Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters 30-06 +p with low temp sensitivity

MD

You may already have run these tests, but I think testing +p loads with low temp sensitive powders would be a very popular read.


Bugger

What are .30-06 +P loads?

Hopped up handgun cartridges and arms designed for such are often labeled +P. Not heard of a similar designation in rifles.

I wonder if he means loads between 60K PSI and 65K PSI?
There have been some discussions on other forums about running pressures up to 65K because the actions would handle it.

Either way, they are over SAAMI pressures...

Ed

The 06 is loaded to a lower pressure than 270 and others. The best accuracy I get from my favorite 06 is hotter than what is in manuals. My beat up 721 with Kevlar stock and a screwed in 700 barrel can shoot ~ 1/2" 5 shot groups with a couple powders. Unfortunately the best shooting load is IMR4350 which isn't considered temperature insensitive.
H4831sc and H4895 seem to do fine, but the loads are fairly warm with the H4895.

My issue is how high a pressure are my loads. I go by how many reloads I get out of a case, and other non-scientific methods. Also, I'd like to see what a professional might consider "+p" or higher than normally listed in manuals but safe in modern bolt actions.

257 Roberts +P

Will other powders consistently shoot (not can shoot) one moa for five shots? If so, that's quite precise for a sporter weight rifle in a cartridge with nontrivial recoil. Then you have temperature insensitive options.

The limiting factor in pressure isn't the actions (normally) or the barrels. It's the cases. No reason to run pressures that high. Temp sensitive powders don't do a thing when you get dew in your barrel on a foggy morning, or dust on the prairie, or a long case pressing in on the bullet etc etc. When you push the envelope, you're asking for it. If you do it with one of the enclosed face actions, (Rem Weatherby etc.) you'll lock up the action and the hunt is over.
All for what?? another couple hundred FPS? bragging rights at the club about how fast your old Ought-six shoots??

What's a hot 30-06 load going to kill that a normal will not?

Maybe a PD at 978 yds because the rifle needs to be pushed pass SAAMI to keep bullets flying at 0.25 MOA?

It ain't always about impact energy at 150 yds.

When you go off on your own and exceed published limits for a cartridge, you're playing with fire. Don't expect anyone to go out on a limb to assist you on a fool's errand. "Professionals" behave professionally and responsibly.

If you want or need more power than a cartridge loaded to its proper limits provides, go bigger.

My point is getting the accuracy. Probably more accuracy than needed. I get very good accuracy at the higher pressures. That is why. The 06 case is made the same as the 270 case, so those of you that think this unwarranted why don't you just keep your non- requested unwarranted opinions to your self!

If only Bob Hagel was still alive.

Hot 30-06 "prairie dog loads"? Have fun!

Your opinions are like your ass-holes. You have them true but they stink and I for one don't want to smell it.

Rock on, Smarty Pants!

I'm amazed that someone as briiliant as you are felt the need to ask others for advice.

I have his book. Some of his loads were indeed on the warmish side.

Found it in a used book store 10-15 years ago for 2-3 bucks. Nice read.

I'm NOT a gun writer so.....

Why should the 06 be 'limited' to 50,000 CUP in "modern" firearms when 243s, 308s, 270s, etc are NOT in the same "modern" firearms? ?

What's UNSAFE about shooting 60,000 psi in MODERN firearms regardless of the cartridge? I realize most of us don't have pressure testing equipment .....

As Mule Deer has said, we can use a chronograph and load to velocity levels appropriate to the cartridge.



A Hot P D load ? funny!

Higher velocity/pressure will flatten trajectory and make longer shots easier. Higher fpe is not needed nor the goal.


Jerry

I like fast...it makes life much easier. A very handy byproduct of speed is that I typically find much better accuracy the harder you lean on a load. Brass is a consumable, so if I rag the primer pockets out in three or four loads, its just the cost of doing business.

What is Smarty Pants going to compare his loads to in order to "determine" when he gets to 60k with his '06?

I agree with your premise about the other carts with higher limits, but without access to pressure testing equipment, you're flying blind. One minor whoopsie involving a popped primer was all I needed to see the light.

A feller could probably teach himself how to measure case-head expansion and get some idea about what his loads are doing, but after reading a couple of pieces about it, I decided it was more fun than I wanted to have.

Our Hero wants somebody else to go out on a limb, not do the work himself. Guys like that are usually the first ones to reach for a lawyer when stuff goes awry.

Who gives a queef about 60K PSI when shooting Arisakas and Steyr M96 SBS actions. The Steyr is claimed to be proofed at 120K PSI and Mr. Parker Otto Ackley found he couldn't destruction test the Arisakas.

Years ago I worked in a small gun shop doing gunsmithing.
One of customers talked about loading four grains over the max in his .338 Winchester Magnum.
Why would you do that, I asked.
He said he and his brother were going to hunt black bears
He said they were shooting tomatoe cans full of water at 200 yds. You should see them blow up! Etc. Etc.
Next time I saw him he asked how my welding skills were.
I asked why he wanted to know

He said those little square things on the front of the bolt were starting to have hairline cracks.
I said let's send it to the factory and have them check the receiver and replace the bolt.

Maybe the guy with a face full of bits of powder and brass!😱

Chill bro.

Just messing with y'all.

Did I ever mention how my friend got a glass eye?

What pressures are you working at?

What bullet, case, gun, powder etc... and what MV with what type of barrel and length?

I agree I get the best accuracy usually at the top end of loads, but running some over the chrono I"m not really over the top load/speed wise.

And once you start seeing pressure signs its a good thing to back off. But what pressure signs do you use? Mic the case head? With a mic not a caliper adn trained how to use a mic correctly?

Also you will almost always find as you approach top end you are not gaining MV, you may actually be sititng still or loosing sometimes. Thats beyond pressure I want to deal with for sure.

Once I stop gaining normal increments of speed on a load work up I'm done going up.

100 fps is HARD to gain without danger or doing some wild combination of things to make it all work. 200 fps above is going to take some new powder or such, you won't get there safely by normal means.

Then for rounds like the 06 the very best answer to this problem is the 300 Win/Wtby/RUM rounds.

The WW-1 30-06 military loads were 150 gr @ 2700 fps. By WW-2 it was up to 2800 fps and modern hunting loads are usually around 2900 fps.

I can get 3000+ fps from my 22" rifle with 60 gr of H4350 which is 2 gr below max and with a powder that is not temp sensitive. There is no reason 3100 fps shouldn't be safe with a max load and a longer barrel. I actually hit 3050 fps from my gun with a max load, but got a little better accuracy at 60 gr. If 3 shots aren't inside an inch it is because I pulled a shot, the load and rifle are capable. I could care less what it does with 5 shots, I'll never shoot at game that many times.

I've loaded 165's to 2900 fps and 180's to 2800 with the same powder. All have been MOA, all are at or below book max loads and I don't consider any of them to be excessive.

I've read of guys using loads that beat those speeds by 50-75 fps;in rare cases 100 fps with really long barrels. To me it just isn't worth it for less than 100 fps. If I need more than the speeds I'm getting then one of the 300 mags will beat my speeds safely with an additional 200-300 fps.

But on the other hand I see no reason to handicap the 30-06 with the older WW-1 era loads either.

JMR- EXACTLY


Jerry

Bugger. -

You can probably find what U R looking for Under

Reloading. Forum

Good. 30-06 loads

37 pages


Jerry

I have thought of similar things. The pressure in many rifle cartridges was set decades ago for older designs and with the fairly new technology of smokeless powder.

I wonder why this seems a joke to some. Brian Pearce has increased velocity and pressures with revolver rounds. Why couldn't it be done with rifle rounds. Of course he had access to pressure testing equipment.

45-70 in a Marlin Lever can be fun.

This.

Knew dat.

I've been capitalizing on the 30-06 case volume for many years, and often get scorned by the purists.

I'll just throw out some physics info.

Case volume comparisons.

300 SAUM - 71-72 gr give or take.

30-06 (I've measured, after fireforming)

milsurp - 68 gr
Rem - 69 gr
Win - 71 gr
Norma - 72 gr

If you are wondering what the hell I'm trying to say, reloading probably isn't your gig.

1/1/1/ which 1 is 1 ?

If it walks like a duck......


I must add - IN modern firearms.

Jerry

Bugger,

Thanks for your definition. Just wanted to know, because when SAAMI lists +P loads they define it with a specific maximum average pressure (MAP) for that cartridge. For instance, the only rifle cartridge I can recall offhand with a SAAMI +P pressure level is the .257 Roberts, and the +P pressure is 58,000 PSI--which is less than the .30-06 standard of 60,000.

SAAMI lists the maximum average pressure for the .270 at 65,000 PSI, which is also the top MAP they list for any cartridge. There are several reasons for SAAMI to list a MAP for certain rifle cartridges under 65,000 PSI, such as erratic pressure spreads (the reason the .243 Winchester is one example) and weak brass, but the .30-06 has never shown either tendency. Instead the MAP is 60,000 because of so many old .30-06's.

I don't see any reason not to handload the .30-06 to higher pressures in a modern rifle, but the question is how's +P pressure determined?

Probably the best method for the handloader is velocity, since measuring case head expansion has so many problems it's actually pretty useless. According to one old rule of interior ballistics, when using single-based powders pressure increases at approximately twice the rate of velocity.

Another (and more precise) rule is that velocity with single-based powders increase at the same rate as the powder charge: If the powder charge increases 1%, then velocity increases 1%.

Combine both rules and the increase in presssure from 60,000 to 65,000 PSI is 8.33%. But since velocity will only increase half as much (again, with single-based powders), then the increase will be about 4.16%. In a 180-grain load at the standard 2700 fps this means an increase to 65,000 PSI will result in about 2810 fps. However, some powders already reach about that level even without increasing pressures to 65,000.

But as far as an article about such increases, well, it presents all sorts of problems, including accurate pressure-testing when working up loads--and then persuading some magazine or website to publish the results of handloads exceeding standard SAAMI pressures.

Back in Bob Hagel's day this wasn't a problem, the reason some of his .30-06 handloads reached very impressive velocities--which I am sure required pressures over 65,000 PSI. But it is today, for better or worse.

"But as far as an article about such increases, well, it presents all sorts of problems, including accurate pressure-testing when working up loads--and then persuading some magazine or website to publish the results of handloads exceeding standard SAAMI pressures."

How does Brian Pearce get printed then. Not trying to be troublesome, but it does seem Rifle and Handloader are either cutting edge with this or reckless from what you are saying.

Bugger - I load the 30-06 above SAAMI as you suggest. H4350 is your friend for max, temp insensitive loads.

Try this: 150 gr - 60.0 grains, 180 - 58.0 grains. I've not shot many 165's but simple extrapolation indicates 59.0 grains. You need to work up to those loads using a chronograph. Assuming a 24" barrel, stop at 60.0 grains or 3000 ft/sec with a 150, 59.0 grains or 2900 for a 165, and 58.0 grains with a 2800 with a 180.

You assume the risk here but I've shot those loads for years in many 30-06 with nary a stuck case, hard bolt lift, or loose primer pockets.

m

Speer's #14 manual lists 58.0 grains of H-4350 with a 180 grain bullet at 2756 fps. Working up to that same load with a 180 A/bond gives me 2725-2740 out of a 22" barrel. Being right in line with factory velocities I figure that's as good a place as any to stop.

Bugger,

I'm getting about the same velocities as bwinters in a Sako , 24" barrel and use H4350 and with Noslers ballistic tips except I use 61 grs for the 150's and they run around 3100 fps.

Some of those velocities can be beat with a good chambered custom barrel depending on the length. Read what mule deer posted again. Superformance is an interesting powder to try along with Ramshot hunter.

There was a thread on taking the 30-06 to 65000 psi on another forum some years back and was an interesting read. I believe the pressure testing was done by a guy that worked for a large powder company..

If velocity is your only goal, I'd just get a magnum caliber with a long barrel. I'm a classic caliber man and see no need for super hot magnums. Jacking the pressures uo in the 30/06 is not a good idea.
Faster bullets can actually reduce penetration due to rapid premature expansion, as well as causing significant meat damage. I recall a discussion in Atlanta about this, among a group of magnum afficionados at a gun shop. Eventually a bet was laid. $100 if I recall correctly, that slower calibers would penetrate further than "magnums". The 2 calibers were 7x57 Vs 7mm Rem Mag and 308 Win Vs the 300 Win Mag. Loaded to factory specs, using the same bullets. 139 & 180 gr. respectively. The medium was wet Atlanta phone books, stacked in a cardboard box. I won the bet, as the standard calibers penetrated 25-30% deeper than the magnums.

But some people get their panties in a wad when anyone suggests sticking to the design pressures & velocities of a very capable cartridge..

No reason for personal insults in a rational discussion.

brayhaven-

I'll be nice and polite.

I believe you and your tests report.
I respectfully suggest that you try to duplicate those same tests using 'premium' bullets. I think you'll find 'different' results.

Jerry

The comments made by others that have made up facts and ridicule a request deserved the comments I gave.

There's +p loads for the 257 Roberts. 7.9x57 mm and 7x57's are loaded above 'standard' pressure. In revolvers there's loads for the Ruger only.

Ken Waters had three sets of pressures for the 45-70. Springfield, old lever actions and bolt action or falling block.

38 Special has a standard load and a +p load.

By running a chambering reamer into a 280 and making it a 280AI, the pressure can be in creased as in almost any "improved" cartridge.

But suggest increasing pressure in the 06 will cause people with minimal IQ to ridicule the suggestion.

My most accurate load in my old piece meal 06 will shoot <.25" groups. The load is 50.1 grains of H4895 and 180 grain flat based Hornady Interlock bullet.

The case life is good, extraction is good, etc.

According to what I've found this is a 'excess -heavy' load in today's manuals.

With my old Springfield 03 I shot a .15" 5 shot group with an overloaded by today's manuals. Again it was H4895 but with 150 grain bullet. I used this load in rifle silhouette.

These loads came out of the original Hornady reloading manual printed in 1968.

Back then they didn't seem to have accurate pressure sensing equipment just as I do not.

So what pressures should I be getting with these loads.

Finally, why is it that I should put up with moronic comments for asking a question?

Bugger

'moronic' comments usually come from .....

As it turns out we have NEW powders that produce the increased velocities desired AND the loads are published in 'newer' loading manuals.

Some folks are lost in the 70s or earlier.

Jerry

Bug hole groups only at extreme velocity/pressure? I don't doubt you, but it does beg the question--why? What earthly reason is there to stress an ancient '03 Springfield with loads like that, no matter how accurate such loads may be? I submit there are better platforms for such folderol, and other cartridges better suited to that kind of sturm und drang
than the .30-06.

Again - this.

There you go with them technical terms again!





Ed

I'm using R17 in the 30-06 these days. This pressure chart was one reason I tried it. Screenshot from another web forum, for those that haven't seen it...



I wrote to DK and he told me the test barrel was 24".

bob-

uh huh!

Remember some 'don't' want to see.


Jerry

That's amazing accuracy. Almost unbelievable! 🙄

Same guy ran a bunch of tests a few years back using 180s and 200s. That is where/why I run 180s in an 06 to 2800 with the same powders.

Re 17 surprises me. I was getting 2850;2875 with 55 grains and thought it too hot so never loaded them again. Re 17 is accurate in 06. I may revisit now I know the skinny on the pressure. Thanks for posting. Mind sharing the website?

Just the nature of the Internet Beast.

Might want to dust off your ignore function.

I don't mean to sound like I am in any way an expert on this, but if I were sitting at bench at the range, and a fellow came up to the next bench over and said he'd been playing with "30-06 +P" I would listen politely while he was setting up and by the time he was chambering the first round, I would be on the way to the car.

In fact, I've done that a couple of times-- not with 30-06, but with a fellow who claimed his 30-30 shot like a 30-06, and another time with a guy seeing how far he could push a 7mm Rem Mag mixing powders together. The point is, that you don't know what's going to happen. Neither does the other guy, not really. If I'm not going to go over SAAMI, why should I be sitting next to a guy who will?

Buy some Lapua brass and a copy of Quickload and work your way up.... You'll know when you've gone too far.

If you feel the need to hot rod a rifle may I suggest Ruger #1 45-70? BTDT

whelennut

bobnob17,

Is there a chart with RL17 and 200 gr bullet data?

My happy spot with RL-17 and a 200 grain Nosler Partition is 55.0grains of powder.

Here is my load with RL-17 powder and 200 grain Partitions.

Thanks for posting that. 55.0 gr with 200s is what I have worked up to as the max load after seeing what several others have found to be a sweet spot.

Good load density, easy extraction, punched primers look normal, primer pockets stay snug and all the rest of the indirect indications of not stupid-high pressures.

I am getting around .5 MOA for three in a Steyr SBS and then usually mess up the group with sloppy follow through.


Just wondering what PSI we are running at when doing so.

I've been loading 54 gr RL-17 under a moly'd 208 Amax. 22.5" bbl, 2650-2700 fps depending on time of year.



Did some load workup with moly'd Nosler 190 ABLRs a while back.

Same 22.5" bbl, RL-17

56gr - 2865 fps
57gr - 2915 fps
58gr - 2950 fps, primer starting to flatten a little.

I'm still pretty new to handloading, so I've never messed with coated bullets.

Is it correct to assume that coated bullets effectively lower the pressures created?

Yes, it's just a dry lube. Reduces friction/pressure.

Anyone tried RL-17 with 215 Bergers in the 06?

To answer the OP's question, I don't think there's enough "+P" there in an '06 case to justify creating a class of ammo for it.

The .257 Roberts is widely available in a +P designation, but there is a significant difference in pressure limits between the two, so for people with modern rifles it's worthwhile to have the +P loads. That's not really true in the '06, when you're talking about going from 60ksi to 65 ksi. And if someone is silly enough to stick a 65ksi load in a Garand, or one of the common '06 pump or autoloaders, it could damage the gun.

I've got a few guns that I run above book loads, but in those cases I've studied the data very carefully and have worked up loads watching chrono and case expansion data, but I don't claim anyone could use it in their rifle.

Yes, moly coated, 22.5" bbl.

54.0 gr - 2650 fps, very accurate (3 shots, .207" at 100 yards)
55.0 gr - 2700 fps, a little bolt stiffness

All the details here,

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbth...0/215_gr_Berger_in_the_30-06#Post9704870

Should I sell him the pound and a half of H205 that I still have? Or do you think there may have been a reason it was discontinued? An ancient Nosler book said 165 @ 3100....

Not a writer but Bob Hagel made me do it.

Jack

PS, I don't hot rod my Springfield 1903 for two reasons. It is old and I don't want to blow up an engraving job and a piece of wood that 3 grand might not replace. Besides that, factory 150s kill deer.

Also, Superformance works. ( but in a stronger action, not the 1903) Buy Hornaday factory stuff. It is tested.

Hammer down that is a great load.

I shot some federal high energy factory 30-06 ammo through my chronograph. 180 grain partition 2888. 22 inch barrel rem 700 ti. recoil was noticeable. Used it on a big 6x6 elk. If you/I/we could get the federal 3006 Load P3006tt4. 2880 fps with a tipped trophy bonded bullet. Awesome!!!

Bob -
Thnx for this chart. A lot of good info AND pressure tests.
I appreciate it.

