Correlations of powder burn and alloy in PP

[John McCorkle]

So attempting my first pp loads in my 06...going with some Lee 309-160 I have on hand at around 14 bhn...

I have seen a load of 2400 do very well with most weights charging from 16-21 grains...but looking at the burn/pressure profile on quick load it looks pretty tame in comparison to other powders.

Could a higher charge of 2400 or for that matter much faster burning powder like unique work on paper patched bullets or slow like a 4064 or 4895? Looking for good case fill out without filler used (just a bit leery of fillers in 06) with something you get around 23-2400 fps with this bullet...

What is the correlation between alloy and powder burn rate when paper patch is used? Roughly the same? Does the bullet have more tolerance for powder and charges of those powders with paper patch?

Am I making this more complex than it really is?

If I can get 2moa at that speed I'm happy...I hunt at 50-75 yards...so that level of accuracy will do just fine for whitetail in my application.

Thoughts?

Sent from my Moto G Play using Tapatalk

[barrabruce]

Start of with starter loads for jacketed bullets.
Or cast bullet loads.
Rules of thumb
You may get an extra 150 fps over jacketed loads.
There is less pressure than jacketed due to the softer materials used so powder may not burn as clean in the real slow powders.
Ball powders are supposed to work real well if you have them.

For you interest I use a lot of 4895 in my 30-30 using 170 grn pp
I use a fast to slow powders and can find a load that it likes.
I use a Dacron filler thou on the lighter charges.

Ideal is a case full of powder slightly compressed.
I don’t load 30-06.
But this may help.

Paper patch is pretty forgiving of alloy hardness. 14 Bhn is good

There is a learning curve you must go though ..like anything worth pursuing

The devils in the details and it takes time to learn to wrap a bullet properly.

[John McCorkle]

Start of with starter loads for jacketed bullets.
Or cast bullet loads.
Rules of thumb
You may get an extra 150 fps over jacketed loads.
There is less pressure than jacketed due to the softer materials used so powder may not burn as clean in the real slow powders.
Ball powders are supposed to work real well if you have them.

For you interest I use a lot of 4895 in my 30-30 using 170 grn pp
I use a fast to slow powders and can find a load that it likes.
I use a Dacron filler thou on the lighter charges.

Ideal is a case full of powder slightly compressed.
I don’t load 30-06.
But this may help.

Paper patch is pretty forgiving of alloy hardness. 14 Bhn is good

There is a learning curve you must go though ..like anything worth pursuing

The devils in the details and it takes time to learn to wrap a bullet properly.

Even bullets with gas check shank? Would that cause bullet flight issue as it exits the muzzle?

Sent from my Moto G Play using Tapatalk

[barrabruce]

Gas check shanks are good as it allows the paper to fold down over the base with out a bulge.
That Lee 160 will work if you patch slightly over the nose a bit.
Have the paper grain the right way

Read the stickies!

There is a sticky in the black powder paper patch section on paper.
Just pull up a stump boil the billy and read a lot.
Take a few notes.
Try it and see.

I have a 1500 FPS load that shoots good to 500 yards on the range if I’m up to it.
Screaming light bullet loads and normal 150-180 grn loads to 1800-2100fps.

1 1/2" accuracy is pretty normal with 2moa easy.
1 moa I have done but not on demand for long stings.

Most ways work but some will work better in your rifle.

If you size a loverin down to abou 1/2 to 1 thou over bore and patch and size to fill the throat and can finger seat it in your as fired case with a case full of slow powder that burns well and doesn’t fertilze the lawn then you will have reached Navara.

[CJR]

The NRA laboratory tested PP load for the 30/06 was; 160 gr. 301618(BHN 17), 53 gr. W760 (no fiber filler), CCI 250 Mag primer, @2816 fps MV and 46,620 c.u.p. pressure. Ref: NRA Cast Bullet Manual, p.97.

Best regards,

CJR