Typically if YOU cannot find data for a certain powder in either a manual or on the powder mfg. website you will most likely not get an answer from someone unless THEY have found the data somewhere and will direct you to it.

This is a safety issue and typically no one is going recommend data if it is NOT posted manufacturer data.

 

Have not looked at more current manuals but 24th edition of Hodgdon Data Manual shows a load range of 26-28 gr of W748 with 40 gr bullets I would look at a new manual or go to Nosler's site to check for current info.

 

If "Win 748 works great" you must have already tried it. Use you own judgment with an unproved loading

 

The 35 gr bullet is not really appropriate for a 223. It might work in a bolt gun with 12 twist but with an AR it may well blow up due to high spin rate. 748 as has been noted is much slower than the recommended powders for 40gr bullets that I’ve checked.

I personally would not use this bullet/powder combination.

 

I agree with Doom. That's to light for 223. Probably a hornet bullet. Don't use it.

 

Hornady shows no data for the 35 gr. V-Max bullet or W748 powder in Hornady Manual 8th edition in the 223 Remington or the 223 Remington Service Rifle sections .
40 gr. V-Max is the lightest weight data is shown for in 223 Remington and 68 gr. bullets are the lightest in Service Rifle section .
Gary

 

I thought about trying the 35 gr. V-Max in my .223 but, decided not to because the shape sucks. It's really designed for the Hornet, and similar cartridges. I called Hornady and asked about load data, and they said just use 40 gr. data.

 

Hornady 10th Edition lists a 35gr NTX for the 223 Remington, but Win 748 is not a recommended or tested powder for that application. None of the powders tested with the 35 gr NTX are even close to the same burn rate as Win 748. All the powders listed for that grain bullet in a .223 Remington burn much much faster than Win 748. I'd say proceed with caution!

 

I have loaded a couple thousand Barnes 36-grain Varmint Grenade,... ("solid copper" incorrect - I cross referenced to a different Barnes bullet I use - so, sorry),... bullets for at least a decade (ims)! In fact, I just started loading a few hundred more, as I write this!

My semi-auto has a 24" barrel with a 1 in 9" twist rate and my pump has a 16" barrel with the same twist. I load 36 gr Barnes Varmint Grenade bullets with absolutely excellent sub MOA results! I load them at Maximum Powder Charges, with X-Terminator powder, resulting in Chrony velocities just over 3,750 fps from my 24" barrel,... because that's what the rifle shoots most accurate with!

Never had a bullet failure from my twist rate, or, velocity,... ever!

I think the 1 in 9" twist rate is not only underestimated, but also maligned by some who probably don't shoot with it!

Grizzly4U,... shoot your 35 gr bullets with confidence!

https://www.barnesbullets.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/223RemingtonWeb.pdf

jmo

 

I have loaded a couple thousand Barnes 36-grain Varmint Grenade solid copper bullets for at least a decade (ims)! In fact, I just started loading a few hundred more, as I write this!

My semi-auto has a 24" barrel with a 1 in 9" twist rate and my pump has a 16" barrel with the same twist. I load 36 gr Barnes Varmint Grenade bullets with absolutely excellent sub MOA results! I load them at Maximum Powder Charges, with X-Terminator powder, resulting in Chrony velocities just over 3,750 fps from my 24" barrel,... because that's what the rifle shoots most accurate with!

Never had a bullet failure from my twist rate, or, velocity,... ever!

I think the 1 in 9" twist rate is not only underestimated, but also maligned by some who probably don't shoot with it!

Grizzly4U,... shoot your 35 gr bullets with confidence!

https://www.barnesbullets.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/223RemingtonWeb.pdf

jmo

eye eye eye eye!

 

Shooting monolithic or sintered bullets, is entirely different than classic jacketed bullets.

Using 3,750fps results in 300,000 RPM.
If you read the varmint bullet RPM thread I did some years ago, you'll see that is on the high side; but not out of the safe range for several classic bullets.

Barrel smoothness and actual twist rate will ultimately affect the RPM limit that a particular jacketed bullet can endure; as well as the rifling type.

The Vmax is officially limited at about 290,000 RPM. I've had several barrels which could easily take them faster with safety. OTOH, I've got a WSSM barrel that destroys them below that number. While it's kind of a hoot to send a few non-flammable tracers downrange for people to see, it makes reliably hitting a target a mess. 😁

Cheers

 

I'm looking at my Hodgdon #26 manual and it has loads for the 40gr. bullet and has 748 loads, what's interesting is it shows the same starting and maximum load of 26.0 and 28.0 for 40.0, 45.0,50.0,52.0 and 53.0 gr. bullets. 26.0 start to 28.0 max, the latter is probably as much as the case will hold.
Normally you wouldn't choose such a slow powder for a light bullet but at least around where I live there's not alot of choices when shopping for components.
If the op decides to load the 35gr. bullets with 748 because that's all he has use magnum primers and put a light crimp on the bullet to help hold it back a little for better ignition even if he's shooting it in a bolt gun. That max load is listed at 3579fps with the 40gr. bullet, hardly light speed.

 

A misunderstood post on my part,... gone!

 

This is the third post you have referred to Barnes bullets as " sintered" or, as I call that type bullet "frangible".

But, Barnes bullets that I use, are solid copper,... you may want to recheck your sources.

I said monolithic or sintered. A "Solid copper" bullet, is a monolithic bullet.

The Varmint Grenades you love so much, are not monolithic. If you actually read the Barnes page for yourself, you can clearly read they are sintered tin-copper core, with a gilding metal jacket holding them together.

 

So sorry, I was referring more to the their TSX and TTSX bullets I use .

Copyright material removed

 

Yup! You got that right!

 

And it's amazing that people can survive by refusing to read the directions.... but they do.

 

Sometimes it is hard to break old habits, I have been verifying my posts with published resources for well over a decade and a half,... my apologies,... but, there was no dastardly, or, diabolically illicit intent meant by my mistake.

But, when moderators break the rules, there is obviously ulterior motives, imo.

Mike, since you are bringing up rules,... wasn't it you that advised me that web published web addresses were not copyrighted material, and the way to get info posted, within this site's rule structure?

Makes me wonder why the web address was deleted with the copyrighted material,... if there is no site rule against posting it?

 

URLs are fine. Says so in the 'sticky' about copyrighted materials

 

My apologies Mike,.... I should have addressed my question about deleting the address/URL, directly to Darkker.

Sooo,... Darkker,... what was the infraction I committed, that validated you to delete the URL that linked to the manufacturer's info, supporting my point, in our discussion?

 

First: The link.

After seeing that you stole the entirety of the page from Barnes, ignored copyright law and our easily found stickies. I discovered the link at the bottom had an error in it and wasn't displaying correctly. Who knows why, simple ghost in the machine, a missed keystroke in one of the multiple edits to the thread you have. Regardless, as you can easily see in several stickies and many threads, we have neither the time or requirement of babysitting every word or line of broken code in a post that is getting moderated. Especially in a post that is so egregiously forbidden.

If you would like to follow the rules and copyright laws, and simply post a link to Barnes; go right ahead.😊


Second: The discussion.

The conversation was around bullet construction and RPM limits. Your story about how many of the "all copper" varmint Grenades you shoot, and a misunderstanding of different RPM limits. Which caused me to respond with some info about those things. Notice I didn't originally point out your error, simply covered the two main construction types Barnes is known for today.

You took exception to me using the word sintered, which the Varmint Grenades your story was about; clearly are. Conveniently you decided to ignore me also using the word monolithic. Which as I previously explained, is what the TSX/TTSX lineup is.
Even if you mistakenly told a story about VG, but meant the TTSX. My RPM explanation and wording of construction, is correct.

Cheers

 

I'm sorry Darkker, but,... did you check to see if that web site advertisement was COPYRIGHTED,... or, did you just assume it was? Or, do you just like following all my posts and chastising me,... I seem to see to a pattern materializing over the past few months?

As to the link not working,.........hmmm,..... I always double check all links I post after posting them,.... and it worked just fine! I have never had a comment of "Linky no Worky" in fifteen years! And, I don't remember any part of the LINK RULE stating, links that don't work will be deleted!

Have you ever heard the old saying,..." when you find yourself in a hole,... stop digging."

I have written to Barnes on this subject, since it really is up to Barnes whether the ad was protected by copyright, and whether I was infringing, or, not,... by doing a copy, paste and post of their info ad.

I hope to get a reply next week, and, will post the reply, when I get one!

 

Pretty much all web sites have some sort of copyright on them, somewhere. Just because YOU can't find it.... does not mean it does not exist. And you seem to be having trouble 'finding' information in the 'stickys' here so...... just sayin'

If you can EXPLICIT permission from Barnes to post pages from their web site, then go ahead, and include the verbage where they granted you permission.

Otherwise.... follow the rules and quit-cher-bitchin'.

I think that about covers it.

 

You have a small minded little man given more authority than his puffed up ego can handle.

NOW,... that covers it!

 

Maybe this isn't the place for you, shooter444.

Now, back to our original broadcast.......

 

Have to see the humor in this. Everybody seem's to be going to the 60gr + bullet's in 223 and here is a guy wanting to use 35gr bullet's. I'd say to the OP, if you can't find a load printed for that powder, don't try it. To many other powder's that will work to fool around trying to find data for a powder that seems hard to find data for!

 

Thank you!!!

 

I used to use and shoot a lot of 748 in my .223 bolt. I agree it does work better with heavier bullets. I shot a lot of 55 gr. with it. I didn't get great velocity though, around 3,050 fps with 55 gr. Sierra's. I shot some 40 gr. Sierra's with 748 and IMR4198, and they shot great.

 

You may run into an exception here and there, but, generally speaking, when a powder is too slow for the bullet weight you get low peak pressures which lead to large velocity SD's, a lot of powder fouling, and you throw a lot of the powder out of the muzzle, unburned, so you are wasting powder. In this instance, QuickLOAD suggests pressures around 40,000 psi for 100% case fill and about 20% of the charge still not burned when the bullet clears the muzzle. Much better would be to hold out to get something like 4198. I know that's a tall order, currently, but the 748 would be better set aside for heavier bullets.