Reloader 26/Short Barrels

[Monteria]

Well, I shoot 180 ELDMs from an 18" 7 PRC at 2815fps with RL26.

I ran the following powders to max in my rifle and RL26 was the fastest by 100fps.

4831sc
7828
H1000
Magpro
LRT
RL26

It's not that RL26 needs more barrel. You need to push to max in your rifle, not book max, actual max, to know any powders true potential in that barrel. You proved that yourself when you found heavy bolt lift in your long barrel that you don't see in the short one.

 

[Calvin45]

Until today, I never put any stock into there being better powders for short barrels. I believed that if a listed powder was the fastest when tested in a 24 inch barrel, it would still be the quickest in a shorter tube compared to other powders.

This is not true.

I have been struggling to get velocity out of a 20 inch 300 WSM I just built. Rather than ramble, I'll give you the velocity numbers.

69 grains of reloader 26, 190 Speer Impact, is getting me 2,820 fps.

The load manual says 3,004 fps with a 24 inch barrel. I knew I would lose some velocity but not 184 fps!

So after 60 rounds of this, I finally just try a faster powder. 66.5 grains of Staball 6.5 got me 2,910 fps and less case expansion measured by a micrometer.

Hodgdons load manual says that 66.3 grains of Staball 6.5 should get me to 2,960 fps. in a 24 inch barrel with 61k psi.

So I pushed it a little past max due to a little bit of head room on the pressure and the cases are doing fine. The velocity loss from a 24 to a 20 inch tube isn't even worth mentioning.

Unless anyone with some experience here can give me a better explanation, I'm going with the faster burn rate was what made the difference.

Thanks a bunch for sharing. I know there's been no shortage of tests showing that as you cut down a barrel the powders that were fastest mv in a longer barrel continue to be the fastest as length went down.

But I've never seen rl26 data. I'd be curious about superformance and rl17 too. And to be honest the StaBall 6.5 is unconventional as well

All four of these powders have one thing in common: PROGRESSIVE BURN RATE!

It's not just that they're double base, it's that their burn rate changes, increases, over time compared to normal powders. This results in less spiky more flattened out pressure curve, less abrupt at the beginning, but maintaining higher pressure further down. It really does make sense to me that progressive burn rates would therefore suffer disproportionate velocity loss compared to static burn rates

Interesting.

 

[AZ82New]

Thanks a bunch for sharing. I know there's been no shortage of tests showing that as you cut down a barrel the powders that were fastest mv in a longer barrel continue to be the fastest as length went down.

But I've never seen rl26 data. I'd be curious about superformance and rl17 too. And to be honest the StaBall 6.5 is unconventional as well

All four of these powders have one thing in common: PROGRESSIVE BURN RATE!

It's not just that they're double base, it's that their burn rate changes, increases, over time compared to normal powders. This results in less spiky more flattened out pressure curve, less abrupt at the beginning, but maintaining higher pressure further down. It really does make sense to me that progressive burn rates would therefore suffer disproportionate velocity loss compared to static burn rates

Interesting.

If I tried N560, which is slower than the 4350 class of powders that SB 6.5 is in, I should also see a wider discrepancy than H4350 or SB 6.5 IF it's due to burn rate.

If it has to do with progressive burn rate (a concept I am not familiar with), it would reveal that too.

If I can find the time, I'll try it. SB 6.5 is doing pretty good for me so I'm probably just going to land there.

 

[AZ82New]

Well, I shoot 180 ELDMs from an 18" 7 PRC at 2815fps with RL26.

I ran the following powders to max in my rifle and RL26 was the fastest by 100fps.

4831sc
7828
H1000
Magpro
LRT
RL26

It's not that RL26 needs more barrel. You need to push to max in your rifle, not book max, actual max, to know any powders true potential in that barrel. You proved that yourself when you found heavy bolt lift in your long barrel that you don't see in the short one.

Maybe, but I was also measuring a fair amount of case head expansion in the 20 inch barrel. I could tell I was pushing near the top already.

 

[Calvin45]

If I tried N560, which is slower than the 4350 class of powders that SB 6.5 is in, I should also see a wider discrepancy than H4350 or SB 6.5 IF it's due to burn rate.

If it has to do with progressive burn rate (a concept I am not familiar with), it would reveal that too.

If I can find the time, I'll try it. SB 6.5 is doing pretty good for me so I'm probably just going to land there.

For sure, if it ain't broke don't fix it!

 

[highfinblue]

If I tried N560, which is slower than the 4350 class of powders that SB 6.5 is in, I should also see a wider discrepancy than H4350 or SB 6.5 IF it's due to burn rate.

If it has to do with progressive burn rate (a concept I am not familiar with), it would reveal that too.

If I can find the time, I'll try it. SB 6.5 is doing pretty good for me so I'm probably just going to land there.

I'm running SB 6.5 in two rifles, only tried it in two rifles, 6.5 CM, 22-250, and both are capable of the best groups I've ever shot with great velocity. I may have already shared this and if I have I apologize, but I'm interested in trying it in other cartridges. Maybe place for another thread, but what cartridges have people tried it in with success?

 

[AZ82New]

I'm running SB 6.5 in two rifles, only tried it in two rifles, 6.5 CM, 22-250, and both are capable of the best groups I've ever shot with great velocity. I may have already shared this and if I have I apologize, but I'm interested in trying it in other cartridges. Maybe place for another thread, but what cartridges have people tried it in with success?

280 AI
6.5 Creedmoor
300 WSM

If you see load data with H4350, Hunter, H100v, reloader 16, 17 or N550…….its going to work in that cartridge.

I got great velocity and accuracy out of the 280 ai but the SD was atrocious. There was a lot of empty space in that case.

For me it has worked best when the case is very full. So the 280 ai, h100v or Hunter were comparable in velocity but with much better extreme spreads du to the loads being slightly compressed.

 

[Hard Head]

280 AI
6.5 Creedmoor
300 WSM

If you see load data with H4350, Hunter, H100v, reloader 16, 17 or N550…….its going to work in that cartridge.

I got great velocity and accuracy out of the 280 ai but the SD was atrocious. There was a lot of empty space in that case.

For me it has worked best when the case is very full. So the 280 ai, h100v or Hunter were comparable in velocity but with much better extreme spreads du to the loads being slightly compressed.

Has anyone got any new News about R26,I have used Staball HD in my 7mmprc with mixed results,have a 1/2 # of 26 I am going to try this Friday to see what happens. Also have read that N565 and 568 are very good in it and that 570 is hard on barrels,any input,using a HMR wilderness 24" and a area 419 Sidewinder with it, got 2890 with the Staball HD with 3 shot group yo could cover with a dime but not impressed with a 12 fps SD ,using Peterson brass 180 eld match and 215 mag. primers 2 depths shot 3.305" and 3.335", 3.335 is .007 off the lands, Pete

 

[MagnumManiac]

BURN RATES ARE NOT CONSTANT.
This all that needs to be understood here, nothing more.

 

[highfinblue]

280 AI
6.5 Creedmoor
300 WSM

If you see load data with H4350, Hunter, H100v, reloader 16, 17 or N550…….its going to work in that cartridge.

I got great velocity and accuracy out of the 280 ai but the SD was atrocious. There was a lot of empty space in that case.

For me it has worked best when the case is very full. So the 280 ai, h100v or Hunter were comparable in velocity but with much better extreme spreads du to the loads being slightly compressed.

I really try to shoot full cases in about everything, as it has proven to be some of my most effective loads over a variety of powders in so many different cartridges. The one exception I have is in a Remington 700 with a heavy 26" barrel chambered in .243 Win and 38 grains of IMR 4064 behind 85 grain Sierra GK's. I have tried so many bullet and powder combos I finally gave up and stuck with that load as it is by far the most accurate. It is the only accurate load I have worked up, but it is very accurate.

 

[Mike Matteson]

BURN RATES ARE NOT CONSTANT.
This all that needs to be understood here, nothing more.

I am kind of lost on "Burn Rates Are Not Constant". That would have to be with Primers, seating of primers depth, Case volume, and concentricity with the cases. a few others. Other than that or temp change would be or could be a problem. Enlighten me I seem to be miss something here.
I generally shoot only one type of bullet out of a rifle. Onces I have determind what I am going to use. That would include case, primer, powder, bullets, grouping, and consistences. The other is I generally use H powder to be consistantly in a wll confind temp change in velocity being I hunt in weather that varies 130 degrees in temp change.

 

[Hard Head]

went out today with my 7mmprc staball hd with 180 Hornady's in 2 different loads and overall length average 2928 and 2915 same powder charge just different seating lengths with a sd of 4.56, the R26 averaged 2960 with a sd of 48.8 and a group at the smallest was loading was 1.5 " and Staball HD was .285 and .310, I will be using Staball as it is available and around 20 bucks a pound cheaper than R26 if you can find it and if the new owners make it available, Pete

 

[MagnumManiac]

I am kind of lost on "Burn Rates Are Not Constant". That would have to be with Primers, seating of primers depth, Case volume, and concentricity with the cases. a few others. Other than that or temp change would be or could be a problem. Enlighten me I seem to be miss something here.
I generally shoot only one type of bullet out of a rifle. Onces I have determind what I am going to use. That would include case, primer, powder, bullets, grouping, and consistences. The other is I generally use H powder to be consistantly in a wll confind temp change in velocity being I hunt in weather that varies 130 degrees in temp change.

It has nothing to do with individual cases and #lots of powder.
What it means is the powder burn rate is not CONSTANT across cartridges or even bore sizes.
Burn rate charts are a joke and not accurate in any way, they are a very rough guide as to what MAY be similar.
Anyway, this is well documented in many reloading manuals and powder sources.
For example, in straight wall cartridges, or those with minimal shoulder, such as H&H or 375 Weatherby, slow powders do not behave as they should, so a faster powder then behaves like a slow powder giving correct performance because the burn rate has changed due to the case shape. Example, H4350 replaces H4831 and gives far higher velocities in almost straight walled cases.

Cheers.

 

[Mike Matteson]

I could find tons of hornady over the last few years but Nosler?? Nope. Don't get it as to why we can find one brand but not the other. I have however been finding seconds of Nosler (accubond that is) to put back in my small stash. I cleaned out the lgs from the hornady interbonds and they haven't seem to get any more back on the shelves. The lgs had shelves full of hornady as well as other lgs and sportsman's warehouse. But no Nosler.

I just came across some Nosler 2nd the other day. They had what I was looking for. So I got 4 boxes for stock.
What I have read about 2nd is seem that it does make much different in groupling. I have to see. Anyway they are for a rainy day.
I don't quite know how we got to bullet over reloading powder burning in shorter barrels.
My thinking is if using a shorter barrel, them Mag Primer might apply. I normaly use 26" barrel lengths, but now have some in the 28" to 30" lengths. I don't have any rifle the use more than about 75grs of powder. So I stay with LRP no MLRP's.
Shorter barrels I would have to try MLRP to see if that didn't speed things up. I have used them, but I didn't gain any more velocity, and grouping got bigger. At the same time the Larger rifles with larger powder requirements, I would say would need MLRP's.