THE ACCURATERELOADING.COM FORUMS


Moderators: Mark
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
accurate 1680 powder?
 Login/Join
 
new member
posted
I just purchased 8 lbs of this powder.after looking on the burn charts I see it is right there with h110 and win 296.Can this powder be used in the 357 mag? How about light bullets in the 308? 22-250? any help is apprec thanks don
 
Posts: 24 | Registered: 26 June 2006Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
My only experience with AA 1680 is in .22 K-Hornet. It is significantly slower than ww 296 in this application.

I would presume to offer no data, but yes, it can be used with heavy bullet loads in .357. Light bullet loads in .308 and .22-250 would have to be reduced loads, but yes, it could be used as a propellant with those, too; just not an optimum one.
 
Posts: 13245 | Location: Henly, TX, USA | Registered: 04 April 2001Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
It works well in a 25-20.
 
Posts: 317 | Location: Texas Panhandle | Registered: 09 July 2006Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of 308Sako
posted Hide Post
This is one great powder for the .22 Hornet and the 7.62 x 39!






Member NRA, SCI- Life #358 28+ years now!
DRSS, double owner-shooter since 1983, O/U .30-06 Browning Continental set.
 
Posts: 3611 | Location: LV NV | Registered: 22 October 2002Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of Alberta Canuck
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by ddhotbot:
I just purchased 8 lbs of this powder.after looking on the burn charts I see it is right there with h110 and win 296.Can this powder be used in the 357 mag? How about light bullets in the 308? 22-250? any help is apprec thanks don



A really capable and esperienced reloader can work up a safe load for just about any powder in any cartridge. That DOES NOT mean it is a smart move.

AA 1680 is nothing like 296 or 110 in burn rate. Judging a powder's usefulness by its relative position on a burn rate chart is exceeding unwise. Although powders may be similar distances apart on the printed page, when piled up in a list, that DOES NOT indicate they are similar distances apart in burn rate.

There is data available for using 1680. A comparison of that data with the published recommendations for 110 and 296 will soon show they are not similar, and generally are not widely useful in the same cartridges.


My country gal's just a moonshiner's daughter, but I love her still.

 
Posts: 9685 | Location: Cave Creek 85331, USA | Registered: 17 August 2001Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of bartsche
posted Hide Post
FrownerFYI!! Some of the lighter loads of H110 in the 38 special and .357 mag. REVOLVERS tend to get bullets stuck in the barrel. The pressure to insure adequate burning is not achieved and as the bullet leaves the cylinder all the burning powder is pushed out the gap between the barrel and the cylinder. 1680 and 680 are slower burning and might lead one to believe that it might happen here also but this I do not know from experience.. These same loads (H110) in a .357 rifle work well as does 680 loads.

Unless you have a good bit of reloading experience and have developed really safe work habits, it might not be prudent to use 1680 in medium to large capacity bottle necked cartridges. But than a few years back I told a guy with a Sea Fire handle something similar about Blue Dot in rifle loading and look where that went. Big Grinroger


Old age is a high price to pay for maturity!!! Some never pay and some pay and never reap the reward. Wisdom comes with age! Sometimes age comes alone..
 
Posts: 10226 | Location: Temple City CA | Registered: 29 April 2003Reply With Quote
  Powered by Social Strata  
 


Copyright December 1997-2023 Accuratereloading.com


Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia