• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

New Winchester Staball 6.5 ball powder

Staball is not temperature stable. I ran a test in the 25 creedmoore using Peterson SRP brass, 131g blackjack bullets and both cci 400 and 450 primers through a 28” Bartlein suppressed.
I will choose one specific loading to present however this pattern marched out throughout the testing of an entire ladder test
On day one the temperature was 61 F.
Staball 44.6g 3029 fps with SD 9 (3 shots) cci 450
Day two the temperature was 41 F.
Staball 44.6g 3006 fps with SD 8 (5 shots) cci 450
Staball 44.6g 3004 fps with SD 10 (3 shots) cci 400
that is a 1.2 FPS difference per degree F
 
Last edited:
  • Wow
  • Like
Reactions: 7mmMato and Sheldon N
Well I’m seeing a few post I didn’t won’t to see..
I have a 2 more weeks before I get home to do my testing. Hoping to start seeing some better results..
I have a good load with h4350 that’s been great, was just looking to improve some, always striving for better...
Hope it’s not 8#’s of misery...
 
JesseB81 said:
Staball is not temperature stable. I ran a test in the 25 creedmoore using Peterson SRP brass, 131g blackjack bullets and both cci 400 and 450 primers through a 28” Bartlein suppressed.
I will choose one specific loading to present however this pattern marched out throughout the testing.
On day one the temperature was 61 F.
Staball 44.6g 3029 fps with SD 9 (3 shots) cci 450
Day two the temperature was 41 F.
Staball 44.6g 3006 fps with SD 8 (5 shots) cci 450
Staball 44.6g 3004 fps with SD 10 (3 shots) cci 400
that is a 1.2 FPS difference per degree F
Click to expand...
Uhm.. these are supposed to be statistically significant results? 3 shots, 5 shots, 3 shots. Last batch with different primers. These results don’t mean shit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheChief, 308pirate, AFancyPenguin and 3 others
padom said:
1.5gr over what max? The powder has only been out a few weeks.... You talking about Winchester suggested data initially released with the powder? Throw that right out the window. YOUR gun will tell you whats max and all that shit is conservative as hell.

Sierra book max for Varget with a 105 in 6br is 27gr. The known go to load for 105/Varget in 6BR is 30gr and thats what everyone loads and shoots without any pressure. Thats 3gr over Sierra's "book max."
Click to expand...


Maybe my experiences have led me to believe differently that generally things line up. In all my time, I have never seen such a low velocity when compared to published data. There is little rise in velocity over 8 charges and 1.6 grains. Shooting 120, 139, 162, 175, and 180 grain bullets and 5+ powders, I am usually pretty close to published data with my barrel. I haven't seen anyone post such a flat spot ever, across any cartridge. Hodgeon, in my experience, is pretty close to reality. Being 80FPS slower while 1.6gr over the data is off to me.

My next step is to reshoot the loads starting at mid 48 with 10 shots each of 5 ladders loaded with 5 different large rifle primers to eliminate the primer variable.
 
lash said:
Uhm.. these are supposed to be statistically significant results? 3 shots, 5 shots, 3 shots. Last batch with different primers. These results don’t mean shit.
Click to expand...
Re read the post retard. The entire fucking ladder test was slower not one charge weight
 
2aBaCa said:
@RogueTanker What 5 primers would you be trying?
Click to expand...

20191101_192628.jpg
 
reubenski said:
I've reached flat spots in increasing charge weights/ velocities. In fact I try to find them; their called nodes. And getting so hung up on published velocities unnecessary. They've never equalled reality for me. I mean if you expect them to correlate what is your expectation of a .236 bore vs. a .237 bore in that correlation?

What would you think if I told you I'm drying Varget out right now in an attempt to pick up 70fps on my current 22BR load?
Click to expand...

Nodes yes. Show me a node that hovers over 1.6 grains. That's what I'm saying. This is a statistical outlier based on my observation on this board and from my own experience with multiple calibers and a dozen powders. I'm not saying it can't happen, it's unusual is all. And I would say about .005% of a difference between bores. I get what you're saying. It's never 100% a match, but this a much larger than a couple percentage points. Also when in my experience with this barrel I'm almost almost within 25fps of published.
 
