Mk262 Mod1 load info

Bob I am not being a smart ass. At least not intentionally.

But . . . how is 1.2gr of internal volume not significant?

Really, it is not that I don't believe you - I know better than that shit. But I honestly do not understand and I am hoping that you can help me to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Airgator0470

I don't worry about using MIL brass any longer... I've used Rem, Win, Fed, and others with no observed differences... this is an interesting internal capacity/volume chart... maybe years past there was a significant difference but it does not appear so. Without cut-aways and the ability to view the actual web area, they all appear close.


http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/909/iJqW5k.jpg

---

Rumbler, The LC brass has the highest capacity. If, as reported. it is thicker and the military standard, one would reason it should have one of the lowest capacities. At least that's what I took away from the chart.

No problem Mike... fair question, if you look at the extremes: Lapua at 29.2 vs. LC at30.4, perhaps with those two cases one might be able to detect a noticeable difference as there is a spread of 1.2, ... but when you look at and consider the difference between the more common brands, Win commercial, WCC, Fed Tac, Hornady, and LC, it's only a spread of 0.4... insignificant in my opinion and experience as I get Hornady, Fed Tactical, and LC brass for free and have not encountered any pressure issues one way or the other.

Personally, I think the thick mil brass issue is an over inflated issue, not completely worthy of ignoring, but not enough to worry about. But each reloader must decide for themselves where to place additional caution. Me... I think using a true 5.56 or Wylde chamber is more important when trying to duplicate military-type rounds (true 5.56mm and MK262) than head stamps (granted you're using the ones above an not some obscure crap).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Airgator0470

No problem Mike... fair question, if you look at the extremes: Lapua at 29.2 vs. LC at30.4, perhaps with those two cases one might be able to detect a noticeable difference as there is a spread of 1.2, ... but when you look at and consider the difference between the more common brands, Win commercial, WCC, Fed Tac, Hornady, and LC, it's only a spread of 0.4... insignificant in my opinion and experience as I get Hornady, Fed Tactical, and LC brass for free and have not encountered any pressure issues one way or the other.

Personally, I think the thick mil brass issue is an over inflated issue, not completely worthy of ignoring, but not enough to worry about. But each reloader must decide for themselves where to place additional caution. Me... I think using a true 5.56 or Wylde chamber is more important when trying to duplicate military-type rounds (true 5.56mm and MK262) than head stamps (granted you're using the ones above an not some obscure crap).

---

Edit to add- Perhaps it's better stated this way... if 24.5grs of TAC shows specific pressure signs with Win commercial, I'd suspect the same will show if you change to Fed Tac... I think at that point, the chamber, powder, powder charge, and weather will be of more influence than the head stamp. Some of my good loads are using RP brass... and not the WCC or LC, who knows...

Thank you, Bob. I see your point. :smoker:

Being a pretty modern powder isn't CFE223 a pretty stable powder temp wise? I know the way I shoot and the way I load temp stability is something I should pay attention to.

I am inclined to think so also. But in checking the Hodgdon website I see it is not a member of the "extreme" family. That is their group of temperature stable propellants.


http://www.hodgdon.com/new_prod.html

. . and . . .

http://www.hodgdon.com/extreme.html


So . . . . I dunno. :(