THE ACCURATERELOADING.COM CAST BULLET FORUM


Moderators: Paul H
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Need cross ref. for milsurp IMR7383
 Login/Join
 
one of us
posted
I'm gittin' old. Must be. The other day I was lookin' right at it and now can't remember where it was to save my butt.

Anybody know the commercial powder that I can cross reference to from IMR7383?

Thanks,
Puncher
 
Posts: 234 | Location: 40 miles east of Dallas | Registered: 21 December 2002Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
"Trust in The Lord with all your heart"......and He'll help you find the cross ref. data.

Shoulda' known better than to waste my time on a bunch of useless inquiry posts scattered across three sites.

Puncher
 
Posts: 234 | Location: 40 miles east of Dallas | Registered: 21 December 2002Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Puncher,

I think the main problem is everyone is splitting time between the old list and the various proposed new lists and nobody is lighting long enough to "do business" on any of them.

IMR 7383, the inexpensive new bulk pulled powder that Hi-Tech Ammo is selling in seven pound jugs for $28 a jug responds between IMR 4064 and H380 (considering the little bitty cases right up to the larger cases).

A smart man would start out with beginning loads using the IMR 4064 data for a given cartridge, begin his charge increase series and get real careful when he exceeds the 4064 data and begins to lap over into the H380 range of load weights.

Surplus IMR 7383 is bulky compared to normal canister powders, and you may find yourself hitting a full-up case before finding pressure signs. Still, your velocities at that full case will be significantly improved compared to the other cheap pulled surplus powders like H872 or IMR 5010.

Cases that need extra caution. Smaller caliber strong bottleneck cases requre extra caution. Anything that generally likes IMR 4381 has a potental to develop some significant pressures with IMR 7383.

Now is that more of what you were looking for?

Oldfeller

[ 12-27-2002, 14:39: Message edited by: Oldfeller ]
 
Posts: 386 | Registered: 30 September 2002Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Not H308, H380.

I can see I am going to miss the "enforced" review feature that used to be on Shooters. Make a typo here and it is "up there" very next thing unless you intentionally preview it.

Sloppy typers, beware, you need to select "Preview Post" to take that final look-see before you send it.

Oldfeller
 
Posts: 386 | Registered: 30 September 2002Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
ignore

[ 12-25-2002, 16:56: Message edited by: Oldfeller ]
 
Posts: 386 | Registered: 30 September 2002Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Oldfeller:
Not H308, H380.

I can see I am going to miss the "enforced" review feature that used to be on Shooters. Make a typo here and it is "up there" very next thing unless you intentionally preview it.

Sloppy typers, beware, you need to select "Preview Post" to take that final look-see before you send it.

Oldfeller

I think everyone knew what you meant Kelly. But your pt about proof reading is sure valid, yet there's an edit feature here which I like.

FWIW-- that 7383 didn't sound all the great?? commnets?
 
Posts: 1529 | Location: Central Wisconsin | Registered: 01 March 2001Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Aladin,
I'll give MY comments in a week or so. Lemme git to da' range an' shoot dis' stuff up an' I'll post a range report on it.

I'm doin' 3 batches using the ladder technique. One with 175 gr. SPBT sniper match, one with 150 gr. PSP and the last with Lee cast .309-200 w/GC.

I'll letcha know sump'm.
 
Posts: 234 | Location: 40 miles east of Dallas | Registered: 21 December 2002Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of TCLouis
posted Hide Post
One can go back in this forum and edit the errors out of their messages to when they see them. I always hope I K atch them before others do. The we don't seem to have the grammar/spelling/error nazis here, that some forums seem to have

If Hi-Tech is selling it then one should have a cross reference for this powder.
LouisB

Now if Jeff B. or Hi-Tech would just get a new supply of 4759.

[ 12-27-2002, 19:35: Message edited by: TCLouis ]
 
Posts: 3975 | Location: TN USA | Registered: 17 March 2002Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Aladin, thanks for mentioning the edit function. I used it to cut the unnecessary duplication of the previous post.

IMR 7383, like all $4 a pound military surplus powders, is a mixed blessing. Our previous 50 cal pulled surplus powders were so very slow that we all had developed "use a full-case of powder" paradims and "only low velocity can happen" paradims in using them.

They were for target uses only, they couldn't drive a bullet fast enough for hunting uses unless you used a booster-igniter charge of Unique to get it burning good.

Now here comes a military surplus pulled powder that is mid-range, and a pretty broad-mid range at that. It can be used to load to nearly full jacketed velocity in 8mm and in 30-06. It can be used in 6.5mm and 7mm (and smaller bottle-necks?) to go full velocity with jacketed.

What you see are some people sticking by their paradims and not liking the powder, or like Jethrow and Buckshot, getting their "considerations" opened up considerably by the stuff. Remember, it can do jacketed too, perhaps even better than it can do lead.

It can certainly do a lot more than what we used to be able to get for a $4 a pound pulled powder.

Accuracy reported has been good to very good. Case loads have ranged 3/4 to 100% full on the top end jacketed loads.

Is it "too fast for cast"? Yes, if you have a 1,600 fps speed range as your firm intention and you absolutely insist that you want to fill up your case to get there. (H860 & H872 excel at that particular task)

Or you can be like Buckshot, and only use a partial case for the slower target rounds and when you want a "burner" for hunting, fill it on up some.

Sundog stated a trueism about very slow Mil-surp powders like H872, that for what the 100% case full of powder would do velocity-wise a much much smaller load of Unique would do the exact same thing, as cheaply too, but without the fouling and powder residues left in the bore. IMR 7383 breaks this cost/volume equation, being able to do the low velocity target job with a partial case, very inexpensively.

The stuff ignites partial case loads with normal primers too, BTW. Will it require a filler for absolute accuracy? Most likely.

I tend to only load 2,000 fps or a bit more for light hunting applications. I shoot the same loads year round to keep my hand in (same trajectory, scope settings and recoil, etc.) This stuff looks good to me, so I bought 3 jugs of IMR 7383.

I am considering buying a few more jugs for later as when this powder goes away we will likely not see a $4 a pound mil-surp IMR 4064-H380 span powder again for a long time.

It fits a valued niche for me. It can do jacketed at 90% of full velocity (or better in the over capacity cases) and it can shoot lead at any velocity where you can still get good accuracy. And it can do it CHEAPLY.

If you shoot .308, 30-06, 8mm, 6.5, 7mm and want one $4 surplus powder that can handle both your jacketed and cast needs, then this might be the mil-surp pull powder for you.

Is it perfect? Heck no, all mil-surp powders are irregular and quirky and none of them follow a load book recipe. Not something for begining reloaders to be using as their first load building exercise anyway.

If you are a skilled reloader you can get something good out of it using the simple "load building" skills you already have. Just remember, this one HAS a top-end to it, unlike the pulled mil-surp powders we have used in the past.

Oldfeller
 
Posts: 386 | Registered: 30 September 2002Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Interastin' Oldfeller... guess I hadn't read up much in the way of those posts. Appreciate it.

Wish I had several jugs of surplus 4759-- I think I hesitated due to reports of slower fps among other reports. My lot is fine-- accurate too.

How does the grain size of this 7383 compare to say 4320/4064--- and how does it meter? 4320 yrs back was always my favorite for the 220 Swift.

What kind of ES's are those 7383 loads making?

I have always figured the same about those slow ball surplus fuels-- by the time ya mess with it and load at least double for chg wt, your almost to the point of using the first line stuff. Generally powder isn't a place I try to cut corners, as I always figure I saved 13-16 cents per rd by making the slug myself.

[ 12-25-2002, 20:30: Message edited by: aladin ]
 
Posts: 1529 | Location: Central Wisconsin | Registered: 01 March 2001Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
If you can find where Buckshot wound up posting you could get some of his current extreme spread and SD IMR 7383 information from him. I'll quote his last posted information down below in an attempt to preserve it.

Truth is I have been too busy playing "Moldman" to even shoot my own new bullets these last few weeks. And this will continue for a while, I am afraid. Buckshot and Jethrow are the root source for most of this current IMR 7383 information anyway. Maven added some 7.5 Swiss data to the pot as well.

Buckshot, are you out there buddy? Or are you still waiting to see what finally develops with all these various replacement lists?

Sad thing is that I sense the Shooters group IS dispersing, some to other interests and other hobbies not just to other lists. None of the replacement lists really seem to have garnered a majority of the senior posting members yet, so the "scattering effect" continues on unabated. This is a very unfortunate circumstance.

Here is Buckshot's last Shooters post on IMR 7383 where he does offer some ES data on several cartridges.

***************************** Buckshot's data

The shooting of 90 rounds of surplus IMR7383 and 20 rounds to bracket the supposed burn speed was edjumacational, and got to be like work :-). I used it in a 35 Rem (Mauser), 30-06 (03A1), 7x57 (M98/08 Braz), and 6.5x55 (M96 Swede).

This information, along with previous firings in the 30-40 M95 Steyr has lead me to form a couple ideas about it, and that a couple of my test loads weren't used with the right bullets of known performance in the firearm. Using a couple bullets for the 1st time in a couple rifles may have skewed things, accuracy wise.

To re-cap the 30-40 and the 40 rounds fired previously, all the groups were very good. The loads of 35 & 37 grains (311291) and 43, 44, 45, 46 grains (311407, 183gr)were all close to, fillered, or drop tubed w/mild compression. Keep this in mind.

All cast bullets were lubed with Javalina and sized appropriately for each rifle. They were all seated to engrave, as is my routine. Data will be VEL/ES/SD

7x57, 29" bbl, 287405 Loverin @ 153grs:
30.0, Dacron: 1915/67/28
35.0, Dacron: 2254/124/51
40.0, Full case: 2421/91/46
40.0, Full case, Horn 154gr: 2300/90/46

This rifle dotes on the RCBS 7mm-168. I used the Lyman because those are the ones I had sitting already lube/sized. This rifle has never shot this bullet to the same level as the RCBS. Groups were only fair and should really be re-shot with the other heavier slug. The condom load is a comparison to Hodgden data of: 39.5 H380 w/154gr slug @ 2382 fps, 23" bbl. Just a bit off. No load showed any pressure signs.

30-06, 24" bbl, 311407 @ 183grs:
33.0, Dacron: 1850/109/41
35.0, Dacron: 1950/94/39
38.0, Dacron: 2077/37/13
40.0, Dacron: 2181/62/24

This bullet has never been fired in this rifle. Again, they're the bullets I had sitting ready to go in 30 cal. Cases WERE roll crimped into a lube groove. The last 2 loads were very good, being 1.5". No load showed any pressure signs.

6.5x55, 29" bbl, Ly 268645 @ 152grs:
21.6, Dacron: 1534/96/40
24.6, Dacron: 1740/15/6
H380 comparison.........
Book: 45.0 H380, 110 gr 2626 fps, 26" bbl.
Shot: 45.0 IMR7383, 120gr Rem C-L: 2937/40/18

The 2 cast loads shot very well, the 21gr load having a flyer, but overall, the same very good results as has been expected in previous cast shooting. Sub 1.25", and both had 4 in sub 1". Maybe one or 2 unburned powder grains. The condom load was a bit surprising velocity wise! Accuracy of the load was diappointing at about 3". This bullet having never been fired from this rifle before so I can't draw any conclusions from the group. It's the bullet I had closest to the book data. As you might guess, there was indications of presure. Not crazy, but there none the less :-).

35 Rem, small ring Mauser, Saeco #356 @ 198grs 20" bbl:

NO Fillers of any kind used.......
30.0, No crimp: 1457/78/32
33.0, Crimp: 1683/63/30
35.0, No crimp: 1753/119/51
35.0, Crimp: 1752/72/27
37.0, No crimp: 1835/85/32
37.0, Crimp: 1830/73/30

Accuracy of the 37.0gr loads was what I expect from this rifle/bullet combination. Very good. Accuracy of the lighter loads was overall mediocre and seemed to make no difference as to being crimped or not. These were loaded without any filler to see what would happen. No effort made to orient the powder, but even the lightest charge was about 80% capacity. No pressure shown at all.

Bracket loadings assuming H380 burn speed, 35 Rem. No filler, crimped:

37.0 IMR4320: 1829/33/13
37.0 H4350: 1613/96/35

As may be seen by the IMR4320 here in the 35 Rem (37.0gr load), and the 6.5x55 (45.0gr load), this lot (whatever it is) is a bit faster than H380. At least in these 2 applications. One case being of smaller capacity, large bore. The other being of moderate capacity and a much smaller bore. Two very dissimilar cartridges, yet displaying similar results as regards H380.

So what conclusions have I personally drawn? Not surprising I don't think, is that it wants to be confined. Either in full caseloads, or by a filler. I think that in the 35 Rem at least, it would definately bear a re-test with Grex, and/or a magnum primer. I don't think the Dacron was providing what it needed.

I grant that the testing wasn't as inclusive as I'd have liked, but it's given me an idea about the powder anyway. It appears that for certain cartridges it should be an outstanding cheap powder for condom loads. In all honesty, I was a bit disappointed in it as regards cast results. Even considering a couple bullet mistakes I had higher hopes for it than what it did, overall. I do not think it is as benign a powder as either WC852, or WC872. Both much slower, but from experience both being very eager to please, and easy to figure out. This IMR7383 bears some more thought.

..........Buckshot
 
Posts: 386 | Registered: 30 September 2002Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Compared to IMR 4064 grain size, the grains of IMR 7383 are the same length, but are perhaps 10-20% (a small amount) larger in diameter. Mixed together, you cannot pick out the grains of IMR 7383 from the IMR 4064 because they are not sufficently different in size or in color.

Any powder measure that handles standard IMR powders well should be able to handle IMR 7383 without any problems. It is physically pretty much the same old standard IMR sized stuff.

*********************

IMR 5010 is the only mil-surp powder that I know of that is signifcantly larger than the rest of the IMR family of powders. Throw a few grains of those 1.5 times longer, 3-4x larger diameter logs in amongst the standard IMR sticks and they DO stand out clearly.

Metering issues with IMR 5010 have been reported before as the grains are relatively huge compared to what the powder measures were designed to handle.

Oldfeller
 
Posts: 386 | Registered: 30 September 2002Reply With Quote
  Powered by Social Strata  
 


Copyright December 1997-2021 Accuratereloading.com


Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia