• This Forum is for adults 18 years of age or over. By continuing to use this Forum you are confirming that you are 18 or older. No content shall be viewed by any person under 18 in California.

N140 or N150 for 90s in .223?

Hey Mike, interesting quandary you have here. I'll throw in my two cents just in case it helps. Now, a preface: I am a service rifle shooter, so all this may be irrelevant.

Last year I spun up a 14-6.5 gain twist, 5R, service rifle barrel. It is a 20" finish. I am limited to a 4x scope so I am using a Leupold FX-II with a .75 moa target dot. Last year I shot it for one weekend match with 80.5s and I was happy, this year I decided to try some 90s - I had won 150 from Sierra.

Talking to Joe Carlos, I started with from 23.8 to 24.1 of N140. Did a test spread with some 'whatever' brass I had laying around and came to 24.0 at 2603 Avg with 8.4 SD, and 24.1 at 2606 Avg with 9.1 SD. Ultimately, I picked the 24.1 because it grouped better, and set off for a match.

I shot a two day, 4x600 (160 shots for record, 1600 agg). The second day I shot the 90s the whole day, And shot a 792-32X. This was with well used, sorted, LC brass.
The following weekend I shot the same score, but 36X - but my elevation was better, about 4" at 600 yds. I used new Lapua brass for this run, and I felt really good about it.

I had good luck seating those at .004" off the lands, but I am going to try to step it in .002" increments, to see if it closes up a bit. If I can improve my ammo and hold just a little bit, this rifle will be an X-ring gun all day long.

I am liking the N140 and the 90 SMKs, I just ordered more of both. Best of Luck!

Brady @ Bartlein

Brady - That's some damn good shooting! I'm curious though, why'd you opt for a gain twist that was so 'aggressive'?


I'm glad to hear the N140 is working well with the 90s; that's better velocity than I would have expected out of 20" service rifle too. Sorta corroborates what others have said; it's almost right on with what you'd expect to run Varget at.


I'm hopeful to get the rifle back and out to the range sometime this week. As soon as I get a chance to test the N140/N150 loads, I'll post up some load & chrony data; maybe it'll help somebody else thinking about VV powders and 90s in the future.
 
Last edited:
Brady - That's some damn good shooting! I'm curious though, why'd you opt for a gain twist that was so 'aggressive'?


I'm glad to hear the N140 is working well with the 90s; that's better velocity than I would have expected out of 20" service rifle too. Sorta corroborates what others have said; it's almost right on with what you'd expect to run Varget at.


I'm hopeful to get the rifle back and out to the range sometime this week. As soon as I get a chance to test the N140/N150 loads, I'll post up some load & chrony data; maybe it'll help somebody else thinking about VV powders and 90s in the future.

Hey Mike,

When it comes to gain twist, I am a serious advocate. I run them in all of my competition guns because it just seems to give you an edge. In addition to the other benefits (lowering the pressure curve, constant positive contact on the bullet), gain twist just seems to be a little bit inside of a straight twist in nasty conditions. I feel like that's true, and the bench rest guys I talk to swear by it.

There are three reasons why I wanted to the "radical" gain: I am running anywhere from .3 to 1.5 gain in any of my competition rifles, and I wanted to try a bit more to see what the added benefit was. Additionally, I wanted to run heavier bullets (up to the 95s). And, a good customer, Joe Carlos builds them, and I wanted to see what all the fuss was about.

I very much am liking the performance that I am getting out of the rifle, however, the price point is a deterrent ($260!). For me, worth a try. Going forward, typically I will stay 1.0 gain or less.

To the load in the SR - I have been getting a little bit of flattened primers on the Lapua brass, but not as much on the LC. Probably because the LC has 5+ firings on it, but the average vertical, SDs, and groups have been enough to convince me to stick with it for now.

Just ordered an 8 pounder of N140 for next season. Of course I get teased now about tea and crumpets, with my pinky at maximum extension...!

Best of Luck,

Brady
 
Wow......great thread, thanks for the information!

I have turned my first two 223 barrels and have had some time spent regarding load development, most of this has been mentioned but I thought I would share what I have (please insert disclaimer here!)

I am using the same chamber, and all of this is Berger 90’s based. The barrels are benchmark 35” finished, 7 twist medium palma FYI. They are 3 groove simply because I like them for smallbore.....and wanted as little bullet distortion as possible. The length is for no other reason than iron sight radius.

All loads are LAPUA brass, and CCI 450 primers.

I ran both charge weight and seating depth tests. The best average accuracy and velocity consistency was at a cartridge OAL of 2.620” (approx .010” jump)

24.5 grains of N140 produced 2810fps in these barrels, great accuracy (sub half minute) and an ES of 7
25.0 N140 was also good with a MV of 2860fps, a larger average ES of 12, and good brass life (on my third reloading, no loose pockets or excessive brass growth)
24.5 of N150 produced 2833 (actually faster than the 24.5 N140, possibly the additional barrel length???) and an ES of 17
25.0 N150 produced 2884fps, with an ES of 11. Again a little faster than N140.....or I misrecorded something LOL

Varget is also very good, and I fully agree with the 24.5 grain load. Most of my experience is with the 308.....this has been an adventure for sure!

Please forgive the very limited barrel quantities.....as I mentioned, I only have experience with the development or these two.

I am using 25.0 N140, and am shooting iron sight Palma scores @ 1000 well above my 308 scores so far.....this cartridge and bullet is a joy, and I may never go back.

All the best,

Kev
 
Hey Guys,

Just picked up a rebarreled .223 for MR F-T/R, and I'm starting load dev again. Rifle has a 28" HV Bartlein with the ISSF/.169 chamber.


I plan to run 90gr VLDs, 90gr SMKs, or 88gr ELD-Ms behind Lapua brass and CCI primers.


I've got ~75+ lbs of Varget, and I know that's 'the powder', along with 4895 (which I have none of, and can't seem to find a consistent supply). I'm hopeful to find a good load with Varget, however I never could get it to work to my satisfaction in my last .223 setup for TR.


That brought me to looking at Vhit powders; they seem to have a very consistent supply here in the states, but I don't know many folks using it (I assume because it's historically been expensive).


That said, I've done some searching and it looks like N140 and N150 would both work; the VV load data seems to show them both pushing 90s at near identical velocities. My preference would be to grab N150 as I think it'd also be a good option for 200gr bullets in a .308 too, however my main focus is to get something ideal for .223s with 90s.


Anyone have any thoughts/experience/recommendations with either N140/N150 behind a 90gr class bullet in a .223? Any general ideas on expected velocities? The load data for the long throated 90/223 always seems to be off by a few gr/few hundred FPS.


Thanks in advance!
Mike

Edit: Not interested in the double based N5x series.
We have 3 - F-TR's in .223. 30" Krieger barrels, 1:6.75 twist. Eliseo, Kelbly and MPA stocks. We let the barrel decide what it likes to shoot. Over time we have found these recipes work for our barrels. Testing with Berger 90gr VLD and Sierra Match Kings 90gr using Varget, RE15 and N140 we observed 2 of 3 favor N140 and 90gr SMK's around at 2,775-2,840 FPS, using 24.3-24.8gr N140 depending on powder lot, bullet and barrel.
Do a ladder test at 500 yards and see, then OCW at 100 yards, then Jump test at 100 yards. Our best jumps can range from .010 to .043.
 

Attachments

Last edited:
Berger used N140 and N150 with their 85.5 Bergers....

85-5gr-LRHT-Test-Results.jpg



In House Accuracy Testing

Our initial testing of this bullet in our in house Accuracy Test Center (ATC) showed very promising results as well. Our ATC is a 300 meter test tunnel with environmental controlled conditions and state of the art testing fixtures and equipment. Here, we test our bullets and ammunition to make sure that the performance is where we want it to be. We shot two 5-shot groups back to back and got a 1.00″ group with the first 5 shots and a 1.49″ group with the second 5 shots, which combined into a 1.6″ 10-shot group! The consistently 1/2 MOA group sizing at 300 meters shows just how tight of grouping this bullet can achieve. An image of our in house test results below. We are truly excited about how well these bullets perform!




https://bergerbullets.com/new-berger-22-caliber-85-5-grain-long-range-hybrid-target-bullets/
 
Last edited:
I was able to test recently with N140, Varget, and H4895. In my mind, there is no comparison in terms of grouping, the H4895 wins hands down over the other two. In my hands, the N140 was no bueno - velocity was poor and I probably killed a few primer pockets in a single firing with loads that I thought should not have been anywhere close to MAX pressure (according to QL). Like Drew posted earlier, my impression is that N140 generates too much pressure to be of use with 90s in F-TR. QuickLoad analysis suggested that N140 would MAX out around 2790-2800 fps, with predicted pressures much higher than either Varget or H4895 running at velocities of ~2825 and 2840 fps, respectively. The precision with N140 seemed comparable to Varget.

Varget was about what I expected, giving good, solid velocity numbers, and just a bit less velocity than H4895. However, I did not find the precision with Varget to be nearly as good as with H4895, regardless of seating depth. In contrast, H4895 gave noticeably tighter grouping, across a pretty wide seating depth range. As some of us know from past experience, the problem with H4895 is poor brass life, and the possibility of losing jackets, especially on very hot summer days, if you push the load too hard (i.e. >2850-2860 fps). I plan to see whether H4895/90 VLDs can be tuned in at a velocity closer to that expected with Varget (i.e. 2820-ish), with the idea of extending brass life a bit and minimizing the possibility of jacket failure. That's clearly slower than a well-known accuracy node with H4895/90s in a 30" barrel (~2840-2850 fps), so it may not want to tune in appropriately, even with rigorous small increment seating depth testing. However, I think it's worth a try as in my setup the precision with H4895 has always seemed to be far better than any other powder I've ever tried.
 
Last edited:
I was able to test recently with N140, Varget, and H4895. In my mind, there is no comparison in terms of grouping, the H4895 wins hands down over the other two. In my hands, the N140 was no bueno - velocity was poor and I probably killed a few primer pockets in a single firing with loads that I thought should not have been anywhere close to MAX pressure (according to QL). Like Drew posted earlier, my impression is that N140 generates too much pressure to be of use with 90s in F-TR. QuickLoad analysis suggested that N140 would MAX out around 2790-2800 fps, with predicted pressures much higher than either Varget or H4895 running at velocities of ~2825 and 2840 fps, respectively. The precision with N140 seemed comparable to Varget.

Varget was about what I expected, giving good, solid velocity numbers, and just a bit less velocity than H4895. However, I did not find the precision with Varget to be nearly as good as with H4895, regardless of seating depth. In contrast, H4895 gave noticeably tighter grouping, across a pretty wide seating depth range. As some of us know from past experience, the problem with H4895 is poor brass life, and the possibility of losing jackets, especially on very hot summer days, if you push the load too hard (i.e. >2850-2860 fps). I plan to see whether H4895/90 VLDs can be tuned in at a velocity closer to that expected with Varget (i.e. 2820-ish), with the idea of extending brass life a bit and minimizing the possibility of jacket failure. That's clearly slower than a well-known accuracy node with H4895/90s in a 30" barrel (~2840-2850 fps), so it may not want to tune in appropriately, even with rigorous small increment seating depth testing. However, I think it's worth a try as in my setup the precision with H4895 has always seemed to be far better than any other powder I've ever tried.
Ned, After considerable lurking, have tried a 1:7 Shilen .219 prefit 30”, free bore punched to .190”, with Berger 90 vld’s jammed approx .010 giving square marks, and mixed LC brass unsorted on a Sav 12. Varget ladder showed a node down low and a scatter near desired MV. N150 was all scatter. H4895 gave a one hole node from 24.4 to 24.6 gr with a second test giving a corresponding MV of 2848 and 2852. Exactly what I wanted, and no pressure signs. Will shoot 24.5 next 600 yd match. Thanks for your sage advise. Seymour
 
Someone revived this one so I’ll update what I wrote a few yrs ago.

at the time that I wrote my previous post up until about two years ago I was running lots of N 150 from 2013 and 2015. Those lights were virtually indistinguishable from one another. I have recently started shooting with newer lots of N150 and it’s not even the same powder. In my 308 I am running about two full grains less powder with 2017 and 2021 lots than I was running in the past. I think with the more recent lots of in 150 you may most certainly run them in a 223.
 
Ned, After considerable lurking, have tried a 1:7 Shilen .219 prefit 30”, free bore punched to .190”, with Berger 90 vld’s jammed approx .010 giving square marks, and mixed LC brass unsorted on a Sav 12. Varget ladder showed a node down low and a scatter near desired MV. N150 was all scatter. H4895 gave a one hole node from 24.4 to 24.6 gr with a second test giving a corresponding MV of 2848 and 2852. Exactly what I wanted, and no pressure signs. Will shoot 24.5 next 600 yd match. Thanks for your sage advise. Seymour
Sweet! I hope it continues to shoot well for you.
 
Someone revived this one so I’ll update what I wrote a few yrs ago.

at the time that I wrote my previous post up until about two years ago I was running lots of N 150 from 2013 and 2015. Those lights were virtually indistinguishable from one another. I have recently started shooting with newer lots of N150 and it’s not even the same powder. In my 308 I am running about two full grains less powder with 2017 and 2021 lots than I was running in the past. I think with the more recent lots of in 150 you may most certainly run them in a 223.
Can't edit the last post so I'll revise it here.

Turns out that in my case it wasn't the powder after all. This is one of those only change one thing at a time lessons.

I managed to shoot up the last of my 2015 lots at the same time I shot out the barrels on both of my main F-TR rifles. When I got the big velocity change I had just spun up 3 new barrels (from 2 manufacturers) and I was getting consistent answers from all three. Well, it turns out it was the barrels. All three were button barrels. I don't have the pin gauges to check but I'm going to guess that all three are tighter bores. I recently re-barreled with new Bartlines and my loads with the 2017 lot are right back where they have always been in the new barrels and they are still hot in the other three.
 
I really wish I could find some H4895, I have been looking hard for about a year and I haven't seen it once locally or on line. I think theyve put it on the back burner and are focusing on Varget since that's more popular I assume.
 
HOT DAY AT 800M AT OTTAWA ON WAS CLEAN. SHOT 13 WAS LOW BOTTOM OF BULL PRIMER BLOWN,
AGAIN ON 15 SHOT.
VT 150 24 GR 90 GR VLD BERGER, HOOVER POINTED, BARNARD S ACTION,30.5 BARTLIEN , 7 TWIST
NECKTURNED LAUPUA BRASS
FOR ME I ONLY USE VARGET THE BEST POWDER FOR 223 REM HANDDOWN
 
I really wish I could find some H4895, I have been looking hard for about a year and I haven't seen it once locally or on line. I think theyve put it on the back burner and are focusing on Varget since that's more popular I assume.
H4895 showed up at Third Generation today. It was gone fairly quickly. That's the first time I have heard of H4895 for sale in a very long time. I didn't get any because it was gone before I found it had been available. Nonetheless, keep your eyes peeled for the next week or two at online vendors, as it may also show up at other locations. I would suggest making a list of several of the major online reloading supply vendors, bookmarking each website. That way, you can check all of them in just a few minutes first thing in the morning.
 
