I'm trying to put a load together using Prvi 62 grain FMJ .224's in a .223 for my AR. I loaded 24 grains and was very disappointed. The accuracy was dismal and the load was anemic, it cycled, but weakly.


Ramshot's data seems to suck. In the 4.2 manual they do not list a 62 grain. They list (max loads with TAC) a 68 with 25.5 grains, and a 69 with 25.2 grains. In the following manual they list 24.1 grains for the 68 and 24.1 for the 69. Sound like some lawyer crap to me.

The 4.3 manual lists 24.5 grains max with a 62 grain Berger. 24 grains was weak with the Prvi and I don't expect much more with 24.5 grains. I have read of people using 26 grains with the 62 grain FMJ, which sounds more like it.

The thing is I have 8 pounds of this TAC crap and 1000 bullets, because it came so highly recommended, I need to get them to shoot. I'm thinking the manual is all screwed up.

From Steve's reloading pages(you must read the disclaimer, as always) TAC is listed with bullets 60-63 grs at 21.8-25.8 grs. What did the primers look like? Did the Brass get miked for expansion? Have you miked factory brass as a starting point? Seems like you've got room to grow if you check stuff. Checked other manuals? Good luck stevek(not associated w/Steve's reloading pages)

Given that they publish pressure readings with their load data, I'm guessing that that's what's determining the data, not a lawyer. Maybe try a different(hotter) primer? What velocity were you getting? Not sure how many fps anemic is. Have the Privi bullets worked well with other powders?

What sucks about Ramshots data? It's always been pretty accurate in every cartridge I've tried.

Jeff

Try 25 and 26 grains. Most Ramshot powder (and indeed any modern powder) tends to work better closer to maximum.

What I would guess is that due to the bullet pressures are lower than ideal.

I just loaded 25.5 grains. The original load was weak, cycled slow and didn't toss the brass far, just kind of fell out

This gun chucks brass when shooting M193 and cycles strong. I can't feel the cycle with M193, but I sure could with the load I tried. It was like I was on the edge of not fully cycling.

Tac has a burn speed between H335 and H4895. The max load for H335 is 26 grains. I feeling ok with this load. A round or two will tell. I've been loading for 32 years now, always have figured right.

Or, you could try good old 748.

I love the smell of burning cat piss in the morning

I wouldn't expect anything close to match accuracy from the privi bullets. They are barely ok for blasting ammo, and that is about it...so that could be most of your problem right there.

You might have a slow lot of TAC, but without some chrono data you are shooting in the dark...as one might say.

TAC works well with heavier match bullets like the 77 Sierra or 75 Hornady, giving good velocity numbers and match accuracy. Try one of those or a 69 and you should have better luck.

TC

I haven't been real impressed with TAC in .223 either. I heard how clean and accurate it is in other calibers, but just haven't seen it in .223. It's one of the dirtiest powders I've ever used in .223 and I don't get the accuracy out of it that I get with Re15, Varget, 748 or even WC844.

I think I'll run it through a 308 FAL.

In my 223/223AI I find TAC needing about .3 more to equal H335 in 40/50 gr. bullet weights.
My custom tubed 223AI with 40's and 50's did not shoot well with TAC and that was over the whole incremental load work up over a chronograph to as high a velocity as I felt comfortable.
X-terminator on the other hand shot tiny knots over the course of load work up and is one of the few cases I've seen such a drastic difference between powders. I say that knowing Mule Deer wrote once Tac and X-Terminator are so close that X-Terminator might just be a little faster burning lot of TAC.
TAC in my son's custom AR 15 shoots as good as my custom bolt guns. You can conjecture all you want from what others say about how a powder will perform but until you try you don't know and the issue likely isn't a powder problem so much as a compatibility issue. Your a little quick to jump on TAC. YMMV.

for 55 gr, 24.5 is a mid-range load good for just plinking I'd say. I run 25 in mine all the time and it functions wellfor just run of the mill ammo

for the 62 gr. Ss109 bullet many folks are using 25, 25.5 and 26gr for it.


for my DPMS M4, 25.5 shoots the 109s just fine. The ss109s I have all came from wideners so they may be PRVIs

I guess I'm in the minority here. I was really impressed the first time I ever used it...burned clean for me & chrono'd exactly where I figured it would with all five bullets I used the last time I was at the range.
I used the Barnes # 4 for reference & velocities were very consistant & in line with the published data.
Rifle used was 20" AR.

