H380--->Major Disappointment
- Thread starter DocCoyote
- Start date
dogtired
New member
I use it in my 22-250, 223 and have enjoyed accuracy in my 338-06 but have chosen another powder for my go to load. I am sure I have used it in the 222 and 30-06 as well. Probably the 243 too but I can't remember. I love how that stuff meters especially when loading hundreds of 22 cal rounds. Double check every 25 rounds or so and never off.
fireball10x
New member
I use 37.5 grains rel 15 in my rem 700vssf with cci br primers get 3866fps and 1/4 inch groups at 100.I used h380 before but get more velocity and better accuracy with rel 15 I don't care how it meters I have a RCBS chargemaster
fireball10x
New member
Start at 35 and work your way up I'm at max at 37.5 with a 55bal tip
Handgunr
New member
Doc,
As is widely known, extruded powders just don't throw very well. Most folks toss a "lesser" load, then trickle the load up to where they want to be. I've known some that just throw their extruded loads with all the crunching and bumping and call that "good enough".
To me that's widely inconsistent, and I can only imagine what their actual weights really are.
I agree with Steve regarding your gun maybe not liking the 60gr. bullets, and with many .22-250's, the rates of twist are generally 1 in 12, and more often 1 in 14". If your gun is of the latter, it'll generally shoot 45-55gr. bullets the best.
I've loaded the 22-250 for almost the total 35yrs. that I've reloaded, and really have never been without one. I've used just about every powder in them at one time or another, including Varget.
In my particular experiences, I've found that choices in components, even the lesser considered ones, can make big differences in group sizes. Mapping out a load for a particular gun isn't all that hard, and again, like Steve had mentioned, choosing a bullet that is conducive to your gun's rate of twist is a logical "first choice".
I've found where certain components, such as the brand of brass, bullets, or as already mentioned, primers, have given a certain level of consistency over the years, and I've tended to stick with them.
Not that I don't try other components in the place of others, as I keep different brands on hand, it's just that as an overall consensus, certain one's do better than others for the most part.
Powders that have worked very well range from IMR3031, 4895, 4064, 4350 and Varget in the extruded realm, and BL-C2, H380 and H414 in the Ball powder area. My old favorite load that used IMR4064 under a 55gr. VMax, has recently been replaced by H414. The ball powder filled the case more completely, and the Federal Match primer lights it off with no problem.
I know it's been recommended to use "magnum" primers with "any ball powder" for a more positive ignition, but I start by using a regular primer first. Especially a "match primer". They are more consistent, and usually fall in the middle as far as flame strength.
I've found that trying regular primers with given ball powders first, has in several cases, produced better accuracy than switching to magnum primers right off the bat.
If I recall correctly, Hodgdon's initial load using H380 was based on the use of a 52gr. Sierra Match bullet, and 38.0grs of the powder so aptly named.
Good luck,
Bob
As is widely known, extruded powders just don't throw very well. Most folks toss a "lesser" load, then trickle the load up to where they want to be. I've known some that just throw their extruded loads with all the crunching and bumping and call that "good enough".
To me that's widely inconsistent, and I can only imagine what their actual weights really are.
I agree with Steve regarding your gun maybe not liking the 60gr. bullets, and with many .22-250's, the rates of twist are generally 1 in 12, and more often 1 in 14". If your gun is of the latter, it'll generally shoot 45-55gr. bullets the best.
I've loaded the 22-250 for almost the total 35yrs. that I've reloaded, and really have never been without one. I've used just about every powder in them at one time or another, including Varget.
In my particular experiences, I've found that choices in components, even the lesser considered ones, can make big differences in group sizes. Mapping out a load for a particular gun isn't all that hard, and again, like Steve had mentioned, choosing a bullet that is conducive to your gun's rate of twist is a logical "first choice".
I've found where certain components, such as the brand of brass, bullets, or as already mentioned, primers, have given a certain level of consistency over the years, and I've tended to stick with them.
Not that I don't try other components in the place of others, as I keep different brands on hand, it's just that as an overall consensus, certain one's do better than others for the most part.
