What kind of powders do you like for your AR15/Semi autos and why? [Archive]

5.56 Bonded SP

10-16-17, 10:59

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, with an occasional about .2 variance in powder charge. Most charges are right on the money though, getting a pretty good 1.5 MOA using Tac batch loading bulk SP bullets. I am more interested in large volume loading over match grade ammo, weighing every charge is too tedious for my purposes, as long I can shoot in the 1-2MOA range I am happy.
I've messed around with CFE223, and where as it did what it claims with copper fouling after a few hundred rounds it was fouling a lot of carbon into my actions ( an insane amount of soft carbon ). Much more so than any other powder I tried, maybe my loads weren't hot enough, but I was getting near full case load and didn't want to try any compressed loads. So I lost interest in CFE223.
I've had good luck with H335, and it has given me some very accurate loads.
I started using Tac because I have been loading 60+ grain bullets and it is burning much cleaner than CFE223 has. So far, H335 and Tac have been burning the cleanest; but I haven't shot enough of the Tac loads inbetween cleaning to say which burns cleaner.
Any suggestions on powders I should try out? I will mainly be using 60-64gr SP and Ballistic tip bullets. Hoping to stay in the 30$ a pound range, but would be willing to give more expensive powders a try if they burned significantly cleaner. I would be willing to try anything so long as it meters decently.
With H335, CFE223, and Tac; I get very similar accuracy. I love how Tac has published load data for 5.56 and 223.

Worth note, I have been exclusively using CCI450 primers.

B52U

10-16-17, 11:08

Ramshot TAC has become my favorite powder for the reasons you stated. Good velocities for heavy bullets, ball powder for easy and accurate metering in progressive presses. Good middle of the road burn rate for versatility in use with a range of bullet weights, published 5.56 data, and burns fairly clean and also has an anti-copper fouling composition. And up until recently, was one of the cheaper options.

I also have done a lot of load dev with CFE223 and hated the fact that you had to load to the max to get a clean burn and decent velocities (which still never bested TAC loads for me). Very dirty when loading middle of the road pressures. Also very temp sensitive at those higher pressures. Too slow burning for 223 IMO. Might be decent for .308.

markm

10-16-17, 11:14

5.56 Bonded SP

10-16-17, 11:17

Ramshot TAC has become my favorite powder for the reasons you stated. Good velocities for heavy bullets, ball powder for easy and accurate metering in progressive presses. Good middle of the road burn rate for versatility in use with a range of bullet weights, published 5.56 data, and burns fairly clean and also has an anti-copper fouling composition. And up until recently, was one of the cheaper options.

I also have done a lot of load dev with CFE223 and hated the fact that you had to load to the max to get a clean burn and decent velocities (which still never bested TAC loads for me). Very dirty when loading middle if the road pressures. Also very temp sensitive at those higher pressures. Too slow burning for 223 IMO. Might be decent for .308.

I did not know it had copper fouling reduction properties!
I also love how they publish load data for everything from 34gr-90gr bullets with 223/5.56!

B52U

10-16-17, 11:28

I did not know it had copper fouling reduction properties!
I also love how they publish load data for everything from 34gr-90gr bullets with 223/5.56!Well, upon further research to back up my claim, this may be in dispute now. I was pretty sure it contained tin bizmuth, but I could be wrong according to this thread. My apologies for perpetuating what could be myth. In any case, copper fouling hasn't been an issue for me.

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/ubb/printthread/Board/34/main/163482/type/thread

5.56 Bonded SP

10-16-17, 11:29

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.

Sounds like you haven't shot a bunch of CFE223 with moderate charges :p Lol, JK. That stuff didn't give me any malfunctions with my guns, but cleaning was such a PITA that I don't even want to use the 2-3#'s of the stuff I have laying around! haha

I have considered trying h322, but I'm worried it might be a little fast for the heavier bullets. Might have to try some with some 50gr zmax.

