Go to the Hodgdon online loading data. Select Rifle, 223 Remington, then filter for 55gr bullets. Scroll down to "55GR HDY FMJ". I have seen pistol powders used for "mousefart" loads in rifles before but I think these are guaranteed squibs.

Attached Images

Hodgdon 55gr pistol powders.jpg (72.3 KB, 119 views)

Is that load for a .223/5.56 case, or something much smaller that uses that bullet? They look like pistol loads and pistol powders, with velocities out of ~7" barrel, but I don't think I'd trust that tiny amount of powder in such a relatively big case as .223. My spidey sense says good chance of a flashover pressure spike.

Google - hodgdon subsonic loads

SUBSONIC RIFLE LOAD DATA | The High Road

And SUBSONIC RIFLE LOAD DATA | The High Road

Since they are pressure tested loads with fast burning powders in the small .223 case I doubt they are typos or will be squibs.

That's probably it. However: So the typo is the omission of the subsonic tag. Interesting to note that the printed version of the manual does not list any subsonic loadings for 223. Thread title edited to be less theatrical.

Will they cycle with a suppressor?

__________________
Just hanging with my dogs

Fast burning pistol powders have been included in some rifle load data over the years but it's hard to imagine the usefulness of such loads. These may not work the actions of semi-automatics and sights would probably need re-adjustment. I don't know about accuracy, but it probably wouldn't be the best. It also would seem to be wasteful dollar-wise to use a commercial jacketed for a very light load.

This appears to be more of a "because I can do it" stunt than anything of practical value. Why not just buy a .22 rimfire rifle or handgun?

I use 4.1gr of Bullseye for a 60gr 224 cast in a bolt gun. I think those numbers for TG and others are fine.

I've shot the titegroup and Trailboss loads out of a 16" unsuppressed AR. The action doesn't hardly move. You have to work the action by hand.

If they had called out a cast bullet I would have believed it right away. Are you running a supressor?I believe a supressor will increase gas port pressure. I wounder if that would be enough to cycle with a carbine gas tube?

The data listed by Hodgdon only states a 24" barrel was used , no mention of a suppressor ... the test were probably done in a bolt action with no supressor ...
Hornady tested the bullets and loads in a 26" barreled Remington model 700 ... I like it when they publish what firearm and barrel length is used to work up the data they give .
Gary

__________________
Certified Cajun
NRA Member

Shooting those loads................

a rifle should last forever !!

Talk about minimum wear and tear. Wow.

It's nice that they show the options... The case capacity is about the same as a .357 Mag. so it seems like the loads are very, very light but it looks like they were trying to stay subsonic.

Maybe, but you've also got the issue of gas volume. The volume of the barrel and gas tube is significant. That small charge of pistol powder may not be producing enough gas to cycle the action without dissipating the pressure, even with suppressor back pressure.

It is 3 grains of powder versus 25. That's a significant difference in gas volume.

With the general atmosphere of hostility in courts, do you really think a major company would market a product that would invite liability claims?
There is data available to download just about anything you can think of for gallery or small game. That almost automatically drops MV below speed of sound or approx 1086 fps.

They won't be squibs. The typical low end for a PCP air rifle is just over 1000Psi, and the high is around 1300.

I haven't made up any light .223 loads but I have gone as low as 10 grains of fast pistol powders in a .30-'06 load using 110 grain .30 Carbine bullets. Good for short-range target shooting and on small game. At one time there were factory-loaded light rifle loads available, used for finishing shots on wounded game animals. I don't see why the .223 loads listed wouldn't fire OK, but not likely to produce enough energy to function the mechanism of a semiauto rifle.

Several weeks ago I took my two young grandchildren to the range to allow them to fire a real WWI Springfield Model 1903. I used those light loads, no recoil and not much noise. No way would I let them shoot full power .30-'06 ammunition.

I kilt a deer several years ago with 1 00Buck out of a Rem 721 30/06.
I believe it was with IMR-4198. Will have to check my notes. I have a page of reduced loads and light bullets from a gun magazine.
The older Lyman manuals will have gallery loads listed for a lot of cartridges.
I’ve shot some 32gr Sisk bullets out of Hornet, Bee, 222 and 223. Did lousy in all. Tried to download for squirrel.

Pistol powders are generally better than slower IMR type powders for use in ultralight loads. The Lyman cast bullet handbook used to provide many very light cast bullet load recipes.

I think older manuals had more options with light loads, often the slower handgun powders with common rifle rounds. Yes, there’s often plenty of room in the case for a double-charge, should one not be careful.

I’ve used A-2400 & IMR-4227 at times for reduced loads. It’s an option if one wants to get below just a lower end(within data) charge of regular powders listed.

Just like with low powered 22 ammo, much of the time it won’t cycle a semi-auto action. Of course not a concern in most other types of actions.