223 55gr Sierra Gamekings

[Witty4740]

Hey new to reloading and have bought some ADI2206h powder along with 55gr Sierra SBT Gameking (#1365) projectiles and CCI BR4 primers, question is, in the ADI hand-loaders guide on their website that exact projectile is not listed so should I just use the info for the closest sounding one which is the 55gr SPR SP?

It states starting charge of 25.0grs and maximum of 26.0grs, so should I just work up in increments of 0.2grs from 25.0? Also I'm just reloading my once fired ADI/OSA/PPU brass
.

Cheers Chris

[sungazer]

I started load testing at 23 grns of 2206H found a good spot at about 23.6 and another at 25.4. Much past that and you will be compressing and probably getting into pressure areas.

[JimTom]

I am far from being a guru reloader and won’t tell you what’s right or wrong, however I followed some advice given to me and have reloaded using projectiles not specifically listed in the ADI load data.
In addition I work loads up in 0.5gn increments.

[Dreamcaster51]

Hi Whitty4740
I shoot a Howa 1500 223 with a 9 twist. The most accurate load I have ever used in this rifle is
23.9 2206h behind a 55gn Sierra super roo. Same projectile Ibelive but sold in 1000 lots for pro roo shooters. I love em!

[Cooper]

I run 25.5gr of AR2206H in ADI case. 26 was starting to flatten primer. I like the the Sierra Gameking - mainly because they are cheap. But they also shoot accurately.

They are a fairly tuff bullet reconmended for use in 220 swift and 22-250.

I find ballistic tips preform better on thin skinned game as they expand faster. But they game kings work pretty well out of my Howa mini action with 1-9 twist (20in barrel) 25.5 is good for 3080fps. I've also heard the game kings preform better out of new barrel for some reason??? Not sure how true that is?

[anacrolix]

I've just started using these in front of 25 gr BM2. Very accurate. Good penetration to make up for the 223's lack of power.

[Flyer]

Hey new to reloading and have bought some ADI2206h powder along with 55gr Sierra SBT Gameking (#1365) projectiles and CCI BR4 primers, question is, in the ADI hand-loaders guide on their website that exact projectile is not listed so should I just use the info for the closest sounding one which is the 55gr SPR SP?

It states starting charge of 25.0grs and maximum of 26.0grs, so should I just work up in increments of 0.2grs from 25.0? Also I'm just reloading my once fired ADI/OSA/PPU brass
.

Cheers Chris

The Sierra and Speer bullets are pretty much identical, so the loads will be the same.

I start with a 0.4gr spread. Once I find a node, then I split the difference between the best group and the next best (up/down 0.2gr) to see if it improves. You can split the difference again (up/down 0.1gr) if you're keen, but I've found that 0.1gr usually doesn't make a big difference. It's also the margin of error for my electronic powder thrower.

[Kelsey Cooter]

The original question never really got a direct answer, and I am now wondering the same thing, will I use the speer soft point data for the sierra super roo? I notice the speer isn't boat tailed so won't it be totally different to the boat tailed super roo?

The powders ill be starting with are 2208 and BM2

[AZZA'S HJ47]

I use 23g of 8208 with the super roo proj and from all the experience ive had with them for the price point there is very little that i can say is bad about the super roos

[deanp100]

If they are the same weight just run them, especially if you are using minimum loads

[deanp100]

.

[Member-Deleted]

The original question never really got a direct answer, and I am now wondering the same thing, will I use the speer soft point data for the sierra super roo? I notice the speer isn't boat tailed so won't it be totally different to the boat tailed super roo?

The powders ill be starting with are 2208 and BM2

KC
flat base [Speer] vs boat tail [Sierra] might make a difference to the accuracy achieved at long distances. it will make no meaningful difference to reloading since they're the identical weight and very similar shapes. a flat base vs a boat tail won't change pressures (at least not in a .223) to any degree that would be a concern. use the Speer data for your chosen powder, start a grain under minimum and work up in increments towards the ADI stated max load. find the sweet spot that makes your rifle a shooter.

[PM3010]

I am new to reloading and take great interest in this thread. I am in the process of developing a load for my 223 with Super roo (55gr Sierra SBT Gameking (#1365) projectiles). It is very interesting reading what various people do and choices they make. I’m not sitting in judgement, just very interested. From what I gather reloading is a very personal, with the aim of developing a load that suits the rifle and the situation. Thanks to those who have passed on knowledge.

