I have been playing around with 165 grain bullets and RL-22. My Rifle (a model 70 classic)Has never really liked 165s. But the RL 22 is showing promise. My groups using several bullets are all under 1.5 inches and most are under 1.25. It shoots 180s better than that and 150s too!. I traded for some 150gr nosler Partitions and thought i would try them in my 06 with RL-22. I could not find data for 150 grainers in my book for the powder, so I went to Aliants web site. It is very interesting. In the right hand collom of the data chart it gives the preasure for each load.
The hottest load for a 150 grain was with RL-15. It gives 3005 with 58500 PSI, while the RL-22 gives only 2815 but preasure is only 46000 psi. 12500lbs less. So as you already likly are aware, it is a slow powder for the round. The load on the site was 63 grains, my guess is that was all they could fit in the case as the preasure was so low. I could get 64 in mine
and loaded 5 rounds to see how it does. This info leads ne to bellive that RL-22 would posibly do real well in a 30,06-AI. I would be interested in hearing from any one who has tried RL-22 in the 06 and as a matter of fact RL-15 too !thanks...tj3006

I've had good success with heavy bullets and RL22 in the .30-06.....I also have had good success using H414 and 180 grain bullets in the .30-06

However some have warned about batch to batch variation in RL22 and one should keep that in mind.....I haven't shot so much that I can support that statement but like RL22 in the .30-06 with heavy (180 to 200 Grain) bullets.

Thomas, here is my experience with Aliant powders in a 30-06 AI with a 26" barrel and a variety of 165 gr. bullets. Maybe you can try some of these loads. They go to MAX, and I'd recommend starting 3 grs. below and working up to them, watching closely for pressure signs. If you have a 24" barrreled gun, I wouldn't exceed 3140 fps; or, if a 26" barreled gun, I wouldn't exceed 3200 fps.

R19… 60.5 165 SierraMatBT 2871
R19… 61.5 165 SierraMatBT 2912
R19… 62.5 165 SierraMatBT 2978
R19… 63.5 165 SierraMatBT 3014
R19… 64.0 168 SierraMatBT 3074
R19… 65.0 168 SierraMatBT 3101 [13/16" 3-shot]
R19… 65.0 165 SWIFT 3188
R19… 65.0 165 NBT 3162/3195
R19… 65.5 165 NBT 3212
R19… 66.0 168 SierraMatBT 3176 [0.75" 3-shot]
R19… 66.0 165 NBT 3247 over MAX! Rem Brass
R19… 66.0 165 NBT 3144/3145/3111
R19… 66.0 165 NBT 3170/3147/3136
R19… 66.0 165 NBT 3162/3160 Lapua - BEST LOAD
R19… 66.0 165 NFB 3236 over MAX
R19… 66.0 165 Horn BT 3263 over Max
R19… 66.0 165 Sier BT 3219 Too Hot
R19… 66.0 165 LRB 3217/3182/3173/3194
R19… 66.0 165 Swift 3245 over Max
R19… 66.0 168 CT 3160

R22… 63.0 165 2950
R22… 64.0 165 3032
R22… 66.0 168 SieMatch BT 3096
R22… 67.0 168 Sierra 3140
R22… 66.0 165 NBT 3168
R22… 67.0 165 NBT 3235 BEST LOAD
R22… 68.0 165 NBT 3276 Too Hot
R22… 69.0 165 NBT 3317 Too Hot

R25… 66 168 NCT 2888/2953 [2956]
R25… 67 168 NCT 3012/2992 [3010/2994]
R25… 68 168 NCT 3029/3000 [3014/3028]
R25…70 168 NCT 100/3133 [3121/3082]
R25…71 168 NCT 3134/3132 [3128/3140] No pressure signs

R25… 69 165 NBT 3145
R25… 69.5 165 NBT 3158
R25… 70 165 NBT 3176
R25… 70.5 165 NBT 3187
R25… 71 165 NBT 3250/3209 No pressure signs
R25… 71.5 165 NBT 3219/3222 No pressure signs - BEST LOAD

Finally, here's some data from QL for standard 06 and 165 grs SierraBT with 25" barrel. These are tapped/compressed loads. These are loaded to 65,000 PSI - thus, work up to them from 3 grs below, moving up at 0.5 gr increments, while watching carefully for pressure. Also, I wouldn't exceed the velocities posted for these slow-burning powders.

VihtN560/112.4% fill/67.5g/3117 fps
Re-22/115.2% fill/67.1g/3104 fps
MAGPRO/115.3% fill/70.4g/3102 fps
WXR/114.0% fill/67.4g/3102 fps
7828SSC/112.6% fill/66.6g/3082 fps

I like RL22 & 180gr bullets in my son's 06. Try 61gr under a 180gr bullet for about 2730fps in a 22" bbl. This is a 1moa load in his rifle.

It looks as though with the RL-22 veloity is aproaching 300 win stuff, and beating the 300 rsaum. I do not have a AI at the moment and I probably will not convert my model 70. But if I found a good enough deal on an interarms MK 10 or mabye just bought a charles daily action , (I might do a Reminton or ruger but i like Mauser style Extractors. I would probably go 24 inch...tj3006

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:
However some have warned about batch to batch variation in RL22 and one should keep that in mind.....I haven't shot so much that I can support that statement but like RL22 in the .30-06 with heavy (180 to 200 Grain) bullets.

My experience with reloader powders has left no doubt in my mind, that from lot to lot, they do vary significantly. I have witnessed this in 27, 28, and 30 calibre guns. In my opinion H 1000 burns faster than expected too, and showed considerable pressure signs before expected velocities were reached. I like and prefer IMR 7828 and N 165/170 for slow burners.
My next set of experiments will center around the VV-N 500 powders and medium weight bullets.

Guys, if you look at the data I posted above, you'll see that Re19 is only slightly faster than Re22; and, Re22 is only slightly faster than Re25.

Basically, I'm doing my own "Federal High Energy" or "Hornady Light Magnum" loading - that is, stuffing as much slow burning powder as possible in an under-bore cartridge, using tapping/compression techniques. Actually, you can outdo Federal and Hornady, if you're willing to take the case to 65,000 PSI. Why not? - modern brass can take it, and it's common practise now with the so-called "latest-and-greatest" mags, etc. That's how the manufacturers make these "new" cartridges look better than the old.

Why reloaders continue to stay with powders that are DECADES OLD (e.g., 4350 or W760), when newer high-energy and slower burning powders are available is beyond me. The major advance in reloading in the last decade or so is the Federal High Energy/Hornady Light Magnum techniques - I've been doing this since the mid 90s, and it works.

thomas
i have just got my pressure data back and 63 gns of R 22 behind a 180 gn partition in a 24 inch 06 gave a velocity of 2850 at a pressure of 62/63000 psi
daniel

M98, have you tried Re25 yet?

OK try this one on I've got a load for 06 with 47 gr of RL-11 and a 150 gr sierra. And yes I still to have some RL-11

This is what Alliant has to say about Re 19, 22, and 25. The differences as you can see between Re19 and 22 are minimal - something I've observed as well. Indeed, lot-to-lot variations might give rise to considerable overlap in performance.

Re19 is a smokeless heavy rifle powder; Re19 relative quickness - 11.3% (Alliant scale)

Re19 provides superb accuarcy in most medium and heavy rifle loads and is the powder of choice for .30-06 and .338 calibers. Powder of choice for 270, .30-06 and .338. Excellent metering and accurate and consistent in most medium caliber cartridges.


Re22 is a smokeless magnum rifle powder; Re 22 relative quickness - 11.1%.

Re 22 is a top-performing powder for big game loads provides excellent metering, and is the powder of choice for .270, 7mm magnum and .300 Win Mag. Powder of choice for 7mm Mag & .300 Win Mag. Excellent metering. Accurate and consistent


Re25 is a smokeless heavy magnum rifle powder ; Re25 relative quickness – 10.5%

Re25 is relatively new, advanced powder for big game hunting features improved slower burning and delivers the high energy that heavy magnum loads need. Our slowest burning powder. Maximum velocity. Ideal for over bore magnums.

quote:

R25… 71.5 165 NBT 3219/3222 No pressure signs - BEST LOAD

If the above load is for a 30-06 improved it's faster by 100 fps than what my 26" 300 H&H will do and what Nosler #5 says is a safe load for the H&H.

So if I have the cartridge right the loads above are dangerous, absurd and irresponsible.

I have used RL-25 in the 7mmSTW, and it was good. H-1000 is about its equal in my rifle. I don't plan to try it in the 30,06 I can't fit enough RL-22 in the case to push preasure very high or velocity very fas. seems like the 25 would be more of the same. Might try it in my frends 300 win though. ...tj3006

Savage99, before you jump to conclusions, what load are you using with your 300 H&H? 30-06 Light Magnum 165 gr bullet ammo clocks at 3025 fps out of my 3006 AI (Oehler 3 screen spaced at 4 ft) - they are supposed to be at the ~57-58,000 PSI range and probably less in my AI, because the cases are being fire-formed at the same time. Can you explain that?

I am loading 69 grs of IMR 4350 and a 165 gr bullet. Sierra shows 3100 fps for that load and Nosler shows a 70 gr max just over 3100.

Are you asking why someone says that new brass gives less velocity or less pressure? As to less velocity new or FL brass would soak up some energy.

Savage99, no, your claiming my data is absurd and irresponsible. Yet, by using similar techniques as I use, Hornady Light Mag 30-06 165 gr. ammo is getting over 3000 fps with 24" barrels and 3025 fps in my gun, even though the brass is being fire formed into a larger case volume. I believe the velocity in a 26" barreled standard '06, would even be higher - maybe in the 3060 fps range and very close to your 300 H&H velocities. Light Mag ammo is safe, operating below 60,000 PSI.

Your using 4350 - a significantly faster burning powder than Re25 - for which the 300 H&H is over bore. You should try slower burning Re25 behind your 165 grs bullets. I bet you can exceed 3300 fps with your 300 H&H and still be within 65,000 PSI. Please understand, I'm willing to push to 65,000 PSI, which I believe is safe when using modern brass (I like Lapua).

This weekend I'll run QL for the 300 H&H. QL predicts velocities of over 3200 fps for the 06AI when using 165 NBTs with a 26" barrel, slow burning powders, and PSIs limited to 65,000 PSI.

Finally, reloading manuals are uneven in how they load the various calibers - some are hot and some are cold. Check out the published velocities for the standard .308 - some of the Nosler loads are irresponsible with many pushing 70,000 PSI and more. As I recall, they underload the 300 H&H.

Ackley Imp-
Have you tried this with any of the V-V N500 powders? I tried to do what your chart above reflects some years back and concluded that, in the lots I had anyway, there was no difference between RL19 and RL 22. I originally purchased those powders for exactly that reason and was unhappy with their performance, so I tried the experiment with Hogdon's SC4831 and the V-V powders. The results were much improved with V-V powder.
Another attempt to use RL 22 in 270 Wby left me wanting too. Pressure signs appeared way before I thought they should have. IMR 7828 fixed that nasty little problem.
I still use RL powders in 300 & 348 Winchester, but much prefer the V-V powders for other hi-steppin' loads.

Speers #12 shows a maximum average of 54,000 CUP for both the 300 H&H and the 300 WM.

I don't get caught up in discussions that someones small case makes more velocity than my big case. Everything has a cost/risk and I try to be on the safe side.

I drive big cars and shoot big bullets at game. It's just the way I am. To each his own.

The other day I had a case stick in my 270 WSM. I "never" have this happen to me.

The load was a half grain less of the same powder and bullet that I hunted with last fall. This load is just under the suggested maximum as well. The only variable that I can find is that the temperature was 85F on the load that stuck.

It was with MagPro powder.

Be careful.

Engineers build bridges etc with wide safety margins. Pushing a brass case to it's limits just inches from ones eyes seems to be risky. At least thats my opinion.

S99, did you have a loose primer pocket afterwards? Did you blow the primer? Neck-sized only cases will eventually STICK in the chamber - a problem solved by full sizing the case.

You may be surprised to know, that I'm 55 y/o and been reloading since I was a little boy (with my Dad); and, I've never had a stuck case, although I've blown primers without getting stuck cases. I have reams of data like that I posted above on July 21, yet I seem to avoid problems. I watch my primer pockets like a hawk.

I've found that primers blow on first-fired cases at 80,000 PSI and above. Prevously fired cases may blow primers at lesser PSIs. Working around 65,000 PSI with modern brass is safe, and if you work with QL, you'll see that considerable velocities can be achieved with the newer slow burning powders - all at 65,000 PSI and less. This is the Federal High Energy and Hornady Light Magnum approach - they've just leaned to mass produce the ammo using an automated tapped/packed/compressed powder technique.

Why many reloades hang on to these OLD powdes is beyond me, when better powders are now available. I've found that Re19,22,25 are super high-energy, double-based powders that are superior to IMR or H 4350 in performance. Moreover, VVn560 is a great powder, but very much like but no better than Re22. Norma MRP and IMR7838ssc is roughly equivalent to Re22, whereas Retumbo and MRP-2 are very close to Re25 in performance - but not better. We need an even slower powder, and I've been experimenting with H50BMG. I'll post my findings on this forum.

S99, you should try some of these newer slow-burning powders before you condemn what I'm doing. Indeed, I'd be interested in what you find, and I'd love to share our experience. I've encourage M98 to do this as well, and we've had many exchanges by private email.

But, it's important that you experiment with an expectant positive attitude. You might be pleasantly surprised.

Buckshot, your comments regarding Re19 and 22 are interesting - I've found that they are very close in performance as well. Indeed, that's what Alliant says - 11.1% vs. 11.3% in quickness - I bet that's not satistically significantly different given lot-to-lot variations.

I've tried VVn550 and VVn560. Both are potent double-based, high-energy powders with 550 clearly faster than 560. But, I've found 560 to be roughly the same in burn speed as Re19/22 and of no improvement in perfomance. I try all the newer powders hoping to find one even better. I've experimented extensively with Norma MRP and MRP-2, and I go back to Re19/22/25 as giving equivalent, if not superior performance. I'm looking at IMR7828ssc, Retumbo, and H50BMG. I'll post when I know. Preliminary tests show another toss-up with Re19/22/25 - most of my loads are with Re25.

AIU,

When I chase another boat with mine I am very competative but I will back down if it gets dangerous. Thats how I load too.

The case stuck and of course the extractor jumped over it. I could not knock it out with the .22 cleaning rod I carry to the range. Later it came out with the .30 rod. I measured the case and the head diameter was the same as the others which were all well used WW FL brass. The primer was tight in the pocket.

A round before had some extracton difficulties. I pulled the rest of the loads and the weight was correct at 74 grs of MagPro behind a 140 Ballistic tip with 215's in the 270 WSM. Last year I worked up to 74.5 grs but it was cool out.

I buy RL 22 10 lbs at a time and have RL 10, 15 also in fives, Rl 19 and 25.

It's physics and not physcology you know with pressure.

S99, what loads have you tried with Re22 and 25?

I use RL 22 in the 270 WSM, 264WM and 7mm WSM.

Currently I am testing H4831 SC in the 270 WSM with 140's.

The 300 H&H is all set with that load. It's more than powerful enough for anything here. If I need more power I would use the 358 Wins or 375's.

The loads in the 270 WSM and 7mm WSM are right up there. RL 25 is too slow for the 140's out of those cartridges.

I have been loading since 1953 with the same goal and I don't push it. If I want to push it I have 375's. They will hammer anything here.

Savage99, here's the QL analysis I promised. I'm not trying to change your loading practices; I see this exchange as a discussion of internal ballistics, and to point out that maybe, just maybe I'm not being absurd and irresponsible. Analysis also shows that these big mags - as they get bigger - get less efficient. Likewise, the 308 is more efficient than the 30-06.

Please note, that your 300 H&H could reach 3300 fps with Re25 or Retumbo. The 30-06AI also easily reaches 3200 fps with Re25 as well - I get that velocity with 71 grs., which is a tapped/compressed load. Note that IMR4350 is not the top performing powder for either cartridge. Also, note the relatively close correlations between QL data, and my measured data.

Cartridge: .30-06 Ack Imp
Bullet: .308, 165, NOS BalTip
O.A.L.: 3.360 inch
Barrel Length: 26.0 inch
Predicted Data for Indicated Charges of the Following Powders. Matching Maximum Pressure: 65000 psi or a maximum loading ratio or filling of 120 %

MRP 112.9% 71.0g 3241 65000
Re-25 119.9% 72.6g 3230 65000
N560 111.0% 70.5g 3218 65000
MAGPRO 113.9% 73.5g 3204 65000
Re-22 113.7% 70.0g 3202 65000
WXR 112.5% 70.3g 3201 65000
RamMag 114.7% 74.8g 3187 65000
I7828SSC 111.2% 69.6g 3186 65000
RamHun 102.2% 66.3g 3154 65000
Re-19 111.2% 66.9g 3150 65000
W760 99.9% 64.1g 3149 65000
Retumbo 120.0% 73.5g 3146 58811
MRP 2 120.0% 73.1g 3139 58834
I4350 104.3% 62.8g 3138 65000
H4831SC 111.7% 70.2g 3137 65000

Cartridge: .300 H.& H. Mag.
Bullet: .308, 165, NOS BalTip
O.A.L. L6: 3.600 inch
Barrel Length: 26.0 inch
Predicted Data for Indicated Charges of the Following Powders. Matching Maximum Pressure: 65000 psi, or a maximum loading ratio or filling of 120 %

Retumbo 116.8 % 82.9g 3312
MRP 2 116.4% 82.2g 3306
MRP 106.8 % 77.9g 3305
Re-25 113.9 % 80.0g 3302
N560 105.2% 77.5g 3295
RamMag 109.4% 82.7g 3286
MAGPRO 107.9% 80.8g 3281
7828SSC 105.8% 76.8g 3276
Re-22 107.7% 76.9g 3270
WXR 106.5% 77.2g 3268
H870 120.0% 88.4g 3240
H1000 111.6% 81.1g 3239
H4831SC 106.5% 77.7g 3232
Re-19 105.5% 73.7g 3221
RamHun 96.7% 72.8g 3217
W760 94.6% 70.4g 3215
IMR4350 98.8% 69.0 g 3205



C A U T I O N : any load listed can result in a powder charge that falls below minimum suggested loads or exceeds maximum suggested loads as presented in current hand-loading manuals. Understand that all of the listed powders can be unsuitable for the given combination of cartridge, bullet and gun. Actual load order can vary, depending upon lot-to-lot powder and component variations. USE ONLY FOR COMPARISON !

Your loads are too hot. I think that they are dangerous. Good luck to you.

S99, Why are they dangerous or too hot?

Ackley Imp-
I have yet to use V-V N 170, have you tried this powder? As stated in their literature, it is their slowest canister powder available to the public.

I first used 3N37 in a 38/357 and thought it better than Unique. The next powder tried was N-160. It did everything in the 7 Rem mag that 4831/H1000 and others claimed to do, but could not. I am impressed with all of their products thus far.

Thomas and AIU,

My Montana action is at the barrel makers now, getting a 24", no. 3 contour 30-06 AI chambered barrel (it should be back next week).

I already shoot a 35 Whelen AI, and I agree that the magic of the AI version isn't so much an increase in case volume as it is the ability to handle higher pressures safely (which is what Ackley said himself).

I am looking forward to trying the the Barnes TSX bullets (168 grains) as soon as it is done.

This rifle is getting the full treatment: engraving, custom stock, etc....so it will be a year or two until I can hunt with it.

Thanks for the load information...think I will start with RL-19 as I have a few pounds sitting around.

Garrett

quote:

ability to handle higher pressures safely

In my observations this is not true.

Savage99, you have given no cogent reasons why the loads I've listed are too hot. Yet, I've provided for you considerable data justifying what I'm doing and showing that they're safe, yet likely reaching 65,000 PSI. Until you provide some good reasons for your negative claims, I'm FORCED to concluded you're full of...well you know what, and that you just like making unsubstantiated claims. True?

By the way, I don't think the AI line of modifications allows the case to take more pressure "safely." The AI improvements, with a few exceptions, are only mild improvements. Improved performance is based more on the fact that the parent cartridges were under loaded, such as the standard 30-06, which is largely underloaded, because of many poor quality weapons out there that could not take 65,000 PSI safely. The AI guns are usually better/stronger modern bolt-action guns that will take higher PSI safely.

AIU,

Ackley did test rifles to the failure point, and found that the improved versions would run to higher pressures before destruction (compared to the standard case).

He felt 2 phenomena were responsible: reduced bolt thrust and "cling" of the brass to the chamber at peak pressures.

Whether he was right about the reasons, others have tested rifles to failure and reproduced his results.

If I am going to take pressures to the highest "safe" levels in my reloads, I want those loads in a case with minimum taper and a sharp shoulder.

Garrett

N.Garret, how high (i.e., to what PSI) do you take your reloads? AIU

quote:

Savage99, you have given no cogent reasons why the loads I've listed are too hot.

Yes I have. Your loads are hotter than what the 300 H&H will do!

"Yet, I've provided for you considerable data justifying what I'm doing and showing that they're safe, yet likely reaching 65,000 PSI. Until you provide some good reasons for your negative claims, I'm FORCED to concluded you're full of...well you know what, and that you just like making unsubstantiated claims."

You have no proof except that your gun has not blown up yet. As far as I read you have no real pressure measuring instruments. Your loads are far above any handbooks and should not be published.

Who needs this stuff anyway straining things? Just load up a magnum and be safe.

The best load I ever found for the 30.06 is 48.5 gr IMR4895 with anybodys 150gr hunting bullet. It will shoot MOA out of anything you put it in including a Garand or P17. It will kill any deer sized critter you hit well with it. If you want something faster get a 300 Weatherby Mag or one of the other miracle speedsters.

AIU,

I have only a few cartridges that I "push" a bit...the 30-06 AI will be another one.

I don't measure pressure directly, but the calculations are in the 63 to 65 KPSI range.

I realize modern steel takes us far beyond that, but I also like the idea of a margin of safety.

In any case, I would only feel comfortable with 65 KPSI in a minimum taper case with a sharp shoulder.
It's no coincidence that modern (new) cartridges have evolved to that.

Garrett

S99, I'm willing to listen, but not to emotion. Show some real data, and I'll change my mind.

quote:

Originally posted by Ackley Improved User:
S99, I'm willing to listen, but not to emotion. Show some real data, and I'll change my mind.

AIU,

Just be careful ok. It good that some try to increase velocity. As it is I have been stuck with the 30-06 and 4350 since the 1950's

As I see it the weak spot is still the cartridge case and not the steel so watch your brass.