Funny.....just this weekend I tried 24.5gr with 62gr TSX in my T3.

It was a little cool at around 40 degrees but my velocity was about 200 fps less then what the barnes data suggests at 2850fps. Three shots grouped about 2.5"!!!

55gr BTs with 26gr were running about 3100fps and could be covered with a nickel.

I think powders burn cleaner at the higher operating pressures, say up around 60k psi, don't they???

If so, when TAC is burning dirty it probably needs a bit more to up the pressure and get it to clean itself up.

The other factor is, of course, that rifles vary. In one of my .223's Varget works better than TAC with heavy bullets--but in all three of my .223's (a sporter-weight bolt with a 1-9 twist, a heavy-barrel bolt with a 1-12 twist, and 16" AR with a 1-9x twist) 26.0 grains of TAC and a 50-grain bullet works as well as anything else, and far better than most.

I have mentioned this before, but it probably bears repeating: I have found all the Ramshot rifle powders work far better when at maximum pressures. By this I don't mean pushing the limits, but at 60,000 psi or so. At lower pressures they burn dirtier and accuracy normally isn't all that great.

The 223 is a 55K cartridge right?

That's the SAAMI rating, but CIP is 62,000. And pressure rating is always approximate, due to measuring differences. For instance the .22-250 has a lower CIP rating than it's SAAMI rating--though theoretically the ammo is loaded to the same pressure.

Could the primer have something to do with dirty burning?

John, is there a particular primer you prefer with your TAC 223 loads? I started with WSR and have recently moved to CCI450s since that was about all I could find at the time. I have not noticed any difference.

A few of us around here, north central Washington, all shoot .223 Rem with 77 MK's over 23.6 of Tac, very accurate past 600 in our AR-15's 8 and 9 twist heavy barrels.

Been running 26.5 with Hornady 50 VMax and 26.0 with Sierra 55 Spitzers and getting great accuracy in a M700 VS and an older Kimber of O Model 84. I use Rem 7 1/2 (preferred) but switched to WSR when the 7 1/2's ran low and I can't really tell a difference. But then Winchester primers are supposed to be fairly hot anyway.

Am also getting almost exactly the speed Ramshot lists for TAC with the 150 Hornady SP in a 22" M700 .308. Loading their top load of 46.5 grains and getting right at 2890 fps with really excellent accuracy as well. Using Fed 210's with that load in the .308.

Ruger280,

I use CCI BR4's, the target version of the CCI 400 small rifle primer.

if you like to shoot 62 grain bullets, figure out what the military uses for its 62 grain green tip ball ammo, I have pulled those bullets and seated a 60 grain vmax and gotten spectacular speeds, well at least for a 60 grain bullet. the green tip ball ammo shoots horrible, but if you put a decent bullet on, it can shoot very accurately

Cummins, have you ever weighed the charge?

I wonder if it is a military version of H335?

I prefer TAC over anything else I have tried in small cases. I won a BR match with it a few years ago. If you keep it hot, it burns very clean. I have had great luck with it in 22-250 with 40 grain bullets and .222 with 40 and 50 grain bullets. That pretty well splits it. Xterminator is definitely faster than TAC.

I have never loaded TAC for a gas gun but have for a bolt .223 and it didn't disappoint. Wasn't loading heavy bullets though. I think I was running around 28.5 with the 40s and 27.5 with the 50s. This stuff is money! It is way better than 748.

Back 30 years ago I used the old Speer #9 manual when I started loading. In that manual you had better work the load up. I started loading 222 rem and used win 748. I ended up about .3 grains less than max, and that was still pushing it a little. Todays manual shows a max charge of 2 grains less with that powder. Yet it shows the same pressure. The differance is that back them they expected that you would act responcibly and be responcible for what you do. Not today, with all the lawyers and people sueing for what is their fault, these reloading people know their arse is in the wind.

What I believe they do now is build the test barrels to absolute minimun specs in both chamber and bore. Believe me when I say, My DPMS is not minimum spec. My custom 284 winchester is in fact has a minimum spec chamber, and it tops out with a 168gr match bullet and H4831sc at 1.7 grains less than max.


I striped the DPMS down for cleaning after only 40 rounds of that load I made, it was filthy. Ball powders never seem to burn well below near maximum pressures. They burn dirty and inconsistantly. When I made this load I noted that it was only 80-85% of case capacity, I knew that was going to be a problem. In a best case situation, ball powders work best with a full case, or even a little compression.

I'm going to test the bullets now. I'll load a few with Varget and see if it makes much differance. Except I need a load for Varget and a 62 grain bullet.

Crosshair,

The big difference between loading manuals today and several decades ago (when I also started loading) is that today's manuals are based on pressure-tested data. In the 1960's most of them were still worked up by adding powder until the rifle and ammo showed signs of real distress, then the load was backed off a little.

Other than that, there is no overall pattern to the data presented in today's manuals. Some (including Nosler and Ramshot) show the data they got from their pressure barrels. Others work up loads in pressure barrels and then chronograph it in sporters, which often results in low velocities.

There is also a much bigger difference in bullets today than there used to be. Fory years ago most of the bullets available resulted in about the same amount of pressure. You could use Sierra data to load Winchester or Hiornady bullets and not get in a lot of trouble. But the wide variety of bullets today makes it advisable to use data worked up for the specific bullet being loaded--or at least something as similar as possible.

I've worked up loads for quite a few cartridge/Ramshot powder combinations using a chronograph to see how velocity was coming along. I came to the conclusion that Ramshot's data is usually very close to being spot on.

24.5 grains of TAC and a 62 grain TSX shot fine in my gas gun, 47 grains shoots fine in a 308 under a 130TTSX

The velocity, as long as it's reasonable, is not really important. Accuracy is though, and I'm only asking about 2 moa out of this gun, otherwise I would have bought high dollar bullets. I have a RRA NM for the real accurate stuff. This is a run and gun rifle. Still, 5 moa + is not acceptable.

I am beginning to suspect more and more that this is a bullet problem, not a powder problem.

There is nothing wrong with the Prvi bullet as a run of the mil type. I've shot some prvi loads useing that bullet and get 2 moa or so. When I open the gun up and find it filthy after only 40 rounds it is a powder problem, simply didn't burn right, especially in the cold. If it burns dirty then it figures to have burned inconsistantly. I kicked the pressure up, we will see soon. well, as soon as it warms up a little, I'm getting too old to like shooting in 20 degree weather.

always interesting to see the newer folks get tripped up... the more years you have loading the more it'll all make more sense.

If I'd have done the same thing, complain, when I first shot N540 I'd have quit right there, snooped a bit, found the loads needed to be hotter and boom... tight groups, high speeds and acceptable pressure.

TAC is one of the best 223 powders for heavier bullets, IE its SUPER with 77s... have no clue on the 62s but I'd say you are weak as noted...

Varget and 62s... 25.5 should be really safe I'd think.. I"d be guessing you could shoot over 26 depending on the lot....

What you have to understand is that there are so many variables... brass, chambers, barrels, lots of powder, primers, etc... a 62 is not just the same.. IE some are steel penetrators, some not, same weight bullets some have more or less bearing surface and so on.

The best you can do is learn to read pressure signs and move forward from there.
Especially in an AR, rim lifts are not always a sign,cratered or flat primers not always, but a smear of the ejector usually is a sign that I try to avoid...

