looking for a reliable, versatile powder

[justin22885]

im looking for a single powder that can fill my rifle reloading needs, currently i hand load for 5.56, .308, and to a lesser extent 7.62x39, 7.62x54R and 8mm mauser

so what im looking for is a powder that can serve all of these with a focus on the smaller calibers being more important... since i handload in higher volumes id prefer something that meters well, is very temperature resistant, clean burning, with reliable ignition and be somewhat inexpensive

doing an extensive amount of research on some of the properties and researching load data for various cartridges trying to keep them all to the same barrel length, what ive found seem to be the most flexible among a broader range of cartridges with good velocity, and seem to be easy to meter and reliable are hodgdon (bl-c2, H322, and CFE223) alliant (RL-15 and RL-17) as well as winchester 748

other ones ive looked into are varget, a couple accurate powders, IMR3031 and IMR4895, varget didnt seem to produce as much velocity as the rest in the load data i found, accurate powders didnt seem to do all that well either, and the IMRs were longer extruded powders that seem to have a reputation for poor metering

is there anything you can say that would exclude any of these as being a primary candidate for being my sole powder for rifle calibers?

 

[Hangingrock]

I'm not going to exclude a particular powder you have listed but rather recommend Aliant RL-15 in regards to the 5.56 and 7.62 NATO be applicable. As for the other cartridges mentioned I have no experience except for being on the receiving end of 7.62X39 and 7.62X54R.

 

[justin22885]

well, to be fair im pretty much done with 7.62x54R, i see no reason to keep up with this caliber in any realistic form, surplus ammo was great but its now more expensive than .308 with the same performance and a lot of other issues related to it being a rimmed, generally steel cased cartridge

as far as 7.62x39 goes, im probably going to quit trying out handloads for this as well, its not really worth the small improvement you get having to pay $0.45/rd when i can buy it pre-loaded and steel case for $0.22/rd

im not sure how correct i am with saying this but in both .223 and .308 i noticed the RL-17 has close to a 100fps edge over RL-15 in 16 inch barrels, but im not sure how well either of these meter, and with volume reloading this is important

 

[BigBore45]

IMR-4064 would be my pick, it meters kinda bad but even at .5 grain spread i notice nothing over the crony or on paper to make me worry about it. If you want one that will meter well i would go with winchester 748, its a ball powder, with the 748 i would advise using mag primers as it can be hard to get reliable ignition in cold weather. tis the season

 

[justin22885]

where i live, there are wild variations in temperature over the year.. as low as -40 in the winter, +90 in the summer.. so a powder with low temperature sensitivity would be important too

 

[anothernewb]

You've already hit on some of the best I know of. Blc-2, H414, H335. and cfe 223.

I've used blc2 and H335 with success in 308. H335 should work in the 2 Russian ones fairly well.

 

[jmr40]

I don't like the idea of using a single powder to load multiple cartridges. In some cases it works OK, but most of the time at least one if not all of the rounds you load for will be using less than optimal powder. Buying 2 containers of the same powder costs exactly the same as 2 containers of 2 different powders.

 

[Hangingrock]

justin22885

im not sure how well either of these meter, and with volume reloading this is important

I can only speak to RL-15. I use a Redding power measure and the charge weights are uniform with in reason. The charge weight I'm using for the 5.56mm - 69Gr-HPBT is at near maximum so I'm careful as to variances thus problems which I have not experienced using RL-15 with the Redding measure. This also applies to the 175Gr-HPBT in the 7.62mm-NATO.

 

[Kaldor]

where i live, there are wild variations in temperature over the year.. as low as -40 in the winter, +90 in the summer.. so a powder with low temperature sensitivity would be important too

If thats the case, IMR 8208 XBR. Will work in any .223 loading, and will work well for 308 up to around a 168gr bullet.

Temp doesnt bother it, and it meters very nicely.

 

[justin22885]

If thats the case, IMR 8208 XBR. Will work in any .223 loading, and will work well for 308 up to around a 168gr bullet.

Temp doesnt bother it, and it meters very nicely.

hmm, a tad more expensive than most powders but if these claims are true, then its very interesting indeed, hmm, found some load data, it doesnt look to be as good as H322 which touts being resistant to temperature fluxuations, how does H322, RL-17, and IMR8208 compare in that regard?

 

[jmr40]

Of the rounds you load for 308 is the only one I load for so I cannot comment about the others. As to temperature Varget and RL15 are considered very good 308 powders that are more stable than most.

Most powders will see 1-2 fps difference for each degree temperature changes. A load you develop at 70 degrees could easily be over 200 fps slower at -40. It might not be a factor to you, but it works the other way too and is a concern in hotter climates. A load that is safe at 50 degrees could be 120 fps faster and over pressure if fired at 110 degrees.

Varget, or really any of the more stable powders will still be affected by temps, just to a far less degree. Around 1/2 fps for each degree.

 

[justin22885]

i already planned on developing a handload with a margin of error for hotter temperatures to prevent the over-pressure issue

 

[Newtosavage]

H4895 is a pretty versatile powder. Plenty accurate for me too, when I hand scale it.

 

[Reloadron]

I don't like the idea of using a single powder to load multiple cartridges. In some cases it works OK, but most of the time at least one if not all of the rounds you load for will be using less than optimal powder. Buying 2 containers of the same powder costs exactly the same as 2 containers of 2 different powders.

I would be in that group. While I can for example use IMR 4895 to load 308 and 223 I never had much luck with it in 223. This summer I had some pretty good luck loading AA 2495 in my 308 loads for both my bolt gun and my M1A (never tried in my AR 10) but that powder would not work in 223 loads. By the time you work through a caliber and rifle if there is a one size fits all I have yet to find it. Doesn't really bother me having several powders I work from for different calibers.

Ron

 

[MEHavey]

Imr 8208

 

[Airgead]

I have not used it yet personally (it's sitting in a box waiting for my reloading area to get set up after the move) but I have read good things about IMR4166. I believe it's versatile enough for all the cartridges you mentioned and temp insensitivity is a key selling point.

 

[300Whspr]

I've loaded a lot of AA2200 data powder in .223 and 7.62x39 for 14-15" TC Contenders and Encores. Good stuff, I like it a lot. Don't know if the old Data Powder is the same as the new AA2200 though...

 

[justin22885]

the way i see it, with a temp sensitive powder i have to download sometimes a significant margin to compensate for temp variations that could lead to unsafe pressures.. so even if the temperature resistant powders have a tad less velocity potential i believe that at 60 degrees they can be loaded to higher pressures than say something like 748 or 4895, giving me the same if not better performance at lower temps without risking having a pipe bomb for a rifle when temperatures increase

that said i like what RL-17 is able to achieve, it maintains higher pressures for longer so i dont know how this is going to act with the gas system of any of my gas operated rifles so thats something i need to figure out about it, and if it truly is an insensitive powder, if these things are ok, then i'll go that route, if it turns out RL-17 is temp insensitive or unsafe with gas operated weapons, then my focus will be primarily H322 and IMR8208

im trying to find more info about IMR 4166 because from what i read in an article about it, it seems like a direct competitor for these other ones listed, but its pretty new, it is an extruded powder though so hard to say how its going to meter which with high volume reloading i wont be weighing each charge

__

im noticing a trend of just about all ball powders being temperature sensitive and the short or fine extruded grain powders to offer the best combination of temperature insensitivity and metering

 

[TimSr]

RL17 is a slow burning powder, similar to IMR4350, which was great for my bolt guns. I started working with it when I couldn't find 4350. Then I started shooting my "308" and "06" loads in my M1A and M1Garand, and noticed how poor accurracy was, and extra "slam". I little research found that everybody recommends NOT using it in those two gas operated rifles. I've learned a lot since those days. Gas operated weapons generally perform better with powders in the faster end of the spectrum for their caliber. I've loaded IMR4198 in 5.56, .308 M1A, and reduced loads in 8x57 with great results with actual load data available. I've been using H4895 for gas the military rifles, and is great for reduced loads in other calibers as well.

5.56, .308, and to a lesser extent 7.62x39, 7.62x54R and 8mm mauser

I guess the question here is what type actions we are talking about, but I think your best solution is a powder for gas ops and a different powder, like RE17 for your bolt guns.

 

[justin22885]

H4895 is already out of my consideration though, ive used it in the past, i like it a lot but im looking for something more easily metered for better consistency with higher volume reloading

and its all for semi automatics, i only have a couple bolt actions and dont care much for them for the bulk of my hsooting.. figure rifles like AKs, PTR91, MAS 49/56, and possibly an AR-15/10 at some point

 

[Kaldor]

hmm, a tad more expensive than most powders but if these claims are true, then its very interesting indeed, hmm, found some load data, it doesnt look to be as good as H322 which touts being resistant to temperature fluxuations, how does H322, RL-17, and IMR8208 compare in that regard?

