There's something to this ball powder...

[Nobade]

I have been messing with a 6.5 TC-U bolt rifle for a couple of years now. It shoots awesome with greasegroove boolits, but until today it never has worked with paper patched. So, what changed? Powder. I had been using IMR powders, mostly 3031. Reading here about good results with 760, I tried some loaded with 748 and some with 760. Boolit is the BRP 129 Kurtz, sized to .259" and patched back up to .2645. Seated to the base of the neck with the case completely full of powder, it put 20 rounds - 10 of 748 loads and 10 760 loads, into a 4 inch group at 200 yards. It has never done that, usually throwing PP boolits all over the landscape. The 748 loads were pretty snappy, the 760 noticably slower but all hit the same place. Looks like I'll have to be buying more ball powder to play with in the future.

[geargnasher]

Yes there is something to it! Double-base powders have always been very cast friendly at high loading density because they act like an inert granular filler behind the boolit until the boolit is fully engraved. Usually the kernels touching the boolit base don't ignite until the boolit is well on it's way, thus protecting the boolit from damage during it's most vulnerable state, during transition from case to bore. Cooler burning too in general, compared to SB powders.

Gear

[303Guy]

Mmm... very interesting! The question of ball powders has come up recently as being cast friendly. I'm now testing what's left of my AR2208/Varget and would like to find a suitable ball powder to replace it with. (Apart from the boolit base peening which is far less than that caused by AR2209/H4350, the AR2208 seems to produce lower pressure with higher velocity than the AR2209).

[CJR]

It's hard not to like lower peak pressures, lower burning temperatures, highest velocities, good bulk density loads without fillers, and excellent PPCB accuracy.

Best regards,

CJR

[303Guy]

Well, I've been looking for a ball powder to replace my AR2208/Varget. So far I have identified three candidates. Those are H335, BL-C(2) which has the lowest pressure of any powder and H414. (H380 could be a possible but it seems to have too much empty space in the case).

What troubles me with highest velocity and lowest pressure is that it means the mean pressure is higher and that means a longer barrel is called for. I want this for my short barrelled pig gun so I'm leaning towards H335.

On the other hand, BL-C(2) would be more versatile in so far as I could attain near 308 velocities using it in my mint bore two-groove No.4.:roll: (Not a bad plan since I have other 303's working at normal 303 Brit velocities).

So, which should I select?

( BL-C(2) is very similar to Winchester 748 ).

[frankenfab]

H335 is great in the .444, anyway.

surplus:

WC844 = H335

WC846 = BL-C(2)

WC852 = H414, but probably a little slower.

Don't know if you can get that stuff there, or not.

ETA: I'm proud to say I got some of all three!

[nanuk]

I remember reading that if one powder gives faster speeds than another, it will do so in shorter barrels also

I think this was taken down to shorter than 16 inch barrels.....

anyone else remember reading something like this?

[Doughty]

I've been using Accurate Arms 2520 in my high velocity (1800-2500) loads. Both patched and unpatched. A favorite load in my .38 Krag (.30-40 Krag blown out to .375) is 43 grains behind a 290 grain paper patched bullet. I have not tried any of the other ball powders in this burn range, but would like to, especially some of the surplus powders. I have tried the WC860, which is a slower burning ball powder, but can't get much velocity out of it, even with a duplex starter.

[CJR]

303 Guy,

It is possible to have the same AVERAGE pressure for a typical degressive powder and a ball progressive powder. However, the effects on a PPCB will be radically different. The digressive powder will peak quickly and then drop quickly. Kind of like setting off an explosion behind a PPCB. Since the PPCB has an inertial slowness in getting started to move , it will experience a peak pressure before it starts to move. Result? Excessive obturation/initial high temperature/may be lead vaporization.

