Is there a powder burn rate range for the AR-15 when reloading?


PDA






Bexar
May 9, 2014, 10:14 AM
I know the Garand does because slower or too fast a powder than several powders on either side of IMR 4895 can damage the rifle.

The direct gas impingement system of the AR-15 seems like it would allow for a slower powder which I have several pounds from "magnum rifle" days.

I'd like to use the IMR 4895 stuff for the 06' and .308 and use the too slow burners for the AR if possible.

Thanks...Bexar

If you enjoyed reading about "Is there a powder burn rate range for the AR-15 when reloading?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
jmorris
May 9, 2014, 10:30 AM
I have used as fast as Reloader 7(146) and as slow as Varget (182).

http://www.reloadersnest.com/burnrates.asp

X-termanator, 748 and TAC are what I use most of the time.

Swampman
May 9, 2014, 11:59 AM
What are the actual "slow" powders that you have on hand and want to use in .223?

If its Retumbo and RL-25, I'd say no.

"Too slow burners" isn't really specific enough information for us to go on here.

cfullgraf
May 9, 2014, 01:11 PM
I know the Garand does because slower or too fast a powder than several powders on either side of IMR 4895 can damage the rifle.

The direct gas impingement system of the AR-15 seems like it would allow for a slower powder which I have several pounds from "magnum rifle" days.

I'd like to use the IMR 4895 stuff for the 06' and .308 and use the too slow burners for the AR if possible.

Thanks...Bexar

The Garand's issue with powders is the port pressure. Too high a port pressure will run the risk of bending the op rod. Generally, slower burning powders will generate higher port pressures in the Garand.

There are loads for 223 Remington with IMR4895. One source is Hodgdon's web site. There are others.

Check here.

http://hodgdon.com/basic-manual-inquiry.html

Bexar
May 9, 2014, 02:10 PM
The Garand's issue with powders is the port pressure. Too high a port pressure will run the risk of bending the op rod. Generally, slower burning powders will generate higher port pressures in the Garand.

There are loads for 223 Remington with IMR4895. One source is Hodgdon's web site. There are others.

Check here.

http://hodgdon.com/basic-manual-inquiry.html
Yes...IMR 4895 is fine for the AR-15 and I do appreciate your input. However, I am interested in the slower burning powders like IMR 3031...H450...IMR 7828...Win760...H4350 and similar powders I either have a full pound or half pound of from my .300 Weatherby self abusing days. One of the main reasons I'm asking is if I when I make my annual sojourn to the reloading component store is if they only have a slower powder I'd like to have the option to buy for the AR to reload for our Daughter's rat rifle.

Nighthawk0083
May 9, 2014, 02:37 PM
hornady has imr 3031 listed in there 9th edition. 75gr bullet min load 18.6 @ 2200fps and the max load is 21.2gr @ 2600fps. This is specific for an ar load. Although I dont think this powder is even close to as slow as the others you listed. Hornady has it listed as faster than imr 4895. According to the info that I have I cannot find any data for the other powders you listed.

Nighthawk0083
May 9, 2014, 02:44 PM
The slowest ar powder with data I could find is power pro varmint which is the second slowest powder listed. Do some searching and you may find someone that has made it work. I couldnt find any data but I didnt look that hard. Good luck.

jmorris
May 9, 2014, 04:39 PM
3031 is one of the faster powders that I use for .223.

I linked an ordered list of powder burn rates in #2

Reloader 7 (Alliant)
RIF-2 (Nobel)
3031 (IMR)
Benchmark (Hodgdon)
BM2 (ADI)
RP2 (Bofors)
R902 (Rottweil)
S321 (Somchem)
N201 (Norma)
Brig 322 (Scot)
AR2219 (ADI)
H322 (Hodgdon)
TU3000 (Vectan)
X-Terminator (Ramshot)
2230 (Accurate)
RIF-1 (Nobel)
748 (Winchester)
Reloader 10X (Alliant)
BLC-2 (Hodgdon)
AR2206 (ADI)
2460 (Accurate)
H335 (Hodgdon)
TAC (Ramshot)
H4895 (Hodgdon)
2495 XMR (Accurate)
AR2206H (ADI)
PCL 507 (PB Clermont)
N202 (Norma)
SP10 (Vectan)
BOF7.62 (Bofors)
S335 (Somchem)
Reloader 12 (Alliant)
4895 (IMR)
Brig 4065 (Scot)
N135 (Vihtavuori)
SP9 (Vectan)
Varget (Hodgdon)

carbine85
May 9, 2014, 04:53 PM
Why do you want slower burning? Slower burning = higher pressure.
I have used 4227 and 4064 and didn't like either for the AR.
My best loads come from IMR4895.
I'm also having good luck with AR- Comp

Potatohead
May 9, 2014, 05:39 PM
Good to hear. I just got a couple lbs of 4895

243winxb
May 9, 2014, 06:58 PM
IMR 3031 with 68gr Hornady works well. Find other data here. http://stevespages.com/page8a.htm More can be found in old powder guides here. http://www.castpics.net/ The H450 will not work in 223 Rem. Other loads may or may not work the action??

243winxb
May 9, 2014, 07:05 PM
http://www.6mmbr.com/223rem.html The gas port pressure curve is a critical part of internal ballistics for cartridges used in gas operated firearms. Gas operated weapons are generally tailored to a narrow range of powder burning rates and characteristics. If the port pressure is too low the weapon will fail to function and if to high the weapon may function too forcefully or rapidly causing extraction or cycling problems. With such a wide range of bullet weights from 40gr to 80gr, matching the gas port location and size is critical.http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=502784 A problem with IMR4198 or H4198 is not a common problem. Just an example.

steve4102
May 9, 2014, 07:50 PM
Why do you want slower burning? Slower burning = higher pressure.

