Spherical or Extruded

[ncrypt]

Guys, I have a few powders I want to try since there is still a shortage, but I can't determine if they are spherical or extruded. I checked the manufactures sites and no luck. I was hoping you guys that have used them could help.

IMR
1-4064
2-3031

Alliance
1-Reloader10
2-Reloader15
3-ARCOMP

thanks

[Huffmanite]

IMRs are extruded

Alliant ARcomp should be spherical, not sure about the rest.

[PawPaw]

RL10 and RL15 are stick (extruded) powder.

Don't let extruded bother you. RL15 is my go-to for several calibers.

[ncrypt]

Thanks guys. Very helpful. I actually prefer extruded.

[RC20]

I like extruded for rifle but spherical or flake does fine in pistol

[Marco Califo]

Ball or spherical powders have been used in all U.S. Mil spec rifle ammo for years. 5.56, 7.62. Specifically: 5.56 in M193 and M855 are WC844 (available as surplus), retail canister version is H335; 7.62 147 grain FMJ is WC846, retail canister version is BLC (2). The military has a policy of testing and only accepting powders the go bang reliably and consistently.

[Snyper]

I like to use ball powders whenever I can simply because they measure smoothly and consistantly compared to "stick" powders.

There's not much difference in performance between types

[PawPaw]

From the Alliant website, specifically the Reloder 15 page:

Selected as the powder for U.S. Military's M118 special ball long range sniper round.

If it's good enough for military long range ammo, it's good enough for me.

[Marco Califo]

Yes, Reloader 15 is the one exception: the only extruded powder used in a current small arms military loading.
I would try it if I could find some.
P.S. It isn't made in USA

[mnoirot64]

I shoot a lot of Alliant Reloder. Specifically R 19 and R 22 in heavy magnum loads. They've both been great powders for me - although I do not use a case activated powder drop with either one.

[William T. Watts]

RL15 may be an extruded powder (stick) it still is a double base powder like the ball powders, It doesn't burn as cleanly as the IMR series (single base)! When I load/use this powder I use mag primers to help it burn a little cleaner in 22/250 and 30/06! William

[Jimro]

PawPaw,

Three extruded powders have been used for the "military's sniper round"
IMR 4895 in M118SB
Reloader 15 for M118LR
IMR 4064 for Mk316 Mod 0.

Two spherical powders have also been used.
WC 846 in M118SB
WC 750 in M118LR

The spherical powders were known to produce sub par accuracy compared to the easier to light stick powders. This was noted with regular M80 ball by a DTIC study in the 90s when they were looking at a 4 millisecond delay in ignition that was troubling for adoption of the M134 minigun.

Bart B. has noted that the accuracy acceptance standards couldn't tell a difference between the ball and stick lots from a fixed accuracy device, but the shooters sure could. Which makes sense as the arsenal primers of the era were not designed with accuracy in mind.

That being said, nothing wrong with Reloader15. It is very consistent lot to lot.

Jimro

[markr]

Doesn't it seem slightly annoying that powder cannisters don't tell you what type of powder it is? As in extruded, spearical, or flake? WTH?

[Marco Califo]

the arsenal primers of the era were not designed with accuracy in mind.

@Jimro: I am curious, was this before CCI reworked the formulas for igniting ball powders? Which would then be pre#34 and #41?

[Jimro]

Marco,

Yes and no, not all of this story happened before CCI reworked their primers. For a long time arsenal rounds used #34 and #43 primers. The #34 was used in M80 ball.

Remington ran Lake City up until 1985 when Winchester/Olin took over, then lost the contract to Alliant/ATK in 2001.

So you could say that Remington produced sniper ammunition 1985 and prior
M118 (IMR 4895) 173gr FMJBT (1963-1982)
M118SB (IMR4895, WC846) 173gr FMJBT (1983)
M852 (IMR4895) 168gr SMK (1982)

Then Winchester took over and produced
M118SB (IMR 4895, WC846) 173gr FMJBT until 1994
M852 (IMR 4895) 168 SMK last known production 1992?
M118LR (WC750) 175gr SMK 1995
M118LR (Re15) 175gr SMK 1997

ATK
M118LR (Reloader15) 175gr SMK 2001 to present

And then NSWC Crane came up with M118LR Mk316 Mod 0 and Federal (also owned by ATK) is the sole producer.
M118LR Mk316 Mod 0 uses, Fed Match Brass, Fed GMM Primer, IMR4064, and 175gr SMK. The earliest date stamp I've seen on Mk316 Mod0 bullets was 2007 if I recall correctly.

They say that CCI reformulated their primers to deal with ball powders in the early 90's as best I know.

The powder/primer issue with ball powders wasn't noted as far as I know until 1998. http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA341390

The M118SB lots were sometimes loaded with M80 brass, using the same primer. The M118LR primers are a bit of a mystery, but the Mk316 Mod 0 primers are definitely FGMM.

Anyways, you can tell that by 1998 the government had figured out that the #43 primer wasn't as good as the #34 primer for positive ignition, that the WC846 powder wasn't as good as WC846 Flash Suppressed (WC846FS) and that WC749 and WC750 were very much like WC846. All of this is from a powder/primer positive ignition reference as to what "good" or "better" means.

I might be off on some of the dates, a lot of this is straight from memory without notes, so take it with a grain of salt.

Jimro

[Marco Califo]

Thanks Jimro. It was/is my understanding that the reformulation of primers for igniting ball powders solved an ignition issue. Then the next logical question is did fixing the ignition fix the accuracy anomaly? IMO ball powders work fine, but I am far from a competition shooter although I will take on any AR shooter at 400 yard steel plates (I will shoot a Savage bolt gun), and let them use Extruded, while I won't. I am not convinced that I NEED to use only extruded powders, yet that is what I read here often.

[PawPaw]

Originally Posted by Jimro

Three extruded powders have been used for the "military's sniper round"
IMR 4895 in M118SB
Reloader 15 for M118LR
IMR 4064 for Mk316 Mod 0

.

I'm aware, Jim, and I'm a big fan of IMR 4895. It's one of the standard powders on my bench and when I'm playing with a new caliber, one of the first things I do is find a 4895 load for it. Very versatile powder. It's also extremely versatile in reduced loads. Which reminds me, my last 8-lb jug is getting a bit light. I'll have to do something about that soon. There was a time when surplus 4895 was easy to find. Those days, I'm afraid, are long gone.

However, I do like RL15 in the .308, the .30-30, and the .223.

[Jimro]

Then the next logical question is did fixing the ignition fix the accuracy anomaly? IMO ball powders work fine, but I am far from a competition shooter although I will take on any AR shooter at 400 yard steel plates (I will shoot a Savage bolt gun), and let them use Extruded, while I won't. I am not convinced that I NEED to use only extruded powders, yet that is what I read here often.

Well, the Mk262 Mod 0 and Mod 1 match ammo for 5.56 uses ball powder and it has been winning matches without any problems.

Winchester used Win748 for commercial 308 match ammo for a bit without any serious complaints that I know about.

That being said, I think that if there is an ignition problem with your load, it will show up in the standing or slung shooting positions, and not from a bipod or rest. But you won't know if you load has an ignition problem for real without some serious internal ballistic measuring tools.

Then again, it wouldn't surprise me if stick powders do perform better than ball powders in 308. German Salazaar has noted that the most mild primers produce the lowest velocity SD, and when you are using mild primers you need a powder that is easier to ignite and stick is easier than ball in this regard.

My thoughts? You can create sub MOA ammo using ball powder. Lots of handloaders do it. If you aren't shooting at the David Tubb/Shirley Gallagher/Bart Bobbit level of three position rifle shooting, you will never notice the difference in powder as you are going to be the weak link in the accuracy triangle (shooter, rifle, ammo).

Jimro