Anyone try CFE223 powder yet?

[Jason]

I'm considering ditching moly-coated bullets after I finish up this big stash of Lapuas that I have and am thinking that the CFE223 powder might make that transition a little easier if it lives up to the hype from Hodgdon. Has anyone used this powder for CPT loads for highpower silhouette? If so, how did it work out for you? I prefer not to have to clean my rifle during a tournament, and with the WA state match and the Ironman tournaments, that's a lot of rounds.

[Jason]

No one? No one at all?

Dandeman,

Where are you with data when I need help here?

[lone ringer]

I'm considering ditching moly-coated bullets after I finish up this big stash of Lapuas that I have and am thinking that the CFE223 powder might make that transition a little easier if it lives up to the hype from Hodgdon. Has anyone used this powder for CPT loads for highpower silhouette? If so, how did it work out for you? I prefer not to have to clean my rifle during a tournament, and with the WA state match and the Ironman tournaments, that's a lot of rounds.

Jason, have you checked the Hodgdon loading data? They only recommend that powder for the 260 Rem with 107gr bullets. Varget and Benchmark are more versatile. http://data.hodgdon.com/cartridge_load.asp

[Jason]

Jason, have you checked the Hodgdon loading data? They only recommend that powder for the 260 Rem with 107gr bullets. Varget and Benchmark are more versatile. http://data.hodgdon.com/cartridge_load.asp

Thanks, Tony. I've looked at all the Hodgdon data many times over, and have the 2012 load data book (magazine).

I am already using Varget (for over half the guns that I load for) and didn't have great luck with Benchmark, as well as it not really being any more versatile than the CFE223 powder. Hodgdon specifically mentions "with light bullets" in 308-size cases in some of their documentation for Benchmark. I am hoping that more data will be coming out for the CFE223 powder, as I want the burn characteristics of Varget with slightly better metering (CFE223 = spherical, Varget = extruded) and the promised copper fouling reduction. Varget is slightly faster burning than CFE223. On Hodgdon's powder burn rate chart that contains 145 powders rated from fastest to slowest, Varget is 99 and CFE223 is 103. There is data for 200gr bullets in 308 Win, even 250gr bullets in 375 H&H. That leads me to believe that the lack of data for bullets heavier than 107gr in 260 Rem isn't because it's not safe, but only because there hasn't been time and enough demand to develop and publish it. Since I haven't used it myself, I also don't know how bulky it is. I already think that Varget doesn't fill my 260 Rem cases enough for top confidence, but that's probably being a little too picky due to shooting benchrest previously.

If I had more time and better equipment for testing, I'd just figure this out myself. Since I don't, I thought I'd ask here hoping that other data heads might have already done it or would know of someone who has.

[edgehit]

You may consider N140 if you can give up the copper fouling reduction tha CFE promises. The short sticks meter better than Varget.

[Jason]

I emailed Hodgdon just now to get some clarification on whether the data isn't there for bullets over 107 grains yet because they haven't gotten around to it or it's not suitable for bullets heavier than that. I'll report back when they answer.

[shakes]

Jason take a peek at IMR 8208 XBR. Out of my rifles I get clover leafs at 200 meters. 35 grains.

[lone ringer]

I emailed Hodgdon just now to get some clarification on whether the data isn't there for bullets over 107 grains yet because they haven't gotten around to it or it's not suitable for bullets heavier than that. I'll report back when they answer.

Jason, I am thinking that as long as the CFE223 has a slower burning rate than Varget it should be fine to use with heavier bullets.
Agustin's favorite .260 ram load had 37.5 gr of Varget with a heavy 6.5 bullet. You should be able to use 38 to 38.5 gr of CFE223 safely but remember the rule of starting 10% less and working up.

[Jason]

Got answers back from Hodgdon. Here's the email thread, in order.

From: Jason McCurry
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2012 10:33 AM
To: Help Account
Subject: CFE223 powder data for bullets >107gr in 260 Rem?

I am interested in using the CFE223 powder as a replacement for Varget and other powders in my highpower rifle silhouette loads for bullets from 107 to 123 grains. As we can go through 300 shots in a weekend tournament and I would rather not clean during a tournament, I am excited that the CFE223 powder might let me do that a little bit better than Varget does. I was a bit disappointed to see that you don't have data for bullets heavier than 107 grains listed for the 260 Remington cartridge, though. I see that CFE223 is slower in the burn chart than Varget and you show data for bullets up to 200 grains for 308 Win (the 260 Rem parent cartridge). Due to those, I am wondering if the lack of data for bullets over 107 grains in 260 Rem (or 6.5 Creedmore) is due to the powder not being suitable for heavier bullets in those cartridges or just because it's new and you haven't had time or enough demand to do the proper testing and publishing of the data yet. Can you clarify which it is?

Also, like most highpower accuracy games of 1000yds or less, we in highpower rifle silhouette have pretty well settled on the 6.5mm cartridges (260 Rem, 6.5x47 Lapua, 6.5 Creedmoor). For longer distances, we commonly use bullets like the 123 A-Max or Scenar up to the 139 Scenar or 140 A-Max. Please consider focusing on the heavier bullets in those cartridges. There are a lot of us ready to burn up a lot of CFE223 powder if it works for those bullets, as a spherical powder that meters well and helps reduce copper fouling to get us through a tournament sounds almost too good to be true.

Thanks,

Jason McCurry

From: Help Account
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2012 7:32 AM
To: Jason McCurry
Subject: RE: CFE223 powder data for bullets >107gr in 260 Rem?

The burn speed of CRE223 is not compatible with bullets over 107 gr in weight when loading the 260 Remington. There is no way to make the CFE223 work acceptably well with the heavier bullets without have pressures rise well past the danger level.

Mike Daly
Customer Service Manager
Hodgdon Family of Fine Propellants
Hodgdon Smokeless Powder
IMR Powder Company
Winchester Smokeless Propellants
GOEX Blackpowder

From: Jason McCurry
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2012 1:17 PM
To: Help Account
Subject: RE: CFE223 powder data for bullets >107gr in 260 Rem?

Can you clarify why the burn rate for CFE223 makes it unsafe for bullets over 107gr in the 260 Rem but Varget, which shows as faster burning on the burn rate chart (99 vs 103), has data for bullets all the way up to 142gr?

Thanks again,

Jason McCurry

From: Help Account
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2012 2:08 PM
To: Jason McCurry
Subject: RE: CFE223 powder data for bullets >107gr in 260 Rem?

The CFE223 and Varget are quite a lot different. The Varget is medium sized, extruded kernel of medium density. It takes up a great deal of room in the case and is easily ignited. The CFE223 is a very dense, double based, spherical powder that is difficult to ignite and takes up much less room in the case.

When you are looking at a burn rate chart it is relative and arbitrary with no basis in science. All powders change burn rate in different environments or in different cases. Our product manager orders the powders by comparing them in a certain cartridge. Making any other comparison would or could yield a different order.

When we tested the CFE223 in the 260 we found that the performance with bullets at 107 gr and up was not consistent as the pressure rose at a rate much higher than velocity rose. With 107gr bullets and up, the resulting velocity at safe allowable pressure was below what anyone would want to shoot. So, we did not show those results.

Mike Daly
Customer Service Manager
Hodgdon Family of Fine Propellants
Hodgdon Smokeless Powder
IMR Powder Company
Winchester Smokeless Propellants
GOEX Blackpowder

[Dee]

I wonder what velocities he considers to low for anyone to want to shoot them? I don't particularly want a upper end range velocity in the first place. No desire to run up to 3000 fps much less any faster with the 6.5, someplace in 2750 range would be fine for me with a 107.

Tureau got a pound of it to try I will have to see what the volume difference is between it and Varget. But now I am thinking this is just a bit of marketing for the Tacticool crowd with so many people shooting .223 ARs they are probably trying to maximize that market area with claims of being cleaner and cleaning while shooting. It does seem rather hard to believe it could actually make a dirty barrel cleaner as was the claim IIRC in the magazine article I read about it earlier this year. If it isn't all hype and it does as advertized in a .223 it should do well and possibly make it to military use where a barrel that shoots well even after a lot of rounds without getting fouled up would be beneficial.


Dee