Home Forums Reloading Big Game Rifles H 414

And over a discontinued powder of all things.

I have used a lot of W760, as it is my go to powder for the 243 in bullet weights from 55 to 90. I have also used it in a 17 Rem, 7-08, 6.5 Creed, 7X57, as well as a couple of others. I have used H414 data with zero issues. As far as 760 being temp sensitive, it may very well be, but I've never noticed a problem, but then again I don't shoot much in hot weather or expose my ammo to heat.

I have never been one to try only one powder when working up a load for a new rifle/cartridge I'm reloading for. I like to experiment, and use different powders and primers in my search for best load I can come up with. With all the choices in powder out there, I don't see a reason to limit yourself to just one and trying to make it work. The only exception to that has been H4350 and the 6.5 Creedmoor, as it will pretty much work for most rifles. But even then, I use 6.5 Staball in one of my rifles because it gave the best speed and accuracy.

Everyone is going to look at reloading somewhat differently, because of the differences in what we are looking for. It is a process that can be fairly simple or extremely complicated, depending on the goal. It can be a a way to relax and enjoy what you're doing, or a very tedious task that tries your patience and pocketbook. It is also a process in which you're never too old to learn something, and I do all the time. I try to be helpful to other reloaders, but ridiculing them when they don't do it like you're doing it is wrong.

Then stop making a big deal out of nothing then and over analyzing things that don't need to under a microscope. Maybe work on your sling shot techniques. Think you can nail Goliath at 15 paces ?

Can agree with much of that. But, reloading forums are rampant with misinformation and utter bull shi t. If that's not refuted along the way some unsuspecting sap who's just reading and not posting may take something for granted and have a bad experience.

This thread is case in point. You have a discontinued powder and many here saying it's the same thing as something else. It may very well be exactly the same, but it's not labeled the same, nor is the manufacturer documenting it as the same in printed material for the masses.

What would happen if that unsuspecting sap decided since some anonymous guy with a high post count on the campfire said one thing is gospel truth, so something else must be true as well, and they have something go very wrong. What do we tell newbs about reloading. Always work up, or back up, when changing a component. Has THAT common sense approach ever hurt anyone?

When I started learning this stuff I had the superb benefit of being physically SHOWN what to do. The closest thing to the internet was a George Jetson cartoon. These days everyone learns something electronically and too much is lost in translation.
The two or three that are arguing aren't the only ones reading, and hopefully enough argument can be made to keep the uninitiated from doing something stupid.

As far as how someone "does" something, I couldn't give a rat's ass. I'll tell ya what I know about things I've done and it's up to you to decide to try it or not, OR to even read me talking about it. But don't come at me because you're unwilling or flat out lack the ability to understand the concept of working smarter not dumber, of saving some time/effort/money. I've made the dumb mistakes along the way and learned a trick or two from them.

As the saying goes, you can lead a mule to water but you can't make him drink.

I'm out, y'all have fun.

H414 USED TO BE a decent powder, but who even has enough anymore to worry about it being "the same" as W760? I have 4 pounds left out of 8 only because there were better powders to use and it's been setting in the back for 20 years.

Feral nut makes a mountain out of a mole hill, and you can see that for yourselves ! Stay within the data of load manuals and no issues will be encountered period. We see maser is your friend.. take him with you.

You can't set up a 30-06 die to bump shoulders, you can't grasp the basic concept of annealing a cartridge neck, you burn throats on a 35 Remington, you ignore basic rules of reloading safety, and you flat out refuse to learn otherwise. Why are you even posting in this reloading forum?



Nice try Maser. Playing 3rd grade games dude, 3rd grade games.

Lmao get a life!

I bump shoulders fine, and have consistently dimensionally measured with no problems with acceptable annealing. And thats not ok with you obviously.

And never said l burned out a throat with my 35 rem.

Climb on down pard before you hurt yourself

The Darwin Award

You earned it fair and square.

Now own it.

I have always enjoyed working with older (discontinued) powder as well as older (discontinued) bullets when I can find them (or have them on hand), just to make comparisons with newer (similar) components.

Feral is giving readers here a lot of prudent advice on a subject that requires constant attention to details. Anybody who thinks discussions of this type where smokeless powder characteristics and handling is “ making a mountain out of a molehill “ is one man’s interpretation that infers that caution and thinking your way into reloading is SIMPLE. Well it may be to those who are easily satisfied, too busy or unconcerned with the subject of propellants. But gun powder performance has been key to shooters since the black powder era. Just look at how many books and writers cover it.

I for one enjoy reloading and was lucky to have Frank Snow, the man who founded Sierra Bullets, my neighbor, and who helped me learn in my younger days living in SoCal. I enjoy every element of the hobby and I’m always looking for improvement. But I too understand for the hunter factory ammo will almost always do or basic reloading skills and equipment. But if you are a rifle crank who still can’t accept the fact that nobody can shoot five rounds into the same hole there is always something to experiment with. I still enjoy stalking, reading the ground and woods even if I don’t score. The older and stiffer I get the more I enjoy the hunt regardless of success. So to my way of thinking the only thing I can see here that is SIMPLE is the poster who is obviously simple minded. You can easily see and walk around a mountain but you can get tripped up in a mole hill. It’s the small things that count and I’m not referring to your intellect .

