Thread: The “you can’t go wrong” .223 load

No, ADI got 3384fps with 27.5gr from a 24 inch barrel, not 3480fps.

Speed and pressure go hand in hand. You are getting more speed than ADI would have gotten if they had been using a barrel as short as yours. And you would be getting more speed than ADI if your barrel was as long as theirs. Therefore it's pretty obvious that your pressures are higher too.

Ugh. Would be great if you could stop editing all your comments.

I have time to kill. Want me to run the numbers on your 7mm so we can see how silly your load for that is?

Look, I hereby retract that statement, which I made in a carefree happy moment, and which I now regret.


(I forgot I had a shorter barrel to be honest, it was a couple of years ago I did it)

I have to get what I want to say right!

You will hate the 7mm loads, but, they all have vastly different throats, so there is great variety in results of the same loads. But try:

50 grains H4350 and a 139 grain interlock for 2925 fps (24 inch barrel) This is a modern rifle though, not a rolling block...

Originally Posted by BillyDixon

I have to get what I want to say right!

You will hate the 7mm loads, but, they all have vastly different throats, so there is great variety in results of the same loads. But try:

50 grains H4350 and a 139 grain interlock for 2925 fps (24 inch barrel) This is a modern rifle though, not a rolling block...

Computer says yes...

Cool.
I have loaded for two other 7x57 rifles this year - one needed 52g of 2209 to get that same velocity, and another (using older 2209 ) needed 53.5 grains.

Originally Posted by BillyDixon

Cool.
I have loaded for two other 7x57 rifles this year - one needed 52g of 2209 to get that same velocity, and another (using older 2209 ) needed 53.5 grains.

I found similiar with a ex mil 98 in 7mm.
Big revelation in changing to w760.
Less powder for better velocity and accuracy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Dicko

I found similiar with a ex mil 98 in 7mm.
Big revelation in changing to w760.
Less powder for better velocity and accuracy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

W760 is the equivalent of ADI 2209

Greetings All,
Getting back to the OP AR2206H has been my main powder in the .223 since I ran out of AR2206. Mostly it has been loaded with 55 and 69 grain projectiles. It is a little bulky with most loads being compressed. More recently BM8208 has been used in some loads. Most of my loading has been with now ADI powders starting with AR2201.
Following on from some of the later posts ADI, then Mulwex, starting in the mid 1980's produced a range of powders including AR2205, AR2206, AR2207, AR2208, AR2209, AR2213 and others. By the early 1990's ADI was producing most of Hodgdons extruded powders and around 2,000 there was a bit of a reorganisation and AR2206 was dropped in favour of AR2206H (H4895) and also AR2213 in favour of AR2213SC (H4831SC). Both powders were a little slower than those that they replaced. Nick Harvey described AR2209 as being between IMR4350 and IMR4831 in speed and my chronographing supports this. About 2002 AR2209 was sped up to match H4350 more closely without any suffix being added. Again this is supported by Hodgdons online data and my own chronograph results. There also seems to be two sets of data for BM8208 (IMR8208XBR) with later lots being significantly slower. My chronographed results giving much less velocity than suggested in the Hodgdon data even in a 26" barrel but close to Pet Loads data from Handloader and the Hornady data. Without a chronograph I would not have not have had a clue about any of this.
Regards Grandpamac.

Ar2213 got changed to ar2213sc the sc is shorter cut...they made the length of granual logs shorter...that's it.no other change. Weird that you suggest it got slower burning as normally making something smaller means it burns faster.its great powder

Originally Posted by Micky Duck

Ar2213 got changed to ar2213sc the sc is shorter cut...they made the length of granual logs shorter...that's it.no other change. Weird that you suggest it got slower burning as normally making something smaller means it burns faster.its great powder

Greetings @mickyDuck,
The AR2213 story is a bit more complicated. ADI had been making AR2213SC and AR2213H for Hodgdons from around 1995. These were both slower than AR2213, based on the ADI November 2000 Guide, to match the older H4831. I suspect that ADI stopped making AR2213 at the same time but it took a few years to run down their stocks prior to releasing AR2213SC on their local market. AR2213 was already a SC powder same as all the other ADI powders but ADI used the SC to indicate a lower speed same as AR 2206H being slower than AR2206. AR2206 was closer to early IMR8208XBR in speed from my chronographing although this may have changed. I really should test that.
Regards Grandpamac.

Originally Posted by grandpamac

Greetings @mickyDuck,
The AR2213 story is a bit more complicated. ADI had been making AR2213SC and AR2213H for Hodgdons from around 1995. These were both slower than AR2213, based on the ADI November 2000 Guide, to match the older H4831. I suspect that ADI stopped making AR2213 at the same time but it took a few years to run down their stocks prior to releasing AR2213SC on their local market. AR2213 was already a SC powder same as all the other ADI powders but ADI used the SC to indicate a lower speed same as AR 2206H being slower than AR2206. AR2206 was closer to early IMR8208XBR in speed from my chronographing although this may have changed. I really should test that.
Regards Grandpamac.

Technically any configuration change of a powder may alter burn rates but in practical application may not ( always ) be apparent. I use AR2213 ( agree with MD, it is a fantastic powder ) and did a bit of a test of batches with 243W handloads a few years ago. Had some old, old stuff in tin cans ( Mulwex label ), some early 2213sc and some very recent 2213sc. Just compared one adopted load using exaclty the same charge of each powder shot through a chronograph. At 100 yds all MVs and POIs were the same. There may be others but it's the only powder I use giving such consistency from batch to batch. I don't bother comparing loads when opening new bottles / batches of AR2213sc.

Originally Posted by Micky Duck

Ar2213 got changed to ar2213sc the sc is shorter cut...they made the length of granual logs shorter...that's it.no other change. Weird that you suggest it got slower burning as normally making something smaller means it burns faster.its great powder

Shortening the grains allows more surface area for the retardant that’s applied to the outside of the grains

Originally Posted by Micky Duck

Ar2213 got changed to ar2213sc the sc is shorter cut...they made the length of granual logs shorter...that's it.no other change. Weird that you suggest it got slower burning as normally making something smaller means it burns faster.its great powder

Surprisingly good in the 243.

Harvey had GWPs and then Vislas in the last 15-20 years of his life. Maybe EPs before that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk