All, I've been trying to work up some loading data for IMR 7383, thinking it would work with CB's (It doesn't!) and treating it as something akin to IMR 4064 (It isn't!). Loading it as 4064 in my .243 Win. (with 85 gr. Sierra SP's), at 36 thru 39 grs. was disappointing: Large velocity spreads, poor accuracy and dirty cases. Today I tested it with 41 thru 43 grs. (compressed load), but with 87 gr. Hornady BTSP's (ran out of Sierras). Btw, all loads used Win. standard LR primers. Accuracy was all one could wish for, ES & SD dropped to < 40fps compared to the earlier experiments. The data are below (I hope) and suggest that 7383 is closer to IMR 4350 than 4064. ...Maven

37 gr.
Mean = 2,627
SD = 184
ES = 68

38 gr.
Mean = 2,638
SD = 42
ES = 140

41 gr.
Mean = 2,911
SD = 37
ES = 114

42 gr.
Mean = 3,066
SD = 26
ES = 85

43 gr. Max. Load!
Mean = 3,099
SD = 28
ES = 105

Hello Maven, glad to hear that someone still shoots jacketed bullets in the .243. I have settled on IMR 4350 as THE powder in the .243, but I like to hear of any positive experimenting. Curmudgeon and I were chumming for crows just this last weekend, and I had the Savage 110 along with some 3100 fps loads using the 4350. No luck on the crows but a good weekend of plinking in the desert.

Please keep the railroad stories coming, I fired for the Southern Pacific from July 2 1955 to January of 1959. Mostly steam for the first two years.

Regards from duke.

Duke, I've also found that IMR 4350 is the powder for the .243 Win. However, the last time I used it (with the 85 gr. Sierra SP's, I got an ES of 200 fps. So far IMR 7383 hasn't done that with 41 to 43 gr. charges and Hornady 87gr. BTSP's. If you have 7383, be careful with it, especially when ambient temps. are >75 deg. as they may be in Nev. Incidentally, my Ruger #1 doesn't particularly like jaceketed bullets that weigh less than 80 grs. As for the RR stories, it's nice to know you appreciate them. On the SP, did you fire coal or oil? And here's a small "story" from my trip to Portland, ME 2 wks. ago to see narrow (2 ft.) gauge steam (originally from the Edaville RR. in Plymouth, MA) in operation. I rode the cab of the steamers and after watching the fireman tend his fire, told him how easy he had it. If he put in 6 small scoops of coal for the entire trip (3 mi's.) it was a lot. On the 2-8-2 I worked on, it was 9-12 scoops/min. Unfortunately, having just got a digital camera the other day, I only have 35mm slides (and no scanner) of the event. ...Maven

I've just gotten some 7383 from Hi-Tech. First thing I'm trying it in is 22-250. I've got some test rounds loaded but haven't had a chance to try 'em out yet. I've been anticipating more 4350-like performance; if that's the case in this cartridge, by the time the case is packed I'll probably be getting really good .223 velocities with a 55 gr. jacketed bullet. (The most I've been able to cram into a 22-250 case is 36 grains. 53 grains in .30-06. Not a whole lot in 4350 terms.) I'm not expecting this to be a great cast bullet powder in bottleneck rifle calibers, but I'll bet it will be in the 45-70. One interesting thing I've noted from the military ammo specifications, the .50 spotter cartridge that used the 7383 had a nominal maximum average pressure of 38,000 PSI (which would've been CUP.) So the powder's suited for operating at less-than-high-intensity pressures. It's pretty coarse grained, and I'll bet its deterrent coating is rather light. Probably not as "progressive" as some IMR powders. I'll let y'all know how it works out in the 22-250. It'll probably be a while before I get it tested out in anything else. (But I've got enough of it that you can bet I'll try it out in anything it might work in!)

Maven, The Southern Pacific steam roster was all oil fired as far as I know. We did have it easy, the only thing we had to shovel was sand to clean out the tubes. I bet that 2-foot guage was fun to see and run on, a differant kind of railroading from what I knew.

I'm just about out of my last can of 4350, so I'm whatching this thread closely. I lost it for a couple of days because I couldn't remember the title.

Regards from duke.

I use jacketed 100 grainers in .243 on these Texas whitetails. It may not be THE powder,but I use 4831 for jacketed and for the 95 grain cast I use 4227. My son in law also shoots .243 and I load for the both of us---my grandson also shoots one or the other of our .243's and he carries a box of ammo in his bag---so we shouldnt have a problem running out of ammo in the field.

Here's my first report on using 7383. I tried it in the 22-250, not with cast bullets, but with some of those j*ck*t*d pills. As has been mentioned, I knew it was bulky and expected it to be rather slow for this cartridge with a 55 grain bullet, and expected it to be limited by case capacity, not by pressure. (Turns out that's the case, but not as much so as I thought, in fact I think they pretty nearly coincide.) I decided to see just how much of this stuff I could work into a case, and in a fired neck-sized Winchester case that's 37 grains. I came up with a bit unorthodox procedure for doing this, but it works well if you really want to fill a case. I pour a plastic drinking cup about 2/3-3/4 full of powder. I submerge the case, mouth-up in the powder, and jiggle the cup up and down vertically so the powder bounces in the cup, not sloshing over the side of course. I then pull the filled case out from under the powder and tap it rapidly and vigorously against the side of the cup to settle the powder. It goes maybe halfway down the neck. I dip it again to fill it to the top, slightly mounded over, and tap straight down on the case mouth with my fingertip to level it off flush. That gets it about as full as it's going to get without mechanical ramming, and it's very consistent. The extreme variation I've gotten on the scales with this method has been from 36.9-37.2 grains, usually right smack on 37.0. I don't think my RCBS powder measure would do as well with this coarse tubular powder, and I'm not cutting any grains this way. Anyway, thinking the true "maximum load" by pressure would be more than I could fit in the case, I loaded some up to this full charge, seating 55 gr. Hornady FMJ "blems" to the cannelure and crimping them in with a Lee Factory Crimp Die. Guess what? In this cartridge at least, Hi-Tech's characterization of the powder as similar to 4064 or 4320 isn't far off! 37 grains is a safe load in my rifle, but it's a hot one and probably right at max. (Might be too hot in others, or with the bullet seated right against the rifling.) The 200 yard POI is about the same as that of a 55 gr. Winchester PSP over 36 gr. of surplus 4895 (mine is a little slower than current 4895.) My Chrony wouldn't register a shot all afternoon, probably needs a fresh battery (which I'd meant to carry but forgot), but I'll be very surprised if this load doesn't register 3600-3700 FPS. It seems to produce a good bit of gray smoke (I didn't notice any flash), and there was no trace of unburned powder in the cases or bore. The wind was gusting all over the place at 15-25 MPH, but I was able to post a 1.65" 5-round group, which I'm going to see if I can post on here. (The colored dot sticker I aimed at is 3/4". I put it on my scanner with a US quarter for scale.) I think this is a load I'll definitely keep.

OK, I've got an update to the above, having put a brand new battery in the Chrony and gotten it working.

That load I mentioned with the Winchester 55 gr. PSP over 36 gr. of my old, slow surplus 4895 averages 3483 FPS about 8 feet from the muzzle. The 55 gr. FMJ over 37 gr. of compressed 7383 averages 3231. There are no pressure signs with either one on the cases or primers. The 7383 FMJ load does shoot nearly to the same 200 yd. POI as the other-better BC, perhaps? The velocity spread of my 7383 loads is a bit higher than the 4895 ones, but the 7383 groups are about half the size of the 4895 ones. I can't say too much about the ultimate grouping ability of either, because I've been shooting in bad wind conditions with a flimsy plastic rest, but the fact that I'm shooting better with the 7383 loads under the same conditions says something. As for my "hot load" assertion, that was based on the similar POI to the 4895 load (that's heavier than typical loading manual maximums for modern canister grade 4895) and the rather large muzzle blast that's likely an indication of a slow burning powder. I'm starting to think this stuff is more like 4350.

For what I'll be using this rifle for, punching holes in paper out to 300 yards and maybe pot-shooting at the odd chuck, .223 ballistics are fine and likely mean longer barrel life. I expect I'll burn a lot of this stuff in it. I've still got other rifles in other calibers to experiment with.

Not Richochet, For what it's worth, my .243Win (Ruger #1) shot as well with 7383 as it did with IMR 4350 and with considerably lower standard deviations to boot: 1 m.o.a. or less with either powder. The problem is that I'm a cast bullet shooter, but now find myself with ~7lbs. of 7383 to use...and it's definitely not a CB-friendly powder. I'm going to try it in both my .30-06 and 8mm Mauser with jacketed bullets and treat it as 4350, albeit a starting load. ...Maven

I tried 50 gr. of 7383 with the 165 PSPCL in the 30-06 this afternoon. Velocity averaged 2459 fps and a five shot group measured 2-1/4". However four rounds went into 1-1/8". The first shot was the wild one. The group was fired after 45 rounds loaded with AA2495 had gone down the tube. At any rate I did not start with a clean barrel. I have not experimented with seating depth either so I don't know what to expect from this barrel. It is a new barrel to me. The only other group I ever shot with it measured 2.2" and that with Varget.

Just went ahead and ordered another batch of this stuff. I think I'm going to like it well enough to want it around for a long time, and I think the days of $4.00/lb. surplus powder won't last much longer.

All, I decided to try 7383 in my .30-06 with a few 150gr. & 180gr. jacketed bullets I had lying around. Following my work with the .243Win., I again treated 7383 as IMR 4350 and used 52.5grs. with six 150gr. & six 180gr. pills (all I had). Mean velocity, SD & ES were 2,533fps; 14; 38, respectively, for the 150 grainers and 2,426fps; 26; 71 for the 180 grainers. I used WLR primers as I had with the .243Win. However, they were flattened even though the powder charge was below max. for 4350 (ambient temp. was only in the low 60's). Moreover, the vel. was less than predicted for 4350, especially with the lighter bullet, but the pressure signs tell me that 52.5grs. may not be far from a max. load in the '06.

I tried 7383 in a .25-06. 45 grains gave decent accuracy behind 120 grain bullets and is all I want to load in this cartridge. Primers were more severely flattened than my usual load of 47.0 grains of IMR-4350.

I was using a NEF Handi rifle precisely because of the lousy ejector. No stuck cases so the pressure must be reasonable despite the flat primers. Did not break out the Chrony for this session.

Doesn't make sense for a load of that weight of IMR powder in that cartridge giving that velocity to be making high pressure. A similar weight of 4064 would give a 150 gr. nearly 3000 FPS. I suspect this stuff may have a relatively light coating of deterrent (solely on the basis of the relatively low pressure of the .50 spotter cartridge it was used in, 38,000 CUP max avg.), so it's likely not as "progressive" as 4350 and won't have as favorable a velocity/pressure ratio, but I still can't see that making excessive pressures at 2500 FPS with 52.5 grains of an IMR powder under a 150 grain bullet. (The original uncoated MR-type powders used in 1906 gave 2700 FPS at 78 feet to a 150-grainer with 50,000 PSI max avg. pressure. They weren't progressive burning at all, in fact slightly degressive.) We have a clue from the specs of the .50 Spotter in that 120 grains of 4831 and 110 grains of 7383 gave the same weight bullet the same velocity, with 35,000 PSI (CUP) for the 4831 and 38,000 PSI for the 7383. It's a little faster than 4831, and my initial "seat of the pants" wild guess was that it'd be in the 4350 ballpark. It's obviously designed to burn efficiently in that lower pressure range, which 4831 wasn't, which is why I'm guessing on a lower deterrent content. It's also made in rather large but thin-walled tubes, which would slow the rate of combustion by reducing the total surface area over finer-grained powders like, say, 4895 (thus requiring less deterrent to reduce the initial burn rate), but completing burning relatively quickly at lower pressures because of the thinner web.

I'm getting ready to try it myself in the 30-06. Got to get on down to the basement and load some up.

I wish I had a calibrated Oehler M43! I wish somebody with official DuPont data on the powder's vital statistics would pop up and enlighten us, too!

NR, As I wrote earlier, all 12 fired cases had flattened primers and velocity was roughly 220fps less than what Lyman suggested for IMR 4350 with the 150gr. bullets, but very close for the heavier ones. Since the sample was small (two groups of 6), I hesitate to draw too many conclusions, nevertheless, the primers were flattened. I intend to try some 168gr. BTHP's that I've been hoarding with 52.5gr, 53.5gr. and 54.5gr. just to see what's what with 7383. ...Maven

Keep us informed. I've got some test rounds loaded up, but haven't had an opportunity to shoot them yet.

Data Monday,NR? Dan and Steve should give u a commission. Sales may get so good they'll go all the way to $6.00/ lb.What's this doing in cast bullets?

Dunno. It got started here. Maven's an old cast bulleteer, just put it where he's used to being.

I'll have some data shortly.

Bartsche, I think it's possible to use IMR 7383 with CB's if you're not locked in to moderate velocities (1,700-1,800fps) as I am. What I mean is I don't need speed just to punch paper. What I do need is an accurate and consistent (low SD & ES) target load and I don't think 7383 is it: Too erratic, smudged cases, too much unburned powder. For that kind of work, you can't beat AA XMP5744, H/IMR 4198, IMR 3031 or AA 2015BR. If you want milsurps, IMR 5010 (with Grex filler) and WC 860 (no filler) are excellent. However, for jacketed bullet loads in some cartridges, the .243Win. for ex., 7383 is wonderful. ...Maven

.30-06. Federal cases, neck sized. CCI 200 primers. Winchester 150 grain Power Points. 56 grains of IMR 7383, Hi-Tech's batch. (Takes special vibrational settling techniques to get that much in case, compressed by bullet seating.) Lee Factory Crimp. 2680 FPS avg. from 22" Ruger M77. No signs of high pressure. About 1/3 of shots made a bright muzzle flash in daylight. No unburned powder that I can see. All shots went into a 3.2" group at 100 yards. All but 2 horizontal fliers (Wasn't watching the crosswind!) went into a vertical string 1/2" wide by 2.7" high. That's not an impressive group, but I think it's the best one I've ever shot with this Ruger. A tackdriver it's not, and it's got a loose nut behind the butt. I can do a lot better with my Vanguard and M70, though. I think I need to check the guard screws, and it may need its bedding redone.

This load just equals the original 1906 load, with 12% more powder to do it. It's not far from what 56 grains of 4350 would do.

Just loaded up 90 more rounds of that load. (All I had bullets for.)

Tried it out in the 45-70 today, with 49 grains of IMR 7383 under my 340 grain wheelweight #457422HPs, hand lubed with "Ricochet Lube" (Coastal Uniplex High Temperature Grease, Disc Brake Wheel Bearing). Remington cases, CCI 200 primers, Lee Factory Crimp. Average velocity was 1352 FPS from my 22" Microgroove 1895 Marlin with good consistency, but I've never seen so much unburned powder. Maybe half the charge burned, meaning that maybe half of each individual kernel burned and there were just as many left after shooting as before, with a slightly smaller outside diameter and a bigger hole through the center. Powder spilled out in the action and littered the concrete floor where I was shooting. The body of the Chrony collected quite a bit of it that fell in the open top. I had to shake it out of the cases before putting them back in the box. Funniest thing was, after one shot I noticed three powder kernels at the muzzle. Two of them were clinging to the lube film on the inner crown of the muzzle, and one was teetering on the edge of the bottom center of the bore at a 45 degree angle. As always, there was no significant leading. I won't be using this load again, because unburned IMR powder jams up Marlins. I've had problems in the past with the unburned tubules of powder from Remington 405 gr. SP factory loads. (I think those are loaded with either 4198 or 3031. it's a long cut IMR powder, anyway, like 7383.)

I also did some testing with what's becoming my favorite 45-70 load: 35 gr. surplus WC680 under the same 340 grain wheelweight #457422HPs, "Ricochet Lubed." Remington cases, CCI 250 primers, and a tuft of polyester fiber filler compressed under the bullet. Lee Factory Crimp. Average velocity was 1470 FPS from my 22" Microgroove 1895 Marlin. What I've changed from the last iteration of this load is switching from CCI 200 to 250 primers. Should've done that from the start. When I began with this powder at 32 grains, no filler, 200 primer, I got no hangfires or misfires but did get several dull booming shots with subsonic velocities and lots of unburned powder. Worked the charge up to 35 grains and it worked better. Adding the polyester fiberfill helped a lot with the consistency, but was a bit messy as it did not melt and blew out the muzzle to float around like gray thistledown. Changing the primer to the 250 doesn't seem to have changed the average velocity (I'd recorded 1480 avg. before), but improved the consistency again and now the polyester fiber is just starting to melt. I noticed today a distinct tendency for the fiber blowing out the muzzle to clump together, and a couple of shots produced little or no visible "down." There is no visible unburned powder, and again no leading. This load is very similar ballistically to the old blackpowder loads with the Gould bullet. A little ahead, actually. The table "Velocity, Energy, Penetration And Trajectory of Winchester Bullets and Recoil of Rifles" in Barnes' "Cartridges of the World," reprinted from the Ideal Hand Book #17, printed circa 1906, Lists the ".45-70-330 Gould H." at 1338 FPS at 50 feet. From a 26" barrelled 1886. The .45-90 was listed at 1480 FPS with a 300 grain bullet.

Haven't tried this load with the magnum primer and no filler. The case is about half full, so it might work OK.

????? Did you really have a full case load of IMR 7383 when you had your issues with that incomplete combusition ?????

That would be A LOT of IMR 7383 in that big long case. The more I think about it the more I have to think you were perhaps running a partial case load of loosely constrained powder that never even got ignited completely in the first place.

===============================================

A booster charge may be needed for complete combustion of some military surplus powders on larger diameter straight wall cases if a full case compressed load of the powder will not burn cleanly and leaves a lot of half burned sticks around.

Some like Alliant 2400 or IMR 4227 as a "booster" starter powder. I like an even slower, more similar speed booster powder myself -- it is easier to get inside a given speed range using a varying ratio of a more similar burn speed booster powder. IMR 3031 is an example of a more similar speed bumper powder for IMR 7383. IMR 7383 is an example of a more similar speed bumper powder for IMR 5010.

The intent here is just to increase the immediate pressure with the bullet still in the case to above the minimum combustion temp and pressure needed to get a total burn of the granules and to keep it up there on up the bore until the powder is totally consumed (a clean burn).

Once you get it going good using the pressure booster load, it will go ahead and burn completely as it simply burns a bit faster at the higher pressures you have achieved.

Raw 50 BMG bulk powders ignited by standard rifle primers sometimes simply can't keep up with the big bore displacement area that is opening up and can flare out on you in those big straight walled cases. If you have loose space in the case, they sometimes never really ignite good in the first place.

Note folks do recommend magnum primers a lot with the bulk mil-surp powders? The magnum primer boosts the ignition temperature and helps raise that case pressure up above the minimum temp/pressure required to get good ignition on the heavy 50 BMG surplus powders.

Without a booster of some sort the barely ignited burning powder sticks may go out on you as the big bullet moves quickly up the barrel (opening up the combustion space quicker than the raw surplus powder can fill it up with hot enough, high enough pressure gas). When fired raw, you can get lots of soot residue and lots of partially burned powder sticks. Magnum primers do help with this issue, so you should try to use them first.

Your fps speed and recoil kick are going to go up when using a booster powder. A slower more similar speed booster powder allows a gentler start and a more easily adjustable "top end" and a lesser kick on the shoulder bone as well.

(that's why I don't ever recommend fast pistol powders as a booster, they are too abrupt and have no fine incremental control on speed and pressure).

The rules are the about the same as boosting the slow BMG powders, but with IMR 7383 expect a good bit more speed and kick when you "hurry up" IMR 7383 to the point it burns completely. You are releasing the other half of that unburned powder you used to have to clean out of your action.

Oldfeller

P.S. Remember old Ralphie's glasses lying broken in the snow as he frantically tried to come up with his "story" to cover himself, because if you do something dumb with ANY form of reloading you CAN shoot your eye out .....

Trying to use fast pistol powders to bump stuff up is an excellent example of using a stop sign as a B-B gun target (my "Ralphie" lesson when I was his age, except I clipped my ear lobe instead of my eyeball)

[ 10-15-2003, 10:41: Message edited by: Oldfeller ]

There may be a large contingent of folks out there that believe in added ignition loads and duplex and triplex loads. I always thought that I was a guy that was smart, safe and knew what he was doing and that this technique offered no great danger to AN EXPERT LIKE me. Shine it on. Often you won't hear the dangerous mistakes we've made. But more than I have made them and, for one, with duplex loads. I'm not talking about hard to lift bolt handle here either. Personally to discuss and suggest this in open forum is just in poor taste if not poor judgement. My advice for what it is worth is that if you haven't tried it don't bother. We have a plethera of powders to play with now days. These are the type of experiments that should be conducted in a controled lab environment BUT ONLY IF THERE IS A NEED. There isn't. This is one toy that isn't a toy. When I was young I wouldn't have listened to this either. Roger

Roger I hear your words. And all in all it's sound advice. Anyone not understanding the boosting 'principles' or have event the least bit of doubt should NOT try it. Cause I'm telling ya "IT'S YOUR BABY". Screw up and it's your own fault. 'Nuff platter...

Understand I'm NOT faulting anyone for using a kicker charge as I've done some of that myself. But I think you NEED to EMPHASIZE the ROOOOLES of doing such. So what's the citeria for doin' such??

My own first and foremost is: Ya need a tight loading. No shifting of the charges, the 'kicker' needs to stay PUT. Mild load compression is desirable at seating taking for granted the larger kerneled/slower fuel on top is packed and stays as such.

Second-est Roooole: Use a chronograph and start conservatively and watch for pressure signs closely while monitoring the extreme spread. Wild gyrations in MV is not good...

Anyone else for more roooles??

Boosting always takes place using a full case, compressed loads of "too slow" powders with just a little booster powder up by the flash hole.

The theory is that the booster charge ignites first and boosts the case pressure up beyond the bottom combustion limit of the slow mil surp bulk powder (getting you up to good clean combustion).

Remember, small amounts of a slightly faster powder located right next to the primer flash hole (loaded first under the bulk of the "too slow" powder). This is in combination with a crushed by the bullet load of bulk mil-surp powder. There is no free space anywhere in these loads.

Boost with a just slightly faster, relatively similar speed powder.

Your goal here is to just get up to complete and clean combustion in the safest possible fashion, not to make up some crazy super powered round.

You are trying to use $4 a pound powder to save money, right? Not to make a Dick Casull special out of a 45/70.

Really, most cases can't take a full case load of straight IMR 7383 without getting up into the decent clean burn pressure range, but a large bore straightwall case very well might need a bit of a booster to get complete, clean burning with some of the mil-surp powders.

I suspect the clean burn load in a 45-70 is going to kick a bit more, however, whichever surplus powder you use.

Notice how I stay with a stick booster powder, when boosting a bulk stick powder? If you used a fine ball powder to boost with, it would migrate away from the primer flash hole as it would be small enough to roll away between the sticks of the bulk powder.

It is also easier to get a good tight full case load using a more similar speed booster powder. You know you can fill the case with the base powder with incomplete combusition and lower than normal pressures. Your bumper charge of somewhat faster powder should also fill up the case (compressed) in combination with the bulk charge. You are trading off some of the volume of bulk with the similar but slightly faster booster on a sliding scale that translates intos slightly more speed and slightly more pressure in a controllable fashion.

Obviously, if you don't feel comfortable loading duplex loads, then please don't do it. Folks who load the same 2-3 surplus powders a lot generally have considerable experience with their favorite powder and favorite case, enough so to bump a load safely.

If you are going to use the relatively slow miltary surplus powders in a broad range of cases (including large diameter straight wall cases like the 45-70) you are eventually going to have to boost one a bit to get complete combustion.

Just do it safely. Ignition charges of 3-5 grains of booster powder have been used with the slow burning mil-surp powders for quite a few years to get rid of the "half burned powder clogging up your levergun" issues.

It's not a beginners trick, not by any means. I have also used IMR 7383 itself as the booster, in combination with a bulk charge of much slower IMR 5010 powder in a bottle necked case. Get the sense of relative speeds that is in play here?

Of course if you are a young reloader who believes in keeping to the books in all things, you likely aren't going to be using the undocumented surplus bulk powders anyway. For those folks, just ignore most of this stuff about these $4 a pound surplus powders and go on with your righteous reloading.

The older reloaders, some of whom have locked up an action (or worse) at some point in time with a bumper charge might want to consider telling the complete story to keep others from going there with that particular combination of items.

This is not a bad thing. Just like all the horror stories folks told about bolt bending kept me from making the same mistakes on our recient group bolt bending fund raiser, telling your stories about your bumper charges gone awry can stop folks from going there as well. (BTW, I got off clean on that forray into bolt bending -- no complaints at all, so thanks for all the horror stories you gave up-front -- it helped me avoid going there)

If Grumble can tell you his stories and Bruce B and Buckshot can tell you theirs, then you KNOW better and don't go do that. Bruce B taught me NOT to use fast pistol powders to bump with, and I learned from his mistakes. What were all of yours, so we can learn from them?

Oldfeller

[ 10-15-2003, 11:14: Message edited by: Oldfeller ]

I have been loading IMR 7383 since Hi-Tech started carrying it. There warehouse is a 1/2 mile from where I work, so its easy to pick up. This powder works well in the 7.5x55 with jacketed bullets for full loads. It also works well in the 30-30 with the RCBS 30-180-FN and the 7.65 Arg with heavy cast bullets. The problem with it is that it doesn't burn well in less than 100% loads, its dirty! It doesn't respond to booster charges too well either, sure it burns cleaner and has about 140 fps more velocity in the 30-30, but accuracy is poorer. To get this powder to burn clean, I had to drop tube the powder in and compress it lightly. BE CAREFULL what cartridge and bullet weight you use! This has worked for 303 british and smaller capacity cases with lead bullets, accuracy is ok, but not sterling. Full jacketed loads are very accurate. In my tests. it seems to burn a little faster than IMR 4831, but it needs to be ignited fully to work better.

Which brings me to another critique of mine per 'bulk/cheap' powders. I think the old adage you get what you pay for definitely applies. Consider with a cast bullet your already saving the cost of a jacketed bullet and with cast most often your using a reduced charge from maximum, often by a good deal. And powders on the faster side which typically yield many more shots per pound, another reduction in cost.

So why mess with bulk/surplus? If your shooting only a few thousand rds a yr it begs the question if it's really saving anything. By the time you go into all the load testing, added time say with boosting, who's GOT THE TIME??

Then the surplus arrives and it's a "blend"-- mixed with something else. Which is Fool's Gold.. Add the hazmat, the wife's objection to 50 some pounds of powder in the house..

Take some 4759, some Blue Dot or Unique-- and forget the hazzle.

Well BS...you have a point there, and it's probably right for alot of cast shooters. But you see I've never been one to use the faster powders,like the Unique and Blue Dot you mentioned, in my cast rifle loads. I like a powder that fills the case up more then the faster ones so as not to have to use as much filler. I've been pretty lucky with surplus powder so far, plus I can buy it locally and not pay the hazard fee. It also doesn't take alot of shooting to find an suitable load so I think one saves all the way around. I will agree with you from being in the forums that alot of fellows have gotten some bad surplus powder.

Didn't answer Oldfeller's first question up above. All of the 7383 loads I've mentioned have been compressed. The load of 49 grains in the .45-70 lightly so. The 37 grain charge in .22-250 and 56 grains in .30-06 are full to the mouth WITH vibrational settling, and then compressed with bullet seating. The .30-06 loads were tending to spring the bullets back out a bit. The bulk density of this powder is low.

Well,if you try to compress a fine ball powder like 5020 on top of a little 680 you will push the primer out. That's just one scenario. it happened. If you try to keep 680 in place with a lightly compressed load of 5010 you better hold them bullet upright from the time you load it till the time you shoot it if you want to keep your auxillary primer in place. The real focus isn't how can avocational loaders use the duplex or auxillary priming loading process; it's should anyone in open forum be trying to propagate a technique where the uniformed, illinformed or self recognized experts could cause equipment damage, harm to them or others. Sitting next to someone at the range who is about to touch off his first time duplex load experiment could result in a real surprise. It's not a contrlled environment. Is it? And I am an old fellow. Roger

Another rule, is to not pressurize the powder column any more than necessary, especially if that column is long like in an '06 sized case. Yes, you can use a pistol powder, but make sure it is no more than a half grain to keep its additional pressure effects near zero. You are after its HEAT, not its pressure. Most of these machine gun ball powders like 860, 872 etc., don't burn correctly at all up front when compressed hard, so add a cc or thereabouts of plastic shotgun filler to keep the powder column in check. Using 5010 or other big stick powders, this additional shotgun buffer on top is counterproductive because it won't stay there, and these powders are porous enough to take some compression leaving some airspace. ... felix

Felix, I beg to differ with you re: fillers with WC 860 and IMR 5010. While it is true that plastic fillers (e.g., Grex) can migrate with the aforementioned powders if the loaded rounds are agitated, I've not found it to be so since my before-after chrono. data is markedly different when using one of them. I.e., its effect is so positive with respect to ES & SD to make me keep using fillers (Grex or powdered bran) with 5010, but not with 860. With the latter, there's less to be gained from fillers except an extra step in reloading. Respectfully, ...Maven

Maven, I havn't played with 5010 in years, and never have had with fillers even then. Naturally, I stand corrected. Obviously, it is just slower than I remember. I doubt there ever would be a fast lot of that stuff for anything smaller than a 250 grain case. ... felix

Maven, I just loaded 40 grains of 7383 behind 3 different types of 80 grain bullets and 41gr 7383 behind a 75 grain pill for my.243. These were virgin selected Winchester brass and two different magnum primer manufacturors.What were your loads and good results? Your 06 flattened primers have me a little concerned.This will be the first time I'm using this powder. I don't think I'll pull the trigger till I hear from you. Thanks Roger

Roger, My loads (see first post on this thread)were 41gr. (2,911 fps), 42gr. (3,066fps) and 43gr. (3,099), which is a MAX. load for the 87gr. BTHP's I was using (in a Ruger #1). Then too I couldn't get any more powder into my cases, even with the bullets seated to 2.72". While 7383 performs like IMR 4350, it isn't, and it generates a bit more pressure than 4350. Even with lighter bullets, I'd start at 40gr. and work up, mostly on the assumption that your lot of powder may be faster than mine. Also, see my next post about the .30-06 & 7383. ...Maven

Another consideration: My 7383 came from Hi-Tech. Their jugs bear no lot number. I didn't ask Dan, but assume it's pulldown powder as they're selling .50 Spotter projectiles and cases.

My California friend who's been telling me for 6 months or more how useful the 7383 is in medium rifle cartridges and how it's the last opportunity we'll have at $4/lb. surplus powder got his from Jeff Bartlett, who no longer lists it on his site. (Or else I've overlooked it.) He told me that Jeff told him that he had 3 different lots of different burning rates. So we may be discussing apples and oranges, as different as the fast and slow lots of WC852.

All, I had a chance to test 7383 in the .30-06 today, mostly with Speer 168gr. HPBT's and five heavy cast bullets (Lyman #311644: 195gr., Ed Schmitt-designed tapered bullet). Combustion was clean with both bullet types;, i.e., no unburned powder in the bore or cases and only an occasional smudged neck. Accuracy was excellent with the HPBT's, but not the CB's, which were moving at 2,414fps. Moreover, extreme spreads and standard deviations were quite low, never exceeding 20fps. for the latter for charges of 52-to 52.5gr. Although 7383 mimics IMR 4350, it isn't 4350 in that I could only get 53gr. in my cases and even that was a chore since compressing the powder also bulged the necks. (I had to pull & resize 10 out of 55 because of this.) The other thing of note was difficult bolt lift ~1/4 of the time: Not good! Whereas the Lyman "Reloading Handbk., 47th Ed." indicates 57gr. as a max. load for 4350, I found my lot of 7383 a bit hotter: 53gr., if you can jam it, in is MAX. for me. And no, I didn't achieve the velocities Lyman listed either, even factoring in a 22" bbl. (mine; they used 24"): I was 115-120fps slower than the published figures. Finally, if you use 7383 as a substitute for 4350, don't stray far from [published data for] starting loads. ...Maven