In shotguns and pistols, the relative cleanliness of powders is a consideration, but in rifles it's hardly ever mentioned. As carbon buildup is detrimental to accuracy, why aren't we more concerned about which rifle powders burn cleaner than others? Many riflemen go to the trouble and inconvenience to moly plate their bullets for the purpose of extending the number of rounds fired between cleaning. So, why not check to see if, say, one of two or three otherwise suitable powders burns more cleanly than another? Any thoughts?
-- Doc

This is always a consideration for me. When starting out with a new gun, i always try a couple of different powders. I not only look for the best accuracy after a few shots but also after many shots. On occasion i will do a 25 to 50 shot group. This will give you a real test of the load! I have a T/C Encore in 223 that did a 25 shot 1.75" 100 yard group and this was with 3 different shooters!

I mostly varmint hunt and this is a major concern for me.

mike

------------------
NRA Life Member

America, Love it or LEAVE IT!

Doc,
Most rifle cartridges operate at considerably higher pressures than pistol cartridges and they do so with a longer barrel. The powder fouling associated with pistols is more a function of incomplete burning at lower pressures and because of short barrels than anything.
Having said that some rifle powders are noticeably "dirtier" than others but with most rifle shooters its not a major consideration as 20 rounds is a lot of shooting for most people.
Rifle powders burn cleaner and more consistently...it a function of pressure and time (long barrel).

Most stick powders seem to be pretty clean compared to ball powders, with the exception of the new Ramshot stuff. There are HUGE differences in fouling. If you want the worst, compare H335 vs the new Ramshot Tac. After you tried the Tac, you'll never go back..... FWIW, Dutch.