Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Reloading
RL26 and the 270WCF...Wow
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Bowfishn" data-source="post: 2148507" data-attributes="member: 56875"><p>I am not a Propellant Engineer so I could not explain that to you. It would appear that if you look at all the numbers listed in QL for different powders that Ba is not the only difference between those powders. For instance in my 26" 6,5 CM using a 143eldx 48 gr of RL26 will burn 100% where as IMR7828 even with a higher Ba using 46 gr will only burn 97.87% of the powder. There appears to be much more involved than just Ba between powders. </p><p>I do know that I have put a lot of RL26 (with 8 different brands and weight bullets) down the barrels of 3 different 6.5 CM rifles with different barrel lengths. </p><p>I have used 3 different lot numbers of powder, all 3 lots gave slight velocity changes + or - 50 fps at the 2900 fps range. After adjusting each for velocity change I could predict changes with various bullet weights using QL pretty close to results over my Magneto speed at the range. My lot of powder I am using now that I have about 16 lbs of has an adjusted Ba of .3450</p><p>As far as the other powders you mentioned my only experience with them is running the numbers on QL, I cannot relate to actual use but the others using the 7828 ssc seem to be inline with QL numbers.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Bowfishn, post: 2148507, member: 56875"] I am not a Propellant Engineer so I could not explain that to you. It would appear that if you look at all the numbers listed in QL for different powders that Ba is not the only difference between those powders. For instance in my 26" 6,5 CM using a 143eldx 48 gr of RL26 will burn 100% where as IMR7828 even with a higher Ba using 46 gr will only burn 97.87% of the powder. There appears to be much more involved than just Ba between powders. I do know that I have put a lot of RL26 (with 8 different brands and weight bullets) down the barrels of 3 different 6.5 CM rifles with different barrel lengths. I have used 3 different lot numbers of powder, all 3 lots gave slight velocity changes + or - 50 fps at the 2900 fps range. After adjusting each for velocity change I could predict changes with various bullet weights using QL pretty close to results over my Magneto speed at the range. My lot of powder I am using now that I have about 16 lbs of has an adjusted Ba of .3450 As far as the other powders you mentioned my only experience with them is running the numbers on QL, I cannot relate to actual use but the others using the 7828 ssc seem to be inline with QL numbers. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Reloading
RL26 and the 270WCF...Wow
Top