300 Win Mag and Accurate 4064

M

Marco B

Inactive
Hello all.

First of all thanks for letting me join the forum.

About me:
I'm right now 42 years old.

I moved from Germany to the US late 2014 and enjoy the freedom given here and love to work with my American colleagues.

I'm not barely new to reloading. I started roughly 9 Month ago for Pistol and Revolver(45 ACP, 357 Mag and 500 SW)

Last week I decided to start loading for Rifle in 300 WinMag. I guess this is not the easiest Cartridge to start with. :D

All load data in my Manuals are for IMR4064. So I looked around here and all posts I found stated that they are "interchangeable". Therefore I started at the low / midrange of the charges stated there

The participants in this trial were
Federal Brass (once fired, trimmed to 2.610)
Accurate 4064
CCI Large Rifle Magnum Primers
Nosler Ballistic Tip 150 grain Spitzer boat Tail
Hornady 165 grain BTSP Interlock

I choose for both bullets a starting load of 60 grain of 4064

With the Nosler Bullets I was almost spot on (according to my abilities)
With the Hornady bullets I didn't hit the paper @100 yards

So I tried to get the Hornadys on the paper and did a work up in 0.5 grain increments to the max charge listed for IMR4064 with limited success. :cool:

The harder I push them, the closer I get. :D
But I don't want to blow myself up by exceeding published load data, especially if it's for a "interchangeable" powder. ;)

When I compare my hand loads to factory ammo, the felt recoil is away less on the hand loads. (I don't own a chronograph, so I can just guess by comparing the felt recoil :D)

From the logical I need to push this bullets harder than written in my load data but as I said, I don't want to overdo it and hurt myself or others.

Every input is appreciated.
 
With the Nosler Bullets I was almost spot on (according to my abilities)
With the Hornady bullets I didn't hit the paper @100 yards
Click to expand...

Never in my life have I had a spread that was that radical. So for the time being I would suggest you check your cases, I believe it would be interesting to know what effect the chamber had on the cases.

When determining what a rifle likes I normally load 120 rounds of 10 rounds each with different head stamps, powders and bullets. I would suggest you stick with one bullet and use starting loads and work your way up to maximum loads.

F. Guffey

Every input is appreciated.
Click to expand...
 
Thanks for the input, F. Guffey.

What you said is almost what I did with the Hornadys.

I loaded up 3 Test rounds of each charge up to the max published load, to see what happen. I did this in 0.5 grain increments from 60.5 to 62 grain

At Max load I was able to hit the 12 Inch Target @ 100 yards but the hits were spread all over the target.

To the cases:
They are after firing 2.615 (0.005 longer) and Neck diameter increased from 0.333 to 0.342.
Other than that, I don't see any differences or pressure signs.
 
MB

One thing I'll pass along on the 300WM, from my experiences reloading for this case, is this.

Be very careful about mixing the different BRAND names/head stamps of this case,
as there can be almost 10gr of INTERNAL CASE H2o capacity's/differences between all the brands of brass. :eek:

Keep the case capacity's sorted to each weight/brand name, and use/make careful notes on each brand you use.

I went thru this when reloading for my hunting partners rifle in 300 WM,
from very poor shotgun groups to blown primers, for normal loads etc.
Once the case capacity's were standardized, the rifle started performing like it should.

YMMV,

Tia,
Don
 
They are after firing 2.615 (0.005 longer) and Neck diameter increased from 0.333 to 0.342.
Click to expand...

The 2.615" is the length of the case from the end of the neck to the case head; I find the length of the case from the shoulder/datum to the case head more more useful. The neck expansion from .333" to .342" could be considered excessive. I have tightened case necks up by forming 8mm Remington Mag. and 300 Weather magnum cases to 300 Winchester.

I know you will have your hands full before you have this worked out, I would suggest you check the throat of the chamber. Again, I have rifles that shoot small groups and I have rifles that shoot groups like a shotgun, I do not have a rifle that shoots both ways.

There could be enough difference between the two bullets, I do not mix bullets that have a tough time getting past the rifling with bullets that get past the rifling before it knows it was there.

F. Guffey

F. Guffey
 
Looking at Ramshot / Accurate online load data.... they do not even recommend it for the 300WM.... nor do they have ANY load data for it and the 300WM.

I suggest you try a more suitable powder.

I believe your load for the 165gr is probably way over the starting load, especially if you worked up from 60grs ! ... and I am curious where you got your data from ?

There are numerous propellant manufacturer reloading websites.

In this day and age... there is no reason to use data for a different powder, in a cartridge / bullet weight that it really is meant for.


I am not trying to be harsh, and perhaps I am missing something.... but I really think you are doing it wrong.

Heck... 4064 is a good powder.. in .308 Winchester... NOT 300WM.


I did find some data from a 2003 Accurate load manual.... BUT , not knowing if Accurate 4064 was reformulated in the last 13 years... I would be very hesitant to use that data.

Also... there was / is ( ? ) a recall on Lot #14202... so check your lot number.

Powder Type: 4064

Lot Number: 14202 (lot number on bottom of can)

If you have this lot number, please call:
1-800-497-1007 or 1-800-416-3006
 
Last edited:
1) You are using two bullet weights 150 gr and 165 gr.

2) The powder you are using is appropriate for the lighter bullet not so much the heavier one.

3) The powder is not appropriate for cartridges of that capacity.


Choose a slower powder and things will be more in tune.
 
You say you didn't hit the paper with the 165 gr bullets. That doesn't mean they were inaccurate, you might have put all the shots into a 1/2" group. The point of impact could be so far off that you missed the paper. Use a bigger target, or shoot at closer ranges 1st. Then adjust the scope.

Any of the 4064 powders are not a very good option for 300 WM. There are lots of online loading sources if you don't have access to paper manuals.

http://www.hodgdonreloading.com/
 
Thanks all for the reply's.

First of all, I purchased the equipment used from a work buddy, and it came with a couple of components.

There were as well 3 (closed) Cans of AA4064 which he used also for the 300 Win - No he didn't give me any load data.

As in my first post stated I used IMR4064 load data because they are "nearly" interchangeable.
I reduced this loads which I found in my Speer #14 and different online sources about 10% for start loads and watched for pressure signs / squibs.

My thoughts here were to use up the available stuff, if possible.
This is obviously not the case, what gives me a opportunity / excuse to look for a rifle in .308 next Saturday at the gun show :D

I purchased already a can of H1000, which is the most recommended powder for this cartridge and go from there.

Again, thanks everybody for their input. It's a great community here.

MB
 
JMR

I did a work up to max load in my manual for IMR and close to max loads I hit the paper.
But the groups looked like a shotgun pattern in all directions.
Therefore I assume with lighter loads it was the same case.

I did a little more research in my book and online as well and it seems that the 4064 types of powder disappear from the data if the bullet weight gets higher than 150 grain.
But as said, I switch powder anyways.

Thanks for the support
 
I agree 4064 seems to be too fast of a burning powder even for 150gr bullets. My goto powder is H1000 for 190+gr and RL22 for up to 180's. Be cautious about experimenting with less than ideal powders especially in a high pressure caliber such as 300WM. I suggest getting a chronograph to help you track velocities when loading uncharted territories.
 
Marco, Welcome to America! Nothing like throwing a post like yours out to get a few, I'm sure, out into the garage looking at loading books..:) That said....

I have reloaded for years and everything from .380 up to .300 win mag. Mostly the .38 cal pistols, the 7mm and more recently in the past few years, .308, 30-06 and 6.5 Cr. I will even confess to having started out with surplus H4831 in the yellow cardboard can, up through todays, plastic H4831 SC.
I have data books from retail chains that are no longer with us. I say all this as there is constant change in data as the powders change, some like 4831 are in their 3 or 4th reformulation. I have old data that listed 64 gr of 4831 as a top load for the 7mm mag. Today that might get you in a whole lot of trouble. I would encourage you to use up to date books, powders and primers.

Your use of 4064 ok, it's listed in just about all the loads for the 300 win mag in the newest Hornady loading book. 60 gr is at the top for the 165 gr bullets however.

I have loaded the 7mm for years but that was basically the same load over and over with charge adjustments as the powder changed. The .300 is one I recently took on as my son has one so I'm playing around with different combos at this time.
So far my best results have come from 178 gr. eld-x Hornady bullets with IMR 7828, middle load at 72 gr. giving 2900 fps.
Just to give you a comparison, 4064 falls between 88 and 96 depending on the brand, on the burn rate scale. 7828 is 137. The scale runs from 1 to 149 and is in most reloading manuals.
Now, I'm not one to say that any given powder is no choice for certain caliburs, I drive my brother nuts cranking out very accurate loads that aren't in the main stream. This comes from having grown up with a load data list way back that had 3-6 listed loads and the few powders we had back then. I never nor would load something up that hadn't been published in a book at some point. Adjust for the powder change and be conservative is the rule.

Here's one more thought as you get into loading for that 300 win mag, reduced loads. They are fun to shoot and there is an effort in the past couple years to facilitate that. IMR 4198 is one of the powders that has been tested and incorporated into the data books for just purpose. You can load down a 180 gr bullet to 1900 fps and safely shoot it in the .300. Very mild kick and you don't need a lot of powder. Great for young one coming up as well as trigger work for anyone.

And finally, move your target back to 50 yards, get the gun centered with a factory load of one of yours before taking it out to 100. You need a reference as to where they are hitting.....some loads go quite higher than some quite lower, good to know up close.

Good luck!
 
They are in a group that has little difference between them and unless you are bumping the top I would shave a grain off the I roll if subbing for aa as the aa is said to be slower. Vaeget is right in there too. Always know for sure and side on the cautious side.
 
1stmar
They are not interchangeable, but similar. The AA4064 burns a little slower than the IMR version does.

Supercup
Thanks for the reply. I went already the way you described by firing first @50 yards with factory ammunition and then went to the 100.
With factory I'm already spot on, so I feel confident with that rifle and know how it's acting with factory ammo.

I gathered an 8 LBS Keg of H1000 this weekend at a gun show nearby and this will be my go to powder for this cartridge for further development. :)

I might play with the AA4064 Powder when I get me a chronograph, to see how it is doing when I go above the load data which is stated in my manuals.

It's a possibility as well, my rifle don't like the combination of this Hornady bullet and 4064. :(
 
I have shot up one keg of AA4064 and kegs of IMR 4064 in the 308 Win and 30-06. Loads are similar but not interchangeable. My AA4064 has pressure issues before IMR 4064 and charge for charge, the velocity is less.

I don't have a 300 Win Mag, cannot provide any good load data for that cartridge. However I have a 300 H&H Magnum which takes the same amount of powder, plus or minus a grain. That cartridge prefers the 4350 types of powder, and that is what I recommend you use in the 300 Win Mag. IMR 4350 (or H4350, or AA4350) is slower than IMR 4064 and a better choice, in my opinion, for these belted magnum cartridges.
 
Marco, sounds like you are on the right path. What you'll find is that the big belted magnums like slow burning, full cases and higher velocities to be at their best. 4064 meets one of the 3, velocity. I like the extreme powders as they are meant to be stable in all temperatures, that includes H4831, IMR 7828 and some of the other new offerings. The surplus stuff we grew up with is gone and the new formulations are tailored more toward certain cartridges rather than make do. Another interesting thing you'll find is the burn rate charts change all the time. Two adjacent powders on the chart could be grains apart or a tenth of a grain apart. The batches are tested and compared constantly and vary. The old military rounds were loaded by velocity tested per batch, not by a set grain weight. If the velocity target took 52 grs, so be it, the next batch might take 51 or 53.
Keep us informed on your progress with the H1000.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top