Powders that have worked very well range from IMR3031, 4895, 4064, 4350 and Varget in the extruded realm, and BL-C2, H380 and H414 in the Ball powder area. My old favorite load that used IMR4064 under a 55gr. VMax, has recently been replaced by H414. The ball powder filled the case more completely, and the Federal Match primer lights it off with no problem.
I know it's been recommended to use "magnum" primers with "any ball powder" for a more positive ignition, but I start by using a regular primer first. Especially a "match primer". They are more consistent, and usually fall in the middle as far as flame strength.
I've found that trying regular primers with given ball powders first, has in several cases, produced better accuracy than switching to magnum primers right off the bat.
If I recall correctly, Hodgdon's initial load using H380 was based on the use of a 52gr. Sierra Match bullet, and 38.0grs of the powder so aptly named.
Good luck,
Bob
Bob Tobergte
New member
Quote:
When it comes to rifles and gunpowders .......... "One rifle's poison is another's medicine"!
That's why there are so many available .....
The fact that H380 is available is not a scourge .... it's one of many blessings we handloaders are able to enjoy.
Three 44s
Hey! Are you my long lost Brother? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/ooo.gif
When it comes to rifles and gunpowders .......... "One rifle's poison is another's medicine"!
That's why there are so many available .....
The fact that H380 is available is not a scourge .... it's one of many blessings we handloaders are able to enjoy.
Three 44s
Hey! Are you my long lost Brother? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/ooo.gif
DocCoyote
New member
Spur, I suppose it could be a primer problem. I've never heard what handgunnr said about using magnum primers with ball powder, I'm using Winchester LR Non-Magnum primers.
It just baffles me that the 60gr pills shot so poorly with H380 while they shoot under MOA with Varget. I get 3650fps with Varget and that's just enough velocity to stabilize the 60gr bullets. I was getting the same velocity with H380 and didn't get stabilization. Perhaps it's a barrel harmonics issue. I've got a box of 53gr SMKs and 55gr SGKs. I think I'll use the H380 for those and stick with Varget for the 60grs.
I think my problem with the messy loading is just what handgunnr said, that I've gotten used to under-loading and trickling up to desired charge weight. Maybe I should just spend a few extra minutes dialing in the powder thrower.
I guess I was just real disappointed when I worked this load up and got such poor performance. I've read of a lot of people who really liked H380 and it looked good on paper. I guess my expectations were too high. Lesson learned.
Thanks for the input everybody.
It just baffles me that the 60gr pills shot so poorly with H380 while they shoot under MOA with Varget. I get 3650fps with Varget and that's just enough velocity to stabilize the 60gr bullets. I was getting the same velocity with H380 and didn't get stabilization. Perhaps it's a barrel harmonics issue. I've got a box of 53gr SMKs and 55gr SGKs. I think I'll use the H380 for those and stick with Varget for the 60grs.
I think my problem with the messy loading is just what handgunnr said, that I've gotten used to under-loading and trickling up to desired charge weight. Maybe I should just spend a few extra minutes dialing in the powder thrower.
I guess I was just real disappointed when I worked this load up and got such poor performance. I've read of a lot of people who really liked H380 and it looked good on paper. I guess my expectations were too high. Lesson learned.
Thanks for the input everybody.
coyote control
New member
Quote Doc:I guess I was just real disappointed when I worked this load up and got such poor performance. I've read of a lot of people who really liked H380 and it looked good on paper. I guess my expectations were too high. Lesson learned.
Doc,
When I start with a given powder or bullet I never expect to have high expectations. I just load things up and if a certain bullet or powder does not work good then I move on to something else.
As far as the H380 goes, which I have very limited use of, it does seem to work very good with the 52's. I have seen several test done using these with around 40-41 1/2 grs of power with excellent accuracy in the 22-250.
Anyway, I don't use H380 myself, mostly because I get highier velocity using H4895 with 55's than using H380 - in the 22-250.
Doc,
When I start with a given powder or bullet I never expect to have high expectations. I just load things up and if a certain bullet or powder does not work good then I move on to something else.
As far as the H380 goes, which I have very limited use of, it does seem to work very good with the 52's. I have seen several test done using these with around 40-41 1/2 grs of power with excellent accuracy in the 22-250.
Anyway, I don't use H380 myself, mostly because I get highier velocity using H4895 with 55's than using H380 - in the 22-250.
Martyn4802
New member
Quote:
Spur, I suppose it could be a primer problem. I've never heard what handgunnr said about using magnum primers with ball powder, I'm using Winchester LR Non-Magnum primers.
It just baffles me that the 60gr pills shot so poorly with H380 while they shoot under MOA with Varget. I get 3650fps with Varget and that's just enough velocity to stabilize the 60gr bullets. I was getting the same velocity with H380 and didn't get stabilization. Perhaps it's a barrel harmonics issue. I've got a box of 53gr SMKs and 55gr SGKs. I think I'll use the H380 for those and stick with Varget for the 60grs.
I think my problem with the messy loading is just what handgunnr said, that I've gotten used to under-loading and trickling up to desired charge weight. Maybe I should just spend a few extra minutes dialing in the powder thrower.
I guess I was just real disappointed when I worked this load up and got such poor performance. I've read of a lot of people who really liked H380 and it looked good on paper. I guess my expectations were too high. Lesson learned.
Thanks for the input everybody.
The problem you're having with H-380 and 60 grain bullets shooting well might not be the H-380 powder at all. It could be the twist in your barrel not stabilizing the 60 grainers. I've not had good luck with 60 grain bullets shooting well in my 22-250. My twist is 1-14" and it shoots 55 grain bullets very well, but not 60 grain bullets.
I tested several different powder/bullet weight combinations, including H-380, before I found the magic formula. My rifle shoots 55 gr Sierra HPBT bullets into a 1/4" group at 100 yards for three shots. I use Federal 210 Match primers for the loads, and seat bullets .010 off the lands. For load development, for all of my rifles, I use a 36X benchrest scope, then I change out the scope once I've found the right combo for a load. The group mentioned was shot with 32.6 gr of Benchmark. But, Varget was a close second shooting the same bullet with a 3/8" group for three shots.
If you want to shoot heavy bullets, you need a fast twist barrel.
Martyn
Spur, I suppose it could be a primer problem. I've never heard what handgunnr said about using magnum primers with ball powder, I'm using Winchester LR Non-Magnum primers.
It just baffles me that the 60gr pills shot so poorly with H380 while they shoot under MOA with Varget. I get 3650fps with Varget and that's just enough velocity to stabilize the 60gr bullets. I was getting the same velocity with H380 and didn't get stabilization. Perhaps it's a barrel harmonics issue. I've got a box of 53gr SMKs and 55gr SGKs. I think I'll use the H380 for those and stick with Varget for the 60grs.
I think my problem with the messy loading is just what handgunnr said, that I've gotten used to under-loading and trickling up to desired charge weight. Maybe I should just spend a few extra minutes dialing in the powder thrower.
I guess I was just real disappointed when I worked this load up and got such poor performance. I've read of a lot of people who really liked H380 and it looked good on paper. I guess my expectations were too high. Lesson learned.
Thanks for the input everybody.
The problem you're having with H-380 and 60 grain bullets shooting well might not be the H-380 powder at all. It could be the twist in your barrel not stabilizing the 60 grainers. I've not had good luck with 60 grain bullets shooting well in my 22-250. My twist is 1-14" and it shoots 55 grain bullets very well, but not 60 grain bullets.
I tested several different powder/bullet weight combinations, including H-380, before I found the magic formula. My rifle shoots 55 gr Sierra HPBT bullets into a 1/4" group at 100 yards for three shots. I use Federal 210 Match primers for the loads, and seat bullets .010 off the lands. For load development, for all of my rifles, I use a 36X benchrest scope, then I change out the scope once I've found the right combo for a load. The group mentioned was shot with 32.6 gr of Benchmark. But, Varget was a close second shooting the same bullet with a 3/8" group for three shots.
If you want to shoot heavy bullets, you need a fast twist barrel.
Martyn
Handgunr
New member
Doc,
Well after I posted I saw that you mentioned that you were getting good accuracy with Varget using the 60grs. If the 60's will stabilize with Varget, but not with H380, I'd have to say that it's not a rate of twist issue. If there is an issue with it, it apparently has to be slight.
Regarding magnum primers and ball powders, yes, it's been widely recommended that magnum primers are used with them due to their ignition properties. Extruded powders are porous, in that they have small holes that run through their length where flame can get in and around the kernels. Ball powders are a solid spherical. Some very round, and others somewhat flattened, like flake powders.
Volume wise, if a space is filled to capacity with either powder type, ball powders naturally fill it very densely with very little airspace. Extruded powders, not nearly as much density, but plenty of airspace for the ignition to take place easily.
Some loading manuals still recommend it highly, like Speer, but there's several who don't, based on their load research.
I choose to try the standard primers first, and if I see signs of ignition problems, I'll switch over to see. Using match primers though, I've never had to bother really.
As far as using extruded powders, I've had excellent results with them over the years, so I spent the money and bought the Lyman DPS1200 autoscale. It has been a godsend as far as metering those powders, and it makes for very consistent loads. The RCBS Chargemaster is another great tool based on the same idea.
In my opinion, they are a "must have" when loading with extruded's, and as far as desirable tools in handloading, they're right up there with the chronograph.
PS-You're one of the first folks in awhile that mentioned, or recognized the possibility of barrel harmonics as being a possible issue. Every barrel has it's sweet spot, and particular "ring" characteristics. Finding the load that shoots within that sweet spot, or harmonic pitch, on a consistent basis, is the secret.
Take care,
Bob
Well after I posted I saw that you mentioned that you were getting good accuracy with Varget using the 60grs. If the 60's will stabilize with Varget, but not with H380, I'd have to say that it's not a rate of twist issue. If there is an issue with it, it apparently has to be slight.
Regarding magnum primers and ball powders, yes, it's been widely recommended that magnum primers are used with them due to their ignition properties. Extruded powders are porous, in that they have small holes that run through their length where flame can get in and around the kernels. Ball powders are a solid spherical. Some very round, and others somewhat flattened, like flake powders.
Volume wise, if a space is filled to capacity with either powder type, ball powders naturally fill it very densely with very little airspace. Extruded powders, not nearly as much density, but plenty of airspace for the ignition to take place easily.
Some loading manuals still recommend it highly, like Speer, but there's several who don't, based on their load research.
I choose to try the standard primers first, and if I see signs of ignition problems, I'll switch over to see. Using match primers though, I've never had to bother really.
As far as using extruded powders, I've had excellent results with them over the years, so I spent the money and bought the Lyman DPS1200 autoscale. It has been a godsend as far as metering those powders, and it makes for very consistent loads. The RCBS Chargemaster is another great tool based on the same idea.
In my opinion, they are a "must have" when loading with extruded's, and as far as desirable tools in handloading, they're right up there with the chronograph.
PS-You're one of the first folks in awhile that mentioned, or recognized the possibility of barrel harmonics as being a possible issue. Every barrel has it's sweet spot, and particular "ring" characteristics. Finding the load that shoots within that sweet spot, or harmonic pitch, on a consistent basis, is the secret.
Take care,
Bob
DocCoyote
New member
Quote:
PS-You're one of the first folks in awhile that mentioned, or recognized the possibility of barrel harmonics as being a possible issue. Every barrel has it's sweet spot, and particular "ring" characteristics. Finding the load that shoots within that sweet spot, or harmonic pitch, on a consistent basis, is the secret.
I mentioned this on another post the other day, but I'll say it again. I read somewhere recently (I think it was an article by Rick Jamison in Shooting Times) that barrel harmonics play a bigger role in accuracy than consistency of load and velocity. I recently shot a string of 10 40gr Vmax's out of my 22-250 at an average of 4050fps. The extreme spread for the load was 144fps, not great at all! But the 10 bullets grouped 1.1" (at 120 yards) with 5 of the bullets within a 1/2", and all but one within 3/4". Now I know that these are not spectacular groups by some standards, but they are good for me. And with an extreme spread of 144fps, I think they're pretty darn good groups. I think this is a little contrary to popular belief, and is what constitutes a "sweet spot" or "pet" load. What do y'all think?
PS-You're one of the first folks in awhile that mentioned, or recognized the possibility of barrel harmonics as being a possible issue. Every barrel has it's sweet spot, and particular "ring" characteristics. Finding the load that shoots within that sweet spot, or harmonic pitch, on a consistent basis, is the secret.
I mentioned this on another post the other day, but I'll say it again. I read somewhere recently (I think it was an article by Rick Jamison in Shooting Times) that barrel harmonics play a bigger role in accuracy than consistency of load and velocity. I recently shot a string of 10 40gr Vmax's out of my 22-250 at an average of 4050fps. The extreme spread for the load was 144fps, not great at all! But the 10 bullets grouped 1.1" (at 120 yards) with 5 of the bullets within a 1/2", and all but one within 3/4". Now I know that these are not spectacular groups by some standards, but they are good for me. And with an extreme spread of 144fps, I think they're pretty darn good groups. I think this is a little contrary to popular belief, and is what constitutes a "sweet spot" or "pet" load. What do y'all think?
The fact you are getting the same or more velocity with 380 would tend to eliminate the twist rate. A combination of borderline twist rate, barrel harmonics, and primer maybe?
I have only used Rem 7 1/2 primers with my 22-250 but would try mag primers if that were suspect. H-380 seems to group best for me right at the max for the individual rifle, but that does not explain groups the size you were getting.
You would think if it was a primer issue it might show up in ES. Like you said if you are in the sweet spot ES may not mean alot at short range but if you are out of it small variations in velocity could be large variations in harmonics.
Handgunr
New member
Quote:
I read somewhere recently (I think it was an article by Rick Jamison in Shooting Times) that barrel harmonics play a bigger role in accuracy than consistency of load and velocity.
Doc,
I respect most of Jamison's articles (and the fact you brought it up), but if he did in fact write that, I'd have to disagree totally with him on this one.
Think of it this way;
In regards to barrel harmonic's, when a shot is fired, the barrel oscillates very much like a tuning fork when struck. Actually the barrel muzzle does so more in a circular "whip" motion.
Now a slight difference in load velocity might not make a big difference, but if you figure the movement of the end of that barrel in the terms of a clock face, a consistent load will exit at the same point in the circumference of that whip, like say at the 1:00 o'clock point.
Inconsistent loads might exit the barrel at different points during it's oscillation, hitting at lets say, 11:00, 12:00 and 1:00 at random. One reason why bull barrels, or heavy barrels are more accurate overall.....less barrel vibration or whip due to it's stiffer profile.
A good question would be if a given barrel has a particular favored harmonic pitch, or sweet spot, how consistent does the load have to be to stay within the parameters of it ?
I believe (or am highly suspect) that different loads might produce different harmonic changes in a barrel, and the one's that shoot the best will be in that harmonic "sweet spot" mentioned earlier.
Very much like a crankshaft in an engine. Off balance and it'll vibrate like hell. Smoothed out and you won't feel a thing. I could be wrong and the barrel pitch might be characteristically unchangeable, but I can't believe that.
Oh well....FWIW....
Take care,
Bob
I read somewhere recently (I think it was an article by Rick Jamison in Shooting Times) that barrel harmonics play a bigger role in accuracy than consistency of load and velocity.
Doc,
I respect most of Jamison's articles (and the fact you brought it up), but if he did in fact write that, I'd have to disagree totally with him on this one.
Think of it this way;
In regards to barrel harmonic's, when a shot is fired, the barrel oscillates very much like a tuning fork when struck. Actually the barrel muzzle does so more in a circular "whip" motion.
Now a slight difference in load velocity might not make a big difference, but if you figure the movement of the end of that barrel in the terms of a clock face, a consistent load will exit at the same point in the circumference of that whip, like say at the 1:00 o'clock point.
Inconsistent loads might exit the barrel at different points during it's oscillation, hitting at lets say, 11:00, 12:00 and 1:00 at random. One reason why bull barrels, or heavy barrels are more accurate overall.....less barrel vibration or whip due to it's stiffer profile.
A good question would be if a given barrel has a particular favored harmonic pitch, or sweet spot, how consistent does the load have to be to stay within the parameters of it ?
I believe (or am highly suspect) that different loads might produce different harmonic changes in a barrel, and the one's that shoot the best will be in that harmonic "sweet spot" mentioned earlier.
Very much like a crankshaft in an engine. Off balance and it'll vibrate like hell. Smoothed out and you won't feel a thing. I could be wrong and the barrel pitch might be characteristically unchangeable, but I can't believe that.
Oh well....FWIW....
Take care,
Bob