• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

5.56 SBR Reloads?

alamo5000

Major Hide Member
Full Member
Minuteman
Jun 18, 2020
1,685
1,956
I am wondering if anyone knows of a source where they tested various powders for 5.56 SBR ammo?

I have a 10.5" SBR and I want to work up some loads to try and maximize velocity using heavy bullets (75-77grain etc).

Please note that I reload all the time and have for a long time. I am not new to reloading at all, but if someone else has done powder vs velocity tests out of short barrels that would be interesting information to have.

Any constructive input is welcome.
 
...TBH, with a 10.5" it may be better to go with lighter & shorter projectiles than the 75-77gn projectiles to gain more FPS within the "practical" range of that barrel length. Typically, 75-77's are long and will intrude into the powder column more, limiting powder capacity and achievable FPS.

...some powder tests can be found here, keep in mind the barrel length difference. http://www.natoreloading.com/556/
 
...TBH, with a 10.5" it may be better to go with lighter & shorter projectiles than the 75-77gn projectiles to gain more FPS within the "practical" range of that barrel length.
I am not looking for velocity for the sake of velocity. I would like those specific weight of bullets to try and gain more velocity (if possible) strictly for better terminal performance.

I ran some tests today using what I have on hand and with some 75 grain bullets and CFE 223 I was able to get 2325fps out of my 10.5" SBR. That was measured with a Labradar.

That's not bad at all, but I am thinking there might be some powder combinations out there that could do even better.
 
1649717854144.png

Here's some suggestions from Quickload, assuming a compressed charge.
 
@Dogtown I have never used Quickload so I don't know it's capabilities. Is it possible to pick random powders and see what comes from it?

Not that I plan to try it, but say like could you put some 300 blackout powders like H110 or CFE Black (or many others) and see what data comes out? Is that possible?
 
That’s basically what I did. I told it spit out a list a powders, with descending velocities, based on a case fill percentage. H110 or CFE BLK would probably be way off the bottom of the list in this case (5.56mm w Hornady 75gr) because they would generate too high pressure without a safe fill percentage (>70%).
 
1649732769597.png

Here's H110 - look at that pressure! At an 81% fill rate it's already at 74k

1649732846089.png


CFE BLK is actually nowhere near as bad, but still not ideal.
 
View attachment 7847952
Here's H110 - look at that pressure! At an 81% fill rate it's already at 74k

View attachment 7847953

CFE BLK is actually nowhere near as bad, but still not ideal.
Dude!

Thanks! I know what QL does but I have never used it for anything.

I had a thought a while back... 'what if'... this is my mad scientist thought for the day...

What if someone modified a 5.56 case to make it have less volume. Say when they manufactured it have the same external dimensions (so that it's compatible with all the parts out there) but the webbing could be extra thick or the walls could also be thick to decrease the internal volume.

The idea would be to figure out a powder that would work to generate extra velocity (safely)...say 2,500 fps...would be cool.

In any case I am going to look at a burn rate chart and see if anything strikes me that we could run through your computer.

IMR 8208 .
H335.
N133
Hogdon Benchmark
Power Pro 1200 R
Maybe something like Reloader 7 would be interesting to see as well.
 
Did some testing today with the stuff I have on hand. I haven't found any of the most promising powders yet though.

Using Hornady 75 grain bullets, Lake City brass, and my 10.5" SBR the following results happened.

19 grains of Reloader 7 got me I think 2,137fps.
23.8 grains of IMR 4064 got me just over 2,200 fps

CFE 223 still reigns supreme at 2,325 fps from previous tests.

When I find some H322 and H335 I will try some of those to see if I get better results.
 
When I find some H322 and H335 I will try some of those to see if I get better results.

I'm your huckleberry...

 
  • Like
Reactions: alamo5000
I'm your huckleberry...

Thanks! It looks like the 322 is already gone.

Thank you again for running all the numbers for me. If I had access to the QL software it would be kind of interesting to just go down the list of powders and see what pops up.
 
...TBH, with a 10.5" it may be better to go with lighter & shorter projectiles than the 75-77gn projectiles to gain more FPS within the "practical" range of that barrel length. Typically, 75-77's are long and will intrude into the powder column more, limiting powder capacity and achievable FPS.

...some powder tests can be found here, keep in mind the barrel length difference. http://www.natoreloading.com/556/
You aren't getting fragmentation out of 10.5" velocity which is why the 75-77gr otm projos have been the bullets of choice out of shorties for going on 20 years.
 
 
I got great results from 23.8 gr of H4895 and 77 SMK. It’s a 12.5” 1:7 barrel though.
Avg 2500 fps
 
  • Like
Reactions: alamo5000
I got great results from 23.8 gr of H4895 and 77 SMK. It’s a 12.5” 1:7 barrel though.
Avg 2500 fps
This is excellent information. Thanks. Trying to get powders locally is a PITA. I don't want to pay $75 per pound, but I will add that one onto my list of things to eventually try out.
 
These are the problems you have when you take a cartridge designed around a 20" barrel and shoot it out of one that is only 10.5.
Far better to use a cartridge designed from the ground up around a 10" barrel.
 
These are the problems you have when you take a cartridge designed around a 20" barrel and shoot it out of one that is only 10.5.
Far better to use a cartridge designed from the ground up around a 10" barrel.
You can work on that and in the mean time I will be shooting as much as possible. ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: MarshallDodge
Hi Bro. I know what you want for your 10.5, if you want top tier

any 77 grain OTM< like Berger will be top tier choice for any shorty. It doesn't need high velocity to penetrate and do mega damage.

However, if you are not keen on 2300 FPS or something like that, then this is what you want, and its proven.

50 grain Barnes TSX. This is no brainer. Out of 20" barrel, you can do 3400 FPS in nato pressure. Out of 10.5? high 2k. There is probably nothing better than this "overall" because its barrier blind too.

Molon did a good writeup on it, and everything he said is good.

Molon's 50 TSX report

I had similar experience to Molon. This bullet, or Hornady GMX too, or Barnes TTSX, all those in 50 grains...they are not match bullets, so you can expect around 1.5-2 MOA, which is not an issue because a 10.5" AR15 is made for pretty much under 250 yards or so.

Here are good loads for 50 grain TSX

AA2230 26 grains 2.200
Benchmark 25.5 grains 2.200
N133 24.5 grains 2.200

TSX takes 2.200
TTSX takes like 2.215
GMX takes like 2.200
 
Last edited:
Bought several powders to test out. I definitely want to try some more to see if I can get even better.
Below are the real world results out of MY gun, a 10.5" SBR shooting 75 grain Hornady bullets.

H335 produced 2312 FPS using a charge of 23 grains. This is the published max load on Hodgon's website.

Leverevolution does not (as far as I know) have any 223 load data. Fortunately for me I can also use this powder in 6ARC. Johnny's reloading bench used Lever in a 223 video so I worked my way up to similar loads that he was using. Given his bullets were 77 grain in that video. 25.5 grains of Lever netted 2373 FPS with the 75 grain bullets. I could probably go up a little bit in charge weight but I didn't see the point, especially considering that there was no way it would catch up to TAC.

The star of today's show is Ramshot TAC. A published max load of 24.1grains netted me a velocity of 2464 fps with everything else remaining the same. I could probably up the charge beyond published max but I tend to stay away from doing that.

Compared to the previous high water mark set by CFE 223 I made big improvements. The best I was able to get with CFE 223 was 2325 fps. I think the charge weight with CFE 223 was 24.9 grains or something like that.

Today's testing netted me a gain of 139 fps over what I previously had gotten.

At this point I would be more than comfortable buying a few 8lb jugs of TAC and calling it good, but I still want to do some research before I do that.
 
Overall I am pretty stoked about today's results. That's even better than I had imagined. Previously @Dogtown was gracious enough to help me use some Quickload data and in the few powders he helped me with H322 was the top contender. In the QL data a load of 22grains would give a theoretical velocity of 2485fps. 22 grains is the max load for that powder/bullet combo on Hodgon's website.

I still want to try out some H322 because in theory it's still a little faster (by 21fps compared to my real world data). I definitely would like to do a lot more testing so I am open to suggestions for other powders to try.

None the less I now know that I have at least one really good option. If everything else fails I know I have at least one that produces excellent results.
 
H322 is an Extreme powder which should make it less sensitive. That would make me feel more comfortable about loading near max.

TAC is a good powder but is temperature sensitive if you think that you may be shooting on hot days.
 
H322 is an Extreme powder which should make it less sensitive. That would make me feel more comfortable about loading near max.

TAC is a good powder but is temperature sensitive if you think that you may be shooting on hot days.
It's 96 degrees outside with a 'feels like' of 103 degrees today. That said I didn't leave the ammo outside to heat up.

I am still testing but based on what I am seeing I still have some room to go up in charge using my rifle. I will probably go test some more to try and see what other results I can get but thus far it's really promising.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MarshallDodge
I did a test going over max by .1 grains. Nothing. Not even a sign of pressure at all. I might revisit the 'over max' thing later on but not today. I am very confident that I can go even farther but I don't see the need to do that right now.

I shot several 5 shot strings and the average was almost 2460 fps for all of them. I had a couple of shots that went above the 2480 fps mark.

I'm pretty sure this is a winning combination. I was hoping to get over 2400 fps, but to average out at around 2460 fps is great.
 
Max published loads are based on criteria that you would have a hard time duplicating. Variation in chamber and brass dimensions, primer type and lot, powder lot, bullet seating depth, temperature, etc, all contribute to a value that they know will work in a variety of guns.

I would read your primers. If there is still a nice radius along the edge then you have some room, completely flat and you're getting near a catastrophic event.
 
  • Like
Reactions: alamo5000
Max published loads are based on criteria that you would have a hard time duplicating. Variation in chamber and brass dimensions, primer type and lot, powder lot, bullet seating depth, temperature, etc, all contribute to a value that they know will work in a variety of guns.

I would read your primers. If there is still a nice radius along the edge then you have some room, completely flat and you're getting near a catastrophic event.
They are quite nice. I definitely have space left to run with it should I so choose to do so.

For this particular load I like the idea of having space above max left to run. Ideally I will be able to just throw the charge weight to 'close enough' and load up a few thousand of these in bulk. For stuff like this a progressive press looks mighty attractive. ;)

It's a ball powder so having it be easy to throw (from various options to do so) will be kind of nice.
 
Once I get this one nailed down I want to create a load using 62 grain soft points. They look pretty nasty in ballistics gel even out of a short barrel.

I should be able to get those out over 2600 fps probably. That would be awesome.
 
Leverevolution does not (as far as I know) have any 223 load data. Fortunately for me I can also use this powder in 6ARC. Johnny's reloading bench used Lever in a 223 video so I worked my way up to similar loads that he was using. Given his bullets were 77 grain in that video. 25.5 grains of Lever netted 2373 FPS with the 75 grain bullets. I could probably go up a little bit in charge weight but I didn't see the point, especially considering that there was no way it would catch up to TAC.

LOL. No.
Lever beats TAC by 50-100 fps with 75gr BTHP in 5.56, if you run them at equal pressures. (Or load to the same pressure signs.) You just weren't pushing Lever as hard. Of all the loads you mentioned, it sounds like TAC is the only one you've pushed very hard for your barrel, and even that one isn't very warm.

Look, this whole excercise of "what's the best powder in a short barrel" is based on flawed theory. The truth is, your fastest powder in your 10.5" barrel is the same one that's fastest in a 16" or 20". The only reason to switch to a different powder for a short barrel is to avoid so much flash. If that's your goal, then something like 8208 (which has been available recently) or Benchmark are better choices than most of the ball powders. If your goal is speed, then the choices are easy - pick one of the top performing 5.56 ball powders for that bullet weight. TAC, 2230, CFE223, or Lever. It doesn't matter if it's a 10.5" barrel or a 20" in that regard.
 
...TBH, with a 10.5" it may be better to go with lighter & shorter projectiles than the 75-77gn projectiles to gain more FPS within the "practical" range of that barrel length. Typically, 75-77's are long and will intrude into the powder column more, limiting powder capacity and achievable FPS.

...some powder tests can be found here, keep in mind the barrel length difference. http://www.natoreloading.com/556/

When a barrel is shortened, the light weight bullets lose a lot more velocity than the heavy bullets. Short barrels generally perform best with heavy for caliber bullets for that reason.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MarshallDodge
I actually did side by side comparisons.
Lever beats TAC by 50-100 fps with 75gr BTHP in 5.56, if you run them at equal pressures. (Or load to the same pressure signs.) You just weren't pushing Lever as hard. Of all the loads you mentioned, it sounds like TAC is the only one you've pushed very hard for your barrel, and even that one isn't very warm.
I went with PUBLISHED DATA. It wasn't a matter of me pushing anything 'hard'. That said I did not find any load data at all for 223 and Lever. My basis for even buying it is that I can test it out in 6 ARC. That said I recalled a video from JRB where he attempted to clone some 77gr ammo so I was left using only a rough outline of where to possibly start.

In his video at around 25.6 grains (albeit using a 77 grain bullet) he ran into pressure signs in his rifle. Taking into account that my bullet was 75 grain I just did a rough guideline on it. Can I push it harder? Probably. But based on what I was seeing I knew I was getting pretty close even at 25.5 grains. Just eyeballing my non published load development with that powder I had to figure if another .1 grain of Lever would add 75 to 100 fps to average velocity and my estimation was no. I guess it might, but on average I estimated a gain of 30-40 fps should I bump it up by .1 grains. If I bumped it by .2 grains that would have possibly matched the manufacturer's published average data using TAC.

Yesterday was the first day of testing so absolutely NOTHING is final. Normally I go through several days of trial and error just to try and catch things I might have missed.

I ran multiple strings of TAC loads and the highest velocities using published data (not over) was 2481. The average from I think 20 shots was something like 2458 (including one outlier that had a lower velocity).

I almost NEVER go beyond max on any of my loads for any rifle. I like the buffer zone for error especially when I go to mass production.

If you can help me find some other real world data for Lever and 75 grain bullets I will be more than glad to re-test it.
Look, this whole excercise of "what's the best powder in a short barrel" is based on flawed theory. The truth is, your fastest powder in your 10.5" barrel is the same one that's fastest in a 16" or 20". The only reason to switch to a different powder for a short barrel is to avoid so much flash. If that's your goal, then something like 8208 (which has been available recently) or Benchmark are better choices than most of the ball powders. If your goal is speed, then the choices are easy - pick one of the top performing 5.56 ball powders for that bullet weight. TAC, 2230, CFE223, or Lever. It doesn't matter if it's a 10.5" barrel or a 20" in that regard.
There is zero theory involved. Conversely the theories that you are presenting do not match my real world testing.

I don't give two hoots about flash. For one I am shooting suppressed almost 100% of the time and at least for now I am not shooting at night hardly ever.

What I am finding though is just basing things off where on the burn rate chart things fall has no bearing on velocity when done with a shorter barrel. This part is relatively true. That said there are other characteristics of powders that apparently DO make a difference though. What those 'other characteristics' are, I do not know but simply just picking a powder because it's higher on the burn rate chart doesn't fix anything (based on my tests).
 
When a barrel is shortened, the light weight bullets lose a lot more velocity than the heavy bullets. Short barrels generally perform best with heavy for caliber bullets for that reason.
This is not at all the reason why I personally am using heavy bullets. I am basing much of my bullet choices on terminal performance at a given velocity range. Previously long ago when I started getting into this I read a TON and was guided by Molon and other's research in the area of terminal ballistics.

To me at least whether or not it has purely higher velocity is irrelevant. I am basing my choices off of a combination of price per bullet and what it does to a target at self defense ranges.
 
This testing is definitely ongoing and evolving. Supply of what I would like to test isn't always there though. The parameters are being adjusted based on my findings.

When the opportunity presents itself (as well as budget) I will buy a few other powders to test.
 
For those that haven't watched it please watch this video below from Sage Dynamics where he tests factory 75 grain factory ammo. His average velocities out of a similar barrel length is 2271 fps. I am beating that by over 180 fps. That's significant.

 
I actually did side by side comparisons.

