The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Skunkworks > Handloading, Reloading, and Bullet Casting

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old July 6, 2012, 08:26 AM   #1
rebs
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 10, 2012
Posts: 2,232
H335, varget or ?

what is a good powder other than H335 or Varget for the 223 ar-15 with a 16" barrel ?
rebs is offline  
Old July 6, 2012, 08:51 AM   #2
CrustyFN
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 4, 2006
Location: West Virginia
Posts: 2,258
I have used H-335, Varget, BL(C)2 and W-748. They all work but I like H-335 best.
__________________
I don't ever remember being absent minded.
CrustyFN is offline  
Old July 6, 2012, 08:53 AM   #3
ScottRiqui
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 27, 2010
Location: Norfolk, VA
Posts: 2,905
I've liked H335 the best so far as well. But, I was given eight pounds of AA2230, and I'm almost out of H335, so I'm hoping I like the 2230 too.
ScottRiqui is offline  
Old July 6, 2012, 09:05 AM   #4
browninghunter86
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 14, 2011
Posts: 524
I have some but have yet to try it but IMR 8208 XBR is suppose to be a good option. H335 for plinking and Varget for heavier match bullet is what I have been working on with good results
browninghunter86 is offline  
Old July 6, 2012, 09:06 AM   #5
GlenF
Member
 
Join Date: April 4, 2011
Location: Lawrence, Kansas
Posts: 63
335 & Varget

The only powder I would suggest other than the ones you mentioned would be Benchmark. It is very good in 223 for the 50 and 55 grain bullets I have worked with.

Are you set on a certain bullet?
GlenF is offline  
Old July 6, 2012, 09:10 AM   #6
Wyoredman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 6, 2011
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 1,256
I have done some testing with CFE223. Here is a link to my post on TFL showing velocities at different loads of CFE223 and standard vs. magnum primers. http://thefiringline.com/forums/show...ghlight=cfe223

The CFE223 really did keep the copper fouling to a minimum. After fireing the rounds for this test, I cleaned my bore with Barnes copper remover and only needed one patch. Normally it takes four or five wet patches and some heavy scrubbing to to get the copper out of my barrel!

I didn't have a good day for accuracy, but I am going to work some loads with CFE223 if it ever cools off! 90+ degrees around here makes it hard to sit at the range!
__________________
Go Pokes!
Go Rams!

Last edited by Wyoredman; July 6, 2012 at 09:31 AM. Reason: Spelling correctios
Wyoredman is offline  
Old July 6, 2012, 09:34 AM   #7
jimkim
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 3, 2008
Location: middle GA
Posts: 319
I'd give H322, and IMR-4198 a try.
__________________
Jan. 4, 2007 gasoline $2.10 gal....HMMM?
jimkim is offline  
Old July 6, 2012, 09:53 AM   #8
603Country
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 6, 2011
Location: Thornton, Texas
Posts: 2,270
I use H335 for the 40 grainers and AA2230 for the 65 grainers. I use near max loads of each. I was going to try the 2230 on the smaller bullet, but the H335 shot so well I just went with it.
603Country is offline  
Old July 6, 2012, 11:02 AM   #9
homesick
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 11, 2011
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 321
My sons AR does well with Benchmark and CFE223 / he shooting 69 gr Sierras in it. He can put 10 shoots in 1.5" which is good if you consider the barrel lenght and trigger pull (which is really heavy).
homesick is offline  
Old July 6, 2012, 11:14 AM   #10
rebs
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 10, 2012
Posts: 2,232
I am mainly loading 55 gr Hornady bullets.

Thanks for all the replies
rebs is offline  
Old July 6, 2012, 11:28 AM   #11
TATER
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 19, 2002
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 921
I sometimes get all nostalgic, IMR-3031 and H-380
TATER is online now  
Old July 6, 2012, 04:25 PM   #12
DeadCenter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 17, 2006
Posts: 105
H335, H4198, Varget, I use them all in my AR loads, depends on the bullet I use as to which powered works best.
DeadCenter is offline  
Old July 6, 2012, 04:52 PM   #13
PawPaw
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 24, 2010
Location: Central Louisiana
Posts: 3,112
Or IMR 4895, or Reloder 15. Both work great in the AR15.
__________________
Dennis Dezendorf

http://pawpawshouse.blogspot.com
PawPaw is offline  
Old July 6, 2012, 08:53 PM   #14
rebs
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 10, 2012
Posts: 2,232
Quote:
H335, H4198, Varget, I use them all in my AR loads, depends on the bullet I use as to which powered works best.
which bullets have you found H335 to be the best with ?
rebs is offline  
Old July 6, 2012, 09:06 PM   #15
zxcvbob
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 20, 2007
Location: S.E. Minnesota
Posts: 4,193
How about H322?

I'm still using Varget. Gonna switch to WC844 for my 55-grain loads next time I do a batch, and keep using Varget for the 62's until I use it up.

CFE233 and SMP842 look intriguing, but I couldn't find any in stock anywhere so I bought 2 jugs of 844 instead. That will last me a long time.
__________________
"The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is with a good guy with a gun"
zxcvbob is online now  
Old July 7, 2012, 07:46 AM   #16
DeadCenter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 17, 2006
Posts: 105
Quote:
which bullets have you found H335 to be the best with ?
I get get excellent results with H335 and Midway 55gr HP Dogtown's. I am shooting these from a 20" 1-12 twist AR.
DeadCenter is offline  
Old July 7, 2012, 08:17 AM   #17
CrustyFN
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 4, 2006
Location: West Virginia
Posts: 2,258
Quote:
which bullets have you found H335 to be the best with ?
I have been shooting MOA and sub MOA with the bulk 55 grain Hornady FMJ-BT.

Quote:
I'm still using Varget. Gonna switch to WC844 for my 55-grain loads next time I do a batch, and keep using Varget for the 62's until I use it up.

CFE233 and SMP842 look intriguing, but I couldn't find any in stock anywhere so I bought 2 jugs of 844 instead. That will last me a long time.
I'm half way through a 8 pound bottle of WC-844 and get the same results as H-335.
__________________
I don't ever remember being absent minded.
CrustyFN is offline  
Old July 7, 2012, 12:06 PM   #18
rebs
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 10, 2012
Posts: 2,232
Quote:
I get get excellent results with H335 and Midway 55gr HP Dogtown's. I am shooting these from a 20" 1-12 twist AR.

How many grains of H335 ?
I have been getting good results using 24.0 gr with the 55 gr dogtowns and 24.5 with Hornady 55 gr fmjbt's
rebs is offline  
Old July 7, 2012, 04:41 PM   #19
Marco Califo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 4, 2011
Location: LA
Posts: 830
Military 844

I have both H335 and military surplus 844. They are said to use the same data: this means starting loads listed for 335 are starting loads for 844.
But I have found 844 to burn a little slower, and load more powder.
In other words I think 335 is hotter for the same measure, and would not use the same amount as 844; definitely less by volume.
I did work up to max 844 M193 load of 28.5 grns 55 gr fmj with no signs of excess pressure. But shooting those all day got my barrel very hot.

TM-43-0001-27

Propllant:
Type-----. WC844 or
CMR 170
Weight - 28.5 or 26.5 gr
Projectile:
Weight 56 gr
Performance:
Chamber pressure 52,000 psi
Velocity 3250 fps, 15 ft from
muzzle
__________________
........................................................

Last edited by Marco Califo; July 7, 2012 at 11:44 PM. Reason: Yes.
Marco Califo is online now  
Old July 7, 2012, 06:02 PM   #20
Unclenick
Staff
 
Join Date: March 4, 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 10,280
Marco,

That's normal. The reverse could just as easily be true on your next purchase.

Surplus WC844 will have been purchased in bulk. Bulk purchases are not blended to a standard burn rate the way canister grade stuff sold to handloaders is. The expectation is the loading manufacturer will use a pressure test gun to adjust his load, but the handloader will be stuck with published load data that doesn't vary, so the handloader needs a more consistent burn rate, even if it costs more to achieve that (and it does, which is why large scale ammo manufacturers buy in bulk and determine their own load data).

Hodgdon has H335 blended to ±3% of a nominal burn rate value where some bulk purchases can vary up to ±20% (though 10% seems to be more common). Anyway, if the seller is telling you H335 load data applies, then that should mean he tested it (and did not assume that) and found the minimum data was be safe. Data beyond that may not be safe or may still be underloaded, as you found out.
__________________
Gunsite Orange Hat Family Member
CMP Certified GSM Master Instructor
NRA Certified Rifle Instructor
NRA Benefactor Member
Unclenick is offline  
Old July 8, 2012, 12:23 AM   #21
Marco Califo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 4, 2011
Location: LA
Posts: 830
Thanks Nick

I bought mine from Wideners ($85+HZ+SH). I know they tested 846, and they have a note saying how they tested it. I wish they did that for 844, but they just say "If you reload 223 you know this powder."

http://www.gibrass.com/gunpowder.html Says:

"WC844 Original application is U.S. 5.56mm NATO Ball M193 (55gr) & M855 (62gr),
plus Tracer M196 & M856. Typical starting load for 55gr bullet is 26gr,
and 62gr bullet is 25gr. A ball powder which can be loaded with Hodgdon H335 data.
Also works great in 7.62mm NATO (.308 Win.).
This is pulldown powder.
$100/8# jug. $376 for 4 jugs. $528 for 6 jugs ($88ea)"

I trust their statement as it is consistent with TM-43-0001-27.

I am not disputing your post. My point though, despite lot variances, "was 844 actually a different powder than H335?"

I suspect 844, on average across all lots, actually burns slower. IF true (and that is a big IF) then 844 may be usable beyond H335 published loads, if it is actually a slower powder (and for me more useful than H335 is in loading 308).

I think sellers of surplus powders are ALWAYS going to reference a faster commercial powder, and Never reference an actually slower powder. To do so would risk pressure increases beyond SAAMI ranges. I think referencing an actual matching speed commercial powder is unlikely because that would not be safe with lot variances.

On the other hand, H335 may actually be a commercial version of 844 formula at the time Hodgdon introduced it, and both have been kept stable since. I don't know.

I was hoping Quickload would be able to shed light on this. However, I was disappointed to find their website does not list 844 as one of the powders it has data for (must only have H335).

I am just challenging the assumption they are really equivalent, or, do we reference H335 as convenient faster data to fill an inconvenient data void for an actual burn rate that is slower?
__________________
........................................................

Last edited by Marco Califo; July 8, 2012 at 09:31 AM.
Marco Califo is online now  
Old July 8, 2012, 10:43 PM   #22
Unclenick
Staff
 
Join Date: March 4, 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 10,280
Marco,

That WC844 is H335 is something I got from the 2009 Hodgdon MSDS sheet, along with those for a number of other relabeled powders. They are in the table below. The current (2011) Hodgdon MSDS for spherical propellants no longer has the alternate names available, but the Winchester one availale (2009) still does. The only difference is bulk grade verses cannister grade. Hodgdon keeps back bulk lots that turned out to be extra fast and extra slow, then blends those with new bulk lots as need to adjust the average burn rate to within 3% of nominal, thus creating a cannister grade blend. I got that straight from the mouth of one of Hodgdon's technicians. You can call them and verify it for your own satisfaction. They also have held back lots that are exactly average burn rate for doing their load data development.

Code:
                   | St. Marks  |                        | Thales   |                      |
     Hodgdon       | Mil & OEM  |      Winchester        | (ADI     |  IMR                 |   
___________________|__Numbers___|________________________|__________|______________________|_
                   |            |                        |          |                      |
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   |                        |          |
-------------------|--- 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
Don't put too much faith in TM-43-0001-27. It's just intended to provide examples, not to serve as a book of load recipes. Moreover, it has more than one error in it. For example, it says M2 Ball and M72 Match have the same 50 grain charge of IMR 4895. The actual historic average charge of IMR 4895 in M72 was 47.5 grains. You'd expect a smaller charge with a heavier bullet, anyway. You can see it in the last years in the table of National Match ammo loads below. Note that from 1962 on, Lake City gets quite a bit of velocity variation with different lots of IMR 4895, with lighter charges producing more velocity some years than heavier charges did in other years. That's all about lot burn rates differing. There is no one fixed recipe because bulk powder varies too much by lot to allow it.

The way the military develops a load is the bullets have to reach a certain velocity window within a certain pressure profile. If a particular bulk lot of powder cannot achieve that, the lot is rejected for use in that load. On another board a former Aberdeen Proving Grounds Test Director described how, in the 70's, they got two lots of WC852 (H380) for M2 Ball ammo, and how one lot would achieve the required velocities without the muzzle pressure getting too high for the Garand, but the other would not. They used both, but the latter lot was qualified for machinegun use only, and not for use in Garands. Unfortunately the DCM issued much of the machine gun stuff for Garand use during the 80's. As a result some op-rods met their maker prematurely. I still have some of those rounds. You can tell them by pulling the bullets and weighing the charges/ The average charge weight in the machine gun ammo is over 56 grains, while the good stuff is more like 53 grains, IIRC (haven't had any for awhile and don't recall an exact number; just that it was several grains lower).

What you have is pull-down powder from ammo deemed to be getting too old for stockpiling, so you know it qualified correctly at one time or it would not have been loaded in the subsequently pulled-down cartridges in the first place. But you just don't know exactly what charge weight they chose for that specific lot.

Bottom line, if you depend on recipes, only cannister grade powder will be sure match them well. Bulk lots may or may not. The cannister grades are indeed adjusted to about the average seen for the bulk grades, but being adjusted, they vary less from lot to lot.

__________________
Gunsite Orange Hat Family Member
CMP Certified GSM Master Instructor
NRA Certified Rifle Instructor
NRA Benefactor Member
Unclenick is offline  
Old July 9, 2012, 12:27 PM   #23
praetorian97
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 9, 2011
Location: Boise, ID
Posts: 455
My .02 is that they are both great but the h335 is slightly cheaper.

If you are loading something else like a 308 round then buy Varget because you can use them in both calibers.
praetorian97 is offline  
Old July 9, 2012, 02:41 PM   #24
droptrd
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 22, 2011
Location: Illinois
Posts: 310
im surprised nobody mentioned TAC. my best results (in an AR)with TAC. currently using CFE223. its pretty good as well
droptrd is offline  
Old July 23, 2012, 03:23 AM   #25
Marco Califo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 4, 2011
Location: LA
Posts: 830
844 is not = H335

844 is a bit slower.

"161 SP 10, Vectan
162 H-335, Hodgdon
163 R 903, RWS
164 WC 844
165 BL-C(2), Hodgdon
166 WC 846
167 SP 9, Vectan
168 2460, Accurate
169 SP 7, Vectan
170 Reloder lOx, Alliant
171 W-748, Winchester
172 W-748BR, Winchester
173 TAC, Ramshot
174 2495, Accurate
175 Reloder 11, Hercules
176 Reloder 12, Alliant
177 N135, Vihtavuori
178 IMR-4064, ll\1R
179 Brigadier 4065- Scot
180 Varget, Hodgdon
181 Leverevolution, Hodgdon
182 2520, Accurate
183 N-202, Norma
184 XMR-4064, Accurate
185 4064, Accurate
"

Attached list from: http://www.castpics.net/LoadData/Main.html
Attached Files
File Type: pdf BurnRates.pdf (10.7 KB, 9 views)
__________________
........................................................

Last edited by Marco Califo; July 23, 2012 at 03:31 AM.
Marco Califo is online now  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:18 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.13239 seconds with 10 queries