Running full house .223AI loads in non-fireformed brass?

H

Hunt

New member
I have a stupid question that has been bugging me for some time so I thought I would ask. I have a .223AI with 1/8 twist 22" Rock barrel.

With that said, say that a good high pressure load in fireformed AI brass is 26.5 grain of RL-15 behind a 75 AMAX. What would happen if that same amount of powder is used in new non-fireformed .223 brass of the same brand?

I guess what I'm saying is pressure a function of case capacity or chamber capacity? Will a fireformed load cause sticky bolt lift in new non-AI brass?
 
Pressure is more a function of chamber capacity. The brass expands to fit the chamber size. I would work up to it the first time though just to be safe.

Jack
 
It's not a stupid question.....I've shot lots of thousands of 223AI ammo and I did try that.....Like Jack said, work up to it. It was too much pressure in my rifles and I could NOT run full on 223AI load data with my FF loads. I run MAX loads from the parent chamberings for FF loads now.
 
Originally Posted By: brdeanoIt's not a stupid question.....I've shot lots of thousands of 223AI ammo and I did try that.....Like Jack said, work up to it. It was too much pressure in my rifles and I could NOT run full on 223AI load data with my FF loads. I run MAX loads from the parent chamberings for FF loads now.

Ditto.
Same here with my 223AI.
 
You would sieze the brass in the bolt head after you have beat the bolt handle to get the bolt out of the gun, it could possibly ruin the extractor.

Best case is that you would have the primer fall out of the brass, loose in the gun with the anvil possibly getting in the trigger [beeep]'y.

I have had many Ackley cartridges. Fireforming loads are usually 1.0g or mores less than formed loads.

Bottom line, what is the use in fireforming the case if you have to throw it away after it is fired?

1-8 twists spike pressures faster than 1-14 twists to make matters even more complicated.
 
None of these correspondents seem to indicate that your question's answer is simply an OVERLOAD of a standard caliber, clearly presented in any loading manual...

To fireform an improved cartridge using "1 grain less" than the maximum standard load for the parent cartridge (as suggested and even endorsed by a couple of respondents) is NOT the correct/accepted fireform procedure!

Instead, the correct fireform practicefor an improved/wildcat cartridge is to load a medium velocity load in the parent cartridge!! Do you or these others not read/use any loading manuals??!

I post this so others will not suffer injury and/or a destroyed firearm
 
Buckeye,
I hear you and agree with what you are saying. However, there is no loading data for a .223AI in my Sierra, Lyman 48th, Hornady, Lee and Nosler manuals.

The .223 brass is used in a AI chamber and _NOT_ in a SAAMI .223 Rem. chamber. Therefore, my question is whether pressure is more of a function of the chamber volume as opposed to brass volume.

This particular rig is throated for 75 gr AMAX to be seated at 2.485 with a 1/8 twist barrel. Therefore, this again is not loading for your traditional .223 Rem.
 
Dear Hunt:

It is irrelevant as to whether pressure is a function of the chamber volume or the brass volume [PSI or CUPS per SAMMI is a function of chamber volume which includes the case and the gunpowder in it] as the case will likely NOT fireform well and/or will burst with a maximum standard load in an AI chamber.

You may or may not be hurt depending on how well the AI chamber is made and how well it can support the standard case shoulder with a a maximum standard load, vents gas, etc.

At least 3 other posters above think a near max standard load is [the safest] way to fireform in an AI chamber... and they are wrong, also.

But, if you are still curious, do so immediately in your own custom rifle with some pressure equipment and medical personnel nearby to report the results.
 
Agreed.

Originally Posted By: Jack RobertsI would tend to pay more attention to those who have done it repeatedly with at least a few AI chambers.

Jack
 
Let's see what we have learned here:

1. Now the moderator of this forum, Jack Roberts, says: "...pay more attention to those who have done it repeatedly with at least a few AI chambers"

Guess what?, I HAVE worked with AI chambers, so its interesting that one presumes I haven't done so despite my previous posts that never indicated I was inexperienced or experienced with AI chambers....

Can you observe how mislearning happens i.e. folks just presume without any facts?

2. I have been reloading since 1983 and reading literature on it since then; when did the moderator and posters start to reload? See, I am now asking for facts as to the degree of their experience...I am presuming nothing.

3. The central theme of reloading is safety first, and within that, start at a known safe level [establised in load manuals by ballisticians/engineers smarter than me and you and with access to labs and test equipment] and work your way up while monitoring for known pressure signs.

4. Poster Hunt accurately notes there is "no pressure data..." in his manuals for the 223 AI caliber [SAMMI pressure data for the standard .223Remington applies to any .223AI action so use that as the baseline, generally true for any AI caliber ]. Thus, shooter observance of any and all pressure signs per the incremental load workup methos is all the more important. You have few, if any, labs testing with AI cartridges (22/250AI an exception per the Nosler #4 manual...). Remember, though, ALL GUNS ARE DIFFERENT.

5. Poster Brdeano and others note that the "pressure " was too much in their 223AI barreled action with .223 R cases that were loaded to the 223AI level i.e. beyond-maximum fireform loads...in fact, it is likely no more "pressure" than a standard .223R cartridge BUT now an uncontrolled spike in pressure exceeding the chamber design.
Such an effort is using the .223R case with almost no shoulder support[barely] in an AI chamber...all the support is nearly absent until fireformed. Thus, support is at the lands and the bolt face, case base only when fireformed, and a .223 AI level load is sure to exceed headspace safety as the shoulder support is [almost] non-existant. Thus, what appears as "pressure" is really human error exceeding the safety of the safe fireform method.
The longer throat of the AI chamber noteed by poster hunt is not enough to overcome this error and prevent a likely headspace issue and a ruptured case
 
Last edited:
per this discussion...i was taught to use - for an AI version of a standard chambering - a fast burning powder in the mid-range loads of the standard chambering with the bullet into the lands to eliminate case stretching....
why would anyone use a "good high pressure" improved loading to begin the fire-forming process...there's no mention of bullet seating ...
i think you're courting safety issues as well as possible case failure/chamber damage...as well as gettin someone new to the improved arena of handloading into a world of hurt...
i fear someone will read this & accept it as gospel when in fact its not recommended to fire-form this way...JMO.
 
Last edited:
BuckeyeSpecial,
My post was not directed at anyone in particular. Just a general recommendation to pay more attention to those with experience with AI chambers. If you will read back through the topic you will see that I always said you had to work up to a max fireforming load.

As for my experience reloading, I have been reloading for over 50 years and for wildcats for over 35 years.

Jack
 
My post wasn't to stir up a hornets nest and was more for my edification in understanding fireforming and what is/isn't acceptable when fireforming. The general consensus is that you use .223 load recipes while working up to them just like any other setup. I wasn't advocating using full-house loads in .223 nor was that my intention...Simply trying to understand the do/don'ts of fireforming.
 
Dear Jack Roberts:

Please note I reviewed all earlier posts prior to my replies.

Given that you have over twice the years reloading as do I, and that you are also the moderator, it was/is surprising that you were not the 1st to post that Hunt's original hypothetical proposal was a very bad and foolish idea, and contrary to safe reloading methods.

So, that omission is what prompted me to post in the first place as no one else did....though I realize no one can moderate this site constantly to the second of every hour.

That said, I feel any moderator of this Reloading Forum should be prepared to tell people [bluntly] : "NO, here's why..." on a safety deviation.

Many of these folks are apt to believe everything here as gospel, as they may be novice reloaders....and don't have a frame of reference per experience and a grounding in the sciences involved.

ayissuesny
 
I lived near Parker Ackley, and he worked on some of my rifles many years ago. Once I build a 257 Roberts Ackley Improved on a Ruger ultra lite Model 77. Ackley told me that to fire form the cases, fire standard - not the +p, factory loads to fire form the cases, that way the pressures would be moderate and just right to form the AI profile. I did just that, and the it worked just as he predicted. BuckeyeSpecial is correct. Many of Ackleys wildcats were designed to be formed that way, even thorough factory loads could generally be used, it was better to use moderate hand-loads.
 
I use 90% full house 223Rem loads seated to touch the lands when I FF 223AI brass. Even then, it takes a second (223AI) load to perfectly form the shoulders.

I can't get a full-house 223AI load in a standard case with the powders that I use.
 
Being new to reloading, the above posts and comments have been enlightening on two fronts. First, I don't take postings on this website as gospel, just informative. Secondly, I now have a better feel as to why USC kicks Ohio State's butt pretty much annually as of late in football.

Regards to all!
 
Careful, don't be talkin smack about my Buckeyes mister. I have family (by marriage) on your so cal condoms and still am a Buckeye fan.
 
Back
Top