I went with PUBLISHED DATA. It wasn't a matter of me pushing anything 'hard'. That said I did not find any load data at all for 223 and Lever. My basis for even buying it is that I can test it out in 6 ARC. That said I recalled a video from JRB where he attempted to clone some 77gr ammo so I was left using only a rough outline of where to possibly start.

In his video at around 25.6 grains (albeit using a 77 grain bullet) he ran into pressure signs in his rifle. Taking into account that my bullet was 75 grain I just did a rough guideline on it. Can I push it harder? Probably. But based on what I was seeing I knew I was getting pretty close even at 25.5 grains. Just eyeballing my non published load development with that powder I had to figure if another .1 grain of Lever would add 75 to 100 fps to average velocity and my estimation was no. I guess it might, but on average I estimated a gain of 30-40 fps should I bump it up by .1 grains. If I bumped it by .2 grains that would have possibly matched the manufacturer's published average data using TAC.

Yesterday was the first day of testing so absolutely NOTHING is final. Normally I go through several days of trial and error just to try and catch things I might have missed.

I ran multiple strings of TAC loads and the highest velocities using published data (not over) was 2481. The average from I think 20 shots was something like 2458 (including one outlier that had a lower velocity).

I almost NEVER go beyond max on any of my loads for any rifle. I like the buffer zone for error especially when I go to mass production.

If you can help me find some other real world data for Lever and 75 grain bullets I will be more than glad to re-test it.

There is zero theory involved. Conversely the theories that you are presenting do not match my real world testing.

I don't give two hoots about flash. For one I am shooting suppressed almost 100% of the time and at least for now I am not shooting at night hardly ever.

What I am finding though is just basing things off where on the burn rate chart things fall has no bearing on velocity when done with a shorter barrel. This part is relatively true. That said there are other characteristics of powders that apparently DO make a difference though. What those 'other characteristics' are, I do not know but simply just picking a powder because it's higher on the burn rate chart doesn't fix anything (based on my tests).

That's a lot of words to explain that you know better than people who've been doing this a long time. Do you really think you're the first and only person to test different 5.56 powders in a 10.5" barrel? :rolleyes:
I was going to offer some better data, but I'll just let you ramble on instead.
 
Instead of starting a completely new thread, I will piggyback on this one with some additional questions. Now that some time has passed and it seems I can find a lot more available ammo, what would the preferred "defense" cartridge be for an 11.5? Something effective inside the home but also effective at 2-300 yards and somewhat accurate? I keep mostly m193 stuff on hand, but I am looking for something that Is going to be slightly more accurate at 1,2,300 yards. I was just about to order a 1000 mk262mod1-c when i read some information about that cartridge in that short of barrel may not properly fragment past 100 yards. so now i am second-guessing.

i have been able to find mk262, black hills 50gr tsx, barnes 62gr tsx, and the 75gr TAP
 
I would buy several different types and see what functions and is accurate in your gun.

You lose a bit of velocity with the short barrels so I prefer a heavier bullet to retain energy further out.
 
i have been able to find mk262, black hills 50gr tsx, barnes 62gr tsx, and the 75gr TAP

You'll find proponents for each of those you listed, and IMO they're all decent choices. And don't forget about the 75gr TAP SBR, which is a completely different bullet and load than the regular 75 TAP. I recommend doing a hard search for that SBR load, as it's pretty good for a short barrel.

I've also been experimenting with a 50gr or 55gr (sorry, tired right now and don't remember) "Controlled Chaos" bullet from Lehigh Defense, and am very impressed with it from my 11.5" 5.56 home defense gun. It's more expensive, but worth considering. Underwood or a few other places might offer it in loaded ammo if you don't load your own.

Of course, just about any hunting load with a cup & core style bullet in the 55-75gr range will be a reasonable choice as well, and any of the above are better performers than M193 in all but price.
 
Instead of starting a completely new thread, I will piggyback on this one with some additional questions. Now that some time has passed and it seems I can find a lot more available ammo, what would the preferred "defense" cartridge be for an 11.5? Something effective inside the home but also effective at 2-300 yards and somewhat accurate? I keep mostly m193 stuff on hand, but I am looking for something that Is going to be slightly more accurate at 1,2,300 yards. I was just about to order a 1000 mk262mod1-c when i read some information about that cartridge in that short of barrel may not properly fragment past 100 yards. so now i am second-guessing.

i have been able to find mk262, black hills 50gr tsx, barnes 62gr tsx, and the 75gr TAP
I can only talk about my experiences and preferences.

The shorter the barrel the less distance a bullet (especially in 5.56) will reliably fragment. The 100 yards thing is fairly common, but that is also related to bullet construction as well as the anticipated target. Keep in mind that this has NOTHING to do with accuracy or how far you can accurately shoot. For example I can shoot my 10.5 to 200-300 yards and get reliable hits on target. The primary limitation is I am using a 1x Aimpoint. That said at those distances most bullets will not fragment.

The 100 yards thing is a 'guideline' because it's totally dependent upon the bullet construction and design. Typically though light bullets are frowned on and heavier bullets are more prevalent for this specific application for people that say, 'do this stuff for a living'. By far the most popular is going to be 77 grain. That said if you get a 62 grain soft point it will also do significant damage, especially in the context of home defense where you don't really have to consider shooting through car doors or whatever.

Again though, many LE and others have to consider barriers and all that stuff when choosing rounds hence heavier bullets are generally preferred or in some cases even mandated depending of course on the weapons platform.

