Printable View
Hey guys I need some help with finding a load for my creedmoor. I've tried H4350 and it was great! Problem is I can't find it anywhere now and I do not want to rely on searching for it all the time. I've tried imr4350 and my groups open up and velocity drops. I've tried h100v and I get the velocity back up but worse groups. Is anybody using anything other than h4350 and getting around 2800 fps and good groups? I have access to lots of powder other than 4350. Thanks in advance.
Try IMR4451. Supposed to be equivalent to H4350, just made in Canada so availability shouldn't be a problem.
Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
Not a 6.5 Creed but last fall I switched to 4451 from H4350 in my 260 w/ 120 NSB for whitetails. Without looking through my notes IIRC the charge was within .5 grain for the same velocity as the H4350. It also had a slight edge accuracy wise.
Here are both powders tested in a 284. http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/...-new-imr-4451/
Bill
Reloder 17
H4350
RL-17
H4831sc
imr4451
imr4831
imr7828
norma MRP
RL-19
RL-22
ive shot all of these except the 4451 in a 260 and all work very well.
Has anyone tried Hornady superformance powder? It's listed in Hornady reload book. Already picked up RL17 and have superformance to try shortly.
Yes. Superformance is close to H4831 in burn rate. I tried it with the 120gr Amax and it shot ok but not as good as H4350. RL-17 is close to H4350 in burn rate so I would work with it.Quote:
Originally Posted by bearcatrp
Close to h4831?Quote:
Originally Posted by wbm
when was the last time you looked at a powder burn rate chart?
Superperformance is quite a bit faster than h4831 is. And the data isn't even close to similar. And there is almost nothing they cross reference to each other.
H4831 is a slower powder made for heavy for caliber projectiles.
Superperfotmance is quite a bit faster and made to push light to medium weight projectiles. Superperformance doesn't have a whole lot of uses,as in not very versatile,like h414 or varget it,however the loads it is good for tend to show a velocity increase over most everything else listed for the bullet weights it's suitable for.
Thanks for the information guys! I am shooting 140's by the way. I will look at my local supply and see what I can find.
Any particular loads for a 140 with these powders?
According to Hodgdon H4831 is number 128 on their list. Superformance is 130 or SLOWER.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryfulman
Actually it is a bit slower than H4831...at least Hodgdon thinks it is.Quote:
Close to h4831? when was the last time you looked at a powder burn rate chart?
https://www.hodgdon.com/PDF/Burn%20R...02015-2016.pdf
guns and ammo 6.5 Creedmoor review author had good results with 47.5gr Superformance and a 120gr Sierra.
http://www.gunsandammo.com/reloading...6-5-creedmoor/
I used Win 760/H414/AA2700, before switching to Superformance.
A few very important things to note:
1) With 140gr bullets, 2800 fps is well over-pressure; with EVERY powder. If you don't care, that's you choice, but understand the choice you make.
2) Superformance isn't a regular powder! Don't look at burning rate charts and think you can load like normal. Reloader 17 is similar to Superformance in burning curve, but not as progressive.
So what does this mean? Progressive powders burning curves change with pressure. You can't accurately "read" pressure signs in a brass/primers, but you REALLY can't with progressives; and because of the changing burning curve, you can't "walk-up" on the chronograph and know where you are.
I've burned over 18# of Superformance in my Creedmoor now, and have piles of Pressure Trace data.
Because a regular burning curve(doesn't matter the burning rate, if it is appropriate to the cartridge) is a sudden spike, then a quick fall; there is a natural tendancy to think more and faster is simple. Perhaps. Here is an example of a "normal" burning curve from a powder.
http://i78.photobucket.com/albums/j8...psvxacmarz.png
With a progressive powder like RL-17 or Superformance in particular, the curve looks MUCH more like a mesa, such as this:
http://i78.photobucket.com/albums/j8...ps0ktikfds.png
However because the curve will "Peak" more like a "normal" powder with increased pressure, you get a diminishing returns problem. As you increase pressure and increase the peak and fall rate, you get less effecient "pushing" of the bullet. What we found with 140gr Bullets and Superformance in the Creedmoor, was that you can run 15,000 psi LESS than max SAAMI pressure, and only loose 50 fps in velocity.
So don't treat Superformance like it's "burning rate" suggests it is. Burning rates are based upon either calculations, or bomb testing. But that only describes it limitedly, in a single application. As you know, case fill and case capacity will alter burning rates and have a powder act differently in any given case.
The canister version you know as Superformance, was designed around the 30-06 application; so it's no surprise that it is perfect in the Creedmoor. Dave Emary who is now Hornady's head ballistician, was a powder designer for many years with General Dynamics. If you want to know what it is appropriate in, use his data, he created it, NOT Hodgdon. Hodgdon's actual testing is quite limited, on a in-house basis.
+1.Quote:
With 140gr bullets, 2800 fps is well over-pressure; with EVERY powder. If you don't care, that's you choice, but understand the choice you make.
darkker: Do you think this might be a good powder to test with heavy bullets [105 gr] in a .243 win?
Good question Mik, not sure. Because of the case to bore ratio, I would think not, but would have to put pen to paper to get a better answer.
I REALLY don't like the 243, particularly with heavies, and over the years I've really wanted to love the 243. Unfortunately it has a very nasty(and well earned) reputation for wild unexplained pressure spikes when using heavy bullets and appropriately slow powders.
What is a good starting place for the superformance? I'm shooting 140 target vlds
Not home to verify but I believe Hornady reload book shows max 80 or 85 grain bullets for 243 and using superformance. That being the case, then why does Hornady reload book allow 140 gr in 6.5 creedmoor? 1/2 a mm more make that much difference? Never got around to reload 243 with superformance so I don't know. Need your input darkker.
Dawg,
For the starting in the Creedmoor with that powder, start at the start in Hornady's manual. I'll have to get home to get you the numbers.
Across all the pounds of it I've shot, there indeed can very well be a 10% swing in burning rates. The Current 16# I have is well slower than the stuff Hornady tested(Pressure testing verified). So as with all powders, don't focus on the specific weight in grains, so much, as the RELATIVE velocity from the load in grains. If you haven't already found an accurate node, and you get to book max velocity, you went over book pressures. Superformance's push, REALLY doesn't care about barrel length. We tested a 27" and then chopped it to 23", there isn't any practical velocity difference. This was also in an article I read a couple months back, somewhere, with 4350. Actually gains velocity with a somewhat shorter barrel. Not unlike the 308.
Bear -
It's about expansion and bore surface area per grain of powder. Why I said that not all powders act the same in every application. It you jump to Hodgy and look at 243 load data for the 107gr. All but 2 things are listed in CUP, NOT PSI. That is a huge tell by it's self. CUP is not accurate, and honestly not terribly appropriate to use for applications over 45,000 PSI. The "reported" pressure will actually swing on the order of 15-20,000 psi. Much like for these heavy match bullets in question, and listing a G1 drag number, and a SINGLE G1 at that. Supersonic flight for these isn't appropriate, nor terribly accurate; the G7 is the appropriate description. These bullets once trans-sonic begins, then G1 is a much better description of behavior. Sorry, I digress..
Surface area is: Pi*R squared Look at the 107gr Vs. 140gr. Both using Hodgy data for 760/414. 243 - 38gr max 6.5 - 40.2gr max
Max grains, divided by the surface area shows:
243 - 819.37
6.5 - 734.39
That's maybe not worlds apart, but significantly different. So a powder that is appropriate for "heavy" in one caliber isn't always appropriate for another. 107gr isn't exactly "heavy" for the 243 anyhow.
Appreciate the reply Darkker. Think I will work up loads 1st with RL17 first,, then try superformance. Unless I can find some H4350 which allot of folks praise.