.223 65 Grain SBT Reloader 15 recipe?

tutz724 · April 22, 2019, 10:17 AM

Been loading up .223 Rem for use in an AR and was looking through recipes in three different loading manuals. I cannot find a recipe that uses Reloader 15 for 65 grain bullets. Seems 69 grain and up have listings but not for 65 or lighter.

Now I know what I'm going to get, "don't ever load what's not published", but it has me thinking the question: Is 4 grains on a bullet enough to have a huge impact on safety if one were to use a starting load for the 69 grain bullet and load 65 grain bullets with that load? Accuracy? Reliability?

I guess the meat of the question is, can someone explain to me why the weight of a bullet would cause you to not use a powder that you can use with a heavier bullet? Especially 4 grains. I know there has to be a cut off, but where is the grey area?

I was researching a little last night about bullet weights and powder charge, and then started looking at the charts in the load manual. Seems that heavier bullets (at least .223) get called for lighter powder charges. Seems backwards. Can anybody offer any insight? It's just something I'm curious about. I like knowing why instead of just "here's the recipe".

NoSecondBest · April 22, 2019, 11:17 AM

Two things here: first, all loading manuals almost always call for less powder for heavier bullets. Second, look at Alliant's reloading site and look there. They make Reloader 15. They have a load listed for a 62 grain bullet. If you can't find a load for what you want, and you're not an experienced reloader, I'd suggest getting a different powder or bullet and following published loads. Four (4) grains on a bullet can be a lot or a little. Four grains on a forty grain bullet is 10%. Four grains on an eighty grain bullet is 5%. It's all about math. Be safe until you learn more and just follow the published guides. It doesn't sound like you're ready to experiment just yet. Sorry about the lecture, I retired as a safety manager and I've been reloading for fifty years also. I've seen it all.

Marco Califo · April 22, 2019, 11:37 AM

You can call Sierra. I understand they will specifically tell you to use the data for their 63 gr. Bullet. The reason is the bearing surface is the same on these two bullets and despite the small weight difference you use the same load. For max downrange impact AA2520 has loads @ ~3250 for this bullet (as 556); almost that for 223.

**Unclenick** · April 22, 2019, 05:39 PM

Tutz724,

When bullet moves forward in a barrel, the volume of the bore behind it is added to the volume of the case, increasing the total volume the powder is burning in. This is called expansion. When a bullet is heavier, for any given average pressure behind it, it takes longer to move forward, so expansion happens at a slower rate. This means the powder, at any given point in its pressure curve, is making pressure in a smaller space when the bullet is heavier. Because of that smaller space, you have to use less powder or the pressure will get too high.

If Sierra has RL-15 data for that bullet they will email it to you on request.

603Country · April 22, 2019, 08:02 PM

Do you insist on R15? I’ve had great accuracy in my 223 and that bullet with H335 and A2230.

Sierra did tell me that the 63 gr SMP and the 65 gr GK could use the same load data, and my Lyman 49th had load data for the 63 grained.

9MMand223only · April 22, 2019, 08:16 PM

Hello. Reloader 15 isn't ideal choice for this lighter bullet, but since you asked, I would say start at 25.0 grains or so and work up to 26 grains or so and your in the ballpark. Use OAL of 2.250 to 2.260.

Reloader 15 is similar to W748 in load amounts. RL15 maximums should be slightly more than W748 with 65 grain bullets.

Oh, sorry, I didn't answer your question about the "4 grains".

Actually, what matters WAY more than 4 grains is the bullet profile. If the length of the bullet is similar to 69 GR SMK, then 4 grains won't make that much difference. Probably ~.2 grains more you could load. However, if the bullet is 30k shorter, and you load to long 2.260 OAL, while the load for 69 SMK calls for like 2.230, then you have dramatically less pressure and might be able to load 1.0 whole more in the 65 than the 69.

etc.

std7mag · April 23, 2019, 08:39 AM

I had always been told that it is acceptable to use data for a heavier bullet.
The charge for the heavier bullet will be lower than for the lighter bullet.
Start with the starting load, and work up.

