Chic, your synicism know's no limit

Matt, as usual a great description.

Allen, I shot both extensively and picked the better of the two. Actually both shot very well. I got them at local Pawn shop's for under $400 each! The "keeper", as I've mentioned to you, is fabulous for a stock rifle with nearly any flatbase bullet grouping an inch or better... sometimes much better! The two are under 100 serial no's apart and are amongst the best machined stainless M70's I've seen. The other is going to PacNor next week to become a 257 Roberts to match the 06 (22" fwt bbl). Both are going in Borden Rimrock stocks and will wear 2x7 Leupold's.

Did you use your D'Arcy 338 much this year? I've been having fun with mine and have been re-visisting RL22 with great results... I'd forgotten how good that powder is in the 338WM!

All the best,

BA

Matt, I remember arguing with USRAC execs several years ago about the junk plastic magazine follower they were trying to standardize on the Model 70. In every case, their counterpoint was that the stainless steel follower was "unnecessary" and that the new plastic one was an "improvement". Evidently, enough people griped besides me, because after a while, thankfully, that new, "improved" follower disappeared, and the stainless version was resurrected. In the gun business, so it seems, compromises and shortcuts are always passed off as "improvments", and desirable features cashiered as "unnecessary". I don't care for such shenanigans, so I still insist on the original firing pin stop screw, just in case the "firing pin retainer rings both broke, or the cocking piece broke off at the firing pin." You named two good reasons to prefer the old system....

Brad, I just hunted with the .300 Winchester this year. That rifle is also going to Mexico in January for coues deer and desert mule deer.

The Echols .338 is going to Tanzania next September for 28 days of hunting (mostly in the Selous), along with a .416 Remington. My now-standard load for this .338 Winchester is the 250 gr. Nosler Partition in Winchester cases with IMR 4350 powder and Federal 215 primers @2705 fps., zeroed for 200 yds. Accuracy is astounding, and would serve for varmint hunting purposes. A super rifle in all respects that simply can't be improved upon, at least for my use. It shoots the 210 gr. and 225 gr. Partitions just about as well as it does the 250s. I've never owned a better .338 since I bought my first one some twenty-three years ago.

The scope is a Leupold Vari-X III 2.5-8X, and I had Premier Reticles add a single 400 yd. wire, calculated around that 250 gr. Nosler load. This addition doesn't clutter up the sight picture at all - you scarcely notice it - but it's there for the occasional extended-range shot, should it be needed. It really works, and there's nothing to mess up! I had a backup 2.5-8X tricked out the same way.

AD

[ 12-04-2003, 07:56: Message edited by: allen day ]

Brad and Allen, I have a couple of questions to ask that is a little off topic but comes to mind as you talked about loads and powder.

My question is about consistency from lot to lot with certain powders as well as their temperature sensitivity. I have used the IMR's Hodgdon's and RL powders with great results in various rifle and caliber combinations over the years. As of late I have began to wonder about what happens to groups and velocities when you break open that new can of powder.

I also hunt in some fairly extreme temperatures. Nothing too hot or too cold but quite a distribution none the less. I never worried about it much but have started to wonder what these temperatures do to POI due to internet and gun mag ramblings yada yada. Specifically, Hodgdon is supposed to be consistent and temp insensative, IMR is not so temp insensitive but consistent from lot to lot and RL are temp insensitive but can be very inconsistent.

These wonderings would usually send me to the range but over the spring and summer I have sold every big game rifle that I own to finance a couple of custom model 70's (7mm and 338 in the old belted variety).

I guess back to the question. How do you keep your ammunition consistent? I've spent alot of time and money to achieve that with my rifles. Now how do I do it with my ammunition, specifically with regards to the powder? No one I hunt with seems to worry about it. Should I?

Chuck

Chuck, I concern myself about which powder is going to perform well from a standpoint of accuracy, velocity, load density, and consistent chronograph readings ahead of all other considerations. So with any new rifle, I take all the time I need (months, if necessary) to experiment with powders, primers, etc., before I settle upon a load, and I usually stick with that one load in a given rifle for the life of its barrel. During this test period, I try to shoot under a variety of temperatures - from freezing to over ninety degrees F - paying attention to all pressure indicators, chronograph readings, as well as targets - before the load is actually adopted.

Once a powder is selected, I buy it in quantity, enough to last for several years, and preferrably of the same lot number that I experimented with.

Here's sort of a case study: D'Arcy developed a load around the 250 gr. Partition with Reloader 19 that was a tackdriver in that previously mentioned .338 Winchester, and very consistent. I started working with IMR 4350 because I had nearly fifteen pounds of it (same lot number) and I decided that I wanted a load that didn't fill the case quite so much. The IMR 4350 load I settled upon required 5 grains less powder to come within 30 fps. of the Reloader 19 load, and with slightly better accuracy still. Recoil was noticably less, and pressure indicators and chronograph readings uniform at all temperature levels. The powder charge I use is not maximum by at least two grains, but it produces the velocity, consistency, and accuracy I want, plus it's easy on the brass and it's easy on me. Powder compression is not an issue, either.

Yes, Hodgdon's 4350 Extreme is coated for greater uniformity at various temperatures, but it doesn't shoot as well in my rifle as IMR 4350 does, disqualifying it from the get-go.

AD

Thanks Allen

Chuck

Gentlemen,

Depending on how much traffic a site is getting, the price can get quite high.

As an example, we are paying around $1,500 a month to run our dedicated server, and about 700 Gig of bandwidth each month.

I understand this is quite cheap, for the amount of bandwidth we are running.

[ 12-04-2003, 20:09: Message edited by: Saeed ]

Allen,

As you probably know the Hodgdon's 4350 Extreme is an Australian powder. With the exception of the 223, 22/250, 243 and 308 I have not found our powders to be as good for accuracy as similar burn rate IMR powders.

If you test a calibre like 300 Win or 375 H&H across lot of bullets and loads quite often the most accurate and fastest load will come from our powders. However, the average accuracy across all of the loads will tend to be better with the IMR powders.

These powders also seem to vary from lot to lot in terms of whether they shoot well with a given load.

Mike

Mike, when you say "these" powders, which are you refering to?

Chuck

Chuck,

The powders Hodgdon sell as H4227, H4198, Benchmark, Varget, H4350, H4831SC, H1000, Retumbo and BMG50 are all Australian made powders. They are sold here with a different numbering system.

I think they have been improved since being sold in the US and this would undoubtedly relate to the market size over there as well as the wide range of other powders you can buy.

Since the question often gets asked the numbers out here are:

H4227 = 2205
H4198 = 2207
Benchmark = Benchmark 2
Varget= 2208
H4350 = 2209
H4831SC = 2213SC
H1000 = 2217
Retumbo = 2225
50BMG =2218

For some reason the powder we have called 2206 is not sold by Hodgdon as 3031.

Mike

I agree with Allen and Mike... I've gone in for the Hogdon "Extreme" stuff but I'm beginning to rethink it. I honestly haven't found it very consistant in terms of accuracy or temperature insensitivity. IMR powders have never behaved like that in my rifles. What got me concerened was I took my 338 WM out to our ranch the other day to shoot... it was right at 5F. Plenty cold but dead calm. I had 210 Partition's loaded with my usual H4350 charge and also had the 210's loaded with RL22 as I'd not used it for several years. Well, surprise! The H4350 charge lost something in the neighborhood of 80 fps and didn't shoot worth a darn. The RL22 was faster by about 30fps and punched nice groups. So, I've been playing with RL22 and have found it very consistant in terms of accuracy and velocity even in very cold weather. As with the H4350, RL22 loses velocity too, but the groups don't open up as with H4350 and it isn't marketed as being "temp stable"... what a crock. My whole experience has got me thinking of pulling IMR4350 off the shelf and giving it a whirl... it's always performed well in past 338 WM's.

Allen's approach is perfectly sound and I have nothing to add to it. As to finding "THE" powder, there's such a wealth of info on these boards I think it's easy to find a concencus among the experienced loader's.

BA

Thanks Brad. My methods are actually very similar but the trouble comes with getting alot of the same lot. It can get a little scarce up here sometimes and I worry when I am forced to switch lots that I am going to have to start all over. I hope matching velocities is enough. Time will tell.

Chuck

[ 12-04-2003, 20:36: Message edited by: Chuck Nelson ]

Chuck, you know what I'd do (and I have done it)? I'd buy a bunch of the same powder with no concern's for lot no's and mix it all up together very carefulluy in a large, sealable container and forget about it! I know this sounds like "Heathen Handloading Heresy" but it works... make you own "Lot"!

Good idea.

Chuck