Reloder 16 vs. Reloder 17

[dave7mm]

Rifle.
17 pound 1000 yard Bench Rest Rifle.
Defiance Rebel Action RBLP.
Jewell 2oz. Trigger.
D&B Supply MBR Tooley Tracker,Rutland Laminate.
Bartlien Fluted MTU 28 inche. 1-8 twisted.
Vias Brake.
10-60x52 March Tactical. 20 MOA rail.

Cartridge.
6.5mm Super Long Range, SLR.
140g Berger Long Range Boatail. LRBT.
Lapua Palma Case. Small Primer Pocket
CCI-450 Magnum Small Rifle Primer.

Chronograph.
Oehler Model 33.
10 Foot spacing on screens.

Conditions.
85 Degrees sunny and overcast.
500 yard target single shot ladder test.
Winds at 45 to 90 degrees say 5 to 15 mph. gusts.
In other words.. they sucked.

Reloader 17.
41.5- 2882
41.8- 2885
42.1- 2909
42.4- 2929
42.7- 2962
43.0- 2970

Reloader 16.
41.5- 2773
41.8- 2799
42.1- 2828
42.4- 2861
42.7- 2884
43.0- 2881

I have a 12 pound 6.5 SLR and have been running 42.5g of Reloader 17 all summer and doing very well with it.No case issues of any kind.And I had a nice flat line right at 42.4 and 42.7 just like my light rifle.Run the light rifle at 42.5 for 2940 or so.It works.

I picked up the Rel 16 at last weekends match and wanted to just see how it stacked up.
Its sold as being faster than Rel 17 but im thinking that they got that all wrong.
The Reloader 16 has a bit more bulk to it than 17 and has a dull finish.It actually meters better than 17.Not sure why that is.But it seems that way.
I saw no signs of pressure with any of these loads.But you should keep in mind that I have a small firing pin and these Defiance actions are real good at hiding pressure... Just to check things out I decapped the 42.7 and 43g loads of Rel 16 and reprimed them.Checking for over sized primer pockets.
I saw no issues and will go up, as I still have room in the case.
Interesting was that the Rel 16 ladder of six rounds, only had 3.5 inches of verticle at 500 yards.. This is very good..
The Rel 17 had 5.5
Only load data on Rel 16 I could find, on the 260 Rem, was some recipe garbage, saying that 41.7 and a 142g MK was dandy.

dave

 

[dave7mm]

The Rel 16 and Rel 17 were all fired within about 1.5 hours.
Was trying to keep the barrel from getting to hot.Even as it was, it got a tad warm.
From several weeks ago.Same same as above.

Reloader 23.

42.6- 2686
43.0- 2701
43.4- 2721
43.8- Brain Fart
44.2- 2785 .........book max
44.6- 2798 .........compressed
45.0- 2833 .........more compressed

H4831SC.

44.1- 2725
44.5- 2758
44.9- 2767
45.3- 2801
45.7- 2831 ........book max
46.1- 2855
46.5- 2855
46.9- 2888.........compressed

Total amount of vertical on the Rel 23 was 9.25 inches with a classic flat line...ie no verticle between shots 44.2 and 44.6.
Total amount of vertical on the H4831 was 10 inches.nice flat line between 46.1 and 46.5.

dave

 

[jpretle]

Your 2nd group of velocity listings, show the use of VV160.
The vertical you mention says you used H4831.

 

[dave7mm]

Your 2nd group of velocity listings, show the use of VV160.
The vertical you mention says you used H4831.

Corrected.
Thank you.

dave

 

[whatwind?]

What does rifle produce with 130 gr bullets?

 

[dave7mm]

What does rifle produce with 130 gr bullets?

I have no interest in a 130g Bullet.
I have no idea.
dave

 

[Ray in Houston]

Nice info here Dave... thanks a bunch.........

 

[earlcurtis67]

Nice info here Dave... thanks a bunch.........

Yes, thank you! E
I’ll be loading and testing for a 260AI soon as was gonna test 4831SC and RL23

 

[earlcurtis67]

What did you see with the RL17 load at 41.5 and 41.8.? Looks like a nice flat spot there

 

[boltfluter]

Dave,

Great info here. Thanks for sharing. Getting ready to try some RL16 in my 6x47 Lapua for a winter load for coyotes.