Jerry

Thanks, FYI my gun has a 1-11" twist.

How have those RL-17 loads performed at temperatures from zero to 90?

Mule Deer, it never gets to 0f here. Have shot R17 loads with 168s, 180s and 208s at around 40C with non moly bullets and had no probs.

I find about 20-40fps difference between hot weather (about 40c) and cold weather (about 7c) with these loads. That's as wide a variation as I get the chance to shoot in.

Will try to find the link to those charts for those asking. He tested lots of Alliant and H powders with bullets 180 to 220g from memory.

Think it was the ACCURATERELOADING forum if someone has the time to search. I'm on my meal break at work and venison curry is calling.

I have been overloading dozens of cartridges for 15 years to see what happens. This pic is from 9-12-2003.

1) I would have bet money I could not get as much velocity in 270 150 gr as I did with Re17.

But once I include the temp sensitivity into my derating calculation for a useful load, Re17 is down with the rest of the powders and trajectory that changes with temp.

So I never used Re17 for anything after that, due to my wide temperature range hunting.

2) 30-06 published data exists in old load books that takes advantage of all the strength in the large boxer primer pocket version of the Mauser case head.

3) I am currently using IMR 4451 with temp stability and anti Copper fouling coatings using H4350 data.

I am also using IMR 4161 with temp stability and anti Copper fouling coatings using IMR 4895 data.

And - did you find out anything groundbreaking?

I would say he did...



My interpretation is that Rl 17 gives excellent velocity but obviously it's lost in temp swings.

Jerry

The mere act of loading the '06 with temp stable powder using published load data will put performance levels into the +p range as temperature drops.

Clarkm,

That's why I asked my question! My experience with 17 is it's not nearly as temp-resistant as it was billed as when introduced.

One of the interesting things noticed when 17 first appeared was how many handloaders were reporting magic velocities--when no pressure tested data had yet been published. Then when data was published, those magic loads and velocities weren't included. In fact, some older Alliant powders beat 17's velocity in a number of loads, and newer Alliant powders in a bunch of other loads.

But once a powder gets a reputation for magic, the rep tends to stick.

I don't believe in magic.

RL-17 is just another powder, with it's own capabilities and limitations.

My very limited temp test of RL17 consisting of two shots at 70deg, and two at just under 20, after sitting out all night with temps to 8, showed no change in velocity. Measured with a Magnetospeed on a 338-06. Other powders lost up to 100fps.

Thanks for your civility Jerry.:)
You might be right, but the only premium bullets back then were the old Barnes pure copper & lead & the Nos partition. We could have used FMJ I guess, but that wasn't the point.

Karamojo Bell killed over 900 elephants with the 7x57.. Jack O'connor said the (American) hunting community would be no worse off if the only caliber available was the .270 & the only loading the 130 grain.

As a gunsmith, I've seen a lot of damage to guns: some from experimentation, but mostly carelessness. I've just never seen a need to jack up pressures over 60K.

There was a post regarding the Ackley improved calibers and pressure. But it's very different. The case design with minimum body taper allowed that to some extent by transferring breech pressure to chamber pressure. And the case head was still the limiting factor.

prm,

One of the problems with "temperature sensitivity" is that there really isn't a firm definition, and to a certain extent it's dependent on the cartridge and load. A chapter in the Norma manual mentions this, essentially stating that a very temp-resistant powder can be developed for any specific cartridge/bullet combination. But the same powder may not be particularly temp-resistant in another cartridge/bullet combination.

I've seen this many times during my load testing at different temperatures. Among the more cold-resistant results of what might be termed "standard" powders occurred with IMR4350. A load with IMR4350 and a 300-grain bullets in the .375 H&H lost only 38 fps from 70 to zero, but during the very same test, IMR4350 lost 74 fps in a .30-06 load with 165's.

During the same test, however, two loads with Hodgdon Extreme powders lost less than 15 fps in the 7x57 and .338 Winchester--which is less than the normal variation between two strings of chronographed shots recorded at the same temperature. This is what I've generally seen with Extremes in a wide range of cartridge/bullets combinations.

