Thread replies: 14
Thread images: 2
Thread images: 2
Anonymous
Handloads to replicate factory 5.56 2017-02-18 10:40:03 Post No. 33038860
[Report] Image search: [Google]
Handloads to replicate factory 5.56 2017-02-18 10:40:03 Post No. 33038860
[Report] Image search: [Google]
tl;dr Looking for an actual complete recipe for replicating factory milspec 5.56 with XM855 projectiles?
There are a lot of factors involved in the performance characteristics of handloaded ammunition. People mostly think about powders and projectiles as the key pieces- and maybe they are- but primers, case trim length, cartridge overall length, and crimp can all affect muzzle velocity and accuracy.
The gun itself can also affect accuracy and muzzle velocity. Parts of a 5.56 chamber fits a round slightly looser than a .223 Remington chamber, making for lower pressures with the same loadings.
In searching for load data, the only thing I can seem to find is .223 Remington. I can't find any 5.56. Shooting handloads with .223 Remington recipes in my 5.56 chamber seems to result is much lower muzzle velocities (sometimes 300-500 fps lower than factory).
I can measure *most* of the factors for factory ammunition. I'm using surplus 62gr projectiles with a COAL of 2.250 and Wolf small rifle magnum primers in lake city brass. I dissected a factory round and measured 26.5 grains of a spherical powder that looks a lot like Winchester 748 but who knows what it is.
Does anyone know what Federal puts in these Lake City 5.56 milspec rounds?
>>
>replicating factory milspec 5.56 with XM855 projectiles
If you say something like that, I have no idea why you don't just buy it instead.
http://www.brownells.com/ammunition/rifle-ammo/lake-city-ammo-5-56x45mm-nato-62gr-xm855-prod44665.aspx
>>
>>33039040
>Buying military rejects
>Buying shitty pullet bullets with fuck up primers
>>
>>33039089
pulled bullets*
>>
>>33039040
>>33039089
>>33039102
The questions remain.
I'd like to be able to do this because reasons.
("Pulled" bullets are not rejects- they're projectiles that are removed from loaded cartridges by the manufacturer because of some other issue with the production run, like wrong primer or incorrect powder charge. Manufacturers sell these at a huge discount because of scratches and blemishes from the pulling process. The performance is comparable to unblemished.)
>>
if you're looking to handload a round within factory specs, unless you can do it for less than what they're charging you it's literally not worth it
people handload to cut costs or live out some pseudo-gunsmith fantasy
>>
>>33039857
I know you *think* you know what I'm trying to do or what my motivation is, but you don't.
This is precisely the reason I haven't asked this question here before. I knew going in that I would be beset by obnoxious fucking know-it-alls who are trying to look smart.
I'm really only looking for the information. I don't have the strain gauge equipment to test pressure limits myself, or I'd be doing that. It'd almost be worth the $600-ish to avoid the bullshit.
tl;dr- just answer the question. If you don't have an answer, then have a nice day.
>>
>>33040010
The question you're asking is entirely outside the scope of knowledge possessed by your average kommando.
>>
>>33040067
Without question. Im hoping for an above-average kommano. I know there are a few of them around.
I guess the core of my qestion is wat powder they use for that recipe.
>>
>>33040087
Pretty sure it's still WC844.
Powder charge varies as they batch load to a velocity while staying within pressure limits.
>>
>>33040125
this....
it is wc844. you can buy reclaimed powders from the same guys who are demilitarizing this ammo.
>>
>>33040125
This is helpful. Thanks!
Anyone have anything to the contrary?
>>
>>33040164
american reloading sells in jugs og 50 to 100 pounds.
>>
I think, iirc*, h355 is a civilian name for the same military powder
Thread posts: 14
Thread images: 2
Thread images: 2