Load data for Barnes 85 gr Match Burner

[MrTwister]

I finally picked up some of these bullets and i'm looking for a starting point for powder charge or location of good load data for this bullet in 5.56mm. I've already downloaded the load data from Barnes, not much there. I currently have the following powders for loading:

Winchester 748
Reloader 15
Benchmark
IMR 8208 XBR

Thanks for any help and let me know your experiences with this bullet.

[markm]

748 is slow enough to make a run at these. But the Benchrest rooted powders such as XBR and H322 will most certainly outperform the ball powders. Get some Tula/Wolf primers and you'll probably make these bullets sing.

I've had good luck with H322 and Sierra 80 gr.

[bb223]

Their .223 data for the 85gr Match Burner is:

2.260" COAL, 24" Barrel

Winchester 748
min 20.5gr 2275fps

max 22.8gr 2543fps


RL15
min 19.4gr 2285fps

max 21.6gr 2477fps

I don't have anything for 5.56, sorry.

But maybe those can work as a starting point?

[MrTwister]

Thanks for the replies with much needed info!

[opsoff1]

I would be very careful with seating depth and it is critically important whether you are single loading these or are running them through a mag.

If these are at mag length - 3 words - Don't do it.

If they are to be single loaded - you can load them long. This will increase your case capacity and your velocities. Those listed velocities are anemic. Bullets of this design are very jump tolerant. If your rifle has a long throat (Wylde or even a 556 NATO) you can really seat these way out. Your powder capacity will go up significantly along with your velocities. Long heavy bullets seated deep in the case run the risk of collapsing the boat tail from the pressure. The optimal depth puts the bottom of the bearing surface at the bottom of the neck/shoulder juncture.

The load data for the 80 SMK can be used as a rough guide.

If you want to run a high BC, heavy 223 at mag length - there are far better bullets - the 77gr SMK for example.
As a point of comparison, my 80 SMK load (single load) runs 2.500 OAL with 24.5 Rel 15 - velocities 10ft from the muzzle run 2750. My LR (1000yd) load with 90gr JLK's runs 2700 with even more Rel 15. All of these are out of 20" service rifle bbl's.
I would also caution against using ball powders behind heavy bullets in 223. It will work, but you'll be far happier with a stick like Rel15, N140/N540 or Varget.
I was one of the test shooters for Berger when they were developing their 82gr Match Target and have shot some other exotic heavy 224's - the 90 JLK and 90 Swampy's as well as the PRL 87's and the the Hammond mag length 80's....burned a lot of powder testing and learning.

[markm]

I agree with opsoff1. I actually don't use ball for anything anymore.... except H335 for night shoot muzzle flash circus loads.

[Molon]

But the Benchrest rooted powders such as XBR and H322 will most certainly outperform the ball powders.

Not necessarily. The 10-shot group pictured below was fired from an AR-15 at a distance of 100 yards using hand-loads topped with the Barnes 85 grain Match Burner. The load was charged with a ball powder. The 10-shot group has an extreme spread of 0.56".






...

[mic2377]

There are ball powders that work with heavy bullets, just not very many. One that comes to mind is Alliant 2000-MR. It is a dense high energy ball powder that is similar is not a bit slower than RL-15, and reasonably temp stable. I have used it with good success. It also works great in 308 and meters through a measure very well.

[bfoosh006]

Deleted

[opsoff1]

bfoosh,
Respectfully - I looked that Barnes load data and honestly something is not quite right. They are saying that they shot 85gr MB's out of a 24" Wiseman (those are test barrels) with a 1/12 twist?? Sounds a bit suspicious to me. I haven't run a stabilty calculation on this bullet, but 35+ yrs of experience tells me no way will that stabilize.
Their published velocities are also specific to a 24" bbl. The max velocity shown was in the upper 2500 range. Out of a 20" bbl - velocities should be on the order of 80-100fps slower - which moves the velocity down to high 2400's.
Bottom line - that is SLOW from a .223 performance standpoint. They say the COAL was 2.260 which is mag length. That level of seating depth seriously impedes case capacity. That is the reason for the low velocities.
As I ststed in my earlier post;
"... Long heavy bullets seated deep in the case run the risk of collapsing the boat tail from the pressure. The optimal depth puts the bottom of the bearing surface at the bottom of the neck/shoulder juncture."

The boattail collapse issue was something that was explained to me in great detail by Walt Berger during discussions on the use of heavy bullets in a .223. Berger, to be sure, has probably forgotten more about bullet design than anyone even collectively knows.

Out of curiosity, what are you loading for powder? CFE223 or A2520? I'd be interested to understand how you got those velocities from a barrel 4" shorter - have you verified your chronograph?
Also - if you have the chance - how long is the bullet itself? How long is the bearing surface?
As a point of comparison, the Sierra 80gr MK has a Sectional Density of .228 vs .242 for the Barnes and this is right on with respect to the weight of each. The Barnes at 85gr's, claims a .410 BC vs the .420 for the 80 Sierra. Something is off. So this leads me to suspect that the 85 is a shorter bullet with a smaller ogive radius and a longer bearing surface. None of which are hallmarks of great LR bullet - which is the whole point of shooting heavy match bullets.

If you are shooting these heavies at ranges of 300yds or less - it is a total waste of a bullet. These heavyweight 223's are primarily designed for performance advantages at range - read 500yds - and out. Running them at those velocites and at short range isn't gaining anything for you and if you are shooting them at longer ranges, the lack of velocity is hurting you more. If you are punching paper at 100 or 200 yds - shoot a a nice light BR flat base at 2900-3000 fps - way more fun all the way around.
Let me know what you find - very curious about this.

Thanks