Norma Powders

14 November 2001, 05:45

DavidReed

The Reloader series as currently manufactured is produced by Bofors is Sweden. Incidently Norma and Rotweil both get their powders from Bofors as well. In Ken Howell's Desiging and Forming Custom Cartridges he gives a list of same as powders for the three companies. I'll post this later when I can look at my book.

14 November 2001, 05:59

<bobshawn>

Harald __

According to my listing (fastest to slowest): R-1 and R-123 are single-base extruded; 200, 201, 202, 203-B, 204, MRP, and MRP-2 are all double-base extruded. Bofors is the primary manufacturer.

Good shooting.

Robert

14 November 2001, 10:11

<PCH>

Yes, it's supposed to be true. Some Norma and Reloader powders are the same. For example RL 15 and Norma 203-B. I've been told by the Norma support that data is interchangable for these two. I know other powders in RL and Norma are the same but maybe someone else can sort them out?

14 November 2001, 18:21

DavidReed

Here is the same as powder data according to Ken Howell's book.

Norma N203 = Reloader 15 = Rottweil R902

Norma N204 = Reloader 19 = Rottweil R904

Norma MRP = Reloader 22 = Rottweil R905

I would assume (a good way to get myself in trouble) that the newer Reloader 25 and Norma MRP2 are same as powders. Can anyone confirm this?

15 November 2001, 03:33

bill smith

DavidReed: I hate to seem ungrateful for all the information, but what about RL-7 ?? is there a Norma counterpart ??

15 November 2001, 11:41

bill smith

if you look at the post on this forum entitled "powder suggestions?", it appears like everyone believes the Reloader powders to be greatly effected by temperature. if this is so, then, are the Norma powders likewise effected? this seems like a negative aspect of the powder, unless you make your loads very close to the hunting period, that is to say you reload during the winter for a winter hunt.

15 November 2001, 14:54

KuduKing

quote:
Originally posted by bill smith:
if you look at the post on this forum entitled "powder suggestions?", it appears like everyone believes the Reloader powders to be greatly effected by temperature.

Hell yeah. With Reloader 22 in the 7mm Rem Mag, I lost 85 fps from 75F. to 50F. That is nearly 3.5 fps per degree F. I hate to think what would happen at 30F - - not a pressure problem, but plays hell with your trajectory and POI. Or in reverse if I worked up a load in cold weather then used it in Africa, I could stick the bolt.

On the same day over the same chronograph, a load using H4831SC in the .270 Win showed a loss of only 20fps, which is less than 1 fps per degree F.

Winchester 760 is even worse than Reloader 22. In the .300 WSM, a load using W760 varied 103 fps from 85F. to 68F. That is 6 fps per degree F.!! Totally unacceptable. I had safe loads at 75F. spike and overpressure at 90F. And these loads were BELOW what was listed on the Winchester website.

The factory .300 WSM round exhibited only slightly less temperature sensitivity.

Especially after the recent Reloader 22 recall, I'm making the switch to Hodgdon.

15 November 2001, 23:33

1894

Thankyou for the answers. I wondered if I would be trying to bring some MRP back from my trip as they have some good load data for that and the 156gr Oryx.

17 November 2001, 03:13

bill smith

so....somebody give us a clear answer to a couple questions....

1. Since the Reloader powders apparently are pretty unstable with regard to temperature, why not go to a stable powder....like Hodgdon? By so doing, you eliminate the need to adjust loads as well as remember at what temperature your reloads were assembled.

2. Since Norma is apparently the same as Reloader, are the Norma powders likewise unstable with regard to temperature....OR are you saying that the powders are not the same, but merely their burn rate is the same and therefore the Norma powders are not unstable?

17 November 2001, 08:01

Fritz Kraut

quote:
Originally posted by bill smith:
... the Norma powders likewise unstable with regard to temperature....

This is interesting for us swedes, as we reload with Norma or buy their factory loads. Every early winter we resight or scopes to cope with the slower velocities and sunken trajectories.

Iï¿½ll try to get some Hogdon, as you claim that is less sensitive for changes in temperature.

Fritz

17 November 2001, 08:42

<Patrick_D>

Bill,

Would those be some of the Hodgdon powders actually manufactured in Australia, by AMI?

Just had to throw that in!

Patrick

19 November 2001, 12:49

bill smith

Fritz: I am not claiming anything. Earlier in this thread, it appeared like the posters felt that the RL powders are unstable. Later on someone mentioned that they had Norma counterparts and were in fact manufactured by the same company as Norma. Since i have never heard any previous claims of instability with RL powders, or Norma, I was trying to find out if Norma was unstable in the same manner as the RL powder. I have always regarded Norma powder as a "premium" powder. So......with that explanation in mind, do you have any experience that tells you that Norma powders are unstable with regard to ambient temperature?

Patrick: I don't have a clue who makes Hodgdon powder.

[This message has been edited by bill smith (edited 11-19-2001).]

20 November 2001, 06:19

<Taylor>

Hi Guys

Been loading for a long time with all kind
of powders, among them vita and norma.
Loading for the 300 RUM now with norma MRP-2
and i can tell you one thing there is nothing unstable with this powder from Africa to artic climate.

20 November 2001, 06:43

bill smith

Taylor: Thanaks, pardner, that's what I was lookin for. And MRP-2 is exactly the powder i was wondering about.

20 November 2001, 07:29

<bobshawn>

Patrick_D & bill smith __

Hodgdon is, and historically has been, a distributor of gunpowders. They do not manufacture any gunpowders. FYI, their source for H4198, Benchmark, H322, Clays, H1000, H4831, H4350, Varget, and H4895 is ADI (Australian Defense Ministry). For H380, H870, H414, BL-C2, H335, H110, HS-6, HP-38, And Titegroup, their source is ST. Marks/Primex/ General Dynamics/ Winchester-Olin.

Please be advised that this is a rather old listing. Hodgdon might very well have changed sources by this time.

This is not intended to demean Hodgdon in any manner. They sell high quality gunpowders that are thoroughly reliable and safe. However, like all our other suppliers, they do tend to "gild the lily".

Good shooting.

Robert

22 November 2001, 14:55

Atkinson

I have never found the RL series or Norma powders to be unstable, in fact you can get 75 FPS difference with the same powder from day to day and barrel to barrel, gun to gun..considering most show a standard deviation of 15 to 50 or more in a single firing of 5 across the chronograph..Another thing that pops up from time to time is a rifle with a 100 FPS deviation and better accuracy than a load with 7 FPS deviation, and that smacks Murphy in the head....!!???

I try my damndest to remove myself from standard shared technology and test guns at the range as over the years theory has become a dumping ground for BS.

------------------
Ray Atkinson

ray@atkinsonhunting.com
atkinsonhunting.com

22 November 2001, 15:30

<Paladin>

Hey, Swedes!!!

If it's not as secret as the stock discs on the 6.5 rifles, it'd be great to get links to data for these three Norma powders:
N 200
N 2020
N 2010

On the latter two, I particularly need data for handgun applications..... Thanks!

23 November 2001, 09:28

jpb

Hi there

Norma has a lot of loading info at

http://www.norma.cc/normawebNY/index.htm

However, the emphasis seems to be on rifle loading.

Send Norma an email via the link on their web page and they will usually send you your desired loading info within a week.

jpb

25 November 2001, 04:47

<ppromxman>

Hey Ray...

Maybe it's time for some quantifiable testing since you are trying to sort through the B.S. and all.

Remember Bob Hagel...he lived north of Salmon Idaho up near Gibbonsville. He regularly wrote for handloaders digest and he wrote a few book that were pretty informative. One of the things he published was temperature tests which were quite extensive for their time. For some reason, we have not seen good testing of current powders published anywhere that I know of.

I wonder if we could set the parameters for some testing and have results posted. It may not be definitive but might add to the body of knowledge so to speak. What are your thoughts....

Paul Prochko