But the truth is that powders claimed to be temperature resistant just have a broader "comfort zone" than other powders. Another truth is that NO powder will produce the same velocity, even in loads in its comfort zone, at temperatures from zero to 100 degrees. And powders that resist cold may not do so well in heat, though in general there's an overall resistance to both cold and heat in the most effective powders.

The most temperature-sensitive powders I've tested, both in cold and heat, are those developed to produce higher-than-average velocities in specific applications, even inside their comfort zones.

Another factor is that large velocity variations often don't show up until temperatures get really cold or really hot. Almost any powder will be pretty consistent between about 35-40 and 80-85. Some that are more temp-resistant will extend that range a little, but it takes a really temp-resistant powder to minimize velocity variations in a wide range of cartridge/bullet combinations from zero to 100.

My own tests of RL-17 in various loads indicate its temp-resistance is better than average, but not outstanding.

brayhaven,

Ackley's tests were deeply flawed. More recent tests, with better testing equipment (including pressure-sensitive taper used in a number of industrial applications) indicate case shape has zero effect on "breech pressure"--the pressure on the bolt face. This is because at pressures above .30-30 level cartridges brass stretches, and overall chamber pressure is distributed equally to the bolt face. Extremely heavy-walled cases might prevent this, but not many commercial cases are heavy enough to prevent stretching at 60,000 PSI.

John those are really good points and one reason a lot of this temp sensitivity business will drive us crazy chasing it. And then when you change lots of powders and see the variations it's sometimes hard to evaluate what you're looking at and what's causing the variations.

Frieds and I are now seeing lot to lot changes in H1000 in the 7mm Mashburn; I noticed it about a year ago as my old lot dwindled and I tried some new stuff. The old lot gave 100 fps more velocity. They are noticing the same thing so I don't think it's temperature since I've shot the new stuff side by side against my older ammo.

It's hard to be a backyard lab on this stuff.

I remember a ways back when I noticed this temp stability business, I recall IMR4831 showed more velocity loss in the 7 Rem Mag with 140 gr bullets than it did in the 270 with 130's. This was pretty consistent over maybe a couple of winters, since I did a lot of winter chrongraphing back then. I often wondered if load density had an effect on it,

I also recall that 7828 did pretty well in the 7 Rem Mag with 160's going from winter back to summer temps, It seemed more consistent than either IMR4831 or IMR4350, but like you say it might have been the load and cartridge.

What you have observed is the reason I will replace older powders with the newer temp resistant powders but not until I burn up the old stuff...

"back then" and 'Barnes & N P' tells me it has been a long time SINCE those tests.

I encourage you to RE do the tests w/todays Modern Bullets.

It makes sense to me that c/c bullets expand much more at HI vel and therefore reduces penetration.

We have a few more Premium Bullets today that will withstand HI vel and penetrate MORE.


Jerry

What cartridges did you test RL-17 in?

I would have to look at my notes but have tried it in at least a dozen, though not always in one of my extreme temperature tests. But I do note temperature as part of any range session, and have noticed velocity variations at temps from 35-40 to 80-90 in some cartridge/bullet combos.

Am planning extensive shooting at both summer and winter temps over the rest of 2016 with a bunch of newer powders advertised as temp-resistant for a magazine article. Will know more as those tests take place.

I have gotten the same results for RL17 in the 6.5CM, 7mm-08, 7mm-08AI and 30-06 - zero velocity variation from ~25F to ~65F. Same loads do start picking up velocity as the temperatures go over 70. Have seen 25-50fps from ~65F to 95F.