As a civilian though I literally cannot think of a situation (minus any complete social breakdown) where I would need to shoot someone at those longer distances. Even if you shoot junk 55 grain ammo out of a really short barrel it definitely will not feel good to the person on the receiving end regardless if it's 10 yards or 200 yards. It will definitely still punch holes but the relative amount of damage will be significantly less the farther you go out.

There are literally hundreds of videos out there that show various gel tests and gel tests out to much farther distances with a variety of barrel lengths and grain weights. I would say go watch a bunch of those videos and figure out what type of bullet (IE actual projectile) will satisfy your specific needs and choose accordingly.

In general though there is no definitive answer to your question because it depends on who you ask. A special forces guy will have completely different requirements of how bullets perform than say some guy that is doing home defense stuff. If you however take into account all the various factors (IE penetration, barriers, fragmentation, etc) as a whole most of the time those criteria all intersect more on the heavier end of the bullet spectrum. That's not to say that we need to take into account all of those same criteria.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jMarine
Hornady 5.56mm 75 Grain TAP SBR



hornady_75_grain_tap_sbr_box_01_resized-2515185.jpg




One of Hornady’s later editions to their line-up of 75 grainTAP ammunition is their 75 grain 5.56mm TAP SBR load (#81295.) The “SBR” abbreviation stands for short-barreled rifle; the intended platform for the usage of this ammunition.



hornady_75_grain_tap_sbr_cartridge_02_re-2515193.jpg




This ammunition is loaded with a 75 grain flat-base, soft point bullet. This bullet is not a bonded projectile; it does however utilize an array of cannelures intended to lock the lead core of the bullet to the gilding metal jacket. The cartridge is sealed and crimped at the case-mouth.



hornady_556_75_grain_sbr_powder_03_resiz-2515196.jpg






75_tap_sbr_sectioned_bullet_02_resized-2515199.jpg




Here’s some pics comparing the 75 grain TAP SBR projectile to a few other modern heavy .22 caliber projectiles.



hornady_75_grain_sbr_versus_75_grain_t2_-2515205.jpg






75_grain_SBR_vs_75_grain_gold_dot_04_res-2515204.jpg






70_gmx_vs_75_sbr_03_resized-2515203.jpg




This ammunition is loaded in brass cases with a head-stamp that reads: “Hornady 5.56 NATO”. The primer-pockets are crimped and sealed.



75_grain_tap_sbr_casehead_01-2515209.jpg




Contrary to erroneous information that has been posted on the Internet claiming that this ammunition “contains a propellant closer to gel than powder”, the form of the powder that this ammunition is charged with resembles that of a number of modern “ball” powders.



hornady_556_75_grain_sbr_powder_25-2515213.jpg




Velocity


Since the Hornady 5.56mm 75 grain TAP SBR ammunition is intended for use in short-barreled rifles, I chronographed the ammunition from the shortest barrel that I had on hand; a Noveske 14.5” N4 barrel. This barrel is chrome-lined and has a 5.56mm NATO chamber with a 1:7” twist.



novekse_n4_14_5_inch_0012-2515368.jpg




Chronographing was conducted using an Oehler 35-P chronograph with “proof screen” technology. The Oehler 35P chronograph is actually two chronographs in one package that takes two separate chronograph readings for each shot and then has its onboard computer analyze the data to determine if there is any statistically significant difference between the two readings. If there is a difference, the chronograph “flags” the shot to let you know that the data is invalid. There was no invalid data flagged during this testing.


The velocity stated below is the muzzle velocity as calculated from the instrumental velocity using Oehler’s Ballistic Explorer software program. The string of fire consisted of 10 rounds over the chronograph.


oehler_chronograph_32-1336391.jpg





oehler_computer_02-1336390.jpg



Each round was single-loaded and cycled into the chamber from a magazine fitted with a single-load follower. The bolt locked-back after each shot allowing the chamber to cool in between each shot. This technique was used to mitigate the possible influence of “chamber-soak” on velocity data. Each new shot was fired in a consistent manner after hitting the bolt release. Atmospheric conditions were monitored and recorded using a Kestrel 4000 Pocket Weather Tracker.



kestrel_4000_21-1336387.jpg




Atmospheric conditions

Temperature: 77 degrees F

Humidity: 33%

Barometric pressure: 30.05 inches of Hg

Elevation: 950 feet above sea level


The muzzle velocity for the 10-shot string of the Hornady 5.56mm 75 grain TAP SBR ammunition fired from the Noveske 14.5” N4 barrel was 2460 FPS with a standard deviation of 12 FPS and a coefficient of variation of 0.49%.


For comparison, I also chronographed Hornady’s 5.56mm 75 grain TAP T2 ammunition back-to-back from the same barrel. The muzzle velocity for this load was 2649 FPS with a standard deviation of 11 FPS and a coefficient of variation of 0.42%.


For additional comparison, I chronographed the Speer LE 223 Remington 75 grain Gold Dot ammunition from the same 14.5” Noveske N4 barrel. The muzzle velocity for the 75 grain Gold Dot ammunition was 2463 FPS with a standard deviation of 12 FPS and a coefficient of variation of 0.49%.



hornady_tap_sbr_muzzle_velocities_table_-2515374.jpg




Accuracy



I conducted an accuracy (technically, precision) evaluation of the Hornady 5.56mm 75 grain TAP SBR ammunition following my usual protocol. This accuracy evaluation used statistically significant shot-group sizes and every single shot in a fired group was included in the measurements. There was absolutely no use of any group-reduction techniques (e.g. fliers, target movement, butterfly shots).


