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.

 

[z987k]

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.

Use the parametric powder search feature.

 

[fuzzymarindave]

H4831SC is your huckleberry for the mid-heavies. Your N160 should be great for lighter bullets!
I use H4831SC, N560; and, H4350

 

[Brad1974]

Use the parametric powder search feature.

oh ive done that extensively. That's really what has me asking questions. For example, if I search on GRT for 280 ai powders, H4831 is not one that it gives me, yet its one of the most mentioned by actual 280 Ai reloaders. Same with H4350 when I was loading for 30-06. everyone's seems to think it was the gold standard, but GRT didnt even mention it because the burnt powder was so low.

 

[Brad1974]

H4831SC is your huckleberry for the mid-heavies. Your N160 should be great for lighter bullets!
I use H4831SC, N560; and, H4350

I hope youre right, because I have a good amount of H5831sc on hand. I'll definitely be trying that. After hearing from a good number of people on here and in a 280 Ai Facebook group, I am convinced I need to give N560 a shot too. I think those would be my top 2 to go head to head at this point, with N160 on deck in case neither of those give me what im looking for.

 

[z987k]

oh ive done that extensively. That's really what has me asking questions. For example, if I search on GRT for 280 ai powders, H4831 is not one that it gives me, yet its one of the most mentioned by actual 280 Ai reloaders. Same with H4350 when I was loading for 30-06. everyone's seems to think it was the gold standard, but GRT didnt even mention it because the burnt powder was so low.

It depends on your parameters. You have two competing negatives here. One is that GRT is just a simulation and it can only really simulate what you put in it and make it match that data. The other is that a lot of people do things the way they've always done them and it doesn't matter how inefficient that is, they're going to keep doing it that way. Or maybe they value ES/SD over velocity to a very large degree.

The reason 4831 isn't coming up as a powder for you is because with that barrel length and a 160ish bullet, you're not burning all the powder. Probably. N560 isn't different there, but it's worth another 100fps.

280ai and a 162eldx(and probably other 160-165gr lead bullets), with an emphasis on being single base for hopefully more temp stability and lower ES/SD, H4350 does look like your top powder. It's 125fps slower than the top double base.... which in a hunting scenario is only 50-75fps off your range.

 

[Brad1974]

It depends on your parameters. You have two competing negatives here. One is that GRT is just a simulation and it can only really simulate what you put in it and make it match that data. The other is that a lot of people do things the way they've always done them and it doesn't matter how inefficient that is, they're going to keep doing it that way. Or maybe they value ES/SD over velocity to a very large degree.

The reason 4831 isn't coming up as a powder for you is because with that barrel length and a 160ish bullet, you're not burning all the powder. Probably. N560 isn't different there, but it's worth another 100fps.

280ai and a 162eldx(and probably other 160-165gr lead bullets), with an emphasis on being single base for hopefully more temp stability and lower ES/SD, H4350 does look like your top powder. It's 125fps slower than the top double base.... which in a hunting scenario is only 50-75fps off your range.

That first paragraph of yours actually explains why I am out looking for others real experience using these powders. I know GRT will first of all be only as good as the measurements I plug in, and I don't even have my real case capacity, seating depth, and all of the other data it needs to give a better estimate. Even then it will still just be a ballpark, and I'll need to test everything. I definitely know that asking most people what powder they use, absolutely doesn't mean they are using a good powder, but it does give me an idea of what kind of results people are getting when they use whatever powder they choose. I just want to narrow it down to 2-3 powders that should be good, so I can test them.

H4831 is definitely showing it's too slow burning, and gets 93-95% burn in the GRT (I know it's not accurate). But N160 actually shows 100% burn, even if I shorten the barrel length down to 17". But, again, not accurate numbers to even get a ballpark at this point. All of my questioning on this forum and other places has helped narrow down to a handful of options. I think the bottom line is I will plug in the real numbers that effect the powder selection in GRT once I can do so. That will at least give me closer info & I can pick which one or two I will start with. I'd just rather not bother with ones that are very unlikely to be good powders just because they show up in reloading manuals.... which is a whole other story.