David

John, I completely agree there is little definition. The powder is only one variable. Primers, barrels are also likely influential to some degree. I will admit I don't understand the physics/chemistry of how a powder could have little change across temps in one cartridge and significant change in another. A given powder is applied only in similar expansion ratio situations and would, I think, react similarly. I certainly can't refute Norma or anyone else though. Sure be fun to test though! I need more rifles. What I did is nothing more than collect a few data points. Certainly not enough to be definitive. My goal was to simply have a better understanding how velocity would change from an indoor range to a typical winter hunting situation. Nothing more. Having said that, it told me enough regarding how my loads perform in my rifles. It was very consistent in that ball powders lost a "significant" (to me) amount of velocity while the extruded powders lost very little if any. Off the top of my head, 2000MR, TAC, and LVR lost 80-100+ FPS, while 8208, RL-17, H4350, and IMR4451 lost anywhere from 0-25 FPS. Again, only four shots, take it for what it's worth.

IIRC, Denton found that barrel temp is more critical than powder temp when determining PSI/Velocity.

When posters offer their own findings here, how are you controlling for barrel temp especially while firing multiple shots to obtain sufficient samples to be statistically significant?

prm,

Here's the quote from THE BIG BOOK OF GUN GACK, in the powder chapter:

The Norma Reloading Manual, published in 2004, contains a very interesting chapter on smokeless powders by Sven-Eric Johannsson of Nexplo/Bofors, a Scandinavian company that, among other products, manufactures Norma powders. Johannsson’s essay includes this statement: “For any caliber, rifle, bullet combination it is possible to engineer a powder that shows little pressure or velocity temperature dependency, but if loaded and shot from any other caliber, rifle, bullet combination, would likely exhibit a totally different temperature-behavior profile.” Put in simpler terms, a powder’s temperature-resistance depends on the cartridge and bullet used.

TAC was originally designed as a military powder, specifically for the 5.56x45 and 7.62x51 NATO cartridges, where the same powders tend to work. I was informed it was very temp-stable, and the first time I cold-tested it at right around zero Fahrenheit, the same load averaged EXACTLY the same velocity as it did at 70 degrees--which has to be coincidence, since two strings of the same load almost never average exactly the same even when chronographed within minutes of each other. But it was pretty impressive.

During the same test, a load with 150-grain bullets in the .30-06, using Big Game powder, chronographed 21 fps than it did at 70, but I've also chronographed the Big Game load I use in the 9.3x62 with 286-grain bullets. It's been pretty consistent, though I haven't chronographed it in cold down to zero.

Thanks. I believe you! I don't understand the interior ballistics that make it so, but I don't understand a lot of things. I'll load some TAC on the .308 Win and see what happens next winter.

I no longer shoot jacketed bullets in WW2 rifles with some exceptions. When I started shooting they were not that old, now they are. Hmmm. My first 06 was a Springfield 03-A3. Dad bought that as surplus for about $9 I think. It wasn't mush more than 20 years old then.

The worst powder load combination was the slowest Winchester ball powder at that time in a 300 Win Mag. Shooting text book loads one hot summer's day- Ft Peck MT. Sighting in the rifle and checking the loads 100+ degrees. First shot, I couldn't see the hole in the target, I needed the exercise so I walked down range (100 yards) and back. That first shot showed no sign off excess pressure. The second shot the bolt lifted a little harder. I looked at the base of the cartridge. The primer showed some pressure. No shiny brass or anything. I walked down range and back. The next shot, powder in my face, the bolt was almost frozen in place. I finally got the bolt open. the case could be reused again with a shotgun primer perhaps. No damage to the rifle so...

No I didn't shoot another load. I pulled all the bullets. That was the only pound of that powder and I've never bought it again.

Does this make anyone think of H 205 ?

I have used H 205 and still have 1 lb. I loved it in 30-06 w/165 gr bullets. I never had a problem but others did and H discontinued its production.

Jerry

carbon12,

I missed your post about Denton's conclusion. In my experience he's correct, the main reason I test both ammo and rifle when the ambient outdoor temperature is about where I want it, whether zero or 100 Fahrenheit.

Far too many gun writers have chronographed and target-tested ammo that's been heated or chilled, rather than reproducing actual field conditions--which is what we're interested in.