best 280 AI powders

[Brad1974]

I am looking for the best possible powder options for my soon to be 280 AI, and would like to hear about your experience with different powders. I have been messing around with the GRT software, and the two powders that stand out the most seem to be N160 and Reloader 23. Have any of you used either or both of those? I do have a pretty good stockpile of H4831sc, and I have seen people say it's a good option too, but looking at the GRT data it appears I would only get around 92% burnt powder even at the higher loads... I have heard that less than 100% burnt powder can create some inconsistency. Anybody used H4831, and what were the results? I am trying to remain within a reasonable temperature stability range, but it isn't the only consideration. I would like to to be at least moderately fast, but speed is not a priority over accuracy. I will be using it for long range hunting, but also for 1000 yd target shooting. I will be using Peterson brass, either CCI or federal primers, and will be starting with the 168 grain Berger Classic Hunter bullet (since we have a bunch already). What are your thoughts and/or experiences?

 

[Leibhart1]

N165 and a 175 Berger is consistently shooting sub 1/2” for 5 shots for me. Velocity is a little slow at 2810 but I’ll take small groups over velocity all day long


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Brad1974]

N165 and a 175 Berger is consistently shooting sub 1/2” for 5 shots for me. Velocity is a little slow at 2810 but I’ll take small groups over velocity all day long


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks! 1/2" would make me very happy. Mine will be a 22" barrel, so I don't expect blazing fast speeds, but hoping to get a load to around 2800 fps or better if possible, but I agree that groups and good SD/velocity spread are more important to me than top speed. Comparing the N165 to N160 n GRT I see faster speeds and more complete burn from the N160... but I don't know if that matters much or not... I also don't have my seating depths and such figured out yet, so I can't put in exact measurements.

 

[Axlrod]

With bullets from 140 gr to 160, in 3 different rifles, H4831sc was always the best for me.

 

[112Savage]

H4831SC
RL23
RL26
Those are the three I’ve used with 162ELDX and 175ABLR
I have used Nosler brass but have switched to Peterson
I have used both Fed210M and CCI 200
162ELDX is going around 2900 from a 22” using RL23
The 175 ABLR is going around 2850 from a 24” using RL26
I have never used VV powders but they should be great.

 

[6mm Remington]

The load I worked up for my 280AI using 140 gr. Partitions or 140 gr. Accubonds is with IMR7828SSC. It has worked very well for me. The load is the same with the two different bullets and it works very well. The Partitions chronograph at 3230 fps and the Accubonds at 3186 fps.

 

[eoperator]

R23

 

[Brad1974]

With bullets from 140 gr to 160, in 3 different rifles, H4831sc was always the best for me.

thats good to know. what other powders did you try besides the H4831? was better because of group size? how did the velocity & ES/SD compare?

 

[Brad1974]

R23

R23 looks great in the GRT software... Id live to try it, but man it's expensive. the only place I could find it, it cost nearly double what the N160 cost. $89/lb or $619/8lb It might be worth it if its better in every way, but it would have to be pretty significant for me to justify the cost.

 

[Brad1974]

H4831SC
RL23
RL26
Those are the three I’ve used with 162ELDX and 175ABLR
I have used Nosler brass but have switched to Peterson
I have used both Fed210M and CCI 200
162ELDX is going around 2900 from a 22” using RL23
The 175 ABLR is going around 2850 from a 24” using RL26
I have never used VV powders but they should be great.

how did the H4831 do compared to the others as far as group sizes, velocity, & SD/ES? R23 looks great, & is fastest, but its crazy expensive. I am really hoping the H4831sc i have will work great, but am concerned about consistency since it apparently wouldnt get a complete burn... at least according to GRT, which may not be accurate.

 

[z987k]

R23 looks great in the GRT software... Id live to try it, but man it's expensive. the only place I could find it, it cost nearly double what the N160 cost. $89/lb or $619/8lb It might be worth it if its better in every way, but it would have to be pretty significant for me to justify the cost.

Bullet weight and barrel length is going to matter for which powder is best. In the VV powders, the heavier bullet with a longer barrel, N560 will be favored. But with a lighter bullet it'll skew to N555 and then N550.
Or the 100 series if you want more temp stability at the expense of speed.

4831 gets fully burned if the bullet is heavy enough. For example, with the 195EOL, it's 100% burned at 18in.
But with the 145LRX, you need 27in.

 

[Brad1974]

It's unlikely that N160 is faster than N560. It's also unlikely RL23 is faster than RL26.

Bullet weight and barrel length is going to matter for which powder is best. In the VV powders, the heavier bullet with a longer barrel, N560 will be favored. But with a lighter bullet it'll skew to N555 and then N550.

I dont havecany pesronal experience yet with VV powders, but it is my understanding that the 100 series is more temperature stable & often more known for accuracy, while the 500 series are more temperature sensitive & known for higher speeds. Is that corrbullets? far as light vs heavy bullets, what would you call 160-168 grain bullets? I will be using a 22" barrel, so feel like im kind of in the middle as far as bullet weight & relatively shorter barrel. What would you think should work best in that case? Ive reloaded for other cartridges, but this will be my first 280 Ai. Most of my research has been reading forums & playing with thr Gordon's Reloading tool software. in GRT, it predicts N160 speeds to be very close to the N560, and if thats true, id like to keep the better temperature stability of the N160.