Need some help here with .470 reloading
I am in south america and cannot bring powder and primers into the country easily (that is a major understatement)

What I have in hand is Remington 91/2M primers and a single base CBC (magtech) powder. This is their slowest burning powder and is called CBC 124.

Well today I tried a few loads with 500 grains woodleights throug my cronograph:

90 grains +12 grains filler = 1747 fps

95 grains +10 grains filler = 1801 fps

Federal factory = 1049 fps


Question 1: is this remington primer much worse than the 215?? So that I will never get good results??

Question 2: was 40 fps to little for a 5 grain increase in powder? Is this powder no good?

Question 3: as I increase the charge, how much can I compress the powder?

ooops I ment 2049fps for the federal factory load

i don't think the primer will make much difference. it sounds like your powder is very slow (don't have any idea what it compares to) our H4831 is usually a 108 grain load. my guess is to keep upping the load and checking the regulation.

quote:

Originally posted by Ddouble:
Question 2: was 40 fps to little for a 5 grain increase in powder? Is this powder no good?

You had a 6% change in powder energy and a 6% change in bullet energy (the velocity change per you 2 stated velocities was 54 fps. not 40). Just what you would suspect. roger

quote:

Originally posted by bartsche:

quote:

Originally posted by Ddouble:
Question 2: was 40 fps to little for a 5 grain increase in powder? Is this powder no good?

You had a 6% change in powder energy and a 6% change in bullet energy (the velocity change per you 2 stated velocities was 54 fps. not 40). Just what you would suspect. roger

Those Remington primers are OK. You just need to increase the powder charge until you get the MV up to specifications. You don't have too much further to go, it seems to me.

many thanks to all.

I will keep going up with the chrono and looking for pressure signs.

Anybody thought the 2050 fps was slow for the Federal? Could it be my chrono? or that is just the normal overestimation of charted ballistics?