• 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.

Sta-Ball Match

Hey guys.

I'm new to Sta-Ball Match, as it is actually replacing a single base extruded powder for me, or at lest, trying to..

Those of you that use it, do you get the beat standard deviations with magnum primers or standard primers.

Have you noticed any kind of tell stability or consistency even close to matching Varget, H4895, AA2495 or H4064? I'm having some issues making it group even after an extensive seating depth test.

Thinking about magnum primers or maybe even swapping to Sta-ball6.5 and magnum primers.

All of this is being shot in .223 and .308 heavy for caliber. 190smk in 308, and 75 to 80 grain in .223

Any insight would be appreciated

Big Phil

The Constitution is my Bible
 
I got poor ignition results with Murom KVB primers in cold weather, but did just fine with REM 7.5 and CCI 450.
Have you noticed any kind of tell stability or consistency even close to matching Varget, H4895, AA2495 or H4064? I'm having some issues making it group even after an extensive seating depth test.
I have only played with StaBall in 223 and 204, and only for varmint rounds. It was just okay, not stellar.

I don't put ball powders in the same class as extruded powder in terms of velocity stats or temp stability, but they still have their place for short range rounds that need to be bulk loaded.
 
I did some playing with the 6BR and Federal Gold primers - seemed good and the velocity was OK. But I went back to Varget/H4895 for now. I'm not so keen on double base powders, but keep various around to cover shortages.
 
I did some playing with the 6BR and Federal Gold primers - seemed good and the velocity was OK. But I went back to Varget/H4895 for now. I'm not so keen on double base powders, but keep various around to cover shortages.
NZ, can I ask why you don’t care for double base powders? I genuinely would like to know, because I don’t really know the difference between the two. Thanks.
 
NZ, can I ask why you don’t care for double base powders? I genuinely would like to know, because I don’t really know the difference between the two. Thanks.
I personally have my own opinion, and perhaps NZ will reply again. I prefer a single base extruded because it is very easy to ignite, very temp stable without being "extreme"ly expensive, and typically yields me far better SD results every time I use it compared to ball powders.

I do have some double based extruded, such as Reloder15, and ball powders that give me very accurate loads, but the standard deviations I can never get below 12 to 18 fps.

Perhaps the more seasoned guys can tell you more
 
NZ, can I ask why you don’t care for double base powders? I genuinely would like to know, because I don’t really know the difference between the two. Thanks.
I don't hunt much anymore. Far too old for trudging up hills and there seems more uphill than downhill slopes thee days. Must be due to climate change. When I did, I mostly used a 308, which, according to lore, should only be loaded with W748. Latterly, I used s 280AI, filled to the brim with R22. Awesome deer killing calibre, BTW. (yes, calibre is the correct spelling - you know that I'm a Pom, right?) Don'cha hate it when the press say "high=calibre rifle"?

I was introduced to TR by some friends, who also shot ISSF/UIT pistol. I shot UIT Pistol in the UK, before moving to NZ in the 80's - back when the UK allowed it!. I didn't get the TR bug and continued with handguns for a while - and varmint shooting became the summer evening pastime - so loading for the 222, 223 and the Swift.

The most common powders in NZ are made in Australia, by, at the time Mulwex, now ADI and Winchester, imported from the US. Alliant powders were around in smaller quantities. Vihtavouri powder did appear from time to time - mostly for pistol and shotgun - mainly as the importer was a shotshell manufacturer.

Anyway - during my short flirtation with TR - I learned that most of the shooters were using powder (and projectiles) supplied by the NZNRA at lower than retail price. They had gone through a period of AR2201 - a not very temperature stable single base, being the recipe, and moved through W748 ( "you need a hotter primer to get it lit properly.") and had settled with AR2206, at the time the Aussie military 223/308 powder and following it's introduction, AR2208, which we now know as Varget. AR2206 was adjusted following a request from Hodgdon's to AR2206H, to become H4895. As we also know, AR2209 is H4350. ADI do not manufacture double based powders. After AR2201, temperature stability became key to their powders, due to the environments the Aussie military were working in. There was another popular one-AR2214, which was magnificent in the 7mm and 300 magnums, but was discontinued in favour of AR2217 (H1000). All the slow powders, AR2225 (Rotumbo), are of course, not made for "us", but are propellants for large calibre canon shells of the 30mm variety..

What I also learned from the TR guys - and my own reloading is that the single base powders are easier to tune. While making hunting loads, I was happy with 1 minute of deer. In the North Island, shots are mostly under 200yds and I have stood on more sleeping animals, than shot them - well, maybe.. Loading for varmints, I learned to develop loads, especially for the 223, that were minute of rabbit at 300 yds, and that I would get overpressure "spikes" when loading 748, the H4895, providing a more linear pressure, when getting close to maximum velocity. I also noticed that the lower temperature caused less carbon in the first 3 inches of the bore and cleaned more easily. This was confirmed when, due to the recent great powder famine, and having acquired a 6mmbR, was forced into developing a load using IMR4166, being the only powder available, that although I could get an very accurate load, the velocity at 28.5g was not what I wanted, and that 28.8, caused every pressure sign in the book. It's a terrible powder - and yes, I used it for 2 seasons. I have never had to clean a rifle so much. During the famine, I also stocked up on R17 and Staball - all 3. You never know when you will need them. I only use R17 in an older Ruger Precision, which I shoot on occasion, but generally let my grandson shoot ( and clean), keeping the loads to a moderate level.

So - given the experience, when I took up FTR =, only 4 years ago, I decided to stick with the ADI single base powders. Varget for the 308. I went through the 155g thing, but my latest, new, rifle Barnard with a KS Arms barrel, ( having used a 2nd hand gun previously ) prefers 185's and 190's. It would probably like Berger 208's, but I need to eat. The Creedmoor thrives on H4350, as does the 6.5SLR and the 6mmSLR likes H4831. All the ADI version, you understand. All were simple to develop - one ladder session at the farm, and length testing at 500 yds - I load long at home and take a press to the range. I also bought 5 kilos of 2206H/4895, for the BR. Start testing as soon as my new barrel arrives .I'm trying Alpha brass this upoming season , too. The older barrel, now a 6BRX will likely run on Varget. I expect to get 4000 rounds through the BR before needing to replace it., the BRX...well, I may get a season out of it - It's had over 3000 rounds of BR already.

As I am typing, my Garmin chrono just got delivered. So I guess load testing starts soon. Our season will hopefully kick off at the end of September. I have to make a short trip to Europe, so I'm hopeful that the rain holds off next week to get a bit of trigger time .before I go..
 
Last edited:
Just always use CCI 450 and be happy.
I really appreciate that. I ask all of this because I'm trying to develop a cheap load that shoots these very cheap bullets and Sta-ball Match was what was on the shelf. So I bought 16 pounds of it. Just trying to get some velocity consistency out of the damn stuff and wondered if it compares to Varget of 4064 in temp stability in any appreciable manner
 
I have only played with StaBall in 223 and 204, and only for varmint rounds. It was just okay, not stellar.

My results too for both '6.5' and 'Match' versions so far.

I am currently testing S-B 'Match' against VarGet in 223 Rem in a heavy-barrel F-Class rifle alongside lots of other alternatives to the Hodgdon /ADI powders which have been banned in the UK and Europe under health and environmental regulations (EU 'Project REACH'). In terms of groups, 'Match' fell well short of VGT and H4895 results, albeit it was tested in poor range conditions which didn't help. MVs were about 40 fps down on H4895 equivalents and 60 fps on VGT under 77gn SMKs in a long-throat 223.

MV ES results were much poorer than H4350's for '6.5' in a 6.5X55 F-Class rig. Groups were 'so-so' and top 'book charges' MVs were slightly below the H4350 equivalent. I don't see how Hodgdon can claim enhanced MVs, except where the denser StaBALL grades allow heavier charges in case capacity constrained applications.

The StaBALL range's claimed USPs are good metering against extruded stick types (true); a new manufacturing technology giving more consistent results than traditional ball grades. (St. Marks' chemists call them 'Accuflat', and that's what they are - little flat disks like miniature coins.) My opinion so far is that yes, they give better results than older ball types, but not to a game-changing extent. I'll stick to extruded types for all match handloads. ...... and thirdly, far improved temperature stability over other ball types (which US reports suggest is so, but so far my use in the British Isles has seen wet, cold miserable conditions vs even wetter, colder etc! In any event, we rarely see large temperature swing related problems here.)

I will move onto trying 'Match' in 308 Win with the 175gn SMK, but not against a VGT benchmark as I don't have any left from pre-REACH times, rather four European powders - Reload Swiss RS50; Lovex S062 aka Shooters World 'Precision' in the US; Viht N150; Viht N550.

On primers, 223 was loaded with the old Russian manufactured PMC SRM (Murom KVB-5,56) as this is what everything else has been loaded with in my tests. Despite the 'SRM' label, it's a very mild primer and is chemically identical to the standard PMC / Murom models, but with a thicker and much tougher cup to cope with higher pressures. In my 223 test, I loaded three 5-round weight batches with Rem 7 1/2BR primers as this 'hotter' model might suit a ball technology powder better. MVs rose by 20-30 fps over same charge weight PMC primed equivalents in a 30-inch barrel, the trio had more consistent ES values, but not any lower than from the mild primer. The MV increase could in any case be from the 223's general sensitivity to primer brisance and energy rather than be a reflection on StaBALL Match.
 
On primers, 223 was loaded with the old Russian manufactured PMC SRM (Murom KVB-5,56) as this is what everything else has been loaded with in my tests. Despite the 'SRM' label, it's a very mild primer and is chemically identical to the standard PMC / Murom models, but with a thicker and much tougher cup to cope with higher pressures. In my 223 test, I loaded three 5-round weight batches with Rem 7 1/2BR primers as this 'hotter' model might suit a ball technology powder better. MVs rose by 20-30 fps over same charge weight PMC primed equivalents in a 30-inch barrel, the trio had more consistent ES values, but not any lower than from the mild primer. The MV increase could in any case be from the 223's general sensitivity to primer brisance and energy rather than be a reflection on StaBALL Match.
Laurie, I intentionally took the StaBall Match into cold weather to test below 20F (-7C) and had obvious hang fires with the KVB that were ruining the performance, but with the REM 7.5 and CCI450 did not have any indications of hang fires. REM 7.5 and CCI 450 showed roughly the same velocity stats in cold as in warmer temps, but like we said earlier nothing stellar.

Varget and H4350 were still doing very good all the way to -20F, and to me represent the state of the art at present. I will try and catch a cold day this winter and continue the StaBall testing, but I think I already know I won't fall in love with it based on warmer tests.

One of the only personal reasons for continuing to test these newer powders is the hope that they should be more steadily available in the near future, (but one never knows when politicians get involved).

I have no explanation for the recent availability of Varget and H4350. I have bitter memories of those droughts and waiting for the slow boat from OZ to arrive. As one lives longer, they learn to change their personal definitions of stockpile and margins, so that never happened again.

I had hoped for better with these StaBall powders, but at the same time I will say they are not horrible, just not stellar.
 
Laurie, I intentionally took the StaBall Match into cold weather to test below 20F (-7C) and had obvious hang fires with the KVB that were ruining the performance, but with the REM 7.5 and CCI450 did not have any indications of hang fires. REM 7.5 and CCI 450 showed roughly the same velocity stats in cold as in warmer temps, but like we said earlier nothing stellar.
Thank you so much th for doing all of this work and sharing it with us. I am flat-out swapping to 450 primers. Feels like going back to my win748 and win760 days. Yikes. Thanks again!!
 
My results too for both '6.5' and 'Match' versions so far.

I am currently testing S-B 'Match' against VarGet in 223 Rem in a heavy-barrel F-Class rifle alongside lots of other alternatives to the Hodgdon /ADI powders which have been banned in the UK and Europe under health and environmental regulations (EU 'Project REACH'). In terms of groups, 'Match' fell well short of VGT and H4895 results, albeit it was tested in poor range conditions which didn't help. MVs were about 40 fps down on H4895 equivalents and 60 fps on VGT under 77gn SMKs in a long-throat 223.

MV ES results were much poorer than H4350's for '6.5' in a 6.5X55 F-Class rig. Groups were 'so-so' and top 'book charges' MVs were slightly below the H4350 equivalent. I don't see how Hodgdon can claim enhanced MVs, except where the denser StaBALL grades allow heavier charges in case capacity constrained applications.

The StaBALL range's claimed USPs are good metering against extruded stick types (true); a new manufacturing technology giving more consistent results than traditional ball grades. (St. Marks' chemists call them 'Accuflat', and that's what they are - little flat disks like miniature coins.) My opinion so far is that yes, they give better results than older ball types, but not to a game-changing extent. I'll stick to extruded types for all match handloads. ...... and thirdly, far improved temperature stability over other ball types (which US reports suggest is so, but so far my use in the British Isles has seen wet, cold miserable conditions vs even wetter, colder etc! In any event, we rarely see large temperature swing related problems here.)

I will move onto trying 'Match' in 308 Win with the 175gn SMK, but not against a VGT benchmark as I don't have any left from pre-REACH times, rather four European powders - Reload Swiss RS50; Lovex S062 aka Shooters World 'Precision' in the US; Viht N150; Viht N550.

On primers, 223 was loaded with the old Russian manufactured PMC SRM (Murom KVB-5,56) as this is what everything else has been loaded with in my tests. Despite the 'SRM' label, it's a very mild primer and is chemically identical to the standard PMC / Murom models, but with a thicker and much tougher cup to cope with higher pressures. In my 223 test, I loaded three 5-round weight batches with Rem 7 1/2BR primers as this 'hotter' model might suit a ball technology powder better. MVs rose by 20-30 fps over same charge weight PMC primed equivalents in a 30-inch barrel, the trio had more consistent ES values, but not any lower than from the mild primer. The MV increase could in any case be from the 223's general sensitivity to primer brisance and energy rather than be a reflection on StaBALL Match.
Laurie thank you as well for all of this work you're doing. I wish we could take the marketing lineup from winchester and line them up and whip them with a switch for talking up all of these selling points that really are just inflated claims.

I'm pretty sick of Winchester boofing us with bad WLR primer cups and now this Sta-Ball sales pitch. There is nothing Match about this powder from what it sounds like, and from my experience, even when compared to other ball powders.
 

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
165,063
Messages
2,189,390
Members
78,688
Latest member
C120
Back
Top