AR-Comp and 62gr fmj
- Thread starter Kram
- Start date
Marco Califo
New member
I do not use fuzzy math. I also (still) have all 10 digits and both eyes.
Powder maker: https://www.alliantpowder.com/
You will see different data depending on the on-line data or downloading the 2023 Reloaders Guide, or the Products: AR-Comp: All Loads: 223. Curiously, Alliant seems to avoid 62 gr bullet weights. The one they list (on-line load lookup) is for Speer 62 gr FMJ using Reloader 15; none for AR Comp with 62 gr.
The specific bullet manufacturers may also have load data. Speer tops out at 23 grains for same weight+shape: https://www.speer.com/reloading/rifle-data.html
Powder maker: https://www.alliantpowder.com/
You will see different data depending on the on-line data or downloading the 2023 Reloaders Guide, or the Products: AR-Comp: All Loads: 223. Curiously, Alliant seems to avoid 62 gr bullet weights. The one they list (on-line load lookup) is for Speer 62 gr FMJ using Reloader 15; none for AR Comp with 62 gr.
The specific bullet manufacturers may also have load data. Speer tops out at 23 grains for same weight+shape: https://www.speer.com/reloading/rifle-data.html
Last edited:
Thanks for cleaning up your original post.
Like you found out, the Alliant site doesn't even come close to 62gr bullet load data. None of my Reloading Manuals have any data for 223/5.56 using AR-Comp. I checked Hornady site but couldn't find anything there.
The next time I'm at my reloading store (Phillips Wholesale) l'll take a look at the Hornady manual. I find myself using more and more of their bullets.
Like you found out, the Alliant site doesn't even come close to 62gr bullet load data. None of my Reloading Manuals have any data for 223/5.56 using AR-Comp. I checked Hornady site but couldn't find anything there.
The next time I'm at my reloading store (Phillips Wholesale) l'll take a look at the Hornady manual. I find myself using more and more of their bullets.
Marco Califo
New member
They SELL their reloading data in manuals or guides.
I am not impressed with Alliant's data or annual guide. They really seem to avoid providing data for copper bullets, too.
But, Hornady tries to get you coming and going: you have to buy there bullets, then buy their data to use them. My best resource is the Hodgdon Reloading Center (which includes IMR, Accurate, Winchester, and Ramshot powders), but they do not have Alliant data. Speer load data is the best source for Alliant hangdun data.
According to my Hornady manual with a 62g bullet for AR-comp
223 max is 23.4g at around 2900fps out of a 26in barrel
5.56 nato data shows a max of 24.6g at around 3100fps out of a 20in barrel
On a side note, you can get the Hornady app for your phone. you can buy the entire manual for around $20, and individual cartridges for $0.99. Its not a subscription, its a straight purchase. It does require internet connection to work, either cell data or wifi.
To second 44amp's post. Always check you manuals and load data before buying powder and or bullets. buying stuff and then trying to find a way to make it work generally ends with poor loads at best.
223 max is 23.4g at around 2900fps out of a 26in barrel
5.56 nato data shows a max of 24.6g at around 3100fps out of a 20in barrel
On a side note, you can get the Hornady app for your phone. you can buy the entire manual for around $20, and individual cartridges for $0.99. Its not a subscription, its a straight purchase. It does require internet connection to work, either cell data or wifi.
To second 44amp's post. Always check you manuals and load data before buying powder and or bullets. buying stuff and then trying to find a way to make it work generally ends with poor loads at best.
Thanks fellas,
I've got plenty of different powders, calibers and projectiles, including the stuff listed in the OP.
I just thought that I'd load something different, darn rain just won't stop. Getting data first is why I asked. I couldn't find those 2 combos anywhere.
It's too bad you fellas have to get so defensive. Your assuming and we know what happens when people do that.
I've got plenty of different powders, calibers and projectiles, including the stuff listed in the OP.
I just thought that I'd load something different, darn rain just won't stop. Getting data first is why I asked. I couldn't find those 2 combos anywhere.
It's too bad you fellas have to get so defensive. Your assuming and we know what happens when people do that.
Last edited:
Marco Califo
New member
I do not think any responses were defensive. What we have seen are cautious reactions to "fuzzy math" estimating loads rather then relying on published data.
"fuzzy math" is an assumption in and of itself, which is why i admonished caution. Just trying to be clear you should never be guessing/assuming (fuzzy math) when it comes to load data. Happy to help find published data though.
Last edited:
Things have been slow of late, glad im not the only one to have noticed it.
I find many many disagreements here come from poor communication. Poorly worded or ambiguous questions. But as you said also assumptions or different perspectives or interpretations.
I generally try and ask questions to clarify and ensure im on the same page as the OP. But many times things take odd turns and go down rabbit holes and get so tangled up its hard to get a word in edge wise to get the actual question answered or problem solved.
I find many many disagreements here come from poor communication. Poorly worded or ambiguous questions. But as you said also assumptions or different perspectives or interpretations.
I generally try and ask questions to clarify and ensure im on the same page as the OP. But many times things take odd turns and go down rabbit holes and get so tangled up its hard to get a word in edge wise to get the actual question answered or problem solved.
Good deal. Hornady is probably my favorite manual. Not to mention its cheaper than the hard copy. Thats more bullets you can buy
9MMand223only
New member
Shadow, what you are saying, does not make sense. You are basically saying, that without load data, you cannot reload.
You don't actually believe that, do you? Look at Alliant Reloading data. It has "zero" loads for many, many weight bullets, and only has "1" type of bullet per load, of the few they have.
So what you are saying, and you don't recommend, is that you CANNOT USE Alliant powder, UNLESS you have the exact same bullet they have in their load data. Which still doesn't make sense, because you have no idea what capacity the brass they used is, and 223 brass varies as much as 1 ENTIRE GRAIN in powder, to get same velocity and pressure.
What I am saying is accurate. You don't need load data, you can make it. Because basically almost EVERYONE who buys Alliant powder already does this.
ALso, older people know, that in the 1970's, load data was not SAAMI and super higher pressure in many cases. And load data was scarce. So people just start low, "exactly like I am saying" and work up. This is basics in the past.
But its kind of like kids today. they can't even change a lightbulb or fix a toilet. But 40 years ago, nearly everyone could fix basic things. etc etc etc.
You don't actually believe that, do you? Look at Alliant Reloading data. It has "zero" loads for many, many weight bullets, and only has "1" type of bullet per load, of the few they have.
So what you are saying, and you don't recommend, is that you CANNOT USE Alliant powder, UNLESS you have the exact same bullet they have in their load data. Which still doesn't make sense, because you have no idea what capacity the brass they used is, and 223 brass varies as much as 1 ENTIRE GRAIN in powder, to get same velocity and pressure.
What I am saying is accurate. You don't need load data, you can make it. Because basically almost EVERYONE who buys Alliant powder already does this.
ALso, older people know, that in the 1970's, load data was not SAAMI and super higher pressure in many cases. And load data was scarce. So people just start low, "exactly like I am saying" and work up. This is basics in the past.
But its kind of like kids today. they can't even change a lightbulb or fix a toilet. But 40 years ago, nearly everyone could fix basic things. etc etc etc.
Using the 11th edition. But i have 10th as well. Both editions had 62g loads with ar-comp. I am using a digital edition, not hard copy. I wonder if it has more loads than the hard copy does?
Last edited:
What I am saying is that, working up a load from scratch is unnecessary and probably foolish given the amount of good load data and things like GRT and QL that we have these days. Your better off hunting down the data than heading into the weeds trying to reinvent the wheel.
Last edited:
9MMand223only,
I removed your post for ignoring the posting requirements clearly laid out in this sticky.
After posting the required warning, you needed to state clearly that this is your personal opinion and experience, and it would be better to note this opinion is not shared by the firearms industry, as the whole purpose of SAAMI and CIP limits is to publish the numbers the industry agrees on both for the safety and the longevity of all guns in good condition that are chambered for the ammunition. Yes, those guns withstand proof loads, but not a steady diet of them, so one has to consider a normal load should be within a safe steady diet limit and that this limit will be lower than the pressures the gun can maximally withstand.
We have, more than once, had reports of individuals with guns showing signs of extreme stress while staying within published load limits, indicating that even those maximum published loads can occasionally be too high for a particular gun and need to be worked up to from the starting load to account for all possible problems that come from gun and component lot variations. We've had reports of commercial ammunition, like some Federal magnum rifle loads having their spent primers fall out during ejection due to expanded primer pockets, and yet they are loaded within the SAAMI limits. So even those aren't low enough for some components. Clearly, they would not be OK with the percentages of overload you suggest are perfectly safe.
The increases you proposed, depending on the powder and bullet combination, will increase peak pressure by as much as 26% if the loads are perfectly prepared and fired in constant conditions of ammunition ambient temperature and barrel temperature. The problem with assuming the safety of a generalized overload percentage is it is not backed off to make room for any of the pressure variation allowances the SAAMI system makes allowance for, such as the further pressure increase that comes with aging an ammunition lot nor for the statistical outliers within an ammunition lot that will show up every once in a while.
The bottom line is that a blanket statement like yours may be true a significant portion of the time with a significant percentage of guns and gun conditions but may not hold true for all guns under all conditions. Your load development worked out OK in your guns, but unless you have tried the same load in dozens of different guns in the same chambering, you don't have a statistically significant sample from which to generalize. You have anecdotal evidence but not definitive evidence.
So, in the future, please include the required warning from the sticky. With that, you can state what you've found to be true in YOUR guns, but please indicate that it may not work out in others, especially if they are older and fatigued, to begin with.
I removed your post for ignoring the posting requirements clearly laid out in this sticky.
9MMand223only in deleted post said:
After posting the required warning, you needed to state clearly that this is your personal opinion and experience, and it would be better to note this opinion is not shared by the firearms industry, as the whole purpose of SAAMI and CIP limits is to publish the numbers the industry agrees on both for the safety and the longevity of all guns in good condition that are chambered for the ammunition. Yes, those guns withstand proof loads, but not a steady diet of them, so one has to consider a normal load should be within a safe steady diet limit and that this limit will be lower than the pressures the gun can maximally withstand.
We have, more than once, had reports of individuals with guns showing signs of extreme stress while staying within published load limits, indicating that even those maximum published loads can occasionally be too high for a particular gun and need to be worked up to from the starting load to account for all possible problems that come from gun and component lot variations. We've had reports of commercial ammunition, like some Federal magnum rifle loads having their spent primers fall out during ejection due to expanded primer pockets, and yet they are loaded within the SAAMI limits. So even those aren't low enough for some components. Clearly, they would not be OK with the percentages of overload you suggest are perfectly safe.
The increases you proposed, depending on the powder and bullet combination, will increase peak pressure by as much as 26% if the loads are perfectly prepared and fired in constant conditions of ammunition ambient temperature and barrel temperature. The problem with assuming the safety of a generalized overload percentage is it is not backed off to make room for any of the pressure variation allowances the SAAMI system makes allowance for, such as the further pressure increase that comes with aging an ammunition lot nor for the statistical outliers within an ammunition lot that will show up every once in a while.
The bottom line is that a blanket statement like yours may be true a significant portion of the time with a significant percentage of guns and gun conditions but may not hold true for all guns under all conditions. Your load development worked out OK in your guns, but unless you have tried the same load in dozens of different guns in the same chambering, you don't have a statistically significant sample from which to generalize. You have anecdotal evidence but not definitive evidence.
So, in the future, please include the required warning from the sticky. With that, you can state what you've found to be true in YOUR guns, but please indicate that it may not work out in others, especially if they are older and fatigued, to begin with.