2aBaCa said:
While you're at it, I would suggest throwing a magnum in there just in case this powder is ignition sensitive.
Click to expand...

I thought I had 210M but I don't. I don't have easy access any magnums right now, so I'll test these this weekend and see where things stand. Magnums will be up soon
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2aBaC̶a̶
I've been thinking every day for the last week that I needed to buy some. I think I'll just keep checking this thread for a while before dropping the hammer. Lol

Also, I too noticed the weird PV 1/2 price hazmat date thing.
 
I'm with @reubenski. When I run temp tests, I'll load my rounds the night before and however many I want (to me, more is better, so I will shoot at least 20 at each temp) for 30º go into an ammo box, which I place inside a cooler with an ice pack, and the whole thing sits in my freezer overnight. The ice pack is just there to make sure the rounds stay cold as I drive to the range, which is only 10-15 minutes away from the house. The ambient temp rounds sit on my reloading bench until I'm ready to go. The 100º+ rounds go into a different cooler with one of those Hot Hands hand warmers about two hours before I head to the range. I check everything with an infrared thermometer so I can gather as much data as possible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: willswim4pie, Edgecrusher and BLKWLFK9
JesseB81 said:
Re read the post retard. The entire fucking ladder test was slower not one charge weight
Click to expand...
Pretty confident for a dumb fuck that has no idea what he’s talking about, aren’t you?

Your 8 rounds with one primer and three rounds with another don’t mean shit. Read a bit about standard deviation and learn a little about variation in a “stable” load. Then come back to us with some solid data. We’ll talk.

However, I realize that you won’t bother since you’re so confident in your non-existent ladder test. So I think that you should move on to a powder you have faith in. Faith is better than statistics anyway.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 308pirate and RogueTanker
I just ordered 8 pounds from Powder Valley and HazMat is still $12.95. I’m excited to try it.
 
I know if I don’t buy some now I’ll regret it. When people get a good idea if it’s any good, I won’t be able to get my hands on any for months...?

...but I have so many pounds of random powder I bought when powder was impossible to find that I’m already not using. Lol
 
Just ordered 4lbs for A $123 bucks from PV. Use will be 6mm Creed and 22/250 . I guess its too fast for 6.5 PRC .
 
Got my jug yesterday so I'll be testing in my dasher tomorrow.

I broke out my Harrell's powder thrower that I haven't used in forever but threw 30 charges and weighed each on my A&D scale. Color me impressed. It's pretty late so I'll post a pic tomorrow with all the numbers as well as update how they do at the range.

30 individual weighed charges averaged 36.28 grains
lowest was 36.22 grains
highest was 36.34 grains
 
  • Like
Reactions: biggershooter, rydah, 260284 and 6 others
lash said:
Pretty confident for a dumb fuck that has no idea what he’s talking about, aren’t you?

Your 8 rounds with one primer and three rounds with another don’t mean shit. Read a bit about standard deviation and learn a little about variation in a “stable” load. Then come back to us with some solid data. We’ll talk.

However, I realize that you won’t bother since you’re so confident in your non-existent ladder test. So I think that you should move on to a powder you have faith in. Faith is better than statistics anyway.
Click to expand...
Dumb cunt... the entire fucking ladder test was shot over not one charge weight
 
canezach said:
I'm with @reubenski. When I run temp tests, I'll load my rounds the night before and however many I want (to me, more is better, so I will shoot at least 20 at each temp) for 30º go into an ammo box, which I place inside a cooler with an ice pack, and the whole thing sits in my freezer overnight. The ice pack is just there to make sure the rounds stay cold as I drive to the range, which is only 10-15 minutes away from the house. The ambient temp rounds sit on my reloading bench until I'm ready to go. The 100º+ rounds go into a different cooler with one of those Hot Hands hand warmers about two hours before I head to the range. I check everything with an infrared thermometer so I can gather as much data as possible.
Click to expand...
I did not run this test to test the temp stability. I ran this test in search of a node. The 1.2 FPS decrease per degree in temperature F was a coincidental finding therefore I did not test multiple temperatures as that was not the point. However when I see that every single charge weight was slower on the 40 F day vs 60 F day I’m gonna say it’s not fucking temp stable. Take the info at face value and quit criticizing the scientific principles applied. Then go fuck yourself.
 
  • Like
Reactions: minigunner86
In summary, I shot 30 rounds on day A at multiple charge weights. I shot the same 30 rounds on day B. The only variation was a 20 degree difference in ambient temperature. The velocity decreased by 1.2 FPS per degree F. The purpose of this testing was NOT to test the temperature stability but rather to find a node and to test different primers relationships to pressure. The decrease in velocity was a completely unexpected finding. The fact that it was so uniform throughout the entire ladder test tells me that this powder is not temperature stable. Every single charge weight was slower then the previous shooting. I am not claiming to have done a scientific study. I’m not sure why people want to criticize instead of taking this at face value.
 
JesseB81 said:
In summary, I shot 30 rounds on day A at multiple charge weights. I shot the same 30 rounds on day B. The only variation was a 20 degree difference in ambient temperature. The velocity decreased by 1.2 FPS per degree F. The purpose of this testing was NOT to test the temperature stability but rather to find a node and to test different primers relationships to pressure. The decrease in velocity was a completely unexpected finding. The fact that it was so uniform throughout the entire ladder test tells me that this powder is not temperature stable. Every single charge weight was slower then the previous shooting. I am not claiming to have done a scientific study. I’m not sure why people want to criticize instead of taking this at face value.
Click to expand...
Maybe it boils down to not caring what you did here, not trying to be a dick here. What part of your results will actually mimic mine? You got after 918, which made me snicker of coarse, but he was darn close to being correct, case fill plays hard.
It is up to each of us to run our own tests, just because Joe says it meters perfect, maybe I do not have his thrower, what lengths will I go to to duplicate his findings, not very far, making that input useless to me.
Before I forget, why would anyone waste 150 rds of barrel life testing shit when their existing load is doing it's job, wait to for a new chamber, it may cut test loads needed by 60% to decide if it is for you.
I live in an area where I can test ammo in temps from -30 to 102 deg. If I am going to test ammo at 0 deg, I leave ammo in the back end of my PU overnight, rifle in the back seat, get out in the morning and test it all at 0 deg, that is a test, not refrigerating ammo and strapping ice packs to it on a 75 deg day and telling the world how 40 deg ammo performs on that day. wasting bandwidth.
Baking ammo in the sun and claiming you shot 150 deg ammo, that is real life shit and can get people hurt.
I almost bought some of this powder, then asked myself just when has ball powders worked in medium to large sized cases. Sure, someone can give me the anomaly, but not often, And secondly, this powder has to be of a slower burn rate than advertised, or any cases it claims it will work in will have at least 15% reduced case capacity, and that rarely ends well either.
Good luck to all!
 
  • Like
Reactions: JGottschall and Lesco Brandon
When Hodgdon started marketing their extreme line of powders they wrote an article on temperature stability and posted it on their website. This was 20 years ago. They used several of their powders in different cartridges and they showed different degrees of stability depending on the application. I can’t find it right now. Maybe someone saved it somewhere.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bfoosh006 and Steel head
918v said:
When Hodgdon started marketing their extreme line of powders they wrote an article on temperature stability and posted it on their website. This was 20 years ago. They used several of their powders in different cartridges and they showed different degrees of stability depending on the application. I can’t find it right now. Maybe someone saved it somewhere.
Click to expand...
I remember it.

There was also someone on the first hide I think who did a temp test With H4350 in a few different cartridges that had some interesting results.
 
JesseB81 said:
In summary, I shot 30 rounds on day A at multiple charge weights. I shot the same 30 rounds on day B. The only variation was a 20 degree difference in ambient temperature. The velocity decreased by 1.2 FPS per degree F. The purpose of this testing was NOT to test the temperature stability but rather to find a node and to test different primers relationships to pressure. The decrease in velocity was a completely unexpected finding. The fact that it was so uniform throughout the entire ladder test tells me that this powder is not temperature stable. Every single charge weight was slower then the previous shooting. I am not claiming to have done a scientific study. I’m not sure why people want to criticize instead of taking this at face value.
Click to expand...


Why? Because of your first post where you posted "Staball is not temperature stable. " and you didn't do a good test to find out if it is or not. Now there is someone on another site saying that they saw on the Hide that it's not temp stable. See how your little "test" can spread bad info fast?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 308pirate, Sierra770, Engine 22 and 10 others
I holding out on disappointment until I get home. Have had very good results with h4350, I take my time and find OCW, play with seating depths etc...
Once I find what is working well out to 1,000 yds, ballistic data inline with results and know me and my weapon are in tune. At that point I start looking, then and only then at how temperature affect the outcome of POI’s.
I’ll do a good run with the staball 6.5 and give it a chance. I am more than confident in my reloading techniques and equipment..
My MRAD in 6.5 is a
 

So here the results. I started to get heavy bolt lift and hard extraction on the top end.

Since, I was trying to eliminate the Primer Variable, I switched to Sierra 175gr soft points. i have alot of these, they're consistent and cheap. All other variables stayed the same. temps were a balmy 45° this morning. I ran all 50 shots quickly, across the same charge weight (i.e all 46.2 loads, then the 46.4, etc...). I will say the barrel was noticeably cooler than expected for the high ROF.

So it's looks like primers only had a small effect on the velocity. That leaves two answers from here: 1. the powder and data is slow or 2. the powder likes to be *significantly* over max to hit the published velocities.
 
Milo 2.5 said:
Maybe it boils down to not caring what you did here, not trying to be a dick here. What part of your results will actually mimic mine? You got after 918, which made me snicker of coarse, but he was darn close to being correct, case fill plays hard.
It is up to each of us to run our own tests, just because Joe says it meters perfect, maybe I do not have his thrower, what lengths will I go to to duplicate his findings, not very far, making that input useless to me.
Before I forget, why would anyone waste 150 rds of barrel life testing shit when their existing load is doing it's job, wait to for a new chamber, it may cut test loads needed by 60% to decide if it is for you.
I live in an area where I can test ammo in temps from -30 to 102 deg. If I am going to test ammo at 0 deg, I leave ammo in the back end of my PU overnight, rifle in the back seat, get out in the morning and test it all at 0 deg, that is a test, not refrigerating ammo and strapping ice packs to it on a 75 deg day and telling the world how 40 deg ammo performs on that day. wasting bandwidth.
Baking ammo in the sun and claiming you shot 150 deg ammo, that is real life shit and can get people hurt.
I almost bought some of this powder, then asked myself just when has ball powders worked in medium to large sized cases. Sure, someone can give me the anomaly, but not often, And secondly, this powder has to be of a slower burn rate than advertised, or any cases it claims it will work in will have at least 15% reduced case capacity, and that rarely ends well either.
Good luck to all!
Click to expand...
You must live in Ohio lol
 
Fuck you
Rob01 said:
Why? Because of your first post where you posted "Staball is not temperature stable. " and you didn't do a good test to find out if it is or not. Now there is someone on another site saying that they saw on the Hide that it's not temp stable. See how your little "test" can spread bad info fast?
Click to expand...
It’s not temp stable if it shows 1.2 FPS difference per degree F is it.... fucking idiot.
 
  • Wow
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: Kyle87, XLR308, Pilotscrappy and 2 others
JesseB81 said:
In summary, I shot 30 rounds on day A at multiple charge weights. I shot the same 30 rounds on day B. The only variation was a 20 degree difference in ambient temperature. The velocity decreased by 1.2 FPS per degree F. The purpose of this testing was NOT to test the temperature stability but rather to find a node and to test different primers relationships to pressure. The decrease in velocity was a completely unexpected finding. The fact that it was so uniform throughout the entire ladder test tells me that this powder is not temperature stable. Every single charge weight was slower then the previous shooting. I am not claiming to have done a scientific study. I’m not sure why people want to criticize instead of taking this at face value.
Click to expand...

Jesse Borgelt too easy to remove your post form FB...

Your inital ladder test and charge selection is simply wrong.

Your initial test(NOT the temperature test you did) where 3 rounds per charge as you mentioned in your post...read it back dude. Thats worthless data end of the discussion.

All your data come from there and if your in a false node or in the red zone it's normale to see erratic data. Things that make your temperature test worthless too

You selected a wrong node that all I am telling ya. Select the lower one at 44gr and redo the test with only the Cci-450 over a larger sample.

Also so you understand, Powder characteristics change with pressure and that's a known fact. You pretty much experiencing that mixed with a bad node.

Take a deep breath, hold your horse and accept the fact that your data is irrelevant.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tokay444
918v said:
How do you measure velocity?

You have crazy jumps in velocity with just .2 grains of added powder.
Click to expand...


Charges dropped on a CM 1500 and measured with a magentospeed sporter with a fresh battery. I was thinking that might have been an issue so I put a new one in. I have used this brass with XBR 8208 and don't have such random movements. This powders seems to be up and down and all over the place. As most powders tend to trend upwards with increased loads, this powder just doesn't want to be consistent.
 
padom said:
Say what you want but 3 shots doesnt determine real world data for velocity and temp stability. To draw conclusions like you have you need to shoot 25 shots for each data point and control your ammo temps as mentioned above.

Actual data with proper controls speak louder than any words.
Click to expand...

Do you have any 25 shot temperature "real world data" that you've conducted in the calibers you shoot competitively?
 
918v said:
How do you measure velocity?

You have crazy jumps in velocity with just .2
RogueTanker said:
Charges dropped on a CM 1500 and measured with a magentospeed sporter with a fresh battery. I was thinking that might have been an issue so I put a new one in. I have used this brass with XBR 8208 and don't have such random movements. This powders seems to be up and down and all over the place. As most powders tend to trend upwards with increased loads, this powder just doesn't want to be consistent.
Click to expand...


Just thinking, that's twice I've had two major spikes with a .2 change in powder at the top end. The first time I thought it was the different primer. Well I didn't see much of a change with the second test, until that last magnum load. Maybe in this round, there is a pressure threshold that has to be met before the velocity develops. Guess a round three is in order. Gotta say I'm fairly disappointed with this powder overall though. Things just aren't lining up.
Click to expand...
 
918v said:
Try 2.800” OAL like in Hodgdon’s data. You were within 10FPS with 46.2grs.
Click to expand...


With the S&B and WLR primers I was right there. Then they promptly nosedived the next load. The erratic ups and downs don't seem like they'll translate to accurate and stable nodes. And if I loaded them to 2.8, I'll be jumping the bullets .160" to the lands. I can't imagine that'll work. But I could be wrong.
 
Don’t be scared to jump. When shooting heavy bullets close to the lands with too fast a powder you get weird pressure spikes. Seating the bullets deeper gives them more of a running start and eliminated this problem.

Also, a shorter COAL might put the bullet in a better jump node for ES/SD purposes.

I once had fits over this with Berger LRBT until I decided to find a shorter COAL with the same charge and got the ES under 10 FPS.

I routinely jump .140”+, shoot in the .2’s
 
  • Like
Reactions: lash, ddavis, supercorndogs and 3 others
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

I
Winchester is introducing two new powders
Replies
9
Views
1K
MK20
MK20
W
Powder recommendations for 55 grain Hornady CX in 223/556
Replies
6
Views
640
secondofangle2
secondofangle2
NHPiper
StaBall Match Testing - 77gr Reloads, Chasing mk262
Replies
78
Views
8K
rdsii640
rdsii640
W
264 Win Mag Load Development
Replies
8
Views
3K
Dead Eye Dick
Dead Eye Dick
Alex.Jones.SLC
Looking for a starting point to reload 6.5 Creedmoor with the options I have on hand.
Replies
15
Views
3K
Alex.Jones.SLC
Alex.Jones.SLC
Top Bottom
Back