However, a ball progressive powder will start the PPCB moving at low pressure and the pressure will be constantly increasing until PPCB muzzle exit. The result is gradual PPCB obturation at lower temperature, lower PEAK pressure, and maximum velocity. Maximum cartridge loads are typically based on PEAK pressures. Likewise, maximum progressive powder loads will typically have PEAK pressure that are 8000 to 10000psi lower than digressive maximum loads. Result? Progressive ball powder loads, with 8000-10000 psi lower PEAK pressure, will reach the highest velocities possible by having a higher AVERAGE pressure. Some side benefits are; one doesn't have to worry about a max. PEAK pressure excursion occurring on a hot day, and the gun operating at lower PEAK pressure will give a longer gun operating life (i.e. minimal bolt lug set-back, etc.), and all this at max. velocity. A win/win situation for PPCB.

Best regards,

CJR

[bbqncigars]

Doughty:
WC860 is one of the standard powders used in the .50BMG, so I imagine it might be a little too slow for some smaller calibers in shorter (<32") barrels. Now you got me thinking about trying it in the 45-70 Creedmoor, though. BTW, nice website and gorgeous looking molds.

[Doughty]

Digressive ball powder loads, with 8000-10000 psi lower PEAK pressure, will reach the highest velocities possible by having a higher AVERAGE pressure.
CJR

CJR, Did you mean to say "Progressive ball powder loads." If "digressive ball powders" is whay you meant, would you give me a few examples of those types of powder. Not trying to be critical, I just don't know that much about powders.

bbqncigars, For use in .45-70 is why I originally got the WC860. Got rid of all the .45-70s except for an old trapdoor, so am wanting to use the powder. (Thanks for the kind words regarding the website and molds.)

CJR, since I've wandered into the area of duplex loads with ball powders, what does that become? A digressive-progressive?

Richard

[CJR]

Richard,

Thanks for catching my typos, which I've now corrected. Ball powders are "progressive". Let me see if I can post a powder reference I've used in the past.

As to your question; I would think that a digressive/progressive mixture becomes a "neutral" powder.

Best regards,

CJR

[CJR]

Richard,

Here you go. This should be helpful; http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101//navy/docs/es310/ballistic/ballstic.htm It shows the pressure curves for the different powders.

If that doesn't work, do a search for "Introduction to Naval Weapons Engineering". Then select "ES310 Introduction to Naval Weapons Engineering", then go down list and select "Ballistics". It should open up then.

I forgot to mention that this link shows the technique of controlling the burn rates with "geometrical shapes of granules. Ball powders control their burn rates by using different deterrent chemical coatings.


Best regards,

CJR

[Doughty]

CJR,
Thanks for the link. Interesting stuff.

[303Guy]

Thanks, CJR.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/navy/docs/es310/ballstic/IMG00007.GIF

Which type of propellant to use depends on the application. If the barrel cannot be made very long, it is better to use a degressive propellant to achieve the maximum exit velocity in a limited distance ...
I've been looking on the net for specific powder pressure curves but couldn't seem to find any.

The message I am getting is that these ball powders need enough pressure to burn well. Unburned powder at the muzzle is not so bad if the boolit flies fast enough and straight enough. I can't seem to get BL-C(2) in my parts so I need to look at the other remaining choices. Ball powder does sound like a good choice for cast and paper patched.

So the question is, which ball powder would be better in a short barrel?

[CJR]

303 Guy,

I've evolved to two (2) ball powders for my PPCB loads; W748 & W760. W748 is faster burning than W760, so for a shorter barrel I would think that W748 would work best. You won't know untill you try it in your particular gun.

Best regards,

CJR

[303Guy]

CJR

Thanks for the help and advice. I located some W748 and did some double checking and confirmed that the W748 fell closer to AR2208/Varget than anything else and that is would likely be the 'optimum' powder for the short barrel and paper patched boolit. So far I have fired exactly one test round and this single test seems to confirm that it is as close for as can be hoped for. I checked against pistol loading data for the 308 Win and that indicated just about optimum too even though case capacity for heavier bullets is smaller.

Pistol data for rifle calibers confirmed what nanook said;

I remember reading that if one powder gives faster speeds than another, it will do so in shorter barrels also ...

Thank you all. Thank you Nobade for starting the thread.:drinks:

P.S. It's a neat looking powder!8-) And it is almost a direct substitute for Varget which I was looking for also. In fact, I tried the same powder measure setting which threw 44.8gr W748 as opposed to 33gr Varget/AR2208. That load seems to produce the same pressure and velocity. Perfect!

http://i388.photobucket.com/albums/oo327/303Guy/W748205PPtrial001.jpg

The L/H primer was with AR2208/Varget - shown for comparison. The base is way less damaged than would be with Varget. It was fired without a wad. A bit of the patch base ring was recovered in the sand - that's interesting as I haven't been finding any pieces of patch with AR2208.

The bore is super clean and shiny!

Things are looking good!:drinks:

[geargnasher]

303guy, Winchester 748 is my all-time favorite for .30-30, 34.5 grains for any boolit/bullet that will chamber in a levergun. Absolutely stellar in my Marlin 336 with an 18" barrel! Nearly 2200 fps with excellent accuracy from 165-grain GG/GC boolits shoots flat, shoots far, and fills the freezer. I would assume that it would also be ideal in the .303 British at velocities of 2,000 fps and above.

Gear

[CJR]

A tibit of info about W748 & W760. It is my understanding that when W748 & W760 powders were first introduced, they were designated as "Benchrest" powders, i.e. "BR". Then somewhere along the way, Winchester dropped the "BR" designation. For me, these two powders work very well for my PPCB efforts!

Best regards,

CJR

[Nobade]

Have you guys had good results with less than a case full of ball powder and PP boolits? Most of what I have done shoots best with a case full to the base of the boolit. But Quickload says I will overpressure the 30-06 if I do that with 760. Does the "buffer" effect work even though there is some airspace or will it need filler on top?

[CJR]

Nobade,

For PPCB in the 30/06, the NRA recommended (Cast Bullet Manual) two (2) WW760 loads;

1. 160 gr. 301618, BHN 17, 53 Gr. WW760, no fiber filler, 2816 fps (muzzle), 2834 fps (15 ft.), 46620 c.u.p.

2. 195 gr. 301620, BHN 19, 49 gr. WW760, no fiber filler, 2515 fps(muzzle), 2530 fps (15 ft.), 44350 c.u.p.


The pressures listed were obtained from tests at H.P White Laboratory, Bel Air, MD.

Best regards,

CJR

[Nrut]

Do all ball/spherical powders have a progressive burn rate?

I am thinking H335 and BL-C(2) for using in the 35 Whelen as Hodgdon has loading data for those two powders in that caliber..
Thanks

[CJR]

Nrut,

Excellent question! Prior to ball powders, burn rates were controlled by using different geometrical shaped grains which have different surface areas to burn. With ball shaped granules; a ball is a ball, is a..... , and the surface area is relatively constant. So in order to change powder burn rates with ball powders they use different deterrent chemical coatings. So, theoretically speaking, depending on what chemicals are used to coat the ball granules, you could achieve any burn rate you wanted, i.e. digressive, neutral, progressive.

I found it was simple to identify progressive powders in reloading manuals. Look for the powder with the lower PEAK pressure and the highest velocity. When you find it, chances are it's a progressive powder. As I mentioned sometime back, one of the Lyman manuals had, for one caliber, the measured pressure and velocity of a digressive powder load and a progressive powder load. Though the velocities were close, the pressure was lower with the progressive powder. Likewise, it wasn't that long ago that Hornady was hyping their progressive powder loads,i.e. 200-300 fps higher velocities at the same SAMMI pressure levels that's dictated for standard calibers. Marketing at its finest!

There are some NRA articles on the development of ball powders.

Best regards,

CJR

[303Guy]

I see BL-C(2) consistently produces higher velocity with lower pressure than the other powders. Not so in the 30-06 but close. That would be my first choice I should think. It's the same in the 303 Brit but it's not available in my parts

[Nrut]

Thanks CJR and 3030Guy,
Both Hodgdon and Accurate Powders manuals have pressure data and come to think of it I usually default to the powder that that gives the highest velocity for the lowest pressure..
I also tend to try powders that give compressed loads if they are in the velocity range that I am after..

[Nobade]

Nobade,

For PPCB in the 30/06, the NRA recommended (Cast Bullet Manual) two (2) WW760 loads;

1. 160 gr. 301618, BHN 17, 53 Gr. WW760, no fiber filler, 2816 fps (muzzle), 2834 fps (15 ft.), 46620 c.u.p.

2. 195 gr. 301620, BHN 19, 49 gr. WW760, no fiber filler, 2515 fps(muzzle), 2530 fps (15 ft.), 44350 c.u.p.


The pressures listed were obtained from tests at H.P White Laboratory, Bel Air, MD.

Best regards,

CJR

Thanks for the loads - I just picked up a bottle of 760 today to play with, so I'll see what I get.

[geargnasher]

Nobade, check out MJ's "paper patch challenge" thread, I just shot and chrony'd some groups with Winchester Supreme 780 and 160-grain PPCBs. At 99% loading density in the LC '06 brass the charge was 59 grains and velocity on the high side of 2650 with my 22" barrel. So far I'm really liking this powder, it does the same thing RX22 does but without needing compacting buffer to protect the boolit base for accuracy, and it gets a shade more than 200 more fps with what appears to be about the same pressure.

Gear

[303Guy]

I tried a lighter boolit in my pig gun with W748 and the boolit base was undamaged. Velocity wasn't the highest judging by boolit impact damage. I repeated the test with wheat bran filler and the impact damage was notably more and there was indication of higher pressure on the primer plus boolit base deformation and trailing edge 'feathering'.

The charge was 34.8gr W748 under a 194gr boolit. (I didn't reduce the charge for the wheat bran test).

http://i388.photobucket.com/albums/oo327/303Guy/194grwithwithoutWB008.jpg

Compared to stick powder.
http://i388.photobucket.com/albums/oo327/303Guy/30grFILLER_35grNOFILLER_2209_208gr-1-1-1.jpg

[geargnasher]

Big difference there, and not just grain size. With the ball powder I would think you could eliminate the filler completely unless your load is running less than about 90% of case capacity. I'm wondering if you could get some H414/Win760 and see what that gets you as far as case capacity.

I'll look later tonight and see what .303 capacity is and see if I can scrounge up some load data for cast boolits of that weight.

Gear

[303Guy]

That load is 75.6% density and was without filler. With filler (wheat bran) the efficiency goes up quite a bit but with feathering. I can get H414 and I dare say it might be the powder for my longer barrelled guns. Right now money is tight so I shall be concentrating on using what I have, especially with the pig gun. It's such a handy little carbine and so easy for me to carry around with my elbow-itus. So I need (or want) a load with a bit of velocity to increase its versatility with its short barrel. Hence the pursuit of spherical powders in the Varget burn-rate range. So far I've found W748 to meter rather well. Each time I weigh a measure load it comes out at 34.8gr and that's without the vibrator I affixed to the measure for consistency with stick powders (a trick that works well).

[geargnasher]

I was checking the capacities and such before bed, looks like typical loads in the .303 with W760 are about 5-7 more grains than the W748, so if you're at 75% with nearly 35 grains of W748 you'd be at 82.5% on the conservative side with an equivalent load of 760.

I forget how long your pig gun is, but whether it's half a meter or a meter it will probably still blow lots of unburned powder out the muzzle, that's sort of the nature of the beast with ball powders. Also, I've seen data from several different reports that show muzzle velocity to be 50 fps or more several feet in front of the muzzle compared to muzzle exit velocity when using ball powders, like they give a little boost from the muzzle blast after the boolit is free from the confines of the bore.

In any event, I'll bet you'll get higher velocity (if that is your goal) with the heavy boolits and W760 than with W748, even though the barrel is shorter, although the 748 should work just fine for you. I'm assuming that hunting velocity with the best accuracy possible and good funtionality is the goal here, and I think you're on the right track with the ball powders.

One other thing you might try with the W748 is a half-grain of Dacron (polyester fiberfill). If you have any old stuffed toys, an old pillow, torn-up jacket, or know anyone who sews you probably have a lifetime supply of the stuff. The Dacron works better than wool or cotton IME, and won't start a grass fire like some of the natural fiber fillers can. I've had really good luck combining Dacron, 60-80% loading density with slow ball powder, and plain-based cast GG boolits because it seems to be the right combination of gentle launch (the powder), consistent burn (the Dacron), and undamaged boolit bases (combination of the slow, soft powder and the fiber cushion behind the boolit base that also seems to help greatly to reduce or eliminate gas-cutting of the base).

I wish there was some way I could ship you the half-pound of H414 I have here from an odd lot so you could try, but I don't know of any economical way to do it. If you do, it's yours for the shipping.

Gear

[303Guy]

Thank you kindly, Gear. Unfortunately powders cannot be shipped easily in my parts. Dealers can't ship it locally for internet purchases either.

I haven't found any visible sign of unburned or partially burned powder. If I use wheat bran I do find it in the catch cloth. I've also found partially burned stick powder when the load was too low. I'll make a plan for a better catch, just to see. I was surprised at the apparent difference in velocity with the addition of wheat bran.

I do have a torn jacket which I kept for the Dacron and I have used it but not under the 194gr boolit. That was with the card tests.

The pig gun barrel is 370mm/14.5 inches from the breach face. I might get a chance to chronograph it today.

[303Guy]

How low can one go with W748 under a 194gr boolit in the 303 Brit? The Brit has the the same case volume to base of neck as the 308 Win.

[geargnasher]

The only real-world personal experience I can share on that is taking a .30-30 load that starts at 32 grains and reducing it to 22 grains and working up. It was really dirty until about 25 grains. Keep in mind I used Dacron to keep the powder located against the coals and there might be some risk of SEE if you reduce the load too far. 25% reduction below starting loads is pretty drastic for any rifle powder, but I got away with it with that powder. Always be super-careful when reducing ball powder loads much below minimum recommended loads.

Gear

[Nobade]

Today I shot the 30-06 with some of the 53gr. WW760 loads behind Ranch Dog 170 bullets, sized to .303 and patched back to .309 and lubed with Rooster Jacket. No filler. It worked fairly well, only had 4 wild fliers out of 40 rounds fired. Shooting at 300M I was seeing approx. 2 foot groups. Not terribly accurate, but it seems to be a good start and gratifying that I could fire that many shots with no leading and the bore is still super clean. What I did discover is this powder really needs magnum primers. I loaded some with Wolf LR and some with Federal 215s, the Fed primed ones lit off instantly and hit higher than the Wolf primed ones, which sometimes had perceptable hang fires.

Now I need to start trying to find out the source of the fliers. My guess is bullets with voids in them. I didn't weigh each bullet, next time I will and see if that helps. And maybe open up my sizer to .304 to get a .310 bullet to fit the throat tighter... the search goes on.

[geargnasher]

Yes, Nobade, I had a range session today with the Supreme 780 and '06 that was giving me odd flyers every three or four rounds, dropping one four inches low from the group with annoying regularity. I suspect base voids as well, I didn't weigh these boolits because I was in the more elementary stages of load development, but I was culling a lot of them due to visible base voids, no telling how many had a bad void right under the surface near the edge of the base.

I'm going to some more development using card wads under the boolit bases, and also change back to Felix lube as a patch lube, all these were done with 45/45/10 tumble lube and I don't think it's up to the task of going over 2650 fps.

Gear

[Nobade]

I think my next step is to try some #311466 from my new NOE mould and see if the shorter nose is a help. As for lube, the Rooster Jacket seems to be working very well, no sign of leading or really anything in the bore but a little dust.

[303Guy]

Are ball powders position sensitive? I repeated the H748 test, this time with Dacron filler. Boolit impact damage was only slightly less then with wheat bran but a lot less than with no filler. The gun was fired straight down so the powder was away from the flash hole.

[geargnasher]

My experience says yes, very much position sensitive when loaded to fairly low density. I discovered this shooting turtles from a high bank with my .30-30 years ago, when pointed down, even slighly down, with my light charges of 748 I would occasionally get a barely-perceptable hangfire, and slight vertical stringing seemed to be the rule. I switched to 2400, same thing, then switched to Unique and the problem went away. I'm sure Dacron would have made it a non-issue with either the 748 or the 2400 based on later experiments I've done.

Gear

[CJR]

Nobade,

I'm a little surprised with the group size you got at 300M. Your load is close to the NRA load I cited for a 160 gr. bullet. These NRA recommended PPCB loads should be capable of 1MOA or less. Some questions/comments:
1. Is your PP in contact with the chamber's forcing cone? PPCB seem to shoot better when against the chamber forcing cone.
2. Have you miked your the OD of your PPCB, after some time, to see if the paper is increasing in OD?
3. Weighing your CB for long range is a good idea.
4. I use magnum primers in my W748 and W760 loads.
5. There are many CB form designs that are accurate up to some range and then become unstable/inaccurate after that. Many, many years ago the NRA identified some available CB designs that had these problems. Shortly thereafter, the mould makers stopped making these bullet forms. Though your CB design form may be fine at lower velocities/pressures, when you drive it close to 50,000 psi, the bullet will be severely obturated (depending on its hardness) to the bore and in some cases the form of the bullet will be changed slightly (i.e. nose set back, etc.). The bullet's dynamics/stability will then change just enough (i.e. spacing changes between CG/CP) to affect long range accuracy. Only more testing will tell you exactly what your hi-vel CB form/load will do at long range.
6. From what I've read, if you get vertical stringing that typically indicates the powder charge is not quite right. The recommended solution is to do some "incremental ladder testing" at long range until you find the "sweet spot" (i.e. where a range of powder charges cause no vertical stringing). An example would be; you find a powder range of say 49.5 to 51.5 grs where these loads all impact at the same location at 300M. Any loads lower or above this powder charge range would vertical string on target.

Best regards,

CJR

[Nobade]

Hi CJR, I was surprised at how bad it shot too. But I am right with you on the theories.

#1 - Yep, seated to it engages the rifling a bit. Not huge though since there is barely any bullet in the case now.

#2 - They were .309", I wish I had some slightly thicker paper for .310.

#3 - I totally agree. I suspect the filers I got were from voids inside. Hitting them this hard is going to likely reveal flaws that normal cast bullet loads don't show.

#4 - Yep, I learned that. I had some primed with Fed 215s and some with Wolf LR. The Fed ones hit higher and were more accurate. The Wolf primed ones had quite perceptable hangfires and hit lower.

#5 - I think this is a problem with these boolits. They weren't very hard, and do have a fairly long unsupported nose and a very large meplat. Next time out I'm going to shoot #311466 Loverin style boolits, from my new NOE mould. A short round nose and almost all body should take the launch better. I expect I'll see better results from them if the theory is correct. Those NRA paper patch bullets look like that as well, so that's some sort of verification.

#6 - You're right about the vertical. I had lots of wind so I would expect to see lots of horizontal, but the vertical is powder charge and primer. Going to only hot primers should stop the inconsistant ignition, and once I get a boolit that shoots predictably I can start doing ladder tests to home in on the ideal powder charge. I also want to try some WW780 to see how that works, since it'll allow a full case instead of some room like 760. I suspect it'll work even better but don't have any yet.

[geargnasher]

Nobade, it worked pretty well for me, just fill 'er up to the boolit base, but don't compress it too much as pressure seemed to really spike and POI changed greatly when I began to add enough to "just" compress it. I've tested to 60 grains with Federal 210 primers and 150-grain boolits at 99% load density with good results, also added enough to make 100% and several fractional amounts of compression density but decided that was a bit more pressure than I was looking for (not unsafe by any means, just more than I wanted), you should be able to go at least another grain if you need to to fill the case with your lighter 311466. My chronograph numbers and targets didn't show any need for magnum primers, of course YMMV as always.

Gear

[303Guy]

geargnasher, your logic sometimes aligns with mine to an uncanny degree! It's good to have folks out there who have actually done and 'proved' the things I've sometimes only speculated about. And I refer to several folks. Quite a few folks in fact.

Yup. This has got to be among the best site there is! :drinks:

[windrider919]

Don't know if it is still true, but for years in the 70's and 80's reduced loads below the loading manuals (and the starting load was still fairly hot) were discouraged due to erratic ignition and some reported never fully explained overpressure events with reduced charges of WW 748.

Back in those days, if you wanted to shoot reduced loads you shot only IMR extruded powders.

