Here is the place to post questions/thoughts/comments related to the pressure data posted by M 98 and Ghubert.

Gentlemen, thank you very kindly for your pressure work & posting coalation of all this data! Its layout is superb!

The more I look at data like this, the more I believe that my next rifle will be a light .30-06 shooting a 180 or 200 gr. bullet.

One aside: I've always loaded RL22 in my .270 WCF, especially for my 140 & 150 gr. projectiles. Its given me good accuracy & especially good velocity with charge weights of 59 & 59.5 grains.

Given what you've observed in the .30-06 with RL17, do you think it would be worth my time to consider the 17 in my .270?

Thanks again!

friar

The 270 has always worked well with the slow burners like H4831/R22/NORMA MRP, im sure R17 will work in your 270 with the 130 s, but it would be most beneficial where you need more case capacity, when useing mono projectiles and the use of slow burning powders just takes up to much case capacity, resulting in overley compressed loads
MRP would be an excellent powder in your 270
Daniel

Hi Friar,

I've done a bit research for you and it seems it might be worth trying RL17 with the 130 grain bullet as both the load data on the Alliant website and my doodlings with QL seem to show that you should be able to get around 3100 with acceptable pressure.

The Alliant website for example show an advantage of around 150fps with 130 grain bullets in favour of RL17 over RL19 and RL22.

The situation in Quickload is less clear as it does give very good velocity for the pressure, but also appears to claim the same for H4350 and a few others of that burn rate. This last is not as significant as the data on the Alliant website however because I get the same claimed similarity between H4350 and RL17 in loads for my 30.06, whereas actually the situation is much closer to Daniel's pressure tests and I seem to get a 100-150 fps more from RL17 for the same pressure signs.

The situation with heavier bullets is less clear again and I suspect that much slower powders are the way to go, as Daniel says. The manufacturer's own data however indicates a possible velocity gain.

I do know that we will never know unless someone tries it and reports back to us; seeing as I don't have a .270, you don't feel like volunteering do you?

In all seriousness the data from the Alliant website is:

Caliber         Bullet                  Case      Minimum OAL   Bbl Length  Primer      Powder  Charge Weight  Velocity
                                                        (inches)                                       (grains) (fps)  	

270 Winchester 	Speer 100 gr HP 	Winchester 	3.1 	  24 	   Fed 210 	Reloder 17 	59 	3,554 	-
270 Winchester 	Speer 130 gr BTSP 	Winchester 	3.2 	  24 	   Fed 210 	Reloder 17 	54 	3,136 	-
270 Winchester 	Speer 150 gr BTSP 	Winchester 	3.2 	  24 	   Fed 210 	Reloder 17 	51.5 	2,921 	- 

Vs

Caliber         Bullet                  Case      Minimum OAL   Bbl Length  Primer      Powder  Charge Weight  Velocity 
                                                                                                        (grains) (fps)
	
270 Winchester 	Speer 90  gr HP 	Winchester 	3.17 	24 	CCI 200 	Reloder 19 	64 	3,341 	-
270 Winchester 	Speer 100 gr HP 	Winchester 	3.1 	24 	CCI 200 	Reloder 19 	62 	3,220 	-
270 Winchester 	Speer 130 gr SP 	Winchester 	3.24 	24 	CCI 200 	Reloder 19 	57 	2,904 	-
270 Winchester 	Speer 150 gr SP 	Winchester 	3.27 	24 	CCI 200 	Reloder 19 	53 	2,745 	-

Vs

Caliber         Bullet                  Case      Minimum OAL   Bbl Length  Primer      Powder  Charge Weight  Velocity 
                                                                                                        (grains) (fps)

270 Winchester 	Speer 130 gr SP 	Winchester 	3.24 	24 	CCI 200 	Reloder 22 	58 	2,947 	-
270 Winchester 	Speer 140 gr SP 	Winchester 	3.26 	- 	CCI 200 	Reloder 22 	56.5 	2,949 	-
270 Winchester 	Speer 150 gr SP 	Winchester 	3.27 	24 	CCI 200 	Reloder 22 	54 	2,769 	-

If you have access to a chronograph, brilliant, if you can measure CHE or PRE or something like that even better, please give it a try and post your results.


Best,

Amir

Amir, thanks so much for your work here! It is truly a help & blessing to me; I have now made up my mind to try the RL 17 with 140 & 130 gr. Accubonds. As with the data you posted, I also use WW cases & (mostly) Federal 210 (and some 215) match primers.

I have a very good friend in Minnesota who does all my reloading; he has a good chronograph & is a very experienced reloader. I'll email him this thread as a starting point for the RL 17 work.

I have to do a little more thinking, but I'm also inclined to buy another batch of RL22 (which is what I've use to this point with 140 gr. Accubonds & 150 gr. A-Frames) to compare to the RL17.

RL22 has given me 3000 fps with 59 gr. behind the 150 gr. A-Frames, but I worry this may be a little too hot (slightly cratered primers, one loose primer pocket [but unknown times fired on that particular brass piece] yet always good bolt lift & extractions). I have had no issues with 59.5 gr. RL22 pushing the 140 gr. Accubonds, again right at 3000 fps. I suspect I may have a "fast" barrel.

Let me also share why your help is so appreciated; in early december my father fell down a flight of stairs & suffered a severe brain injury. He's doing remarkably well now (miraculously so, in fact - praise God), and I have hope he will make quite a good recovery. I'm also quite busy with my work as a lutheran pastor at a middle-sized congregation, and am married with two young children.

All of this is by way of saying that I have been "speculating" in my mind about the potential advantages of RL17, while also wondering what bullet to push. Your work has greatly reduced the speculation and given me some real data to start from, so much so that I no longer worry about wasting time & money doing so.

For all of that, let me say a final word of thanks for your (and Daniel too!) generosity of time & kindness of speech. It is truly a blessing to me in this busy and tumultuous time of my life!

God's richest blessings to you, my friend,

Chris "friar" Meier

p.s. I will keep you posted as to my findings, and when I have a little time tonight, I'll look up the details of the two loads I mentioned above.

Sorry to hear you're having a torrid time of it Chris, my best wishes in getting through these difficult times.

It's a pleasure to have helped and although I'm not an expert, of which there are many on this board, I do like to help where I can.

As I said I don't load the .270 so I can't comment about the RL22/150gr A-Frame load but QL says it compressed and around 62Kpsi. This is with guessed at parameters so is not to be taken as at all accurate, in particular OAL and case H20 volume.

RL17 isn't magic, it was designed for a specific role and in that it excels, the niche where it does it's best work is, as Daniel says, when you would ideally need to get more of a powder with the approximate burn rate of 4350-RL19 into a case but are limited by load density rather than pressure. With like for like apparent pressures with 4350 it gives a 100-150fps gain in my limited experience. This is borne out by Daniel's pressure tests.

It seems to me that with the 150 grain bullet you need a powder of a slower burn rate, i.e. the RL22 you are using, and if you can get enough into the case to give you 3000fps with decent case life, I'm not sure RL17 would give you much benefit.

By all means try it but I suspect its utility will be with the lighter bullets if any in this calibre.

Please do keep us updated and keep well yourself my friend.

Best

Amir

Thank you, Amir - I just got back from seeing my father this afternoon, and he continues to make a tremendous recovery; I am astonished at his improvement. I am reminded of the passage "in all things God works for good."

So, with a bit of a sigh of relief, I have dug out the specs from the A-frame load:

WW cases (capacity unknown)
Fed 210 Gold Medal Match primers
OAL 3.360"
RL22 59.5 gr.
150 gr. A-Frame
22" featherweight barrel
3045 fps @ 15' from muzzle
p.s. While I do have slightly cratered (and flat) primers, I have never had anything but a smooth, easy bolt lift & only mild extractor marks on some of the brass

If I'm in the neighborhood of 62Kpsi, I'm very comfortable with that, and would keep that as my "larger big-game" load.

So, the RL17 would be for the 130 gr., and maybe the 140 gr. Accubonds. The 140 gr. has a b.c. of .493, whereas the 130 gr. is about .435. In theory, I might be better off at 300 to 400 yards with the higher b.c., even if muzzle velocity is a bit slower. We'll see!

Thanks again, and I'll keep you informed. God bless,

Chris

I am having trouble opening these loads. I click on them and they say the website cannot be found. Can you enlighten me?

It seems to work for me Rob.

Is anyone else having problems?

I tried it again with several different bullet weights can't be found. I tried the Athina link no problem opened right up.I am interested in the 200/220gr load with RL17

quote:

Originally posted by Rob1SG:
I tried it again with several different bullet weights can't be found. I tried the Athina link no problem opened right up.I am interested in the 200/220gr load with RL17

Hmmm...

The link is http://gh.hostoi.com/Nosler200R17.pdf in it's raw form or http://gh.hostoi.com/Nosler200R17.pdf .

Try copying and pasting into your browser address bar.

Failing that pm your email address and I'll send you a pdf.

Make sure you can open pdfs and right click and select "save as" if your browser doesn't support them.

I would appreciate if others would try them and post if they have trouble.