[No1Mk3]

G'day Witty4740,
The design of a jacketed projectile is pretty much irrelevant as regards load data, soft point, flat point spire point flat base or boat tail, the data is based only on bullet mass. Data for 55g projectiles is the same foe ALL 55g projectiles, but if you find yourself in a position where the weight is not listed then use data for the next HEAVIEST projie than what you have and you will always be on the safe side, Cheers.

[mikejay]

G'day Witty4740,
The design of a jacketed projectile is pretty much irrelevant as regards load data, soft point, flat point spire point flat base or boat tail, the data is based only on bullet mass. Data for 55g projectiles is the same foe ALL 55g projectiles, but if you find yourself in a position where the weight is not listed then use data for the next HEAVIEST projie than what you have and you will always be on the safe side, Cheers.

New to reloading, will be reloading 223, thank you so much for the info. As a newb this is one of my 1st questions, I was sending myself round the twist (pun intended) trying to source load data that wasn't there.

[Yes]

G'day Witty4740,
The design of a jacketed projectile is pretty much irrelevant as regards load data, soft point, flat point spire point flat base or boat tail, the data is based only on bullet mass. Data for 55g projectiles is the same foe ALL 55g projectiles, but if you find yourself in a position where the weight is not listed then use data for the next HEAVIEST projie than what you have and you will always be on the safe side, Cheers.

Sorry to drag up an old thread but a lot of people come to the site for info (perhaps without joining) and read what can be erroneous information.

According to ADI, bullet shape/type is extremely important to powder loads. There's discrepancies all over the place, but for ease, let's just use the 55g projectile the OP was asking about, and ADI AR2206H powder recommendations:

55 GR. Barnes TSX Flat Base: 21-22.6g
55 GR. Sinterfire: 22-24.6g
55 GR. Speer Soft Point: 25-26g

Basically a 5 grain spread across the 55g projectile types; according to ADI, at least, you should take into consideration the bullet type - not just weight.

[bladeracer]

Sorry to drag up an old thread but a lot of people come to the site for info (perhaps without joining) and read what can be erroneous information.

According to ADI, bullet shape/type is extremely important to powder loads. There's discrepancies all over the place, but for ease, let's just use the 55g projectile the OP was asking about, and ADI AR2206H powder recommendations:

55 GR. Barnes TSX Flat Base: 21-22.6g
55 GR. Sinterfire: 22-24.6g
55 GR. Speer Soft Point: 25-26g

Basically a 5 grain spread across the 55g projectile types; according to ADI, at least, you should take into consideration the bullet type - not just weight.

I don't know what the Sinterfire is but the TSX is a monolithic copper bullet, very different to a copper-jacketed lead core. Sinterfire is lead-free so I suspect it is also monolithic. The Speer is a copper-jacketed lead-core bullet

Perhaps if you understood the bullets you are discussing you would better understand the load data.

Regardless of the load data any manufacturer offers, it it always just a guide. It has no reference to what maximum loads will be in your specific firearm loaded by your specific techniques.

[Yes]

Sorry to drag up an old thread but a lot of people come to the site for info (perhaps without joining) and read what can be erroneous information.

According to ADI, bullet shape/type is extremely important to powder loads. There's discrepancies all over the place, but for ease, let's just use the 55g projectile the OP was asking about, and ADI AR2206H powder recommendations:

55 GR. Barnes TSX Flat Base: 21-22.6g
55 GR. Sinterfire: 22-24.6g
55 GR. Speer Soft Point: 25-26g

Basically a 5 grain spread across the 55g projectile types; according to ADI, at least, you should take into consideration the bullet type - not just weight.

Perhaps if you understood the bullets you are discussing you would better understand the load data.

I think that's the point I was trying to make? Not all bullets are equal based simply off the weight?

[bladeracer]

The relevant differences between jacketed lead bullets are primarily the bearing surface, which dictates how much friction the bullet has to overcome in the bore, and the shape of the ogive, which is only really important to prevent jamming the bullet into the rifling. So generally you can use all load data given for a 55gn jacketed bullet of similar shape. You _may_ want to change the load for a VLD or a very blunt round nose (due to less and greater bearing surface), but the differences to the firearm will be almost unmeasurable.

[bladeracer]

Sorry to drag up an old thread but a lot of people come to the site for info (perhaps without joining) and read what can be erroneous information.

According to ADI, bullet shape/type is extremely important to powder loads. There's discrepancies all over the place, but for ease, let's just use the 55g projectile the OP was asking about, and ADI AR2206H powder recommendations:

55 GR. Barnes TSX Flat Base: 21-22.6g
55 GR. Sinterfire: 22-24.6g
55 GR. Speer Soft Point: 25-26g

Basically a 5 grain spread across the 55g projectile types; according to ADI, at least, you should take into consideration the bullet type - not just weight.

Perhaps if you understood the bullets you are discussing you would better understand the load data.

I think that's the point I was trying to make? Not all bullets are equal based simply off the weight?

Read the post you took issue with. It specifically refers to jacketed bullets only...

[Yes]

Sorry to drag up an old thread but a lot of people come to the site for info (perhaps without joining) and read what can be erroneous information.

According to ADI, bullet shape/type is extremely important to powder loads. There's discrepancies all over the place, but for ease, let's just use the 55g projectile the OP was asking about, and ADI AR2206H powder recommendations:

55 GR. Barnes TSX Flat Base: 21-22.6g
55 GR. Sinterfire: 22-24.6g
55 GR. Speer Soft Point: 25-26g

Basically a 5 grain spread across the 55g projectile types; according to ADI, at least, you should take into consideration the bullet type - not just weight.

Perhaps if you understood the bullets you are discussing you would better understand the load data.

I think that's the point I was trying to make? Not all bullets are equal based simply off the weight?

Read the post you took issue with. It specifically refers to jacketed bullets only...

No, the post emphasised ALL 55g projectiles. Perhaps have a reread.

[bladeracer]

No, the post emphasised ALL 55g projectiles. Perhaps have a reread.

"G'day Witty4740,
The design of a jacketed projectile is pretty much irrelevant as regards load data, soft point, flat point spire point flat base or boat tail, the data is based only on bullet mass. Data for 55g projectiles is the same foe ALL 55g projectiles, but if you find yourself in a position where the weight is not listed then use data for the next HEAVIEST projie than what you have and you will always be on the safe side, Cheers."

His second statement about all 55gn bullets is a generalisation, but is still valid.
We are discussing load data, not actual testing in a specific firearm.
All load data are generalised, the people providing the data have no control of any of the external influences over those data. Also, do not regard ADI data as accurate, I don't believe they do any significant testing, merely use computer modeling.

For examp[le, Barnes' load data is 25.8gn of AR2206H (IMR4895)

Barnes .223 TSX data.JPG (44.89 KiB) Viewed 12981 times

Load the three bullets in your own rifle, using your own methods, and see what data you get from it yourself.

I happen to have received TSX and TTSX bullets today in the mail and will be testing them shortly, but in 7mm. I can test 120gn VMax alongside 120gn TSX but those are the only two I have of identical weight.

[Yes]

No, the post emphasised ALL 55g projectiles. Perhaps have a reread.

"G'day Witty4740,
The design of a jacketed projectile is pretty much irrelevant as regards load data, soft point, flat point spire point flat base or boat tail, the data is based only on bullet mass. Data for 55g projectiles is the same foe ALL 55g projectiles, but if you find yourself in a position where the weight is not listed then use data for the next HEAVIEST projie than what you have and you will always be on the safe side, Cheers."

His second statement about all 55gn bullets is a generalisation, but is still valid.
We are discussing load data, not actual testing in a specific firearm.
All load data are generalised, the people providing the data have no control of any of the external influences over those data. Also, do not regard ADI data as accurate, I don't believe they do any significant testing, merely use computer modeling.

For examp[le, Barnes' load data is 25.8gn of AR2206H (IMR4895)

Barnes .223 TSX data.JPG

Load the three bullets in your own rifle, using your own methods, and see what data you get from it yourself.

I happen to have received TSX and TTSX bullets today in the mail and will be testing them shortly, but in 7mm. I can test 120gn VMax alongside 120gn TSX but those are the only two I have of identical weight.

I agree in theory. But having starting points for min and Max loads is vital and is bullet profile specific, not solely weight specific. Or a better way to put it, powder loads are bullet profile and weight specific (whether for safety or performance).

I'd also argue that minimum starting points are also as important as maximums.. And yes, my own experiences with hand gun loads tell me there is likely a good spread in either direction to remain "safe". But you wouldn't want to be loading up super low loads (projectile may not make it out of the barrel) in the same way you wouldn't want to go super high and get a kaboom.

[bladeracer]

I agree in theory. But having starting points for min and Max loads is vital and is bullet profile specific, not solely weight specific. Or a better way to put it, powder loads are bullet profile and weight specific (whether for safety or performance).

I'd also argue that minimum starting points are also as important as maximums.. And yes, my own experiences with hand gun loads tell me there is likely a good spread in either direction to remain "safe". But you wouldn't want to be loading up super low loads (projectile may not make it out of the barrel) in the same way you wouldn't want to go super high and get a kaboom.

Very few manufacturers list minimum load data, it is usually only listed in very specific circumstances, generally reduced loads of very slow powders, in large cases, with heavy bullets. Unless it is specifically stated not to reduce it they are just random starting loads, not minimum loads.

I load up lots of super-low loads that often don't make it out the barrel, it doesn't cause any problems. Generally I find the squib levels to be in the vicinity of 300fps to be able to make it out the muzzle - that's in anything from .22LR to .303.

I rarely load anything up to the point of seeing pressure signs, other than when I'm trying to determine where the high-water mark is. And yet some of my loads exceed ADI maximum loads, with zero pressure indicators.

Bullet weight is _by far_ the primary factor for charge weights, regardless of bullet design.

[JimTom]

G'day Witty4740,
The design of a jacketed projectile is pretty much irrelevant as regards load data, soft point, flat point spire point flat base or boat tail, the data is based only on bullet mass. Data for 55g projectiles is the same foe ALL 55g projectiles, but if you find yourself in a position where the weight is not listed then use data for the next HEAVIEST projie than what you have and you will always be on the safe side, Cheers.

Sorry to drag up an old thread but a lot of people come to the site for info (perhaps without joining) and read what can be erroneous information.

According to ADI, bullet shape/type is extremely important to powder loads. There's discrepancies all over the place, but for ease, let's just use the 55g projectile the OP was asking about, and ADI AR2206H powder recommendations:

55 GR. Barnes TSX Flat Base: 21-22.6g
55 GR. Sinterfire: 22-24.6g
55 GR. Speer Soft Point: 25-26g

Basically a 5 grain spread across the 55g projectile types; according to ADI, at least, you should take into consideration the bullet type - not just weight.

G’day mate, this direct from the ADI website FAQ.

What if my bullet isn’t listed?
If your particular brand of bullet is not listed in our reloading data, you should refer to the data for the bullet that is most similar in structure and design to yours. E.g. A Nosler BT is a lead core spitzer so you can refer to the Speer SP as a guide for your load development.

[bladeracer]

As you can see now, the data listed for the monolithic copper TSX is 25.8gn of IMR4895 (AR2206H in Oz) making 3171fps (not the incorrect 22.6gn offered by ADI). It correlates very closely with ADI's 26gn of AR2206H (IMR4895 in the US) for 3315fps with the 55gn Speer SP - two _very_ different bullet designs.

Speer's data is 25.5gn of IMR4895 at 3246fps. Note also Speer does not differentiate bewteen their two different 55gn bullet designs, the same data are for the TNT and the SP.

Speer 55gn data.JPG (117.48 KiB) Viewed 12971 times

[Yes]

I agree in theory. But having starting points for min and Max loads is vital and is bullet profile specific, not solely weight specific. Or a better way to put it, powder loads are bullet profile and weight specific (whether for safety or performance).

I'd also argue that minimum starting points are also as important as maximums.. And yes, my own experiences with hand gun loads tell me there is likely a good spread in either direction to remain "safe". But you wouldn't want to be loading up super low loads (projectile may not make it out of the barrel) in the same way you wouldn't want to go super high and get a kaboom.

Very few manufacturers list minimum load data, it is usually only listed in very specific circumstances, generally reduced loads of very slow powders, in large cases, with heavy bullets. Unless it is specifically stated not to reduce it they are just random starting loads, not minimum loads.