The shooting set-up will be described in detail below. As many of the significant variables as was practicable were controlled for. Also, a control group was fired from the test-rifle used in the evaluation using match-grade, hand-loaded ammunition; in order to demonstrate the capability of the barrel. Pictures of shot-groups are posted for documentation.


All shooting was conducted from a concrete bench-rest from a distance of 100 yards (confirmed with a laser rangefinder.) The barrel used in the evaluation was free-floated. The free-float handguards of the rifle rested in a Sinclair Windage Benchrest, while the stock of the rifle rested in a Protektor bunny-ear rear bag. Sighting was accomplished via a Leupold VAR-X III set at a magnification of 25X and adjusted to be parallax-free at 100 yards and a mirage shade was used. Wind conditions on the shooting range were continuously monitored using a Wind Probe. The set-up was very similar to that pictured below.



lothar_walther_ar15_on_bench_03-2211995-2427000.jpg




The Wind Probe . . .

wind_probe_2016_01_framed-1439099-2096792.jpg




The test vehicle for this evaluation was one of my semi-automatic precision AR-15s with a 20” stainless-steel Lothar Walther barrel. The barrel has a 223 Wylde chamber with a 1:8” twist.



lothar_walther_barrel_21_resized-1336364.jpg




lothar_barrel_crown_02_resized-1297385-1336365.jpg





lothar_walther_barrel_free_floated_05-12-1336366.jpg




Prior to firing the Hornady 5.56mm 75 grain TAP SBR ammunition, I fired a 10-shot control group using a hand-load topped with the Sierra 55 grain BlitzKing. That group had an extreme spread of 0.88”.



55_blitzkings__control_group_fro_75_tap_-2515220.jpg




Three 10-shot groups of the Hornady 5.56mm 75 grain TAP SBR ammunition were fired in a row with the resulting extreme spreads:


1.28”

1.41”

0.93”


for a 10-shot group average extreme spread of 1.21”. The three 10-shot groups were over-layed on each other using RSI Shooting Lab to form a 30-shot composite group. The mean radius for the 30-shot composite group was 0.44”.

All fired cases ejected briskly from the rifle in a 4:30 direction. The spent cases were gathered approximately 12 feet from the rifle.


The smallest 10-shot group . . .



hornady_556_75_grain_tap_sbr_measured_gr-2515221.jpg




The 30-shot composite group . . .


hornady_75_grain_tap_sbr_composite_group-2515223.jpg




Lastly, for the Internet Commandos in our viewing audience, I fired a 3-shot group of the 75 grain TAP SBR ammunition from 100 yards. That group had an extreme spread of 0.36”.
icon_smile_big.gif




Hornady_75_grain_TAP_SBR_3_shot_group_01-2515224.jpg




…..
 
Black Hills 5.56mm 50 grain TSX: Accuracy, Velocity and Terminal Ballistics



50_tsx_boxes_03-2268864.jpg



Today, we have a wider selection of quality self-defense ammunition for our AR-15s to choose from than ever before. The construction and function of these modern self-defense loads is not limited by the archaic confines proffered by the Hague Conventions and far surpasses the consistency of terminal ballistic properties of “old school” loads such as M193 and M855.


There are two modern schools of thought regarding the selection of the type of projectile to use in a self-defense load; the first preferring a fragmenting, heavy (75-77 grain) OTM bullet and the second opting for an expanding “blind-to-barriers” bullet. Some of the top performers in the fragmenting, heavy OTM match category are Hornady’s 5.56mm 75 grain TAP T2, the Black Hills Ammunition load utilizing the Sierra 77 grain Tipped MatchKing and the Nosler 77 grain Custom Competition.




heavy_otm_bullets_05-2268865.jpg




A plethora of 5.56mm/223 Remington loads utilizing expanding barrier-blind projectiles have come to the market in the last several years. Top performers in this category include the 62 grain Trophy Bonded Bear Claw found in Federals LE223T3 load and the Nosler 64 grain Bonded Solid Base bullet with “Protected Point Design” loaded in Nosler Defense Ammunition. Both of these bullets have their lead-cores bonded to their copper jackets. (Both of these bullets are also found in the 5.56mm FBI loads.) Another top performer in the expanding barrier-blind category is the Barnes 50 grain TSX bullet found in the 5.56mm Black Hills load. This is the load that is the focus of this range report.



barrier_blind_projectiles_04-2268866.jpg




The monolithic (all copper) Barnes 50 grain TSX hollow-point bullet used in the 5.56mm Black Hills load is a proprietary design; it’s not the same 50 grain TSX projectile that is available as a reloading component. The proprietary 50 grain TSX was developed to provide better blind-to-barriers performance after passing through automobile safety glass (windshields) compared to the standard TSX projectiles. The original TSX bullets have unfortunate occurrences of the expanding petals shearing-off (or collapsing-in on themselves) when passing through auto safety glass. The proprietary 50 grain TSX has greatly improved on this situation (although the petals of the new 50 grain TSX still tend to collapse-in on themselves when passing through sheet metal barriers.)


A side effect of the proprietary 50 grain TSX projectile’s ability to expand and retain its petals after passing through auto safety glass is that the velocity expansion threshold of the new projectile has risen compared to the original TSX design (from approximately 1900 FPS to approximately 2300 FPS). This is where the increased velocity of the 5.56mm load (compared to a standard 223 Remington load) proves beneficial.


