I picked up a 50ct. box of a hundred and sixty Nosler Accubonds, but I'm hesitant to burn off the powder and projectiles on workup when all I've is fifty bullets. But I actually need to locate a bullet in the 160 course that my older rifle likes.
H4831 will get the job done in the Swift but not authentic nicely. You are going to by no means receive the pressures you require for consistency Along with the .223. 760, or H414 will be superior but for many cause I ain't the most significant fan of most ball powders.
Liberalism; The extremely hard but acknowledged notion that it's completely possible to choose up a turd from the clean up end.
Run your load up with the precise powder (sc or typical) and lot you will be working with however. Very same burn off charge doesn't mean it will behave "specifically" the identical. I have observed over a hundred fps difference between sc and mil-surp many H4831.
some cartridges have a tendency copper foul a lot more than Other people nevertheless, irrespective of how smooth the finish is to the bore and have to have cleaning on the copper fouling more typically.
Considering the fact that there won't look like any "Formal" Load Data on the market for this Load, can some of you deliver a starting point with this combination and points to think about when Doing the job this Load up?
I am utilizing it that has a 210 Berger. In my rifle, H1000 was not as accurate. RL22 did well but I had been slightly concerned about temp stability. I think I am at 72 grains and acquire about 2850ish fps
excaliber explained: I have located the precise reverse to become accurate in my gun. H4831SC was the slowest powder with one hundred eighty g Accubonds. RL22 was a considerably faster and Similarly precise powder in my 300 Acquire Mag.
The main h4831 vs h4831sc reason I switched from IMR 4831 to H4831 was to take full advantage of the temperature insensitivity of the Hodgdon Intense powder.
Ballistically, this Severe Extruded powder is the precise copy of H4831. Bodily, it has a shorter grain dimensions, consequently, the designation SC or h4831sc load data small Lower. The shorter, extra compact kernels allow the powder to stream with the powder steps more easily, helping to alleviate the continuous reducing of granules.
Regardless of the similarity in nomenclature, They are completely various powders, with IMR 4831 becoming significantly more quickly compared to the Hodgdon variants. You should not address them as the same powder, as they most certainly aren't.
I use 52 grs H4831sc with a 117gr Hornady BTSP. It's accurate, moderate mannered, and knocks whitetails down DRT. If it absolutely was me, I might start out at fifty two gr and perform up.
Southwest Idaho I tried H4831sc in my 300 WM but had significantly better velocity and precision with H1000. I might instead use a slower burning powder with 215g drugs.
I sawed one in 50 percent to see how thick the jackets have been, they usually were simply two times as thick to be a 50-grain hollow stage was. Ditto to the 64-grain Electrical power Position, as these bullets are built for deer, not prairie dogs or woodchucks. You now know almost everything I know about the 22-250 and slow-burning powders, and I don't know anything at all in any way concerning the 223. I doubt that you're going to get everywhere with that cartridge and 4831, but allow us to understand how h4831 vs h4831sc it goes.