I load up lots of super-low loads that often don't make it out the barrel, it doesn't cause any problems. Generally I find the squib levels to be in the vicinity of 300fps to be able to make it out the muzzle - that's in anything from .22LR to .303.

I rarely load anything up to the point of seeing pressure signs, other than when I'm trying to determine where the high-water mark is. And yet some of my loads exceed ADI maximum loads, with zero pressure indicators.

Bullet weight is _by far_ the primary factor for charge weights, regardless of bullet design.

You don't shoot semi-auto handgun then. Double tapping a Glock that starts with a Squib would be a day you wouldn't forget.

Best case scenario, you need a new gun... Worst case, well, you can imagine.

We'll have to agree to disagree on the projectile profile... I prefer to be thorough and account for all controllable variables when it comes to reloading. Most data I consult also provides min and max - which we can both agree on, are good starting points, but are just that - starting points.

[bladeracer]

You don't shoot semi-auto handgun then. Double tapping a Glock that starts with a Squib would be a day you wouldn't forget.

Best case scenario, you need a new gun... Worst case, well, you can imagine.

We'll have to agree to disagree on the projectile profile... I prefer to be thorough and account for all controllable variables when it comes to reloading. Most data I consult also provides min and max - which we can both agree on, are good starting points, but are just that - starting points.

I shot IPSC with pistols for thirteen years, but have never used a Glock. I would not be double-tapping any load during reduced load development. Generally a semi-auto pistol squib won't cycle to allow a second shot, it usually requires the user to ignore the issue and deliberately chamber a second round and fire it. Making it a user failure, not an ammo or firearm failure.

You need to get out of the mindset that any source of load data is gospel, it is ALL just generalised options to give inexperienced reloaders some guidelines to get them started, that is all it is. With some experience you will find you no longer even bother looking for load data from other people, you can just generate your own through your own testing.

[marksman]

quite interesting read so far

l am leaning more on Blades way of thinking though as after having quickload for many years now and reloading for many different rifle rounds, custom fitted chambers, sloppy sammi factory chambers and many wildcats that there is no data for (but l cannot talk about handgun at all sorry)
what Balde has said earlier is IMHO the truth "Regardless of the load data any manufacturer offers, it it always just a guide. It has no reference to what maximum loads will be in your specific firearm loaded by your specific techniques."
using quickload to custom reload for a specific chamber and bore l have seen that l could go well over most listed loads in any handbook but there were a few l could not safely get to the book max, nothing is written in stone

TBH the majority of handgun user l know have got there handload data from some guy at the club they shoot with
it has always puzzled me why they did not take handloading more seriously like you would with a longarm

[Yes]

G'day Witty4740,
The design of a jacketed projectile is pretty much irrelevant as regards load data, soft point, flat point spire point flat base or boat tail, the data is based only on bullet mass. Data for 55g projectiles is the same foe ALL 55g projectiles, but if you find yourself in a position where the weight is not listed then use data for the next HEAVIEST projie than what you have and you will always be on the safe side, Cheers.

Sorry to drag up an old thread but a lot of people come to the site for info (perhaps without joining) and read what can be erroneous information.

According to ADI, bullet shape/type is extremely important to powder loads. There's discrepancies all over the place, but for ease, let's just use the 55g projectile the OP was asking about, and ADI AR2206H powder recommendations:

55 GR. Barnes TSX Flat Base: 21-22.6g
55 GR. Sinterfire: 22-24.6g
55 GR. Speer Soft Point: 25-26g

Basically a 5 grain spread across the 55g projectile types; according to ADI, at least, you should take into consideration the bullet type - not just weight.

G’day mate, this direct from the ADI website FAQ.

What if my bullet isn’t listed?
If your particular brand of bullet is not listed in our reloading data, you should refer to the data for the bullet that is most similar in structure and design to yours. E.g. A Nosler BT is a lead core spitzer so you can refer to the Speer SP as a guide for your load development.

I don't know if you meant this for me or Bladeracers, but this is precisely what I was getting at: "refer to the data that is most similar in STUCTURE and DESIGN"... Of course weight of projecte is crucial, and the starting point, but stating that Structure and Design have no bearing on your final load is, frankly, incorrect. And there is enough varience between projectiles to have a bearing on where you should start working up your load, and in some cases, a question of safety.