Sniper & Sharpshooter Forums banner

61 - 73 of 73 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
42 Posts
H-414 is a different type of powder than Varget. Varget is an extruded powder and when the case is filled there is some space around the granules. Compressing will reduce this some but not enough as a rule to cause severe pressure spikes. H-414 is a ball powder and can often lead to some sudden pressure increases as the load is compressed. Unless Hodgdon has tested H-414 with Compressed loads which are usually indicated in their load data I would avoid compressing it. Just because "Cousin Clem" wrote in a Forum that "I've dun it and ain't had no problems" doesn't mean that you won't.

FWIW, Hodgdon's online manual doesn't list H-414 as a recommended powder for the .223 with a 55 gr bullet. Way too slow and doesn't show up on their data until you get to the 82 and 90 gr bullets. The heavier bullets can utilize the slower burn rates. What you may find with a "case full" of 414 is a slow bullet and a nice large fireball in front of the muzzle.
Hodgdons manual #26 shows 28.5 grains h414 as the top load with no starting load and a speed of 3100 fps with 40800 cup. No fireball out of a 21 inch barrel. I did not realize that cousin Clem worked for hodgdon a while back that s great for him so successful!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,851 Posts
Hodgdons manual #26 shows 28.5 grains h414 as the top load with no starting load and a speed of 3100 fps with 40800 cup. No fireball out of a 21 inch barrel. I did not realize that cousin Clem worked for hodgdon a while back that s great for him so successful!
So you want to rely on a manual that was published 22 years ago rather than the current data they present on their online load data? Wonder how many changes that powders undergone since that manual was published. I think I'd rather stay current.


One thing to consider is that since various manuals have been published (and remember the data that goes into a printed manual is already several years old due to the development time) many, many, lots have been produced and the only CURRENT data is what the manufacturer posts. Even my Internal Ballistics software doesn't recommend H-414 for 55gr .223 loads. According to Hodgdon it's more like H-4350 and really belongs in far larger cartridges with heavier bullets.

But hey, it's your rifle.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
42 Posts
Lots of people on here seem to rely on firearms that are older than that and really old technology. What do you think the legal aspects of a powder change and not a name change would be for a powder company?

Funny how you can make fun of my country roots and then to find out i was right must be hard to take.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
166 Posts
I could be wrong but I believe that H414 is the same powder as Winchester 760. For years that was their go to magnum /heavy bullet powder. It is undoubtedly not the optimum 223 powder but if you are happy with how it works for you then who are we to tell you otherwise.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,234 Posts
Farmboy, from one hick to another, I suggest you reduce your tone a notch and show some respect for advice that you requested and what cost you nothing. It was fine until that last sentence.

I don't care about your reloads, but I do care about your attitude.

You haven't been here two weeks. I'd guess it's way to early to be making enemies of what are otherwise automatically friends.

-Nate
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
42 Posts
Farmboy, from one hick to another, I suggest you reduce your tone a notch and show some respect for advice that you requested and what cost you nothing. It was fine until that last sentence.

I don't care about your reloads, but I do care about your attitude.

You haven't been here two weeks. I'd guess it's way to early to be making enemies of what are otherwise automatically friends.

-Nate
perhaps i took the cousin clem comment wrong if so i am sorry.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,234 Posts
Oh, you may have taken it the right way, or not. That's the tough thing about the internet.

What else I'll say is that deadshot has proven himself to be a sane and generally good guy, and he follows a conservative approach to offering loading advice on an internet forum. When he says something, I don't always agree, but I listen and respect it. He's been breathing longer than I have. Maybe you have been too. I don't know, but I'll give you the same benefit of the doubt.

If you want to try a different ball powder and especially if you run any little-heavier bullets like 60+, try out AA2520 for a pound. It's a nice mid-range powder...not best for heavies, probably not best for 55's or under, but a good powder for what it does.

-Nate
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,851 Posts
Lots of people on here seem to rely on firearms that are older than that and really old technology. What do you think the legal aspects of a powder change and not a name change would be for a powder company?
It is not my intent to continue an argument but to merely put forth some things I've learned over a lot of years.

Yes, there are a lot of old rifles out there that are being shot today. I have one that is exactly the same age as I. The difference between rifles and powders however is that the rifle is the same as when it was built. Other than age from use or the normal attacks by nature (rust, fatigue, etc) they aren't being subjected to the changes of a chemical manufacturing process. When powder is manufactured it can change from batch to batch but it can also change incrementally over the years. If it didn't then why would a Powder Company have to issue regular updates to their loading data.

It's not uncommon, especially in the case of Hodgdon who does not manufacture any of their own powders, to find subtle changes in the performance of their products over time. It's not all in the burn rate but the heat (energy) generated when it burns that is all important. It's so important to he precision shooters that they will purchase huge amounts of powder with the same lot number just to be assured that THEIR load data doesn't change from the last winning match to the next just because they opened a new bottle.

These changes can also lead to incremental increases (or even decreases) that stack up over time. Go back to a loading manual from the 70's and compare the recommended powders/loads for a manual recently published. Those changes are a constant source of conversation and they aren't all brought about by "Lawyers".

It's not necessarily a product change that is at issue it's the incremental change in that product, especially in those that have had inherent problems over the years. Small changes add up. Not a big deal between Lot #xxx000 and Lot #xxx001 but 10 years and a few hundred lots later it might be enough for the Mfr or in Hodgdon't case the Merchandiser to no longer recommend it for a given caliber/bullet combo. You also need to take into consideration that in 20 years there is a far better product offered by the same company that provides the performance and with a lot better safety margin.

Yes, people do use old technology all the time. When it comes to powder however, I prefer and highly recommend that one use the most current data available. As I said earlier, that old rifle hasn't changed but how much has that new bottle of powder?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
48 Posts
I have reloaded some 223 to try in my remington 700 sps tactical i reloaded with 77 grain Nosler customer comp with 22 grains of H4895 and CCI benchrest primers the maximum cup 50200 and a velocity of around 2700 f.p.s the starting load is 20 grains and 2474 f.p.s. according to the lee modern reloading manual second addition.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,851 Posts
I have reloaded some 223 to try in my remington 700 sps tactical i reloaded with 77 grain Nosler customer comp with 22 grains of H4895 and CCI benchrest primers the maximum cup 50200 and a velocity of around 2700 f.p.s the starting load is 20 grains and 2474 f.p.s. according to the lee modern reloading manual second addition.
You may or may not have good luck with that bullet in the SPS Tactical. If yours is the same as mine was (I am waiting for the new barrel as I write this) the max weight for the 1:9 twist barrel is supposed to be 73 gr. I got nice small groups with Berger 73's but had no luck at all with the 77 gr. Rifle did super well with 52 gr match bullets but any wind ended accuracy over 100 yards. With the 20 inch barrel it's hard to get enough speed to get the necessary stabilization you can't get right off with the faster twist rate. My new barrel for my .223 SPS Tactical is 1:7 just so I can shoot these heavier bullets with better accuracy.

This said, it's not an absolute that slow twist rates won't yield accuracy with heavier bullets. It is pretty much a given that if you do get an accurate load it's more a matter of luck than design.

Good luck.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
48 Posts
I have had good luck with the 69 grain nosler custom comps and after reading some posts on reloading forums about the 77 grain nosler custom comp bullet. From what I read it is getting the velocity of the bullet above 2650 feet per second. I had the powder so I loaded 100 as a trial batch just to see if they work in my rifle. I will post some photo's up when I get my rifle back from Remington as I sent it bavk for the trigger recall and its been 7 weeks so far and no sign of my rifle.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,851 Posts
I have had good luck with the 69 grain nosler custom comps and after reading some posts on reloading forums about the 77 grain nosler custom comp bullet. From what I read it is getting the velocity of the bullet above 2650 feet per second. I had the powder so I loaded 100 as a trial batch just to see if they work in my rifle. I will post some photo's up when I get my rifle back from Remington as I sent it bavk for the trigger recall and its been 7 weeks so far and no sign of my rifle.
The big issue with bullets and accuracy it's all a matter of stability. The longer a bullet the faster it has to spin in order to be stable throughout it's flight.

Some bullets that are close to the optimum length for a given barrel twist rate can be forced to behave by using hotter loads. Unfortunately, hotter loads are also the ones that are most difficult to control when seeking accuracy.

You may get adequate accuracy from a 77 gr bullet in a 1:9 twist rate but probably only at short ranges and it will increase your reliance on "Luck".

If you're looking for a heavier bullet that will perform well in the 1:9 barrel check out he Berger 73 gr BT Target. I like them so well I bough a couple of 1,000 piece boxes of them. Otherwise I'd stick with the 69 gr bullets and work on both my load and gun handling skills.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
48 Posts
Thanks for the advise ill look in to the verge 73 grain BT Target as I said it is just a trial just to see if the work for now just waiting for my rifle to get its warranty work done and returned to me so I can go and shoot some.
 
61 - 73 of 73 Posts
Top