Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel

Log In

A valid email is required.
Password is required.
Site Notices
1/14/2017 8:11:35 PM
Posted: 2/26/2009 4:05:40 PM EST
I know RE-15, Varget or VV are popular for 69-77gr.

I'm using VARGET, but somebody recommended Ramshot TAC.
????



I've never tried it, so I thought I'd ask here because you guys in Service rifle shoot a lot of 77gr.

(I'm a 3-gunner who loads on a XL650, looking for something that meters better)

Thanks
Derek
Link Posted: 2/26/2009 4:40:18 PM EST
Never tried the TAC but RE15 meters quite well in a Uniflow and BR-30 should do fine on the dillon. If you are loading mag length for 3 gun, I HIGHLY recomend the Hornady 75 BTHP as you can get 600 in a bulk box for less than 500 of the 69's, much less than 500 77's. Shoot great and are good at mag length out to 600. 24.5 of RE15 drives them good.
Link Posted: 2/27/2009 12:36:09 PM EST
TAC being a ball powder meters very well out of powder measures but it is a double based ball powder. Hard on the throat of your rifle.

To my knowledge, Black Hills uses TAC powder. Those that use their ammo claim they get great accuracy but in all reality, it is because they use match grade bullets, mostly Sierra's!

However, all powders that can be loaded in 223 and 308 cases are in great demand and hard to get.
I say, get what you can today and the hell with throat erosion until times are better .

Dave McGrath
Link Posted: 2/28/2009 7:01:51 AM EST
Thanks Dave, I've got plenty of WC846, win748, and AA2230 for 55gr.

My barrels are chrome lined, so I don't spend much time worrying about erosion.

I thought ball powder like 748 burned cooler and had LESS throat erosion than extruded ??????????

Link Posted: 2/28/2009 7:23:30 AM EST
The majority of us use Re-15 and Varget, but some do use TAC and like it. TAC is a ball powder and will meter better in your Dillon.
Link Posted: 2/28/2009 7:39:49 AM EST
Originally Posted By Derek45:

I thought ball powder like 748 burned cooler and had LESS throat erosion than extruded ??????????



On the container, "748" states that it is cooler. "748" is a double base propellant (Nitrocellulose and Nitroglycerine) while VARGET, IMR, and VV N100 series are single base (NC only). NG has a higher flame temperature than NC. I have contacted Western a couple of times to ask how this can be; however, they have never replied. I have worked with the now defunct Hercules Powder Company years ago as a Senior Development Chemist working with propellants.

Link Posted: 3/1/2009 3:57:48 AM EST
I'm using TAC this season , Its OK but in my load development I could'nt better(barely equalled) the accuracy I was getting from the several stick powders I used in previous yrs. I used it cause I had it ,I sold off my remaining stock of it and I would'nt buy more. RE15 meters just as good in a Hornady measure.


Tim
Link Posted: 4/22/2009 8:41:25 PM EST
[Last Edit: 4/22/2009 8:42:54 PM EST by Adventurer96]
Currently, I use TAC in both 5.56 and 7.62, although I only have a load worked out for 175gr Sierras in 7.62. It's a good performer in my estimation, and I like the powder because of its:

Price
Availability
Versatility
Relative temperature stability (compared to 3031 and other powders I used when I lived out west)
Ease of metering

Also, it seems to be a fairly clean burning powder, although I don't shoot enough to compare it to much.

It's a tradeoff for me, to a degree, where I'm looking for a powder which can fit many bills and allows me to mass-produce blasting ammo as well as fine tune a precision load.

FWIW, a few the guys I spoke with out in UT who shot service rifle use TAC exclusively now.
Link Posted: 4/22/2009 8:53:33 PM EST
tag
Link Posted: 4/23/2009 2:19:57 AM EST
Link Posted: 4/23/2009 3:20:30 PM EST

Anyone have any luck with TAC and the 80 SMK for 600 yards?
Link Posted: 4/23/2009 4:53:03 PM EST
Top Top