Hornady 55gr SP w/c v. SPBT w/c

[HappyCamper]

This is getting nutty.  I loaded 1000 rounds of 55gr SP w/cannelure.  They have  a flat base.  Hornady manual has product #2266 and gives a COL of 2.2.  As a matter of fact, the manual shows every one of their 55gr bullets has a COL of 2.2.  At that length, the cannelure hits the case mouth perfectly.

 

Then I bought Hornady 55 gr SPBT w/cannelure.  Same bullet but with a boat tail base. The Hornady reloading manual does not list them at all.  They show a FMJ with BT, but not a SP.  The Hornady product number is also 2266 for both the flat base and the BT base.  

 

I figured I'd load them just like the other #2266 bullet, but, at a COL of 2.2, the cannelure is nowhere near the case mouth.  I will have to shorten the COL by quite a bit to hit the cannelure.

 

I would assume hitting the cannalure is more important than staying at the 2.20 COL, but this seems weird.  It's also weird that this bullet is not listed in the Hornady manual, #10, #11, and even the phone app.  

 

Anyone have experience with these bullets?  Suggestions welcome.

 

Thanks in advance. 

Edited March 5, 2022 by HappyCamper

[Chills1994]

If this is for an AR15, then I seat everything, 55 grain FMJ’s, 69 grain SMK’s, or 77 grain SMK’s, out to 2.25” plus or minus.  I reckon going out to 2.260” plus will start giving me issues getting them to fit into AR mags and/or getting them to feed reliably from a mag.

 

I just so happen to have the 11th edition of Hornady’s manual close by.

 

They call it a “55 gr. BTSP W/C”.

 

Take another look at page 170 of the 11th edition.  Top right of that page :

 

Edited March 5, 2022 by Chills1994

[Chills1994]

A couple years back I did a test where I compared accuracy between 2 loads.  I kept everything the same except one batch of 20 got the Lee Factory Crimp Die treatment.  The other batch of 20 didn’t get FCD’ed.

 

Turns out I had better accuracy with the batch that did NOT receive the FCD treatment.  So since then, the Lee FCD has been removed or omitted from my .223 toolheads.

 

so in my opinion, it really doesn’t matter where the case mouth ends up with respect to the cannelure (as long as the COAL = 2.250”) Neck tension gets dialed in with either a Lyman M die or a Redding Type S sizing die (no decapping rod/expander ball) with a neck bushing.

Edited March 5, 2022 by Chills1994

[HappyCamper]

Well that's really weird.  I have #10 manual and I looked at #11 at the store and did not see that (must not have looked close enough).  But, just last night before I posted this thread, I bought the Hornady reloading app, #11, complete with a $20/year subscription, and it does not show that bullet.  

 

Also on the app, there is a section on bullets.  It shows #2266 as a "SP with cannelure" (flat base).  By it, there is a button that says "View online."  Clicking that goes to the Hornady website, where it shows #2266 as a "SP Boattail with Cannelure."  

 

Not the first time I've seen a typo in a reloading manual.  Hope the next typo isn't catastrophic. 

 

So, you are saying to load to 2.25 and ignore the cannelure, right? 

[HappyCamper]

I just emailed Hornady tech support to ask why the ambiguity in listing the bullet, and, do I load to COL or load to cannelure.  I'll post their response if I get one. 

[HappyCamper]

As Alice would say, this is getting curiouser and curiouser.

 

Although Hornady treats these bullets as though they are the same, the one with the BT is .725 nose to base, and the FB is .699. 

 

More interesting is that the nose to top of cannelure on the FB is .468 and on BT is .429, or, .039 closer to the nose on the BT, hence the need to seat deeper/shorter in order to crimp on the cannelure, even though load data states the same COL for both bullets, as my new friend Chills1994 showed above.  

 

Also of interest, it is clear to see that the BT has a much straighter ogive and the FB is more curved.  So, how is it that the BT can have  a sleeker ogive, longer length, and a boattail, yet, the BC for both bullets is listed as .235?  Wouldn't all those physical differences change the BC at least a little?

 

 

[TonytheTiger]

10 hours ago, Chills1994 said:

so in my opinion, it really doesn’t matter where the case mouth ends up with respect to the cannelure (as long as the COAL = 2.250”) Neck tension gets dialed in with either a Lyman M die or a Redding Type S sizing die (no decapping rod/expander ball) with a neck bushing.

Agreed. I take it a step further and adjust my seating die to load my heavy match bullets and then leave it there for 55gr blaster stuff. Seems to end up between 2.2 and 2.22" for a wide variety of 55gr FMJ's, and the varying COAL's make zero functional difference.

