24hourcampfire.com
24hourcampfire.com
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Hop To
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3
Joined: Mar 2020
Posts: 139
M
Campfire Member
OP Offline
Campfire Member
M
Joined: Mar 2020
Posts: 139
I have a 264 Win Mag Sense to and am developing loads for accuracy. As the 264 has ample case capacity and I generally like to have 90%+ fill, this would favor the slower powders. That said, I've tried some RL33 and noticed the heavy barrel is not after 1 firing on a cold barrel. Closely similar velocities with faster powders seem to put less heat in the barrel.

Q's: Assuming I find an accurate load with faster powders (IMR4350 is not bad), will the barrel life be better off with the faster powders or slower powder? I had thought that peak temp would be lower and favor the slow powder, but I'm having second thoughts on that theory.

BP-B2

Joined: Mar 2020
Posts: 139
M
Campfire Member
OP Offline
Campfire Member
M
Joined: Mar 2020
Posts: 139
Sorry for unclear post, darned auto spell checker. Rifle is Remington Sendero. Barrel is hot after 1 round when shooting RL33 with 130gr A-Max with 72.5gr. No pressure signs.

Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 14,635
S
Campfire Outfitter
Offline
Campfire Outfitter
S
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 14,635
I'm glad I'm over those days!


Even birds know not to land downwind!
Joined: Aug 2015
Posts: 13,206
Campfire Outfitter
Offline
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Aug 2015
Posts: 13,206
It would stand to reason that if you load a larger charge of slower powder you will be subjecting the barrel to a longer intense burn period. Hence, the barrel heats up faster and the throat would erode faster.
But, I could be wrong, I was once before.


Let's Go Brandon! FJB
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,531
F
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
F
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,531
For one thing I never thought of 4350 as being fast. But I can see the OPs point. Fast powder has a fast pressure peak. Higher pressure=higher temp.

Last edited by Filaman; 06/22/20.

What goes up must come down, what goes around comes around, there's no free lunch. Trump's comin' back, get over it!
IC B2

Joined: Mar 2020
Posts: 139
M
Campfire Member
OP Offline
Campfire Member
M
Joined: Mar 2020
Posts: 139
I agree that normally 4350 is not regarded as fast, unless you load a 264 Win Mag.... Typical powders for the 264 are 4831 and 7828, H1000 and the old H870. I'm thinking now that the quicker flash provides less time to heat, so while hotter, the faster powders reduce conduction time and there's likely less difference in the flame temperatures.

Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 4,016
8
805 Offline
Campfire Tracker
Offline
Campfire Tracker
8
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 4,016
It’s probably not enough of a difference to matter in terms of round count/barrel life. Also barrels are cheap to replace!

Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 59,910
M
Campfire Kahuna
Offline
Campfire Kahuna
M
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 59,910
Originally Posted by Filaman
For one thing I never thought of 4350 as being fast. But I can see the OPs point. Fast powder has a fast pressure peak. Higher pressure=higher temp.


No, not nearly correct. The more powder burned, the higher the temperature--especially with double-based powders, though the temp difference isn't all that much compared to single-based powders.


“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.”
John Steinbeck
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 44,710
M
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
M
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 44,710
Originally Posted by 805
It’s probably not enough of a difference to matter in terms of round count/barrel life. Also barrels are cheap to replace!


OK there Diamond Jim.

Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,372
Campfire Tracker
Offline
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,372
About half my rifles are magnums and the other half is not.After scoping the barrels out,it looks like you start seeing erosion with magnum cartridges in few as a hundred rounds when your burning about 70-80grs or so of powder.My non-magnum rifles burning 45-60grs of powder with several hundred rounds through them don't show any erosion.So it seems to be like a cutting torch,burning large amounts of powder is going to get the barrel hotter and starts to slowly burn.Add that with multiple firings without cooling is going to speed up the barrel burn.Magnums are great,I really like them.Work up a load for them and shoot them a lot less and they will last a long time.Get a 308 or a 30-06 and shoot them more while your saving the barrels on your magnums.

Last edited by baldhunter; 06/22/20.

~Molɔ̀ːn Labé Skýla~
As Bob Hagel would say"You should not use a rifle that will kill an animal when everything goes right; you should use one that will do the job when everything goes wrong."Good words of wisdom...............
IC B3

Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,195
K
Campfire Tracker
Offline
Campfire Tracker
K
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,195
There is one heck of a difference in the Heat Index between various powders. This is evidenced by how difficult some are to clean as the carbon gets cooked on to a much higher degree than others.

I tried to copy and post the Heat Index chart where they give the Relative Heat Index of all powders listed by the coolest to the hottest.

Joined: Jun 2016
Posts: 9,475
G
Campfire Outfitter
Offline
Campfire Outfitter
G
Joined: Jun 2016
Posts: 9,475
I know RL 33 is a very slow burning powder, but 72.5 grains of anything in a 264 is a boatload. And Alliant doesn't even list it in 264 charts, or the ones I have.

Loading a 264 off Hodgdon charts with their powder plus IMR & Winchester shows a max charge of 67 or 8 grains. with the slowest they offer.

Now this doesn't answer which powder is hotter, but 72.5 grains in a 264 might be a whole different source of heat.

Am I way off base here? Missing something?

Joined: Mar 2020
Posts: 139
M
Campfire Member
OP Offline
Campfire Member
M
Joined: Mar 2020
Posts: 139
The RL33 data i have i obtained from what sounded like a knowledgeable 264 shooter. His pet load in 264 WM was 77.0gr with a Berger 140 VLD as I recall. I started low and have been up to 77.0 gr and primers were starting to flatten, but the firing pin dimple still looked good. No extraction problems or case splits. I generally never load anything near max as accuracy generally is not there.

