Chrono Data - Federal XM223SP1 62gr Bonded

Temp = 58F
Elevation = 1300’
prochrono @ 15’

Federal XM223SP1
62gr bonded .223
20" Colt 5.56mm 1x7", freefloated with 3x9 Nikon Scope
Lot # 49P659X005

2777
2743
2760
2751
2778

2762 fps ave (relatively mild for a 20" barrel)

Other observations: Accuracy was reasonably good at about 2MOA (1") at 50yards, much better than 62gr Remington Core Lokt Ultra Bonded, but not as good as 75gr Hornady 5.56mm TAP in this rifle. I also shot it into water at close range and it did not hold together as well as the 62gr Remington that was going probably 75fps faster. Bottom line is it’s a relatively cheap ($9.90/20 rounds), reasonably accurate load that maintains decent, but not spectacular, bullet integrity.

Seems weak. Did you by chance measure COAL? Would be grateful to get a charge weight on a pulled round.

Not the most powerful .223 for sure, but I honestly think that this bullet would do better, by that I mean hold together better, when fired out of a shorter barrel with less velocity.

COAL = 2.231" (via lyman dial caliper)
Charge Wt. = 24.2gr (Wonder how this compares to the 64gr Gold Dot?)
Bullet Wt. = 61.8gr (somewhat mangled getting it out of the case since I don’t have a bullet puller)

Weights measured with an old RCBS beem scale.

Thanks DRT. I have 62gr and 64gr pulls of this flavor and am trying to figure out some loadings for them. 24.2 grs. would explain the slow velocity. That would only be about 2500fps out of 16" or shorter barrels.:eek:

These rounds were designed to expand and perform at much lower velocities though I’m sure…

And thanks for the info!

My experience is that my 16" LE6920 generally runs about 4% slower than my 20" rifle. I’m guessing that’ll put them in the 2650fps range. I’ll chronograph them out of my carbine next time I have a chance just to confirm.

I dont reload .223 but you got my interest up so I did a search and found this.

http://beta.ar15.com/archive/topic.html?b=3&f=16&t=510446

Very similar COAL and 24.1gr so I guess it’s typical. What charge weights have you measured in your fusion and gold dot?

I think you are spot on. They definitely expand. Water at close range is tough on a bullet but I bet they’d do much better in a 10.5"-14.5" weapon. They probably won’t come apart so much at the lower speeds.

I am reloading these, so don’t have factory ammo to compare with.I was doing accuracy testing on loads from 24.4 up to 25.6 on the 64grainers, 25.6 having the best results.Around 25 is what the 62 grain Fusions liked. Not trying to start this into a reloading thread.

I appreciate the testing and the info.:thank_you2:

I’m sure many of you are familiar with the Speer Gold Dot 24448 and how it performs, well Doc’s post in this thread made my decision to pick up the XM223SP1 since its so much cheaper…

https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=73955

Thanks for the chronograph data. Pretty much confirms what I was expecting after shooting some at 100 to 500 meters through a 14.5" DD LW. At 300 & 400 it was pretty clear it was on the slower side. The bottom really fell out at 500M based on the number of additional MOAs I had to dial in vs what my 55 grain loads require.

Accuracy was acceptable in the 14.5" (the LW shoots good, but is hard to shoot good if you know what I mean.) A 5 shot group ran 2.4".

A 10 round group in the 18" Noveske SPR barrel put 9 of 10 in 1.25" at 100 Yds with an extreme spread of 1.65". With me on the trigger, this is very good accuracy.

Yup…and that’s the reason I’ve been stocking up on this round. Perfect for use through both my BCM 14.5 mid-lengths :wink:

Would it be correct to assume the 20" rifle the data was taken from has a 5.56 chamber?

Not really sure what difference that would make as the ammo is .223 pressure and not 5.56…am I missing something? :confused:

Yes, per my original post where I indicated it was a 5.56mm.

223 ammunition would have lower pressures and velocities in a 5.56 chamber (as it has a longer leade) than it would in a 223 chamber. I don’t know about all 5.56 ammunition, but the Federal 5.56 with the 55 gr bullet is loaded to a longer OAL than the Federal 223 with the same bullet

223 SAAMI pressures are not necessarily lower than 5.56 NATO pressures as they are measured differently

D’OH!! I missed that

Interesting…I didn’t know that.

Thanks!

Upon further study of the difference between the Federal 223 & 5.56 ammunition, it’s come to my attention a correction to my earlier post is in order-

It appears Federal either uses two different types of 55 gr bullets when loading the 223 & the 5.56 or uses the same bullet but with the cannular in a different location. The cannular of the 5.56 bullet is further back from the bullet’s tip

I chronographed lot number 49Q660X005 this morning in a 14.5" DD LW and a 16" Noveske N4 Light. Both are chrome lined barrels. From a velocity standpoint the 14.5" gun was surprisingly slow at < 2,500 FPS. Not sure if it’s a slow barrel or if the powder does not perform well at this barrel length.

Temp: ~56*.
Altitude: 5,000’
PACT Chronograph at 10’.
Wind 10+ early. Worse later.

14.5 DD LW - 10 shot string:
(Cold/Dirty barrel.)

Avg - 2,469 fps
H - 2,564
L - 2,405

16" N4 Light - String 1; 11 shots:
(Cold/Clean barrel).

Avg - 2,583
H - 2,622
L - 2,518

[16" N4 Light - String 2; 10 shots:
(Cool/Dirty barrel).

Avg - 2,586
H - 2,629
L - 2,548

It’s interesting that the 16" barrel ran over 100 fps faster. This makes a huge difference if shooting any distance at all.

With the 16" N4 and Aimpoint Micro, I got a rough 200M zero using +2" high on the 100 Yd gong. I was then able to get consistent hits by going to the top edge of an 18x18" gong at 300 Meters. Warm and fuzzy on this part.

I’m really interested in seeing the velocity out of a 10.5".

I would think that the velocity would still be high enough to expand reliably, but hopefully I could get a good 100 yds out of it (ballistics wise)

What were your results, velocity and otherwise, from the 18" barrel, shootist?