I also haven't noticed much effect in accuracy with a mild powder charge variance, but I might not be good enough of a shooter to see the difference at the distances I shot ( mainly 100-200 yards ). Have you noticed any other advantages with the non ball powders besides accuracy? I hear people complain about temp sensitivity with ball powders, but for me it has never been a problem at all.

5.56 Bonded SP

10-16-17, 11:37

Well, upon further research to back up my claim, this may be in dispute now. I was pretty sure it contained tin bizmuth, but I could be wrong according to this thread. My apologies for perpetuating what could be myth. In any case, copper fouling hasn't been an issue for me.

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/ubb/printthread/Board/34/main/163482/type/thread

No worries either way! It would be nice, but all of my barrels are chrome or nitride, so copper fouling has never really been an issue since I always clean my guns after I get home from the range ( at the very least a few swipes with a bore snake). The only thing that ever seems to really affect my accuracy is when my barrels warm up.

Probably a good thing, I think the Tin compounds leave a little more carbon fouling in lieu of copper fouling but that is only an assumption on my part from my limited experience with CFE223.

MisterHelix

10-16-17, 11:40

Hodgdon Benchmark works well for my .223 (77grain), 6.8spcii (100/110grain), and .308 (165/168grain) semi-auto rifles. It meters just find through my hornady powder drop on the LNL AP.

markm

10-16-17, 11:55

Sounds like you haven't shot a bunch of CFE223 with moderate charges :p Lol, JK. That stuff didn't give me any malfunctions with my guns, but cleaning was such a PITA that I don't even want to use the 2-3#'s of the stuff I have laying around! haha

I have not. Just 1 lb. I start out a little hot. Ran it with ss109 bullets and liked it for the limited rounds I used it.

I have considered trying h322, but I'm worried it might be a little fast for the heavier bullets.

I've run it with 77 gr bullets by the thousands... no kidding. It's a heavy bullets best friend.

Might have to try some with some 50gr zmax.

I also haven't noticed much effect in accuracy with a mild powder charge variance, but I might not be good enough of a shooter to see the difference at the distances I shot ( mainly 100-200 yards ). Have you noticed any other advantages with the non ball powders besides accuracy? I hear people complain about temp sensitivity with ball powders, but for me it has never been a problem at all.

Temp sensitivity isn't why I favor extrudeds. It's hard carbon fouling and the good accuracy I get out of extruded.

5.56 Bonded SP

10-16-17, 12:11

I have not. Just 1 lb. I start out a little hot. Ran it with ss109 bullets and liked it for the limited rounds I used it.

Maybe that was my problem, not running hot enough

I've run it with 77 gr bullets by the thousands... no kidding. It's a heavy bullets best friend.

Does it burn cleaner than say h335?

Temp sensitivity isn't why I favor extrudeds. It's hard carbon fouling and the good accuracy I get out of extruded.

So the extruded stuff leaves a softer fouling? Is it a similar amount just softer?

markm

10-16-17, 12:41

It's some old school precision shooter advice. We've given our hand loads to riflesmiths, and they've asked if it's ball powder that will ruin their barrel. Now I don't think its' THAT dramatic. But mil testing that I've read (maybe AMU) cited some ball powders leaving hard carbon fouling in the middle area of the barrel.

B52U

10-16-17, 12:47

Markm, what kind of load density does the H322 load have with 77gr bullets? I assume with it being a faster powder, that it leaves a bunch of room in the case.

5.56 Bonded SP

10-16-17, 13:06

Markm, what kind of load density does the H322 load have with 77gr bullets? I assume with it being a faster powder, that it leaves a bunch of room in the case.

This was my thought as well, leaving worry for good burn... But I have heard some guys swear by that load ( h322 with 75ish gr bullet ) and I would not be surprised. I wonder if the slower bullet helps the burn? My most accurate load was about 24grH335 with a 50gr pill gave me consistent sub moa 5 shot groups.
I haven't messed with match loads for about a year though.

markm

10-16-17, 13:15

The 77 otm or tmk cobble up so much case that the low bulk density of H322 isn't a problem. It just works really well.... and over many different barrel lengths and profiles.

ghostly

10-16-17, 15:19

It really depends on what bullet weight and what I'm trying to accomplish, but TAC is what I use for the majority of it, especially on the progressive presses.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

markm

10-16-17, 15:42

gunnerblue

10-16-17, 17:30

TAC is one of my favorite powders for a variety of cartridges including AR15’s and AR10’s. Overall good accuracy and standard deviation while just being very easy to work with to include metering, etc. 8208 XBR is my preferred powder for 62, 77 precision loads, however. Very accurate and since I load these by weighing each charge, progressive metering is not a concern. On the other hand, my tests show that TAC varies no more than 0.01 of a grain when thrown from either my RCBS or Hornady progressive throwers, while 8208 XBR will occasionally vary by 0.02 but generally around 0.01-0.15

markm

10-16-17, 17:33

I never obsess on my charge variances with the small kernel extruded powders. I know they're there. But it's not hurting accuracy a bit.

pinzgauer

10-16-17, 18:15

CFE got on my radar as it's becoming the Grendel powder of choice and is widely available.

I use it for all kinds of stuff, it's a very flexible powder. About the only thing I'm not reloading with it is 223, but I know I can if I need to.

Krazykarl

10-16-17, 18:19

H335 for 55gr training loads as it meters very well through the Dillon. It also produces respectable precision (3.144" n=10) through my 20" scoped rifle. 69 gr MK was wonderful with n540. Only powder were I actually obtained published velocity results (2924 fps).

5.56 Bonded SP

10-16-17, 19:49

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?

http://accurateshooter.net/pix/burnchart1601op.png

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.

mgrs

10-16-17, 22:10

Can you give a reference to this chart and this quote? How slow are we talking?

http://accurateshooter.net/pix/burnchart1601op.png

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.

Bimmer

10-17-17, 07:56

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...

Ramshot TAC has become my favorite powder for the reasons you stated...

I used to shoot tons of TAC...

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...

markm

10-17-17, 09:54

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.

markm

10-17-17, 10:24

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.

MarshallDodge

10-17-17, 23:32

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.

bp7178

10-17-17, 23:34

mgrs

10-19-17, 19:16

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.

https://i.imgur.com/oQYYvmP.jpg

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.

czgunner

10-19-17, 19:48

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.

https://i.imgur.com/oQYYvmP.jpg

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?

markm

10-20-17, 10:20

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...

5.56 Bonded SP

10-20-17, 17:36

I always thought the main culprit of gas port erosion was the bullet shearing against it, not the gas from powder burnt. The type of powder used is probably a factor is GP erosion, but I believe the main cause is the actual bullet rubbing against it. Gas port erosion is natural, and will happen no matter what type of powder is used.
Faster powders do have their downsides too in regards to throat erosion. GP erosion from slow powder is news to me, but I wouldn't consider faster powder always better at all.

My line of thinking has always been, fast powder with light bullets, slower powder with heavier bullets as a very general guideline for ideal performance since that is what most manuals imply. ( many manuals only have data for slow powder with heavy bullets and vice versa )

mgrs

10-20-17, 18:20

Is the Douglas barrel stainless? Possibly more wear on the softer metal?

Yes, and probably.

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...

Agreed. I use TAC for almost everything in 5.56 now. I think the throat would go before the port erodes enough to be a real problem. I just got the scope so had to take a peek. It's more useful to find bore damage or leading.

markm

10-20-17, 18:36

I always thought the main culprit of gas port erosion was the bullet shearing against it, not the gas from powder burnt. The type of powder used is probably a factor is GP erosion, but I believe the main cause is the actual bullet rubbing against it.

I believe that port erosion is almost 100 percent hot gas erosion. There might be a slight bullet wear component for the first few rounds. The bullet no longer is even contacting the tear drop shaped cavity worn into the barrel.

Clint

10-20-17, 19:06

Mark,

What are your favorite loads with H322?

mic2377

10-21-17, 05:07

I have in the past run a lot of H335. It is an excellent general purpose 223 powder. Good velocity + accuracy, and relatively clean. It is very flashy and temperature sensitive. Similarly Win 748 works great, and is also less flashy.

However, I am like MarkM in that I am converting over to exclusively temperature insensitive extruded powders like H4895, Varget, and 8208 XBR. The loads I develop also seem to show more consistent accuracy in wider variety of weapons as well.

ghostly

10-21-17, 06:10

I used to use H335 and had good results. It metered well and shot great. You'll find H335 flashy until you compare it with powders like Varget. I haven't tried 8208 XBR, but have been curious how it would do in bolt guns. For now I'm sitting on a good lot of 16 lbs of H4350, another lot of 14 lbs H4350 I haven't tried, and another 8 lb lot.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

markm

10-21-17, 16:28

Mark,

What are your favorite loads with H322?

The house load is 21.6-21.8 gr of H322, 77 gr OTM, Wolf Primer, Lee Factory crimp.

bp7178

10-22-17, 00:10

Mark,

Have you guys ever tried LT-32?

hotrodder636

10-22-17, 01:15

Tagged

kwg020

10-22-17, 15:58

RL10x
AA2015
Benchmark
AA2230

yellowfin

10-22-17, 20:13

For my 55's and 62gr Varmageddon (I'm surrounded by farm country so there's groundhogs here--of course I've gotta start making friends to be able to zap them, but details details.) it's H335 all day long. 75's and 77's do well for me with 8208 XBR which I also like for .308. Definitely want to try AR Comp at some point as well.

AndyLate

10-22-17, 22:59

Today I was shooting the 62 gr Hornady bthp with a moderate Tac load, and a warmer H335 load. I shot at 50 yards today, the 100 was a little crowded. Both loads shot nicely in my scoped 20" AR, the suprise was when I shot my 16" BCM lightweight middie with an AP PRO and printed .5 to .75" 5 shot groups with a simple front rest. I definitely found two powders I like!

I also tried 24.5 grains of TAC and a 55 gr Hornady FMJ. I was expecting a milder load, it's no weak sister and I understand why that load gets recommended a lot here.

Andy

5.56 Bonded SP

10-23-17, 00:07

markm

10-23-17, 12:27

I also tried 24.5 grains of TAC and a 55 gr Hornady FMJ. I was expecting a milder load, it's no weak sister and I understand why that load gets recommended a lot here.

It's a mild load. But it runs really good due to the slow powder/light bullet combo. You don't get a great percentage of powder burn, but it's still a nice plinking/practice load.

mgrs

10-27-17, 22:59

It's a mild load. But it runs really good due to the slow powder/light bullet combo. You don't get a great percentage of powder burn, but it's still a nice plinking/practice load.

Switched from 24.5gr H335 and Hornady 55gr FMJ to 24.3 gr tac and the Hornaday 55gr SP for my hosing load. Very mild as mentioned but seems to run fine in most everything.

markm

10-28-17, 10:09

Switched from 24.5gr H335 and Hornady 55gr FMJ to 24.3 gr tac and the Hornaday 55gr SP for my hosing load. Very mild as mentioned but seems to run fine in most everything.

The only problem I had with it was POI shift when I shot 5.56 pressure ammo. The TAC load shot 1-2" low. So either my practice ammo, or defense ammo wasn't zeroed.

5.56 Bonded SP

10-29-17, 23:32

The only problem I had with it was POI shift when I shot 5.56 pressure ammo. The TAC load shot 1-2" low. So either my practice ammo, or defense ammo wasn't zeroed.

You can load that 55gr tac load way hotter..
27.3gr is the max load for a 5.56 chamber for 55gr fmj per ramshot manual.
223 chamber is about 25.7gr

That might fix your poi problem.. But from my experience some bullet styles just shoot different poi regardless of charge weight.

223
48284

5.56
4828548285

markm

10-30-17, 10:18

You can load that 55gr tac load way hotter..

I know. But the point of that load was to get a mild practice round that stretched 8 lbs of powder a long way. I don't shoot TAC or 55 gr FMJs any longer.

Bimmer

10-30-17, 10:30

I don't shoot TAC or 55 gr FMJs any longer.

