New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - RE-17
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Check GunBroker.com for SWFA's No Reserve and No Minimum bid firearm auctions.

RE-17

 Post Reply Post Reply   Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: June/16/2013 at 22:40
tejas View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman


Joined: March/08/2010
Location: Lone Star State
Status: Offline
Points: 353
I am looking for data using RE-17 in the 300 WSM. I have the newest Nosler and Berger reloading manuals, plus an older Lyman and Speer manual. Only the Berger has any info on RE-17, but only for bullets up to 190 grains. I'm wanting to find a load using 200 grain Accubonds.The Berger manual lists 54.5-60.5 for a 190 grain VLD. I built three sets of three rounds from 55-57 grains, just to get to a starting point. Before I got to the range, Ben, from Alliant emailed me some data which I had asked for a few days before. He reccomended 63-67 grains. Not real close to what I had "guessed" at. I decided to pull the bullets on the ones I built using 55 and 56 grains and kept the ones at 57 grains, then loaded three of each at 59,61,63,65 and 67. I fired the first round loaded at 57 grains. Recoil was heavy and my impact was 2 inches over my normal loads zero. The bolt was stiffer than my max load using RE-19. That was the only round I fired. What a waste of time. I shouldn't have pulled the bullets on the other rounds. Any suggestions? I use a Mac so I don't have Quickload. Any help is appreciated. I'd like to be able to use this powder as I have some on hand and can get more. Thanx
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: June/17/2013 at 09:10
JGRaider View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master


Joined: February/06/2008
Status: Offline
Points: 1432
RL 17 is a little fast for that caliber IMO, especially for heavier bullets. 

http://www.reloadersnest.com/frontpage.asp?CaliberID=244
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: June/17/2013 at 10:10
supertool73 View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Master
Optics Jedi Master
Avatar
Superstool

Joined: January/03/2008
Location: Utah
Status: Online
Points: 9531
Re 17 was designed for short mags.  I use it in my 300 wsm with 180 and it works great.  Have not tried 200s yet but probably will at some point when I run out of 180s. 

It has basically the same burn rate as IMR 4350 but adds more velocity to the load. 

I don't recall what my exact load is, but it is in the 60s somewhere.  That does seem odd 57 grains did that. 
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: June/17/2013 at 11:09
billyburl2 View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: January/08/2009
Location: Cottonwood, AZ
Status: Offline
Points: 3874
If the load doesn't have enough density, it can cause over-pressure as well. While I haven't worked a lot with any of the components listed, 57gr. does seem a bit light. But none of my manuals show reloader 17 either.  
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: June/17/2013 at 12:19
tejas View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman


Joined: March/08/2010
Location: Lone Star State
Status: Offline
Points: 353
Thanx for the help y'all. I guess my safest bet is to continue using my RE19 load. I know it is safe and accurate. I sure wanted the RE17 to work though, as there doesn't seem to be a shortage of it, at least locally. I'll hang on to the stuff I have. Sonner or later, some proven, tested data will become available.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: June/18/2013 at 10:00
jjrgr21 View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar

Joined: January/10/2011
Status: Offline
Points: 364
i found a few,they were 62gr up to 68gr for 165-180gr pills. if you have a sticky bolt at 57gr, i'd steer clear. or just load one per grain and work up till pressure.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: June/18/2013 at 22:40
tejas View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman


Joined: March/08/2010
Location: Lone Star State
Status: Offline
Points: 353
57 grains may not be as far from max as it sounds. This is from the Berger reloading manual:
                           300 WSM

190 grain Match Grade VLD Hunting /RE17, Min 54.5, Max 60.5 / 89% fill ratio

They don't include data using that powder for any bullets that are heavier. JGRaider might be right. Anyway, using that data alone, as a guideline. I would guess the max with a 200 grain would be 59.5-60.0. Yes, I do know that you aren't supposed to substitute different bullets to get powder loads. Maybe the VLDs being made of softer lead build higher pressures and thats why the charge is so low. I'm pretty sure I wont be trying this powder again with any heavy bullets. I certainly wont be using the information I got from Alliant, 63-67 seems dangerously high. If I was doing it over again, I think 54 gr would be a good starting point. Since that load is only going to fill the case to around 85% or so, I doubt that my accuracy would be improved, even if I did get more velocity. I have a good load now using the 200 Accubond and 65 grains of RE19. I wanted the RE17 to work, simply because its easy to get. The price of education is high.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: June/19/2013 at 09:28
supertool73 View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Master
Optics Jedi Master
Avatar
Superstool

Joined: January/03/2008
Location: Utah
Status: Online
Points: 9531
So why not just start with the 55 grain again and work up a load?  If it is safe in your rifle and you are getting the accuracy you want I don't understand why you would turn away from it, especially if it is available to you where the RE19 is not. 

My last precision .308 did not like more than 42.5 grains of varget.  Weird that it didn't, but it shot amazing groups and gave me a 2650ish velocity.  My new .308 likes 44 to 44.5 grains.  Different guns like different things. 

After doing more research I do agree that guy from alliance powder is wrong as well.  I bet 60ish would be max for 200 grain bullets.  If I were you I would call him on that and have him do some double checking on his numbers.  It could turn our bad for someone else if he told them that same data and they are not as cautious as you are.   

Another good powder if you can get it is H4831sc.  I have used it with good results in my 300 WSM. 

