I do measure Every single vacant trimmed circumstance with calipers and ensure They are really inside a specific selection which is mentioned while in the Hodgdon guide in conjunction with guaranteeing the OAL length is inside the printed data too.
Okay happy I requested. The CFE posts great teams And that i already have it found out so I will roll with it.
All I am worried about is security, I don't want to blow up the rifle or trigger pointless use from excessive pressures. I'll acknowledge I even now Do not entirely get how the exact same charge in each conditions brings about diverse pressures, especially after resizing and trimming but I am totally new to this.
I named them just lately inquiring why so number of powders ended up detailed for their bullets and was knowledgeable that they are consistently working on new loads but just Never appear to get the updates on their Site as swift as they ought to.
two) Most significantly, H335 is compared with most all other powders in that it receives incredibly awful when loaded over and above shown data for your personal bullet.
I say the above mentioned due to the fact I often load a huge selection of rounds (on a single stage push) within an afternoon.
Rebs, your did not identify what grain bullet you're working with. I have discovered H335 to get an Extraordinary powder for 55gr bullets, but dismal for heavier bullets like SMK sixty nine/77gr bullets.
Individually, my encounter and feeling of The 2 powders has actually been practically the other of yours. CFE 223 will carry out greater the extended your barrel is and also the heavier the bullet you employ. My views are that CFE 223 is right about the verge of remaining too gradual of the powder to even use in 223.
I’ll even now keep H335 as my mainstay, initially decide on, for many cartridges, but I'll follow bullet reloading manuals more meticulously and never ever exceed maximums demonstrated there.
Once the mil-surp things ran out in the early 1990's, Hodgdon contracted to have an identical powder made. I obtained a number of the new stuff but didn't know there was a variation. Experienced to reduce my very long-standing .223 loads 2 more info grains.
Base line is usually that for plinking ammo, I wouldn't change unless you need to get a few extra FPS for a similar charge body weight or help you save powder for the same pace (will not save A lot)
Kinda sorta. It may be believed from Hodgdon's web-site data for his or her take a look at powder tons within their exam barrel with their choice of bullet that the majority of carefully matches your bullet pounds. No matter whether that should fly as part of your gun or not, I can not promise, but I've an exponential calculation within an Excel file that might give you a form of crude variety to operate as many as.
If okay they go back in the situation, if not they go inside the hopper and I then use the powder evaluate and scale to recharge those instances Along with the powder demand I need. No use creating ammo that won't shoot for the pistol/rifle and my skill. Many of my good loads are a soreness while in the butt to load (a person cause I'm moving to BLC2 for most of the .223 loads).
I’ve read through wonderful points about tac however. I’ve go through it’s much better for lighter bullets? What’s your person’s load data for tac plus the 55gr’er. Thanks and sorry, I really feel like I submit a good deal lol You will be MY ONLY Pals