Powder query

[adam]

Hi all. I have finally stepped into the world of reloading, and made my first ever rounds up on the weekend. I'm using H4895 and havent yet found the super accurate load but that will come no doubt. However I fired 6 shots of the newly re-loaded ammo and my mate said he could see alot of sparks coming out of the moderator. Is that normal?
Also when I cleaned the gun, the powder staining was tougher to remove than on the factory ammo I have been using? Again is this normal with that powder?
Adam

[Hotshot]

Sparks! Must be powder that is not completely burned and it is coming out on fire. A slightly faster burning powder might complete the burn and may be a little cleaner as well. Some powder formulas burn cleaner than others, but a little solvent should zip the residue right off.

[foxwhistler]

adam It`s nice to see youve started the reloading.I think what Hotshot posted above Is probably correct ,as you also have a shorter barrel on your rifle.I`d have thought the only problem with the powder failing to burn fast enough could be lower velocity.Did you chrono the loads?

[jo191145]

Adam
Next time you try H-4895 pop the bolt out of your gun and look down the bore. See any unburnt powder in the bore?
I've never had that issue with H-4895 but I did have it with AA2015. Never did figure out why I just discontinued using it.

What was your load?

[adam]

I went out tonight and worked up to 28 grains with the32 v max. Got good group too less than half inch, but velocity was relly low at around3550. highest of six shots being 3642fps. The barrel is 22" long. When i look down the tube after shooting there is no fouling apparent, the bore looks really clean. When i shoot the factory 40 rems, before i clean i can see like bits and flakes of powder in the bore, but not with H4895. However as i said it seems to take a lot more scrubbing and more carbon remover to get ot out.

[futuretrades]

the hornady manual lists 28.4 grains of h4895 as the max load. test fired out of 26 in. barrel at 4100 fps. you are close to max load. did you look at the spent primers for signs of over pressure, or did the bolt open a little hard, another sign of over pressure. your velocity seems a little low for that much powder, even if your barrel is 22 inches.
i don't use 4895 in my 204, but i have done some testing in my 223 with it. after shooting, cleaning with 4895 was no worse than any other powders that i use, which include h335, h4895, and benchmark.

[adam]

There is no signs of over preassure. Primer was fine and bolt was like normal to operate. My concern is that if I cant match a factory 40 load with a reloaded 32, What to try next. The one thing that I couldnt buy at the time of my reloading gear was 71/2 primers, I had to have 61/2 instead but I cant see that making that much difference?
According to hodgdons web site 29 with h4895, is max for .204 under a 32 v-max

[Silverfox]

adam--While the Rem 6½ and Rem 7½ primers may not seem to be much different to you, I would HIGHLY RECOMMEND that before you approach maximum listed loads in your rifle, that you purchase primers with a much thicker cup than those found on the Rem 6½. The Rem 6½ has a cup thickness of only .0200" while primers such as the CCI450, CCI BR4, and Rem 7½ have cup thicknesses of .0250". I believe that little bit of extra cup thickness may save you from a bad accident due to pierced primers when you begin to approach maximum charge weights.

I can't speak for how hot or cold the Rem 6½ primers are compared to the others I have listed, but I do know that the CCI BR4 and Rem 7½ are benchrest primers and are supposed to be a bit better quality primer than others.

[Njanear]

In regards to the Remington 6-1/2 primer, I found it interesting that Remington states (in its Online Help Center - query Primers) that it shouldn't be used in the .17 REM, .222 REM or the .223 REM - with no mention of the .204 Ruger cartridge in the same breath (or even specifically why it shouldn't, although I am sure that Silverfox 'hit the nail on the head'). If you look at their ballistics though, they do choose to load their rounds with the 7-1/2 - which would seem to imply that they also realize the 6-1/2 primer isn't suitable for the .204 (for the reason Silverfox states, I bet).

[jo191145]

Adam
In case your still doubting Silverfox don't. He's absolutely correct. Rem 6.5's and a 204 do not mix well.
If I remember correctly the 6.5 is the absolute thinnest cup available in a small rifle primer. Suited for use in a 22 Hornet 25-20 Winchester or other low pressure rounds.

Somewhere on James Calhoon's web site you can find an article on primers that lists the varying thicknesses. The 204 requires the thickest available. I have used Winchester primers in the 204 but even they are a little touchy with pressure.


Along with the primers Silverfox mentioned theres also the Federal 205M (M stands for Match. No M at the end means they're thinner.


Once you find one of those primers you can continue with Hodgens data.

[skipper]

I went out tonight and worked up to 28 grains with the32 v max. Got good group too less than half inch, but velocity was relly low at around3550. highest of six shots being 3642fps. The barrel is 22" long.

Someting just isn't right here. 3550 fps with a load of 28 gr of H4895 under a 32 gr V-Max??? I can push a 35 gr Berger at 4100 fps with RE-10X and CCI BR-4 primers.

I did a chronograph test last year of the Rem 7 1/2 versus the CCI BR-4. With the exact same powder charge the Rem 7 1/2 primers averaged about 9 fps faster than the CCI BR-4.

[adam]

Hi lads, been off computer for a while. Thanks for your replies but maybe I didnt make myself clear in the previous threads. The primers are cci 61/2. Its all the shop had when I purchased my equipment. But after reading silver fox's post I will be get 71/2's as soon as possible. What length barrels do you guys run?
Will going from 28grains to 28.5 and then 29 grains make a dramatic increase in velocity? I blieve its nearing a compresed load at these volumes?

[WrzWaldo]

Somewhere on James Calhoon's web site...

http://www.jamescalhoon.com/primers_and_pressure.php

[jo191145]

Wrzwaldo Thanks for the computer literacy

Adam
Just a typo I'm sure but your primers must be Remington if they're 6 1/2's. We all need to know what you have though.
Assuming they're Rem 6.5's you really need to find some of the thick cup primers like Silverfox suggested. Those 6.5's will not hold much pressure.

I agree with Skipper. Your velocitys seem awful low.
1 If your one of the gents who start off with a clean and very lightly oiled barrel you'll notice your first shot/fouler will be very slow. This shot should be edited from your chrono. It will really mess with your average and ES/SD

2 If you have a barrel like all the ones I've had you might start collecting a little copper fouling. Usually aggravated by using the cleaner burning powders like Hodgen's extreme line. Quite often after the fouler you can notice the velocitys steadily rise as the bullet sheds a little copper on a bare barrel creating friction. Then as the powder fouling begins to permeate the bore the velocitys will drop slightly and hopefully stabilize.

Is it hard finding primers on the other side of the pond? I wouldn't doubt it. We had a pretty dry spell over here.

CCI makes a primer for military applications. The 5.56 Nato round. They come in a plain white box. I'm unsure of the specific designation. Never tried them myself but I know they are a thick cup primer. I see them at my gun shop but they always have something a little flashier.
Just one more possibility to keep a look out for.

Get some primers run it up and report back.

[adam]

Thanks for your help and advice all. I will get some rem 7.5's and start at the bottom again and report back. might be a week or two tho. Will a faster burning powder improve matters due to my short barrel? If so what do you recommend?
Thanks again
Adam