12fv 223 owners start me with a good load...

[acdame]

Hi guys,

Just bought new 12fv 223 and need to hand load some 55 60 grain bullets. Let me know where your at thank in advance fellas.

[Robinhood]

That is a 9 twist?

[acdame]

Yep

[WV1951]

http://www.savageshooters.com/showthread.php?45859-Savage-12FV-223-Accuracy-Expectations

http://www.savageshooters.com/showthread.php?27383-Factory-and-Handload-for-Savage-12-FCV

http://www.predatormastersforums.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=958684

http://benchrest.com/showthread.php?71121-best-223-load-for-savage-mod-12

http://www.reloadersnest.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=6896

http://www.thehighroad.org/archive/index.php/t-495001.html

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=486143

etc., etc., etc.

That thing called google

[darkker]

How about any start load in any manual you own. It won't be any worse for accuracy than any internet suggestion.

[Robinhood]

How about any start load in any manual you own. It won't be any worse for accuracy than any internet suggestion.
I agree to an extent. I have seen FGMM shoot 1/2 MOA in many rifles. It always helps to tune the load for your stuff though.

[acdame]

I will just tune the load done it many times before thanks.

[acdame]

http://www.savageshooters.com/showthread.php?45859-Savage-12FV-223-Accuracy-Expectations

http://www.savageshooters.com/showthread.php?27383-Factory-and-Handload-for-Savage-12-FCV

http://www.predatormastersforums.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=958684

http://benchrest.com/showthread.php?71121-best-223-load-for-savage-mod-12

http://www.reloadersnest.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=6896

http://www.thehighroad.org/archive/index.php/t-495001.html

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=486143

etc., etc., etc.

That thing called google

Thanks for that but there is a reason I asked here...

[Texas10]

The two loads my son has developed so far in his 12FV, 223 are both 53 gain.

53 grain V-Max (excellent B.C.) set about .020 off, and IMR3031 near max load per Hornaday manual. Winchester brass, CCI400

53 gain Sierra HP (p/n 1400) set a bit closer, and 3031 or 8208XBR around 3100 fps. Win brass, CCI400 or BR-4

Model 12FV, Revolution thumb hole stock, bedded with Devcon 10110, Vortex Crossfield II, 4.5-18X40 FFP, Harris bi-pod. Action torqued 45 in lb front, 20 in lb rear. Lift kit on bolt, polished firing pin.

Groups in zero's and low 2's at 100 yds.

With a little set up work, you'd be amazed how well this entry level Cabelas special can shoot, especially if you have young eyes, (I don't).

YMMV.

[darkker]

I agree to an extent. I have seen FGMM shoot 1/2 MOA in many rifles. It always helps to tune the load for your stuff though.

I've seen it too, but.... Factories don't use canister grade powder like we do. They also don't load powder in Grains, like most do. So not the same thing, or same way to get there.

[acdame]

The two loads my son has developed so far in his 12FV, 223 are both 53 gain.

53 grain V-Max (excellent B.C.) set about .020 off, and IMR3031 near max load per Hornaday manual. Winchester brass, CCI400

53 gain Sierra HP (p/n 1400) set a bit closer, and 3031 or 8208XBR around 3100 fps. Win brass, CCI400 or BR-4

Model 12FV, Revolution thumb hole stock, bedded with Devcon 10110, Vortex Crossfield II, 4.5-18X40 FFP, Harris bi-pod. Action torqued 45 in lb front, 20 in lb rear. Lift kit on bolt, polished firing pin.

Groups in zero's and low 2's at 100 yds.

With a little set up work, you'd be amazed how well this entry level Cabelas special can shoot, especially if you have young eyes, (I don't).

YMMV.
Thanks for you straight answer just the reason I asked. All of the relevant info and more. Btw my eyes aren't what they used to be either lol.

[Robinhood]

I've seen it too, but.... Factories don't use canister grade powder like we do. They also don't load powder in Grains, like most do. So not the same thing, or same way to get there.

Odd, I have loaded hundreds of Federal brass, 4064, 210M loads copying the precise charge weights that Federal uses and have achieved the same point of impact and the same level of accuracy. At some point your strict adherence to a set of rules that are based on your experience will have to yield. In some cases, Like me, you are incorrect.

[holescreek]

I get very good results with 69gr SMK's over 25gr of Varget. I haven't tried any of the light weight bullets yet.

[darkker]

Odd, I have loaded hundreds of Federal brass, 4064, 210M loads copying the precise charge weights that Federal uses and have achieved the same point of impact and the same level of accuracy. At some point your strict adherence to a set of rules that are based on your experience will have to yield. In some cases, Like me, you are incorrect.

I make no bones that you can achieve the same velocity, or point of impact; but that isn't because there is only one way to do any given thing. There is only one major ammo company that (at least used to) buy canister grade powder, that is Nosler. And despite their advertising to the contrary, even they load by volume. Take the factory tour, watch them fire -up the Dillon's and load by volume(CC's) of powder.
Extruded powder is designed around geometry, and that's how you can control burning rate. Volume will let them compensate for shifting BD between lots.

[Texas10]

Since we're discussing factory loads here, one in particular shoots extremely well out of both my bolt 223's . American Eagle 50 grain tipped varmint p/n AE223GTV. This load has put more than a few 3 shot groups in the zero's at 100 yds, and shoots out to 500 yds very well. And those produced today, seem to be some of the best I've seen so far (look for head stamp with two dots on either side of "FC".

This load is not promoted by Federal on their website, you'll not find any reference to it, but it is widely available online and big box stores like Cabelas, Bass pro, Academy Sports.

I have disassembled this round, and reassembled it only to have it shoot like crap. One thing I've noticed is that they use something like Asphalt on the inside of the neck, even though they list no neck sealant on their spec list. (I had to email Federal to get the specs on this load)

I've read that crimping necks really helps with shot to shot consistency, but I never hear about precision shooters crimping their hand loads.

Question for you guys with decades of experience; is the use of asphalt coating inside the neck a trick to improve neck tension or starting pressures consistency?

Why is it that when I use an inertia puller to remove the bullet from this cartridge, then reload it back as it came, and it shoots poorly?

I didn't intend to hijack this thread. Seems to me this is relevant to OP's question.

[darkker]

Sealant could be for a few reasons. Uniform start & water sealant is most likely.
Federal cases are VERY soft, sometimes dangerously so in the head. At any rate the soft case will obturate quicker and seal to the chamber. This is good for accuracy, not so much for case longevity to the reloader.

[Robinhood]

I make no bones that you can achieve the same velocity, or point of impact; but that isn't because there is only one way to do any given thing. There is only one major ammo company that (at least used to) buy canister grade powder, that is Nosler. And despite their advertising to the contrary, even they load by volume. Take the factory tour, watch them fire -up the Dillon's and load by volume(CC's) of powder.
Extruded powder is designed around geometry, and that's how you can control burning rate. Volume will let them compensate for shifting BD between lots.

Ammunition Manufacturers do use canister grade. They blend like Hogdgon does to get the burn rate(within a wide tolerance) their engineer established. It may or may not be the exact burn rate. It is often the cheapest that comes close enough. The big guys also use commercial loading machinery like the Camdex or the ALW Mark L or even bigger stuff. You have probably seen some on display at the shot show. They may use a 1050 for custom or low production number cartridges though.

You repeatedly refute any concept that someone might have a load that would come close to being accurate in other peoples rifle. Reading pages of loading data sorted by Cartridge on one of the most popular sights on the web you will see most loads for accuracy are the rule, not the exception.

I get it, You have a tremendous amount of knowledge with regards to this sport and loading cartridges. Way more than I, but to over complicate things when someone just asks for a little load help is unnecessary. Every top belly shooter weighs their loads. I don't know of one that uses volume, I'm sure he's out there but I don't know him. Maybe the factory does not but in most cases people reload because they can get more accuracy out of weighing their charge than with factory ammunition.

I can understand some rhetoric if the load is over maximum.

[nova1194]

I have had good results with 27.8 gr of CFE223 under a 55gr sierra Blitzking, best load in 3 of my 4 223s the other one just wont let go of h335.

Mike

[darkker]

1) Ammunition Manufacturers do use canister grade.
2) They blend like Hogdgon does to get the burn rate(within a wide tolerance) their engineer established.
It may or may not be the exact burn rate.
3)It is often the cheapest that comes close enough.
4)The big guys also use commercial loading machinery like the Camdex or the ALW Mark L or even bigger stuff.
5) You repeatedly refute any concept that someone might have a load that would come close to being accurate in other peoples rifle.
6) Reading pages of loading data sorted by Cartridge on one of the most popular sights on the web you will see most loads for accuracy are the rule, not the exception.

7) Way more than I, but to over complicate things when someone just asks for a little load help is unnecessary.
8) Every top belly shooter weighs their loads. I don't know of one that uses volume, I'm sure he's out there but I don't know him.
9) Maybe the factory does not but in most cases people reload because they can get more accuracy out of weighing their charge than with factory ammunition.
10) I can understand some rhetoric if the load is over maximum.

This is why I repeat this, you have also been given incorrect info somewhere along the way. These are important differences to understand.

1) No, not as you say "majors", and specifically because of #2.
2) having a wide tolerance is NOT canister grade powder, not is a single burn rate across a lot. Having a narrow tolerance across the lot, is precisely what canister grade is. That way when a random person goes to the store and buys a can O powder with The same name: He can use some load from a random person and not blow himself to kingdom come. He doesn't HAVE to know as much about i:, that Hodgdon doesn't do much of their own testing, that they never made a drop of smokeless, or that Hodgdon is relatively small potatoes as far as a customer of the manufacturers.
3) Again a description of bulk grade, Not canister grade powder. Canister grade powder is a set of tolerances and consistency associated with a brand name. In this country Hodgdon was a key leader in this. They bought train cars of surplussed powder, blended much of that mess into a reliably consistent thing. I've shot kegs of surplussed bulk powder. When I was young and didn't understand, I called General Dynamics to find all about what was to become known as "CFE223". If you call and give them the parent number, you must also identify the original customer and date. Because powder is sold with seemingly endless variations in bulk grade. While it isn't a great idea, you CAN do that with canister grade and have, relatively speaking, little issue. Had I pretended my second batch of SMP-842 was like the first canister, my face and half the rifle would be not attached...
4) BIG, yes. Nosler isn't that, they use Dillons, 650's is what I believe those were.
5) We are close on this, just defining. I believe that any random person online, and any random load found in a reputable manual; are no father apart when it comes to accuracy. There is no one holy grail load, and the rest crap. There are a whole lot of very good loads, a lot of crappy shooters, and an endless stream of people who don't understand that the canister grade, reloading market is a waste market.
6) You will also see that the internet is filled with searches for cat pictures, doesn't mean our society are all desperately seeking a long lost cat. Means people think there is one magic load, and don't actually want to invest time themselves.
7) For the sake of a new reloader, telling him there is no single magic answer; should be freeing. Allowing them to believe there is only one way, one load; that he should ignore any of the safety warnings, should forget about lot variations or understanding, and just load A load.
8) They most certainly are out there, you are correct you just don't follow all the shooting sports; but who does. But this is exactly what I said, go back up: "weighing charges is a handloader invention". I never disputed this. Accurate and cheap scales have been in the hands of the general public, for almost ever. Accurate and inexpensive volume devices have not. Even currently, most on the market have numbers or hashes, very few of which are actually calibrated to a volumetric measurement. But look back in time (if you are old enough) When Olin still produced stuff, their manuals all had VMD numbers, Western provides that currently, with what they resell.
9) That's a mis-guided opinion in my view. People do think, and many times get, accuracy from reloads that best some factory ammo. You were confused about canister grade powder, how many others understand how powder actually works, or for whom?? That I think is the greater underlying issue.

The reloader has always been the waste market, for defense contractors. That is how Hodgy got started. But they (defense contractors) need to crank out billions of rounds per day, and when they get around to it, a semi for hodgy now and then. Billions per day is NOT weighing charges. Extruded powder is built with a very closely held ratio of bulk density to burn rate. The geometry of the grain is what controls the burning rate. So if the BD is abnormally high, the geometry will be such that it will burn slower and not detonate. This is easily taken advantage of when loading volume, but impossible when loading by weight. This is not an accident. Ball powder was fished out, as a quick way to make powder from recycled propellant stocks. Speeds things up in war time, and allows more production with less capacity.
10) If all you told him was a charge weight, how would he know whether or not it's over pressure? If you think you can simply "look at the book and compare" that's partially wrong. Go back to probably the second most searched thing when it comes to reloading, "Lawyer loads". Do you really think that a books max grain loads vary by so much, and yet so very very little in speed; because of lawyers? That reason is because of different burning rates. And since no manual since the very old A-Squared lists components tested, I wonder. Why would someone buy powder from Hodgdon with ZERO listed nominal lot variations, use a book that doesn't list date or lot numbers tested, and think that magically nothing ever changes; the loads magically would be identical. They are not, because things change. There is a very good article in the newest Norma manual about how "sealed" containers will change moisture with storage and how large the burning rate shifts can be. Worth a read for anyone.

Spreading knowledge is a good thing. Simply getting in line and carrying stones up the pyramid like everyone else is only helpful to the pharoh.

[Robinhood]

Just for the record, You quote listing me as the poster is modified.
When do you think the people writing reloading manuals and the 10's of thousands of reloaders/competitive shooters will catch on?
Outside of bench rest cartridges, can you give me an estimate of the number of top rifle shooters that do not weigh powder?
Out of all of the people that read this forum, how many do you think have abandoned their scales? I admit I have pondered it but the success I have had by weighing powder with the cartridges I choose has me satisfied.