Long Range Hunting Online Magazine


Go Back   Long Range Hunting Online Magazine > Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment > Reloading

Reloading Techniques For Reloading


Reply

Primers vs. Powder

 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #8  
Old 11-06-2013, 11:57 AM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Washington State
Posts: 456
Re: Primers vs. Powder

Grubby

FYI Federal developed the #215 at the personal request of none other than Roy Weatherby himself. Roy was developing his 378/460 parent case because the original 375 Weatherby, an improved H&H case, was not delivering the desired velocity improvements.
The 378 case burns upwards of 120gr of powder and then available primers did not maintain a long (time) enough flame front to light off that amount of slow powder. That was before the Aussi's @ ADI developed the "Extreme" chemical technology that Hodgdon's now uses in all their tubular powders.
Cold weather (-20F) would slow the old surplus H4831 -300fps in the 30/06 so using a mag primer kept the velocities up. The NRA did extensive tests in the 1960's documenting this.
Simply said the #215 has the same "bang" as the other mag primers but it has a longer "flash" time (more fuel in the primer mix). I use it in all my hunting loads and every load I think needs a mag primer, anything >65gr. My 30/06 load is a Sierra 180gr SpBT w/ 56.5gr IMR 4350, #215 primer in a Winchester case. 2900fps out of a long 27" extra heavy tube (1 1/4" stem to stern). This is a high pressure load for an '06 but about the same as the 308 or 270, 55kcup vs. 50kcup.
Hope this helps.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 11-10-2013, 07:57 AM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 16
Re: Primers vs. Powder

Quote:
Originally Posted by brentc View Post
That's probably not the best combo for 150s. Retumbo is a bit slow burning for 150s. To get your load to really shine, jump up to 160s and heavier. Preferably 168s to 180s. But it never hurts to try. You might just like what you find.
Thanks for the advice, I bought some 168's and I am going to get a different powder for the 150's. Locally, h1000 is available, will that be a good choice?

Regards,

Grubby
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 11-10-2013, 07:58 AM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 16
Re: Primers vs. Powder

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kennibear View Post
Grubby

FYI Federal developed the #215 at the personal request of none other than Roy Weatherby himself. Roy was developing his 378/460 parent case because the original 375 Weatherby, an improved H&H case, was not delivering the desired velocity improvements.
The 378 case burns upwards of 120gr of powder and then available primers did not maintain a long (time) enough flame front to light off that amount of slow powder. That was before the Aussi's @ ADI developed the "Extreme" chemical technology that Hodgdon's now uses in all their tubular powders.
Cold weather (-20F) would slow the old surplus H4831 -300fps in the 30/06 so using a mag primer kept the velocities up. The NRA did extensive tests in the 1960's documenting this.
Simply said the #215 has the same "bang" as the other mag primers but it has a longer "flash" time (more fuel in the primer mix). I use it in all my hunting loads and every load I think needs a mag primer, anything >65gr. My 30/06 load is a Sierra 180gr SpBT w/ 56.5gr IMR 4350, #215 primer in a Winchester case. 2900fps out of a long 27" extra heavy tube (1 1/4" stem to stern). This is a high pressure load for an '06 but about the same as the 308 or 270, 55kcup vs. 50kcup.
Hope this helps.
Thanks for the explanation. I will be shooting in cold conditions. Not quite that cold though. I will be pushing some mid 60 grain loads out of the rifle so I suppose the long burn time can't hurt right?

Regards,

Grubby
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 11-10-2013, 08:41 AM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 297
Re: Primers vs. Powder

I was not able to get the same accuracy out of H1000 that I did with Retumbo. I tried both in 300 Win Mag, 7mm Rem Mag and 25-06 with heavy-for-caliber bullets and Retumbo was the star performer across the board.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 11-10-2013, 08:44 AM
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: California Central Cost
Posts: 793
Re: Primers vs. Powder

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grubby View Post
Thanks for the advice, I bought some 168's and I am going to get a different powder for the 150's. Locally, h1000 is available, will that be a good choice?

Regards,

Grubby
Retumbo and H1000 will work fine. It's listed in Hodgdon's.

If it were me I'd use IMR7828 with 150s and those 215M's. It's what I use with my 270Wby.
__________________
Fred Seaman
“Ask, Listen, Learn, Grow”
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 11-10-2013, 10:22 AM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Washington State
Posts: 456
Re: Primers vs. Powder

GRUBBY

like Jfseaman my son Anton uses IMR 7828 in his 300WM with 200gr bullets. Very good, fast, and consistent load. IMR 7828 is on our short list of slow powders. It is an "Extreme Powder" made by ADI in Australia for Hodgdon's and does not slow down w/ lower temps.

The Remington #9 1/2 Magnum Large Rifle Primer has been an excellent performer for me. Try it if you want a little less flash than than the Fed #215.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Current Poll
In the last 12 months, what was your longest rifle kill on big game?
0 to 200 yards - 25.99%
1,546 Vote
201 to 400 yards - 32.14%
1,912 Vote
401 to 600 yards - 23.03%
1,370 Vote
601 to 800 yards - 10.04%
597 Votes
801 to 1,000 yards - 3.92%
233 Votes
Over 1,000 yards - 4.89%
291 Votes
Total Votes: 5,949
You may not vote on this poll.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:18 AM.


Powered by vBulletin ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Management Powered by vBadvanced CMPS
All content ©2010-2014 Long Range Hunting, LLC