30-06 inconsistent data - Barnes V ADI (HODGDON)

[JPSauer]

I have done hours of reading on forums about this and can not find anyone who directly addresses it.

This is concerning H4350 (AR2209) and Varget (AR2208) powder and 30-06 cartridge. These are identical powders as confirmed by ADI.

Barnes 130 TTSX is listed in Barnes 53.5g 3050fps - 56.5g 3225fps
ADI lists 130 Speer - 49g 2979fps - 53.5g 3154fps (48,400CUP)

How can TTSX produce less pressure than a jacketed bullet? Also the velocity sort of correlates with ADI list as correct given Barnes has far exceeded the velocity - does anyone have signs of pressure using Barnes data. Or is barnes data hot as hell?

Second would be the amount of people using the Nosler BT load for Barnes 150g TTSX in 30-06,

Nosler BT - 3006 - ADI Data - AR2209 (H4350) MAX

62.0 grain (C)

3068 fps

48400 cup

Nosler ETIP - 3006 - ADI Data - AR2209 (H4350) MAX

Maximum

57.8 grain (C)

2927 fps

57700 psi

What gets me is the pressure measurement is so different it makes it hard to compare but ADI has always said use a comparable bullet with mono and mono together - in this case, barnes would fit the NOsler etip better than the nosler bt. Most people are using the Nosler BT data - but that being said, if thats applied to the Nosler E-tip it would be on edge if not well into a dangerous load. 57.8 was also compressed!

So - is there a data discrepancy? Or has anyone used these loads and experienced pressure signs? which loads did you use? (SPECIFICALLY H4350/AR2209 with 150TSX or Varget (AR2208) with 130TTSX)? Respectfully, I do not want to hear about other weights, bullets, powders or cartridges.

Your experience will be helpful. Really wish Barnes published their pressure readings. Few manuals do this and its very strange.

Also if anyone could post H4350 data for 130g and 30-06 just curious of powder/pressure using such a slow powder for a 130g.

 

[AJC1]

I have done hours of reading on forums about this and can not find anyone who directly addresses it.

This is concerning H4350 (AR2209) and Varget (AR2208) powder and 30-06 cartridge. These are identical powders as confirmed by ADI.

Barnes 130 TTSX is listed in Barnes 53.5g 3050fps - 56.5g 3225fps
ADI lists 130 Speer - 49g 2979fps - 53.5g 3154fps (48,400CUP)

How can TTSX produce less pressure than a jacketed bullet? Also the velocity sort of correlates with ADI list as correct given Barnes has far exceeded the velocity - does anyone have signs of pressure using Barnes data. Or is barnes data hot as hell?

Second would be the amount of people using the Nosler BT load for Barnes 150g TTSX in 30-06,

Nosler BT - 3006 - ADI Data - AR2209 (H4350) MAX

62.0 grain (C)

3068 fps

48400 cup

Nosler ETIP - 3006 - ADI Data - AR2209 (H4350) MAX

Maximum

57.8 grain (C)

2927 fps

57700 psi

What gets me is the pressure measurement is so different it makes it hard to compare but ADI has always said use a comparable bullet with mono and mono together - in this case, barnes would fit the NOsler etip better than the nosler bt. Most people are using the Nosler BT data - but that being said, if thats applied to the Nosler E-tip it would be on edge if not well into a dangerous load. 57.8 was also compressed!

So - is there a data discrepancy? Or has anyone used these loads and experienced pressure signs? which loads did you use? (SPECIFICALLY H4350/AR2209 with 150TSX or Varget (AR2208) with 130TTSX)? Respectfully, I do not want to hear about other weights, bullets, powders or cartridges.

Your experience will be helpful. Really wish Barnes published their pressure readings. Few manuals do this and its very strange.

Also if anyone could post H4350 data for 130g and 30-06 just curious of powder/pressure using such a slow powder for a 130g.

Because pressure is key to our saftey I would email the publishers of the data. They always have more than what's in print likely to including the pressure traces from the tests. It's unlikely they give those to you, but if you ask specific questions like on your man ual page X you list 30-06 with this powder at Xx amount what was the max pressure.... if you don't strike pay dirt then your second best option is grt or quickloads with data updated with your real world results.

 

[JFrank]

This is concerning H4350 (AR2209) and Varget (AR2208) powder and 30-06 cartridge. These are identical powders as confirmed by ADI.

These are not identical powders. The burn rates are quite always apart.
I find Nosler data pretty close although I start a tad low and work into pressure, I would never just take a full power load out of a book and drop it straight into a cartridge.

 

[JPSauer]

I meant h4350 is the same as ar2209
And varget is the same as ar2208

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

This is like asking how a 5-liter V8 can possibly be faster than a 5-liter V12. You’re comparing different bullets from different manufacturers, tested in different fixtures using different batches of cases, bullets, primers and powder, but expecting everything to be identical.
This is why the rules for safe handloading include, “Start low, work up,” and, “Whenever you change a major component, do a fresh build.”

 

[FLIGHT762]

PSI and CUP pressure measurements are two different ways to measure pressure. Their numbers will be completely different at their maximum pressure limits. When reloading, using available data, we always start low and work up loads for our particular components and especially for our particular rifle.

As reloaders, we cant measure pressure, but we can get hints in higher pressure from our brass & primer observations. We can measure velocity, which can help in knowing when we are getting near published maximum limits.

When I use Hodgdon 4350 and Varget branded powders, I rely on the Hodgdon published reloading data they tested here in the USA using US sourced components. I have looked at the ADI loading data for the ADI AR 2208 & AR 2209 powder equivalents, but I still rely on using the Hodgdon data and other US sourced data.

I do use Hodgdon branded, ADI sourced Benchmark, 8208XBR (under IMR brand, but it is an ADI powder), H-4895, Varget, H-4350 and H-4831. I've never had unexpected over pressure issues using US sourced data on these powders.

If I were to get actual ADI branded AR 2208 & AR 2209 or nay other ADI branded powder containers in my hands, I would then use the ADI sourced data.

I just don't let the ADI data concern me in using Hodgdon branded powders.

It does get confusing. Even here in the USA, some of the Wnchester and Hodgdon branded powders such as W-296 & H-110, HP-38 & W-231 & W-760 & H-414 are the same powders sourced from the St Marks (General Dynamics) powder factory in Florida and branded separately by Winchester and Hodgdon.

 

[JPSauer]

Ok this is my error fir not being clear

ADI makes the powders varget and H4350 for Hodgdon. Hodgdon just rebrands them. They are tested at ADI, by the manufacturer ADI in Australia.

Moving on...
Il boil it down to one question, has anyone tried H4350/AR2209 - in a 3006 with 130ttsx?

Gavin ultimate reloader reloads it to barnes spec, which is 3 grains over cup and core bullet max pressure. So i was concerned whether to use barnes data or ADI/Hodgdon data (they have identical data i checked the Hodgdon website)

About working up, im worried i wont see pressure signs then kaboom? Does that occur?

 

[lordpaxman]

I don’t load the 130 in ‘06, but with the other bullets and powders I follow the published data, starting at the start load and rarely getting even near max, with no problems so far.
Regarding working up a load and pressure signs, if you’re a conscientious reloader, pay attention to details, have QC checks in place then you should see pressure signs when approaching the stopping point, at least in rifle. Although nothing in life is certain except death and taxes. A chrono would help, but heavy bolt lift, extraction issues, primer flow can help point to the danger zone.

 

[Hugger-4641]

About working up, im worried i wont see pressure signs then kaboom? Does that occur?

Since we can't measure pressure directly, the best way to know is a chronograph. Personally, I don't remember ever seeing pressure signs before reaching a listed max charge, but I have seen flattened primers, bulged primers, soot around the primer, ejector marks in a case head, and heavy bolt lift. Not a 100% thing, but if you are working up carefully, you should see one or more of these before reaching a kaboom level.

 

[FLIGHT762]

Ok this is my error fir not being clear

ADI makes the powders varget and H4350 for Hodgdon. Hodgdon just rebrands them. They are tested at ADI, by the manufacturer ADI in Australia.