This is like hearing that the Marlboro Man switched to some other brand...

markm

10-30-17, 11:57

Yeah. Newports! :D

I have TAC, and like it. But it's out of the rotation for now.

mgrs

10-30-17, 20:09

I know. But the point of that load was to get a mild practice round that stretched 8 lbs of powder a long way. I don't shoot TAC or 55 gr FMJs any longer.

The like that it is the same charge I use for 77gr loads and requires no adjustment on the powder bar; only to move to preset marks on the micrometer seat die.

gunnerblue

10-30-17, 22:53

The only problem I had with it was POI shift when I shot 5.56 pressure ammo. The TAC load shot 1-2" low. So either my practice ammo, or defense ammo wasn't zeroed.

For practice, is 1-2” really a concern? Just curious as to your thinking as my weapons are zeroed for defensive ammo, yet the 24.5 TAC/55 gr HDY combo has served me well in 3-Gun competition out to 300 yards.

markm

10-31-17, 09:58

For practice, is 1-2” really a concern? Just curious as to your thinking as my weapons are zeroed for defensive ammo, yet the 24.5 TAC/55 gr HDY combo has served me well in 3-Gun competition out to 300 yards.

The only time It messed me up was in Patrol Rifle Class. My instructor was critical of shot placement and so my POI shift was a minor nuisance when I switched ammo. The ammo is another story...

MarshallDodge

11-03-17, 09:52

The only time It messed me up was in Patrol Rifle Class. My instructor was critical of shot placement and so my POI shift was a minor nuisance when I switched ammo. The ammo is another story...

This messed me up at a 3 gun match once. I had my carbine sighted in at 100 with 77 grain match ammo and accidentally grabbed a mag of 55 FMJ that was moving significantly faster. When engaging some 4" targets at 175 yards, it was enough that I discovered after 3 straight misses that I was barely high left. A slight correction corrected the point of impact but after I had waisted 10 seconds trying to figure out what was going on :rolleyes:

markm

11-03-17, 12:49

I don't even have 55 gr FMJ anymore. The POI shift from 77s was too exhausting.

yellowfin

11-13-17, 22:50

My attention has turned mostly to XBR for heavy 5.56 and .308 loads lately. Lots of catching up to do in the workshop over the next few cold months.

markm

11-14-17, 09:31

gunnerblue

11-14-17, 11:39

Going back to the original question... It's really easier to say which powders I don't like, or which ones are less optimal.

Anything from Reloader is not acceptable due to the crazy temp sensitivity. WIN748 is temp sensative too. But it's a SUPER low flash powder. Other than those examples, I've not run into any powders that really bothered me to use.

Have you tried any of the new Reloader powders (e.g. 16, 23 and 26)? Supposedly they address the temperature issue. I’ve been using RL 23 in .300 WBY and 6.5-284 and have not seen an appreciable drop in velocity thus far. For info, I developed my loads over the summer when it’s usually well into the 90’s and it’s now currently hovering around freezing most days.

gunnerblue

11-14-17, 11:41

My attention has turned mostly to XBR for heavy 5.56 and .308 loads lately. Lots of catching up to do in the workshop over the next few cold months.

When I exhaust my supply of Varget, I’m going to do some more experimentation with XBR in 7.62 to possibly simplify my powder buying as I already use it in 5.56 precision loads. What few tests I’ve done show promise with 175 gr. bullets.

markm

11-14-17, 14:11

Have you tried any of the new Reloader powders (e.g. 16, 23 and 26)? Supposedly they address the temperature issue.

We messed with RE19 for 338 WM when we were struggling. There was an issue with temp. I'd have to see if I wrote it down.

When I exhaust my supply of Varget, I’m going to do some more experimentation with XBR in 7.62 to possibly simplify my powder buying as I already use it in 5.56 precision loads. What few tests I’ve done show promise with 175 gr. bullets.

This is interesting. I've shot a lot of 8208, but never in .308. It strikes me that XBR is a little fast... especially compared to Varget. But we shoot the heavies in .223 with XBR sometimes.... so who knows?