There is a small amount of data out there for these powders in the .338-06, and a lot more data for them in the .35 Whelen. It seems the burn rate is right where it needs to be for these to be ideal powders for the .338-06. Seeing that the demand for .338-06 data being so low, I doubt the powder manufactures are ever going to go through the trouble of getting all 25 of us .338-06 shooters data put together.

I have a mountain of both powders and was wondering if any of you have experience with 225 and 250 gr bullets with either of these? I hate to mooch but if any of you have quickload and wouldn't mind running some numbers for me, I'd really appreciate it.

Thanks,

Todd

I haven't tried either in the .338-06, but Hodgdon's website has data for CFE223, and it looks like an excellent choice.

When TAC first appeared 22 years ago there wasn't much pressure-tested data from Ramshot, but what there was indicated TAC's burn-rate was very similar to IMR4895's--and I used TAC for a long time in several rounds using IMR4895 data, with no problems. Hodgdon's site also indicates IMR4895 gets close to CFE223 ballistics in the .338-06.

Would you use magnum primers? I think I would.

Awesome! Thanks John! I will proceed with caution. IMR4895 is my go to powder for the .338-06. I'm down to a couple pounds. I have 10 pounds of each TAC and CFE-223. I always use mag primers with ball type powders.

Todd

My go-to load in my Ackley version is CFE223 under a 200 NAB. Hoping to experiment with it and a 210 Scirocco soon.