Reloading military ammo.

LeeAdama · February 8, 2010, 01:59 PM

How many grains on average is the 5.56x45 NATO and 7.62x39 loaded with?

Is it 26-27 grains for the 5.56 and 26-28 grains for the 7.62x39?

crimsondave · February 8, 2010, 02:00 PM

of what?????????

snuffy · February 8, 2010, 02:46 PM

You're kidding right!??¿ You are actually coming to an internet forum looking for loading data? Get a loading manual, do a lot of reading, THEN come here for further advise!

mkl · February 8, 2010, 03:07 PM

Quote:

Is it 26-27 grains for the 5.56 and 26-28 grains for the 7.62x39?

It is 23.4925 grains of water in either case!

If this advice seems wrong, I suggest you buy a reloading book!

jimkim · February 8, 2010, 03:26 PM

If I was you, I would call the bullet manufacturer and ask them for a safe starting load using YOUR components. Before I loaded these rounds I would buy, AND read(the front part) a manual. After I understood the safety rules I would load that ammo using the starting loads given me by the tech. I know you don't want to hear that, but I prefer not to have a blind(or dead) guy on my conscience.

Randy 1911 · February 8, 2010, 04:56 PM

Besides that, it will vary depending on what type of powder you are using.

rjrivero · February 8, 2010, 05:45 PM

I have never seen any published load data on 5.56. You'll find that everyone loads to the SAMI standard for .223 Remington. In fact, I've never seen any commercial dies available for 5.56 either. If anyone has a source for any of these items, please let me know.

Thanks.

RJ

AlaskaMike · February 8, 2010, 06:13 PM

RJ, do you honestly think the original poster specified 5.56 to differentiate from .223 Remington? I interpreted his wording the same as everyone else, that he (like most others) consider 5.56 and .223 Rem. interchangeable.

Regardless, I agree with the others--he needs to crack open a manual and do some reading.

MIke

snuffy · February 9, 2010, 01:42 AM

Quote:

I have never seen any published load data on 5.56. You'll find that everyone loads to the SAMI standard for .223 Remington. In fact, I've never seen any commercial dies available for 5.56 either. If anyone has a source for any of these items, please let me know.

That's because the main difference between 5.56 and .223 is in the CHAMBER of the rifle. The loads ARE interchangeable, although the military loads are a bit hotter because the 5.56 chamber has a longer throat.

I'm not about to give give anybody load data for an unknown power out of an unknown rifle to anybody that asks an obviously uneducated open ended question.

colospgsAVID · February 9, 2010, 02:24 AM

My hornady manual shows .223 "Service Rifle" data. In the text preceding the data they state 5.56x45. The bullet weights are heavy at 68 and 75 grains with an AR platform with a 1 in 9 twist. I would suggest getting this manual and reading it! The way I see it that is real 5.56 data. You gotta pay to play, ya know?

EDIT: Snuffy, isn't the brass a tad thicker for Military rounds such as 5.56? Are the primers crimped? I don't know for sure.

Uncle Buck · February 9, 2010, 12:51 PM

Lee,

If these guys seem kinda hard on you or your took their comments as roughing you up, please don't be offended.

I think Snuffy really summed it up. A lot of guys come here and ask a question that very simple research would reveal. If you do not know how to do the research ask.

Also, there are so many different types of powders that do different things at different pressures. Some need regular primers, some need magnum primers to set them off correctly.(One source that claims to be complete listed only 67 powders, probably off by at least 100.)

So if I told you, yes, you could use 26-28 grains for the 7.62x39, you would now have to figure out what powder I am talking about. An example is in the Speer reloading manual #14 (pg 567), they list eleven powders. For those powders they start anywhere from 19.0 grains to the max of 31.5 grains.

Then you have to figure out what weight projectile you want to use. I am glad you asked this question, but the question can not really be answered because you left out some much needed info. (powder type/bullet weight)

Safety is the biggest concern when reloading and none of us want to be responsible for injuring you or blowing up your guns.

rjrivero · February 9, 2010, 04:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlaskaMike

RJ, do you honestly think the original poster specified 5.56 to differentiate from .223 Remington? I interpreted his wording the same as everyone else, that he (like most others) consider 5.56 and .223 Rem. interchangeable.

Regardless, I agree with the others--he needs to crack open a manual and do some reading.

MIke

No, Mike. I don't. I just hope we can all remember that we all started loading once upon a time. I will look for that 5.56 Load data that colospgsAVID alludes to. It'll help me understand where the "max" limit is for the 5.56 chambered rifles. The criticisms of the original post are valid, but I don't want to chase off a new reloader because of a naive question. I would hope to help him keep safe while exploring his new hobby. That's all.

rjrivero · February 9, 2010, 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlaskaMike

RJ, do you honestly think the original poster specified 5.56 to differentiate from .223 Remington? I interpreted his wording the same as everyone else, that he (like most others) consider 5.56 and .223 Rem. interchangeable.

Regardless, I agree with the others--he needs to crack open a manual and do some reading.

MIke

No, Mike. I don't. I just hope we can all remember that we all started loading once upon a time. I will look for that 5.56 Load data that colospgsAVID alludes to. It'll help me understand where the "max" limit is for the 5.56 chambered rifles. The criticisms of the original post are valid, but I don't want to chase off a new reloader because of a naive question. I would hope to help him keep safe while exploring his new hobby. That's all.

Quote:

Originally Posted by snuffy

That's because the main difference between 5.56 and .223 is in the CHAMBER of the rifle. The loads ARE interchangeable, although the military loads are a bit hotter because the 5.56 chamber has a longer throat.

I realize there is a difference in the leade. They are indeed slightly different between the two. I was wondering if there are any DIES specifically designed to return a case to the specs of the 5.56 cartridge.

Clark · February 10, 2010, 01:43 PM

CAUTION: The following post includes loading data beyond currently published maximums for this cartridge. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. Neither the writer, The Firing Line, nor the staff of TFL assume any liability for any damage or injury resulting from use of this information.

The 1950 designed .222 case head was originally registered at 50,000 psi
The 5.56x45mm Nato 1963 was registered at 62,366 psi.
The .223 1964 was registered at 55,000 psi
That case head threshold of long case life is ~ 75,000 psi, making lots of excess safety margin.

The 1945 7.62x39mm Case head with Large boxer primers is nearly the weakest case head available to hand loaders, [the only ones worse are balloon head cases and 10mm handgun]. It is registered at 51,488 psi, leaving little safety margin.
So far my experiments have been unable to demonstrate the strength difference between the old Remington small primer 7.62x39mm brass and the large primer Winchester 7.62x39mm brass, but I know it is there.

What does it all mean?
1) The 5.56 cartridge is strong usually put in strong guns. It is cheap to reload and accurate, making it a rewarding endeavor for re loaders.
2) The 7.62x39 is weak and usually put in weak inaccurate guns. It is available in cheap imported ammo, leaving little incentive to reload.

LeeAdama · February 10, 2010, 04:01 PM

Thanks for the answers, but from what I'm getting the 5.56 NATO has a high powder charge than the 7.62x39.

And yes I know the difference between a 5.56 and a .223.

mkl · February 10, 2010, 05:49 PM

Okay, some (me included) have been pretty hard on you, but it really is our worry that you will try to reload without proper knowledge.

Quote:

Thanks for the answers, but from what I'm getting the 5.56 NATO has a high powder charge than the 7.62x39.

If your are talking about the weight of the powder charge, it may be true in using one type of powder, and will be the other away around using a different type of powder.

Please understand that modern "gunpowder" is not the same as "black powder." In the old days, say 1400 AD through 1870 AD or so, the only "gun powder" was black powder, and you could sort of say how much "powder charge" was needed for a specific cartridge.

Modern "smokeless" powders were invented around the end of the 19th century, and they used much different ingredients than the old black powder. The "power" of all the powder that any cartridge is loaded with today is chosen from at least 200 different formulations of smokeless powder to provide very explicit characteristics when it is set off to push a bullet out of a barrel.

For example, a powder charge of 27 grains of a powder called "Bullseye" would have so much pressure while burning it would blow up either a 5.56 or the 7.62 that you reference. Conversely, a 30 grain charge of a powder called "H870" would barely have enough pressure while burning to get the bullet pushed out the end of the barrel.

Since the old days of BLACK powder, there has been no such thing as a "standard" powder charge for any cartridge. Those days (the black powder ones) ended around 1900 AD.

Hope this helps. Please do read up on reloading before you attempt to make up any "bullets" by yourself.

Best wishes

mkl

mapsjanhere · February 10, 2010, 06:17 PM

27 gr of bullseye in a .223, anyone with quickload able to find out what the max pressure on that is?

February 8, 2010, 02:46 PM	#3
snuffy Senior Member Join Date: May 20, 2001 Location: Oshkosh wi. Posts: 3,055	You're kidding right!??¿ You are actually coming to an internet forum looking for loading data? Get a loading manual, do a lot of reading, THEN come here for further advise! __________________ The more people I meet, the more I love my dog They're going to get their butts kicked over there this election. How come people can't spell and use words correctly?

February 8, 2010, 03:26 PM	#5
jimkim Senior Member Join Date: July 3, 2008 Location: middle GA Posts: 326	If I was you, I would call the bullet manufacturer and ask them for a safe starting load using YOUR components. Before I loaded these rounds I would buy, AND read(the front part) a manual. After I understood the safety rules I would load that ammo using the starting loads given me by the tech. I know you don't want to hear that, but I prefer not to have a blind(or dead) guy on my conscience. __________________ Jan. 4, 2007 gasoline $2.10 gal....HMMM?

February 8, 2010, 04:56 PM	#6
Randy 1911 Senior Member Join Date: May 7, 2009 Location: Western Arkansas Posts: 273	Besides that, it will vary depending on what type of powder you are using. __________________ Been Reloading 27 Years NRA Member Member Old Fort Gun Club www.ofgc.org

February 8, 2010, 05:45 PM	#7
rjrivero Senior Member Join Date: November 17, 2008 Location: NW Ohio Posts: 1,399	Wow....you guys are tough. I have never seen any published load data on 5.56. You'll find that everyone loads to the SAMI standard for .223 Remington. In fact, I've never seen any commercial dies available for 5.56 either. If anyone has a source for any of these items, please let me know. Thanks. RJ

February 9, 2010, 02:24 AM	#10
colospgsAVID Senior Member Join Date: January 2, 2010 Location: Colorado Springs Posts: 188	My hornady manual shows .223 "Service Rifle" data. In the text preceding the data they state 5.56x45. The bullet weights are heavy at 68 and 75 grains with an AR platform with a 1 in 9 twist. I would suggest getting this manual and reading it! The way I see it that is real 5.56 data. You gotta pay to play, ya know? EDIT: Snuffy, isn't the brass a tad thicker for Military rounds such as 5.56? Are the primers crimped? I don't know for sure. Last edited by colospgsAVID; February 9, 2010 at 02:39 AM.

February 8, 2010, 01:59 PM	#1
LeeAdama Member Join Date: January 20, 2010 Posts: 39	Reloading military ammo. How many grains on average is the 5.56x45 NATO and 7.62x39 loaded with? Is it 26-27 grains for the 5.56 and 26-28 grains for the 7.62x39?

February 8, 2010, 02:00 PM	#2
crimsondave Senior Member Join Date: September 30, 2009 Location: North Augusta, SC Posts: 490	of what?????????

February 8, 2010, 06:13 PM	#8
AlaskaMike Senior Member Join Date: September 26, 2005 Posts: 941	RJ, do you honestly think the original poster specified 5.56 to differentiate from .223 Remington? I interpreted his wording the same as everyone else, that he (like most others) consider 5.56 and .223 Rem. interchangeable. Regardless, I agree with the others--he needs to crack open a manual and do some reading. MIke

February 9, 2010, 12:51 PM	#11
Uncle Buck Senior Member Join Date: June 21, 2009 Location: West Central Missouri Posts: 2,592	Lee, If these guys seem kinda hard on you or your took their comments as roughing you up, please don't be offended. I think Snuffy really summed it up. A lot of guys come here and ask a question that very simple research would reveal. If you do not know how to do the research ask. Also, there are so many different types of powders that do different things at different pressures. Some need regular primers, some need magnum primers to set them off correctly.(One source that claims to be complete listed only 67 powders, probably off by at least 100.) So if I told you, yes, you could use 26-28 grains for the 7.62x39, you would now have to figure out what powder I am talking about. An example is in the Speer reloading manual #14 (pg 567), they list eleven powders. For those powders they start anywhere from 19.0 grains to the max of 31.5 grains. Then you have to figure out what weight projectile you want to use. I am glad you asked this question, but the question can not really be answered because you left out some much needed info. (powder type/bullet weight) Safety is the biggest concern when reloading and none of us want to be responsible for injuring you or blowing up your guns. __________________ Inside Every Bright Idea Is The 50% Probability Of A Disaster Waiting To Happen.

February 10, 2010, 01:43 PM	#14
Clark Senior Member Join Date: December 4, 1999 Location: WA, the ever blue state Posts: 4,678	CAUTION: The following post includes loading data beyond currently published maximums for this cartridge. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. Neither the writer, The Firing Line, nor the staff of TFL assume any liability for any damage or injury resulting from use of this information. The 1950 designed .222 case head was originally registered at 50,000 psi The 5.56x45mm Nato 1963 was registered at 62,366 psi. The .223 1964 was registered at 55,000 psi That case head threshold of long case life is ~ 75,000 psi, making lots of excess safety margin. The 1945 7.62x39mm Case head with Large boxer primers is nearly the weakest case head available to hand loaders, [the only ones worse are balloon head cases and 10mm handgun]. It is registered at 51,488 psi, leaving little safety margin. So far my experiments have been unable to demonstrate the strength difference between the old Remington small primer 7.62x39mm brass and the large primer Winchester 7.62x39mm brass, but I know it is there. What does it all mean? 1) The 5.56 cartridge is strong usually put in strong guns. It is cheap to reload and accurate, making it a rewarding endeavor for re loaders. 2) The 7.62x39 is weak and usually put in weak inaccurate guns. It is available in cheap imported ammo, leaving little incentive to reload.

February 10, 2010, 04:01 PM	#15
LeeAdama Member Join Date: January 20, 2010 Posts: 39	Thanks for the answers, but from what I'm getting the 5.56 NATO has a high powder charge than the 7.62x39. And yes I know the difference between a 5.56 and a .223.

February 10, 2010, 06:17 PM	#17
mapsjanhere Senior Member Join Date: August 6, 2009 Location: Albuquerque Posts: 2,832	27 gr of bullseye in a .223, anyone with quickload able to find out what the max pressure on that is? __________________ I used to love being able to hit hard at 1000 yards. As I get older I find hitting a mini ram at 200 yards with the 22 oddly more satisfying.