5.56 / .223 brass difference?

[bigedp51]

LOL! You'll have to come up with some first, since what you're proposing doesn't work out that way, but thanks for playing!

Below is from MIL-C-9963F it states the pressure requirements in cup and psi that YOU refuse to believe. If you don't believe my cut and paste then just look up MIL-C-9963F for yourself. 52,000 cup = 55,000psi and please note the army also tells you both pressures are in pounds per square inch.

MIL-C-9963F
15 October 1976

MILITARY SPECIFICATION
CARTRIDGE, 5.56MM, BALL, M193


3.7 Chamber pressure.

3.7.1 Measurement by copper-crush cylinder.-The average chamber pressure
of the sample cartridges, conditioned at 70° ± 2°F, shall not exceed
52,000 pounds per square inch (PSI). The average chamber pressure plus
three standard deviations of chamber pressure shall not exceed 58,000 PSI.

3.7.2 Measurement by piezoelectric transducer.-The average chamber
pressure of the sample cartridges, conditioned at 70° ± 2°F, shall not
exceed 55,000 PSI. The average chamber pressure plus three standard
deviations of chamber pressure shall not exceed 61,000 PSI.

[Admin]

The author Louis L'Amour who wrote "How The West Was Won", "Hondo" and the "Sackett" series once said that the old West was a very polite place. And if you insulted someone, hands were slapping leather.

The biggest problem most forums have are midgets setting at their computers pretending to be giants. When you quote printed material and are told that you are wrong by these midgets, then hands start slapping the keyboard.

The winner is the one with the best factual printed material.

"All the information in the world is printed in books and all you have to do is read".
Attila the Hun

Last I checked the library was also full of books filled with bad or incomplete information yet are being portrayed as "the truth" and "complete history". Some of them are even books pertaining to science and history. *gasp* I also know for a fact that most self-proclaimed 'forum giants' are also self-proclaimed know-it-alls who generally have zero first-hand experience or knowledge on the subject, but they feel they're experts on the subject because they read it in a book once and in a few different forum threads.

Now I suggest you all start playing a little nicer with one another, cuz if you don't I can promise that you won't like my solution to the problem.

[bigedp51]

I have 1000 rounds of once fired Winchester 5.56 brass. I know the difference between 5.56 and .223 loaded ammo, but I'm unaware of any difference in the raw brass. I do know that military (LC) brass is thicker and can increase pressure, but I'm talking about Winchester brass.

Is there any reason why I can't load the 5.56 brass to .223 specs and use it in my #10PH with it's .223 chamber??

I plan on using SB (small base) die for the first loading, then fire form and neck size after that.



There is no difference in brass

And sometimes books and documentation are all you need to prove a point, military 5.56 brass is made from a higher quality brass. The cases can't be made thicker because it would cause a internal capacity problem therefore it is made with a better grade brass. The military also loads to a higher pressure than commercial .223 and the base harness and design is important at higher pressures, and the last thing you need is a primer popping out of an AR15 in a match and jamming the trigger group.

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o254/bigedp51/hardness.jpg

Army Research Laboratory
Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005-5069


Vickers Hardness Measurements of the M855
Cartridge Case Base

http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA497469

[darkker]

That release shows a hardness comparison between military cases that did, and did not drop primers. There is no comparison to ANY other brass.

That is an internal QC report. They wanted to see if a dropped primer was due to a difference in hardness. The answer was no, the differences that did exist were normal lot-to-lot variation; Which they noted as the brass having "Large Standard Deviations".

While that is interesting, all it does is list the range that military cases are spec'd at, but NOT what commercial is spec'd at.

**Update***
I just got off the phone with several companies.
Gary @ Hornady said,
They shoot for 0.001" thicker walls on 5.56 stamped brass, for a minor reduction in internal capacity. However no difference in annealing or brass stocks.

Zak@ Nosler said,
They only sell 223 stampings, but just size, chamfer, etc whatever comes in.

Jeff@ Remington,
Who reminded me several times that NATO does not follow the SAAMI guidlines, said they use the same brass stock and the same build specs.

Still not a definitive "spec range", however seems to follow my assertion that there is no difference.

Now if the contention is that: There COULD be 2 different specs, then yes there COULD.
The more rational approach(in terms of mass production) to the issue is to only use one spec that will satisfy the requirements of both applications, and get away from all of the production changes, and lot issues.

[bigedp51]

The QC report "Vickers Hardness Measurements of the M855 Cartridge Case Base" is part of a larger study to see if the military 5.56 cartridge case can lightened or made from lower grades of brass and hardness. (go back to commercial standards)
The answer is NO, the military 5.56x45 is loaded to higher pressures and the military chamber has a larger base diameter than the commercial .223

The military case has higher standards than commercial brass and the moderator at AR15.com has reference material located there and also states the brass is a higher quality and has higher quality manufacturing standards.

The link below shows photos of the higher standards for military Lake City cartridge cases and why the QC report was done. Federal is the same company and part of ATK who manufactures the ammunition at Lake City to military standards.

http://www.ar15.com/forums/f_6/42_Reloading.html&page=3

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o254/bigedp51/Picture039.jpg

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o254/bigedp51/hardness-b.jpg

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o254/bigedp51/casehardness2.jpg

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o254/bigedp51/brasshardness.jpg

[darkker]

I agree that there COULD BE 2 specs. But I can't find that THERE IS; for the production issues I already listed.
What you just posted says someone suspected that given there was no standard in the mid 60's, there COULD have been a connection. Fine enough conclusion to draw. But that is an unsupported conclusion, and still not evidence of two separate specs.
An interesting tell in the photo is this quote:
"In his eagerness to be heard at last, and with the benefit of hindsight, Dr. Carten's CASE History consisted largely of scathing but not entirely fair criticisms".


The AR-15 link you posted is a general page. If they are a reference for you, let's work with that. Use your link and click on the "Faq" tab, you get here:
http://www.ar15.com/content/page.html?id=406
Where you scroll down a tad and they tell you this:

Q: What is the difference in 5.56X45 NATO and .223 Remington brass? I can't find dies for 5.56 NATO cartridges.

A: The brass for both catridges is identical (except for the primer crimp in the military surplus brass), the chambers are slightly different. The throat of a 5.56X45 chamber is slightly longer than the SAAMI standard for .223 Remington. Refer to the Ammo Oracle for more details. Buy dies for .223 Remington.

That reference confirms that the brass indeed IS the same.

[MZ5]

the military 5.56x45 is loaded to higher pressures


Now take your finger below and read the .223 Remington line and read the four different pressure "method" readings for the SAME EXACT PRESSURE.

:) It sort of seems like you're confused as to exactly what your position/argument on the pressure issue is. When you decide whether you think that the SAAMI, CIP, and NATO specs are just 3 different ways of expressing the same thing _or not_, that'll probably help you formulate your thoughts better.

Have fun with this. :)

[bigedp51]

I agree that there COULD BE 2 specs. But I can't find that THERE IS; for the production issues I already listed.
What you just posted says someone suspected that given there was no standard in the mid 60's, there COULD have been a connection. Fine enough conclusion to draw. But that is an unsupported conclusion, and still not evidence of two separate specs.
An interesting tell in the photo is this quote:
"In his eagerness to be heard at last, and with the benefit of hindsight, Dr. Carten's CASE History consisted largely of scathing but not entirely fair criticisms".


The AR-15 link you posted is a general page. If they are a reference for you, let's work with that. Use your link and click on the "Faq" tab, you get here:
http://www.ar15.com/content/page.html?id=406
Where you scroll down a tad and they tell you this:

Q: What is the difference in 5.56X45 NATO and .223 Remington brass? I can't find dies for 5.56 NATO cartridges.

A: The brass for both catridges is identical (except for the primer crimp in the military surplus brass), the chambers are slightly different. The throat of a 5.56X45 chamber is slightly longer than the SAAMI standard for .223 Remington. Refer to the Ammo Oracle for more details. Buy dies for .223 Remington.

That reference confirms that the brass indeed IS the same.

All that it confirms is there are no 5.56x45 reloading dies and the cases have the same basic dimensions. During the height of the Gulf War when Lake City could not manufacture enough ammunition the military only purchased 5.56 ammunition from the Israelis and Winchester because they were the only ones who could make the cartridge cases to mil-spec standards. As shown in my earlier links standard Winchester grade brass was not as hard in the base web area as Lake City brass in the QC analysis testing. BUT Winchester had been running the Lake city plant before ATK and had made mil-spec ammo before.

[bigedp51]

:) It sort of seems like you're confused as to exactly what your position/argument on the pressure issue is. When you decide whether you think that the SAAMI, CIP, and NATO specs are just 3 different ways of expressing the same thing _or not_, that'll probably help you formulate your thoughts better.

Have fun with this. :)

I will have fun with what you just said and a posting you didn't read or understand, go back and read my posting about MIL-C-9963F and the pressure requirements written in CUP and PSI pressures for the same ammunition.

[M.O.A.]

Can't we all just get along and come to an agreement to just disagree

[thomae]

:focus:
Going back to the original question:

I have 1000 rounds of once fired Winchester 5.56 brass. I know the difference between 5.56 and .223 loaded ammo, but I'm unaware of any difference in the raw brass. I do know that military (LC) brass is thicker and can increase pressure, but I'm talking about Winchester brass.

Is there any reason why I can't load the 5.56 brass to .223 specs and use it in my #10PH with it's .223 chamber??

I plan on using SB (small base) die for the first loading, then fire form and neck size after that.

The short answer to your post (You've already read the long, long answer) is that yes you can.

Just as you should any time you change components, you should work up from a minimum published load to something that works safely in your rifle instead of simply starting out with a hot load that worked well with a different (insert your choice: bullet, primer, powder, brand of brass, rifle, wife, etc...)

As others have mentioned, you will need to make sure the primer crimp (if there is one) has been removed one way or another, and small base dies are probably not a necessity. I've taken military brass, cleaned, prepped, swaged the primer pocket, full length resized, and it works like a champ.

As with any reloading effort, all standard safety rules and warnings all apply.

Bottom line: It's just not that complicated.

[helotaxi]

You can mince words and split hairs and cite specs, but the bottom line is that for the reloader, the brass is completely interchangeable as much as two brands of commercial .223 brass are interchangeable. Chamber specs don't mean a thing when discussing brass. Hardness specifications for mil-spec also don't matter a bit because the neck and body still size just fine. Swage the primer crimp and load it just like you would a commercial case.

[bigedp51]

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o254/bigedp51/556hard.jpg

Just to prove a point, the 5.56x45 military cases are harder in the base area of the case.

[seanhagerty]

But I read that 5.56 cartidge cases are made from brass. On the other hand .223 cases are made from brass.

[helotaxi]

^^Lol

[bigedp51]

But I read that 5.56 cartidge cases are made from brass. On the other hand .223 cases are made from brass.

You are correct, "BUT" you must soak .223 brass in Viagra to make them as hard as 5.56 brass.

[Jamie]

You are correct, "BUT" you must soak .223 brass in Viagra to make them as hard as 5.56 brass.

I haven't tried that yet. I do dip my .308s in Red Bull to get them to reach 1000 yards. Without it, they just stop and drop at 600 yards.