Does anyone know what powder Norma use for their 470 Loads?

203B 87grns behind the solid and 89grns behind the soft.

Thank you sir.
A mate just bought a Chapuis with a few boxes of ammo and was keen to see if my hand loads would be similar.

For these loads is it neccesary with a filler? And will velocity normaly be around 2150fps (same as norma african ph is listed at)?

I think the need for filler may relate to the primer. The Federal factory loads apparently use a similar powder, about the same charge, and no filler. They use federal 216 primers, hotter than the 215 magnum rifle primer and not available to the public.
With IMR 4831 no filler is needed due to the larger, case filling charge.

quote:

Originally posted by Marty:
I think the need for filler may relate to the primer.

Not necessarily. A standard load in Aus for the 470 is 100grns of AR2209 BUT with 94grns if filler is used.
AND what a difference in felt recoil between the two.

Just got advice from a guy who shoots a lot of 470 and 500 here. He says no need for filler as long as I am using federal 215m primers. He has good experience With Vithavoury N150 91 grains (no filler) behind 500 grain woodliegh. Similar to the reloader 15 load I would guess?

Anyone here drop the filler with R15 loads?

I would think that filling the case 85-90% would make the filler redundant.... No opinions?

Norsk

It does.


IMHO, if a powder is available that fills
the case, use it over one that doesn't fill the case and needs a filler.

Just my HO.


OzHunter
Are you saying the felt recoil was that different ?

And which was harder ?
(Never done a comparison !)

The load with less powder and Kynoch filler has way less recoil.

But is the filler neccesary.. I mean around 109 grains fills up the case volume behind the bullet, a load of 89 grains RL 15 fills up 88% of the case volume or around there... With a federal 15M primer I have a hard time believing ignition will be a problem. And that there is a little (10% air volume behind the bullet shouldn't matter much...

A guy here has been shooting a similar load With no filler for years, never had a problem... I am just wary of fillers (one more variable to Control)...

Norsk


No, filler not needed.


Like you, I don't like fillers and as said before will go to a bulkier powder than use filler.

.

quote:

Originally posted by Ganyana:
203B 87grns behind the solid and 89grns behind the soft.

It's interesting that you can be so certain. In the old days the loaders would never tell you and were rumoured to use stuff the public never saw in canisters.

Above load is rubbish, it does not ignite every time properly. accuracy is very low. That load need a filler but I do not know which and how much of it.

The Norma load using MRP 105.8gr is good and it works properly, the factory ammo has 109.5gr of that powder loaded.

H4350 101 to 103gr is also a good load.
R904 105gr is also good load
Nitrochemi WLP250 109.6gr is ok here even a bit more is better

N560 109.5gr is ok (fire ball)
R904 109gr is ok but not great

quote:

Originally posted by sambarman338:

quote:

Originally posted by Ganyana:
203B 87grns behind the solid and 89grns behind the soft.

It's interesting that you can be so certain. In the old days the loaders would never tell you and were rumoured to use stuff the public never saw in canisters.

He does work for Norma. So he may have an "inside track" on the data.

...nevertheless it is 21st century and many data are openly available on the net:

http://www.norma.cc/en/Ammunit...a/470-Nitro-Express/

Just godt a reply from norma. They say factory ph is loaded with a special powder that has a burn rate between 203b and MRP. Anyones guess where in between that is though... Seems opinions vary as to if shooting 90 grain loads without filler is bad.... By the way norma does not list a filler in their 203b load at 88. grains. They would list the filler if they meant it should be used?

at Norsk

The Load from the HP of Norma using the 203B is not working well as said above, I had a few delayed rounds with that powder. And the accuracy was very very bad, the delayed round was 15cm low at 100m.

The load in the PH is for sure MRP and not faster (I have opend a PH cartridge there was 7.093g inside and it looks like MRP and it also shoots like MRP). They not load the 204 in the rounds for sure. 204 is also working fine by the way (tested the load from DEVA book). I tested all three powders and MRP and 204 are very close up. The 203B is useless. The 203B works not that bad when there are Hornady´s on top indead of Woodleigh´s but really good are non of of them.

Great info buno...
7.093 gram = 109.46 grain
Probably something like MRP then... but

My reloading manual shows 112 grain MRP to get 2113fps with Swift A-Frame and 114 grain MRP for 2065fps with Trophy bonded sledgehammer...No data on Woodleigh though. Tested in Merkel 140-2

So for Norma to get 2150 fps with 109.5 grains, the powder must be faster than MRP, or they are giving false fps on their factory ammo (maybe using longer barrel or something)?

I do not have data on N204. What charge 204 would get 2150 fps?

Norma indicates only 105.8gr MRP (2077fps)
the 109gr probably get the 2100 as indicated on the ammo boxes that yould come really close.

204 is 106gr 2110fps

expected fps seems to be varying a lot depending on source...

Guess I will start with 110 grain MRP and chrono it (or 114 grain N560)

The DEVA data is very close, the infos from the cartridge companies are made usually using a very long barrel which is on minimum measurments inside.

N560 gives a fireball the powder is too slow and also ignites not as good as the singbase ones. N160 is better 113 SP (682m/s) or 110 FMJ (675m/s)

Norma used their N204 powder to load 404 Jeffery ammunition for Parker Hale (some of which I still have). With their own 400gr Solid their load was 87.0 N204 for 2245fps.

Later loading data published by Norma for the same Norma manufactured 400gr bullet was 79.5grs N203-B for 2398fps or 85.6grs N204 for 2339fps.

It does seem a little strange that the 85.6gr load of N204 gave a higher velocity than the earlier heavier load of 87.0grs of same powder. Maybe just different test barrels.

I know the above data is for the 404 cartridge but maybe able to cross reference to the 470.