Jeff

So unique always burns inconsistently? I for a fact, have quite a few loads with surplus ball powder that are dirty, but win many matches I shoot in and are extremely uniform and accurate....

There isn't anything new about reloading to me. When I put that load together I looked in that case and saw the low desity load and figured it would be not good. And I was right! The only reason I try a ball powder is for speed sake, otherwise they are mostly all stick powders. The best powder for 223 is Varget, my RRA NM shoots Varget and 50-60 grain V-Max bullets into the same hole.

While I didn't figure that first load would be great, I sure didn't expect it to be that bad.

SSSHHHHH!!!!! That stuff is hard enough to find the way it is and hense the reason TAC is getting so popular. Ramshot powders in general are VERY available. At least through mail order, I can't get it locally.

Can a civilian ship powder? Or do you need an explosives license to ship powder?

I might be willing to take that dirty, inaccurate TAC off your hands, if so.

Sycamore

I pushed the Hornady 75 BTHP to 2780 in a 16" RRA barrel with TAC. It was the fastest vel I got that bullet. Don't try this without LOTS of experience and case head mic'ing as this is in NATO pressure area and one can get hurt.

Alan

But how was the accuracy?

Were Varget, RL15, and H4895 in this test as well?

I would love to make a 68 or 75 hornady hp sing!

I didn't say it was dirty and inaccurate in general, just at that load level. At NATO load levels it might be fine. Kind of like burning diesel in an engin with too low compression.

Crosshair, is your AR a standard 223 chamber? If it isn't that may account for the lower pressure/velocity.

Curious to see how your higher charge levels improve your outcome.

It's this one



Panther� A3 Lite 16

16" Length w/ A2 flash hider (birdcage)
4140 chrome-moly steel light contour barrel
6 grooves, right-hand 1x9 twist,
button rifled

Chamber: 5.56x45mm

so with all your experience you put together a load you knew probably wouldn't work and then were amazed?

I dunno, and its not a flame, but it just doesn't make sense to make that statement.

I know that the only way I do load work is an audette test.. anything else to start with is a waste of time and components.

TAC with 77s was by FAR the best choice when load work was done on multiple rifles for NTIT ammo. I was surprised at that, test included varget,RL15 and N540. N540 was right there too, but many folks do not like to use it. Team settled on TAC as it ran as fast or faster than the rest, clean, and very accurate. If I had to pick for pure speed I'd think N540, but its supposedly changed so much since I shot any of it, that I might well doubt it these days.

No, not amazed, suprized at how bad it was. I wasn't ready for 5" + groups.

Hi crossair,

TAC is an euro powder, we use in France and Belgium but under another name, when i was shooting AR15, AUG and Sig rifles in 5,56x45 i used to load them rather warm close to Mule Deer spec using 60grs bullets, load was 26,3grs and a CCI250 SRmagnum primer, burning was complete and barrel clean, accuracy was really good particulary with the Sig, speed close to 2950fps. Generaly sphericals like to be loaded at hi density, close to max and are not well adapted to mild loads. Try the mag primers, sometimes it helps even with small capacity cases.

Dom

Ruger280,

If this question was meant for me, yes I did include your powders plus W748. I settled on H4895. It was a bit slower, 2750, but more accurate. I use LC 2001 and newer brass, match prepped, WSR primers (older nickel plated style to hold up to higher pressures) FL size with Forster and seated with same brand die. At 20 deg F, I can keep 10 in 10" @ 600 yds in a 16" RRA 1:9 twist barrel using a 2x compact ACOG. It have no doubt it's not match accurte but It's my EOTWAWKI load for zombies; aka, home brewed MK262 load.

Alan

Nice weapon.

The 5.56 chambering definitely has a longer lead then your normal 223 chamber and will reduce pressure. Bumping up the charge will be your ticket I'd bet.

H4895 is a great powder for 223 it seems. I wish it were any easier to find then Varget.

