BTW, just read Mule Deer's article on the 26 Nosler in Handloader.
The .264 can't be beaten.
If you push the 26 Nosler as hard as you're pushing the .264, you don't think you could exceed that performance with more case capacity?
DF
It's not being pushed that hard at 3250 if you're talking about pressure. Not one sign of over-pressure. In fact when I shot the Audette, I got well over 3300 fps with the last loads. No sticky bolt or extraction, no shiny ejector marks. The accuracy node wasn't there though.
Originally Posted by Bristoe
The people wringing their hands over Trump's rhetoric don't know what time it is in America.
All the available evidence shows that judging pressures by traditional signs such as ejector-hole marks or sticky bolt-lift normally results in around 70,000 psi, and often more. I can cite a bunch of examples if you want, but the basic fact is that you have no idea of the pressure of your .264 handloads.
Another basic fact is that a larger case can get more velocity with the same amount of pressure as a smaller case. The laws of physics always apply.
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.” John Steinbeck
As soon as I get a day without wind I will have a report on he 160gr Woodleigh PPSN with 73gr H570. With 71gr H570 the 60gr PPSN 3 shot average is 3095fps.
When you decide to go ".264 Winchester Magnum" and want to achieve its full velocity potential, you've just signed up to be your own Ballistician.
To achieve the velocity that the cartridge is actually capable of, it is necessary to use the newer, higher-technology, slower-burning powders for which there is little, if not non-existent, pressure data from a manufacturer. If I remember correctly in your Handloader article about loading for the .264 with the newer powders, you didn't supply any pressure numbers either? I don't believe any powder or bullet manufacturer has bothered to measure any since the cartridge is considered "obsolete". (Read that in Handloader as well).
So, as your own Ballistician with a .264 WM, a guy has to rely on traditional means of judging pressure, whether it be sticky bolt lift, ejector marks, PRE or CHE. If you have a better suggestion, I'm open to it.
I have never used the latter two and have confidence that if using the slowest-burning powders in the .264 such as RL-33, WC-872, it will be difficult to get enough powder in the case to have an unsafe load.
If an Audette is performed and loaded in small charge increments into the range of what an experienced handloader would believe over-pressure will be found even when working with new components, a guy can find the max load with for his rifle and work down.
Originally Posted by Bristoe
The people wringing their hands over Trump's rhetoric don't know what time it is in America.
Yes, I am familiar with the lack of published data, as my two .264 Winchester Magnum articles for Handloader both state. But there�s a lot more pressure-tested data for the .264 now, and though there isn�t any for Reloder 33, there�s tested RL-33 for the 26 Nosler�along with Ramshot data for Magnum in the .264.
In the 26 Nosler several powders outperform RL-33 in velocity, including some powders that do very well in the .264. In fact Magnum gets as much or more velocity in the 26, with both 129/130 and 140-grain bullets, than RL-33, using pressure-tested data, so it�s highly unlikely RL-33 is any faster in the .264.
There are also better far ways of estimating pressure than the primitive methods most handloaders use. Miking case expansion works pretty well�but ONLY if you have something to compare it to, such as pressure-tested loads fired in the same make and lot of brass. This is what I did with my first .264 article, published about a decade ago, using powders there wasn�t any tested data for back then. The results were eventually were corroborated when the powder companies later tested them in the .264 . (This didn�t surprise me, as I�d already proven to my satisfaction the method works far better than �reading� bolt life and case appearance, due to testing it in a piezo laboratory.)
Despite the fact that there�s still not enough .264 data with what are probably great powders for the case, the method you used doesn�t prove anything about pressures except that the cases and rifle survived, and extra pressure produces extra velocity. Which is all any handloader does when he guesses pressures by old and disproven methods.
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.” John Steinbeck
My handloads extract normally, have no shiny ejector marks or swipes, primers in fully formed cases show no flattening (which I regard as the worst visual sign of pressure anyhow).
I've reached pressure signs during development with every rifle I've worked with on purpose and have found accurate loads beneath that level of charge which lack the traditional pressure signs. I consider them safe and they function well in the rifles.
The reason RL-33 gives more velocity is that it is manufactured with the same technology as RL-17, which is known to produce 100 to 150 fps more velocity than other powders of similar burn rate.
I tested 7 powders when I first started loading the .264 and I'm not sure if Magnum was in the group. I'll have to check.
Originally Posted by Bristoe
The people wringing their hands over Trump's rhetoric don't know what time it is in America.
Actually, RL-17 doesn't produce velocities 100-150 fps more than other powders. Some enthusiastic amateurs promoted that idea when it was new, but only after testing in cartridges where very few powders worked. But once actual pressure-tested data appeared from Alliant, it was apparent that wasn't true. Both 17 and 33 are very good double-based powders, but they're not magic technology.
And in reality primer appearance is an even less reliable pressure sign than cases. But if you're happy with the results, by all means stick with the load. However, it is still impossible for the .264 to match the 26 at the same pressures.
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.” John Steinbeck
Actually, RL-17 doesn't produce velocities 100-150 fps more than other powders. Some enthusiastic amateurs promoted that idea when it was new, but only after testing in cartridges where very few powders worked. But once actual pressure-tested data appeared from Alliant, it was apparent that wasn't true. Both 17 and 33 are very good double-based powders, but they're not magic technology.
And in reality primer appearance is an even less reliable pressure sign than cases. But if you're happy with the results, by all means stick with the load. However, it is still impossible for the .264 to match the 26 at the same pressures.
Hmmmm....
Quote
Alliant Reloder 17 State-of-the-Art Powder Delivers Amazing Velocities Speed Beyond All Expectations... Here at Accurateshooter.com, we've done a lot of load testing, with a wide selection of cartridges and powders. Generally when a newly-introduced powder offers even a slight edge in velocity or accuracy, that's newsworthy. In the case of Alliant's new Reloder 17 (RL17), we were truly amazed by the enhanced velocities this powder offers compared to other propellants.
With the popular 6XC case, shooting 115gr bullets, most guys are topping out at about 2980-3000 fps with a max load of H4350 or H4831. In just-completed tests with RL17, German Salazar and Bob Jensen were able to achieve 3211 fps with the 115s at safe pressures. And with 107gr Sierra Match-Kings, German was able to increase his 6XC's max velocity from 3038 fps to a mind-blowing 3311 fps. That's a gain of 273 fps over his max load with H4831sc. Now, the max velocity with H4350 and 107s might be closer to 3100 fps, but that still means that RL17 can boost your max velocity by over 200 fps.
That's a huge increase, a monumental gain in velocity. We've never seen anything like this--where one powder offers such a dramatic increase in max velocity over other "preferred" powders used by precision shooters.
Engineered for Enhanced Energy, More Velocity How does RL17 produce so much added speed? There are two main reasons--unique burn properties and high load density. In its chemical properties, RL17 is like no other powder available in the U.S. market. Made in Switzerland by Nitrochemie, RL17 has a unique burn-rate controlling chemical that penetrates all the way through the kernels. Other common extruded powders have only a surface coating. Reloader 17's unique penetrating burn-rate regulator smooths out the pressure curve, allowing RL17 to maintain high energy for a longer period of time.
Originally Posted by Bristoe
The people wringing their hands over Trump's rhetoric don't know what time it is in America.
Yep, that's exactly the source of the "magic RL-17" myth. But once piezo pressure-testing was done, in real ballistic labs, nobody could find the extra zip. Oh, once in a while RL-17 turns out to be a very good powder for a certain bullet/case combo, getting at most 100 fps more. But other powders do the same thing for certain other combinations. 17 isn't a new paradigm in powder performance.
Check out the RL-17 data on Alliant's website if you don't believe me. Other ballistics labs have found the same thing.
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.” John Steinbeck
We talked on a prior occaision about the liter weight bullets and R-33. I am using the 127LRX. I did my testing in Ga at 1000asl. I went week before last to New Mex at 6400. The only change I saw and expected to see was the typical 1" high impact from my zero in Ga. My velocity was 3320 at home , I did not take my chronograh out there, but once I made my zero adjustment I was able to take my goat at 653 with the dope I had plugged in to the phone and the Ballistic AE program. It was spot on. I did not see any temp sensitive issues but my temps in New Mex were about 74F just like they were at home prior to leaving. R-33 has been consistent for me doing my load testing. MY barrel is a #3 contour Kreiger 8 twist. Bill
You made a great shot too. I was alone trying to range, dope wind and get the goat to stand still and dial my elevation..He stood one second too long..fun dyi hunt, even if he had miniature horns..
The information given in this video by the Alliant Technician and Propellent Designer seems to contradict your assertion. Watch the entire video. I'd like to hear your thoughts...
Originally Posted by Bristoe
The people wringing their hands over Trump's rhetoric don't know what time it is in America.
![[Linked Image]](http://s1205.photobucket.com/user/GreybullPrecision/media/DSC_0031_zpsb800cb05.jpg.html)
![[Linked Image]](http://s1205.photobucket.com/user/GreybullPrecision/media/P1000351.jpg.html)
