Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11
  1. #1
    Member Rooster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Saskatoon...ish
    Posts
    39

    Anyone with .223AI data? 68 & 69 gr, specifically.

    Good morning, all. I recently acquired an 8 or 9-twist .223AI (previous owner wasn't sure & my patch/rod technique is a bit suspect) and am now looking for some data if anyone has any, please. There seems to be lots of data on other forums for the lighter bullets and the 77's & 80's, but not a ton for 68's & 69's. Can never have too much information...

    Powders I've decided on for now (that I have on hand) are Varget & H4895. I also have some Benchmark, CFE223, and TAC, but I think they would be better suited for some of the lighter stuff. Thanks guys!

    Rooster

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    SWOntario
    Posts
    1,949
    "...my patch/rod technique is a bit suspect..." Lubed patch on rod and into chamber until there's resistance. Mark the top of the rod at the handle end and the chamber end. Push the rod through the barrel for one complete turn of the handle end dot and mark the chamber end again. Distance between the chamber dots is your twist.
    A net search for '.223 AI load data' turns up 7,700,000 results. However, it's not you. Most of the really good data sites are gone. Most of the rest don't have the AI data. Even 6mmBR.com says there's little or no online data. Probably because it's still a wildcat cartridge with no SAAMI standards. Way down. http://www.6mmbr.com/223rem.html
    There's some data here. No idea if the guys knows his butt from his elbow though. Never heard of him. Not that that says much.
    http://www.the-long-family.com/223ai_load_data.htm

  3. #3
    Member Rooster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Saskatoon...ish
    Posts
    39
    Right, thanks. I know how to do it, just donít have a lot of faith in getting it right. Need a better method to time top dead center at both ends of the stroke. Or maybe Iím just way too anal...

    Thanks for the links. Iíve been through them and yes, there is some useful stuff there, just unrefined according to my specific criteria.

    If itís useful to anyone visiting this thread at all, Iíve been reading more and more that TAC is actually appropriate for the weights I intend to use. Iíll be adding this powder now to my trials.

    Rooster

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    SWOntario
    Posts
    1,949
    Hi. There's a lot of discussion of loads on the assorted forums. Didn't see any other links to data though.
    "...better method to time top dead center..." It's not that critical. A dot with a Sharpie is enough. You're not dealing with wee tiny metrics. It's inches. Way easier to do than it sounds.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    SWOntario
    Posts
    1,949
    Did another search and found this. Actual 69 grain data.
    https://rifleshooter.com/2016/11/223...-a-better-223/

  6. The Following User Liked This Post By Justice

    Sinbad (09-20-2018)

  7. #6
    Member Magmalis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Sparwood B.C.
    Posts
    91
    I would just build a load starting with 223 data and work up from there.

    For my 338 Lapua AI, I started at max,load of 338 Lapua and made 1 round of each working up by .2 grains. I shot all the rounds over a lab radar, a chronometer would work too, and watched for pressure signs from each round. Do it with each powder you want to use.

    Once I found my max load I pulled the remaining bullets out of the heavier loaded rounds and looked at my data. I looked for groups of rounds that were close together speed wise and continued testing on the 2 groups that looked promising (honestly I just looked at the faster one because I have the AI to go faster than a standard Lapua)

    With a 223 you are dealing with less of a gain obviously so I would do the same process with .1 grain at a time. I only tested for pressures on a fully formed cartridge also, I hydroform my brass and can put a full load through the case but I figure it uses some energy forming the case so pressure might be different.
    Last edited by Magmalis; 09-18-2018 at 08:53 AM.

  8. #7
    Member Rooster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Saskatoon...ish
    Posts
    39
    Thanks guys. A few of the manuals I have contain data for 5.56 NATO & I don’t think my logic is terribly flawed by referencing that for a closer approximation for my use. Since 5.56 is higher pressure, and generally shows about a grain to 1-1/2 grains increase over standard .223 data (.223AI powder capacity is reported to be ~2 grains more), I figure it would be a reasonable reference start. Cautiously, of course

    Realistically, this wouldn’t be far off just starting with stiff-ish .223 data anyway, would it?

    Will report back once I’ve gotten to the range with it.
    Rooster

  9. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    SWOntario
    Posts
    1,949
    5.56NATO is loaded into the same case as .223 Rem. .223AI isn't the same thing.

  10. #9
    Member Rooster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Saskatoon...ish
    Posts
    39
    Do you have any first hand load data experience that you would like to share for 68 / 69 grain bullets?

  11. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    SWOntario
    Posts
    1,949
    68 and 69 grain bullets will use the same data. The only difference between 5.56 and .223 is the pressures. Same case otherwise. The AI has a larger case capacity. Still odd that there's very little published data except that the AI, all of 'em, are still wild cats. No SAAMI specs for 'em.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •