NEW IMR Powders

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Savage Shooter
    Warrior
    • Dec 2014
    • 241

    NEW IMR Powders

    My "6.5" = 24" AA Overwatch upper 1/9 twist, NC based US Tactical lower, standard A4 6 position stock, AR Gold Trigger, JPS SCS buffer, Vortex 6-24 x 50 FFP PST with EBR-2C MOA reticle
  • LRRPF52
    Super Moderator
    • Sep 2014
    • 8569

    #2
    If it works well in .223 Rem and .308 Win., as a fine extruded powder, then there might be some good loads in the 6.5 Grendel with it. A fine powder implies good fill density, so it's just a matter of seeing where the burn rate is compared to others. The kernel size is actually larger than 8208XBR.

    NRA Basic, Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, RSO

    CCW, CQM, DM, Long Range Rifle Instructor

    6.5 Grendel Reloading Handbooks & chamber brushes can be found here:

    www.AR15buildbox.com

    Comment

    • lwminton
      Warrior
      • Nov 2014
      • 143

      #3
      Looking at these patterns, I am wanting to know what the load of IMR 4831 was with what bullet. To my eye that group is head and shoulders above. Who needs flyers?

      Comment

      • Savage Shooter
        Warrior
        • Dec 2014
        • 241

        #4
        Is that a photo you took, LRR? If so, then you have some of the powder already? I can't figure out why Hodgdon/IMR/Winchester are ignoring the CFE223 and 4166 powders for the 6.5 Grendel in their load data. Have you contacted them and asked if they had some suggested loads?
        My "6.5" = 24" AA Overwatch upper 1/9 twist, NC based US Tactical lower, standard A4 6 position stock, AR Gold Trigger, JPS SCS buffer, Vortex 6-24 x 50 FFP PST with EBR-2C MOA reticle

        Comment

        • NugginFutz
          Chieftain
          • Aug 2013
          • 2622

          #5
          I did a side by side of IMR4166 vs. Varget, last weekend. One of the LGS's has been trying to tell me that 4166 is the "New Varget", and has even gone so far as to say you can use any Varget load with 4166. The last bit, of course, causes immediate concern, but it's easily checked. Using my CZ550 in .308 as the test subject, I gradually worked up a load of 4166 to match the CZ's favorite Varget load, 44 gr behind a 168 gr Amax.

          This was a 1:1 test, aside from powder.

          Lapua Cases from the same lot, all with 5 firings, CCI 200 primers, powders trickled to nearest .1 grain.

          Here are the results:

          Code:
          Date:	1/24/15 11:05	1/24/15 11:25
          Descr:	44 gr Varget	44 gr IMR4166
          Temp:	36 °F		36 °F
          BP:	30.37 inHg	BP: 30.37 inHg
          
          Shots:		
          #	FPS / FT-LBS	FPS / FT-LBS
          10	2722 / 2764	2702 / 2724
          9	2733 / 2787	2725 / 2770
          8	2715 / 2750	2736 / 2793
          7	2731 / 2783	2727 / 2775
          6	2707 / 2734	2687 / 2694
          5	2730 / 2781	2659 / 2638
          4	2738 / 2797	2669 / 2658
          3	2756 / 2834	2690 / 2700
          2	2724 / 2768	2675 / 2670
          1	2732 / 2785	2682 / 2684
          
          					Diff
          Avg:	2728.8 FPS	2695.2 FPS	-33.6 FPS
          SD:	13.3 FPS	26.4 FPS	13.1 FPS
          Min:	2707 FPS	2659 FPS	-48 FPS
          Max:	2756 FPS	2736 FPS	-20 FPS
          Spread:	49 FPS	77 FPS	28 FPS
          The IMR4166 actually did better than I expected, coming in just under 34 fps slower than Varget (a 1.2% difference).

          ES and SD were a bit worse than Varget but, overall, I'd say it performs comparably well in temperatures in the 30's. I'll do another series after it warms up to see how stable it is in comparison to Varget.
          If it's true that we are here to help others, then what exactly are the others here for?

          Comment

          • bwaites
            Moderator
            • Mar 2011
            • 4445

            #6
            Kernal size is quite large compared to 8208, essentially Varget sized, so getting enough in the case to get decent velocities in the Grendel will be an issue.

            Looking at NF's data, I'm guessing you need to crowd a bit more into that case. Newer powders seem, as a very general rule, to like very full load capacities, and some even seem to like overfills. I'm betting that at approaching 46 grains, or 47 grains, the ES will tighten and it will get even more competitive with Varget in that respect.

            Comment

            • Heywood
              Warrior
              • Aug 2013
              • 121

              #7
              Originally posted by lwminton View Post
              Looking at these patterns, I am wanting to know what the load of IMR 4831 was with what bullet. To my eye that group is head and shoulders above. Who needs flyers?
              That is not a 53 shot group. That is a picture of the listed powders showing kernel size and shape. I wish we could find a good load for 4831 though as I have about 40lbs of it.
              Last edited by Heywood; 02-01-2015, 01:11 AM.
              quis posuit in mea ocreis bologna!

              Comment

              • bwaites
                Moderator
                • Mar 2011
                • 4445

                #8
                Originally posted by Heywood View Post
                That is not a 53 shot group. That is a picture of the listed powders showing kernel size and shape. I wish we could find a good load for 4831 though as I have about 40lbs of it.
                Kernal size is too large, can't get enough in the case.

                Comment

                • bwaites
                  Moderator
                  • Mar 2011
                  • 4445

                  #9
                  Originally posted by bwaites View Post
                  Kernal size is too large, can't get enough in the case.
                  Great for my 7mm WSM though!

                  Comment

                  • NugginFutz
                    Chieftain
                    • Aug 2013
                    • 2622

                    #10
                    Originally posted by bwaites View Post
                    Looking at NF's data, I'm guessing you need to crowd a bit more into that case. Newer powders seem, as a very general rule, to like very full load capacities, and some even seem to like overfills. I'm betting that at approaching 46 grains, or 47 grains, the ES will tighten and it will get even more competitive with Varget in that respect.
                    You may be right, but I can't verify anything over 45 grains without flattening primers. While hodgdon recommends 46 grains for a 168 grain bullet, this is too hot for me, as pressures go through the roof with velocities near 2900fps.

                    My thoughts are that with many folks reporting Varget as being on the slow side for the Grendel, 4166 won't be any better. It's unlikely there will be enough case volume.
                    If it's true that we are here to help others, then what exactly are the others here for?

                    Comment

                    • Heywood
                      Warrior
                      • Aug 2013
                      • 121

                      #11
                      Originally posted by bwaites View Post
                      Great for my 7mm WSM though!
                      Yeah, I use it for my aught six, a 300 win mag and my 7mm mag. My Grandfather bought about one metric ass load of it when they were selling it by the box car load after WWII. They were selling it in paper bags. Still have a bunch, still works great.
                      quis posuit in mea ocreis bologna!

                      Comment

                      • lwminton
                        Warrior
                        • Nov 2014
                        • 143

                        #12
                        I need to get my glasses fixed. Duh!

                        Comment

                        • sneaky one
                          Chieftain
                          • Mar 2011
                          • 3077

                          #13
                          Let's let this play out guys. May be a cool thing. Think positive.

                          Comment

                          • Savage Shooter
                            Warrior
                            • Dec 2014
                            • 241

                            #14
                            So, is the bottom line that no one among the readers here have tried IMR 4166 in a Grendel nor have any reloading info on the powder for a Grendel?

                            In comparing Hodgdon's on-line data, for .204 Ruger (32 gr. Hornady Vmax) CFE223 delivers about 200 FPS higher velocity for the same weight bullets as 4166, at lower pressures than 4166. For the 60 gr. VMAX .223, the pressures are about the same, although velocity is about 200 slower for 4166. Granted, 4166 uses less grains at max (all compressed) loads than CFE223, but the tradeoff is 4166 delivers about 200 fps slower than CFE223 at max.

                            Since both are supposed to be anti-fouling, 4166 doesn't offer that as an advantage. Hodgdon does not claim that CFE223 offers temperature insensitivity, whereas they do for 4166. However, actual field experience among the users here indicates a fairly wide range of stable usage for CFE223 in the Grendel. So, unless IMR4166 proves to be much more temperature stable than CFE223, because of PROBABLY lower velocities and POSSIBLY higher pressures, there might not be any advantage to trying 4166 in the Grendel.
                            My "6.5" = 24" AA Overwatch upper 1/9 twist, NC based US Tactical lower, standard A4 6 position stock, AR Gold Trigger, JPS SCS buffer, Vortex 6-24 x 50 FFP PST with EBR-2C MOA reticle

                            Comment

                            • NugginFutz
                              Chieftain
                              • Aug 2013
                              • 2622

                              #15
                              Ok - here's an update on IMR4166, this time in 6.5 Grendel cases. I only have 123 Amax bullets, so that limits the scope of what I am able to check. Using Varget as a baseline, I loaded the following charges and seated the 123's @ 2.250": 25.2gr, 26.4gr, 27.6gr and 28.9gr.

                              When I got to the 27.6gr, I noted that the powder column was just below the neck, and well into the are which the 123 Amax base would occupy. In short - definitely compressed. Despite the use of a drop tube and case tapping, seating sounds of crunchy bits confirmed what my eyes could see. At 28.9gr, the powder was clearly at the neck, and case taps merely brought the powder to just below. I seated these, as well.

                              I allowed them to sit for 10 minutes (I suspect that was more than enough time), and rechecked the OAL's. As expected, 25.2gr and 26.4gr charges remained at 2.250", but the other two, 27.6 and 28.9, had both pushed the bullet out, and were reading ~2.266" and ~2.271", respectively.

                              While these two still fit my mags (ASC and Elander), it is clear this is at the extreme edge of my comfort zone. I'll shoot the first two loads tomorrow and get some velocity data, but I am tentative about shooting the other two loads. I'll let the chronograph and spirit guides tell me more, after I've shot the first two strings.
                              If it's true that we are here to help others, then what exactly are the others here for?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X