The Firing Line Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old August 25, 2015, 01:31 PM   #1
Wendyj
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 3, 2015
Location: North Georgia
Posts: 1,276
IMR 4166

This powder keeps popping up in magazines and people at my range. It shows it helping keep barrel cleaner and supposedly does well in 308 based cartridges. I bought a lb today to experiment with. Anyone use this in 260 or 308? Wanting to try it out in my 260 with some Sierra Match Kings. According to chart just a tad faster than IMR 4064. It seems very plentiful around here.
__________________
God is NOT dead!!!!
Wendyj is offline  
Old August 25, 2015, 02:05 PM   #2
T. O'Heir
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 13, 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 11,121
Hi. Stuff's only been on the market since last October. Hard to tell if Hodgdon's claims about copper fouling are true.
__________________
Spelling and grammar count!
T. O'Heir is offline  
Old August 25, 2015, 02:13 PM   #3
Wendyj
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 3, 2015
Location: North Georgia
Posts: 1,276
Yes, thank you. I usually put around 10 Barnes along with a bunch of 140 gr smk every range session. The copper fouling really sucks to clean. Doesn't fill case to much capacity with me backing off to 33 grains. 44.5 max according to Hodgdon. That's not a Barnes load. Not a lot of load information for it. 260 shoots best around 24-2500 fps with any bullet I've found. That seems to match speed from Nosler but won't know until I chrono.
__________________
God is NOT dead!!!!
Wendyj is offline  
Old August 25, 2015, 02:23 PM   #4
T. O'Heir
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 13, 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 11,121
"...44.5 max according to Hodgdon..." That supposed to be 34.5?
Don't load .260 myself. My 90 grain .243 ground hog fightin' ammo likes IMR4350. Uses a bit more powder for 1 fps less velocity. Pressures are in CUP for the 4350 vs the PSI for the 4166.
You using a Barnes manual? Their site is decidedly limited.
__________________
Spelling and grammar count!
T. O'Heir is offline  
Old August 25, 2015, 02:58 PM   #5
Wendyj
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 3, 2015
Location: North Georgia
Posts: 1,276
That a typo on my part. iPad keys too small for even little fingers. Yes, I have a Barnes manual. No, this powder isn't even listed for the 129 lxr. Bullet was new enough I had to call Barnes for load data. Been using H4350 and IMR 4350 and the Hodgdon wins for accuracy at 41 grains seated at 2.750. I tried a little longer but these things like a jump in my Tikka. They listed Hybrid 100 V as most accurate powder.
Hodgdon lists 31.7 to 34.5 for the IMR 4166. That's for a Nosler partition 140 grain but I mainly shoot 140 smk and 129 Hornady sst out of mine. The Barnes are tack drivers out to 500 yards but I've got a lot of work to do to push them any farther with accuracy. At 600 they open up like shotgun rounds.
__________________
God is NOT dead!!!!
Wendyj is offline  
Old August 26, 2015, 01:03 PM   #6
T. O'Heir
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 13, 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 11,121
Hi. Full size PC key boards aren't any better. They're not made for adult fingers. Have to proofread everything. snicker.
The maker of the bullet doesn't matter. Only the weight matters. So the load for a Nosler 140 will be the same as a 140 Match King. Pretty much the same price for the bullets too. Nosler stuff is horrendously expensive
I've been wondering if the 4166 is 4064 with the addition of the copper fighting chemical. Velocities etc are really close.
__________________
Spelling and grammar count!
T. O'Heir is offline  
Old August 26, 2015, 04:00 PM   #7
Wendyj
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 3, 2015
Location: North Georgia
Posts: 1,276
I should preview mine but sometimes get in a hurry. Burn rate chart shows 4166 as number 94 and 4064 is number 95. They can't be too much difference. You can see the large flakes like 4064 has and a much smaller flake of a different color I'm guessing is the cleaning agent. I am going on call Friday and won't get to shoot until next weekend. I'm curious of what chron readings are going to be. I'll post back when I get a chance to try some in the 260 and 308.
__________________
God is NOT dead!!!!
Wendyj is offline  
Old August 27, 2015, 12:20 PM   #8
T. O'Heir
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 13, 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 11,121
Hi. It's hard to compare 'em as Hodgdon gives 4064 pressures in CUP and 4166 in PSI for the .243 data. There is no converting that one to the other either. I'm just thinking velocities with a given load. Mind you, their .260 data shows slightly less powder gives slightly less speed, but more pressure with the 4166. Don't think it makes much difference.
__________________
Spelling and grammar count!
T. O'Heir is offline  
Old August 27, 2015, 07:05 PM   #9
stubbicatt
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 15, 2007
Posts: 1,707
T O'Heir, I'm pretty sure that while bullet weights matter a great deal in terms of powder charge, so too does bearing surface. Unless I really missed the mark here, the Barnes pure copper slugs are significantly longer, with longer bearing surfaces, than traditional lead core, gilding metal jacketed, bullets.

I'm not sure, but I recollect that the Barnes bullets do require a lighter load to achieve similar pressures.
stubbicatt is offline  
Old August 27, 2015, 07:38 PM   #10
Reloader2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 18, 2013
Posts: 252
Quote:
Originally Posted by stubbicatt View Post
T O'Heir, I'm pretty sure that while bullet weights matter a great deal in terms of powder charge, so too does bearing surface. Unless I really missed the mark here, the Barnes pure copper slugs are significantly longer, with longer bearing surfaces, than traditional lead core, gilding metal jacketed, bullets.



I'm not sure, but I recollect that the Barnes bullets do require a lighter load to achieve similar pressures.

This makes more sense than all bullets give the same pressure with the same load. Could cause trouble if you don't pay attention to the details.
Reloader2 is offline  
Old August 28, 2015, 12:01 PM   #11
Wendyj
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 3, 2015
Location: North Georgia
Posts: 1,276
The Barnes bullets are a different animal of their own. I had to contact Barnes for load data and seating depth on the 127 grain lxr. It has its own powder of H4350 at 41 grains. Seated 2.750. I stretched a few out to 2.80 and group size changed considerably. They will hold .35 at a hundred with their specs. That's about 2500 fps on the chronograph. The IMR 4166 seems to have better powder charges for the .308. I picked up some IMR 4451 which is supposed to be closer to my 260 loads. Can't do much more than experiment with both and ladder up until I see pressure signs. Both powders are getting really good reviews but of course my loading manuals don't show these powders. Hodgdon does have loads in their manual for them so I'm just going with their mid range loads to start. I have a muzzle brake on the 260 and the 308 and haven't loaded any of these in 308 yet but muzzle flash in 260 is almost nonexistent. I'll be loading this week and shooting next weekend.
__________________
God is NOT dead!!!!
Wendyj is offline  
Old August 28, 2015, 02:44 PM   #12
T. O'Heir
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 13, 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 11,121
Not talking about the bullet at all. Just the powders.
"...Barnes bullets are a different animal of their own..." Hi. Yep. Been saying that for years now. And getting all kinds of daft comments from others. Some don't seem to get it that a solid copper bullet is less dense than a lead cored bullet. Mentioned that a solid copper flies differently than a lead cored on another forum and got an excrement storm of FNG's whining about it.
I kind of suspect Hodgdon may have invented their CFE powder line specifically for solids. Don't know for sure.
__________________
Spelling and grammar count!
T. O'Heir is offline  
Old August 28, 2015, 02:50 PM   #13
Jimro
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 18, 2006
Posts: 7,097
Hodgdon didn't develop the CFE line, General Dynamic did for military reasons. Newer lead free projectiles were causing excess copper fouling the older FMJ with exposed lead base didn't.

Barnes bullets had nothing to do with it, people just aren't running those solids through their hunting barrels the same way a military machinegun is pushing through ammo.

But, for a lot of folks it's a dang good improvement that helps with barrel maintenance.

Jimro
__________________
Machine guns are awesome until you have to carry one.
Jimro is offline  
Old August 28, 2015, 05:55 PM   #14
9MMand223only
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 30, 2014
Posts: 172
I got 8 lbs of IMR 4166 if anyone wants it around NW Georgia.

Its pretty good for heavier 223 and 308.

I just like TAC better
9MMand223only is offline  
Old August 29, 2015, 11:42 AM   #15
T. O'Heir
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 13, 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 11,121
Hi, Jimro. Excellent info. Always laughed when in the CF, long ago. The only thing we got for cleaning everything from .22's to at least .50 BMG's was regular motor oil. Forget if it was 5w or 10w. Wasn't a drop of any kind of solvent in the entire CF supply system.
__________________
Spelling and grammar count!
T. O'Heir is offline  
Old August 29, 2015, 01:22 PM   #16
Jimro
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 18, 2006
Posts: 7,097
Motor oil is great for carbon fouling. I used it, and ATF, a lot on machine guns.

It's always funny how some military veterans swore by "Breakfree" because they used it all those years cleaning everything from M16s to M2s.

The exposed lead base of the bullet really helps reduce copper fouling, atomized lead mixes with hot copper to form a highly brittle amalgamate which doesn't stick to the bore.

Then they get a hunting rifle, or join a military rifle team, and start shooting bullets with reverse drawn jackets which don't have exposed lead, and all of a sudden "Breakfree" doesn't work so well...

A couple years back I had a crazy idea to buy some micronized tin dioxide to mix in with my reloads so I wouldn't have to buy new CFE powders... But I never got around to it, or trying the cheaper version and just adding a small sliver of lead or solder compound to the mix. They used to do that with artillery shells, putting elemental lead inside the shell to decopper the tube...

Jimro
__________________
Machine guns are awesome until you have to carry one.
Jimro is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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 08:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2018 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.07843 seconds with 8 queries