Paul

 

[Willow]

Good to hear RL16 is giving you nice tight vertical. Just got some to try in a 6XC as H4350 is giving me nothing but problems - Have run tests from 38.5 up to 40gr in .2gr increments and can't get an SD below 11.5. Hopefully RL16 offers better performance.

 

[JDinFbg]

I developed a good load for my 6mm Rem. using RL17, but wondered if RL16 would offer any advantages. I contacted Alliant about a year ago seeking info on RL16 and RL17 and was told that RL16 is a temperature stable powder that produces smaller standard deviation velocity differences and has a de-coppering agent in it. Alliant noted that RL17 is the only powder in the Reloder series that does not have the de-coppering agent. It may be a mute point a the moment since powders of any kind are pretty much unavailable, but I wonder if folks out there who have used RL16 think it would be worth the time and effort to test it (if and when I can buy some) given that I have developed a satisfactory load with RL17?

 

[Forum Boss]

Reloder 16 is way more temp stable, and will probably produce more consistent ES/SD and accuracy.

If accuracy is your goal -- RL16
If max velocity within a fairly narrow temp range -- RL17

I should add that Alliant personally showed me test data on RL16 and RL23 (same formulation type) for a full range of ambients from freezing to 110deg F. There were comparisons with other noteworthy powders. All I can say is, if the data was truthful, you will be hard-pressed to find more temp-stable powders than RL16 or RL23 in the higher temp ranges.

 

[JLT]

Reloder 16 is way more temp stable, and will probably produce more consistent ES/SD and accuracy.

If accuracy is your goal -- RL16
If max velocity within a fairly narrow temp range -- RL17

I should add that Alliant personally showed me test data on RL16 and RL23 (same formulation type) for a full range of ambients from freezing to 110deg F. There were comparisons with other noteworthy powders. All I can say is, if the data was truthful, you will be hard-pressed to find a more temp-stable powder (than RL 16 or RL23) in the higher temp ranges.

This statement agrees with my experience with RL-23 . This has been my powder of choice in the .260 AI and I've loaded it in a number of other chamberings.

I started using this powder when I was living in upstate NY. I chronographed loads with a Magnetospeed in the depths of the upstate NY winters and during July and August in the East Texas heat and humidity (where I live now). With The Almighty as my witness, the numbers are the same (within the upper and lower bounds of the confidence interval). The loads chronographed in sub-zero temperatures yielded pretty much the same sample mean velocities in +95 degree East Texas heat. Remarkable stuff. No kidding.

I don't have the same frames of reference with RL-16, but I haven't noticed any material temperature sensitivity with this powder. My experience with RL-16 is limited to a range of temperatures of about 70 degrees (30 degrees to around 100) and it is similarly consistent in this range. RL-23 numbers don't move in a 110+ degree range.

 

[Elwood]

I have tested RL23 in 21c and 4c ( 70-40 f ) with a difference of only 5 fps.

 

[ShootDots]

When RL-23 hit the market a few years ago, I developed a load with it in a 7mm SAUM.. I shot it here at Ben Avery in Arizona. I shot it throughout the year from low 40s in the winter to well past 100 in the summer with ZERO ill effects. I am quite certain RL-16 will do the same, as it's formulation is the same as RL-23. Both of those powders rank near the top of my list of "go-to" powders for almost everything in F-Open!

 

[Ledd Slinger]

I used RL17 for years in various rifles. Great speed across the board with rifles that normally prefer quite different burn rates. It’s funny how it can work in a chambering that likes Varget burn rate then turn around and work well in a rifle that normally prefers H1000 burn rate. Kind of a “do all” powder until you get into really fast or really slow burn rate cartridges. I stopped using it because it burns very hot and was wearing out my barrels faster than other powders.

I then did a lot of testing with RL16. Not nearly as versatile across the burn rate chart like 17 is, but the temperature stability of 16 is far superior to that of 17. I found that RL16 is basically the same burn rate as H4350. In fact I used H4350 data for 16 when it first came out and there wasn’t much data out there. Always hit pressure in rifles with the same charge weight using 16 and H4350. But with identical charge weights using 16 and 4350 from min to max, 16 always gave me 30-40 fps faster speeds on the chronograph.

The other nice thing about 16 is that the kernels are very light so if using it in cases with larger volumes, you will get a better case fill level than other powders in the 4350 burn rate area which I believe helps consistency with ignition of the charge. H4350 is still a great powder and I’m not saying 16 is better, but it’s definitely worth a try in rifles that like that burn rate.