Moving on...
Il boil it down to one question, has anyone tried H4350/AR2209 - in a 3006 with 130ttsx?

Gavin ultimate reloader reloads it to barnes spec, which is 3 grains over cup and core bullet max pressure. So i was concerned whether to use barnes data or ADI/Hodgdon data (they have identical data i checked the Hodgdon website)

About working up, im worried i wont see pressure signs then kaboom? Does that occur?

You were very clear about ADI & Hodgdon Extreme powders being re- branded by Hodgdon. My point was to use data from the branded powder container. I wouldn't use ADI data for Hodgdon powder even though they are said to be equivalent.

I do load a number of Barnes TSX and TTSX bullets in 30/06, 260 Rem. and 270 Win. In the 30/06, I used the 150 TTSX. I ended up using 57.0 grs. of IMR 4350. There was no Barnes IMR 4350 data. I started low using regular cup & lead core data and worked up. That load shoots great, no pressure issues.

For my 270 win., I wanted to use some IMR 4451 with the 110 TTSX. There was no data for that powder. I started low using cup & lead core data. I used a chronograph for this load because it was uncharted territory. I worked up a load to 58.0 grs. and got a velocity of about 3250 FPS with no pressure signs. The load was accurate and shot just under 1 MOA @ 300 yards.

For your 30/06 with the 130 TTSX, I would use Varget with the starting barnes data and work up. Use a chronograph if you have one. H-4350 is a bit slow for a 130 gr. bullet, but I'm sure it could be used, but you would be getting into the 60+ grain powder weight.

In my Barnes #3 manual, there is H-4350 - 30/06 data for their 130 gr. "XBT" bullet, which is a smooth sided mono bullet, not banded like the newer TSX line. They show H-4350 powder starting @ 56.0 grs. (2950 FPS) to a max @ 60 grs (3161 FPS). This should give you a good idea where to start, If you want to use H-4350 with the 130 TTSX.

You're not going to Kaboom if you start low and work up. You will see flattened primers when you've hit the top. I always stopped and backed off at flattened primers.

Hope this helps.

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

Since we can't measure pressure directly, the best way to know is a chronograph. Personally, I don't remember ever seeing pressure signs before reaching a listed max charge, but I have seen flattened primers, bulged primers, soot around the primer, ejector marks in a case head, and heavy bolt lift. Not a 100% thing, but if you are working up carefully, you should see one or more of these before reaching a kaboom level.

I also typically see accuracy fall off before any other sign of pressure problems.

 

[Thomasss]

If you are interested I found a recipe in a 1998 Lyman Powder Manual using IMR-4350 with a Hornady 130 grain soft point. The Maximum was a compressed load of 58.0 grains at 2949fps. Now from my perspective, I'm sure 4350 has changed its formulation to some degree in the last 25 years. I don't believe TTSX existed back then. I like to take sides with caution. I noticed Hodgdon doesn't list 4350 as an option shooting 130 grain bullet in a 30.06 in their current internet guide.
Now, I loaded some 130 grain Speer 130 grain flat bottom HP, smooth skin projectiles last year just to prove to some doubting relatives that my 30.06 could compete with their .270 Winchesters. And it did. I was very happy to do it with 50.1 grains of IMR-4064 seating my bullets at 3.221. I shot sub MOA. just over 2800 fps. and I didn't have to worry about any high pressure loads in the process.

 

[AJC1]

Since we can't measure pressure directly, the best way to know is a chronograph. Personally, I don't remember ever seeing pressure signs before reaching a listed max charge, but I have seen flattened primers, bulged primers, soot around the primer, ejector marks in a case head, and heavy bolt lift. Not a 100% thing, but if you are working up carefully, you should see one or more of these before reaching a kaboom level.

The one time I saw pressure in my 308 was on the second and third test of the same charge. I had taken a break to cool down and like any mistake I had to pull the trigger a second time just to make sure it was wrong. It was a max load of n135 off their web sight so I did expect it was possible, I'd just never had it happen till then. Flat primers and heavy bolt lift. The third was worse than the second, but were not talking beat the action open stupidity, just enough that I knew it was wrong.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

IMO all these long posts trying to explain something very simple.
You can not compare testing methods. CUP and PSI can NOT be compared. Until you find pressure tests using one of the other for both you can't assume anything.

 

[JPSauer]

Does anyone have any software that can calculate the pressure of 130 TTSX with 56.5 grains of varget/AR2208
And also anyone have any software that can calculate a start charge for H4350 and 130grain ttsx?

 

[Nature Boy]

I think we sweat the differences between reloading manuals way to much.

Published reloading data from multiple sources for different bullets often don’t match up exactly, and why should they?

These are reference data, intended to give a you a good, safe, starting point for your own load development.

Once you fire your first round down range your direct observations of the results take precedence over any published reloading data.

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

I think we sweat the differences between reloading manuals way to much.

Published reloading data from multiple sources for different bullets often don’t match up exactly, and why should they?

These are reference data, intended to give a you a good, safe, starting point for your own load development.

Once you fire your first round down range your direct observations of the results take precedence over any published reloading data.

My speculation and observation is this is typically only debated by people who jump straight to maximum loads and then work up until they see signs of dangerous over pressure.

 

[Slamfire]

How can the pressures be different? Powders are blended. Making gunpowder is not that precise, it is not like CNC machining. The end product varies considerable, and slow and fast stocks are blended to an average reference pressure curve, plus or minus.

And different vendors use different test equipment.

Let me say, I will go out and shoot the same lot of ammunition on a different day and I will get different velocities averages. My Chrony only goes up to 32 rounds for calculations, and even with that many shots, the averages are always different. If I shot thousands of rounds, the velocities might converge to a decimal place or two, in theory. But I have never done that.

Cartridge design certainly affects velocity averages. The current crop of short, stubby, straight sided sharp shouldered cases are giving very tight velocity variations. Whereas the WW1 era military cartridges with lots of length, lots of taper, won't provide the same consistency. I think the new cartridges are stiffer, the shoulder angles add to stiffness, so more firing pin energy goes to the primer. And from what I was told, pressures reach 80 kpsia just under the case neck. That will make powder combustion more complete.

A surprising round is the 44 Russian. The articles I have read the cartridge is capable of standard deviations around 10, and extreme spreads around 20 fps. Good rifle cartridges will do that. Heck if I know why the 44 Russian works so well, when the 44 Special surely does not hold velocities as tight.

 

[W.E.G.]

Work up the load for your rifle carefully.

30-06 chambers, and 30-06 brass differ SUBSTANTIALLY.

Flat primers will usually tell you that you are too hot for your rifle and your brass.

You can measure BASE-EXPANSION too if you want to get fancy about it.

I back off when the primers show flat in large-rifle-primer calibers. By doing that, I have had no issues with excess pressure in those calibers. Any benefit from an extra 100 fps in large-rifle-primer calibers is of almost no value. Don't even try to go there. It accomplishes nothing worth having. But going there might cause a primer leak, which will torch-cut your bolt. If your gun does not have an easily-replaceable bolt, blasting with gas from a primer leak will hurt your feelings for sure.

As a separate issue, you can't count on flat primers for SMALL RIFLE calibers if you use thin small rifle primers (think CCI 400 or Winchester small rifle primers or Remington 6 1/2). Use THICK small rifle primers (CCI 450/BR/41 or Remington 7 1/2), and you can then rely on flattened primers as slow-down warning. Winchester has recently started selling a small rifle primer labeled "41." I do not know whether Winchester has thickened the primer cup for their 41 to be comparable to CCI thickness. Until recently, Winchester primers have been simply TO BE AVOIDED for AR-15 ammo.

I know a thing or two about thin leaky primers and torched bolts.

 

[W.E.G.]

You might have the intellectual curiosity as to the "why."

Which is fine.

But the "WHAT" rules the day.

Find WHAT works. Investigate the "why" on the side.
If it still matters at that point.

 

[JPSauer]

Thanks for the replies. I always start on bottom and work up slowly in 0.2grain increments. I am more cautious than the average person. I will just work up more carefully perhaps in 0.1grain increments? and see if I can see a difference from primer to primer. This is going to cost a alot of projectiles with barnes by the time i get to mid load but I guess with what everyone is saying its worth it.

 

[P Flados]

I seem to recall that there is something special about COAL for mono bullets. COAL can make a big difference and your lack of specifying this item is a concern.

I went to the Barnes site and looked up the COAL they use for this bullet.

Quickload say the Barnes Varget data for the 130 TTSX is hot, 62,700 psi (30-06 SAAMI max is 60,000 psi). Note that most guns sold in 30-06 are also sold in 270 Win. The 270 Win is rated for 65,000 psi.

Cartridge          : .30-06 Spring.  (SAAMI)
Bullet             : .308, 130, Barnes 'TTSX'BT 30364
Cartridge O.A.L. L6: 3.240 inch = 82.30 mm
Barrel Length      : 24.0 inch = 609.6 mm
Powder             : Hodgdon VARGET *T

CAUTION: Figures exceed maximum and minimum recommended loads !

Step    Fill. Charge   Vel.  Energy   Pmax   Pmuz  Prop.Burnt B_Time
 %       %    Grains   fps   ft.lbs    psi    psi      %        ms
-04.5   97    52.50   3006    2608   49967   8394     96.6    1.100
-03.6   98    53.00   3033    2655   51401   8466     96.9    1.086  ! Near Maximum !
-02.7   99    53.50   3059    2702   52877   8536     97.2    1.073  ! Near Maximum !
-01.8  100    54.00   3086    2750   54397   8603     97.5    1.059  ! Near Maximum !
-00.9  101    54.50   3113    2798   55962   8668     97.8    1.046  ! Near Maximum !
+00.0  102    55.00   3140    2846   57573   8731     98.0    1.033  ! Near Maximum !
+00.9  103    55.50   3167    2895   59232   8792     98.3    1.020  ! Near Maximum !
+01.8  104    56.00   3193    2944   60941   8850     98.5    1.008  !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+02.7  105    56.50   3220    2993   62703   8905     98.7    0.996  !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!

And here is the other powder:

Cartridge          : .30-06 Spring.  (SAAMI)
Bullet             : .308, 130, Barnes 'TTSX'BT 30364
Cartridge O.A.L. L6: 3.240 inch = 82.30 mm
Barrel Length      : 24.0 inch = 609.6 mm
Powder             : Hodgdon H4350 *T

CAUTION: Figures exceed maximum and minimum recommended loads !

Step    Fill. Charge   Vel.  Energy   Pmax   Pmuz  Prop.Burnt B_Time
 %       %    Grains   fps   ft.lbs    psi    psi      %        ms
-03.3  106    58.00   2986    2573   49256   8508     91.1    1.106
-02.5  107    58.50   3013    2620   50672   8589     91.6    1.092
-01.7  108    59.00   3040    2668   52136   8669     92.1    1.079  ! Near Maximum !
-00.8  109    59.50   3068    2716   53646   8747     92.5    1.065  ! Near Maximum !
+00.0  110    60.00   3095    2765   55205   8823     92.9    1.052  ! Near Maximum !
+00.8  111    60.50   3122    2814   56814   8898     93.4    1.039  ! Near Maximum !
+01.7  112    61.00   3150    2864   58477   8971     93.8    1.026  ! Near Maximum !
+02.5  113    61.50   3177    2914   60195   9041     94.2    1.013  !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+03.3  114    62.00   3205    2965   61972   9110     94.6    1.000  !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!

 

[Varminterror]

About working up, im worried i wont see pressure signs then kaboom? Does that occur?

No.

 

[Varminterror]

How can TTSX produce less pressure than a jacketed bullet?

Because the monometal TTSX has “driving bands,” and alternating grooves in shank which reduce the overall bearing surface, and the conventional jacketed bullets don’t.



It has also been well described in this thread that CUP and PSI are not interchangeable (or even interconvertible) unit systems.

 

[JPSauer]

Thabk you all helps alot
Thanks p flados for that info

I loaded them up and going to work up slowly in 0.3g from minimum of cup and core hodgdon 49g till mid barnes 55g