Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 61

Thread: What kind of powders do you like for your AR15/Semi autos and why?

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    512
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by markm View Post
    As a side note... some slow powders with light (55 gr) bullets can accelerate port erosion on carbine length gas systems. There was a guy on another forum doing metal treatment testing years ago and noted dramatic differences in port erosion with (i think) Varget and 55 gr bullets.
    Can you give a reference to this chart and this quote? How slow are we talking?



    Also, I have been under the impression that faster powder accelerate throat wear? Maybe there is a happy medium?


    ETA: Disregard the attatchment, I tried to upload the chart via image and it got messed up as an attachment. Any mods, please delete attachment, I don't know how.
    Attached Files Attached Files
    Last edited by 5.56 Bonded SP; 10-16-17 at 19:52.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    89
    Feedback Score
    6 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by 5.56 Bonded SP View Post
    Can you give a reference to this chart and this quote? How slow are we talking?



    Also, I have been under the impression that faster powder accelerate throat wear? Maybe there is a happy medium?


    ETA: Disregard the attatchment, I tried to upload the chart via image and it got messed up as an attachment. Any mods, please delete attachment, I don't know how.
    Not sure if faster powders accelerate throat wear...USPSA pistol shooters use very fast shotgun powders with lead bullets to get the desired recoil impulse and those barrels last almost indefinitely. Probably more important is powder composition, heat, and pressure.

    Powders with high nitro content are very erosive. This is more common in pistol and shotgun powders..I think Lil'gun and Titegroup are the worst. Lil'gun for example is popular with magnum revolver shooters and known to cut top straps. You'll also find .300BO users who complain about how hot it is.

    Ball powders usually have lower flame temps than extruded, but they also often have more additives to promote ignition and stability. I do not know if that leads to better barrel life. It makes sense that slower powders would accelerate port erosion, as more of the powder will still be burning when it hits the port.

    Powders I have loaded in .223 by burn rate (fast to slow)

    Alliant R10x
    Hogdon H335
    IMR 8208XBR
    Ramshot TAC
    Alliant 2000mr (same load data as CFE223 and commercial SMP842)

    Of the above, 8208 and TAC were the only two that worked well from 55gr-77gr and if I could only have one, it would be TAC. A little less stable than 8208, but cheap, meters great on a progressive, excellent SD and accuracy, and very predictable loading. Ramshot also publishes 5.56-pressure data. I like that I can load 24.3gr of it for both 55gr bulk hosing loads and 77gr precision. You'll want temperature/velocity data with it though.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Humboldt County, CA
    Posts
    2,345
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by 5.56 Bonded SP View Post
    I've been sticking with ball powder for easy use with my RCBS uniflow powder measure. Haven't messed with many different powders. So far Ramshot Tac has been metering the best for me...

    Quote Originally Posted by B52U View Post
    Ramshot TAC has become my favorite powder for the reasons you stated...

    Quote Originally Posted by markm View Post
    I used to shoot tons of TAC...

    Quote Originally Posted by gunnerblue View Post
    TAC is one of my favorite powders for a variety of cartridges...

    I haven't even started loading rifle cartridges yet (I'm remodelling, and building a new "reloading room," but I've been sitting on 48lbs of TAC for a couple years, based on the advice of this forum...

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    32,832
    Feedback Score
    14 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by 5.56 Bonded SP View Post
    Can you give a reference to this chart and this quote? How slow are we talking?
    I believe the combination was 101 (Varget) and 55 gr bullets in a carbine gas length barrel where the port erosion was dramatically increased.
    "What would a $2,000 Geissele Super Duty do that a $500 PSA door buster on Black Friday couldn't do?" - Stopsign32v

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    32,832
    Feedback Score
    14 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bimmer View Post
    I haven't even started loading rifle cartridges yet (I'm remodelling, and building a new "reloading room," but I've been sitting on 48lbs of TAC for a couple years, based on the advice of this forum...
    I made some smokin hot 80 gr SMK loads with TAC that shot so flat I couldn't wrap my head around it. I think they were beating 175gr 308 at 1000 yards by like 3 full mils. Both out of 20 inch barrels. In my infinite wisdom, I didn't write the load data down. I'll have to recreate it.
    "What would a $2,000 Geissele Super Duty do that a $500 PSA door buster on Black Friday couldn't do?" - Stopsign32v

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Utah, USA
    Posts
    1,730
    Feedback Score
    4 (100%)
    8208XBR has become my favorite but I have used H4895, H335, H322, TAC, SMP735, Benchmark, 10X, MR2000, N135, and RL15 with good results. It really depends on the bullet and the gun.

    TAC is a good powder and I have shot some teenie groups with it behind a 68 BTHP using my match rifle with a 1:8 twist. Loaded on my Dillon 1050 with a Dillon measure, the stuff just flows so nice.

    I have had excellent results with RL15 behind 80 and 85 grain bullets in a 1:7 twist 22" bolt gun where I can load them a little longer and fit a bit more powder. Those 85s will hit steel hard at 500 for a 223. It is a powder that needs to be trickled to get a consistent powder weight.

    N135 saw use in the field against prairie poodles behind 40 and 50 grain Vmax's. Probably the cleanest powder that I have ever shot. Again, I would recommend trickling this one.

    8208XBR seems to want to be loaded on the warmer side. I am well above max in my 77 grain AR loads but it does well at longer range steel. Flows great through my Lee drum measure. It also works great in my 223 Ackley behind the obsolete 75 Amax and the 80 ELD. It makes the 308 shooters scratch their heads, lol.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    2,837
    Feedback Score
    16 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by markm View Post
    I used to shoot tons of TAC. H322 is pretty much the house powders these days. XBR is always nice too. I rarely shoot ball powders anymore because of how good the accuracy is with short cut, extruded, benchrest style powders.

    They meter good through my 550b. I'm sure there's some charge weight variances, but I've not found this to hurt accuracy. As far as clean burning? They're all the same to me. Now that I no longer run over gassed ARs, the guns stay much cleaner... just keep the bcg lubed, and there's no issues.
    This.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    89
    Feedback Score
    6 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by markm View Post
    I believe the combination was 101 (Varget) and 55 gr bullets in a carbine gas length barrel where the port erosion was dramatically increased.
    If that's the case, CFE223 would be similarly hard on ports since it might be even slower but is marketed for a wider range of bullet weights.


    I was surprised how much port erosion a Douglas MK12 (18", rifle gas, AEM suppressor) is showing at 1108 rounds. All but 20-30 have been heavy 77gr loads (2690 to 2800 fps) with TAC, 8208, or 2000mr.



    Granted there are a lot of variables at work here, so it probably means nothing, but I can show you an 11.5 carbine gas CHF barrel that has had 4000 or more through it and gotten very hot, and this port does not look much, if any, better.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    WY
    Posts
    1,113
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by mgrs View Post
    If that's the case, CFE223 would be similarly hard on ports since it might be even slower but is marketed for a wider range of bullet weights.


    I was surprised how much port erosion a Douglas MK12 (18", rifle gas, AEM suppressor) is showing at 1108 rounds. All but 20-30 have been heavy 77gr loads (2690 to 2800 fps) with TAC, 8208, or 2000mr.



    Granted there are a lot of variables at work here, so it probably means nothing, but I can show you an 11.5 carbine gas CHF barrel that has had 4000 or more through it and gotten very hot, and this port does not look much, if any, better.
    Is the Douglas barrel stainless? Possibly more wear on the softer metal?

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    32,832
    Feedback Score
    14 (100%)
    Port erosion doesn't keep me awake a night for a second. I think it starts out more aggressively in the beginning of a barrel's life and kinda "sets in" to a slower rate of wear. I shot a TON of TAC (somewhat slow) behind 55 gr FMJs for a long time in my carbine gas guns. Meh...
    "What would a $2,000 Geissele Super Duty do that a $500 PSA door buster on Black Friday couldn't do?" - Stopsign32v

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •