I have some IMR 4064 I want to use but no good data for this bullet. Anyone load 250 gr TTSX with IMR 4064 in the 375 H&H?

FYI, here is my concern.

Barnes says "Use load data for our other 250 gr bullet for the TTSX"

Barnes lists 69 (Start) to 74 gr (max) of 4064
Hodgdon Lists 60 (start) to 67gr (max) of 4064 for a 250 gr bullet.

I guess I will go with what Barnes says, but like to ask first because Barnes start load for a 250 gr bullet is 2 gr above Hodgdon'd max load. So, anyone have any info or experience on where to start here?

It is only simulation but QuickLoad show for 67gr 60702PSI (OK) and for 68gr 63549PSI (not OK). It is computed for 3.6" OAL and 95.3gr water capacity.

Sometimes, it is very accurate, sometimes (with modern treated powders like RL-17) not.

Jiri

Wendell,

When I run into differing starting loads like you are seeing, I do the following:

I load up 1 round at either the lowest starting load, or something I'd be comfortable starting with. I shoot 1 round up until I reach an expected acceptable velocity, then I start with my 3 shot groups. The single rounds allow me to check pressure to ensure I don't get myself in trouble. Plus, they also help to confirm velocity.

Here is another source for the 375 H&H. The starting load here is 63 grains for IMR4064, so I'd likely start there and work my way towards the 69 grain starting load suggested from Barnes. If you start looking a 3 shot groups at 68 grains, then you will have only 5 additional rounds from 63 to 67 grains that will rest your mind. If you hit pressure signs in your single rounds, then you drop back and punt, pull your other rounds and start your 3 shot groups at those lower weight charges. To me, 5 bullets, powder and primers are invaluable when it comes to safety.

Also, notice the 74 grain max is the same from the Barnes suggestion.

Any way, that's my $0.02 and you get exactly what you paid for it!

Good luck!!!

What graybird said. When faced with conflicting info like this I start with the mid point of the lower recommendation and work up from there.
Alternatively in this situation I would start with the data for the 270gr and work up from that.

Thanks guys. That is what I had in mind, 1 shot per grain until I get up to mid 60s then try to do 3-5 shot groups.

I head to Bulgaria in 3 weeks so I have a bit of time to get it right. Plus, I have a good number of 270 TSX that shoot 1/2" out of a dirty gun. But these 250 gr ttsx interest me.

I'll report back since a search here turned up no info on the 250s.

Wendell,

I am actually looking to run the same combo out of my 375. So please update with what you find in your load testing!!

In researching load data, I talked with Barnes and Ty told me to run with the data from the older Barnes manual that had the 250 xfb and 250 solid data, but not to use the XLC data.

I also looked at Hodgdon's data. Like you, I noticed their loads are way lower than Barnes. But I think the reason is the pressure they are loading to. They list the pressure for all of their loads on their site, and they are loading to 49,200 cup for their max load in this case and many others are that low or lower.

All the 375 max pressure data I could find from SAAMI was listed in PSI (62k, which is higher than 30-06, same as a 308, a little lower than a 270 or 338 ultramag (65k)), but they did have pressure for the 300 H&H, the 458 and a few others in cup, and they were 53 or 54k cup. So my guess is that the load data from Hodgdon is very much underloaded, but I don't know for sure, as I don't know how or if you can correlate PSI readings and cup readings. I did notice they have other 375 loads that pushed into the 50's (53k) cup, so clearly, the pressure on their 4064 loads and many loads on this chart were kept way down.

I also did go ahead and have a look at the loadings for Sierra 250's that I got from Sierra. Their start load is 63 and their max is 71.5. Which, for a max, this comes pretty close to what Barnes is suggesting. Sierra tends to really do the 10% under in their load data for starting loads, which might account for the lower start point. Their accuracy load is 67.9 grains and the hunting load is 70.3.

Nosler lists the start load for their 260 in the manual I have as 66 and the max as 70. Hodgdon lists 60-67 for the same bullet, similar in relationship to what we see with the Barnes data.

Lyman lists 66-73 for apparently the Nosler 260

And Hornady lists 61.2 to 73.4 for their 270's in my manual.

All in all, I personally think Hodgdon data for the 375 appears to be very conservative when I compare to all the other manuals I have.

