Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Tempature Insensitive ball powders?

What are some good temp stable ball powders for 30-06,7mm-08, 30-30 win. Iload on dillon progressive machines and need a good metering powder. How does win 748 stack up? I have heard win 760 is very temp sensitive ? Thanks

dogdoc

From what I've read and heard, Ramshot's line of powder (all ball powders) are temperature insensitive, except perhaps Ramshot Magnum, which you wouldn't be using anyway. Tac, Big Game and Hunter would be the Ramshot powders most applicable to the cartridges you listed.

Personally I think that sometimes a little too much is made of temperature sensitivity or lack thereof, but I guess that's besides the point.

+1 on the Ramshot stuff.

I run the Ramshot (hunter) through a Dillon 550 for 243 and 270. I've chrono'd over 80 degrees and right at 0, less than 100fps difference.

Ramshot powders burn a lot cleaner than either 748 or 760, too.

I have tested the same load of TAC and Big Game at 70 and zero F. and gotten less than 20 fps difference.

Sometimes temp-sensitivity is overrated, and is generally a relaticve thing anyway, especially at warmer temps. This may sound like Yogi berra, but the only time it really makes a difference is when IT REALLY MAKES A DIFFERENCE. This is usually at extremes, whether hot or cold. I have seen a point of impact shift of several inches at both 0 and 90 from SOME rifles. The only way you'll find out is by testing.

JB

I've used Ramshot Big Game with 70 and 80gr bullets in 243 Win in temps in the 20s to the 80s and not seen a difference in POI or groups. Might be a small test and I haven't chrony'd them in different temps. In the low 70's, 40.5gr of BG and 80gr BTs gave me 3019fps out of a tired 22" bbl with the chrony at 15 feet FWIW. I don't know what it'd do at cooler or hotter temps but the bullet holes on the paper haven't shifted so I don't worry.

That's what we call temperature sensitivity. <grin>

Can someone please quote me where Ramshot claims temperature insensitivity?

I'm not aware of ANY ball powders that claim it nor have I heard Ramshot make that claim but then I haven't read a lot about them.

I've personally tested Varget at 24 degrees and 95 degrees with no measurable diffence.

Hodgdon makes a BUNCH of powders for almost any cartridge that are temperature insensitive. How much money are you really going to save using a cheap powder for a medium or large game rifle folks?

I can understand on a prairie dog rifle or something else for HIGH volume shooting especially if it's to be out of a fat barreled rifle where velocity might not be such a huge factor in load development or "nodes" on the barrel.

$bob$

Ramshot has long claimed some sort of temp-insensitivity for its rifle powders, especially TAC. I don't know if they made a big deal of it in their literature, but they did tell gun writers about it.

TAC is made in Belgium, and was originally designed for small automatic military weapons, where they wanted not only less temperature sensitivity but less fouling. The other Ramshot rifle powders are variations on the same basic chemical theme, but apparently the temperature sensitivity rises as the burning rate slows. They say that Magnum is the most temp-sensitive of their powders, but t-s is relative. In my tests, handloads with Magnum have varied much less than with older extruded powders.

As noted above, my tests with TAC and Big Game have shown virtually no difference in velocities between 70 and 0 F. They tested just as cold-insensitive as H4350 and Varget, with virtually no change other than what could easily be attributed to chronographing the same load on different days, say 10-20 fps.

The other advantage of the Ramshot line is minimal fouling. Most ball powders are notorious for powder fouling. Well, the Ramshot powders typically foul no more than the cleanest burning extruded powdes. It is also claimed that they contain a compound that reduces copper fouling, also due to development for automatic weapons. Of course this compound is a secret, but a represenative of Alliant made the same claim of RL-15 after it had been modified for U.S. military small-arms use.

I do know that I have fired around 500 rounds of .223 ammo loaded with Ramshot powder through the barrel of one of my own Remington 700 factory rifles WITHOUT CLEANING. Not only was there no loss of accuracy, but the tiny amount of powder fouling cleaned up with maybe 6 Hoppe'd patches, and the traces of copper with even fewer patches using Barnes CR-10. Try that with some of the older ball powders....

JB

If I blamed a failure to hit properly an animal I was attempting to kill at any of the substantially below zero Farenheit temps I've hunted in with any powders, regardless of temperature claims about them, I would be way out of line. I have had rifles fail to fire cartridges on a number of occasions, usually traceable to some failing on my part, but cannot honestly blame powders whether ball or other for inaccuracy or low shooting. About the worst thing that might happen at seriously sub-zero temps is that one might hit too far back and/or low on a running shot at game due to some speed loss in the cartridge and the fact that air is considerably denser at cold temperatures. Even so, I would hardly fault a powder for that since every load, regardless of powder, has to deal with the dense air and besides, shooting at a running animal and missing still places the burden of responsibilty on the shooter for taking such a shot.

I can't help you with a specific powder in terms temp insensitivity. However, I can say that Hodgdon sphericals - not temp-insensitive- and IMR powders work just fine for me.

I'll second Ramshot Big Game being rather clean burning in my 243 Win. The only thing I've seen that I didn't like was large SD/ES in velocity but accuracy is great so.....ok.

Klikitarik,

I have seen point of impact shift up to 3-4" at 100 yards when the same load was shot at 70 and then at 0 F. That would mean a shift of 9-12" at 300 yards, which is plenty. (And I know it was the load and not the scope or rifle because there was only a month bedtween the tests, and other loads still hit the right place.)

Just becauase you have not seen such thing doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I have never been to Australia (hope to soon) but just because I haven't seen it doesn't mean it's not there.

JB

I remember Elmer taking the first .41 Mag loads to the arctic in winter and reporting the bullets barely cleared the barrel (slight exageration on my part) due to the cold. I believe they were factory loads, so don't know the powder, I know he was very disppointed in the results in truly cold weather (well below zero).

One thing that is coming from the comments made relating to temerature sensitivity is that most people are hunting in temperature ranges of +20F - +70F. I have hunted around +20F to +110F and not missed an animal due to this phenomenon.

The cases that appear to be affected based on the comments made here, are when the loads are shot at subzero extremes. It is possible that:
A) The powders are individually suseptable to varience based on case shape, powder volume, charger weight and firearm
B) Most of us will never qualify the phenomenon based on the number of shots fired under hunting conditions.
c) Only the dedicated will experiment in these weather extremes and even then, changes may be relative to (A).

AGW

Mr. dogdoc:
I have chronographed WW748 in a .22-.250AI as well as a .308 in temps ranging from 0�F to about 100�F. It seemed to me to be a bit less sensitive to temperature fluctuations above freezing than my experience with WW760, which was tested almost exclusively in the .30-06.

Others have mentioned case shape having some effect on the equation and their arguments might be valid. I�ve not seen convincing data either way on case shape and temperature.

If you are going to extreme cold conditions, that is a different story.
Many years ago, Mr. Dick Metcalf did an informative article in Shooting Times on the effect of extreme cold on velocity. IIRC, he went down to about -25�F or so with a .308. He had, again IIRC, some loads loosing as much as 350fps.

In my pre chronograph days, we did some informal testing down to -40�F or so. In one test we shot at double stacked 5gallon cans at about 300yds - paced, not measured- it was the early �80�s, no laser ranging either. The upshot of this admittedly crude test as that at -40�F, one needed to adjust the aim point up about 12� to hit the same place as 0�F. The loads tested then were .30-06 with 165gr Hornadys and IMR3031 and .308 with 150gr. Hornadys and IMR4064.

As to who would hunt in that temperature, my wife shot her first whitetail buck on the home quarter in Saskatchewan when it was a balmy -38�C, which for the benefit of those of you Stateside is still -36.4�F.

FWIW, the first time I see any Ramshot powder up here, I�ll be picking up a couple 5lb or 8lb cans to try. I still use a fair bit of WW748 and WW760, but as mentioned, it leaves my barrels rather grubby.
Hope that helped and best of luck in your reloading.
Dwayne

Thanks for all the replies so far. I am in Alabama with recent temps around 100F and I happen to be doing some load development in a number of my rifles ranging from 30-30 win to 375 H&H. Of course during hunting season in Alabama temps can range from 10f to 80f hence my concern. Most of my shots are under 100 yards so I am most likely worrying too much but still it makes more confident to know I will not have significant performance changes with the weather.

That's quite true alright. The point I was trying to make, however - and admittedly not a very good job at that, was that at very low temps so many other factors come into play that blaming a particular powder - while admittedly a possible cause - is not probably the most likely cause of problems at those temps with most powders. I guess my thinking and experience is that the "temp sensitive" powders (including many in Hodgdon's pre-Extreme days) have worked well enough. While I would avoid powders that are known to have serious speed fluctuations, I certainly am not one to use only the temp-insensitive types simply because they are.