Regards
RICK

take a walk rick

Sounds good I’ll take you up on that. In the meantime I’m a bit concerned with your health and hearing. I suggest wiping out your ears with a bit of gun-cotton it will clear things up for you. I’ll give you twenty minutes to go to Wikipedia and look it up. If we don’t hear from you again I’ll know you did a good job.

Rick who hates this kind of crap. Over

🤨

Well, somebody had to say it.

The few the proud the experts

Is there a "another" chihuahua running around this thread yipping & nipping at heels?

That is completely contrary to my experience. And to any published data I have found.

My thought is, what you are interpreting as "a velocity node" is simply due to insufficient data points. I am sure, if you fired ten rounds at each charge weight, you would see the graph smotoh out significantly.

Accuracy nodes are a product of bullet exit vs a (somewhat) stable point in barrel harmonics.

Also, you mention several times that you avoid compressed charges. WHY?

Many load manuals suggest compressed charges. Many of my most accurate loads in 308 based and 30-06 based cases are highly compressed.

Never had luck with compressed loads, but now l know about nodes, that might change things.

I'm not even sure we're speaking the same language here.

Why would I fire 100 rounds to confirm what 10 will tell me? Is an OCW test insufficient data? Is a ladder test insufficient data? No, they're not. There are camps loyal to each, and they will argue the merits of each, but neither are lacking in data points else they wouldn't be relied upon by most serious gun cranks.The difference is, I'm finding the same exact data with less rounds fired, and not depending on the wind behaving for me. All I need is that stable pressure point just shy of a book max. 10 initial rounds and I'll have it identified.

"Accuracy nodes" are a product of a stable pressure point in the data. Pressure dictates velocity, no? No? Lower pressure, slower velocity. Higher pressure, faster velocity. Everybody sees that every time they do a workup with a chrono. No?

If velocities are random and irregular would not the pressures driving the velocities be random and irregular, and thus impacts down range be random, irregular, and unpredictable? Surely you understand the value of low ES and low SD, with the holy grail of load development being single digit ES and SD. That's pressure, and only pressure, and nothing to do with barrel harmonics. I'll get to that in a minute.

The side benefit of operating from the middle of a stable pressure point, or "accuracy node", is having a plus/minus tolerance of pressure that doesn't affect the load's performance during less than the most extreme changes in ambient temps, altitude, atmospheric pressure, etc. Dan Newberry preaches this 8 ways to Sunday about his OCW tests. I'm just cutting to the chase with fewer rounds fired. He's not using a chrono, I am. He needs holes in paper to see it, I just need a string of velocity numbers to look at.

What I always see with this method is a load holding together just fine between seasons with ONLY just a slight shift in zero, and nothing that suggests a "loss of accuracy". It was a simple matter for me to just go fire a few rounds the day before a match to check/adjust my 100 yard zero. Once that was done I referred to my ballistics calculator to one of the 3 sets of data pertaining to the current ambient temps. 0 to 30 degrees, 30 to 60 degrees, or 60 to 90 degrees. Twist turrets, read wind calls, and rock on.

But, there are TWO seperate devils to beat down in this.

Now, harmonics. You can be "in" an "accuracy node", and the groups be sub par, or even terrible....until you adjust your seating depth to counter the effect that the harmonics have on the muzzle. As it's been explained to me decades ago barrel harmonics are vibrations that sling from chamber to muzzle and back several times between ignition and bullet exit. Where they concern us is the precise point in time when the bullet exits the crown. When the wave is at the muzzle, or anywhere near the muzzle, the muzzle moves the most. When the wave has left the muzzle and returned to the breech the muzzle is calm or calmer. No? Simple laws of physics, no? What we want is a bullet exit when the wave is not present at, or near, the muzzle. We do not have the ability to make that fine enough adjustment with pressure, else we'd be weighing charges in 100ths or 1000ths of a grain instead of mere 10ths, so we make it with changes of the physical distance that the bullet travels via seating depth changes. We are either beating the train to the crossing, or are waiting for the train to pass on by.

I'll be doing a work up for a new bullet in the next couple weeks so I'll document it. It's a crimp in the cannelure deal with a fixed for function COAL, in a less than ideal factory barrel, so harmonics won't be part of it, but I can illustrate the pressures.

Compressed loads. I never advocate for them. Mainly because I don't like crunching kernels and potentially (and unpredictably) changing the burn characteristics of the powder. There are plenty enough powder choices out there to achieve an 85% to 100% load density without compressing a load. If that's something that doesn't bother you then who am I to argue. I won't do it though, and that's all there is to it.

I have several loads that are compressed. Jack O'Connors highly published load for the 270, 60.0 grains of H4831 was a compressed load and it worked, probably in millions of rounds. I have some 223 loads that are compressed with zero pressure signs.