Hornady Superformance Powder for .270 Win???

[nralifer]

Thank you guys for your comments. I have not tested these loads yet for groups, but in my .338 Superformance loads group 1 in. or less. I will post the results for the .270 as soon as I get them. As far as pressure data, there are no published pressure data for these particular loads, but the fact that case head expansion is no different from factory loads firing similar weight bullets means the peak pressure generated by the Superformance loads I tried are comparable to the factory. Hodgdon says on their Data Center that 58 gr of H4831 behind a 140 gr bullet, generates 50,100 CUP pressure. Since Superformance is listed as having a slower burn rate than H4831, the pressure should be similar.

 

The next question is, how does Superformance generate more bullet speed if the peak pressures are comparable? I read somewhere that Superformance maintains the pressure in the barrel at a higher average pressure than conventional powders without exceeding the peak pressure. It must have more chemical energy per grain than conventional powders and as it burns it releases that energy in a more controlled way. How this is achieved is a mystery to me, but it is the characteristic that makes this powder so remarkable.

[nralifer]

I tried more loads using Hodgdon Superformance powder for .270 Win. in a Mod 70 22in. barrel rifle. Bullet used was Barnes 140 gr Triple Shock in Federal once fired brass, full length sized and trimmed to length published in Hornady manual. Primer used was 215M, powder charge 58gr of Superformance, and COL was 3.203 in. Chronograph used was Oehler three screen. Muzzle velocity averaged 3058 fps. Case head expansion was compared to Federal factory 140 grain load and in both instances increased by 0.001 in. The factory load averaged 2721 fps muzzle velocity. Extraction and primer flattening did not differ between factory and the reloads. Ambient temp was 45 degrees F.

 

Bottom line, Superformance achieves superb velocities in the .270 Win that are very close to those seen in .270 WSM Barnes Vortex ammo.

 

Should anyone decide to try this powder do it only in cartridges for which there is published data using H4831, and do not exceed the weight quoted for H4831. In fact start with charges that are 5-10% lower and watch for pressure signs.

Did those loads actually group well?

The 130 gr. bullets grouped 1.5 in. at 100 yds. Have not grouped the 140 gr. bullets yet. It was a windy day in South Dakota. Overall cartridge length can affect the results, so in load development one will have to find the optimal length for their gun. In my 330 Dakota, Superformance powder groups 250 gr. bullets 1in. or less. Be careful not to seat the TSX bullets too close to the lands as this could cause an overpressure situation.

[nralifer]

Hello everyone.

I apologize for not posting more results for the .270 Win, but I am planning a trip where I'll be using my .330 Dakota, so I have been concentrating on that. I have alluded to the use of Superformance powder in the .330 Dakota, and I will give you the load I finally settled on for my hunt. It is 79 grains of Superformance in new brass using Fed 215M primers. The bullet is a Barnes 250 gr TSX flat base bullet loaded at about 0.045 in. from the lands. Barrel length on my gun is 25 in., and the average muzzle velocity is 2877 fps (approx 4600 ft-lbs energy). This load groups at 0.7 in. or better. By comparison Nosler, in its fifth edition manual, quotes 2738 fps for a 250 grain Partition bullet using 78 gr H4831SC. The Barnes bullet is longer than lead core bullets of similar weight, so compressed loads are more likely when one uses coarse stick powders with Barnes bullets. Superformance, on the other hand, is a flattened ball powder and packs more densely than H4831, H4831SC, Reloader 19 and 22, making Superformance easy to use with long bullets that impinge on the powder space when loaded to the appropriate COL.

 

Given my experience thus far, it is working very well in 30-06 length cases. This means that it would be reasonable to try in the .270 Win, .280 Rem, 30-06, .338-06, .375 Ruger, any of the Dakota calibers up to and including the .375. To start, look for data using H4831 or H4831SC in those calibers and use Superformance charges that are in the lower range of the quoted H4831 charges, and work up. Use high quality new or once fired brass only, to be safe. I am anxious to see what results other members get if they try it.

[nralifer]

Did a little testing today to see the effect of COAL in the .270 Win in my Mod 70 22in barrel Winchester. Used 59gr of Superformance powder behind 130gr Barnes TSX. At a COAL of 3.285 got a 3 in 3 shot group. At COAL of 3.326 this shrank to 0.995 in. This load clocks at 3150 fps out of the 22 in stock barrel. No pressure signs noted. Temp around 80 degrees.

[nralifer]

Did some load development as well as explored the limits of this powder. Had a 270 Win 26 in. barrel made by Benchmark barrels for a Savage 110 action. After breaking it in, did some velocity testing of the load that I referenced in the previous post, namely 59gr Superformance behind a Barnes 130 TSX. It clocked at an average of 3260fps. That is 270WSM territory. Five shot groups with gusty winds at 100 yds of 0.69 and 0.455 in. using cheap unsorted Win brass. Previous post showed effect of COAL. Using a Hornady bullet comparator the COAL of these loads was 2.790 in. In a good barrel this powder groups well. All we need now is high BC bullets to make the 270 Win a viable long range caliber.

[nralifer]

Had a chance to test 140gr TSX bullets in my 26in Benchmark barrel. Got 0.7 in group and average velocity was 3202fps using 58 gr of Superformance. Also tried 59.5 grs behind 130gr TSX and got an average of 3296. Had some primer flattening but no problems with extraction. These are likely max loads, so approach with caution and work up to them in 1/2 grain increments.

[Havasuhunter]

Wow. That is amazing performance. Almost bought a pound the other day, may have to now. I recently traded into a 270 from another member that I need to work up loads for.

 

Thanks for the updates.

[nralifer]

Thanx for your comments. I would be very interested to see what results you get. I'm pretty sure the chronograph is reading the velocities correctly since I have tried factory ammo and the Superformance reloads in my Winchester with a 22 in barrel, and the factory loads were always substantially slower for the same bullet weight.

[nralifer]

Havasuhunter, did you try Superformance?

[Havasuhunter]

I haven't had time to do anything with the 270 yet. I have some reloader 22 and IMR 4350 I'm going to try first when I get around to it. I just barely got my reloading bench set back up. Hoping to get on it in a few weeks. I'm no longer working in the oilfield and will be working in AZ for the next 4 months at least, so I may actually get to it. Hoping to burn a lot of powder at the range during the winter months while the weather is so comfortable.

[1uglydude]

Did some load development as well as explored the limits of this powder. Had a 270 Win 26 in. barrel made by Benchmark barrels for a Savage 110 action. After breaking it in, did some velocity testing of the load that I referenced in the previous post, namely 59gr Superformance behind a Barnes 130 TSX. It clocked at an average of 3260fps. That is 270WSM territory. Five shot groups with gusty winds at 100 yds of 0.69 and 0.455 in. using cheap unsorted Win brass. Previous post showed effect of COAL. Using a Hornady bullet comparator the COAL of these loads was 2.790 in. In a good barrel this powder groups well. All we need now is high BC bullets to make the 270 Win a viable long range caliber.

 

Have you looked into the 129 grain LRX from Barnes? I've been having really good success with it in my 270WSM.

[ctafoya]

I picked up a pound a while back for my 243. Couldn't find load data for a 95gr sst so I called em up.I was told that the powder would not work above 75gr for 243 so I have new un opened pound I need to put in the classifieds.

[nralifer]

 

Did some load development as well as explored the limits of this powder. Had a 270 Win 26 in. barrel made by Benchmark barrels for a Savage 110 action. After breaking it in, did some velocity testing of the load that I referenced in the previous post, namely 59gr Superformance behind a Barnes 130 TSX. It clocked at an average of 3260fps. That is 270WSM territory. Five shot groups with gusty winds at 100 yds of 0.69 and 0.455 in. using cheap unsorted Win brass. Previous post showed effect of COAL. Using a Hornady bullet comparator the COAL of these loads was 2.790 in. In a good barrel this powder groups well. All we need now is high BC bullets to make the 270 Win a viable long range caliber.

 

Have you looked into the 129 grain LRX from Barnes? I've been having really good success with it in my 270WSM.

 

I have not, but it looks interesting. The stated BC is good.

[nralifer]

Wanted to revive this topic. Any body use Superformance powder in the 270 or any thing else? It probably would work well in the 270WSM and 7Rem Mag. CTAFOYA you could try it in the 243 . Hodgdon lists loads for up to 80 grs bullets in their 2012 Annual Manual. I will be trying it in the 243 soon myself for heavier bullets. I will start with charges that are listed minimums for H4831 since both powders have similar burn rates.

[roninflag]

superperformance- one of the big jumps using superperformance powder i see is the 300 wsm, 165 nosler partition, 3273 fps. i read some where the "superperformance powder " that is being sold, is the one blended for 30-06. that rate would have a wide application. wish there was data for my 300 rsaum