the 90gr smk or 90gr VLD instead of the 80gr. That could be an issue.

Whats your powder charge and brass mfg used?
I'm well aware that the .223 is finicky while the 6mm BR is regarded as being relatively forgiving. However, I am quite happy to put down a five dollar bill and invite you to pick it up if the next 5-shot group from my cheap Howa "fun gun" isn't 1/2 MOA or better. And that's without hand-wighing the powder. I tell myself, surely a .223 with better components and much more careful ammo prep can do at least that well, but so far my new F/TR gun isn't cooperating.

I us an RCBS Chargemaster and dump each load onto my Gem Pro digital which has a resolution of .02gr. I add or subtract a kernel or two, if necessary, to hit the target weight exactly, which means each charge is identical plus or minus .01gr, or that's the theory anyway. In any event, I think I'm measuring the charge weights as accurately as anybody who still claims to be sane.

The brass is carefully prepared Lapua Match, identical in every way (except in size) to my 6mm BR Lapiua brass which shoots well. The only significant difference is the primers, which is why I'm asking about those who have experience using magnum primers in .223 ammo.

I've shot 269 rounds of SMK 90gr bullets in this gun only 70 rounds of which were in groups sub 1/2 MOA and those were launched with charge weights in excess of maximum published data. Some groups were truly horrible; worse than 1.5 MOA, especially at lower muzzle velocities. I know that some 1:7 twist barrels will shoot the SMK 90 well, but I don't think mine is one of them. I haven't given up on them, but I'm not going to spend more time on that bullet until I can make one of the 80 gr bullets perform reliably. I think another 4 inches of barrel length might help with the 90gr bullets. As for Berger VLD 90s, I only see them listed as "Out of Stock, No Backorder", so they're out of the question, at least for now. I've tried Hornady A-Max 80gr and SMK 77gr bullets, also with mediocre results.

When it comes to powder, I've tried every reasonable charge weight of IMR 8208 XBR, CFE-223, Varget, VV N-140, VV N-540, plus a couple of other faster powders with lighter bullets which are not suitable for 600yd use. I've also tested some compressed loads on some of these powders at high charge weights, but I really don't like that idea for day-in and day-out use. I'd prefer to find something which just fills the case and still provides reasonably small groups with reliability, but without the need to pray that the gun doesn't blow up in my face each time I launch a round down range. Wincing is even worse then flinching.

I've also conducted a number of seating depths tests on anything which showed promise. In every case, I've produced a group or two which were good or even great, but proved to be disappointing because of lack of consistency.

The fact that I can build a nearly identical gun in 6mm, load ammo in essentially the same way, and go out and reliably shoot decent groups around .350 MOA leads me to think perhaps I'm suffering from inconstant ignition associated with these slower powders. In the case of IMR 8208 XBR, which is one of the faster powders I've tested in this F/TRgun, shoots very well in my Howa behind 69gr SMKs. I wonder if the 8208 might be less reliable when loaded behind 90gr bullets because reduced charge weight leaves a lot of empty space in the case, unlike when used behind a lighter bullet at a higher charge weight.
 
Why limit yourself to these primer options? The primer itself can be the very heart of a reloaders problem in some cases. I would experiment with different brands. There is nothing set in stone saying the CCI BR is the best.
 
I'm well aware that the .223 is finicky while the 6mm BR is regarded as being relatively forgiving. However, I am quite happy to put down a five dollar bill and invite you to pick it up if the next 5-shot group from my cheap Howa "fun gun" isn't 1/2 MOA or better. And that's without hand-wighing the powder. I tell myself, surely a .223 with better components and much more careful ammo prep can do at least that well, but so far my new F/TR gun isn't cooperating.

I us an RCBS Chargemaster and dump each load onto my Gem Pro digital which has a resolution of .02gr. I add or subtract a kernel or two, if necessary, to hit the target weight exactly, which means each charge is identical plus or minus .01gr, or that's the theory anyway. In any event, I think I'm measuring the charge weights as accurately as anybody who still claims to be sane.

The brass is carefully prepared Lapua Match, identical in every way (except in size) to my 6mm BR Lapiua brass which shoots well. The only significant difference is the primers, which is why I'm asking about those who have experience using magnum primers in .223 ammo.

I've shot 269 rounds of SMK 90gr bullets in this gun only 70 rounds of which were in groups sub 1/2 MOA and those were launched with charge weights in excess of maximum published data. Some groups were truly horrible; worse than 1.5 MOA, especially at lower muzzle velocities. I know that some 1:7 twist barrels will shoot the SMK 90 well, but I don't think mine is one of them. I haven't given up on them, but I'm not going to spend more time on that bullet until I can make one of the 80 gr bullets perform reliably. I think another 4 inches of barrel length might help with the 90gr bullets. As for Berger VLD 90s, I only see them listed as "Out of Stock, No Backorder", so they're out of the question, at least for now. I've tried Hornady A-Max 80gr and SMK 77gr bullets, also with mediocre results.

When it comes to powder, I've tried every reasonable charge weight of IMR 8208 XBR, CFE-223, Varget, VV N-140, VV N-540, plus a couple of other faster powders with lighter bullets which are not suitable for 600yd use. I've also tested some compressed loads on some of these powders at high charge weights, but I really don't like that idea for day-in and day-out use. I'd prefer to find something which just fills the case and still provides reasonably small groups with reliability, but without the need to pray that the gun doesn't blow up in my face each time I launch a round down range. Wincing is even worse then flinching.

I've also conducted a number of seating depths tests on anything which showed promise. In every case, I've produced a group or two which were good or even great, but proved to be disappointing because of lack of consistency.

The fact that I can build a nearly identical gun in 6mm, load ammo in essentially the same way, and go out and reliably shoot decent groups around .350 MOA leads me to think perhaps I'm suffering from inconstant ignition associated with these slower powders. In the case of IMR 8208 XBR, which is one of the faster powders I've tested in this F/TRgun, shoots very well in my Howa behind 69gr SMKs. I wonder if the 8208 might be less reliable when loaded behind 90gr bullets because reduced charge weight leaves a lot of empty space in the case, unlike when used behind a lighter bullet at a higher charge weight.


I found out that with std 223, that when I changed from a 7 1/2/cciBR-4 and went to a CCI 450, groups shrank immediately using Top end loads of Benchmark and 55g Noslers, unreal speed.
 
I found out that with std 223, that when I changed from a 7 1/2/cciBR-4 and went to a CCI 450, groups shrank immediately using Top end loads of Benchmark and 55g Noslers, unreal speed.
Thanks Ackleyman. That's the information I was hoping to get; i.e. someone who has tried magnum primers with positive results. I'll try some of my recipes which produced good groups intermixed with not so hot results but this time with magnum primers to see if I can gain some consistency.
 
Thanks Ackleyman. That's the information I was hoping to get; i.e. someone who has tried magnum primers with positive results. I'll try some of my recipes which produced good groups intermixed with not so hot results but this time with magnum primers to see if I can gain some consistency.

Sent you a PM
 
In small rifle primers, "magnum" does not necessarily have anything to do with brisance. It typically means a harder cup to prevent slam fires in an AR, not necessarily a "hotter" primer. If your ES/SD values aren't where you'd like them to be, testing a few different primers that cover a range of brisance values may well be the answer, but that doesn't always mean hotter. In some cases a hotter primer may actually make the problem worse, whereas a primer with lower brisance may often do the job. It's all about burn rate/efficiency in the context of your specific setup and load characteristics and often the only way to know is to actually test them. Testing several different primers ranging from "cooler" to "hotter" should allow you determine whether changing primers will actually fix the issue. If that works, problem solved. If not, trying different powder/primer combinations may be necessary. Also, I'd want to make sure the seating depth was optimal for that bullet. Some people have success with them seated into the lands, whereas others find jumping them to work much better. In my hands, the 90 VLDs shoot much better at ~.015-.020" off the lands, which I wasn't anticipating when I first started doing load development with them. My initial load development groups seated ~.010 into the lands were much like you described, sometimes one ragged hole, sometimes half MOA or worse. Once I started testing them off the lands, I was easily able to dial in the consistency I was hoping for.
+1^^^^ Don't change anything but the primer the gun will tell you what it likes.
 
I shot the 80vld through 2 different barrels, both liked 450s best and br4s were the worst.
As far as sd and es... in my opinion, low #s are a unicorn in a .223. Like you, I get good #'s with the 6br but I can't with the .223. Tried turning, bushing down then expanding up, bushing down, soft seating, annealed vs not, you name it.
How many samples have you taken? I can get the occasional 5 in a row that are good but 20 will always be in the 20s or worse for es. I stopped looking at the chrony #'s when I had an es in the 40'S and it still would hold x ring vert at 600.
Fwiw, I've had good results with varget .020 in the lands and .030 out. 8208 worked at touch and .040 out. Two different barrels and chambers.
Disclaimer... I do not compete but do shoot 20 round strings.
One other thing, I found a bit more "neck tension" gave better results. Might try a smaller bushing if that is the die type you are using.
Good luck!
 
..... snip............
How many samples have you taken? I can get the occasional 5 in a row that are good but 20 will always be in the 20s or worse for es. I stopped looking at the chrony #'s when I had an es in the 40'S and it still would hold x ring vert at 600.
Fwiw, I've had good results with varget .020 in the lands and .030 out. 8208 worked at touch and .040 out. Two different barrels and chambers.
Disclaimer... I do not compete but do shoot 20 round strings.
One other thing, I found a bit more "neck tension" gave better results. Might try a smaller bushing if that is the die type you are using.
Good luck!

Lots of samples. Last year (2015) I ran over 4000 rounds through my chronograph, most of it .223 from two different guns. Like you, I notice little correlation between MV variations and precision. More than once, the best group of the day would exhibit pitiful ES and SD figures while the best ES and SD numbers would be associated with a lousy group. Nevertheless, I really like the idea that my reloading technique for my 6mm BR now produces tight ES and SD numbers, so I'd like to see at least some decent MV consistency with my new .223 F/TR gun. I'd be happy with an ES in the 20s, but I'm not even close to that at the moment.

Currently I'm running pretty low neck tension, but increased neck tension is already on my list of things to try. The throat on this barrel turned out a little short. That's my fault since I requested a faster twist rate after I placed the order but I failed to send Shilen a set of longer dummy rounds, as I should have. Strictly an oversight on my part. So I got a 1:7 twist barrel, but not properly chambered for the heavier .223 bullets.

I'm thinking about re-chambering it so that I don't have to seat my bullets quite as deep into the case as I do now, especially after discovering some of the Berger VLD bullets have shown improved performance with much larger jumps that I would normally experiment with, but thanks to Berger's advice, I now see that pretty large jump dimensions can (in some instances anyway) pay off.

Later this morning I'm off to the range with several charge weight tests using 4 different powders and 2 different bullets which I previously tested with BR4 primers but which I want to retest using the 450s.

I'm sure I'll hit on a perfect recipe just about the time the barrel wears out. Thanks for your comments.
 
+1^^^^ Don't change anything but the primer the gun will tell you what it likes.
+1 again. I found my rifle to be primer sensitive! My particular is fed205M, but be sure to try all of them, our local competitors are all over the place. F205M, cci-450/400, rem 71/2, and even the regular Federals 200?

-Mac
 
Yesterday and the day before I tested 215 rounds of .223 ammo shooting both Berger 80gr VLD bullets and Sierra Match King 90 grain bullets with the CCI 450 magnum primers compared with a like number of rounds using the CCI BR-4 primer. It's not a strict apple-vs-apple comparison since not each and every 5 shot group was perfectly matched with an identical (except for primer type) corresponding 5 shot group.

This data involved two different bullet types and four different powders, but generally speaking the two batches were reasonably similar and large enough to give a decent idea of how the magnum primers performed when it comes to SD at least. I think comparing group size differences would require a more rigorous approach, but SD is a simple way to measure ignition consistency if you sample enough loads, or at least give a strong hint.

Comparing group size with fewer samples showed that the magnum primers reduced my group size as well, but I'd have to do more testing to confirm that data. But the results were encouraging enough that I ordered 2000 magnum primers today..

There was a 22.8% reduction in SD with the Magnum primers. That indicates, to me at least, that magnum primers help reduce SD and seem to improve group size too when shooting .223 rounds with the heavy bullet I use in this 1:7 twist barrel and the powders I prefer. Naturally, YMMV.
 
Was one of the powders you tested IMR-8208? If so did the 450's show better performance?
LitLBoy
Yes, I tested IMR 8208 at various charge weights with some Berger VLD 80 grain bullets. When comparing 5 shot groups at 100 yards from a bench using similar charge weights and seating depths, the group sizes were nearly identical for the best two or three groups of each set. The best group with each primer was .333 MOA vs .354 MOA with the slightly larger group (using the magnum primers) produced during a light but very cold wind from 12 o'clock and temperatures low enough so I couldn't feel the trigger very well. The previous weekend was like a nice spring day with zero wind; i.e. ideal conditions. The results were too close to call and I'm not prepared to say one way or the other quite yet, especially since the temperature was so different.

However, the SDs for these tests went from the mid 40s to the low 20s by switching to the magnum primers. So, in theory, that should help things at longer ranges. In any case, I would say the magnum primers didn't hurt anything and they're less expensive as well.
 
Thanks --- Really appreciate the info. I have been using Fed. 205M, 8208, 75Amzx in a .223AI and SD has been less than 20's
LitLBoy
 
I had a 26" 1:7 that would shoot well with 75-77's, but I experienced the same results as you when I got into the 80+ range. I went to 2000mr as a powder during the Sandy Hook shortage and picked up about 60fps over my rl15 load. With 2000mr the heavies began shooting right with the 75-77's. I don't have the rifle anymore and with the way components were I wasn't willing to burn up a bunch to figure out the exact reason, but my hypothesis was that barrel was a little slower than 1:7 twist and needed the extra little oomph to get the 80+ stabilized. Just a thought.
 
I gave most of my notes to the guy I sold the rifle to, but I believe I was right around 25gr in LC brass. It wasn't a hot load by any means, and I know I've seen others say they're up around 26 with the 90's.
 
In small rifle primers, "magnum" does not necessarily have anything to do with brisance. It typically means a harder cup to prevent slam fires in an AR, not necessarily a "hotter" primer. If your ES/SD values aren't where you'd like them to be, testing a few different primers that cover a range of brisance values may well be the answer, but that doesn't always mean hotter. In some cases a hotter primer may actually make the problem worse, whereas a primer with lower brisance may often do the job. It's all about burn rate/efficiency in the context of your specific setup and load characteristics and often the only way to know is to actually test them. Testing several different primers ranging from "cooler" to "hotter" should allow you determine whether changing primers will actually fix the issue. If that works, problem solved. If not, trying different powder/primer combinations may be necessary. Also, I'd want to make sure the seating depth was optimal for that bullet. Some people have success with them seated into the lands, whereas others find jumping them to work much better. In my hands, the 90 VLDs shoot much better at ~.015-.020" off the lands, which I wasn't anticipating when I first started doing load development with them. My initial load development groups seated ~.010 into the lands were much like you described, sometimes one ragged hole, sometimes half MOA or worse. Once I started testing them off the lands, I was easily able to dial in the consistency I was hoping for.
I won't make any comments about the technical aspect of Brisance or hot ve cold but will make a comment based purely on my observation and I would love some feedback either way.
Simply because I have a decent supply of CCI 450 and CCI 41, I tried to see if I could start to alter my standard load that uses Federal 205MAR, in my 223 AI. That load is 25.5gr of Varget and a Hornady 88gr ELDM. The base load runs right at 2800 from a 28" Krieger as measured simultaneously with a magnetospeed and a lab radar. At 600yd the drop is pretty much spot on with the advertised G7 BC, so I have a decent amount of faith in the chrono numbers. Then on the "Test" load with the CCI 41, it shot up to 2920, and slammed the primer flat, whereas there are no pressure signs on the Federal "AR" primer. So that ended that test pretty fast. So from my observation I would conclude that the 41'a and 450's are indeed "Hotter".
That being said prior to lucking back into a little supply of varget, I really never noticed a difference on anothe albeit lighter load of 24.2 gr of Vit N140. Both types of primers shot pretty much the same and any deviations I saw I (maybe incorrectly) attributed to temperature changes.
Thoughts and comments welcome and appreciated
Thanks
 

Upgrades & Donations

This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.


Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.

You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.


To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.

Forum statistics

Threads
166,238
Messages
2,214,206
Members
79,464
Latest member
Big Fred
Back
Top