RL15 works well for me with 55gr FMJ bullets that i use for just getting some trigger time.
Along with Varmint, Win748.

**Unclenick** · April 23, 2019, 11:09 AM

That's correct. Use 69-grain bullet data if there is no other. Usually a 69-grains is about as light as I would choose to load with a powder as slow as RL-15, but you can use it inefficiently for practice with a lighter bullet. Just realize there will likely be another powder out there that gets you more velocity or at least the same velocity with a lower charge weight and still keeps within peak pressure limits.

Marco Califo · April 23, 2019, 11:54 PM

I just emailed Sierra asking for their data for the 65 SGK. I also asked them to confirm whether the #1395 65 and #1370 63 gr bullets use the same Sierra data. Probably be 24 hours.
Even more curious, their recently updated web data does not include 223 Rem, but they have data for 223 Valk. (which is a very different cartridge). It has two groups, each with one set of data, for that 63 gr #1370 with 60 grain #1375. A second set of data for is used for the 65 grain #1395 and 69 grain #1380 & #7169. There are additional weight groups.
https://sierrabullets.files.wordpres...-valkyrie1.pdf
For some reason, in 223 Rem/5.56 has been ignored by Sierra, in the manual I paid for, for this very popular bullet.
https://www.sierrabullets.com/contact/

**Unclenick** · April 24, 2019, 10:33 AM

That's odd. My ring binder Sierra databook has plenty of .223 and 5.56 data, including separate data for the AR. Since Sierra only gives away data on request for a specific cartridge, what you find on their website is usually just their newest data so those of us with the ring binders can print it and add it in. If you ask for .223/5.56 data, they'll email it to you.

std7mag · April 24, 2019, 10:39 AM

Agreed!
Odd indeed. My Sierra ring binder book has 223, 5.56 data.
Also, Alliant has 62gr Speer with RL15 at 25.0gr compressed.

Marco Califo · April 24, 2019, 12:33 PM

Yes, Sierra has 223/556 data. Just not for the 65 SGK bullet. If you have data from Sierra for the 65 gr SGK SBT I wold love to see it.

Marco Califo · April 28, 2019, 05:37 PM

http://accurateshooter.net/Downloads...223rembolt.pdf
Page 230 has the 63 gr SMP.
Page 231 has the 69 gr SMK.
There is nothing in between, where the 22 Caliber .224 Diameter 65 Grain Spitzer Boat Tail Gameking Sierra # 1395 would be.
Sierra has not responded to me.

603Country · April 28, 2019, 08:10 PM

As I said earlier, I called Sierra to ask about load data for the 65 gr GK. I was told to use the 63 gr SMP load data, since the bearing surface was the same. I suppose if you use the 69 gr load data, you’ll have a more conservative start, but I can’t see that it will matter much. Just start with the min load for the 63 and work your way up.

April 22, 2019, 11:37 AM	#3
Marco Califo Senior Member Join Date: April 4, 2011 Location: LA (Greater Los Angeles Area) Posts: 2,598	You can call Sierra. I understand they will specifically tell you to use the data for their 63 gr. Bullet. The reason is the bearing surface is the same on these two bullets and despite the small weight difference you use the same load. For max downrange impact AA2520 has loads @ ~3250 for this bullet (as 556); almost that for 223. __________________ ............

April 22, 2019, 05:39 PM	#4
Unclenick Staff Join Date: March 4, 2005 Location: Ohio Posts: 21,063	Tutz724, When bullet moves forward in a barrel, the volume of the bore behind it is added to the volume of the case, increasing the total volume the powder is burning in. This is called expansion. When a bullet is heavier, for any given average pressure behind it, it takes longer to move forward, so expansion happens at a slower rate. This means the powder, at any given point in its pressure curve, is making pressure in a smaller space when the bullet is heavier. Because of that smaller space, you have to use less powder or the pressure will get too high. If Sierra has RL-15 data for that bullet they will email it to you on request. __________________ Gunsite Orange Hat Family Member CMP Certified GSM Master Instructor NRA Certified Rifle Instructor NRA Benefactor Member and Golden Eagle

April 23, 2019, 11:09 AM	#8
Unclenick Staff Join Date: March 4, 2005 Location: Ohio Posts: 21,063	That's correct. Use 69-grain bullet data if there is no other. Usually a 69-grains is about as light as I would choose to load with a powder as slow as RL-15, but you can use it inefficiently for practice with a lighter bullet. Just realize there will likely be another powder out there that gets you more velocity or at least the same velocity with a lower charge weight and still keeps within peak pressure limits. __________________ Gunsite Orange Hat Family Member CMP Certified GSM Master Instructor NRA Certified Rifle Instructor NRA Benefactor Member and Golden Eagle

April 23, 2019, 11:54 PM	#9
Marco Califo Senior Member Join Date: April 4, 2011 Location: LA (Greater Los Angeles Area) Posts: 2,598	Sierra I just emailed Sierra asking for their data for the 65 SGK. I also asked them to confirm whether the #1395 65 and #1370 63 gr bullets use the same Sierra data. Probably be 24 hours. Even more curious, their recently updated web data does not include 223 Rem, but they have data for 223 Valk. (which is a very different cartridge). It has two groups, each with one set of data, for that 63 gr #1370 with 60 grain #1375. A second set of data for is used for the 65 grain #1395 and 69 grain #1380 & #7169. There are additional weight groups. https://sierrabullets.files.wordpres...-valkyrie1.pdf For some reason, in 223 Rem/5.56 has been ignored by Sierra, in the manual I paid for, for this very popular bullet. https://www.sierrabullets.com/contact/ __________________ ............ Last edited by Marco Califo; April 24, 2019 at 12:06 AM. Reason: Contact

April 24, 2019, 10:33 AM	#10
Unclenick Staff Join Date: March 4, 2005 Location: Ohio Posts: 21,063	That's odd. My ring binder Sierra databook has plenty of .223 and 5.56 data, including separate data for the AR. Since Sierra only gives away data on request for a specific cartridge, what you find on their website is usually just their newest data so those of us with the ring binders can print it and add it in. If you ask for .223/5.56 data, they'll email it to you. __________________ Gunsite Orange Hat Family Member CMP Certified GSM Master Instructor NRA Certified Rifle Instructor NRA Benefactor Member and Golden Eagle

April 22, 2019, 10:17 AM	#1
tutz724 Junior Member Join Date: August 11, 2018 Posts: 7	.223 65 Grain SBT Reloader 15 recipe? Been loading up .223 Rem for use in an AR and was looking through recipes in three different loading manuals. I cannot find a recipe that uses Reloader 15 for 65 grain bullets. Seems 69 grain and up have listings but not for 65 or lighter. Now I know what I'm going to get, "don't ever load what's not published", but it has me thinking the question: Is 4 grains on a bullet enough to have a huge impact on safety if one were to use a starting load for the 69 grain bullet and load 65 grain bullets with that load? Accuracy? Reliability? I guess the meat of the question is, can someone explain to me why the weight of a bullet would cause you to not use a powder that you can use with a heavier bullet? Especially 4 grains. I know there has to be a cut off, but where is the grey area? I was researching a little last night about bullet weights and powder charge, and then started looking at the charts in the load manual. Seems that heavier bullets (at least .223) get called for lighter powder charges. Seems backwards. Can anybody offer any insight? It's just something I'm curious about. I like knowing why instead of just "here's the recipe".

April 22, 2019, 11:17 AM	#2
NoSecondBest Senior Member Join Date: December 7, 2009 Location: Western New York Posts: 2,736	Two things here: first, all loading manuals almost always call for less powder for heavier bullets. Second, look at Alliant's reloading site and look there. They make Reloader 15. They have a load listed for a 62 grain bullet. If you can't find a load for what you want, and you're not an experienced reloader, I'd suggest getting a different powder or bullet and following published loads. Four (4) grains on a bullet can be a lot or a little. Four grains on a forty grain bullet is 10%. Four grains on an eighty grain bullet is 5%. It's all about math. Be safe until you learn more and just follow the published guides. It doesn't sound like you're ready to experiment just yet. Sorry about the lecture, I retired as a safety manager and I've been reloading for fifty years also. I've seen it all.