Just confirming what's already been said. I've gotten to really like TAC but for it to really work, it needs to be ran at top accetable pressures. This is a geat powder for 75 to 77 gr bullets in the 5.56 loads.

My personal experience, with heavier bullets in 223 is that either of teh 4895s are accurate but as mentioned on the slow side. Much like 4064, very accurate, way to slow.

Truth be known, I've never loaded for a 5.56 chamber. Some for my RRA NM, but maybe I got lucky there. In fact my loading for semi auto rifles is very limted. Always I shot bolts. I guess this ain't my daddy's 223.

Me and the boys have loaded 4,500 rds of .223 using TAC and I'm about to do another 1K and one bud has 500 more to finish his session out for a while....

Yep we like TAC!

Mike

My .223 Rem. sporter shoots 45 gr. TSX bullets in ragged holes with Rem. brass. federal small rifle primer and 27.5 gr. TAC.

Not the powder's fault. I found a nice load with it right away in 223.
Prvi factory ammo isn't super accurate, either. So I wouldn't expect the bullets to be, um, like Bergers.

OK, I shot the 25.5 grain load today. The groups were less than half of what they were before. The rifle ate it fine, no pressure signs. Groups ran 2" to 2.5"(Irons). I don't know if I hit the bullets limit.

I'm going to load it again. This time I will shoot it in my RRA NM to factor in another rifle. Then I'll shoot some loaded with 26 grains of varget, through both the DPMS and the Rock River.

I think I'll load a few with TAC at 25.7 grains in the DPMS.

I'm wondering if a free float tube would help the DPMS.

I just loaded up a bunch with X-Terminator but haven't had a chance to try them out yet. Did I do wrong? Is TAC better?

X Terminator is a great powder for lighter .223 loads. It is about perfect for .223 with 40-55 grain bullets. I bought a couple of cans at a close out sale for half price and loaded them up. They shot really well in my sons ARs. I have since gone to Tac because of its versatility.

Thanks. My main interest is shooting 50 gr. Barnes VG.

Way back, when I got my first.223 700V and put an 8x Weaver on it I was a religious follower of Ken Waters (on somethings). H4895 was a chosen high velocity with great accuracy recipe listed in "Pet Loads"with 50gr Sierra spitzers. 3500 +fps,it did shoot great ,nice groups and fast but that powder goes thru a Uniflow like Lincoln logs. In recent years H335 and 748 have been used successfully.Now in the process of preparing about 7000 casings for a new new batch of 223's I have procured TAC and MR223 to try test loads with.Some with heavier bullets and some with 50-55 gr bullets as I now have an R-15 to feed as well as a different 700V. This is a great and informative thread for me ,Thanks Magnum-Man

I can say this much, if you take 75 Hornady BTHP bullets and push them as hard as its safe to do, you'll loose accuracy, I dont' recall the velocity figures but the 75 amax would hold up to hard push, the BTHP would not. Thats been some years back though, things change... I know at that time I could find amax that sucked and if i measured the OAL of the projectile, the press got slop and they were not quite totally formed... I had that date written somewhere too in a box...

Jeff

Anyone here running TAC in a 204 Ruger?

Yes. Works great.

Not at the moment but did for 2+ years.

I had a great experience as well.

Thanks, I just picked up a VTR and I'm getting it set up.

I'll start off with some Sierra 32's.

When I put the first load together, 24 grains Tac and a 62 grain Prvi bullet, and shot 5" plus groups, I knew it could do much better. The 25.5 grain load cut it down by 2/3 to 1/2.

So now I'll evaluate the bullet. I'll shoot that load in the RRA NM, because it is a proven platform. Then I'll shoot a Varget load because that powder has proven it's self to me. I should be able to get sufficiant data to make a reasonable evaluation.

Ok, I shot the same 25.5 grain load in my RRA NM. 100 yards iron sights bench. A horizontal group 1.25 inches wide with very little verticle dispertion. That was probably my fault. So the bullet os ok, now to look at the rifle. Thinking free float.