I currently use h4895 in my 2 .223rem rifles. I have also loaded reduced loads with Blue Dot sucessfully. Just curious if anyone has used h4895 for a less than full throttle load and what the results were. Hodgon link

While I have not used H4895 in 223, I have used it successfully in 22-250 and 270 Win.

I have found exceptional accuracy with these reduced loads, rarely having to tweak powder charges to find acceptable loads.

My wife, nephews and boys have all used these loads to kill deer and antelope.

I loaded up some of the 60% loads for my daughter to shoot. She loved them, and it made her giggle when she was ringing steel at 100 yards with them. They were really dirty though, sooty down on the shoulder.

The .223 is so mild don't see the need for reduced, but cast bullets in a .223 are really mild. Never could get them to shoot accurately in .223 but in .222 and 22-250 they are very accurate.

quote:

Originally posted by taylorce1:
I loaded up some of the 60% loads for my daughter to shoot. She loved them, and it made her giggle when she was ringing steel at 100 yards with them. They were really dirty though, sooty down on the shoulder.

Dirty and sooty is the same results for me with other cartridges and reduced H4895 ( 6.5x55 and .284 Win.) Started my youngest with low end .223 loads with Varget which was cleaner but they were well above the 60% 4895 loads.

Soot on the necks is merely an indicator of low pressures. If the loads perform well, the little bit of soot is harmless and comes off in just a short time in the tumbler.

Personally, I've never seen anything quite like Blue Dot for reduced loads in a .223 (or other .22 Centerfires). Clean, consistent, and amazingly accurate (and economical!) My Blue Dot loads in a .223 run about 80-85% of maximum standard velocity with the same bullet and group nearly as well.

There are several things to mention here.

First, I see no reason to handload the 223 at all, unless one is seeking the best that can be found for deer, say the 62-70gr TSX. Factory ammo is cheap, and has no kick.

Second, reduced 223 loads seem a waste of time to me. Just use a 22 LR or 22 Mag. Cast bullets for the 223 are absurd, IMO.

Third, the best teaching tool I can think of for a kid is a 22 LR.

I just think this is a hobby for someone with too much time.

Frankly, I think the 223 is a useless cartridge, except for wounding enemies, deer and hogs too, and maybe blowing up varmints.

The need for reduced loads starts with a 243, at a minimum, and then questionable.

KB

I don't think anyone was asking for your permission to download a .223
I don't think they were asking your opinion either on what to have their kids shoot.
Reread the posters original question and who cares "why" he's downloading a .223. The poster is asking for answers to his question not a rundown.
My kids all started with .22 rimfires and then stepped up in increments of caliber, you know what it works.
My oldest son is now 18 and when he was 9 years old even a downloaded .243 was not pleasant for him to shoot. Today the kid will shoot any rifle you hand him and shoot it better than most "adults" ( I mean .458's, and .375's and real lightweight 9.3's).
I'm glad I started him the way I did and wouldn't do it any different, as a matter of fact his little brother is 9 and is progressing nicely through the calibers and yes when we stepped up from .22's we did download his .223.

"Cast bullets for a .223 absurd"--Kabluey. As usual you are misinformed. On your keyboard with no actual experience, I can see where you come up with that. I use to shoot jackrabbits with a guy that had access to about 55 sections--that's right 55 square miles. We went out several nights a week and shooting 100 rounds was not uncommon. Even cheap .22 bullets, that adds up. Shooting out of a pickup the jacketed bullets made too much blast. The cast bullets were much more tolerable. This would be 58 grain bullets around 2200 fps. Far more than a .22 mag for example and much much cheaper to shoot. Range was greatly extended over that of a .22 lr. With cast bullets, no such thing as barrel wear to speak of. So tell us about all your experience with them that makes you think it is absurd.

[/QUOTE]
I'm only expressing my lowly opinon for the 223, not the importance of bringing kids into the sport. I just think the 223 should be excluded from the kids/intro equation - period. Frankly, I think the 223 is a useless cartridge, except for wounding enemies.

KB[/QUOTE]

I know what you are doing and I think its assanine that you have to make a fight every time the .223 is mentioned.
Just my opinion yours is obviously different.
Now go on and really fuck up this guys post and turn it into another 3 page "I'm going to save you all from the evils of the .223" rant.

quote:

turn it into another 3 page "I'm going to save you all from the evils of the .223" rant.

I'll stay out of it and eliminate that possibility...

everyone knows how folks come out of the wood work to flame me as soon as the words Blue Dot and Seafire pop up on a thread..

quote:

everyone knows how folks come out of the wood work to flame me as soon as the words Blue Dot and Seafire pop up on a thread..

Yeah Seafire you are the devils disciple aren't you? Thats why I like 10-11 grains of Blue Dot in my 223, it's all your fault, LOL! Oh BTW, good load and groups very nicely.

Jerry

Who's flaming whooo? I didn't flame anyone. I just stated an opinion. I have no intentions of messing up this great thread. I just like to throw the dogs contention a bone every so often and watch them snarl over it.

KB

Kabluey--You were asked to tell us about your experience with cast bullets in a .22 cal to base your opinion of it being absurd--I notice you didn't provide that.

dsmit50,
I used the 60% in my .243 with 100grn Horn int.(19grn H4895) A bit sooty on the neck, low recoil, accurate at 100yds where I set zero, but fell away low at 200yds.jc

Yes Kabluey I asked twice to emphasize my point that you are full of it and have no basis, as usual, for your uninformed opinion. What you can dream up on your keyboard is the extent of things. BTW you didn't ignore--you did in fact respond--just no facts to respond with--what's new?

Carpetman1: It is understandable, but I think you've misread Kabluewy's posts. You think he was stating an opinion. To the contrary, an opinion, whether well-founded or not, is based on some information. Rather than an opinion, he was stating his prejudice, which is not necessarily based on anything.

Stonecreek--Kabluey did follow his remarks about cast bullets for .223 being absurd with IMO (In my opinion). So yes, I did think it was an opinion. I would think that profoundly stated there should be some experience to back that up. Knowing Kabluey's history I suspected there would be none. Appears I'm correct. I have no problem with Kabluey disagreeing with me. Should we ever possibly agree on anything, that would bother me.

OK, we agree to disagree. I hope that bothers you.

BTW, I find it difficult to believe your statment: "I have no problem with Kabluey disagreeing with me." If that was true, then why do you whine so much?

KB

quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:
Carpetman1: It is understandable, but I think you've misread Kabluewy's posts. You think he was stating an opinion. To the contrary, an opinion, whether well-founded or not, is based on some information. Rather than an opinion, he was stating his prejudice, which is not necessarily based on anything.

??????

Having done the reduced loading quite a bit through the years it is evident that with the medium to slower burning powders the greater the reduction the more soot you incur and the more powder goes unburned out the barrel. In fact there is a point where the soot gets on your shooting glasses.
There are powders that are designed for large reduction ( lower velocity ) and to me it makes more sense to use these. 4759 and Trail Boss are good examples. If "SAFELY" used Blue Dot does a good job and gives good performance. Loading "CAN" be dangerous . Loading Blue Dot in rifle cases can exasperate the danger. roger

Kabluey--No we don't agree to disagree. We agree to vehemently disagree.

quote:

Originally posted by bartsche:

quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:
Carpetman1: It is understandable, but I think you've misread Kabluewy's posts. You think he was stating an opinion. To the contrary, an opinion, whether well-founded or not, is based on some information. Rather than an opinion, he was stating his prejudice, which is not necessarily based on anything.

??????

Having done the reduced loading quite a bit through the years it is evident that with the medium to slower burning powders the greater the reduction the more soot you incur and the more powder goes unburned out the barrel. In fact there is a point where the soot gets on your shooting glasses.
There are powders that are designed for large reduction ( lower velocity ) and to me it makes more sense to use these. 4759 and Trail Boss are good examples. If "SAFELY" used Blue Dot does a good job and gives good performance. Loading "CAN" be dangerous . Loading Blue Dot in rifle cases can exasperate the danger. roger

I'd sure try to find something else to replace Blue Dot in reduced or cast rifle cartridge loads. It's a crazy acting powder in those applications. Wasn't it someone on this forum that blew up a 257 Weatherby Magnum using that powder?

Where the heck is Hotcore, when he's needed?

KB

KB--Hotcore is needed--why don't you go look for him?

quote:

Originally posted by carpetman1:
KB--Hotcore is needed--why don't you go look for him?

You'll find him mostly on a forum on a different web sight. roger

I'm not really looking for him. I was just trying to make a light joke that Carpetman could use all the help he can get from "experienced" blue dot experts. In that regard, as I remember, Hotcore is the man. Since I (sensibly) have no experience with the stuff, I can only watch with amazment. Hotcore and carpetman should make good pals, should they meet over something in common like blue dot reduced loads for the 223. I'm sure they can find a lot of agreement. After all, networking is what are forums are for, right? I'm just connecting the dots.

