Reloading for the 280 Remington

[West_Fork]

How do you know if you get 100% burn? Quickload? Gordons?

I've gotten to where I try to avoid heavily compressed loads but beyond that i've noticed no difference. My understanding is almost all powder burns near the chamber anyway.

My primary hunting rifles are 18" barrels that are shot suppressed. The same powders that work well for people with 26" or longer match barrels work well for me.

It's been a probably 2 decades since I sat down and looked burn rate calcs, etc, and of course it can be assumed that we never get 100%, maybe 99.5 or 98 or whatever.

Of course the powder burns near the chamber, that is where it is located. You are forgetting the time component. You might be getting good results from a short barrel with can, because of the can.

It used to be a rule of thumb that the slowest powders for a given load are the most accurate/consistent (often compressed). Sticking with that rule it's pretty simple, I can look at load data from a 24" test barrel and I know I will see my best results with powders that are the next faster than the what the load data shows because I generally run shorter barrels. This has proven true for the last 30 years for me, and fits with the idea that you want the powder to burn (increasing pressure) as the bullet travels the length of the bore, burning completely just before the exit.

If the load books spec 4831 as the optimal powder for their 24-26" test barrel, I will probably find 4350 to be better out of my 20".

 

[West_Fork]

So......you think you get faster speeds with a shorter barrel length? Enlighten me on how you pull this miracle off?

It's not a miracle, it's a basic principle used in reloading since there has been reloading.

 

[West_Fork]

I assumed he meant faster than one would expect because he optimizes powder for a given barrel length? I believe that is largely a farce though too or at least overblown. For example RL26 produces faster speeds than say H4831 in basically everything they are both well suited for. RL26 is going to produce faster velocities with long barrels and with short barrels and I wouldn't expect that gap to change much from 26" to 18" barrel length.

No, it is about achieving consistent pressure. Velocity is a function of pressure. Pressure is a function of volume and the rate of combustion, or just call it "internal ballistics."

No one powder will preform well in long and short barrels for a given caliber. It will still spit out a bullet, but that's about it.

Think of it as running a gas engine rich or lean, it is a very similar thing.

I just barreled a 243. Went from a 22" to a 26.5" My best loads in the old barrel were around the slower side of 4350, now they seem to be in the 4831 area.

 

[Foggy47]

I am reminded of something I read on the interwebs once: "Many people don't know this......but it's possible to read something you don't agree with on the internet and simply move on with your life". ......and so it goes with shorter barrels = more velocity. Pfffft. Who knew derringers would turn out to shoot faster than long barrel rifles?

 

[West_Fork]

Hello . I am reloading a 280 Remington with 165 grain Remington core locks.

What is a good recipe? I don’t have much IMR…..would varget work?

Thanks

Looks like 41 grains of Varget might be good?

Hybrid 100v meters well and I know it is go-to powder for some hunters I know shooting short mags, and is available. I have been playing with superformace powder lately and have had good results, this again meters well.
I would be willing to bet 4831 is going to be one of the best performing powders, and is readily available where i live. If I were you and your 1 lb of 4831, I would drop $25 on Lee powder measure, or whatever color you prefer, and set it up to drop in the pan of your hornady dispenser, then trickle it by hand. You might this to be even faster than letting the machine do the work.

Any of these are likely to work well.....

 

[West_Fork]

I am reminded of something I read on the interwebs once: "Many people don't know this......but it's possible to read something you don't agree with on the internet and simply move on with your life". ......and so it goes with shorter barrels = more velocity. Pfffft. Who knew derringers would turn out to shoot faster than long barrel rifles?

Another thing that people do on the internet is scan words and jump to some erroneous claim that was never made. Then they spend their entire time trying to disparage this claim that was never made and walk away feeling victorious with their new reinforced ignorance.

Thanks for letting us know you moved on with your life.....

 

[Jerry-B-WI]

I just barreled a 243. Went from a 22" to a 26.5" My best loads in the old barrel were around the slower side of 4350, now they seem to be in the 4831 area.

So you changed the barrel length so you could use a different powder, or you buy a rifle based on barrel length so you can use a specific powder?

I used AA3100 in my for my 6.5x55. Two are in sporterized Mausers and the third is a Remington M700. Guess what, you can't buy AA3100 anymore. I'm not going to change the barrels on my rifles so I can use 4831 or 4831sc.

Not sure why anyone would load specifically for the fastest load. I've always picked a powder that would work well in more than one caliber and then work up the most accurate load for each caliber/rifle. I use W748 in my 30-30 and 300 Savage. I get accurate loads for both calibers/rifles and have to keep only one powder on hand.

 

[West_Fork]

So you changed the barrel length so you could use a different powder, or you buy a rifle based on barrel length so you can use a specific powder?

I used AA3100 in my for my 6.5x55. Two are in sporterized Mausers and the third is a Remington M700. Guess what, you can't buy AA3100 anymore. I'm not going to change the barrels on my rifles so I can use 4831 or 4831sc.

Not sure why anyone would load specifically for the fastest load. I've always picked a powder that would work well in more than one caliber and then work up the most accurate load for each caliber/rifle. I use W748 in my 30-30 and 300 Savage. I get accurate loads for both calibers/rifles and have to keep only one powder on hand.

That's true. Or, you could start load development around the powders most likely to perform well given your cartridge/bullet weight/barrel length. Also more to your point and for the op's consideration, I put a new barrel on a rifle due throat erosion. Throat erosion is another good thing to consider when choosing a powder.

So far there have been some very convincing arguments for not considering barrel length when choosing powders from published data, but I am going to keep doing it because it's kind of like a habit at this point, and I already spent enough of my life doing needless shit.

 

[Wind Gypsy]

It's been a probably 2 decades since I sat down and looked burn rate calcs, etc, and of course it can be assumed that we never get 100%, maybe 99.5 or 98 or whatever.

Of course the powder burns near the chamber, that is where it is located. You are forgetting the time component. You might be getting good results from a short barrel with can, because of the can.

It used to be a rule of thumb that the slowest powders for a given load are the most accurate/consistent (often compressed). Sticking with that rule it's pretty simple, I can look at load data from a 24" test barrel and I know I will see my best results with powders that are the next faster than the what the load data shows because I generally run shorter barrels. This has proven true for the last 30 years for me, and fits with the idea that you want the powder to burn (increasing pressure) as the bullet travels the length of the bore, burning completely just before the exit.

If the load books spec 4831 as the optimal powder for their 24-26" test barrel, I will probably find 4350 to be better out of my 20".

How do you know it has anything to do with how much powder was or wasn’t burned? I have no doubt that you find great loads using this basis while using powders that are within the normal burn rate range for a cartridge/bullet combo. I just don’t believe that going up or down in burn rate due to a few inches of barrel length is something particularly important when picking a powder. Some examples to support my stance:

I found h1000 to perform just as well or better than h4831 behind 175 and 180s in a couple 22” 7 SAUM tubes. I could go even slower burning with retumbo and still get good results. But there have been numerous world class f class and bench rest shooters who have found H4350 to be the best powder for them in 28-32” tubes with the same cartridge behind the same bullets. Rinse and repeat with same powders and same story in 300wsm behind 215-230 grain bullets.

Varget has long been “the” powder for 6 BRs shooting heavy bullets. For some reason the faster burning H4895 is “the” powder preferred by competitive shooters with 26-32” barrels shooting the slightly larger cased 6 BRA.

Varget with a somewhat low case fill ratio does just as good as h4350 in the 26 and 28” barreled 6.5x47s I’ve owned and actually seems preferred in the PRS world. I have no reason to believe h4350 isn’t burned sufficiently in these applications.

Basically, if you use a powder that isn’t on the very slow end for a given application with a very short barrel or with highly overbore cartridge, I think nearly all the powder is getting burned or enough of it that I don’t worry about it.

 

[Angus 1895]

Its loving it today!

 

[West_Fork]

How do you know it has anything to do with how much powder was or wasn’t burned? I have no doubt that you find great loads using this basis while using powders that are within the normal burn rate range for a cartridge/bullet combo. I just don’t believe that going up or down in burn rate due to a few inches of barrel length is something particularly important when picking a powder. Some examples to support my stance:

I found h1000 to perform just as well or better than h4831 behind 175 and 180s in a couple 22” 7 SAUM tubes. I could go even slower burning with retumbo and still get good results. But there have been numerous world class f class and bench rest shooters who have found H4350 to be the best powder for them in 28-32” tubes with the same cartridge behind the same bullets. Rinse and repeat with same powders and same story in 300wsm behind 215-230 grain bullets.

Varget has long been “the” powder for 6 BRs shooting heavy bullets. For some reason the faster burning H4895 is “the” powder preferred by competitive shooters with 26-32” barrels shooting the slightly larger cased 6 BRA.

Varget with a somewhat low case fill ratio does just as good as h4350 in the 26 and 28” barreled 6.5x47s I’ve owned and actually seems preferred in the PRS world. I have no reason to believe h4350 isn’t burned sufficiently in these applications.

Basically, if you use a powder that isn’t on the very slow end for a given application with a very short barrel or with highly overbore cartridge, I think nearly all the powder is getting burned or enough of it that I don’t worry about it.

Well, that's the mystery of reloading and shooting; you never know. Why does more powder not always result in more velocity? Why do some people find accurate loads that have a wide SD? Why did it just throw a flier?
It sounds like you have found the same as everyone else; the published "most accurate" load is probably not going to be my most accurate load. This is because a published "most accurate" load maybe theoretical, or if measured using a barrel made from a different batch of steel, rifled with a different set of buttons or cutters, chambered with a different reamer, and using a different length of barrel.
The only variability I can account for is barrel length. I cannot account for leade angle, free bore, bore diameter, or the surface roughness of the bore.
I have to make assumptions when developing a load, and that is all things not specified are equal. I then take full advantage of what is known, and barrel length is going to narrow down my powder choices greatly; from 30 to 5.

This is also why it is a complete waste of time to ask random people on the internet what the best load is.

 

[b116757]

Well, that's the mystery of reloading and shooting; you never know. Why does more powder not always result in more velocity? Why do some people find accurate loads that have a wide SD? Why did it just throw a flier?
It sounds like you have found the same as everyone else; the published "most accurate" load is probably not going to be my most accurate load. This is because a published "most accurate" load maybe theoretical, or if measured using a barrel made from a different batch of steel, rifled with a different set of buttons or cutters, chambered with a different reamer, and using a different length of barrel.
The only variability I can account for is barrel length. I cannot account for leade angle, free bore, bore diameter, or the surface roughness of the bore.
I have to make assumptions when developing a load, and that is all things not specified are equal. I then take full advantage of what is known, and barrel length is going to narrow down my powder choices greatly; from 30 to 5.

This is also why it is a complete waste of time to ask random people on the internet what the best load is.

Actually there there are some loads that are normally very accurate out if multiple guns notice I didn’t say all guns but multiple guns. Federal gold medal match ammo is generally a very accurate ammo out of most of my guns they seem to do a wonderful job of finding those loads that shoot very very well generally speaking. When I load for prairie dogs we take 10+ guns I load test my prairie dog loads in several guns to make sure multiple guns shoot it well. So on the internet if you check multiple sites and several of them post up a very similar load you’re likely looking at one of the loads that seem to work across multiple guns. I have something like fourteen .223’s so I may know a little something about loads that work in multiple rifles. For most follks that have one rifle of a given caliber it still doesn’t hurt to try some of the generally accurate loads that most people find accurate in their rifles being able to check multiple websites for the same load posted by multiple people can save you a lot in components. I often buy powder for a new caliber based on this method at least when powder is plentiful that is.

 

[ToddG]

I found IMR4350 was the most accurate powder in my gun. It is a 280 ackley but I fire form the brass.

 

[Electrodigical]

Does anyone pay attention to barrel length when choosing powder? It's probably more critical than the scale.

I usally only do with shorter barrels, sticking to the faster powders.
I'm usually an accuracy over speed guy, but for some things and some uses, sometimes neither matter much. lol