450Bushmaster.net

Any one tried or thought of trying Reloader 7 for the 450b?

The reason I asked it that I was looking for some Reloader 15 for some 223 stuff and I saw that the Reloader 7 description said it was "Great in .45-70 and .450 Marlin."

RL 7 is a medium burn rate. Between 4198 and 3031.

MudBug wrote:Any one tried or thought of trying Reloader 7 for the 450b?

The reason I asked it that I was looking for some Reloader 15 for some 223 stuff and I saw that the Reloader 7 description said it was "Great in .45-70 and .450 Marlin."

Not silly at all, you-all just keep right on ah thunk'en, we need it..

RX7 is much slower than 1680 and in the 45 Professional it slowed the bullet on average 500fps, making 1680 was the powder of choice. Now however, 1680 is doing nearly the same thing in the 450b. It looks like we'll end up with powders in the lil-gun to 296 area, that is, if total Hi-Performance is the goal. RX7 might be handy for squib loads and it might even function the action, but case sealing could become a problem. I bet that before we are done all these powders and many more will be totally rung-out. I myself will sacrifice a little accuracy for Taylor Knock-Down, in other words, I prefer the powders that meter through the equiptment a whole lot better than say, stick powders do. So, I tend to use the ball types, even if they are not the most accurate. Of course this is not true for me if paper groups are more important for me, then anything goes for me.

I'm not sure you could get enough RL7 in the case to make it efficient. My question on the slower powders is, "what happens with the unburned powder granules as they pass the gas port". Part of the issue with the adoption of the M-16 was the original loadings using deterent coated ball powders which led to a lot of reliability issues in the field due to crud build up in the gas system. I have some WC 680, (surplus 1680) on hand, and I'm hoping to try some this weekend. Quickload is telling me to expect about 87% combustion at best. For a "sporting" rifle, if I could get 30 rounds without issues, I'd call it usable.
I'll load it under some cast boolits which wil definately make any crud issues obvious.
BD

Hmmm, doing a little research it seems that RL7 is recomended by alliant for the 458 SOCOM.

Also, another powder suggested for the 45-70 is RL 10X.

I see I'm gonna have to start paying attention to those powder burn rate charts.

BD1 wrote:I'm not sure you could get enough RL7 in the case to make it efficient. My question on the slower powders is, "what happens with the unburned powder granules as they pass the gas port". Part of the issue with the adoption of the M-16 was the original loadings using deterent coated ball powders which led to a lot of reliability issues in the field due to crud build up in the gas system. I have some WC 680, (surplus 1680) on hand, and I'm hoping to try some this weekend. Quickload is telling me to expect about 87% combustion at best. For a "sporting" rifle, if I could get 30 rounds without issues, I'd call it usable.
I'll load it under some cast boolits which wil definately make any crud issues obvious.
BD

Should be "Ok"? The reliability issues were from calcium carbonate in the powder, used to reduce muzzle flash, it's been since the late 1960, since anyone has used it..Buuttt..