 

@HappyCamper you're reading way too far into this. Loading manuals are just rough guidelines and in several years of buying thousands of 55gr FMJ's from various manufacturers I can tell you that within a brand one lot of bullets can vary in shape and measurements significantly enough from the next lot that none of the fine measurements you're taking mean anything. Sure, it changes BC, and if you're load is at max pressure and borderline unsafe a bullet profile change could put you over the top, but within reason the BC change means nothing and at reasonable pressures, which just so happens to be where gas guns are happiest, you can use all these different bullets interchangeably (again, assuming you're not jamming into the lands and running hot loads) and never put any more thought into it.

[HappyCamper]

No, not reading too much into this.  I'm just trying to understand where to go with this information.  And, I question everything.  Just my nature.

 

The cannelure is for the purpose of crimping, right?  But, in order to hit that, the round has to be loaded very short.  That seems odd.  Manufacturing defect?  Maybe.  Misprint in the manual?  Maybe.  I'm just trying to find out.  Did I buy bullets that are for something other than an AR15 in .223?  Or, am I reading this all wrong?  Also possible.  But I find it weird to have instructions to the thousandths of an inch and then, basically, load it however I want.  I run restaurants.  If the recipe says 1 TBS of salt, then, the cooks better use 1 TBS of salt.  If the recipe said "salt to taste" then that's a different thing.  

 

And, I figure asking questions is a lot easier, and safer, than making a huge mistake.

 

The BC only enters into this as further "evidence" that something seems wrong with the data.  My guess is, Hornady changed the design of this bullet, maybe "improved" it, and did not edit the data in the manuals accurately. 

 

Appreciate the input.  Thank you.

[TonytheTiger]

But it's all salt to taste. Reloading manuals only tell you what THEY loaded, in THEIR test rifle, to get THOSE results. Every rifle is different, every brass case is different from one manufacturer to the next, every barrels chamber could be different, your atmospherics are different from theirs. If you know anything about BC's you know they aren't a fixed number and they change based on velocity and other variables. And BC's are well known to be inaccurate or optimistically inflated anyway. That's why manuals are guidelines, not hard and fast rules. They aren't going to test every possible combination of brass, powder, primer, or bullet, with/without crimps in every chamber variation at different elevations and weather conditions in multiple guns. They just find a nice middle of the road average that should be safe in a wide variety of situations to give you an idea of where to start and then you salt to taste.

Edited March 5, 2022 by TonytheTiger

[Chills1994]

10 hours ago, HappyCamper said:

Well that's really weird.  I have #10 manual and I looked at #11 at the store and did not see that (must not have looked close enough).  But, just last night before I posted this thread, I bought the Hornady reloading app, #11, complete with a $20/year subscription, and it does not show that bullet.  

 

Also on the app, there is a section on bullets.  It shows #2266 as a "SP with cannelure" (flat base).  By it, there is a button that says "View online."  Clicking that goes to the Hornady website, where it shows #2266 as a "SP Boattail with Cannelure."  

 

Not the first time I've seen a typo in a reloading manual.  Hope the next typo isn't catastrophic. 

 

So, you are saying to load to 2.25 and ignore the cannelure, right? 

Yes….correct.

 

Now, granted there are about a half dozen different ways to take a once fired .223 case or a Lake City 5.56 case and turn it back into a completely loaded round.    There might be some threads still here where I griped about concentricity issues I had with pre-processed Lake City brass.  I still haven’t exactly 100% determined the cause, but I have “back burner’ed” that processed brass.  Instead I have resorted to or relied on using my own once fired XM193 or XM855 ammo that has been fired through my AR’s for the brass.  
 

In my opinion, one of the other ways I think…THINK…I have better concentricity now is that I have removed the decapping rod/expander ball from my full length resizing dies.  I rely on a Redding neck bushing to get the neck tension just right.  Or I use a Lyman M die to open the case neck.

 

Soooo…that is a very long round about way of saying that I am NOT relying on a crimp die to keep the bullet from getting pushed deeper into the case.  Rather I am relying on just neck tension.  
 

I will take the first 5 to 10 rounds that come off the press at the start of a reloading session, insert them into a mag, and hand rack them through the AR.  I do this over the bed, so the rounds are easier to retrieve.  Then I measure the COAL on each of those ejected rounds to make sure they haven’t setback.  If everything checks out, then I will really go to town cranking the 650’s handle.  I do the same with handgun rounds.

 

The first one or two rounds off the press…I will try to shove the pointed end the round into my reloading bench’s top.  Then I check the COAL again.  It’s a very scientific technique.

