- Joined
- May 2, 2001
- Messages
- 7,520
This powder is made in a new way and allows much higher safe velocities in many cartridges.
6mmBR Article-1
6mmBR Article-2
6mmBR Article-1
6mmBR Article-2
Anyone Tried Alliant's New Higher Velocity RL17 Powder Yet?
- Thread starter Len Backus
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/f19/300-wsm-rl17-ttsx-wow-35230/
Len
I have tried it and it smokes for the WSM! I only had a short period of time to work up loads before leaving on a hunt and it greatly exceeded my expectations to say the least.
That TTSX also flat hammers deer at mid ranges at least also. Only went out to around 460 this last time.
BH
Len
I have tried it and it smokes for the WSM! I only had a short period of time to work up loads before leaving on a hunt and it greatly exceeded my expectations to say the least.
That TTSX also flat hammers deer at mid ranges at least also. Only went out to around 460 this last time.
BH
- Joined
- May 2, 2001
- Messages
- 7,520
BH, thanks. Any sense for its temp stability...how much do velocities vary with ambient temps?
I have not done any weather change testing over a chrono yet, but drops were right out to 400 on from 70 degree testing to zero confirm at 20 degrees.
I have been a little leary of RL powders after I got that super hot lot of RL22 a few years ago, but I was more than pleasantly surprised by RL17 so far.
BH
I have been a little leary of RL powders after I got that super hot lot of RL22 a few years ago, but I was more than pleasantly surprised by RL17 so far.
BH
- Joined
- May 2, 2001
- Messages
- 7,520
Just thinking...I could be shooting at 80 degrees or zero degrees. Quite a swing.
Michael Eichele
Well-Known Member
I cant speak for RL17 but I tested Rl25 a couple weeks ago between 71 degrees and -2 or -3 and the difference was 20 FPS even. 3 shot average for each load. I say this lightly because I have learned over the years that sensitivity can be minimal or great with ANY given powder depending on caliber, case load density, and bullet weight. Some may see 20 others may see 100. You just never can guage it for any given powder.
- Joined
- May 2, 2001
- Messages
- 7,520
That is very minimal. Much less than their competitor would want you to think.
Michael Eichele
Well-Known Member
Yup. This is one of the reasons I use it. Besides the fact that every time I find myself having trouble developing a load for a rifle using the powders I would like to use, when I put RL in it, things whip right into shape.
Also, in another rifle a year or two ago, I had tested RL25 with either the 178 or the 200AB (cant remember) and the difference was around 65 degrees and 0 degrees. Believe it or not the colder powder was slightly faster. I dont know why, I just know what the chrony said. I dont remember how much faster either but it wasnt much. Maybe 10-20 FPS average.
tillroot1
Well-Known Member
I shoot it! the case is a .260 improved, 130 Bergers well over 3100 with ease from a 29"barrel and shoot like lazers! Ron Tilley
Rustystud
Well-Known Member
Reloader 17 requires cases with capacities of 308 or greater. It appears to be a pretty good substitute for the VV double based powders.
Rustystud
Rustystud
Shortmagman
Well-Known Member
I just got back from the range after trying RL-17 in four different calibers. I wanted to see if it lived up to the claim of offering greater velocity. I first worked up loads for my 260 Rem with a Hart barrel. I worked up to the max listed 44.0 grains, under a 120 grain bullet. At the max this load showed good promise with 2943 ft/sec velocity which is above this published velocity of 2912 for a 120 grain bullet. It shot a 3/4 inch 4 shot group. I was using 120 Nosler Bt's.
My Ruger 77 with a E.R. Shaw barrel did not do well with RL-17. At the max listed load I got 2965 instead of the published 3136 so that did not work well and the accuracy was not anything to write home about. So I will forget RL-17 in this gun.
Next I loaded my stock Remington CDL in 280 Remington with 139 grain Hornady BTSP bullets and RL-17. This did a little better than my 270. I was able to get 2924 ft/sec out of this bullet with 54.0 grains of RL-17. No load data for this bullet so I worked up to one grain above the listed load for a 145 grain bullet and did not get the velocity of the 145 bullet. Accuracy was ok. About 3/4 inch 3 shot group.
This powder is suppost to be great in the short mags.. so I tried it in my Winchester model 70 Coyote in 300 WSM. I expected very high velcoities since the data shows 3217 ft/sec with a 165 grain bullet and 68 grains of RL-17. I wanted to see what it would do with a 168 grains Berger VLD, so I started at 64 grains and worked up to 67 thinking this would be all the velocity that I needed. It did not work that way. The 64 grains produced 2981 ft/sec and and one inch group, the 65 grain load produced 3004 ft/sec and a 3/4 three shot group and the 66 grain load produced 3036 and another one inch group. So by the time I got to my max of 67 grains I was still short of 3100 ft/sec and I was not getting great accuracy either.