Accuracy wasn't there at 77.0gr, and I had some 3-shot groups of 0.146" at 100yd with 72.5gr in 40F weather with a 130. My Sendero with 1:9 can't handle a 140 boat tail. Remington flat base 140's are ok, but 120-130gr are more accurate.

I am using Redding neck bushing dies and turn/ream every firing to remove brass flow, true the necks, and maintain constant neck thickness and concentricity. About 0.001" flows around 0.040" length on the end of the neck into the I/D, and 0.0008" down the rest of the neck O/D. I bushing size necks to clean up the I/D with a std reamer, pilot on a custom size pilot I hard turned, and neck turn with the same setup every firing, then final bushing size for 0.002" interference for neck tension.

Agree that this is a lot of powder. From others using it and older reloading books, it appears that it's close to H870 in burn rate. Since Warner weather has come on, the RL33 has not been as stable, and I've noticed the great amount of barrel heat, hence my post. Some had raved of it in 264AM but it looks like it might not be there for me. I have probably 200 rds through this gun and would prefer not to rebarell it soon, even though I'd like a 1:8 twist.

Thanks for the opinions, good dialogue.

Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 4,016
8
805 Offline
Campfire Tracker
Offline
Campfire Tracker
8
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 4,016
Have you tried H1000 or Retumbo? Those powders work very well in the 264Win with 130+ gr bullets.

Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 8,049
Campfire Outfitter
Offline
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 8,049

Originally Posted by gunzo
I know RL 33 is a very slow burning powder, but 72.5 grains of anything in a 264 is a boatload. And Alliant doesn't even list it in 264 charts, or the ones I have.

Loading a 264 off Hodgdon charts with their powder plus IMR & Winchester shows a max charge of 67 or 8 grains. with the slowest they offer.

Now this doesn't answer which powder is hotter, but 72.5 grains in a 264 might be a whole different source of heat.

Am I way off base here? Missing something?


I've loaded 77.0 gr of US 869 in my .264 Win Mag. Goes about 3,100 fps with a 140-143 gr bullet.

On a side note, I know W-748 was developed with a "low flame temperature" - whatever that means. Burns cooler than comparable speed powders?

Joined: Jun 2016
Posts: 9,475
G
Campfire Outfitter
Offline
Campfire Outfitter
G
Joined: Jun 2016
Posts: 9,475
Very interesting. Slower powders & data changing rapidly these days. AAbout like buying the latest electronics & by the time you get it home & set up, something newer & better comes along.

I thought the 264 had been satisfied with newer powders from the last decade. Looks like it ain't over yet.

But back to heat, 70+ grains in that bore size has to be a heat generator in it self, not to mention ever ending shortages. Think I'd stay a bit more conventional. Or is that just hiding your head in the sand?

Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 15,262
B
Campfire Ranger
Offline
Campfire Ranger
B
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 15,262
Originally Posted by 805
Have you tried H1000 or Retumbo? Those powders work very well in the 264Win with 130+ gr bullets.


Retumbo does 3225 from my 26” M70 with 140 Accubonds. 33 was a bit faster just not quite as accurate overall. I don’t think you’re on the wrong track with 33 or Retumbo or Magnum or whichever slow burner you can get in there. The 264 is a hot rod so taking it easy on the number of rounds fired helps but it’s never going to be easy on rifling.


Semper Fi
Joined: Mar 2020
Posts: 139
M
Campfire Member
OP Offline
Campfire Member
M
Joined: Mar 2020
Posts: 139
Thanks guys for input. I'm trying some Ramshot Magnum and will plan to pick up some Retumbo to try as it's one that's been floated by several guys. Keep ticking at it as it shows signs of a rack driver here and there. 264 AM is a lot more fun than just following the Creedmore path. 😊

Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 7,263
T
Campfire Tracker
Offline
Campfire Tracker
T
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 7,263
Many of the ball powders burn cooler than stick type. Many of these are slower burning powders so it is burn temperature more than burn rate. Magnum may be in this cooler burning category. One theory and it may only be a theory is the ball powders are less abrasive than stick powders due to the shape of the powder grains. This came from testing in machine guns with high round counts of over 10,000 in some of the tests.

Anyway 869 may be cooler burning but is less temperature stable than Magnum so hope it pans out for you.


"When you disarm the people, you commence to offend them and show that you distrust them either through cowardice or lack of confidence, and both of these opinions generate hatred." Niccolo Machiavelli
Joined: Mar 2020
Posts: 139
M
Campfire Member
OP Offline
Campfire Member
M
Joined: Mar 2020
Posts: 139
Just got the Ramshot Magnum powder this afternoon. Looks like H380 but must be slower yet. Anyone know if this is a rebranded Hodgen powder of some sort aka H414 W760? I'll still use the Ramshot data, just curious.

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3

Moderated by  RickBin 

Link Copied to Clipboard
YB23

Who's Online Now
231 members (12344mag, 160user, 257 roberts, 257robertsimp, 257 mag, 10Glocks, 26 invisible), 1,857 guests, and 852 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums81
Topics1,187,728
Posts18,400,800
Members73,822
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023


 







Fish & Game Departments | Solunar Tables | Mission Statement | Privacy Policy | Contact Us | DMCA
Hunting | Fishing | Camping | Backpacking | Reloading | Campfire Forums | Gear Shop
Copyright © 2000-2024 24hourcampfire.com, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5
(Release build 20201027)
Responsive Width:

PHP: 7.3.33 Page Time: 0.097s Queries: 15 (0.003s) Memory: 0.8975 MB (Peak: 1.0507 MB) Data Comp: Zlib Server Time: 2024-03-29 10:39:08 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS