RE17 -- is RE15 obsolete?

[rsilvers]

I am trying to cut down on powder types.

Reloader-15 has been known for a long time as good for 60+ grain 5.56mm as well as heavier .308. It seems like RE17 made it obsolete.

I have Reloader-17 coming for a .260 project and Quickload thinks it is better than RE15 (RE15 is in M118LR) for .308 for 150+ bullet weight as well.

Alliant does not even list RE17 for 5.56mm but QuickLoad thinks it is mildly better than RE15 for 69-80 grain 5.56mm.

This is making me think RE17 is basically better in every way than RE15 for the types of applications RE15 has been used for.

Would anyone consider it a compromise in some way to use this for 139+ grain .260, 69+ grain 5.56mm, and 155+ grain .308?

 

[halfmoanut]

Everything I have read say's that R-17 has better verlocities(however) nothing trumps accuracy.R-15 remains on my shelf. It is also still available.

 

[Thorbird]

I just can't imagine replacing re-15 for accuracy right now. I haven't used re17, but have a pound to try out. We'll see.

 

[halfmoanut]

I played with it in my 6x47 and the velocities were up about 100fps compared to a equivelent load of H-4350 but the accuracy was not as good,that was with some 115gr DTACS.Good luck all pipes are different as we all know.

 

[jb1000br]

R17 is a good bit slower than 15...they are not even close in burn rate, so both still have their purpose.

JB

 

[cmillard]

i will use re-17 when my 6br is built. m118LR uses re-17. the military has the ability to get powders LONG before we see them released to the public

 

[Steve Blair]

I do not think that RL17, Varget and RL15 are that far apart. Following are top loads in my 6BR with 107 Sierra shot in one session at 55 degrees.

33.4 RL17 - 2914.9
30.8 Varget - 2854.6
31.0 RL15 - 2879.3

Even allowing for RL17's innovative deterrent treatment, the velocities and powder charge indicate that RL17 is slower than RL15 and Varget by about 7-8%. The density and progressivity allow a little more in the case for better velocity. RL17 is not nearly as slow as H4350, for instance.

The key to understanding RL17 is that the burn rate does not change much as the charge burns. The deterrent treatment is uniform through the kernel. RL15 and Varget are treated with surface deterrents and change burn rate as the kernel burns. The effect is that RL17 has a broader, more progressive pressure curve with lower peak pressure.

My RL17 accuracy results in .308 were reasonably good but I still obtained better uniformity (ES/SD) with IMR 4064 and did not pursue further development. It remains my choice in 6BR.

 

[rsilvers]

i will use re-17 when my 6br is built. m118LR uses re-17. the military has the ability to get powders LONG before we see them released to the public

Alliant claims RE15 is used in the M118 long range round. Are you saying RE15 is in M118 and RE-17 is in M118LR?

http://www.alliantpowder.com/products/powder/reloder15.aspx

 

[Rust]

RL-15 is the powder in M118LR.

And to answer the obsolescence question, RL-15 is far from it. It is my go to powder for the 75-80 gr bullets in .223, the 50-60 gr bullets in 22-250 and for the 155-175 range of bullets in .308.

RL-17 seems to be especially suited to the 6mm 105 gr range of bullets in mid capacity cases such as the 6XC, 6mm-250 and 6 x 47. It would seem ideal for the case capacity to bore ratio in those cases.

Early results reported for RL-17 in a .308 with the 155-175 gr range have not been encouraging enough for me to try it. It might be suitable for heavier bullets in a .308.

 

[robbin]

It did for me, RE17 is my go to powder for my .270, .308, 2506 and 6.5X47

The primary reason was that I can compress the chargers which lead to better ES/ED and accuracy. I got noticeable improvements in my .270 and 6.5X47

I bought 16 pounds since I last bought RL15

 

[Ksmirk]

One thing about everyone going to RL-17 is it should be easier for me to get RL-15 ;D I load RL-15 in everything from my 17 Rem to 308! it's gonna be hard for me to justify 80-100fps gain in velocity over accuracy. I do have a pound of RL-17 to try in my 308 and 284 but I've not gotten that far along since hunting season got here lots of things have been put on hold. Later,

Kirk

 

[rsilvers]

it's gonna be hard for me to justify 80-100fps gain in velocity over accuracy.

I have no direct info, but I would think you could make an accuracy load with RE-17 that is just as accurate and may not be 80-100 fps faster but might be 60 fps faster.

 

[Rust]

Just because a powder works well in some chamberings, doesn't mean it will work well with all chamberings.

In a .308 using 155-175 gr bullets, RL-17 probably will not match the velocities achieved with RL-15 as it is a bit too slow. Somwhere around IMR 4350 but not exactly.

 

[Steve Blair]

Rust is correct about lighter bullets in .308. Reloder 17 works well for me with Sierra 190 MK moly but IMR 4064 gives better ES/SD at 100 fps slower. I am willing to trade the velocity for better long-range vertical.

Reloder 17 is not as slow as H4350 but has better energy density and progressivity. It is somewhere between Varget and H4350 and H4350 is somewhere between RL17 and RL19. Direct comparisons are difficult because of RL17's deterrent treatment.

 

[Erik Cortina]

I am trying to cut down on powder types.

I have Reloader-17 coming for a .260 project and Quickload thinks it is better than RE15 (RE15 is in M118LR) for .308 for 150+ bullet weight as well.

Alliant does not even list RE17 for 5.56mm but QuickLoad thinks it is mildly better than RE15 for 69-80 grain 5.56mm.

I just purchased a copy of QuickLOAD and I am still trying to learn how to use all of it's features.

Can you please explain this statement, how does QuickLOAD tell you if one powder is better than the other.

Thank you.

 

[Steve Blair]

X3MHunter:

First, measure the water capacity of ten fired, unsized cases with primers still seated. Weigh the cases empty, fill them level to the neck with distilled water and weigh them again. Average the weight difference or, to be conservative, take the smallest number.

In the window labeled "Cartridge Dimensions", enter the value you obtained in the "Maximum Case Capacity, overflow" box. Also set your barrel length in the appropriate box.

Select the bullet that you want to use and set the "Cartridge Length". Select the powder in the "Charge" window and set a starting amount in the "Grains" box. Look at the "Filling/L.R." box for the percentage of available space used. I try to stay below 100% although slightly compressed loads can work well. Click the button "Apply&Calc" in the "Charge" window.

Check the "Maximum Chamber Pressure (Pmax)" box in the "Results" window. Each cartridge has a defined Maximum Average Pressure (MAP) that is displayed in the "Pmax (MAP)" box in the "Cartridge Dimensions" window. I try to keep max loads about 5% below that figure and start a load series about 15% below maximum. Also check the "Amount of Propellant Burnt" in the "Results" window.

The general idea is to achieve near 100% loading density with a powder that delivers close to maximum pressure and burns almost all or all of the powder in the barrel. That does not mean that combination will produce good groups or low ES/SD. It does mean that it is a reasonable candidate. QuickLOAD is just a tool and predicted results may not match your firearm. Standard loading practices are just as relevant when using a predictive tool as when using a loading manual. Start at a conservative number and work up in 1% increments.

 

[Erik Cortina]

Got it, thank you.

 

[Rust]

Very nice reply from sleepygator.

rsilvers - Shooting at 1,000 yards, the only thing that determines what is "best" is the results on the target and nothing else. Early results are promising for RL-17 in some chamberings, but is yet to set the world on fire.

As mentioned, Quickload is a tool that can narrow the range down as to what might be a good load combination to be tested.

Long range accuracy depends on having a combination of usable accuracy, low ES/SD, and velocity. Sometimes the best 1,000 yard load will not have the best numbers in any one catagory, but will be one with the best combination of low numbers in all three catagories.

Basically, a load that prints fine at 100 yards might have high ES/SD numbers which would show up as excessive vertical stringing at 1,000 yards. Velocity allows the time of flight to the target to be lower, decreasing the effect of the wind, decreasing horizontal stringing, and accuracy is how tight things would be with no wind at all at 1,000.

Quickload cannot predict actual measured ES/SD numbers for a given combination, nor can it predict usable accuracy, nor can it predict measured velocity out of a given rifle although it should be close (not always though).

But it is very useful to narrow the range of possible combinations down, which can reduce development time significantly. And in the case of a barrel burner chambering, that is a big deal indeed.

 

[Erik Cortina]

I have a question, but figured I might as well start another thread, please help if you can.

http://www.accurateshooter.com/forum/index.php/topic,3737903.new.html#new