I just loaded a ladder with varget and the 90's from 22.5 to 25.8. I would also like to load one with 4350 but can't find any data. My gun has a long throat 2.670 coal 2.060 to ogive. I'm using Norma brass which has more capacity than Lapua also and I should be able to get 27 grain before compression. Anybody ever use this combo and have any info or would somebody care to look it up in quickloads. This is in a target rifle with 30" barrel 7 twist, 4350 and the heavies (215) works well in a 308 and was hoping to see if it would do the same in a 223.
- Thread starter jsthntn247
- Start date
I will be anxious to hear about your results. I have been considering a .223 palma gun. The information I did find suggested that N550, RL15 and MR2000 held some promises of high velocity with the 90's. I know its not the information that you are asking for but it might help. Longrange forums has some information about it.
I've got Mr2000 and Rl15 but it's hot down here and they are too temp sensitive. They also are hard on throats when you shoot 22 shots in 10 minutes for most of the barrel life.
I went the other direction in terms of powder burn rates and it seems to be working. Shooting 90 VLDs out of a 30" 7-twist barrel, I initially determined velocities for ~ 6% reduced loads (based on Quickload predictions) of IMR4320, Varget, H4895, H322, and Benchmark powders. I did this mainly to generate some fired cases so I could determine my case volume and to establish a baseline for adjusting burn rate factors in Quickload to better estimate what sort of velocity and barrel times these powders would generate in more "optimal" loads.
From the initial testing, IMR4320, Varget, and Benchmark did not look as though they would give the velocities I was looking for without compression and/or pressure issues. I should point out that most of my other loads for .223 and .308 have ended up very close to the optimized barrel times as reported by Chris Long (Optimal Barrel Time Concept). In the beginning, I was not aware of his theory and was not consciously trying match any specific barrel time, the optimized loads I came up with just happened to be end up there. In any event, it is a parameter that I now try to pay closer attention to during load development.
If you look at his table for optimal barrel timing, you will see that there are "nodes" for different barrel lengths. For a 30" barrel, the optimized barrel time is 1.3684 ms. Depending on the powder, hitting this node will likely put you somewhere in the 2810 fps to 2870 fps range. Reaching the next higher node would require ridiculous velocity and pressure, and is pretty much impossible for a standard .223 case with any powder. In my hands, Varget wasn't optimal. I could reach the 1.3684 ms node using it, but the velocity only ended up at around 2820 fps, which was pretty disappointing. Using Quickload estimates, H4350 may well suffer from the same issue. In all fairness, I have not actually tried it and it is possible that the preset burn rate factor in Quickload for H4350 is way off from the actual value in a .223. So it might work...only way to know for sure is to try it.
For these reasons, H4895 has been the best choice IMO, which is what I suspected well before doing any actual load development. H322 might also work, but I haven't had the time to pursue anything with it as yet. The biggest potential advantage to H322 (if it will work) is that the grains are very fine and it can be weighed to extremely close tolerances. For me, accurate and precise powder measurement is absolutely key in obtaining low ES/SD for a small cartridge like the .223. I'm currently running 24.4 gr of H4895 and getting velocity in the range of 2860 fps with pretty decent ES. More importantly, this load is shooting extremely well so far and the pressure estimates are well under max. During initial development, I ran into some issues of primer pockets loosening up noticeably after only one firing when I went above 25.0 gr of H4895. Not surprising as the velocity was well above 2900 fps. In any event, I think my brass life will be pretty decent where it is now.
All in all, you can try a bunch of different powders and probably find a recipe that will work for several of them. The only problem with that is pushing a 90 gr bullet from a standard .223 case is really stretching boundaries for that cartridge. At that point, every little thing can make a big difference. As an example, I'm getting ~40 fps more velocity by using H4895 as compared to hitting the same sweet spot with Varget. That will be worth something at 1000 yd. Maybe not much, but something. I'm also sorting bullets and pointing them. When you're on the edge of what a cartridge/load can do, every little bit helps. The other consideration (IMO probably one of the most important) is seating depth. Regardless of the powder you choose, you will have to find the best seating depth for your specific rifle. Hopefully, it will be one where you'll have some headroom as the lands erode, so you don't have to re-measure your chamber and adjust your seating depth every couple hundred rounds. In my rifle, I'm seeing approximately .002" erosion per hundred rounds, which is pretty typical. Just something else to think about.
From the initial testing, IMR4320, Varget, and Benchmark did not look as though they would give the velocities I was looking for without compression and/or pressure issues. I should point out that most of my other loads for .223 and .308 have ended up very close to the optimized barrel times as reported by Chris Long (Optimal Barrel Time Concept). In the beginning, I was not aware of his theory and was not consciously trying match any specific barrel time, the optimized loads I came up with just happened to be end up there. In any event, it is a parameter that I now try to pay closer attention to during load development.
If you look at his table for optimal barrel timing, you will see that there are "nodes" for different barrel lengths. For a 30" barrel, the optimized barrel time is 1.3684 ms. Depending on the powder, hitting this node will likely put you somewhere in the 2810 fps to 2870 fps range. Reaching the next higher node would require ridiculous velocity and pressure, and is pretty much impossible for a standard .223 case with any powder. In my hands, Varget wasn't optimal. I could reach the 1.3684 ms node using it, but the velocity only ended up at around 2820 fps, which was pretty disappointing. Using Quickload estimates, H4350 may well suffer from the same issue. In all fairness, I have not actually tried it and it is possible that the preset burn rate factor in Quickload for H4350 is way off from the actual value in a .223. So it might work...only way to know for sure is to try it.
For these reasons, H4895 has been the best choice IMO, which is what I suspected well before doing any actual load development. H322 might also work, but I haven't had the time to pursue anything with it as yet. The biggest potential advantage to H322 (if it will work) is that the grains are very fine and it can be weighed to extremely close tolerances. For me, accurate and precise powder measurement is absolutely key in obtaining low ES/SD for a small cartridge like the .223. I'm currently running 24.4 gr of H4895 and getting velocity in the range of 2860 fps with pretty decent ES. More importantly, this load is shooting extremely well so far and the pressure estimates are well under max. During initial development, I ran into some issues of primer pockets loosening up noticeably after only one firing when I went above 25.0 gr of H4895. Not surprising as the velocity was well above 2900 fps. In any event, I think my brass life will be pretty decent where it is now.
All in all, you can try a bunch of different powders and probably find a recipe that will work for several of them. The only problem with that is pushing a 90 gr bullet from a standard .223 case is really stretching boundaries for that cartridge. At that point, every little thing can make a big difference. As an example, I'm getting ~40 fps more velocity by using H4895 as compared to hitting the same sweet spot with Varget. That will be worth something at 1000 yd. Maybe not much, but something. I'm also sorting bullets and pointing them. When you're on the edge of what a cartridge/load can do, every little bit helps. The other consideration (IMO probably one of the most important) is seating depth. Regardless of the powder you choose, you will have to find the best seating depth for your specific rifle. Hopefully, it will be one where you'll have some headroom as the lands erode, so you don't have to re-measure your chamber and adjust your seating depth every couple hundred rounds. In my rifle, I'm seeing approximately .002" erosion per hundred rounds, which is pretty typical. Just something else to think about.
Last edited:
Thanks Gst, that's a hell of a response. I am worried about primer pockets loosening up after a few firings and is the reason for looking at 4350. I hate neck turning and would like to do it once a year at max. I will run a ladder with 4350 up to 27 grains and see what she does. Anything around 2825 will suit me fine as this will mainly be used for 600 max and that still beats safe loads with 185 juggs. I just invested in a fx-120i and a hydro bullet seater to help get the es down so we'll see. However, you are the 3rd person to tell me that 4895 is the go to powder. I just can't find any and have plenty of the other 2.
I don't have it in front of me but the QL value when I ran it this AM at home was around ~2800-2810 fps at the OBT with H4350. But as I mentioned, that was using the preset burn rate for H4350, so it might be a little better than that. On the other hand, you should be able to get 2820 with Varget and not be overpressure. Although I have everything set up to do it, I have not turned the necks on these cases. The reamer I have is a no-turn neck and frankly, they're shooting pretty well so far without it. I have a little more seating depth testing to do and I'll be GTG. Although I wasn't done with the development at the time, I took the load out to shoot at 600 yd on Labor Day. Even with prepped virgin brass, a rapidly fishtailing tailwind I couldn't really see (wind flags at this range are enormous airport wind socks that need a 20 mph wind even to flutter) and what I suspect now was sub-optimal seating depth, I was still able to shoot 98% on a couple practice F-TR rounds. The vertical gel about 0.6 MOA, although the X-counts were pretty low. I think when I'm finished and have them loaded in fire formed brass, these 90s are going to work very well. We have a 1000 yd match here in three weeks that I want to shoot them in, so I'm hoping to be done with development soon. Good luck with the H4350.
FWIW - Recob's currently has 8-pounders of H4895 in stock:
Browsing HODGDON
FWIW - Recob's currently has 8-pounders of H4895 in stock:
Browsing HODGDON
I have a savage .223 vlp 7 twist 26" barrel and play around with 80 grainers and varget but the throat is short on mine I think,I hit the lands at 2.40 OAL
I have only tried it at 1,000 yards one time and it showed promise. Can I gain anything with 90 grain bullets?
I have a variety of powder and primers on hand.
I have only tried it at 1,000 yards one time and it showed promise. Can I gain anything with 90 grain bullets?
I have a variety of powder and primers on hand.
90's are tough to get to work with a short throat. Mine should come in at 2.670 coal. I loaded the ladder from 24.6 to 27. 27gr is a case full and just slightly compressed. Wonder how much gain in case capacity I can expect after the brass is fired?