Very interested to see what your results are!

quote:

Originally posted by Wendell Reich:
FYI, here is my concern.

Barnes says "Use load data for our other 250 gr bullet for the TTSX"

Barnes lists 69 (Start) to 74 gr (max) of 4064
Hodgdon Lists 60 (start) to 67gr (max) of 4064 for a 250 gr bullet.

I guess I will go with what Barnes says, but like to ask first because Barnes start load for a 250 gr bullet is 2 gr above Hodgdon'd max load. So, anyone have any info or experience on where to start here?

First thing is to know the rifle itself, whether or not the action is strong enough for "pushing the envelope" (which I don't do). For example, my ZKK 602 has a reputation for great strength. Then, how it has handled other loadings -- you have that handled. Data fron different sources varies, and SPEER is very conservative against, say, Nosler. Pick a midpoint and work up using all the usual signs, until you reach the point where you are satisfied -- I go for accuracy first and foremost. If speed is your priority, be careful! Having said all this, my loadbook published data suggests 70 grains IMR 4064 is a good midpoint, and I would start there with no qualms.

Wendell,
You have a PM.

I believe the 68g and + loads are hot. This is based on a somewhat subjective analysis. I swear the 68, 69 and 70 gr loads kicked like a 470! To test this theory, I then shot my standard 270 gr TSX load and confirmed my thoughts. That 270 TSX kicked a lot less than the 250's.

My 270 TSX load is 76g or RL 19. It shoots a consistent 3/4" group. this day it shot .73" 3 shot group.

There were no pressure signs, but accuracy was sporadic. 2 shots touching, then a 2" flyer. I tried WLR primers and CCI 250's. No real difference in accuracy.

I am going to try 67g and work my way down until I get an accurate load. I have run through almost a full box of these 250's with no joy so far. I am seriously thinking about cutting my losses and stay with my 270 TSX load that is accurate as they come.

I am done trying, for now, and have packed my 270 TSX rounds in my locked case in my duffel and will shoot those on this trip and probably on my Brown Bear hunt in April. No sense in tinkering with something that works right?

I will give it one more shot and then either post beautiful pictures of tight groups, or post some 250 TTSX for sale in the classifieds.

Wow, that's not what I hoped to hear! I have not bought my components yet, holding off a bit. So let me know what you come up with on your last attempt. Have you chrono'd any of the loads? Curious to see what kind of velocity you are getting with the loads you are running.

When I talked with Sierra and Barnes, they both like 4064 with their respective 250's, so this is definitely a surprise. Thanks for posting your experience!

I think it is just too hot. I can see it is trying to group at 68 grains and gets worse as you go up. I am hoping that 67 or 66 works well.

Will re-post my results when I try it.

That's very interesting. I was just working up some loads with 150ttsx in a 308. Using the same powder charge as I have used in the past (from the same can of IMR4320) for 165TSX the 150TTSX loads were HOT. Brass flowing and primers flat.
I wonder if the TTSX somehow generates higher pressure even with a lighter bullet?

You guys give R 17 a try.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
You guys give R 17 a try.

If I can score some I will. Barnes listed 4064 as the favorite for that weight bullet. I managed to get to Cabelas when they had 4064 on the shelf, so I made 2 trips and got 4lbs. I am determined to make it work!

FWIW - RL 19 with 270 gr TSX is an incredible powder for my gun.

Yeah, I think I found some R19 recently, and know where I can get at least 1 pound of R17. But it seems that for the lighter bullets, R15 is king. 4064 is supposed to be good from conversations I had with Sierra and Barnes, but your experience suggests otherwise. Based on Rusty's experience, I am trying to locate some Norma powder, but no luck on anything yet, so still interested in seeing how this works out for you.

You mentioned that the 4064/TTSX loads seemed really hot, could it be with that bullet that you are getting hot velocities to go with it?

Chad, Winchester 760 is also a VERY GOOD performing powder in the 375 H&H. AIU

quote:

Originally posted by Wendell Reich:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
You guys give R 17 a try.

If I can score some I will. Barnes listed 4064 as the favorite for that weight bullet. I managed to get to Cabelas when they had 4064 on the shelf, so I made 2 trips and got 4lbs. I am determined to make it work!

FWIW - RL 19 with 270 gr TSX is an incredible powder for my gun.