Also, the WW ball powders were VERY sensitive to powder position in a partially full case, I went to raising the muzzle vertical after chambering a round then bringing it down to point at the target every shot shooting .308 silhouette with WW760 because if the powder was consistently at the back of the cartridge, it made an accuracy difference.

Was not shooting PP in 30 cal back then and found the best cast bullet was the Lyman 311041

On shooting BLC2 - might look at the thread where it is discussed
http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?t=131101

[303Guy]

Thanks for the insight, windrider919.
It is all making a lot of sense now the the gaps in my observations are being filled in.

I did once try some ball powder in a 303 Brit but not having access to pressure measurement equipment I used velocity and primer flattening as an indication. The powder produced a sharp upturn in the velocity curve at the higher end and primer flattening confirmed an increase in pressure. I had another powder at the time which indicated a very small velocity deviation (almost within the instrument resolution) so I abandoned it.

It seems to me that ball powders are one of those animals that need to be understood and used correctly to produce results. (I fell in love with Lil'Gun when loading for my hornet - absolute magic! Someone once said there is no such thing as a magic powder. They were wrong! Admittedly, there is only one such 'magic' powder;)).

[CJR]

Occasionally, you will read statements that PPCB loads will equal or exceed match jacketed loads. Now I've fired my share of match-grade jacketed bullet loads and know what to expect out of my factory rifles. But after shooting PPCB loads, many times I've just sat there looking through my spotting scope, in complete disbelief, on how small my PPCB groups were at 100 yds. I get excited anytime my PPCB are touching one another at a 100 yds. Once you get the PPCB technique right, there is definitely something really significant/magical going on with PPCB loads. It gets my attention anytime a home-cast CB can out-perform a match jacketed bullet at a 100 yds with a factory rifle.

I mentioned this awhile back, but it warrants repeating again. If one does a reasonable job casting lead bullets, he'll get a reasonable quality CB with minimal internal voids/porosity. Minimal internal voids/porosity can still unbalance a CB and degrade accuracy. But, if the CB are separated into weight spreads of +/- 0.5 gr. or less, you will still have randomly oriented voids/porosity that can still cause inaccuracy. However, on firing these PPCB, at pressures close to 50,000psi and hardnesses of around 15BHN, all the internal voids/porosity in the PPCB gets custom SWAGED/OBTURATED to your particular barrel rifling so the CB is close to being perfectly solid; i.e. no unbalancing voids, etc., when it exits the muzzle. So if the form of your CB form is a decent one, you will get high accuracy at long range. Remember, the NRA created PPCB loads equal to or better than government match loads. If they could do it, so can we. Being able to load inexpensive and accurate PPCB, at home, is my motivator. If you want higher accuracy with match jacketed bullets, you have to spend more $$$$$ for a higher quality match bullet. Then maybe you get a match barrel for your rifle, etc., etc., etc. With my PPCB, I spend a couple extra minutes weight-sorting them and get match accuracy in my factory rifle. What's not to like with this scenario? Also, I find my loading technique is getting simpler and I'm producing more PPCB loads in a shorter length of time. Result? More shooting!

Hope springs eternal!

Best regards,

CJR

[Nobade]

I got to shoot the 30-06 again yesterday with PP, and this time with far better results. Using #311366 NOE bullets, sized to .303" and patched to .309", loaded over 45gr. WW760 plus 1.3cc BPI shot buffer I was seeing groups around 1 MOA on paper at 100 yards in our shooting tunnel, and when the wind died down a bit took it out to the big range and shot hanging steel to 385M. Everything at longer range was predictable and once I had the sights dialed in had no problem keeping hits on the highpower turkey swinger at 385. It's either the lack of filler in previous attempts or the change in boolit design, but this rifle really can shoot with the right ammo!

[CJR]

Nobade,

Outstanding effort! The magic of shooting PPCB. Hello PPCB, goodbye jacketed bullets! Keep us posted as you refine your load.

Best regards,

CJR

[geargnasher]

Good job, Nobade! It seems that the compacting filler and ball powders is a good combination with less than 100% density loads. Try some Winchester Supreme 780 or Hybrid 100-V if you get a chance.

Gear