The new design of the proprietary 50 grain TSX, combined with the increased velocity of the 5.56mm load (along with the relatively shorter length of the 50 grain projectile) allows this load to be adequately stabilized from a wide variety of barrel twist rates and produce extremely consistent terminal ballistic properties from a wide variety of barrel lengths. The pic below shows that the Black Hills 5.56mm 50 grain TSX load fired from a 10.5” barrel produces nearly the same results in bare ballistic gelatin as the load does when fired from a 20” barrel.



50_grain_tsx_gel_shots_002-2268875.jpg


Courtesy of Black Hills


Terminal ballistic data obtained by Dr GK Roberts in both bare gel and gel after passing through auto safety glass, when fired from a 14.5” M4 barrel, shows how wells this projectile performs.


Bare gel

Penetration = 14.7”

Recovered diameter = 0.47”


Auto safety glass

Penetration = 17.0”

Recovered diameter = 0.36”


Being a monolithic bullet, the 50 grain TSX is actually slightly longer than a lead-core/copper-jacketed 55 grain FMJ bullet. The 50 grain TSX projectile does not have a cannelure per se, however, the case-mouth is crimped into the top relief-band of the bullet. The primers are also crimped in place. The 50 grain TSX is loaded in WCC 5.56mm brass. The round is charged with a ball powder. The lot of this ammunition that I evaluated had neither sealed primers nor sealed case-mouths, though it is reported that Black Hills will be remedying this situation in the near future.




50_tsx_vs_55_fmj_04-2268876.jpg




Speed is fine . . .


I chronographed the Black Hills 5.56mm 50 grain TSX ammunition from a semi-automatic AR-15 with a chrome-lined, NATO chambered 20” Colt M16A2 barrel.


colt_a2_government_profile_20_inch_barre-1891141.jpg




Chronographing was conducted using an Oehler 35-P chronograph with “proof screen” technology. The Oehler 35P chronograph is actually two chronographs in one package that takes two separate chronograph readings for each shot and then has its onboard computer analyze the data to determine if there is any statistically significant difference between the two readings. If there is, the chronograph “flags” the shot to let you know that the data is invalid. There was no invalid data flagged during this testing.


The velocity stated below is the muzzle velocity as calculated from the instrumental velocity using Oehler’s Ballistic Explorer software program. The string of fire consisted of 10 rounds over the chronograph.




oehler_chronograph_32-1342454.jpg




oehler_computer_02-1342452.jpg




Each round was single-loaded and cycled into the chamber from a magazine fitted with a single-load follower. The bolt locked-back after each shot allowing the chamber to cool in between each shot. This technique was used to mitigate the possible influence of “chamber-soak” on velocity data. Each new shot was fired in a consistent manner after hitting the bolt release. Atmospheric conditions were monitored and recorded using a Kestrel 4000 Pocket Weather Tracker.



kestrel_4000_21-2268881.jpg




Atmospheric conditions

Temperature: 78 degrees F

Humidity: 39%

Barometric pressure: 30.10 inches of Hg

Elevation: 950 feet above sea level


The muzzle velocity for the 10-shot string of the Black Hills 5.56mm 50 grain TSX ammunition fired from the 20” Colt barrel was 3419 FPS with a standard deviation of 11 FPS and a coefficient of variation of 0.32%!



For those of you who might not be familiar with the coefficient of variation (CV), it is the standard deviation, divided by the mean (average) muzzle velocity and then multiplied by 100 and expressed as a percentage. It allows for the comparison of the uniformity of velocity between loads in different velocity spectrums; e.g. 77 grain loads running around 2,650 fps compared to 55 grain loads running around 3,250 fps.



For comparison (and to give you an idea of how good the CV is for this factory loaded 50 grain TSX ammunition) the mil-spec for M193 allows for a coefficient of variation of approximately 1.2%, while one of my best 77 grain OTM hand-loads, with a muzzle velocity of 2639 PFS and a standard deviation of 4 FPS, has a coefficient of variation of 0.15%.




stnadard_deviation_of_4_fps_01-2268883.jpg



Accuracy is final . .



I conducted an accuracy (technically, precision) evaluation of the Black Hills 5.56mm 50 grain TSX ammunition following my usual protocol. This accuracy evaluation used statistically significant shot-group sizes and every single shot in a fired group was included in the measurements. There was absolutely no use of any Group Reduction Techniques (e.g. fliers, target movement, Butterfly Shots).


The shooting set-up will be described in detail below. As many of the significant variables as was practicable were controlled for. Also, a control group was fired from the test-rifle used in the evaluation using match-grade, hand-loaded ammunition; in order to demonstrate the capability of the barrel. Pictures of shot-groups are posted for documentation.


All shooting was conducted from a concrete bench-rest from a distance of 100 yards (confirmed with a laser rangefinder.) The barrel used in the evaluation was free-floated. The free-float handguards of the rifle rested in a Sinclair Windage Benchrest, while the stock of the rifle rested in a Protektor bunny-ear rear bag. Sighting was accomplished via a Leupold VARI-X III set at 25X magnification and adjusted to be parallax-free at 100 yards. A mirage shade was used. Wind conditions on the shooting range were continuously monitored using a Wind Probe. The set-up was very similar to that pictured below.



lothar_walther_ar15_on_bench_03-2268898.jpg




The Wind Probe.

wind_probe_2016_01_framedb-1342522.jpg



The test vehicle for this evaluation was one of my semi-automatic precision AR-15s with a 20” stainless-steel Lothar Walther barrel. The barrel has a 223 Wylde chamber with a 1:8” twist. Prior to firing the 50 grain TSX ammunition, I fired a 10-shot control group using match-grade hand-loads topped with the Sierra 55 grain BlitzKing. That group had an extreme spread of 0.83”.


lothar_walther_barrel_21_resized-1999713.jpg




lothar_barrel_crown_02_resized-1297385-1342445.jpg




50_tsx_control_load_55_blitzkings_01-2268887.jpg



Next, three 10-shot groups of the 50 grain TSX load were fired in a row with the resulting extreme spreads:


1.64”

2.09”

1.97”

for a 10-shot group average extreme spread of 1.90”. The three 10-shot groups were over-layed on each other using RSI Shooting Lab to form a 30-shot composite group. The mean radius for the 30-shot composite group was 0.63”.


The smallest 10-shot group . . .


50_tsx_10_shot_group_measured_02x-2268892.jpg



The 30-shot composite group . . .


50_tsx_composite_group-2268893.jpg




molon_signature_005-1357735.jpg


….
 
  • Like
Reactions: jMarine
Hornady 5.56mm 75 Grain TAP SBR



hornady_75_grain_tap_sbr_box_01_resized-2515185.jpg




One of Hornady’s later editions to their line-up of 75 grainTAP ammunition is their 75 grain 5.56mm TAP SBR load (#81295.) The “SBR” abbreviation stands for short-barreled rifle; the intended platform for the usage of this ammunition.



hornady_75_grain_tap_sbr_cartridge_02_re-2515193.jpg




This ammunition is loaded with a 75 grain flat-base, soft point bullet. This bullet is not a bonded projectile; it does however utilize an array of cannelures intended to lock the lead core of the bullet to the gilding metal jacket. The cartridge is sealed and crimped at the case-mouth.
.....

Here's an updated pic of the newer box for this ammo, with the claimed ballistics listed as well as two of these rounds I fired into a snow bank a few months ago, for what that's worth.

Looking back through my notes, I've just discovered that apparently I never ran these over the chrono with my 11.5" barrel; I'll do that tomorrow and report back, for science ya know.

x37cH9nh.jpg


zLEvBTBh.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: jMarine
Thought I'd also show more detail on the 55gr Lehigh CC load I mentioned earlier. The pic has one bullet that was fired into a snowbank, but I was only able to recover 2 of the 4 petals that fracture off. That solid base tends to penetrate fairly deeply while the fracturing petals seem to do their damage at approximately the right depth for a chest shot on a deer, person, etc. I have not killed anything with this load yet, but having tested it in gelatin, meat, water, etc and comparing to known entities, I'm pretty impressed.

The load I'm using is 27.2gr of WC749 surplus powder; a "warm" load that is safe in my rifles.

dJYNTu9h.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: jMarine
Here's an updated pic of the newer box for this ammo, with the claimed ballistics listed as well as two of these rounds I fired into a snow bank a few months ago, for what that's worth.

Looking back through my notes, I've just discovered that apparently I never ran these over the chrono with my 11.5" barrel; I'll do that tomorrow and report back, for science ya know.



zLEvBTBh.jpg

To follow up on this - I ran a handful of these over the chrono with my 11.5" SBR (Ballistic Advantage barrel FWIW): 2,270 fps. That's not too far off from the claimed 2,310 fps I guess.

It's definitely a mild load, and is a good demonstration of what a good SBR-optimized load is: reduced blast, easy to shoot, and a bullet chosen for good terminal effectiveness at lower velocity.

We've probably all heard someone say that short barrel optimized loads use a faster powder to make up the speed difference with the short barrel - that's false, and isn't how things work anyway. But I do suspect this 75 TAP SBR load uses a faster powder, not to increase speed but to reduce flash and blast, something that is more important with short barrels.

In contrast, just for example, I have a warm Leverevolution load with the Hornady 75gr BTHP that averages 2,610 fps from this same rifle - in the ballpark of the same speeds many people get from 16" barrels with that bullet using powders like Varget and 8208. But the downside is that it's LOUD with a lot of blast, and makes a really impressive fireball. Good for speed, but not the best SBR load for most purposes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jMarine
Thought I'd also show more detail on the 55gr Lehigh CC load I mentioned earlier. The pic has one bullet that was fired into a snowbank, but I was only able to recover 2 of the 4 petals that fracture off. That solid base tends to penetrate fairly deeply while the fracturing petals seem to do their damage at approximately the right depth for a chest shot on a deer, person, etc. I have not killed anything with this load yet, but having tested it in gelatin, meat, water, etc and comparing to known entities, I'm pretty impressed.

The load I'm using is 27.2gr of WC749 surplus powder; a "warm" load that is safe in my rifles.

dJYNTu9h.jpg
DANG. does that say 2940fps from a 11.5? that's pretty dang good!
 
I got great results from 23.8 gr of H4895 and 77 SMK. It’s a 12.5” 1:7 barrel though.
Avg 2500 fps
Ive been searching the interwebs for starting points to develop 77g loads for my 12.5 and 14.5 AR. Your data seems like a promising start i was wondering if youve done any more development on it or if you could share what you used as a starting point for this load?
 
Ive been searching the interwebs for starting points to develop 77g loads for my 12.5 and 14.5 AR. Your data seems like a promising start i was wondering if youve done any more development on it or if you could share what you used as a starting point for this load?

This seems to be a common hang up for new reloaders: you do not need different load data for short barrels.

The only special consideration for short barrels is if you’re looking for a low flash powder, but that’s just about powder choice. Once you’ve selected the powder, like the H4895 mentioned above, then look up book data for that powder and bullet and start there. It doesn’t matter if you have a 12” barrel or a 24” barrel.