Reloader 23
- Thread starter Old Navy
- Start date
I've been substituting RE23 for RE26 in several cartridges and I don't think I'm going back.
Old Navy
Gold $$ Contributor
Just installed a 6.5X284 barrel. I have been testing 142s with what I have on the shelf which is a pound of H4831SC, H1000, 7828, H4350 and #22. My barrel really likes the #22. I read the following on the Alliant web site is why I asked the question. Reloder 23 is perfect for long-range target shooters seeking performance similar to Reloader® 22 with world-class temperature stability. Right on the money again Wayne. Both those numbers are scares.
You would think that Re23 would be a bit slower than Re22, given Alliant’s policy of larger powder numbers meaning slower burn rates, and it appears that way on some burn-rate charts I’ve seen, although the order is reversed on some others. Some shooters have found that, in fact, Re23 seems to be very slightly faster than Re22, and a check with QuickLoad would seem to point to the same thing. In other words, a grain or so less of Re23 than Re22 gives about the same velocity. It is manufactured for Alliant by Bofors of Sweden and is supposed to provide performance similar to Re22, but with an additional agent that is aimed at making it less temperature-sensitive than Re22. It also has a de-coppering agent. It appears to have slightly lower bulk density than Re22, meaning that you can’t get quite the same weight of it into a case as you can with Re22. For example, when I go to QuickLoad for a .270 Win. load with a 150-gr. bullet, I find that 56.0 grains of Re23 fills the case to 101.4% capacity, whereas the same 56 grains of Re22 fills the case to 98.1% capacity. Its applicability range across cartridges seems to be about the same as that of Re22.
bozo699
Gold $$ Contributor
My load for my 6.5*284 was H4831sc but it did very well with RL22 also. I’m betting 23 would do you a excellent job. I never had the temp sensitive problems others have had with 22 I really like 22 and have used a lot of it in my 30 magnums over the years
Wayne
Fast14riot
Gold $$ Contributor
I switched from H4831 to RL23 in my 260AI and haven't looked back. Better velocity, feels like it burns a little cooler, very temp stable. Trickling it is kinda finicky because its not a uniform kernel size, though.
urbanrifleman
Site $$ Sponsor
Two totally different powders,similar burn rate. R23 is totally temp stable, burns very cool, and has a decoppering agent that actually works.
That is incorrect the 56.0 grain change is well below the base of the neck
It is correct by QuickLoad's operational definition of capacity for a particular calculation. QuickLoad computes capacity for a particular bullet seated to a particular depth (or put another way, it subtracts the space occupied by the seated bullet from the capacity to the top of the case). I did the QuickLoad calculation for a particular 150-grain bullet seated so that the base of the bullet would be well below the neck-shoulder junction of the .270 Win. case. The earlier comparison I showed (bulk density of Re23 vs. Re22) is correct as I used the same bullet/seating depth for both powders.
Last edited:
I compete in F-Open. I have used a myriad of powders for many cartridges. For the VAST majority of cartridges used in F-Open, from a 6 Dasher to one of my .300 WSMs, two powders stand out amongst the rest. RL-16 and RL-23. RL-16 can be used in place of H4350 and RL-23 can be used in place of H4831sc. The lot-to-lot consistency is better with the NEW RL-Powders than Hodgdon powders. Both are VERY temp stable. Both "generally" produce a bit more velocity. Now the OPs original question was RL-23 a substitute for RL-22. RL-22 is somewhat slower than RL-23 but is A LOT more temp sensitive. For the vast majority of shooting, if all I could ever get hold of was RL-16 and RL-23, I would be in hog heaven!
bozo699
Gold $$ Contributor
Great input!…..I as well like there new powders. I had a 6 creedmoor built for a antelope hunt 2 years ago, I lined 3 powders out for it H4350, Rl-16 and 23 got equal accuracy and close to the same velocity out of the three with 105’s and 115’s but I got turned onto Rl-26 and haven’t looked back I was shooting in the 2’s with first three but I got another 150 FPS outta the 26 and it’s 1/2” or better shot multiple 1/4” groups with it but I’ll call it a true 1/2 minute rifle so I’m happy. H4350 was good but I think 16 burned much cleaner. Just my observations while working up a quick hunting load.
Wayne
What's your barrel life been like with RL23?
Like ANY powder, if you run up to a max load, your barrel life is shorter. However, with RL-23 you should be able to reach the velocity nodes easier with less powder. On my last 7 Sherman barrel, I got just shy of 1800 rounds. BUT I was running the 180 Hybrids at 2915-2930. I could easily push them past 3000. But why?
I knew it was related to how hot your loads are and YMMV. I'm just curious what barrel life I might expect to get with my rig. I've got a straight 284 Win running 183 smk at 2750ish in a 30" 1-8.5 Brux using RL23. It's a hammer at that node. Have a little over 900 rounds on it. Have close to 12 pounds of RL23 remaining.
Last edited:
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.
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.