There is no 220 grain RL17 data I think, I suspect RL22 or MRP would be just perfect.

Tried the copy/paste on my browser and google both said not found. Rob

They don't work for me either, tried the 180 hodgen links, all not availble.
Don

Gentlemen,

I've tried from a variety of computers and it seems to work for me.

Perhaps it's an ISP thing that only affects Americans?

I know that OK and MI are nowhere near each other so it's leaving me baffled.

I'll see if I can host them up on an American server as well and we'll see if that helps.

I'm assuming even "right-click" followed by "save as" doesn't download them for you, if it does but you cannot open them normally you need the adobe plug-in for your browser.

all the links work for me, fellas!

sorry I can't help!

friar

I cannot get to the url sites as well and selecting "Save target as" errors out with a similar "cannot contact server" error

Any new thoughts?

thanks
338 winmag

OK,


Anyone who has trouble viewing the data can do this:


Open up a new window in Google Docs:

https://docs.google.com/viewer?pli=1


Then choose a load that you want to get the data for.

My favorite 30-06 load at the moment is 180 grain in front of H4831, so I choose this PDF file:

180 grain Nosler Partition - H4831

Now, you highlight it, then right click, then choose "Copy Link Location":

http://gh.hostoi.com/30_06Spri...niel7_Julyt_2006.pdf

Now you go to google docs and paste that in the top window on the page, and click the "Generate Link" button, which creates a link to another page:

https://docs.google.com/viewer...niel7_Julyt_2006.pdf

Now you can go there and the page is all laid out for you.


Still have problems? Post it up and let me know. I've just gotten back from a road trip so I'll be available to help figure it out now.

Mark, I am not sure what has happened but as of today I can now click on a link in the original post and now it opens the doc?

Not sure why today, but I am good to go.

Thanks for your super attention to our requests.
Steve

The PDFs work fine for me but some of the data makes me wonder if I've been left badly behind in the reloading world.

When I was a boy we were told to keep pressures down to 50,000 or max 55,000psi - the SAAMI reference load makes good sense to me. For IMR 4350 my old book started 180gr bullets at 52 grains and had 56 as max, though Speer went to 57, according to my notes. However, the loads in your excellent tables start at 55gr and finish with 58gr, nudging 64,000psi, almost a proof load in British terms, IIRC.

So what's it all about? Am I still thinking in old CUP figures or do reloaders push their luck more these days?

Psi and CUP are two diffrent forms of pressure measuring, cannot be interchanged in no way shape or form

Any updates on R17 loads?

I've been using in 338WM (185-225 grain bullets), 416Rigby (350 grain bullets), and 270Win (110-130 grain bullets). All seem to equal published loads without pressure problems.

How about data on temperature fluctuations and different batches of powder?

Thanks to all.

M98, what were the barrel lengths used in those 30-06 pressure tests? Sorry if I am missing it but I can't see the lengths listed.

I assume 24 inches but don't want to assume wrong.

By the way great work on getting the data.

24 INCHES

Thanks mate.

It seems to me that RL-17 has about the same burning rate as 4831 or 4350 or somewhere in between, the best thing about RL-17 is it does not take up the space that 4831 or 4350 does and you can get more powder in the case and at the same pressure levels or somewhat less in some cases..It is an awesome powder in the 30-06 and the 9.3x62 in my fairly extensive testing, mostly using Daniels data as a guide.

RAY
i get 2900 with the 180 nosler with R17 as you know....hoever i dont use the 180 nosler in the 06 any more...i have totally changed over to the 200 gn nosler partition...i think the 200 gn surpasses the 180 gn nosler in my estimation , and experience...

Does anyone know how this powder (RL-17) would preform in the 8x57 Mauser? I have a Yugo Mauser

Wes62: Yes, I first tried in my .375H&H with Swift A-frame bullets and later in friends 8x57JS, with Norma Oryx and Sellier-Bellot 196gr bullets. Both with federal magnum primers.

Works great.

416 Tanzan:

I have used 3 batches of RL-17. Two last are identical, not measurable difference. The oldest one was a very little faster. About temperature sensitivity, I don't know.

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
It seems to me that RL-17 has about the same burning rate as 4831 or 4350 or somewhere in between, the best thing about RL-17 is it does not take up the space that 4831 or 4350 does and you can get more powder in the case and at the same pressure levels or somewhat less in some cases..It is an awesome powder in the 30-06 and the 9.3x62 in my fairly extensive testing, mostly using Daniels data as a guide.

Hello Ray:


Have you ever tried it in the 9.3x74R, also how would you think it might fair in the 30R blaser?



Best regards.


Malek
Good Hunting/Shooting and God's best.