I guess I kind of look at this like I look at bullets; the IMR (or whatever) powders may be the "InterLockeds" of the powder world. Sure they don't have all the bells and whistles, but they certainly work well enough the vast majority of the time if the user uses them with reasonable care. I think the same can be true of some of the ball or spherical powders. But, certainly, avoid those which show wide swings in temp related speed.

Another point:
Temperature influences on powder is not an issue for everyone.
Aussies never speak of it because they do not have the temperature extremes there and most have never seen snow anyhow. Likewise for African nations.

It is only when you are looking at US winter hunts or some European hunting that this may be an issue. Picking the time of year to develop loads could help eliminates most of the problem, if it is seen as a genuine issue, with your particular rifle and loads.

Another point that has been completely lost, (maybe unsold to the masses) is that when these ball powders were introduced, the marketers neglected to state not only how dirty the burning was but they did state, maybe excessively, that ball powders were "cooler burning" than extruded powders and therby offered longer barrel life.

Like you, I never could qualify this part of the marketing either, so maybe that is why we don't hear too much of it these days.

AGW

One problem in all this is that case shape, primer, bullet weight, bore, etc. can all have an affect. I have seen the same powder lose 80 fps and 150 fps in different rounds from 70 to 0 F.

It is difficult to test ALL variations the correct way, by firing at actual hunting temperatures with the rifle cold as well as the ammo. Partly this is just because shooting in real cold is a pain in the ass.

When doing my tests I generally use rifles chambered for 3-4 different "typical" rounds from the .223 to .270 to .338, and load them with different powders and the same bullet. This gives a cross-section that is probably fairly useful, though by no means comprehensive.

The IMR powders generally do lose some velocity, but seem to be entirely predictable and consistent in doing so. Ball powders (with the exception of Ramshot) can be erratic in cold temps, sometimes hang-firing, or even failing to go bang at all. Velocities with typical ball powders also tend to climb more rapidly in warm temperatures than do velocities with extruded powders.

Elmer Keith once wrote that you should hold for 100 yards farther in real cold, when shooting much past 200 yards. This is not too far off when shooting many older powders, but with many of the newer ones no allowance need be made, other than for the cold air's affect on trajectory, which isn't much at hunting ranges.

I have seen both heat and cold change the 100-yard point of impact several inches, but it is indeed rare. Once used a certain powder with 200-grain bullets in the .338 Winchester. The powder shall remain nameless because it has been changed since. I worked up loads at 60-70 degrees in the spring in anticipation of a June African trip, but did not try it at 90 degrees. I also worked up another load with 250's in the same rifle, which at 60-70 had the same POI as the 200. The 250-grain loading used H4331SC, one of Hodgdon's Extremes.

Suffice to say that I found out the hard way that the 200-grain load with the nameless powder caused the bullet to land about 1-2 inches higher with each additional 10 degrees F. Since the rifle was sighted-in 2" high at 100 yards, at 90+ degrees it would shoot at least 5-6" high. I finished the safari with the 250's, because they did not change impact at warmer temps.

Have already told about seeing POI change 3-4" (this time mostly horizontally) with RL-22 in a .270 Winchester when shot at 0 F. versus 70. It also lost 150 fps. In the same rifle a load with H4831SC shot to the same place at both 70 and 0, and lost no velocity.

Another place temp-consistent powders can really help is double rifles. It is hard enough to regulate some doubles without trying to compensate for muzzle velocities changing 200 fps or so. I have seen doubles cross-fire up to 4-5" at 65 yards when ammo that regulated perfectly at 70 degrees was left in the sun for 20 minutes.

Have also seen them shoot that much apart in cold temps after regulating perfectly at 70. You might think that regulating doubles for cold use is irrelevant, but I have a friend who for years regularly used a .333 double for elk hunting here in Montana. He was very grateful after I recommended the Hodgdon Extremes to him, as those powders took care of his double "de-regulating" at typical winter elk hunting temps. And here in Montana big game hunting can easily take place at well below zero F. I have hunted in weather in the minus 30's, and temps down to -10 are considered pretty balmy.

No, temp-sensitive powders do not make that much difference most of the time. But sometimes they do, and that is why I have spent so much time over the past 15 years or so out there shooting at both 100 and 0. Not many people care, but some do, and that's what they pay me for.

JB

JB,

That post was damned fine!!!

I'm just simply amazed at how well you summarize.

Thank YOU!!!

Other than saying that I'm speechless.

PERFECTION!!! Ane we here on the Campfire get it for free!

Amazing... CLASSIC!!!

$bob$

+1 on that.

I think I might have to borrow this quote for my sig line too:

"shooting in real cold is a pain in the ass"

It's only too true.