IMR 8208 XBR / Benchmark 8208 - anyone using this?

davery25 · April 30, 2014, 02:01 AM

As per the title - looks to be a new powder and claims great accuracy and very clean burning with very little variation from lot to lot.

I'm tempted but it's a tad slower than Benchmark which claims similar and I've had no luck with in my 223 or 22-250

Anyone used it?

nemesiss45 · April 30, 2014, 03:29 AM

I am using it for my .308. I have not been reloading long enough to give a lot of comparisons, but it is my favorite powder for my .308 so far. It meters very well and I have had great accuracy results with it. from the testing I have done, it got me about a 20% improvement over my previous go to load. obviously your results may vary.... but I'd say give it a shot.

mehavey · April 30, 2014, 05:34 AM

8208 is the cat's meow for heavier (120-123gr) bullets in the 6.5 Grendel.
That, along w/ AA2520.

It's not a new powder. Rather, it's been around a loooong time (mid 60s)
and is just recently now "rediscovered."
http://www.longrangehunting.com/arti...r-review-1.php

davery25 · April 30, 2014, 05:43 AM

hmmmm, you guys are tempting me now. The real question is - would you choose it over Varget or 4895?

mehavey · April 30, 2014, 05:45 AM

What cartridge?
If the 223 or 22-250, I'd add it to your powder collection.

pctechdude · April 30, 2014, 06:51 AM

I use 8208 in my 223 rem loads, with a 55gr BT fmj, or 55gr vmax and a charge of 25.4gr. I've ran this load through a lot of guns and all have shown great accuracy. This ranges from bolt rifles, single shots and multiple AR-15's.

**Unclenick** · April 30, 2014, 08:11 AM

Mehavey,

Are you sure you are not crossing 8208 up with one of the WC800 numbers? I'm not finding the number in my older load data (70's). 8208 XBR is currently supplied by ADI in Australia, where it is sold as AR2210. Benchmark is also an ADI sourced powder, sold Down Under as BM2. Both are formulated the way the Hodgdon Extreme powders are, for low temperature sensitivity. It and Trail Boss and IMR 4198 and IMR 4227 are all currently sourced from ADI according to the MSDS sheets. I'm not sure why the latter two were changed from the Valleyfield plant in Canada.

Davery25,

More information might be useful. Name your bullet choices and barrel twist rates, especially. Knowing your primers and barrel lengths could also help.

Hodgdon's relative burn rate chart does show 8208 XBR as slower. However, the charge weights and performance they list in .223 only corresponds to that with light bullets. As you get to 50 grain bullets and up, it looks like the 8208 starts to behave as the faster of the two powders. At 53 grains Hodgdon data has a lower charge weights of 8208 making higher pressures, with lower velocity and higher peak pressure at the low end, and slightly higher velocity with higher peak pressure at maximum. That's typical of faster powder performance.

The above is not an expected result, but I've seen something similar before. IMR 4895 and IMR 4064 exchange relative burn rate order in the .308 with heavy (180 grain) bullets. Charge weight of 4064 needed to produce 2200 fps is lower than the weight of 4895 needed. But the weight of 4064 needed to produce 2500 fps is greater than the amount of 4895 needed. This is caused by grain geometry differences giving 4064 a lower weight to velocity change slope in a filled case operating at near normal peak pressures.

It has to be kept in mind that relative burn rate in the charts is true under just one set of test conditions. Different bullet weights and peak pressure levels in chamberings with different expansion ratios are not married to those fixed condition burn rate results. It's a case of YMMV.

Bottom line is not to count on 8208 to behave like a slower powder in your particular circumstance. It may or may not produce differences in barrel time large enough to improve precision on the target. Only trying will tell. Without more information about your bullets and bores, though, it's hard to try to guess whether or not you'd do better with another choice.

mehavey · April 30, 2014, 08:28 AM

Quote:

...crossing 8208 up with one of the WC800 numbers?

Its history is a bit of a grapevine....

My own experience w/ the Grendel is HERE.
Post #1 in that string is me.
Post #8 provides encapsulated grapevine....

~~~~~~~~~~~~

From IMR:

"IMR’s 8208 XBR is a rifle powder based on an old favorite among the
benchrest community, real sticklers for accuracy, with a distinct
difference. There is virtually no change in velocity with modest or extreme
change in temperatures. The ballistics group at IMR has tested this powder
from -40 to +165 degrees Fahrenheit with virtually no performance variation."

From CastBoolits, a slightly different take:

"...done at the request of benchrest shooters....requested for many years in a row,,,they always said no. a member said he would fund the project, and they said yes.

He paid for the first lot, and collected names of those of us that would buy x number of 8# jugs.

I was on a waiting list for over a year. In the end hodgdon kept the powder and decided to go public with it..i assume he got his money back, but then it was a mad scramble to get distributors to create waiting lists for a product that was not out.

The powder is suppose to be a copy of a imr mil powder from the 60's. the oem 8208 was an excellent br powder in 6ppc."
~~~~~~~~
" will concur with most everything Mike said. Jim Carmichel is a very good friend and he obtained enough 8208 to shoot several matches with and test before it was released. While this is a VERY good powder it IS NOT the same as old IMR 8208! It is different in it's physical properties. We tested it at Jim's balistics lab and it's slightly slower than the original lots of 8208 we have and has a slightly different pressure curve. It's also a product of ADI, an Austrailian powder manufacturer, instead of General Dynamics, the current owner of the IMR powder facilities. One thing it is consistant in is it's burn rate in wide swings in temp and humidity! I shot some matches with the test lot in mid summer and never did have to change my load. I'm sure Mike will attest to how unique that is!"

And of course Hodgdon/AccurateShooter has its own take:

...unveiled a brand new powder, IMR 8208 XBR. From early reports, this is an exceptional new propellant that may change the way the game is played in short-range benchrest. According to Hodgdon, “IMR 8208 XBR is a remarkably advanced technology propellant” formulated for popular match, varmint and sniper rounds, including 223 Rem, 308 Win, 6mm PPC, 204 Ruger, 6mm BR, 22-250 Remington and similar calibers. We’re told the powder is being produced by ADI in Australia.

IMR 8208 XBR is Consistent in All Conditions
This short grain extruded rifle powder exhibits exceptional stability with virtually no change in velocity at temperatures ranging from -40 degrees F to 165+ degrees F. Lou Murdica, who helped develop this new powder, confirms that it is not temp-sensitive. Lou told us: “I have been shooting IMR 8208 XBR for over a year and I have done a lot of winning shooting it. One of the great things about this particular powder is, I always shoot the same load whether I shoot it in Florida or Phoenix AZ. I have never had to adjust for temperature or humidity.” That’s big news in the short-range BR game. Currently, most competitors must tailor their load to suit conditions.

IMR 8208 XBR is Already Winning Matches
Lou Murdica, one of the nation’s top BR shooters, won numerous matches with 8208 XBR in 2009, including the Heavy Varmint Grand Agg at the Cactus Classic. In August 2009, Jim Carmichel won the Heavy Varmint Grand Agg at the IBS Group Nationals. What is significant here is that Jim shot the exact same load of IMR 8208 XBR both days to win the event. That’s right–this powder requires far less “tuning” than most other powders currently used in short-range benchrest.

Product Development and Performance
Lou Murdica revealed some interesting facts about IMR 8208 XBR. Lou explained that the development team was initially trying to produce a propellant that would match the desireable characteristics of the “classic” T32 powder from the 1960s. In the process of developing a T-Powder clone, Lou says that the Hodgdon/IMR powder wizards came up with something even better: “We were originally pursuing a formula like T-Powder, but we came up with something a bit different. It was so good, and shot so well, that we didn’t want to lose it. It turned out that this stuff shot as well or better than the earlier T-clone mixtures and was incredibly stable.”

Lou continued: “I’ve shot a lot of T-Powder and it is sensitive in certain way. I feel this new powder is equal to, if not better than, a T-Powder clone because 8208 XBR is not sensitive. I can shoot the same load, at any location, in any temperature or humidity. Additionally, and this is very important — the new powder is very forgiving. It has a very broad accuracy window. If you’re shooting 30.0 grains in a 6 PPC successfully, we found you could go down to 29.8, or up to 30.2 and the accuracy was still there. You won’t see a change in group size. It has a very wide and forgiving load window.”

The new powder is versatile and has plenty of energy. Lou tells us “8208 XBR is a great powder. With a 6 PPC shooting 68-grainers, I can get up into the 3500 fps range. And the powder will work with larger cases too. I’ve tried it with success in a 6BR with 105s and I think it will work in a Dasher or 6 BRX. I also shot it in a 22BR successfully.”

Lou predicts that IMR 8208 XBR will have a big impact on the Benchrest game once it is widely available: “Once this powder gets in people’s hands I think you’re going to see GREAT things. It’s not finicky. It meters really well out of normal powder measures. It’s really stable. There are plusses all around. We’ll know within a year whether it becomes the powder to beat.”

Lou is no longer involved in the sale or distribution of IMR 8208 XBR: “I’m not in it any more. I have to buy my powder like everyone else.” But he encourages all BR shooters to give it a try: “The powder is fantastic. I have been telling everyone to go to your powder dealers and order it. Buy a jug and shoot it.”

Lou has high praise for the folks at Hodgdon: “You can’t say enough good things about Chris Hodgdon and Hodgdon’s willingness to develop this new powder. They’ve finally given us something we’ve really wanted and really needed. What they have done is great.”

davery25 · April 30, 2014, 08:59 AM

Brilliant posts! I'll give the stuff a try. It's known as benchmark 8208 here. There is no ar2210 for sale on ADI's website.

I'm looking to use the powder in a Howa 1500 varmint 1-in-12 twist 223 rem with 55 grain nosler shots projectiles and a Remington 700 varmint 22-250 with a 1 in 14 twist and the same projectiles

**Unclenick** · April 30, 2014, 09:25 AM

Sorry about the AR2210. That must be proprietary to what ADI makes for Hodgdon. I know ADI had BM and then BM2. Sounds like they've upped the ante with the Benchmark 8208 designation. I'm going to go look at their web site and see what's current. Below is what the deal was last time I looked into it.

Bullets and twist rates?

Code:

Powder Equivalents from 2009 MSDS sheets (some newer ones lack the powder name information).
Note that bulk grade versions have wider burn rate specs and can vary significantly from the
canister grades, which are controlled for burn rate by blending with held back fast or slow 
lots, as needed to adjust them to within ±3% of their nominal burn rates.

     Canister      | Bulk Grade |       Canister         | Canister |      Canister        |
      Grade        |            |        Grade           |  Grade   |       Grade          |
                   | St. Marks  |                        |          |                      |
     Hodgdon       | Mil & OEM  |      Winchester        | Thales   |        IMR           |
___________________|__Numbers___|________________________|__(ADI)___|______________________|_
                   |            |                        |          |                      |
HP-38--------------|-- OBP231 --|- 231 ------------------|----------|----------------------|-
                   |   OBP124   |  AALite (WFL)          |          |                      |
Titewad            |   OBP132   |                        |          |                      |
Tightgroup --------|-- OBP242 --|------------------------|----------|----------------------|-
                   |   OBP465   |  Super-Handicap (WSH)  |          |                      |
Longshot           |   OBP473   |                        |          |                      |
Lil' Gun ----------|-- OBP516 --|------------------------|----------|----------------------|-
Hybrid 100V        |   SHP771   |                        |          |                      |
                   |   SMP224   |  AutoComp              |          |                      |
-------------------|--- WAA90 --|- WST ------------------|----------|----------------------|-
H110               |    WC296   |  296                   |          |                      |
HS-6               |    WC540   |  540                   |          |                      |
-------------------|--- WC748 --|- 748 ------------------|----------|----------------------|-
H414               |    WC760   |  760                   |          |                      |
H335               |    WC844   |                        |          |                      |
BL-C(2)------------|--- WC846 --|------------------------|----------|----------------------|-
H380               |    WC852   |                        |          |                      |
US869              |    WC869   |                        |          |                      |
-------------------|-- WMR780 --|- Supreme 780 ----------|----------|----------------------|-
                   |   WXC170   |  WSF                   |          |                      |
Clays              |            |                        |  AS30N   |                      |
International Clays|------------|------------------------|- AS50N --|----------------------|-
Universal Clays    |            |                        |  AP70N   |                      |
H4227              |            |                        |  AR2205  |IMR 4227 second source|
H4198 -------------|------------|------------------------|- AR2207 -|----------------------|-
Benchmark          |            |                        |   BM2    |                      |
H322               |            |                        |  AR2219  |                      |
-------------------|------------|------------------------|- AR2210 -|- IMR 8208 XBR -------|-
H4895              |            |                        |  AR2206H |                      |
Varget             |            |                        |  AR2208  |                      |
H4350 -------------|------------|------------------------|- AR2209 -|----------------------|-
H4831              |            |                        |  AR2213  |                      |
H4831SC            |            |                        | AR2213SC |                      |
H1000 -------------|------------|------------------------|- AR2217 -|----------------------|-
Retumbo            |            |                        |  AR2225  |                      |
H50BMG             |            |                        |  AR2218  |                      |
-------------------|------------|------------------------|- AR2215 -|IMR 4198 second source|
                   |            |                        |  AS25BP  |IMR Trail Boss        |

davery25 · August 15, 2014, 08:26 PM

Just an update, I ended up selling both the Howa and the Remington and buying a Tikka T3 in 223 (for the 8 twist barrel) and tried out some 69 grain SMKs with a range of different powders - AR2206H (H4895), Benchmark 2 (Benchmark), RL15 and Benchmark 8208 as per the above.

Benchmark is by far the best performing for my calibre/rifle/bullet combo. Some 3 shot groups with the holes touching. Perhaps more/most importantly - throughout the entire load range they all hit to the same point of impact. Other powders performed just as well or only marginally worse but POI changed throughout the charge range.

This powder's here to stay

nemesiss45 · August 16, 2014, 01:22 AM

that's what really got me with my load testing. except the extreme ends of the safe load range, the poa was very close across the whole spectrum of charge weight

cryogenic419 · August 17, 2014, 06:54 AM

I use it in .223 for 69, 77 and 80 grain bullets. This stuff is AMAZING. Velocity is good, relatively clean burning, meters decent enough plus all the other stuff like temp insensitivity. Funny thing is I stumbled onto this stuff by accident, was looking for a powder to just try out with some 69 SMK's, went shopping for powder at a local shop and they had a very limited selection at the time but they had tons of this. I figured if nothing else I'd have some powder for plinking ammo for some .308 168 grainers. Turned out this stuff rocked anything I loaded with it. Its the only powder I use in 69gr and up .223 and only powder I use for .308.

Bart B. · August 17, 2014, 08:39 AM

davery25, I suggest you judge the accuracy of your stuff by the size of the largest group with a given load. Why? The smallest groups of any load happen when all the variables cancel each other out; they'll never be smaller than zero. The largest groups happen when all those variables add up in all directions. There's no limit to their size. After testing several loads the one whose largest group is the smallest of all, that's the one whose variables are the smallest.

One 12-shot group is a better measure of accuracy than four 3-shot ones. It's typically a lot bigger than the largest 3-shot group. All the groups' sizes are zero at the muzzle, aren't they?

Most folks want their reloads to be very repeatable. All those variables need to be as small as possible; right? Their impact on accuracy is masked when they cancel each other out. Their combined effect on accuracy is revealed in the largest groups.

davery25 · August 17, 2014, 08:12 PM

That's a great point Bart. Accuracy tests between H4895 and 8208 show that the largest group with 8208 is only a hair smaller than H4895. That could really be luck, however all the other groups are consistently smaller and all hit to the same POI

Both powders are performers though. I'll load 20 rounds of each and do two 10 shot groups with each for a final verdict.

April 30, 2014, 08:11 AM	#7
Unclenick Staff Join Date: March 4, 2005 Location: Ohio Posts: 21,063	Mehavey, Are you sure you are not crossing 8208 up with one of the WC800 numbers? I'm not finding the number in my older load data (70's). 8208 XBR is currently supplied by ADI in Australia, where it is sold as AR2210. Benchmark is also an ADI sourced powder, sold Down Under as BM2. Both are formulated the way the Hodgdon Extreme powders are, for low temperature sensitivity. It and Trail Boss and IMR 4198 and IMR 4227 are all currently sourced from ADI according to the MSDS sheets. I'm not sure why the latter two were changed from the Valleyfield plant in Canada. Davery25, More information might be useful. Name your bullet choices and barrel twist rates, especially. Knowing your primers and barrel lengths could also help. Hodgdon's relative burn rate chart does show 8208 XBR as slower. However, the charge weights and performance they list in .223 only corresponds to that with light bullets. As you get to 50 grain bullets and up, it looks like the 8208 starts to behave as the faster of the two powders. At 53 grains Hodgdon data has a lower charge weights of 8208 making higher pressures, with lower velocity and higher peak pressure at the low end, and slightly higher velocity with higher peak pressure at maximum. That's typical of faster powder performance. The above is not an expected result, but I've seen something similar before. IMR 4895 and IMR 4064 exchange relative burn rate order in the .308 with heavy (180 grain) bullets. Charge weight of 4064 needed to produce 2200 fps is lower than the weight of 4895 needed. But the weight of 4064 needed to produce 2500 fps is greater than the amount of 4895 needed. This is caused by grain geometry differences giving 4064 a lower weight to velocity change slope in a filled case operating at near normal peak pressures. It has to be kept in mind that relative burn rate in the charts is true under just one set of test conditions. Different bullet weights and peak pressure levels in chamberings with different expansion ratios are not married to those fixed condition burn rate results. It's a case of YMMV. Bottom line is not to count on 8208 to behave like a slower powder in your particular circumstance. It may or may not produce differences in barrel time large enough to improve precision on the target. Only trying will tell. Without more information about your bullets and bores, though, it's hard to try to guess whether or not you'd do better with another choice. __________________ Gunsite Orange Hat Family Member CMP Certified GSM Master Instructor NRA Certified Rifle Instructor NRA Benefactor Member and Golden Eagle

August 17, 2014, 08:39 AM	#14
Bart B. Senior Member Join Date: February 15, 2009 Posts: 8,927	davery25, I suggest you judge the accuracy of your stuff by the size of the largest group with a given load. Why? The smallest groups of any load happen when all the variables cancel each other out; they'll never be smaller than zero. The largest groups happen when all those variables add up in all directions. There's no limit to their size. After testing several loads the one whose largest group is the smallest of all, that's the one whose variables are the smallest. One 12-shot group is a better measure of accuracy than four 3-shot ones. It's typically a lot bigger than the largest 3-shot group. All the groups' sizes are zero at the muzzle, aren't they? Most folks want their reloads to be very repeatable. All those variables need to be as small as possible; right? Their impact on accuracy is masked when they cancel each other out. Their combined effect on accuracy is revealed in the largest groups. Last edited by Bart B.; August 17, 2014 at 08:46 AM.

April 30, 2014, 02:01 AM	#1
davery25 Senior Member Join Date: October 4, 2011 Location: Australia Posts: 318	IMR 8208 XBR / Benchmark 8208 - anyone using this? As per the title - looks to be a new powder and claims great accuracy and very clean burning with very little variation from lot to lot. I'm tempted but it's a tad slower than Benchmark which claims similar and I've had no luck with in my 223 or 22-250 Anyone used it?

April 30, 2014, 03:29 AM	#2
nemesiss45 Senior Member Join Date: February 6, 2014 Posts: 526	I am using it for my .308. I have not been reloading long enough to give a lot of comparisons, but it is my favorite powder for my .308 so far. It meters very well and I have had great accuracy results with it. from the testing I have done, it got me about a 20% improvement over my previous go to load. obviously your results may vary.... but I'd say give it a shot.

April 30, 2014, 05:34 AM	#3
mehavey Senior Member Join Date: June 17, 2010 Location: Virginia Posts: 6,894	8208 is the cat's meow for heavier (120-123gr) bullets in the 6.5 Grendel. That, along w/ AA2520. It's not a new powder. Rather, it's been around a loooong time (mid 60s) and is just recently now "rediscovered." http://www.longrangehunting.com/arti...r-review-1.php

April 30, 2014, 05:43 AM	#4
davery25 Senior Member Join Date: October 4, 2011 Location: Australia Posts: 318	hmmmm, you guys are tempting me now. The real question is - would you choose it over Varget or 4895?

April 30, 2014, 05:45 AM	#5
mehavey Senior Member Join Date: June 17, 2010 Location: Virginia Posts: 6,894	What cartridge? If the 223 or 22-250, I'd add it to your powder collection.

April 30, 2014, 06:51 AM	#6
pctechdude Senior Member Join Date: March 5, 2013 Posts: 159	I use 8208 in my 223 rem loads, with a 55gr BT fmj, or 55gr vmax and a charge of 25.4gr. I've ran this load through a lot of guns and all have shown great accuracy. This ranges from bolt rifles, single shots and multiple AR-15's.

April 30, 2014, 08:59 AM	#9
davery25 Senior Member Join Date: October 4, 2011 Location: Australia Posts: 318	Brilliant posts! I'll give the stuff a try. It's known as benchmark 8208 here. There is no ar2210 for sale on ADI's website. I'm looking to use the powder in a Howa 1500 varmint 1-in-12 twist 223 rem with 55 grain nosler shots projectiles and a Remington 700 varmint 22-250 with a 1 in 14 twist and the same projectiles

August 15, 2014, 08:26 PM	#11
davery25 Senior Member Join Date: October 4, 2011 Location: Australia Posts: 318	Just an update, I ended up selling both the Howa and the Remington and buying a Tikka T3 in 223 (for the 8 twist barrel) and tried out some 69 grain SMKs with a range of different powders - AR2206H (H4895), Benchmark 2 (Benchmark), RL15 and Benchmark 8208 as per the above. Benchmark is by far the best performing for my calibre/rifle/bullet combo. Some 3 shot groups with the holes touching. Perhaps more/most importantly - throughout the entire load range they all hit to the same point of impact. Other powders performed just as well or only marginally worse but POI changed throughout the charge range. This powder's here to stay

August 16, 2014, 01:22 AM	#12
nemesiss45 Senior Member Join Date: February 6, 2014 Posts: 526	that's what really got me with my load testing. except the extreme ends of the safe load range, the poa was very close across the whole spectrum of charge weight

August 17, 2014, 06:54 AM	#13
cryogenic419 Senior Member Join Date: March 29, 2009 Location: NW Ohio Posts: 569	I use it in .223 for 69, 77 and 80 grain bullets. This stuff is AMAZING. Velocity is good, relatively clean burning, meters decent enough plus all the other stuff like temp insensitivity. Funny thing is I stumbled onto this stuff by accident, was looking for a powder to just try out with some 69 SMK's, went shopping for powder at a local shop and they had a very limited selection at the time but they had tons of this. I figured if nothing else I'd have some powder for plinking ammo for some .308 168 grainers. Turned out this stuff rocked anything I loaded with it. Its the only powder I use in 69gr and up .223 and only powder I use for .308.

August 17, 2014, 08:12 PM	#15
davery25 Senior Member Join Date: October 4, 2011 Location: Australia Posts: 318	That's a great point Bart. Accuracy tests between H4895 and 8208 show that the largest group with 8208 is only a hair smaller than H4895. That could really be luck, however all the other groups are consistently smaller and all hit to the same POI Both powders are performers though. I'll load 20 rounds of each and do two 10 shot groups with each for a final verdict.