I am not sure Barnes has tried any R17...I never see it...but it is a good powder in the .375. R-15 is too and what I usually load. But I may switch over to R 17 eventually.

There is quite a bit of R17 around.

Wendell, your rifle has spoken, Save the 4064 for weightier bullets when you can't find powder again...

Unless Wendell find something different out, I think I am going to shelf the TTSX idea for now. Will start with Accubonds instead.

I am really interested in RL17, I keep hearing people recommend it, but the lack of load data from bullet manu's or Alliant makes me pass it over.

Hope to start seeing some good loads on this powder, course then it will probably become impossible to find!

I will figure this out! But it may be a few months with SCI and two big hunts coming up. Maybe I will try some 17 before I give up if the 4064 won't group.

Don't loose faith yet!

Wendell,

Thanks for keeping us all apprized! I will be interested to see how it turns out, the TTSX looks like a near ideal bullet for what I want for general (non DG) use. I think my first step will be to try some accubonds for now. Powder wise, I was thinking Norma 203b as a sub for RL15. However, 4064 is easier to get. Have you tried any 4064 with accubonds? I am wanting to match Nosler's claimed velocities of 2750 in their factory ammo with that bullet.

To be honest, I'm not sure why I want the 250TTSX load so badly. My go to load for everything, DG or PG in this gun is the 270 TSX. It is as accurate as you can expect, clean, dirty, hot barrel or cold, it shoots that bullet great.

I guess we are all looking for that incremental increase in velocity and accuracy. So, we toil on!

Wendell,

That bullet gets rave reviews, and there is load data. By all accounts, it's awesome!

But yeah, like you, the reason I want the 250 or Accubond because I am looking for a higher BC bullet for longer range flexibility. If they made a 270 TTSX, that would be top of my list.

But right now I am wanting 2-3 bullets to choose from that will give me identical trajectories and still carry enough velocity 'way out there' to expand. Turns out the 250 TTSX, GMX (at 2800)and 260 accubonds (at 2750)will do that.

The reason is I need more than one choice right now is that I get a free custom turret from Kenton, but I have to order it by end of February, so I won't have time to really test. So I need 3 choices and only one to actually work out, if that makes sense, so no matter which it is, the trajectories will match up nicely and I will have a load that can do the job as far (farther right now) than I can possibly shoot. It's sorta a belt and suspenders approach.

I like the weight retention on the TTSX, so that's where I have been concentrating. But Barnes has not even worked up data for this specific bullet, so it's irritating. I am not the one to go off charting waters on my own. I want tried and true (safe).

So I think I'll start with where there is proven load data. Now just need that powder....

RL-15 takes you out to 300 yds better than 4064.

Yeah, RL15 is what I was counting on, but unfortunately, I don't have any RL15 and it is apparently impossible to get. So I am going to have to try some alternatives.

I think I saw some at Cabelas the other day but didn't think to try it.

Could be mistaken.

4064 is what Barnes lists as the favorite powder for 250gr.

On the plane for Bulgaria! Will test it in Feb maybe. Adios!

Good luck and safe travels!

My experience for the .375 H&H is that R-15 is the most accurate for 300 grainers with R-17 being second. R-17 will squeeze out a bit more vel form a 300 in the H&H case.

Chad,
With starting from scratch in todays market...start with R-17...I don't think you will be dissapointed. It is also a great powder for many other common rounds....30-06 & .338 WM come to mind.

I don't ever load any 250 or 270's so I don't have data to relay. But after hearing that Wendel shoots R-19 in his with 270's...I have no doubt that R-17 will be acceptable...maybe great.

It is available on several websites.

RL17 I can actually (if it is still there) get a pound of right now. I just don't have any load data. I am not that experienced in reloading, so I am not one to run off and come up with load data. Does anyone have an RL 17 load for 260 accubonds or TTSX's? I want to hit 2750 with the accubond, 2800 with the TTSX if possible (25 inch barrel). RL15 is listed at close to 2800 with the accubond from Nosler's book, so it should be possible.

If someone has some data, that would be great. I called Alliant, and they had nothing for me, and just recommended the impossible to find RL15!

Just got off the phone with Nosler too...they have nothing other than what they have in the manual. They tell me 375 is not exactly on the top of their list for load development so....

quote:

Originally posted by Chad T:
RL17 I can actually (if it is still there) get a pound of right now. I just don't have any load data. I am not that experienced in reloading, so I am not one to run off and come up with load data. Does anyone have an RL 17 load for 260 accubonds or TTSX's? I want to hit 2750 with the accubond, 2800 with the TTSX if possible (25 inch barrel). RL15 is listed at close to 2800 with the accubond from Nosler's book, so it should be possible.

If someone has some data, that would be great. I called Alliant, and they had nothing for me, and just recommended the impossible to find RL15!

Do you have a chronograph??? If so...go on the Big Bore Forum and ask someone to run it through quick-load to get a starting load. Just tell them the bullet the case and R-17 and they can give you a starting place...then just work up to the speed you desire watchin your cases and feeling your rifle for pressure signs.

You can just start with R-15 starting load and work up from there.

Yeah, I have an Oehler. Might do that to see what QL lists as it's potential. I must admit it makes me a bit nervous, though. Somehow, I like knowing Nosler et. al have been doing their thing with their pressure testing equipment etc....

quote:

Originally posted by Chad T:
Yeah, I have an Oehler. Might do that to see what QL lists as it's potential. I must admit it makes me a bit nervous, though. Somehow, I like knowing Nosler et. al have been doing their thing with their pressure testing equipment etc....

QL is very conservative. It will give you a low starting load. Many people have loaded R-17 in .375's...mostly with 300's. I have as well. Start low...watch your chrono, cases, and feel of the rifle and work up. Many people have worked up from R-15 starting loads.

quote:

Originally posted by Chad T:
RL17 I can actually (if it is still there) get a pound of right now. I just don't have any load data. I am not that experienced in reloading, so I am not one to run off and come up with load data. Does anyone have an RL 17 load for 260 accubonds or TTSX's? I want to hit 2750 with the accubond, 2800 with the TTSX if possible (25 inch barrel). RL15 is listed at close to 2800 with the accubond from Nosler's book, so it should be possible.

If someone has some data, that would be great. I called Alliant, and they had nothing for me, and just recommended the impossible to find RL15!

A quote from: http://forums.outdoorsdirector...hp/95834-ReLoader-17

quote:

Originally Posted by Double Shovel

Great info/shooting Steve!

Here are my results.

I developed a 180 Gr E-Tip load for my Sako Finnlight with RL-17. My results were very similar to yours. I settled at 63 grains at 3050 FPS over the chrony. I tested up to 65 - with no apparent pressure problems, but my best accuracy was at 63 and I was plenty happy with the velocity.

Now, for the 375 H&H. I also shoot a Sako Kodiak and have been testing Nosler 260 Grain Accubonds with RL-17. Before my load testing was complete, I used my handloads at 75 grains to take a caribou last October. After further load development, I have settled on 77 grains (tested up to 78.5) of RL-17 for best accuracy. I'm using federal 215M primers and Remington brass. Unfortunately, my chrony battery was toast last time out - I'll send a few through next time out. Have I gained any velocity over RL-15? Only the chrony knows that answer... Accuracy has been better in my rifle using RL-17 instead of RL-15.

Yes, please all work safely and deliberately.

Good Luck with your 270 TSX project!

DS

Thanks for this, I am reading through the post...might just run down to my local store and see if the RL17 is there and grab it and give it a whirl....

Did you see you got a Quickload reply in the Big Bore Forum.

It was right where I thought with a starting load of 74 gr. As I said earlier...I would have started at 75 gr.

Yeah, just saw it and replied. Curious to see how Norma 203b compares, but RL17 is here in town and available now. Or it was a few days ago. I'm gonna head down tomorrow as soon as I can to see if they still have it. If they do, I think I'll grab it and give it a go. That max is much higher than I want to be at, so I should be able to hit my goal, I hope. Thanks for the tip, would be nice if it worked out and RL17 stayed available!

Can you buy Norma 203B?

I can order it. Problem is, I don't know if it will shoot well, or fast enough. So I would want to order just one to see if my rifle likes it, but that is definitely not economical with the haz mat fee.

Rusty tells me it is the same as RL15, so I am tempted to plunge in. But even RL15, I really wanted to start with just one can in case it does not shoot well.

If I could get just one pound locally, I would probably start there.

I should try and get a quickload run on it to see what it shows.