Hi all, this is my first post. What a wealth of information you have here!

I have experienced something different recently while loading 40 grain ballistic tips and Reloader 7. The rifle would not shoot under 1" with any modern published data up to 22 grains of RL 7. Not at the lands, not factory length, not jumping .020, .040, .060 etc.

I found some data in an old Lyman manual(and actually confirmed it on this website) that shows RL7 up to 23.5 grains so I load her up in .5 grain increments up to 23.5. From 21.5 to 23.5 the groups tighten up to under 1/2". These were 5 shot groups that can be seen plain as day on one target.

Here is the kicker. 10 shots over the chrono averaged 3717 fps. The brass is not showing any pressure signs, no heavy bolt lift either. I did load up another 20 cartridges at 23.5 grains and shot just to confirm what the ladder test showed initially. Again, all was good.

Would you guys just shoot the load knowing its into 223 territory? I cannot get over the fact that I'm pushing them over 3700 fps.

rem 700 action
24" douglas
ww brass, rem 7.5 primers

Need a second opinion. Thanks!

I too am a deuce lover and got a smokin deal on a bunch of these same 40gr bullets and I have tried every powder going to get them to shoot like the 40gr Vmax's shoot, never happened for me, so I just put them away and bought some more 40gr v max's. My load is 21.5 gr of reloder 7 with the CCI 450 magnum small rifle primer. FS

Primers aren't flat and no firing pin crater? If not, shoot them. Your custom barrel and chamber appear to allow it.

quote:

Originally posted by dpcd:
Primers aren't flat and no firing pin crater? If not, shoot them. Your custom barrel and chamber appear to allow it.

Edges are still rounded on the primers. They do show a slight cratering but I don't consider it an over pressure sign. This rifle does the same with pooch loads. No extractor mark, no sticky bolt, primer pockets still good. Not tight like new brass but I cannot even come close to seating them with my fingers.

With dinky cases like a Hornet or .222 you may not notice anything until your brass has been fired 2 or 3 times. Then you may find the primer pockets are get loose. You rarely get that kind of performance for free.

quote:

Originally posted by kflan22:

quote:

Originally posted by dpcd:
Primers aren't flat and no firing pin crater? If not, shoot them. Your custom barrel and chamber appear to allow it.

Edges are still rounded on the primers. They do show a slight cratering but I don't consider it an over pressure sign. This rifle does the same with pooch loads. No extractor mark, no sticky bolt, primer pockets still good. Not tight like new brass but I cannot even come close to seating them with my fingers.

primers are the least reliable sign of over pressure. It's obvious that you're looking for someone to endorse your load. Me, personally, I would not drive a bullet at 3700fps from a .222.

I always monitor the casehead expansion.....the forward edge of the extractor groove.

Be careful.

Kevin

SAAMI pressure limits, which most published data sources attempt to stay within, are lower for the .222 than for the .222 Magnum, which in turn is lower than the .223. Since all use the same basic case there is no real reason for this, other than that some early actions for the .222 were rather weak and some left larger a larger portion of the case head unsupported. Also, the .223 needed to meet the military's specification for velocity and the only way to do that was to raise the allowable pressure, an expedient solution.

In a modern turnbolt there is no reason not to load the .222 to the same pressure levels as the .223, and when that is done you quickly find out that there is very little difference in the velocities of the two. For example I've found as a rule of thumb that the .222 will drive a 50 grain bullet to approximately the same velocity as a .223 will drive a 55 grain bullet (but of course individual rifles behave differently and this is only an average).

I can't say whether the loads you're running in your .222 are sustainable, but reloading and shooting of the same handful of cases a number of times to see if there is discernible case head expansion or loosening of the primer pockets will quickly tell you whether you can stay with your load or need reduce it to more sedate levels. I can tell you that I find no problem in driving 40 grain Ballistic Tips at 3400 fps from either of my .221 Fireballs, which have a significantly smaller case than a .222.

As to sticky bolt lift, well that's not a good indicator with a .222-sized case head. The .222's case head has almost exactly one-half the area of a magnum case head, meaning that at the same pressures it exerts only one-half of the bolt thrust. So it takes a lot of pressure to create a sticky bolt with a .222/.223 case. Stay with case head and primer pocket expansion as your best indicators instead.

Thank you all for the replies.
I just want to reiterate that it is a published load here on accurate reloading on the 222 page as well as my old Lyman reloading manual. It's just the chrono reading that got my attention. Had I not done that I would've likely been on my merry way with a good shooting 40 grain load and never given it a second thought.

I will do some further testing loading the same brass checking that primers will hold and measuring case head expansion.
Thanks again.

