Is This Brass 5.56x45 Or .223 Rem?

Status
Not open for further replies.

PCCUSNRET

Member
Joined
May 4, 2009
Messages
1,166
Location
Virginia
Have been given lots of Military brass with crimped primers that have WCC, LC and a few other headstamps that not marked as .223 Rem. Is this brass 5.56x45 or is it .223 Remington?

I know some military brass is supposed to be thicker than regular .223 ammo, but if 5.56x45 is shot in an AR is there any problem reloading it for a .223 as long as I reduce the load and trim the necks? Thanks.
 
Dimensionally, 5.56 and .223 are the same - except for a thicker case. It is safe to reload the military brass but as you mentioned, I would stay away from max loads. You will always have to trim bottle neck cases because they do tend to grow. RCBS now sells an "X" die that requires the first reloading to be trimmed but subsequent loadings do not have to be trimmed. Also, you will have to remove the crimp from the case. It may be worth weighing the cases individually so that you can get an idea of which are heavier (indicating thicker case walls).

Blessings

Paul
 
While the .223 Remington and the 5.56mm NATO are NOT the same round, the cases should be pretty much the same.

Read this for the details on the differences (among other goodies):
Difference between .223 Rem and 5.56mm NATO

The difference tends to be in the pressures the rounds produce, and in the chamber/throat dimensions. The brass cases should be the same, though.
 
Yep, you will have to weigh it to see.

Some commercial is heavier than military and vice versa. After you fire it in your gun, it's whatever your gun is. It is used pretty much interchangeably. No worries.
 
Yep Agree with the three above posts. The only problem I find with MIL brass is having to remove the crimped primers the first time that it is reloaded. Otherwise it is same as same as. If you do a workup of your load as you are supposed to then the case thickness thing is not a problem as long as you sort your brass by head stamp in most instances.
 
308 mil brass tends to be thicker and to have less case capacity than commercial brass.

The reverse is true of 223. Lake City brass has more case capacity than the commercial brass I have checked.
 
Thanks for the info. I've been shooting LC and WCC with reduced loads (between 1 and 1/2 grs. under max for most powders) and have yet to see any showing any signs of pressure. This past weekend I was given about a 500 Privi Partizan cases that have 5.56X45 stamped on the head of the case. I was hoping that these would work in my bolt action rifles as it had no damage on it anywhere (he must have fired it in a bolt action rifle:D) I tumbled them in walnut for about an hour to get them clean, I then removed the primers and crimps and in the process of cleaning the primer pockets. Some days (if I'm real lucky) it will take me longer to clean and store brass than it does the guns I took to shoot. Thanks again!
 
Dimensionally, 5.56 and .223 are the same - except for a thicker case.

Sorry: The thicker case thing is a very popular myth: US military cases are not thicker than commercial cases. i weigh all the cases for my accuracy loads; been doing that for over 40 years. Heaviest US cases are Federal Match. Lapua cases are the heaviest of all.
 
You've never seen 5.56 dies, have you? ;)

No, but figured nobody must reload this stuff as much as I've been given in the past few weeks. I ran a few through the resizer tonight and it felt no different than RP, FC or Win. I was expecting there to be alot more sizing of the body but the only place I felt any resistance at all was down towards the case head. One thing I found out tonight that made me very happy was this PPU 5.56 x 45 did not need to have the crimp removed. I tried a few and the handle on the Dillon just fell down with little resistance. Funny thing is, 5 months ago I figured I would never bother reloading for the .223 as the Hornady bullets I have been shooting have been grouping at less than an inch as long as do my part. However, one of the fellows at the range gave me a recipe for a round he was using that was made up of LC brass, Hornady bullets and Win 748 powder. I have now shot through a pound of this powder and my groups have tightened to about the size of a dime. I let friend that recommended this load shoot my gun this past weekend and he put 10 rounds inside 10 ring of an 8" Shoot 'N See targets. I was using Nosler BT's, LC brass, 24.2 grs of H335 (ran out of Win 748). I am now cleaning and prepping a bunch of this military brass and getting ready for some serious loading this winter.
 
The 5.56 case may not be thicker but most do have lesser capacity than commercial .223 brass does. If you are using military brass that has a lesser capacity you will have to drop the powder charge weight back a bit to keep the same pressures.

I know from first hand experiance. I use a charge of 25.0gr Varget in my .223 ammo. That charge is slightly below the base of the neck. When loading some military PMC brass the same charge way almost to the top of the case mouth. That could be a problem... lol
 
The 5.56 case may not be thicker but most do have lesser capacity than commercial .223 brass does. If you are using military brass that has a lesser capacity you will have to drop the powder charge weight back a bit to keep the same pressures.

As stated several times above, this is not true.

From Sierra.
The conventional wisdom to reduce loads with military brass is familiar to most reloaders and is generally good advice. The rationale here is that the military cases tend to be somewhat thicker and heavier than their civilian counterparts, which in turn reduces capacity and raises pressures. This additional pressure normally requires a one or two grain reduction from the loads shown in most manuals or other data developed with commercial cases. While this is most often the situation with both 308 Winchester and 30-06 cases, it is less true with the 223 brass. We have found that military cases often have significantly more capacity than several brands of commercial brass. Again, take the time to do a side-by-side comparison of the cases you are working with and adjust your load as needed. There may be no need for such a reduction with the 223. Know your components and keep them segregated accordingly.

Article
http://www.exteriorballistics.com/reloadbasics/gasgunreload.cfm


Then there is this, showing that in fact Military 223 brass has more case capacity than 223 brass.
http://www.6mmbr.com/223rem.html
 
I too have weighed case capacities of 223 and 5.56 brass.
Size in the same sizer, trim on the same trimmer. Then weigh the case capacity of water or powder. Fill to the mouth, pour in the pan and weigh. Case capacities of military 5.56 and commercial 223 will vary, but in the cases I have tested, WCC and LC military does not have less capacity than R-P or Win 223. I think you need to do your own testing and work up loads accordingly.
 
steve4102,
I'm not repeating rumor, I'm telling you what I found to be true with the brass I reloaded. You quoted my first paragraph but left off the second paragraph where I relayed my personal experiance with some .223 PMC brass.
I posted:
I know from first hand experiance. I use a charge of 25.0gr Varget in my .223 ammo. That charge is slightly below the base of the neck. When loading some military PMC brass the same charge went almost to the top of the case mouth. That could be a problem... lol
While all the rumors may not be true about .223/5.56 brass I am relaying something that actually happened when I was reloading. You can choose to disregard what I said but that doesn't change the fact it happened. The quote you used from Sierra said, "While this is most often the situation with both 308 Winchester and 30-06 cases, it is less true with the 223 brass." They said less true, not never true.
 
I took Sierra's advice and measure case capacity in grains of H20 myself. I have three kinds of brass, LC, Remington and GFL(Fiocchi). I tested five of each and took the average.

GFL dry weight-102.4gr
With H20-131.4
Case capacity in grains of H20-29gr

Remington Dry weight-95.2gr
With H20-125.1gr
Case capacity in grains of H20-29.9gr

LC Dry weight-96.3gr
With H20-126.7gr
Case capacity in grains of H20-30.4gr.

So, for the brass I am using the Military brass has more case capacity then the civilian brass. As suggested by Sierra, test your own brass to be sure. As I said, don't follow the Internet Myth, check for yourself.
 
WCC and LC Brass, Military or Civilian?

Yes, .223 and 5.56 are dimensionally the same. The only way to tell is that LC Mil brass has the NATO stamp the cross in the circle. WCC (Western Cartridge Company, Olin, Winchester) Military brass has a visible crimp around the primer pocket. When you punch out the primer, you will see a red outline and a small circular indentation around the primer pocket. It is really good brass. But you must clear the crimp before re-priming it. use a chamfer tool or a Hornady primer pocket reamer and it will be gone in seconds. :cool:
 
There is much controversy with respect to the interchangeability of the commercial 223 Remington with the military 5.56: What really is in a Name?

The official SAAMI position is: Chambers for military rifles have a different throat configuration than chambers for sporting firearms which, together with the full metal jacket of the military projectile, may account for the higher pressures which result when military ammunition is fired in a sporting chamber. SAAMI recommends that a firearm be fired only with the cartridge for which it is specifically chambered by the manufacturer.

The .223 Remington is a sporting cartridge with the same external dimensions as the 5.56x45mm NATO military cartridge. It is loaded with a .224" diameter, jacketed bullet, with weights ranging from forty up to ninety grains, though the most common loadings by far use a fifty five grain bullet.

The primary difference between .223 Remington and 5.56x45 mm is that .223 is loaded to somewhat lower pressures and velocities compared to 5.56 mm. The ammunition designated .223 Remington can safely be fired in a firearm chambered for the 5.56 mm, but the reverse may well result in an unsafe combination. The additional pressure created by 5.56 mm ammunition will frequently cause over-pressure problems such as difficult extraction, flowing brass, or popped primers, and in extreme cases, may well damage or destroy the rifle. Chambers cut to .223 Remington specifications have a shorter leade (throat) area as well as slightly shorter headspace dimensions compared to 5.56 mm ‘military’ chamber specifications, which contribute to pressure issues.

Using commercial .223 cartridges in a 5.56-chambered rifle should work reliably, but generally will not be as accurate as when fired from a .223-chambered gun due to the excessive leade. Using 5.56 mil-spec cartridges (such as the M855) in a .223-chambered rifle can lead to excessive wear and stress on the rifle to the point that it is (or will become) unsafe, and the SAAMI recommends against the practice. Some commercial rifles marked as ‘.223 Remington’ are in fact suited for 5.56 mm, such as many commercial AR-15 variants and the Ruger Mini-14, but the manufacturer should always be consulted to verify that use of the military cartridge is acceptable in their model rifle before attempting to use it, and signs of excessive pressure (such as flattening or gas staining of the primers) should be looked for in the initial testing whenever the military 5.56 mm ammunition is used.

Some commercial chambering's are cut to accept both .223 and 5.56 ammunition but you should contact the maker of your rifle and ask!
 
I had the same question about case capacities. Since I now have a lot of time on my hands, I sat down one morning and took 17 -.223 / 5.56 cases and carefully checked case capacity with WC-844 powder leveled to the case mouth.

The 17 Cases ranged from "TW68" to "LC11" and commercial cases.

The lightest case was a "LC70" @ 91.6 grains with a capacity of 32.1 grains.

The rest of the cases weighed between 93-97 grains and the capacities were all very close, 31.3 to 31.9 grains.

The heaviest cases were "GFL" (Fiocchi)@ 101.5 gr. with a capacity of 31.3 gr., "WIN NT" 5.56" @ 100.1 gr. with a capacity of 30.9 gr., "FNM 80-4" (Portugese) @ 102.8 gr. with a capacity of 30.7 gr., "Frontier 5.56 NATO" @100.4 gr. with a capacity of 30.9 gr., "Hornady 5.56 NATO" 99.1 gr., with a capacity of 31.1 grains.

I did the same thing with 17- 7.62 NATO Military brass and 308 Win. commercial cases. I also found the heavier cases had less capacity than the lighter cases.

I've read a lot about this over the years that the consensus is internal case capacity is not related to the weight of the case. My small sampling disputes this. I found, generally, the heavier cases had less capacity.

Some of the lightest cases were Military 5.56 and some of the heaviest cases were commercial. I do segregate my 223./ 5.56 cases by Head stamp / year.
 
Last edited:
I don't sort my brass by HS or weight or any other means for plinking .223 ammo. On a calm day, I can fire 5 shot groups .75" @ 100 yds or 3" @ 300 yds repeatedly just randomly grabbing ammo from the ammo can. Most is LC brass, but there is plenty of other brass mixed in there as well. If the groups open up, it's because of me - not the ammo.

It must not matter that much. I'm not at or even near max load though.
 
Once it's reloaded, it's not 5.56x45mm anymore. Doesn't matter what it was when it left the ammo plant. Once it's fired & reloaded, it's now .223.

There is much controversy with respect to the interchangeability of the commercial 223 Remington with the military 5.56: What really is in a Name?

The official SAAMI position is: Chambers for military rifles have a different throat configuration than chambers for sporting firearms which, together with the full metal jacket of the military projectile, may account for the higher pressures which result when military ammunition is fired in a sporting chamber. SAAMI recommends that a firearm be fired only with the cartridge for which it is specifically chambered by the manufacturer.

The .223 Remington is a sporting cartridge with the same external dimensions as the 5.56x45mm NATO military cartridge. It is loaded with a .224" diameter, jacketed bullet, with weights ranging from forty up to ninety grains, though the most common loadings by far use a fifty five grain bullet.

The primary difference between .223 Remington and 5.56x45 mm is that .223 is loaded to somewhat lower pressures and velocities compared to 5.56 mm. The ammunition designated .223 Remington can safely be fired in a firearm chambered for the 5.56 mm, but the reverse may well result in an unsafe combination. The additional pressure created by 5.56 mm ammunition will frequently cause over-pressure problems such as difficult extraction, flowing brass, or popped primers, and in extreme cases, may well damage or destroy the rifle. Chambers cut to .223 Remington specifications have a shorter leade (throat) area as well as slightly shorter headspace dimensions compared to 5.56 mm ‘military’ chamber specifications, which contribute to pressure issues.

Using commercial .223 cartridges in a 5.56-chambered rifle should work reliably, but generally will not be as accurate as when fired from a .223-chambered gun due to the excessive leade. Using 5.56 mil-spec cartridges (such as the M855) in a .223-chambered rifle can lead to excessive wear and stress on the rifle to the point that it is (or will become) unsafe, and the SAAMI recommends against the practice. Some commercial rifles marked as ‘.223 Remington’ are in fact suited for 5.56 mm, such as many commercial AR-15 variants and the Ruger Mini-14, but the manufacturer should always be consulted to verify that use of the military cartridge is acceptable in their model rifle before attempting to use it, and signs of excessive pressure (such as flattening or gas staining of the primers) should be looked for in the initial testing whenever the military 5.56 mm ammunition is used.

Some commercial chambering's are cut to accept both .223 and 5.56 ammunition but you should contact the maker of your rifle and ask!
 
Yea, I considered locking it because of that, but there were two good additional posts. It is almost like the other thread where two of us hijacked it. :eek:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top