KB

quote:

Wasn't it someone on this forum that blew up a 257 Weatherby Magnum using that powder?

yes, there was...and also publicly admitted to getting distracted while hand loading... and that he had probably loaded a double if not even a possible triple charge...

at least he was man enough to publicly admit his fault instead of blaming it on the powder..

I bet off of this forum alone, that folks that have used Blue Dot have shot hundreds of thousands of rounds with it, and not had problems...

and as said by Roger above, if you are in dire need of factory load data in the same ball park then use SR 4759 or Trail Boss....

or if you want reduced 223 velocity loads and are worried about a kaboom... then use powders like H 1000 or slower...

I'll guarantee ya, you can be an idiot at the reload bench... just fill the case to the top and seat a bullet...H 1000 or slower will never blow up a 223 for ya..

or a 257 Weatherby for that matter..

even I will admit tho... Blue Dot and Stupid, don't go together...if you're stupid, try another powder... or better yet, just quit reloading all together..

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
I'm not really looking for him. I was just trying to make a light joke that Carpetman could use all the help he can get from "experienced" blue dot experts. In that regard, as I remember, Hotcore is the man. Since I (sensibly) have no experience with the stuff, I can only watch with amazment. Hotcore and carpetman should make good pals, should they meet over something in common like blue dot reduced loads for the 223. I'm sure they can find a lot of agreement. After all, networking is what are forums are for, right? I'm just connecting the dots.

KB

You have no experience with Blue Dot? How can you debate with someone who has? Especially someone who has sucessfully. Kabluewy: What a f@#king idiot
Thanks to all the others actually providing useful input.

Messing with blue dot in rifle cartridges is like a grenade tossing competition event in the special olympics; only for participants who are special, but fun to watch as a spectator.

KB

quote:

Originally posted by dsmit50:

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
I'm not really looking for him. I was just trying to make a light joke that Carpetman could use all the help he can get from "experienced" blue dot experts. In that regard, as I remember, Hotcore is the man. Since I (sensibly) have no experience with the stuff, I can only watch with amazment. Hotcore and carpetman should make good pals, should they meet over something in common like blue dot reduced loads for the 223. I'm sure they can find a lot of agreement. After all, networking is what are forums are for, right? I'm just connecting the dots.

KB

You have no experience with Blue Dot? How can you debate with someone who has? Especially someone who has sucessfully. Kabluewy: What a f@#king idiot
Thanks to all the others actually providing useful input.

Although what you say may have meaning your choice of verbiage could have been better selected and your personal affront withheld. roger

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
Messing with blue dot in rifle cartridges is like a grenade tossing competition event in the special olympics; only for participants who are special, but fun to watch as a spectator.

KB

Many pin heads say the same thing about smokeless powder in the 45-70.

quote:

Originally posted by SR4759:

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
Messing with blue dot in rifle cartridges is like a grenade tossing competition event in the special olympics; only for participants who are special, but fun to watch as a spectator.

KB

Many pin heads say the same thing about smokeless powder in the 45-70.

Kabluewy,
It looks like you are gaining quite a following here..

I have never loaded the first grain of Blue Dot in anything. I have never made a post one way or the other about doing so. I have posted about using cast bullets in .22 cal. Although Kabluey has never done it, he has labeled using cast in .22 as absurd. I do it for 3 main reasons, it saves a lot of money if shooting much, blast is greatly reduced which is critical especially if shooting out of a pickup and it saves barrels--no wear with cast bullets.

quote:

Originally posted by carpetman1:
I do it for 3 main reasons, it saves a lot of money if shooting much, blast is greatly reduced which is critical especially if shooting out of a pickup and it saves barrels--no wear with cast bullets.

So, it's a cheap stealthy poacher's dream cartridge.

KB

If shooting jackrabbits is poaching, yes it is. I think of poaching as shooting game animals such as deer at night. Never have done that, I wouldn't trust cast bullets in .22 cal for that.

quote:

Originally posted by carpetman1:
I have never loaded the first grain of Blue Dot in anything. I have never made a post one way or the other about doing so. I have posted about using cast bullets in .22 cal. Although Kabluey has never done it, he has labeled using cast in .22 as absurd. I do it for 3 main reasons, it saves a lot of money if shooting much, blast is greatly reduced which is critical especially if shooting out of a pickup and it saves barrels--no wear with cast bullets.

Amazing how this thread has turned out.

I can see where casting .22 bullets could save a lot of money if a person had a light (aluminum?) gang mould of about 12 cavities. Otherwise I am not quite certain how inexpensive it is or isn't.

My lead pot takes just as much electricity to operate whether I am making .458 bullets or .22 bullets. And as I find casting .22 bullets even slower than casting bigger ones (because I have a higher defect rate casting the .22s), the pot is turned on just as long or even longer.

When I add in the cost of lube dies, gas checks, all that sort of thing, I probably am still saving SOME money, but am certainly not sure as to how much. And if my time was worth anything, I'd probably be losing money by shooting cast bullets. Good thing I'm retired, I guess.

I'm jealous that some of you live in a state where it is legal to shoot from within a vehicle. I don't think I have ever lived where it was. Some of the places I have lived it wasn't legal to shoot from within 50 yards of a vehicle, at least not when I lived there.

As to cast bullets not creating wear in a barrel... Cast bullet shooting is probably not an important source of wear in hunting or plinking rifles, but it sure is in match rifles. My cast bullet bench-rest rifle barrels had to be set back and rethroated regularly to maintain winning accuracy. Folks could argue with each other all day about how much of that was due to the bullets and how much was due to the powder, but the wear occurred just about as rapidly as it did with my jacketed bullet bench guns, and it seemed to have worse effects on the accuracy of the mechanically weaker cast bullets.

Getting back to the OP's thread, though, I don't use reduced loads of a powder which is slow for the cartridge size, such as 4895 in the .223, for one specific reason...

I don't like all that carbon in my rifle actions. Some carbon is very hard, some is very soft. (Diamonds, for instance are about 99% super-hard carbon, IIRC.) Though none of the carbon produced by burning 4895 even remotely approaches diamonds in hardness, some small fraction of it is still pretty hard and sharp edged. I don't want that kind of stuff rubbing around in my rifle action(s) any more than it absolutely has to.

So for reduced loads I use faster, cleaner burning stuff, mainly either Red Dot or Blue Dot in cases that small. I use mostly 4759 in cases as large as or larger than the .30-30 Winchester.

Alberta Canuck--I don't recall seeing any .22 rimfire barrels shot out. According to an old Lyman manual they took 2 identical 30-06's and shot jacketed through one and cast bullets through the other--same number of rounds. Their claim was that when the one shooting jacketed was worn out, there was no measurable wear on the one shooting cast. I use wheel weights for my cast bullets and I have always been able to get them free. I use a 2 cavity RCBS mold and I can cast a pile in fairly short order. The only thing I find slower about .22 cast is that the sprue being smaller--about pin head size they sometimes don't release and have to be picked off. Pouring a little excess sprue eliminates that. Sure I had initial cost of buying the mold. I use Unique and will get about 1000 rounds per pound. With jacketed bullets it's more like 320 rounds per pound. Jacketed bullets run about $15 per 100. I'm guessing my savings around $20 per 100 rounds and there was a time I was going through 300 or so rounds per week. So I figure the savings paid for the cost of the mold that I mentioned pretty fast. If reloading was worth my while, I considered the casting to just be an extension of that.

Not going to argue it with you Carpetman. I was not lying when I posted my experiences with my rifles. I have seen plenty of wear with cast bullets in centerfire rifles.

I might note that some of the RFs you've never seen worn out also fire the RF equivalent of jacketed bullets...copper clad ones.

Maybe the RFs aren't worn out because of the low pressures RFs operate at. Maybe it's just the phase of the moon. Maybe Lyman saw less wear with cast bullets because they were selling bullet moulds, not jacketed bullets. Who knows? Anyway, am not trying to convince you of anything. Just reporting what I have personally experienced with cast bullets, and I'll bet I've fired at least as many of them as pretty much anyone else here over the last 20 years.

Alberta Canuck--There was no flame intended on my part. I was just giving the basis and source of my opinion. True that Lyman sells molds etc, what they said does seem accurate to me. I'd hope they wouldn't lie to help sales?? Pressure is reduced and usually velocity is too thus barrel wear would be greatly reduced. One expense to cast bullets--gas checks was an area I didn't comment on. I have all but decided they are a waste of money. I have shot bullets without gas checks that were from gas check molds and didn't find loss of accuracy nor leading.