Both 322 and 8208 are a short cut extruded. The issue I have with 322 is that it is a little fast burning to use in 308, unless you stick to 155gr and lower bullets. Even then 8208 will give you better velocities over 322.

If you are shooting a AR, 322 might be too fast to use, and can create some reliability issues if your gas system is too long. Ive used 4198 in my AR (18' bbl, rifle gas), which is really close to 322 in burn rate, and I had to load at near max load to get the rifle to cycle reliably. Your mileage may vary. 322 is also far from ideal for anything over 55gr in 223.

RL17 is too slow for 223 and 308. I wouldnt use anything slower than Varget or CFE223 in 308. Win 748 might be another option. But both of these are not temp stable.

I have tried alot of powders in the last couple of years. I have loaded 55-75gr bullets in 223 with 8208 XBR, and 125-168gr bullets in 308 with 8208 XBR. Performance has been excellent. The powder flows nicely through my Hornady rotary drop. I dont shoot alot of heavy bullets in my 308, but for 175s I keep a bottle of Varget and 4064 in the cabinet.

I use I still use a ton of H335 for both 223 and 308, always with 55gr and 155gr FMJBTs, but that powder is definitely temp sensitive. I build my loads in the summer with that stuff and it still works fine in the winter, but probably with reduced performance. I have been kicking around phasing out of H335 and moving to CFE 223, but H335 works great for me, so I dont plan on changing.

As far as cost. I think I pay $15 more for an 8# of 8208 over 335. When you figure the cost that it adds per grain its minimal. At 7000gr per pound, figure H335 at $155 per 8lbs and 8208 at $170, its 2.2 cents per grain for H335, and 2.4 cents per grain of 8208. On a round of 223 at 25gr per charge, thats 5 cents more, on a round of 308 at 45gr per charge its 9 cents more. I think the math is right on that. Yes, a touch more expensive, but nothing thats going to break the bank unless your loading 1000's rounds per year.

 

[justin22885]

i think your math is off.. my calculation os .03 cents per grain, not 3 cents, youre off a decimal and in total ive found the costs of powder are incredibly negligible

mostly itll be for 75 grain .223/5.56 and 150 grain 308

IMR8208 is something i plan to experiment with.. if its powder insensitivity claims are legitimate then it means i can pretty much load to maximum 62,366PSI (5.56 NATO specs) and not have to worry about overpressure issues in warmer climates whereas a more powder sensitive id have to download to lower pressures to build a margin of safety... so even if max velocities at those pressures are a tad lower than other powders, more realistic handloads should be even if not better

 

[Kaldor]

i think your math is off.. my calculation os .03 cents per grain, not 3 cents, youre off a decimal and in total ive found the costs of powder are incredibly negligible

mostly itll be for 75 grain .223/5.56 and 150 grain 308

IMR8208 is something i plan to experiment with.. if its powder insensitivity claims are legitimate then it means i can pretty much load to maximum 62,366PSI (5.56 NATO specs) and not have to worry about overpressure issues in warmer climates whereas a more powder sensitive id have to download to lower pressures to build a margin of safety... so even if max velocities at those pressures are a tad lower than other powders, more realistic handloads should be even if not better

It was early in the AM, and I had not finished my first pot of coffee yet...

If you are loading 75s and 150s, 8208 XBR will be a great powder for you. I cant think of anything else that is temp indifferent, easy to run through a powder drop, and gives good accuracy.

 

[justin22885]

its certainly worth a try.. with the load data ive found it seems to launch bullets at about the same velocity at the same pressures as varget, and varget is one of the most temperature indifferent powders im aware of (read a chart that said between 0 and 120 degrees F it has an average difference of only 8fps) which is the levels of temperature differences i can experience throughout the year where im at

8208 XBR seems like the IMR answer to varget which isnt a bad thing, i'll be comparing it against varget, H322, and RL-17 when i can get back to where my rifles are located

 

[Kaldor]

Varget does a little better with bigger bullets, but is painful to run on a progressive. I wouldnt call 8208 the same as Varget in pure burn rate, 4320 is probably closer.

https://www.hodgdon.com/PDF/Burn Rates - 2015-2016.pdf