Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters 6mm Remington and 70grain NBT’s

Hi all fellow 6mm rem shooters, hoping you can lend a hand. Have been running 95nbt’s in the 6mmRem behind 48 grains of RL22 for very good results. I was wanting to play with the 70 grainers for varmints and tried with H4895 going between 41 and 43 grains for mixed results. It would shoot an inch, but the rifle is capable of much more. If anyone could lead me down the path of what works for them it would be greatly appreciated. Many thanks.

I've had several 6MM Remingtons over the years, all with heavy factory varmint weight barrels....a B78 Browning, Remington Varmint Special and a pretty well done Mauser 98 with a Douglas barrel that had been built in the 70's.

With the Nosler 70 gr BTips, they all liked Winchester 760, H414 (now the same as current Winchester 760) and Accurate 2700. The B78 and the 700 would shoot honest 1/2" five shot groups and the Mauser 98 would shoot right at 5/8".

The Nosler 70 gr BTip is a great bullet. In my Stan Ware built 243 Ackley, they shot well into the .3's @3,800 over H414. For a long range 'dogs or spot and stalk coyotes, it's a killer good bullet. A good pal from South Carlina uses them in his 6MM Remington Ackley Improved for ground hogs.

Good shootin' -Al

I agree with Al Nyhus..I tried 15 different powders on a 6mm Rem, made on a LONG Action, but with a Hornady 75 grain HP.

the barrel was accurate as hell... however the best groups, and clear winner was H 414...

many of the other powders were so close, I couldn't pick which was in second place.

later tried the same thing with the Speer TNT, once again, H 414 also came out on top... even if it had the widest deviation spread..

this was conducted from 200 to 500 yds...

MV was at 3675 fps, and barrel had a one in 7 twist.. made by Pac Nor and installed by John Noveske.

What’s the rate of twist of your barrel. The difference between a 6 mm and 244 is the twist. 70 grain is getting a little small for a 6mm. I had one built with a 1 in 12 just for light bullets. Hasbeen

Think of the numbers 4-3-5-0.

I have the same loads as Al! AA2700, Win 760, H414 Rem 9 1/2, fast and small groups. Seat them to be just barely off the lands if you can.

I shot the heck out of 60g Sierra's at 50g of 760 with a Fed 210, honest 4000 fps in Rem varmint, 9.25" twist on those rifles.

Note to file: AA2700 is perhaps one of the coolest burning powder for this case, burning range in the 4350 range, like 760.

Absolutely, Keith. Another thing I like about 2700 is the reduced carbon buildup in the throat and first few inches of the barrel. 2700 was a killer good powder in my multiple .17 Remingtons, Swifts and the 243s...both standard and the Ackley version.

2700 remains, in my mind, one of the least appreciated powders out there. Plus, it's available!

Good shootin' -Al

Unfortunately we can't get W760 or H414 in Australia at the moment, but have varget and H4350 on hand. It would seem you van't get enough H4350 in the case to overload it without very heavy compression, but stand to be corrected. H4350 might be the go then.

For those not in the know.. evidently AA 2700, is the same powder as H 414 and W 760... just passing that along..

got that info from 3 or 4 sources, when Hodgdon was looking to phase H 414 out...

Take this with however many grains of salt you desire.

Umm, I am going to have to dispute that....

Don't ask me how I know, as I am sure the answer will just jump right out at ya...

Sea fire I hope you know something I don’t. Can you help a fella out and be a little less cryptic?

IMR4350 - best for my 75 grain bullet loads in my first center fire a 6mm; 1/4” groups at 100 yards with SPEER, or Sierra hollow points. Nearly as good with Remington bullets back then.

You're correct re: current H414/WW760 is the same powder at this time. 760 didn't change...H414 did.

I have recent production/packaged Accurate 2700 and Winchester 760 here (8 lb. jugs). They are different enough that when testing identical loads of each in either my 243W or 25-06 resulted in significantly different 'on-target' accuracy and chronograph numbers in both cases. And while there can be some lot to lot differences in all powders, the difference in these is well out of what you would expect from different powder lots. To back this up, a good pal that uses 2700 in his 220 Swift Ackley Improved did the same A-B-A testing against 760 with the same results. Borescoping with his Hawkeye borescope confirmed that the 2700 (current production) left markedly less hard carbon buildup in the throat than the 760 (also current production).

From two well tuned-up powder measures, current 2700 and two earlier 2700 versions I have on hand (incl. the original Accurate Arms version), there's less than a .1 gr. variance in weight when thrown by volume.

While I'm certainly not "...in the know", all I know is what I'm seeing at this point. Maybe someone like MD with a better grasp of the industry could add some better info.

Will 2700 become 414/760 at some point? Who knows?

If so, maybe they'll eliminate the confusion and call the new powder '1291'.

Good shootin' -Al

Al,

From my understanding of the powder industry, gained from getting to know some of the distributors/owners, for a number of years Accurate 2700 is indeed basically the same powder as 760/414--made in the same plant to the same basic standards. The original Accurate Arms 2700 wasn't the same powder--and in fact many Accurate Arms powders were "surplus" military powders--but when Western Powders (the distributing company that introduced Ramshot powders around 2000) purchased the rights to Accurate Arms Powders, they started getting them all made in the same plant--which is also when they dropped the "Arms" part of the name.

But producing the "same" powder doesn't always work out quite like it's planned, due both to variations in atmospheric moisture and even the chemical compounds. Which is why powder manufacturers generally blend manufacturing lots of the powders to be sold to handloaders, in order to come up with a reasonably consistent product. Unblended batches of the "same" powder can vary considerably more, but they're usually sold to ammo manufacturers, which have pressure-testing facilities so they can adjust charges to get the same basic velocities as with the previous batch.

This is also why early canister ("handloader") batches of a new powder often vary more in burn-rate than later batches: The manufacturers don't have as many previous batches to blend into a more uniform product. A few years ago I was sent 2-3 pounds of a new powder for testing, and liked it so much I bought an 8-pounder when they appeared on the market. With the same powder charges as the original sample, the powder from the jug resulted in muzzle velocities over 50 fps faster in the same .257 Roberts load--and accuracy changed as well. So I "blended" what was left of the original sample into the jug to come up with a more consistent powder.

The 6's slightly bigger case over the 243 might change the rules, but have shot quite a few 70 BT's over Varget in three 243 rifles with good results.

Just seeing this... yeah, 4350 powdered my nose pretty good when it blew a primer... I do wear eye protection along with hearing protection...

thank goodness... The load was suppose to be safe, but my barrel evidently didn't like it...don't recall the charge of powder, but it was out of a manual. Had to fix the extractor on a 700 bolt.