The hype is real. HP-38 meters incredibly

[guy_with_boolits]

I'm a beginner reloader and several months ago I asked what powder meters the most consistently with the Lee auto disc powder measure.

HP-38 was mentioned by MANY people.

Today I actually tested it out.

Using a digital scale that has 0.02gn resolution, I threw 10 charges with HP-38 and disc 0.53 cc

The charge measured 5.38gn

I then tared the case and powder combined so I could see only the differences for the next 9 charges.

I got 0.00 for the next nine!

No tapping, nothing special, just pulled the handle each time. Hopper half full.

And yes I confirmed this wasn't something dumb, the scale still measures different values and everything makes sense.

This is incredible!!!

So my question is, what powder for 223 loads would meter as consistently? This would be awesome for rifle!!

I'm guessing this powder meters so well because its such thin flakes, making it much less likely to have different volumes depending on minute shakes or vibrations.

The powder I am currently using for 223 is reloader 7 and its been treating me well for what I'm doing. My goal is to buy expensive new brass (Lapua etc..) and combined with 69gn sierra matchkings make as accurate ammo as possible.

Sierras data for the 69gn is below..of those powders which would meter as well as HP-38?

https://i.postimg.cc/NGbRLpg4/Untitled.jpg

[Winger Ed.]

The finer a powder's granules are- the better and more consistently it will meter out.
Of the different shapes, I've found the ball powders to be a little better than the flake type.

Of the various powders for .223, I find myself coming back to Win748 time & again.

[guy_with_boolits]

The finer a powder's granuals are- the better it will meter out.
Of the different shapes, I've found the ball powders to be a little better than the flake type.

Of the various powders for .223, I find myself coming back to Win748 time & again.

I should do my homework but I notice HP-38 is described as spherical but appears to be smashed flat circular discs. Is that what a "ball" powder is?

[trails4u]

The finer a powder's granules are- the better and more consistently it will meter out.
Of the different shapes, I've found the ball powders to be a little better than the flake type.

Of the various powders for .223, I find myself coming back to Win748 time & again.

It is hard to get away from 748....I LOVE it. Varget has been good too, but 748 meters much better.

[Winger Ed.]

I should do my homework but I notice HP-38 is described as spherical but appears to be smashed flat circular discs. Is that what a "ball" powder is?

I think so. My understanding is that 'ball' and 'spherical' are interchangeable.
Those seem to be solid balls, that got flattened in the manufacturing process.
Maybe when in their liquid state, they were more 'soupy' or had a lower viscosity
and didn't finish the process being perfectly round.

The flake powders seem to look more like little dots punched out of paper and are less dense.

[sukivel]

I like H335.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Cosmic_Charlie]

For heavier bullets in .223 you might try AA 2520. It meters nicely too.

[tazman]

Not one of the powders listed in your picture but I get superb results with BL-C2. Load data at https://www.hodgdonreloading.com/reloading-data-center?rdc=true&type=54. BL-C2 is a sherical/granular powder that feeds very accurately through my Lee Pro Auto disk measure.
My load is exactly midrange, according to Hodgdon data site, in a Hornady case with a Winchester SRP loaded as long as they will fit and feed in the magazines. No pressure signs whatsoever in my rifles.
Those 69 grain Matchkings give me groups under 1 inch at 200 yards with my two Savage varmint rifles. Tested velocities match the listed results for me.

[poppy42]

Hp38 and win 231 are the exact same powder ! They come from the same vat just different labels! To answer your question, probably H335 or varget.

[RJM52]

Also a 748 fan...I use 26.0 grains with the 69 grain SMK and 63 grain Sierra SMP and they are astounding accurate.

[CastingFool]

I use 748 for my 55gr sp and FM, in 223 loads. Love the way it runs through my powder measure.

[Tar Heel]

Accurate 2520

[MostlyLeverGuns]

I use 2520 in the 308, 300 Savage and 223. Meters/measures very accurately. Most of the ball/spherical powders measure with little variation. Acccurate 2460, 2520, 2230 , Ramshot TAC, Hodgdon's H335, BL-C2, H414 all throw charges with 'no' discernable variance from most powder measures. Used them all at one time or another. IMR 4064 and IMR 3031 are 'crunchy' in many measures due to long slender grains. Good for many purposes but not for loading a couple hundred at a time.

[rbuck351]

Any ball/spherical powder will meter very well. The flake types not so well and the stick powders are the worst.

[derek45]

the LEE auto disk may not have enough volume for rifle calibers.

Powders that typically don't measure well are large "stick" powders like IMR4895

Ball powders typically measure very well.

AA2230, 748, H335, TAC,

[alfadan]

Aa2460 or 2230

[OS OK]

You can go to the 'National Center for Forensic Science' and use their database of powders...they have lots of powders there.
http://www.ilrc.ucf.edu/powders/sample_detail.php?powder_id=385

You'll get a picture of the powers and a complete description along with measurements of the granules like below...

https://i.imgur.com/pEXkBFe.jpg

This way, you can look up any recomendations made here if your not familiar with the brand or type.

https://i.imgur.com/tU0tpwv.jpg

[Conditor22]

I'm liking Hodgdon-Varget & Hodgdon-335 for 223 (factory and swaged)

335 meters better, (some prefer srm primers for this powder)

[Divil]

Indeed it does.

[rintinglen]

I votes with them as votes for 748. I have found nothing better for my .223 CZ 527 than a Sierra 52 grain over 26.5 grains of WW 748

[Mk42gunner]

I don't know how they will run through a Lee Auto-disk measure, but H335 and Reloader 15 both ran smoothly through an RCBS Uniflow.

I was even using the RL15 in .223 at the time, although with 55 gr j words.

Robert

[dverna]

For accuracy loads, if you think .1 gr repeatability is needed, and it may not be, limiting yourself to a powder that meters well may not be your best approach.

I like Varget because it is relatively temperature stable. An accurate load at 45* will be accurate at 85*. You may find powders like BL C2 may not exhibit as broad an optimum accuracy operating temperature range.

Lastly a load that requires charges to be within .1 gr are not “robust”. IMO accuracy should be excellent over a reasonable variation in powder charges.

Just some things to consider rather than focusing only on how a powder meters.

[tazman]

I have used my load of BL-C2 in temperatures from 25 degrees to 90 degrees with no loss of accuracy. The impact point changed slightly during the colder weather but that is all.

My Lee Auto disk is just barely able to throw the charge I use but it does so consistently and has for years. Since I found this load, I haven't tested any other powders so cannot comment on them even though I have some on hand.

[shaner]

I started using CFE PISTOL. a while back .it merers as well as titegroup. They both are very consistent powders .

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[tazman]

I started using CFE PISTOL. a while back .it merers as well as titegroup. They both are very consistent powders .

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Yes it does.
I use CFE Pistol for my full power loads as it doesn't do as well with light loads. Somewhat inconsistent and dirty.
Titegroup is much better for light loads and is cheaper per shot to use.

[ddixie884]

For .38spl I like VV N340. Talk about flowing like water........

[44MAG#1]

If a powder varies a little either way I don't pay much attention to the variation.
I sometimes throw Unique and it varies more than most powders I use.
Most are not good enough shooters to tell the difference unless they are some type of super excellent shots that are consistently excellent. Meaning not shooting a couple lucky groups and thinking they are that good.
I get a good load, shoot standing up aftet meeting "good load" parameters, and stay off the sandbagged benchrest.
Many powders vary more from "lot" to "lot" than a couple tenths charge weight variation in the one "lot" of powder one is using. Ever change "lots" of primers, another variation to consider. So we worry about a couple of tenths variation on charge weight.

[tazman]

If a powder varies a little either way I don't pay much attention to the variation.
I sometimes throw Unique and it varies more than most powders I use.
Most are not good enough shooters to tell the difference unless they are some type of super excellent shots that are consistently excellent. Meaning not shooting a couple lucky groups and thinking they are that good.
I get a good load, shoot standing up aftet meeting "good load" parameters, and stay off the sandbagged benchrest.
Many powders vary more from "lot" to "lot" than a couple tenths charge weight variation in the one "lot" of powder one is using. Ever change "lots" of primers, another variation to consider. So we worry about a couple of tenths variation on charge weight.

Yes, I will worry about charge weight variation.
I am not a great shot and can't make the best use of perfect ammunition. That said, I want to have the best chance to shoot the best groups, scores that I can. The best ammunition will help me do that.
Why have a larger group than I could have with great ammo if I don't need to?

If you are using poor ammunition, you don't really know how good you are. Or how bad. The good ammunition shows that too.

[Burnt Fingers]

Try some Clean Shot. It makes 231 look like boulders. It meters like nothing I've ever used.

[44MAG#1]

Yes, I will worry about charge weight variation.
I am not a great shot and can't make the best use of perfect ammunition. That said, I want to have the best chance to shoot the best groups, scores that I can. The best ammunition will help me do that.
Why have a larger group than I could have with great ammo if I don't need to?

If you are using poor ammunition, you don't really know how good you are. Or how bad. The good ammunition shows that too.

Let me explain my answer. After many, many years of watching other people shoot handguns I can tell you this without any hesitation that most are not even remotely good shooters. This is from seeing many, many shoot. A shooter will vary more in shooting ability from time to time they shoot than any small variation in powder charge. Can you actually tell the difference in your shooting ability at fifty yards standing offhand with a load that does 2 inches off the bench or 3 inches off the bench in benchrest tests. Now I am talking offhand shooting. What about a load that is a 2 inch load and a 2.5 inch load? Are you actually that good standing offhand?
I used to shoot with a High Master class NRA Bullseye shooter that would have been hard pressed to do so consistently. He was the best handgun shooter I've ever seen with Bullseye guns and others. Even with horrendous recoil guns he was great.
He is 80 now and doesn't shoot handguns now.
If worrying about slight charge weight variation give you confidence in your shooting then you should worry about it.
But remember the target is the final arbiter and is the final judge in one's shooting. The buck stops there.
It is hard to face, I know that for sure as I have had to come to earth to roost myself now at 68 years old.
Have fun though.

[onelight]

What 44mag says is so true .
I am not a particularly good shot so I am a good example.
A couple of the guys I shoot handguns with at 7 to 25 yards they load in the simplest way they can no sorting or trimming range brass , no weighing bullets or powder charges after measure adjustment and checks . I was doing all these things . They still outshot me and the guys I outshoot I still outshoot after simplifying my process . This is all with iron sighted handguns with 3 to 6" barrels with iron sights .
There is nothing wrong with making them as good as you feel helps but within reason it still boils down to the shooter.

[44MAG#1]

What 44mag says is so true .
I am not a particularly good shot so I am a good example.
A couple of the guys I shoot handguns with at 7 to 25 yards they load in the simplest way they can no sorting or trimming range brass , no weighing bullets or powder charges after measure adjustment and checks . I was doing all these things . They still outshot me and the guys I outshoot I still outshoot after simplifying my process . This is all with iron sighted handguns with 3 to 6" barrels with iron sights .
There is nothing wrong with making them as good as you feel helps but within reason it still boils down to the shooter.

Nothing could be more true. It is MY OPINION and MINE ONLY that probably 80 percent of handgun accuracy is in the shooter themselves when up off the sandbagged benchrest. It is good to have a high opinion of one's shooting but reality is the final judge. Cocktailing loads is good to do and I do it but I let reality be my guide. When I present my case (shooting) to the judge (target) it depends on presentation of the facts (my ability) for the judge to make his ruling (accuracy ability). Plain and simple.
There are no magical loads. Just the refinement and presentation of the shooter. Hold as steady as you can, keep the sights aligned and operate the trigger in such a way as to not disturb the holding of the firearm and the alignment of the sights.
Good loads are nice but are in no way a substitute for refinement of the main problem which is the one holding and firing of the gun.

[tazman]

I will agree that the shooter accounts for the largest portion of the group size but why not strive for the best you can do?

Over the years, I have run across loads that didn't shoot as well as I do.
I always strive for the most accurate load I can find for my handguns. The fact that I can only shoot about a 4 inch group at 12 yards offhand is irrelevant. I am consistent enough that when I suddenly see my group size increase with a new load, I know there is a problem with it. Since I am not a master class shooter, should I be restricted to ammunition that isn't capable of that accuracy?
Why should I add the extra inch or three to my group size when I can load better, more consistent ammunition?
My groups are large enough as it is without shooting substandard ammunition.

I am pushing 70 really hard. I need all the help I can get.

[44MAG#1]

I will agree that the shooter accounts for the largest portion of the group size but why not strive for the best you can do?

Over the years, I have run across loads that didn't shoot as well as I do.
I always strive for the most accurate load I can find for my handguns. The fact that I can only shoot about a 4 inch group at 12 yards offhand is irrelevant. I am consistent enough that when I suddenly see my group size increase with a new load, I know there is a problem with it. Since I am not a master class shooter, should I be restricted to ammunition that isn't capable of that accuracy?
Why should I add the extra inch or three to my group size when I can load better, more consistent ammunition?
My groups are large enough as it is without shooting substandard ammunition.

I am pushing 70 really hard. I need all the help I can get.

I agree about cocktailing loads. As I said previously I do too. But I live in reality. A couple tenths variation on charge weight for most handgun shooters will not make any practical difference. Unless that shooter is a remarkable shooter of which I and most others aren't.
My help would be recovery of say 15 years or so of youth.
Not worrying about very small differences in powder charges once a good load is found.

Let me clarify what I am saying in a country simple way. My MO is I cocktail a load till I know it is going to outshoot me whether I am shooting OFFHAND at 7 yards, 10 yards, 25 yards, 50 yards or 100 yards.
Then I don't worry about it simply because I cannot now shoot well enough to tell the difference in small increases in accuracy of just the gun and load. The biggest, and will always be the biggest factor in my accuracy, is me , and not the gun and load.
I have been accused of saying just load any old load and shoot it. Nothing could be further from the truth. I experiment but I know in the truth of reality that there is no magical load that will ever turn any of us into a PERFECT human shooting platform regardless of what we think and may want. While we strive for perfection it will never come. That is the reality of it.

[onelight]

My standard is + or - a tenth for range ammo . On the Lee turret in auto index this is easy with the powders I use. But I rarely load full power loads if I want more power I use a more powerful cartridge that does not need to be redlined to get what I want .
We all load like we want and hopefully it gives us the results for what we enjoy all the while keeping us in good practice . If it's safe there is no right or wrong.
I occasionally go on an accuracy binge and try to tighten every thing up just depends on my mood and intended use of what I am loading.