Thread: Reloading 25-06 - Opinion on Primer

Yes,and you can actually look up which are harder or softer too lol. SOME people actually use a softer primer on purpose so they know early/earlier if things getting warm..... Now I'm just going to put this here and leave it.... IF adi data etc IS being made milder to accommodate for AR15s..... One would be forgiven for assuming an AR15 is NOT capable of using 5.56 ammunition IF that is after all so much hotter than .223 ammunition........

Originally Posted by Micky Duck

Yes,and you can actually look up which are harder or softer too lol. SOME people actually use a softer primer on purpose so they know early/earlier if things getting warm..... Now I'm just going to put this here and leave it.... IF adi data etc IS being made milder to accommodate for AR15s..... One would be forgiven for assuming an AR15 is NOT capable of using 5.56 ammunition IF that is after all so much hotter than .223 ammunition........

The select fire military rifles are quite different to the civilian semi auto rifles sold to the US public. The military ammo is loaded to a higher pressure, a bit over 60,000 PSI (roughly 52,000 CUP). I suspect that the lower pressure of 55,000 PSI is to accommodate the civilian semi auto's. The pressure is set by SAAMI and Hodgdons produce the data for ADI.
GPM.

THX MD and GPM for for posting such good info.

An interesting thread.

No expert that’s for sure, but have been loading for yonks. Just my 2c.


I agree its smart to check multiple indicators for signs of pressure. That is just good sense. Particularly as we approach max recommended loads.

And, yes, change any component and you need to be mindful that pressures may rise. Personally, If saaay, I changed primer, prior to loading up a large number I would just load a couple with slightly lower and normal powder charge to test first. Bullet brand/design, probably more or less start from scratch.


I agree that Velocity MUST be a very good indicator of pressure. After all its pressure that gives us the velocity. In fact you only need to look at a variety of load data to see its true. Squib or subsonic loads for example are always very low pressure. Its just simple physics. But of course if you haven't given it much thought you may not have realised.

Also we need to remember that at the end of the day, we are only estimating pressures. After all we are not using sophisticated, calibrated instruments like the manufacturers use.

ADI and Ill bet all powder manufacturers check/test each batch of powder to ensure it is within specs/tolerances. What the specs are I don’t know. But internet gossip suggests that it’s +/- 5% (seems a lot to me)

I am perplexed regarding the idea that a powder manufacturer would make a permanent change (and faster at that, which would increase pressures) to a powder burn rate without re-naming it and NOT immediately providing amended load data. I struggle with this idea.

After all didn’t they re-name AR2206 to AR2206H??

Wouldn't that leave them open to litigation?

Regarding OP’s load. I’d be happy with that. Especially since he has had no issues for many years. But looks “warmish” to me. I would not increase the charge.

Originally Posted by Micky Duck

Yes,and you can actually look up which are harder or softer too lol. SOME people actually use a softer primer on purpose so they know early/earlier if things getting warm..... Now I'm just going to put this here and leave it.... IF adi data etc IS being made milder to accommodate for AR15s..... One would be forgiven for assuming an AR15 is NOT capable of using 5.56 ammunition IF that is after all so much hotter than .223 ammunition........

@Micky Duck

Hi MD,

Are you able to provide the info, or a link?

I hate auto correct

Hi guys,

Super interesting and lots of useful info here thank you. I do have access to a chronograph so when we are batch testing my friends 6.5 creedmoor loads I will check my velocity. Only ever checked the velocities when I was first testing batch loads when the rifle was new, which was in 1998. Never changed anything since. Always had the plastic ADI powder containers I'm sure. I don't know if I'll be able to find the paper work where I recorded the velocities? 3100 - 3150 springs to mind but not 100% on that. 22.5" barrel on the Tikka.

Thanks again,

Camel.

Federal standard primers - which I read are at the softer end of the spectrum?

I think it’s a safe and soft load, I use 51.5 of 2209 with the same pill in my .257 Rob ai for 3150 fps. I reckon you are probably only getting 3050 fps? My case is a few grains capacity smaller.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Oldbloke

@Micky Duck

Hi MD,

Are you able to provide the info, or a link?

I hate auto correct

At work at present,will see if can dig it out later... Same with brass brands,some are softer than others.

Originally Posted by Camel

Hi guys,

Super interesting and lots of useful info here thank you. I do have access to a chronograph so when we are batch testing my friends 6.5 creedmoor loads I will check my velocity. Only ever checked the velocities when I was first testing batch loads when the rifle was new, which was in 1998. Never changed anything since. Always had the plastic ADI powder containers I'm sure. I don't know if I'll be able to find the paper work where I recorded the velocities? 3100 - 3150 springs to mind but not 100% on that. 22.5" barrel on the Tikka.

Thanks again,

Camel.

Greetings @Camel,
Glad to hear you were not getting overpowered by the detail. As far as the cans of powder goes I have one packed in 2001 so your plastic containers are likely to post date that and are likely to all be the faster powder. You would lose around 50 fps for the shorter barrel on your Tikka. To me this indicates that your load is in the Goldilocks zone (not too hot and not to cold) and as you have been shooting it longer than most keep their latest wonder rifle there is no need to change it, unless you really want to.
GPM.

Originally Posted by grandpamac

The select fire military rifles are quite different to the civilian semi auto rifles sold to the US public. The military ammo is loaded to a higher pressure, a bit over 60,000 PSI (roughly 52,000 CUP). I suspect that the lower pressure of 55,000 PSI is to accommodate the civilian semi auto's. The pressure is set by SAAMI and Hodgdons produce the data for ADI.
GPM.

Chambers, bolts and barrels are not different, just some lower receiver small parts. Nothing that has any relationship to pressure

Originally Posted by Oldbloke

THX MD and GPM for for posting such good info.

An interesting thread.

No expert that’s for sure, but have been loading for yonks. Just my 2c.


I agree its smart to check multiple indicators for signs of pressure. That is just good sense. Particularly as we approach max recommended loads.

And, yes, change any component and you need to be mindful that pressures may rise. Personally, If saaay, I changed primer, prior to loading up a large number I would just load a couple with slightly lower and normal powder charge to test first. Bullet brand/design, probably more or less start from scratch.


I agree that Velocity MUST be a very good indicator of pressure. After all its pressure that gives us the velocity. In fact you only need to look at a variety of load data to see its true. Squib or subsonic loads for example are always very low pressure. Its just simple physics. But of course if you haven't given it much thought you may not have realised.

Also we need to remember that at the end of the day, we are only estimating pressures. After all we are not using sophisticated, calibrated instruments like the manufacturers use.

ADI and Ill bet all powder manufacturers check/test each batch of powder to ensure it is within specs/tolerances. What the specs are I don’t know. But internet gossip suggests that it’s +/- 5% (seems a lot to me)

I am perplexed regarding the idea that a powder manufacturer would make a permanent change (and faster at that, which would increase pressures) to a powder burn rate without re-naming it and NOT immediately providing amended load data. I struggle with this idea.

After all didn’t they re-name AR2206 to AR2206H??

Wouldn't that leave them open to litigation?

Regarding OP’s load. I’d be happy with that. Especially since he has had no issues for many years. But looks “warmish” to me. I would not increase the charge.

Greetings,
I was perplexed about the change in speed as well. I had been loading with AR2209 in the 6.5x55 for a couple of decades or so and finally shouted myself a new Tikka. I did not want to start loading with a part can so shouted myself a new batch. This was around 2019. I had been loading to the ADI max of 45.5 grains of AR2209 with the 129 grain SST projectile and bumped the load up 0.5 grains to 46 grain expecting around 2,750 fps. The chronograph read 2,860 fps. I had 3 batches of AR2209 from 1991, 2000 and 2019 so I went back and loaded a sample of each with 46 grains and the 120. the two early batches chronographed 2,806 and 2,798 fps respectively and the new batch 2,870 fps. Wondering if my older powders had lost a bit of zip I hunted through my notes to find a chronographed load of 2,781 fps for 46 grains of the 1991 powder shot in 1993 in my M38. Close to the T3.
The Hodgdon data for the 6.5x55 and AR2209 is still for the older version as are loads for some other cartridges. Why is a question I can't answer.
Regards GPM.

Thanks again everyone.

Yes GPM, no plans to change anything - until forced to. The 100 grain interlock is unfortunately no longer available. When I found this out a number of years ago I purchased every box of these projectiles that Robbie T had.

Cheers,

Camel.

Hi,
Sooo, I found it a tad difficult to follow the above post GPM. I’m assuming there are no typo’s in the post, pretty easy to do. So I thought I would lay it all out in a spread sheet to help me better understand. See attached. I hope I got all the info & No’s right.

The way I see it there have been three changes since the original loads back in 1991.


New powder batch.
Bullet change from 129gr to 120gr
Rifle change from M38 to T3


The original loads were:

M38
1993
1991
46
129 SST
2781

The fastest with the new batch of powder is:

T3
2019
New
46
120
2870

In this instance the rifle and bullet have changed.

A difference of 89 fps.

Given the changes and the 89 fps increase I don’t honestly believe you can blame the powder. Just the change from M38 to a T3 could easily account for that.

P.S. You don’t mention barrel lengths or primers??

My 2c
OB

That primer has a sharp edge , it has flowed past what I would call normal, I dont need to load a 25-06 or even know what the load is. Is it a hot load no idea, maybe change to a better primer or adjust seating depth

Sorry mate but recent report have the last load of 2209 a bit faster, up to 80 fps if socials is to be believed