So what do I think of RL-17 at this point? To say the least I am not very impressed. I know that this was just one try and I have not played with different seating depths and other things, but the powder did not offer what I thought it claimed to offer--greater velocity in these different calibers.
I will do some more loads for my 260 Rem. . I would like to try some 130 grain Accubonds and RL-17 but there is no load data for than bullet at this time.
My Ruger 77 with a E.R. Shaw barrel did not do well with RL-17. At the max listed load I got 2965 instead of the published 3136 so that did not work well and the accuracy was not anything to write home about. So I will forget RL-17 in this gun.
Next I loaded my stock Remington CDL in 280 Remington with 139 grain Hornady BTSP bullets and RL-17. This did a little better than my 270. I was able to get 2924 ft/sec out of this bullet with 54.0 grains of RL-17. No load data for this bullet so I worked up to one grain above the listed load for a 145 grain bullet and did not get the velocity of the 145 bullet. Accuracy was ok. About 3/4 inch 3 shot group.
This powder is suppost to be great in the short mags.. so I tried it in my Winchester model 70 Coyote in 300 WSM. I expected very high velcoities since the data shows 3217 ft/sec with a 165 grain bullet and 68 grains of RL-17. I wanted to see what it would do with a 168 grains Berger VLD, so I started at 64 grains and worked up to 67 thinking this would be all the velocity that I needed. It did not work that way. The 64 grains produced 2981 ft/sec and and one inch group, the 65 grain load produced 3004 ft/sec and a 3/4 three shot group and the 66 grain load produced 3036 and another one inch group. So by the time I got to my max of 67 grains I was still short of 3100 ft/sec and I was not getting great accuracy either.
So what do I think of RL-17 at this point? To say the least I am not very impressed. I know that this was just one try and I have not played with different seating depths and other things, but the powder did not offer what I thought it claimed to offer--greater velocity in these different calibers.
I will do some more loads for my 260 Rem. . I would like to try some 130 grain Accubonds and RL-17 but there is no load data for than bullet at this time.
Last edited:
goodgrouper
Well-Known Member
I would have to agree with SHortmag man. I haven't found it to be anything super special. Just another option.
Here's some threads on it:
http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/f28/reloder-17-a-32164/index2.html
http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/f28/i-dont-know-about-rl17-33351/
Here's some threads on it:
http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/f28/reloder-17-a-32164/index2.html
http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/f28/i-dont-know-about-rl17-33351/
Shortmagman
Well-Known Member
Goodgrouper,
I looked at your data when you shot RL-17 in you 300WSM and I found some interesting things when I compared it to my data.
1. You reported 3077 ft/sec with 67.0 grains out of your 24 inch barrel. I got 3087 out of my 24 inch barrel. I found all your velocities very close to mine. I used Winchester case and 215M primers as well as 168 VLD Bergers.
2. When I looked at ES and SD on some of my loads I was very impressed. With the 66.5 grain load it produced 3063 ft/sec with a ES of 16.0 and an SD of 6.0 . Your velocity was very close to mine with the 66.5 load. I have had very few loads that show a SD of 6.0. I need to go back and shoot this load again and check for accuracy.
3. I looked at my 260 load again and found the ES was very impressive ! I only shot 4 times and the ES was 6.0. Again that has to be one of the lowest ES that I ever achieved. The four shots went into about 3/4 inches so again this is another load to look at.
So even if this powder does not give the super velocity that was claimed it does offer something worth while.
I looked at your data when you shot RL-17 in you 300WSM and I found some interesting things when I compared it to my data.
1. You reported 3077 ft/sec with 67.0 grains out of your 24 inch barrel. I got 3087 out of my 24 inch barrel. I found all your velocities very close to mine. I used Winchester case and 215M primers as well as 168 VLD Bergers.
2. When I looked at ES and SD on some of my loads I was very impressed. With the 66.5 grain load it produced 3063 ft/sec with a ES of 16.0 and an SD of 6.0 . Your velocity was very close to mine with the 66.5 load. I have had very few loads that show a SD of 6.0. I need to go back and shoot this load again and check for accuracy.
3. I looked at my 260 load again and found the ES was very impressive ! I only shot 4 times and the ES was 6.0. Again that has to be one of the lowest ES that I ever achieved. The four shots went into about 3/4 inches so again this is another load to look at.
So even if this powder does not give the super velocity that was claimed it does offer something worth while.