H4895 showed up at Third Generation today. It was gone fairly quickly. That's the first time I have heard of H4895 for sale in a very long time. I didn't get any because it was gone before I found it had been available. Nonetheless, keep your eyes peeled for the next week or two at online vendors, as it may also show up at other locations. I would suggest making a list of several of the major online reloading supply vendors, bookmarking each website. That way, you can check all of them in just a few minutes first thing in the morning.
I have a seperate window always open with all the tabs of all the websites Ive bought from. I check it morning, noon and night daily for a long time now. I really should look into how to setup a bot that checks for me. I have never loaded/shot H4895 before.
 
I have a seperate window always open with all the tabs of all the websites Ive bought from. I check it morning, noon and night daily for a long time now. I really should look into how to setup a bot that checks for me. I have never loaded/shot H4895 before.
H4895 is an excellent powder for "heavies" in .223 Rem. My point was that when a certain powder shows up at one major online vendor after a long absence everywhere, you can be reasonably certain other vendors will also receive shipments of that specific powder. If I miss out with the first vendor where it shows up, I start looking even more diligently over the next week or two. I wouldn't be surprised to see H4895 come in stock at other vendors in the near future.
 
H4895 is an excellent powder for "heavies" in .223 Rem. My point was that when a certain powder shows up at one major online vendor after a long absence everywhere, you can be reasonably certain other vendors will also receive shipments of that specific powder. If I miss out with the first vendor where it shows up, I start looking even more diligently over the next week or two. I wouldn't be surprised to see H4895 come in stock at other vendors in the near future.
Ive noticed the same pattern, Got some 8208 XBR online, then soon after it was available at a local store as well.
I did recently get some Reloader TS 15.5 to try. Looking at the burn rate between Re15 and 16, do you think it would be good for 80gr stuff?
 
Last edited:
Ive noticed the same pattern, Got some 8208 XBR online, then soon after it was available at a local store as well.
I did recently get some Reloader TS 15.5 to try. Looking at the burn rate between Re15 and 16, do you think it would be good for 80gr stuff?
It seems like it would be a bit on the slow side to me (Re15.5). However, people have successfully used N150, which I had guessed was too slow and of insufficient bulk density to fit enough powder in the case. Both guesses were wrong, as evidenced earlier in this thread. Sometimes, there's nothing else for it but to actually load some rounds and determine empirically whether a given powder will work. I have seen a few comments by those that have tried out the Re15.5 in other cartridges. They seem to be very pleased with it and my understanding is that the temperature stability is excellent. Not everyone feels the need to hit the fastest node possible at safe operating pressure. So sometimes a powder that does not on the surface seem to have an optimal burn rate for a given cartridge/bullet weight can still work just fine, especially if the reloader isn't trying to get every last ounce of velocity out of the load. Giving up 25-50 fps velocity (as compared to using a different powder) will usually not be a deal-breaker as long as the precision and velocity ES/SD remain acceptable.
 
Last edited:
Like to keep seeing this thread alive for us FTR and heavies.

@Ned Ludd (Yes I still shoot FTR, just not against you!)

Today is range day with 223 and 85.5's against 90's VLD and 308 w/ 185Jug
May the best group win for Sept IL State FTR in Sept.

My money is on the mighty 90 VLD. ;)


Let us know which one you decided to use.
 
Like to keep seeing this thread alive for us FTR and heavies.

@Ned Ludd (Yes I still shoot FTR, just not against you!)

Today is range day with 223 and 85.5's against 90's VLD and 308 w/ 185Jug
May the best group win for Sept IL State FTR in Sept.
I'm interested in your results too. I was able to drive the 85.5 MUCH faster than the 90 in my 22BR, I assume because of a shorter bearing surface, but I could never tune them in suitably. The 90VLD and the 90 SMK are both exceptional designs and tuned very easily for me.
 

Upgrades & Donations

This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.


Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.

You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.


To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.

Forum statistics

Threads
166,264
Messages
2,214,881
Members
79,496
Latest member
Bie
Back
Top