You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
CFE 223 Powder
- Thread starter Cola308
- Start date
Stats Shooter
New member
I dislike CFE 223 in both .223 and .308. I have used it in .308 for 147 gr fmj's and 168 gr smk and in .223 with 62 gr balls and 69gr smk's.
It gets great velocity, the best actually of any Powder I have tried. And it meters outstanding. But after 5 shots on a hot day the poi shifts. I have tried the same loads in several rifles, none of them shift poi with powders like Benchmark or even ball powders like H335. But CFE sure does.
It will group great for 4-5 shots. And if you let the barrel/chamber cool all the way down, and keep your ammo at the same temp, it will work great.
It gets great velocity, the best actually of any Powder I have tried. And it meters outstanding. But after 5 shots on a hot day the poi shifts. I have tried the same loads in several rifles, none of them shift poi with powders like Benchmark or even ball powders like H335. But CFE sure does.
It will group great for 4-5 shots. And if you let the barrel/chamber cool all the way down, and keep your ammo at the same temp, it will work great.
CFE223 is on the fast side of optimum for a 150 grain bullet in .308.
You really think so ? What do you mean by fast ? As far as burn rate CFE-223 is shown to be on the slower end of the 308 spectrum . Right up there with IMR 4320 , Win 748 , BLC-2 and even Leverevolution . I've always considered it a slower powder then what would be better for up to 150gr bullets in 308 . Some powders I'd think better at the 150gr bullet area would be H & IMR 4895 , IMR 4064 and anything else in that burn rate area which is the low to mid 90's or even a little faster where as CFE-223 is 105 on the chart .
What powder slower then CFE-223 would you recommend ? If we are talking about getting the most velocity then the slower powders might be just right but I don't think I'd go much slower the CFE-223 with that light a bullet . Anything slower and you're in the burn rates of N540 , H414 ,Win 760 which to me seem to slow for the 150gr bullet ?
I should add that when I say to slow I don't mean to slow to use or dangerous . Just not optimal for the application . Of course I don't load a lot of hunting loads which means I mostly load for accuracy and velocity means less to me in most instances .
Last edited:
"You really think so ? What do you mean by fast ? As far as burn rate CFE-223 is shown to be on the slower end of the 308 spectrum"
I have Nosler Reloading Guide #8 in front of me as I type. It lists CFE 223 as faster than BLC-(2) and both H & IMR 4895 so of course a couple of steps faster than 4064 and does not even list the CFE223 as a suitable powder for 150 grain in 308 Win.
Where did YOU get your recommendations??
I have Nosler Reloading Guide #8 in front of me as I type. It lists CFE 223 as faster than BLC-(2) and both H & IMR 4895 so of course a couple of steps faster than 4064 and does not even list the CFE223 as a suitable powder for 150 grain in 308 Win.
Where did YOU get your recommendations??
I get my recommendations from TFL as well as other reloaders while at the same time confirming the burn rates here .Where did YOU get your recommendations
http://www.wwpowder.com/PDF/Burn Rates - 2015-2016.pdf
http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2016/01/updated-hodgdon-and-imr-relative-burn-rate-chart/
I may be misunderstanding what you are trying to say . you wrote
CFE223 is on the fast side of optimum for a 150 grain bullet in .308.
I took that quote to mean you think CFE-223 is to FAST a powder for the 150gr bullet in 308 . What powder that has a slower burn rate then CFE-223 is better , more optimal then the faster burn rate powders of IMR-4895 and 4046 and the like ?
IMR 4064 is my preferred powder for 150-155 grain bullets in the .308. There may be better choices but this combination has consistently worked well for me.
After consulting the other manuals on my loading bench, I see that CFE 223 has moved a significant distance on the burn rate chart. In this case, I would caution that the exact date of manufacture was known before using ANY data.
This seems a significant error on the powder manufacture's part and a dangerous situation to say the least. Why not just re-name it CFE 308???
After consulting the other manuals on my loading bench, I see that CFE 223 has moved a significant distance on the burn rate chart. In this case, I would caution that the exact date of manufacture was known before using ANY data.
This seems a significant error on the powder manufacture's part and a dangerous situation to say the least. Why not just re-name it CFE 308???
Last edited:
Hornady says that the listed powders were at least acceptable accuracy.
So if they list CF223, you can at least assume its fairly good.
As they have the choice of all powders available for that application, its a good endorsement as one to try.
I got into R17 that way and have not regretted it.
It falls between 4895 and R17, quite close to Varget, it certainly is solidly in the area for 308.
That said, not all guns act the same and it may well not work in a given gun (ergo all the choices)
As I have a 308 that's pretty accurate I may try it.
The only reason it should "drift" would be fouling.
So if they list CF223, you can at least assume its fairly good.
As they have the choice of all powders available for that application, its a good endorsement as one to try.
I got into R17 that way and have not regretted it.
It falls between 4895 and R17, quite close to Varget, it certainly is solidly in the area for 308.
That said, not all guns act the same and it may well not work in a given gun (ergo all the choices)
As I have a 308 that's pretty accurate I may try it.
The only reason it should "drift" would be fouling.
Oh yes CFE 223 is for sure in the 308 burn rate family . My point has been and i may have not been to clear on this . Is that its not best for the lighter bullets . I personally would not use anything less the 175gr bullets with it and bet 190gr bullets would be optimum for that powder . This is not to say it wont shoot 150gr bullets , just that's not where I'd think it would do best .
Stats Shooter
New member
CFE 223 is suited for heavier bullets. In comparison, it has a relatively slower burn rate than Varget or BL-C2. Slower burn rate means better suited for getting higher velocities with heavier bullets (and filling more of the case).
It is absolutely well suited for .308 and obviously .223......but I just personally don't like it. Which has nothing to do with its burn rate suitability for the aforementioned cartridges.
It is absolutely well suited for .308 and obviously .223......but I just personally don't like it. Which has nothing to do with its burn rate suitability for the aforementioned cartridges.
98 220 swift
New member
I have used it with 168 gr bullets in my 20" barrel savage precsion carbine. It gave by far the best velocity as it does with my 223s. But accuracy was fairly lousy with both. Varget works the best for me good velocity and accuracy.