Not really in fact no. He is talkin slow rifle powders like 7828 and 760, these powders are so slow, one cannot get enough powder in the case to generate adequate chamber pressures and performance let alone anything that would resemble "High" pressure.

Bexar
May 9, 2014, 10:54 PM
Why do you want slower burning? Slower burning = higher pressure.
I have used 4227 and 4064 and didn't like either for the AR.
My best loads come from IMR4895.
I'm also having good luck with AR- Comp
I don't want slower burning but since I have some left over powder from my magnum days I was wondering if I could use them because I'd like to reserve my IMR4895 for the Garand and I was looking for a use for the slower powder I have in stock. I think I'll use the slower powders for whatever calibers She and my Brother have that wouldn't go into Her Garand. I've got to start doing some reloading, more for physical therapy than anything else, and in looking at my reloading assets I was reminded of the several pounds of slow burning powders I still have in inventory.

I've got a lot of load research to do so I guess I'll be happily pro-occupied for awhile.

jmorris
May 10, 2014, 01:21 AM
I don't want slower burning but since I have some left over powder from my magnum days I was wondering if I could use them because I'd like to reserve my IMR4895 for the Garand

As pointed out your 3031 is faster than your 4895 and is fine for .223.

Potatohead
May 10, 2014, 08:43 AM
Not really in fact no. He is talkin slow rifle powders like 7828 and 760, these powders are so slow, one cannot get enough powder in the case to generate adequate chamber pressures and performance let alone anything that would resemble "High" pressure.
Thanks for clearing that up Steve, I was trying to figure that statement out..

flyguy958
May 10, 2014, 09:43 AM
IMR 4064 is just one step slower than IMR 4895 in IMR powders. Seems 4064 would be a reasonable choice in powders if 4895 is not available. RL12 is only slightly faster and Varget is slower than IMR 4064. Is there a problem with IMR 4064 in the AR platform? Burn rates are from Hodgdon.com.

Potatohead
May 10, 2014, 01:44 PM
I found data, and loaded 223 with IMR 4064 so I hope there's no problem.

NWcityguy2
May 10, 2014, 03:27 PM
You should be able to get functional but dirty loads with H4350 and 760. Load manuals will stop publishing load data when velocity truly starts to suffer but there are functional powders slower that where they draw the line. You will need to make your own load data. With H4350 you'll certainly be able to fill the case and put a bullet on top without worrying about excessive pressures.

With 760, Hodgdon does publish loads for extra heavy bullets (82gr and 90gr). Using the 82gr load data would be my starting point.

Once again, they will give below average velocity and shoot dirty. But that being said, they should be functional. For shooting freehand, inside 100 yards, there really isn't a drawback though.

Bexar
May 10, 2014, 03:33 PM
Can't multi-quote so I'll say thank-you to everyone.

Everyone's input is appreciated.

NWcityguy and flyguy especially.

NWcityguy2
May 10, 2014, 03:42 PM
Is there a problem with IMR 4064 in the AR platform?

There is more than one reason 4064 isn't all that popular in 223. It is a good powder though and I've been through jugs in both the IMR and Accurate version. (I think Accurate 4064 is closer to IMR 4320 than 4064)

First off it binds and the neck when trying to put it in the case. That rules out almost everyone who uses a progressive. The Accurate version is better but still not a ball powder.

Secondly it generates below average velocities until you reach max load which is also compressed. The only functional drawback is if you shoot a wide variety of brass you'll see cases where at max load the powder reachs to top of the case. Usually this will be in foreign NATO cases, not a problem for everyone but they are out there. Also due to many misconceptions about compressed loads, some reloaders shy away from them thinking there is something dangerous about crunching powder when you seat a bullet.

Thirdly there are lots of good 223 powders out there that suffer from neither of these problems.

ArchAngelCD
May 11, 2014, 01:07 AM
Yes...IMR 4895 is fine for the AR-15 and I do appreciate your input. However, I am interested in the slower burning powders like IMR 3031...H450...IMR 7828...Win760...H4350 and similar powders I either have a full pound or half pound of from my .300 Weatherby self abusing days. One of the main reasons I'm asking is if I when I make my annual sojourn to the reloading component store is if they only have a slower powder I'd like to have the option to buy for the AR to reload for our Daughter's rat rifle.
I don't think you can get enough of the slowest powders into the case for them to fire correctly and if they do you probably will turn the AR into a single fire rifle because it won't cycle.

You just can't get enough W760/H414, H4350 and especially IMR7828 in a 223 case to do any good. :scrutiny:

NWcityguy2
May 11, 2014, 08:48 PM
I don't think you can get enough of the slowest powders into the case for them to fire correctly and if they do you probably will turn the AR into a single fire rifle because it won't cycle.

You just can't get enough W760/H414, H4350 and especially IMR7828 in a 223 case to do any good.

Given that Hodgdon publishes a couple loads for 760 in 223, seems kind of silly to say that. I've shot about 1000 rounds of an extruded powder that is slower on the burn chart than both 760 and H4350 without a single failure to cycle my ARs. Either my 16" carbine or my 20" rifle. Even with my H2 buffer. So from my actual experience, I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with you.

taliv
May 11, 2014, 08:54 PM
saving "several pounds" would not be worth the effort to me. the magnum powder won't spoil if you keep it properly. it's likely that one day you will have an opportunity to use it appropriately.

use the right powder for the job.

If you enjoyed reading about "Is there a powder burn rate range for the AR-15 when reloading?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!