 

As a side note, I bought a case of Montana Gold 55 grain FMJ’s back in like 2007.   I will have to look again, but I think they have cannelures.  Their QC was horrible so the cannelures are at varying heights on the bullets.  The jackets on the fat end of the bullets also either vary in length or the lead cores having varying lengths.  So, also another reason why I gave up on trying to crimp the case mouth exactly dead nuts centered on the cannelure.

 

Worst.

 

Bullet.

 

Ever.

 

 

[Chills1994]

8 hours ago, HappyCamper said:

As Alice would say, this is getting curiouser and curiouser.

 

Although Hornady treats these bullets as though they are the same, the one with the BT is .725 nose to base, and the FB is .699. 

 

More interesting is that the nose to top of cannelure on the FB is .468 and on BT is .429, or, .039 closer to the nose on the BT, hence the need to seat deeper/shorter in order to crimp on the cannelure, even though load data states the same COL for both bullets, as my new friend Chills1994 showed above.  

 

Also of interest, it is clear to see that the BT has a much straighter ogive and the FB is more curved.  So, how is it that the BT can have  a sleeker ogive, longer length, and a boattail, yet, the BC for both bullets is listed as .235?  Wouldn't all those physical differences change the BC at least a little?

 

 

That is interesting.

 

If I was you, I would weigh each of those bullets individually to make sure they are both 55 grainers.

 

As far as BC goes, I wouldn’t know.  I am in southern Illinois, and have never shot past 200 yards.

 

 

If I was out somewhere where I could shoot to say 500 yards plus, I would spring for a Lab Radar.  I think the Lab Radar’s software/app has the ability to calculate real world BC’s.

 

 

[Chills1994]

9 hours ago, HappyCamper said:

No, not reading too much into this.  I'm just trying to understand where to go with this information.  And, I question everything.  Just my nature.

 

The cannelure is for the purpose of crimping, right?  But, in order to hit that, the round has to be loaded very short.  That seems odd.  Manufacturing defect?  Maybe.  Misprint in the manual?  Maybe.  I'm just trying to find out.  Did I buy bullets that are for something other than an AR15 in .223?  Or, am I reading this all wrong?  Also possible.  But I find it weird to have instructions to the thousandths of an inch and then, basically, load it however I want.  I run restaurants.  If the recipe says 1 TBS of salt, then, the cooks better use 1 TBS of salt.  If the recipe said "salt to taste" then that's a different thing.  

 

And, I figure asking questions is a lot easier, and safer, than making a huge mistake.

 

The BC only enters into this as further "evidence" that something seems wrong with the data.  My guess is, Hornady changed the design of this bullet, maybe "improved" it, and did not edit the data in the manuals accurately. 

 

Appreciate the input.  Thank you.

Going with the cooking recipe analogy, looking again, flipping a few pages back from page 170 in that 11th edition, the Hornady “cookbook” says they used Winchester .223 brass as their “ingredient” for all their load data.

 

Jeeeshhhh…come on man!

 

Really?

 

Who uses just strictly Winchester brass for reloading .223 ?

 

In other manuals, they will typically say to cut the charge weight by 10% if using Lake City brass.

 

It is ASSumed that LC brass is thicker, so there is less internal volume.  
 

Also as another side note, easily 10 to 15 years ago, a well known 3 gunner here basically posted “pick any 55 grain FMJ, stuff the case with 25.0 grains of H335, and seat it out to 2.250” and call it a day!”

 

Me, personally?  That has been my rule of thumb load for all 55 grainers for at least 5 years now.  I  started low and worked up batches that went up 2 tenths of a grain.  And I stopped at 25.0 grains of H335 .

 

Looking at that 11th edition, Hornady’s loads for their 55 grainers using H335 are quite conservative.  

[HappyCamper]

Well, thanks for the info.  That actually answers a different problem I've had.  Some brass is miserable to resize.  I noted on the headstamp a + inside a O, Nato, and thought that was the common denominator.  But now that you mention it, it is also all stamped "LC".  I was focused on the Nato and  I did not connect those LC dots, but, when a piece of brass stops the presses or won't chamber, it's one of those.  I've been sorting that stuff out and figured I'd deal with it somehow later.  Maybe buy a roll sizer or small base sizer on a single stage press, or maybe just trade or toss it. Thanks for clearing that up for me. 

 

Back to your comment on the BC, my point is not what exactly is the BC (as my friend Tony pointed out it is not a hard and fast measurement).  I was simply pointing out that I found it odd that two bullets that have even very visible differences in design are listed as having the same BC.  I find that hard to believe, and, therefor, it makes me wonder what else is wrong with their data?  That is,  I don't care what the BC "really" is, but if that is wrong  then Hornady may have other errors that maybe we should be aware of. Like, I just saw a box of Hornady bullets on the shelf that said "Twist rate 7-12"".  Really?  7 revolutions in 12"?  That's pretty fast.  I would guess they mean a twist rate of between 1-7" and 1-12" but whatever they meant, it is not clear.  So, I question everything.  Nullius in verba. 

 

And to the original question, the loading manual, which I understand is "salt to taste," says load to 2.20 COL and crimp on the cannelure, but both cannot be done.  Either I load to COL and ignore the cannelure or vice versa.  So, instead of guessing or loading something potentially dangerous, I thought I'd ask the good people of this forum for their knowledge and experience to help me solve the dilemma. 

 

I will load to COL.  And I thank you all for the info. 

[Chills1994]

I have some 9mm brass that seemed particularly hard on my elbow to resize.  I normally like to use a Lee/EGW Undersize Die in the first station.  So I took an extra 650 toolhead and put a spare RCBS resizing die in station 1.  It was screwed in just so far.  Then I put the Undersize die in station in station 2.  Powder charging got moved to station #3.  Bullet seating at #4.  And lastly, a Lee FCD was at station #5 .

 

I also use a pre-re-sizer on my prep toolhead for .223.  The Dillon trim die for the RT1500 also resizes the brass.  So I run a full length resizing die ahead of the Rapid Trimmer.  I just don’t screw it all the way down.

 

Sooo…using two 9mm resizing dies back to back made it easier on my elbow.  I don’t know what press you are using, but you could try that.  Or you could run that Lake City brass through the resizing die twice.  Screwing it down for the second pass.  
 

Then check that brass with a case gauge.

 

 

 

 

[Chills1994]

Ha!

 

My curiosity got the best of me, so I did a google search for “not seating .223 bullet to cannelure”.

 

The first result  that popped up was a Brian Enos thread from May 2014.

 

LOL!

 

 

[Nolan]

3 hours ago, HappyCamper said:

Well, thanks for the info.  That actually answers a different problem I've had.  Some brass is miserable to resize.  I noted on the headstamp a + inside a O, Nato, and thought that was the common denominator.  But now that you mention it, it is also all stamped "LC".  I was focused on the Nato and  I did not connect those LC dots, but, when a piece of brass stops the presses or won't chamber, it's one of those.  I've been sorting that stuff out and figured I'd deal with it somehow later.  Maybe buy a roll sizer or small base sizer on a single stage press, or maybe just trade or toss it. Thanks for clearing that up for me. 

 

 

What case lube are you using?  I've made my own and tried all the big names and there is a large variation in effort required to size brass between the various brands.  So far my favorite is Royal Case Lube. A little goes a long way, dries non-sticky so it doesn't have to be wiped off or tumbled off, smells good (although a couple of reviews on Midway complain about the smell???) and leaves your hands baby soft if you're loading on a 550 or single station press.

 

Nolan

 

https://www.midsouthshooterssupply.com/item/00216rls008/royal-case-and-die-lube-5-ounce-spray

 

[HappyCamper]

Well, Chills, good to know I'm not the only one with this thought.  Maybe I can start a support group.

 

Nolan:  I roll a couple handfuls of brass on a lube pad with Hornady lube and then spray the rest of the cases with Hornady dri lube.  I've not had any problems with the cases getting stuck but now and then they are hard to size.  But, mostly, that is the LC brass.  As for the smell, my preferred cologne is Hoppes #9, and, when my family smells that they know I'm home.  But, I'm willing to try your recommendation.  Thanks for the info. 

[SneakyPayload]

On 3/5/2022 at 12:43 AM, Chills1994 said:

A couple years back I did a test where I compared accuracy between 2 loads.  I kept everything the same except one batch of 20 got the Lee Factory Crimp Die treatment.  The other batch of 20 didn’t get FCD’ed.

 

Turns out I had better accuracy with the batch that did NOT receive the FCD treatment.  So since then, the Lee FCD has been removed or omitted from my .223 toolheads.

 

so in my opinion, it really doesn’t matter where the case mouth ends up with respect to the cannelure (as long as the COAL = 2.250”) Neck tension gets dialed in with either a Lyman M die or a Redding Type S sizing die (no decapping rod/expander ball) with a neck bushing.

crimping rifle rounds with the lee fcd has ALWAYS given me accuracy issues out of my rifles. I don’t do it anymore. If you have good neck tension it’s a non issue even in autoloaders.