I did some searches and read a few things about the two. I am loading a 7mm Rem Mag with some 168gr bergers. I am using this as a hunting load only, with good accuracy out to 800-1000yds. From what I am reading, Retumbo has better velocity, but H1000 has better ES values. Will the lesser ES values be a huge concern with the Retumbo? There are obviously a lot of people using it so it must work out alright. I am shooting for a goal of 3000fps or so. Thanks for any input you may have on these powders. Thanks again.
-
If you are being asked to change your password, and unsure how to do it, follow these instructions. Click here
H1000 or Retumbo
- Thread starter mrb1982
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Tumbleweed
Well-Known Member
All you can do is try some and see if your rifle likes it. I have tried Retumbo in several different rifles now and have not found anything that likes it yet. The ES's are generally pretty wide and with H1000 (which is my number one choice) I can usually get very close to or the same velocity as Retumbo. With H1000 it seems much easier to get low ES. Retumbo has the infamous pressure spike at or near max load that can suddenly send your velocity up 75-100 fps.
I am shooting H1000 with some 162gr Hornady Interlocks right now and using 71gr but I haven't had the chance to put it through and chonograph. Judging from what other people are getting with a similar load it is probably going around 3000-3150 at that powder charge.
Probably in the back of my mind I know that the H1000 is probably the better powder for my application, but sometimes a guy gets hooked on the velocity and would like that extra umph. hahaha
I am willing to bet I wouldn't have much trouble getting 3000fps with H1000 also and better ES values.
i shoot a 338 lapua custom rifle.. I recently switched to retumbo from h1000 for my 300 grain bergers.. 91.1 grains gets me 2703 average with an es of 4.... I never got that low with h1000.. I think 11 was my lowest.. both ar good es numbers.. but im a madd scientist.. all depends on the rifle I think.. but i am having awesome results with retumbo.. oh and I had awesome results with retumbo with my sendero 7mm mag..
I have heard a lot of good things about velocity performance with the retumbo and 7mm mag, but were you getting descent ES numbers to go with it?
Also, being in the early stages of my reloading career, what kind of ES do most of you consider to be acceptable for hunting purposes? Obviously, the lesser the better, but is there kind of a range you try to keep under as far as "acceptability" would be, so to speak?
well i would consider 20 and under as pretty good with extreme temp changes.. consider this.. at 50 ft per second velocity change.. at 1000 yrds thats around 9 inches of error.. so the less the better.. i have good results at 20 and under out to 1500... but the less the better and low teens and single digits are ideal for anything.
Sweet, thanks for the info. As much as I would probably enjoy the extra velocity, I think it is probably more important to keep my ES manageable. From what I have read in my many thread searches, I should be able to reach my desired velocities. I am not looking to break land speed records, but if I could get in the 2950-3000 range with good ES and accuracy, that is what I am going for. It would probably be highly more desireable than the benefit of a few fps. I am generally not an advocate of the race to the target anyways I guess.
I'm using Retumbo 71gr with a 168 Berger in a 7Mag. ES is 12 and I have two groups at 200 yds that are .361 outside to outside. I could not get the H1000 to come close. The measured velocity is 2977 and I'm at 2600 feet EL. Hope this helps. By the way, when I switched to Federal magnum Match primers it all came together.
Cool. It will be interesting to see what kind of groups I can come up with. The worst part is the gun will probably shoot better than the shooter in my instance. Just need a little more practice I guess. Right now I am shooting 1 MOA with my 162's with 71gr H1000 and CCI 250 primers. I shot about the exact same with 5 different charges. I just have to get to be a better shooter. As I get to be a better shooter, it will help me to extend my effective range.
Fiftydriver
Official LRH Sponsor
I would say Retumbo is to slow in burn rate for the 7mm Rem Mag which will likely be the reason for the higher ES. Personally, I think H-1000 is still a bit to slow. I would look at H-4831 with that bullet weight personally.
rscott5028
Well-Known Member
+1
I've had great results with h4831sc.
Velocity is nice.
But ultimately what counts is your accuracy/consistency at/beyond your maximum intended range.
How have your loads with each powder performed at 1k thus far?
-- richard
I've had great results with h4831sc.
Velocity is nice.
But ultimately what counts is your accuracy/consistency at/beyond your maximum intended range.
How have your loads with each powder performed at 1k thus far?
-- richard
I haven't been able to test them out that long at this point. I have just learned to reload and have a lot of things to refine before I can say I have anything even capable of giving me a fair definition of accuracy.
No I am hijacking my own thread here, but since I started it, I can do it if I want to. hahahaha
What would you guys consider "acceptable" accuracy to shooting out to 700-800yds? Like for instance, some of the scope manufacturers that sell "shooting systems" want proof on a target that you are capable of shooting a 1 MOA target. To me, specifically when you start talking getting out past 5-700 yds, you would want to be a little better than that, but I am just guestimating I guess. Obviously, the more accurate, the better. I am just curious what others consider to be acceptable for something like that.
What would you guys consider "acceptable" accuracy to shooting out to 700-800yds? Like for instance, some of the scope manufacturers that sell "shooting systems" want proof on a target that you are capable of shooting a 1 MOA target. To me, specifically when you start talking getting out past 5-700 yds, you would want to be a little better than that, but I am just guestimating I guess. Obviously, the more accurate, the better. I am just curious what others consider to be acceptable for something like that.
rscott5028
Well-Known Member
Your original context was hunting.
As such, Shawn Carlock or someone put forth the notion that he won't shoot unless he'd be completely amazed that he didn't make the kill.
I think that's a pretty good measure. Hence, MOA is perhaps good enough in some cases and sub par in others. i.e. depends on what you're hunting and how far
Plinking doesn't really matter, and competition usually requires half that or better.
That said, it's also important to hit what you're aiming at. A rifle may shoot tight groups. But, you have to be able to put the first shot in the kill zone.
-- richard
As such, Shawn Carlock or someone put forth the notion that he won't shoot unless he'd be completely amazed that he didn't make the kill.
I think that's a pretty good measure. Hence, MOA is perhaps good enough in some cases and sub par in others. i.e. depends on what you're hunting and how far
Plinking doesn't really matter, and competition usually requires half that or better.
That said, it's also important to hit what you're aiming at. A rifle may shoot tight groups. But, you have to be able to put the first shot in the kill zone.
-- richard
Recent Posts
-
-
Interesting video on what we all know is going on with automobiles- Latest: FireFlyFishing
-
-
