Just purchased a new toy and looking for a recipe.....
Tikka t3 superlite 1:8 twist.
Anyone shooting one and does handloads?
Printable View
Just purchased a new toy and looking for a recipe.....
Tikka t3 superlite 1:8 twist.
Anyone shooting one and does handloads?
73gn ELD-M. 2206H.
https://www.ballisticstudies.com/sit...dies/files/ADI Handloaders guide 2013.pdf
Cheers...powder weight?
It's your face behind the gun. You should determine how much powder to use by yourself.
The link will give you ADIs data for whatever bullet weight you choose.
Yeah.The ADI data is good and 2206 is a useful powder across the bullet weights (if you can get it).
Hornady 55gr, Varget. Works mint.
2207 or 2208 should be possible and plenty in stock around the country.
2206H is rare as rocking horse poo
I use 2206H for 55 to 80grn targex in my superlite it didn't like 80grn eldm but loved 77 tmk and the 80grn targex
Sent from my CPH2531 using Tapatalk
@cookie do a search,there is at least two threads with favourite .223 loads right across spectrum. MOST pet loads sit in 25-27grn area regardless of powder,that is to say they are close to maximum full case...see what powder you can actually get,look in manual for load n go from there.223s are not fussy beasts normally.
Buy a reloading manual published by the projectile manufacturer you plan on using the most and work it out yourself.Quote:
Originally Posted by cookie
2208 works well in a .223"
Used it with 80 gr A-Max projectiles in a stock Savage Model 12 with a 28" 1:12 barrel.
You should work out the load that suits and is safe in your rifle.
Are you sure you managed to get the 80gr A-Max to stabilise in a 1:12?Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclops
22" 1:8 perhaps?
Greetings,
I found the old AR2206 was ideal before it was slowed to become AR2206H. From testing in the .308 I found that AR2206 and BM8208 were very close in speed and have moved to the BM8208 for my .223 rifles. One thing I have discovered is that the ADI data for BM8208 is for a faster and earlier version of that powder so consulting other data sources would be advisable. I have not loaded the .223 with AR8208 as I can't be bothered with compressed loads.
GPM.
gpm, AR2206 and Dupont 8208 have been out of production for decades. If cookie has any BM2, BM8208, AR2206H, or AR2208 from the last few years - or has to buy new, they will be fine to use the current published ADI data.
Burn rates may have changed slightly vs discontinued counterparts or your old notes, but unfortunately that's not helpful or relevant to today.
Greetings.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pommy
I am well aware that AR2206 has been out of production for 25 years or more. I used it up to about 2011 when I ran out and changed to AR2206H. About 4 years ago I ran some comparative tests in the .308 between AR2206H and the then new IMR8208XBR. Just for fun I salvaged some AR2206 and included that in the test for the 125 grain Speer TNT. Velocities for IMR8208 and AR2206 were near identical as commented. The also agreed with the book velocity.
Last year I started some loads for my heavy barrel .223 for F class shooting. The rifle has a 12 inch twist so the heavies were out so I tried the Hornady 60 grain V Max with AR2206H and BM8208. Velocity for the AR2206H was right on for book data but BM8208 gave way low velocity. So I did a bit of checking. The Hornady data and Pet Loads from Handloader both showed much higher loads to achieve the same velocity and agreed with my results. So the Hodgdon/ADI and the 2 other data sets are at odds with each other. Neither of the two lots of powder is old and it is evident that the speed of one or both powders has been slowed since the Hodgdons data was shot. Why this happened I don't know but happen it did. This is not the first time that my chronograph has shown significant differences in powder speed and likely won't be the last. This is relevant as it is from current lots of powder not old ones. It is the Hodgdon data that is outdated,
Regards Grandpamac.
BM8208 gave excellent speed in my 223. You may have just discovered lot to lot variation. I have had found several powders in several cartridges where the velocities don't align perfectly with one or more sources. Some a little more. Some a little less. It doesn't really matter either way. You adjust for it and move on.
Don't use chronograph and waalah.nothing to see here,it's accurate,carry on lol. 24-25 grns 2206h behind a 50-55 grn pill "just works" don't overthink it unless you playing out long.
InterestingQuote:
Originally Posted by Micky Duck
I'm using 24.7gr AR2208 with 55gr superoo.
In my part of the world, USA, I use Hodgdon Benchmark in 223. Occasionally I use CFE 223. I haven’t used Varget in over 10 years.
23gr of Benchmark and a 75gr bullet. Once you hit 23.5gr you’re playing with pressure and 24.0 will give you one time use brass because the primer pockets are extremely loose but you’ll be over 3000fps. Don’t play there. Play it safe.
Yep you're right - my mistake.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pommy
My Savage Model 12 (that''s where the 12 came from) has a 1:8 barrel.
Greetings all,
I find conundrums interesting and this certainly qualifies. I looked in the ADI and Hodgdon data to see if they offer any for the .222 Rem Mag. For most that may have missed it the .222 Rem mag came out in the 1950's and was an early option for the M16 cartridge. I don't think any company has chambered it in the last 50 years. It has ever so slightly more capacity than the .223. So I looked it up not expecting too much. There was data for the 60 grain Berger FB Varmint and with pressure in PSI no less. The data was really interesting. Generally the .222 Mag takes about 0.5 grains more powder to deliver the same velocity as the .223 and my velocity lined up well with this but the .222 Mag start load was more than the .223 max load and the .222 Mag max load two grains more again.
Mulling all this over I remembered that I had loaded some comparison loads for IMR8208XBR, AR2206 and AR2206H and they were still in the safe. I will add some loads for BM8208, chronograph them over the next few weeks and report back.
Regards Grandpamac.
The 222 magnum got necked down to create the 204 Ruger...the 204 Ruger got necked back up to create another .223&a bit....terminator do it...
I would not be surprised to find that the .222 was based on the .357 Magnum case which shares the body dia and had a strong head.. The .357 Magnum itself was bases on a whole series of pistol cartridges that date well back into the 1800's. Nothing much is as new as it appears.Quote:
Originally Posted by Micky Duck
Regards GPM.