While you may find data published many places on the internet you might want to compare data from several sources. Compare your loads with pressured tested data and see if they make sense.
I try to avoid any load that causes case heads to expand. I get a very high number of reloads from each case like that. If I need to swap primers or powder lots I am not likely to have pressure problems.

quote:

Originally posted by kflan22:
Thank you all for the replies.
I just want to reiterate that it is a published load here on accurate reloading on the 222 page as well as my old Lyman reloading manual. It's just the chrono reading that got my attention. Had I not done that I would've likely been on my merry way with a good shooting 40 grain load and never given it a second thought.

I will do some further testing loading the same brass checking that primers will hold and measuring case head expansion.
Thanks again.

using a chrony along with your load book(s) will certainly help keep you out of trouble. If the load books say that xxx of powder will give you xxx velocity and your velocity is xxx +200 or 300fps more, it doesn't mean you're lucky, it means something is different about your rifle than the one used to get the reloading data. And the pressure in your rifle is running higher. Whether you try to justify it in some manner or whether you say "gee, something is different, maybe the "max" load in the book, isn't the "max" load in MY rifle, I'd better back off" is up to you. That extra 200fps does little in the real world and it may come at a high price.
The measuring of pressure has evolved considerably in the past decade or so. So what was posted as "max" in some of the older books is based on incomplete data or no data at all. Speer, I think it was, was the last big company to begin using pressure testing equipment. Their loads, including max, was based on bolt lift, etc on the theory that Joe Reloader doesn't have all of that laboratory equipment so we should do our testing using his methods.
If you read some of JOC's recommended loads, it'll kinda scare you. To paraphrase an old pilot's saying: there are old reloaders and there are bold reloaders, but there aren't any old, bold reloaders.

quote:

Originally posted by wasbeeman:
using a chrony along with your load book(s) will certainly help keep you out of trouble. If the load books say that xxx of powder will give you xxx velocity and your velocity is xxx +200 or 300fps more, it doesn't mean you're lucky, it means something is different about your rifle than the one used to get the reloading data. And the pressure in your rifle is running higher. Whether you try to justify it in some manner or whether you say "gee, something is different, maybe the "max" load in the book, isn't the "max" load in MY rifle, I'd better back off" is up to you. That extra 200fps does little in the real world and it may come at a high price.
The measuring of pressure has evolved considerably in the past decade or so. So what was posted as "max" in some of the older books is based on incomplete data or no data at all. Speer, I think it was, was the last big company to begin using pressure testing equipment. Their loads, including max, was based on bolt lift, etc on the theory that Joe Reloader doesn't have all of that laboratory equipment so we should do our testing using his methods.
If you read some of JOC's recommended loads, it'll kinda scare you. To paraphrase an old pilot's saying: there are old reloaders and there are bold reloaders, but there aren't any old, bold reloaders.

Well said.

I appreciate the responses I have gotten. I am not trying to push the limits or see how fast I can get my deuce to go, I am just wondering if it is safe to shoot this load only because it is the most accurate load tested with the components that I happen to have an abundance of. Part of what I love about the 222 is its mild manner, excellent barrel life, & accuracy.

I guess its probably time I try a different powder to see if I can get the accuracy I need at more moderate pressure levels.

Thanks again,

kflan

quote:

Originally posted by kflan22:
I am just wondering if it is safe to shoot this load

"Safe" and "sustainable" are two different things.

You've apparently fired quite a number of rounds using this load and experienced no case failures, meaning that the load is by definition "safe". The brass case will fail LONG before the tempered steel of the rifle action comes close to failing. When a case fails, it first will do so at the unsupported portion of the head, just in front of the extractor groove (and just aft of the pressure ring -- the point where the case becomes thick enough to resist expanding against the chamber walls. Alternatively, a pierced primer may occur, or a gas leak around the primer.

Most actions contain such leaks without subjecting the shooter to much hazard, but it would be foolish to routinely push cases to the limit of destruction just to see how far you can go.

What you now need to establish is how "sustainable" your loads are by repeated loading and shooting of just a few cases to see if and when (after how many loadings) you experience either measurable case head expansion or loosened primer pockets. Depending on what your personal standard is for the number of times the brass is reusable, you may or may not need to adjust your load.

A couple of things to check: First, it is possible that you are getting erroneously high readings from your chronograph for some reason (most typically shorter than standard screen spacing). So be sure to shoot some rounds of known velocity (from any rifle) if you have some. Second, as I mentioned earlier, if you pump the .222 up to .223 pressures (in a gun appropriate to such pressures) you will achieve near .223 velocities. So long as the loads don't exceed normal .223 pressures, the loads will be both "safe" and "sustainable".

One way to proof a chrony, is to shoot some match .22 ammo through it. Their velocity is printed on the box and real life velocity is usually pretty close.