April 22, 2019, 08:02 PM	#5
603Country Senior Member Join Date: January 6, 2011 Location: Thornton, Texas Posts: 3,998	Do you insist on R15? I’ve had great accuracy in my 223 and that bullet with H335 and A2230. Sierra did tell me that the 63 gr SMP and the 65 gr GK could use the same load data, and my Lyman 49th had load data for the 63 grained.

April 22, 2019, 08:16 PM	#6
9MMand223only Senior Member Join Date: November 30, 2014 Posts: 283	Hello. Reloader 15 isn't ideal choice for this lighter bullet, but since you asked, I would say start at 25.0 grains or so and work up to 26 grains or so and your in the ballpark. Use OAL of 2.250 to 2.260. Reloader 15 is similar to W748 in load amounts. RL15 maximums should be slightly more than W748 with 65 grain bullets. Oh, sorry, I didn't answer your question about the "4 grains". Actually, what matters WAY more than 4 grains is the bullet profile. If the length of the bullet is similar to 69 GR SMK, then 4 grains won't make that much difference. Probably ~.2 grains more you could load. However, if the bullet is 30k shorter, and you load to long 2.260 OAL, while the load for 69 SMK calls for like 2.230, then you have dramatically less pressure and might be able to load 1.0 whole more in the 65 than the 69. etc.

April 23, 2019, 08:39 AM	#7
std7mag Senior Member Join Date: June 23, 2013 Location: Central Taxylvania.. Posts: 3,609	I had always been told that it is acceptable to use data for a heavier bullet. The charge for the heavier bullet will be lower than for the lighter bullet. Start with the starting load, and work up. RL15 works well for me with 55gr FMJ bullets that i use for just getting some trigger time. Along with Varmint, Win748. __________________ When our own government declares itself as "tyrannical", where does that leave us??!! "Januarary 6th insurrection". Funny, I didn't see a single piece of rope...

April 24, 2019, 10:39 AM	#11
std7mag Senior Member Join Date: June 23, 2013 Location: Central Taxylvania.. Posts: 3,609	Agreed! Odd indeed. My Sierra ring binder book has 223, 5.56 data. Also, Alliant has 62gr Speer with RL15 at 25.0gr compressed. __________________ When our own government declares itself as "tyrannical", where does that leave us??!! "Januarary 6th insurrection". Funny, I didn't see a single piece of rope...

April 24, 2019, 12:33 PM	#12
Marco Califo Senior Member Join Date: April 4, 2011 Location: LA (Greater Los Angeles Area) Posts: 2,598	Yes, Sierra has 223/556 data. Just not for the 65 SGK bullet. If you have data from Sierra for the 65 gr SGK SBT I wold love to see it. __________________ ............

April 28, 2019, 05:37 PM	#13
Marco Califo Senior Member Join Date: April 4, 2011 Location: LA (Greater Los Angeles Area) Posts: 2,598	No Sierra datya for bullet #1395 65 gr SGK http://accurateshooter.net/Downloads...223rembolt.pdf Page 230 has the 63 gr SMP. Page 231 has the 69 gr SMK. There is nothing in between, where the 22 Caliber .224 Diameter 65 Grain Spitzer Boat Tail Gameking Sierra # 1395 would be. Sierra has not responded to me. __________________ ............

April 28, 2019, 08:10 PM	#14
603Country Senior Member Join Date: January 6, 2011 Location: Thornton, Texas Posts: 3,998	As I said earlier, I called Sierra to ask about load data for the 65 gr GK. I was told to use the 63 gr SMP load data, since the bearing surface was the same. I suppose if you use the 69 gr load data, you’ll have a more conservative start, but I can’t see that it will matter much. Just start with the min load for the 63 and work your way up.