Here is some data I found for the 200 grain Nolser.  It is quickload I believe

Cartridge : .300 WSM (CIP)
Bullet : .308, 200, Nosler AccuBond 54618
Useable Case Capaci: 68.026 grain H2O = 4.417 cm³
Cartridge O.A.L. L6: 2.860 inch = 72.64 mm
Barrel Length : 25.4 inch = 644.4 mm
Powder : Alliant Reloder-17

Predicted data by increasing and decreasing the given charge,
incremented in steps of 2.0% of nominal charge.
CAUTION: Figures exceed maximum and minimum recommended loads !

Step Fill. Charge Vel. Energy Pmax Pmuz Prop.Burnt B_Time
% % Grains fps ft.lbs psi psi % ms

-20.0 69 45.60 2272 2293 30612 7605 97.6 1.688
-18.0 71 46.74 2322 2395 32480 7788 98.3 1.650
-16.0 73 47.88 2372 2498 34456 7959 98.8 1.613
-14.0 75 49.02 2421 2603 36541 8118 99.3 1.578
-12.0 76 50.16 2470 2708 38750 8264 99.6 1.536
-10.0 78 51.30 2518 2815 41084 8397 99.8 1.495
-08.0 80 52.44 2566 2923 43551 8516 100.0 1.455
-06.0 81 53.58 2613 3032 46161 8620 100.0 1.417
-04.0 83 54.72 2660 3141 48922 8718 100.0 1.381
-02.0 85 55.86 2706 3251 51847 8815 100.0 1.346
+00.0 87 57.00 2752 3362 54943 8909 100.0 1.311 ! Near Maximum !
+02.0 88 58.14 2797 3474 58225 9002 100.0 1.279 ! Near Maximum !
+04.0 90 59.28 2842 3586 61702 9092 100.0 1.247 ! Near Maximum !
+06.0 92 60.42 2886 3699 65390 9180 100.0 1.217 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+08.0 94 61.56 2930 3813 69309 9266 100.0 1.187 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+10.0 95 62.70 2974 3928 73468 9350 100.0 1.159 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!

Results caused by ± 10% powder lot-to-lot burning rate variation using nominal charge
Data for burning rate increased by 10% relative to nominal value:
+Ba 87 57.00 2835 3569 65222 8609 100.0 1.229 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Data for burning rate decreased by 10% relative to nominal value:
-Ba 87 57.00 2624 3058 45439 9219 99.0 1.421

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: June/19/2013 at 22:59
tejas View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman


Joined: March/08/2010
Location: Lone Star State
Status: Offline
Points: 353
Originally posted by supertool73 supertool73 wrote:



So why not just start with the 55 grain again and work up a load?  If it is safe in your rifle and you are getting the accuracy you want I don't understand why you would turn away from it, especially if it is available to you where the RE19 is not. 

My last precision .308 did not like more than 42.5 grains of varget.  Weird that it didn't, but it shot amazing groups and gave me a 2650ish velocity.  My new .308 likes 44 to 44.5 grains.  Different guns like different things. 

After doing more research I do agree that guy from alliance powder is wrong as well.  I bet 60ish would be max for 200 grain bullets.  If I were you I would call him on that and have him do some double checking on his numbers.  It could turn our bad for someone else if he told them that same data and they are not as cautious as you are.   

Another good powder if you can get it is H4831sc.  I have used it with good results in my 300 WSM. 

Here is some data I found for the 200 grain Nolser.  It is quickload I believe

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica"><span ="spnmessagetext"="" id="msg">Cartridge          : .300 WSM (CIP)
Bullet             : .308, 200, Nosler AccuBond 54618
Useable Case Capaci: 68.026 grain H2O = 4.417 cm³
Cartridge O.A.L. L6: 2.860 inch = 72.64 mm
Barrel Length      : 25.4 inch = 644.4 mm
Powder             : Alliant Reloder-17

Predicted data by increasing and decreasing the given charge,
incremented in steps of 2.0% of nominal charge.
CAUTION: Figures exceed maximum and minimum recommended loads !

Step    Fill. Charge   Vel. Energy   Pmax   Pmuz Prop.Burnt B_Time
%       %    Grains   fps   ft.lbs    psi    psi      %        ms

-20.0   69    45.60   2272    2293   30612   7605     97.6    1.688
-18.0   71    46.74   2322    2395   32480   7788     98.3    1.650
-16.0   73    47.88   2372    2498   34456   7959     98.8    1.613
-14.0   75    49.02   2421    2603   36541   8118     99.3    1.578
-12.0   76    50.16   2470    2708   38750   8264     99.6    1.536
-10.0   78    51.30   2518    2815   41084   8397     99.8    1.495
-08.0   80    52.44   2566    2923   43551   8516    100.0    1.455
-06.0   81    53.58   2613    3032   46161   8620    100.0    1.417
-04.0   83    54.72   2660    3141   48922   8718    100.0    1.381
-02.0   85    55.86   2706    3251   51847   8815    100.0    1.346
+00.0   87    57.00   2752    3362   54943   8909    100.0    1.311 ! Near Maximum !
+02.0   88    58.14   2797    3474   58225   9002    100.0    1.279 ! Near Maximum !
+04.0   90    59.28   2842    3586   61702   9092    100.0    1.247 ! Near Maximum !
+06.0   92    60.42   2886    3699   65390   9180    100.0    1.217 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+08.0   94    61.56   2930    3813   69309   9266    100.0    1.187 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+10.0   95    62.70   2974    3928   73468   9350    100.0    1.159 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!

Results caused by ± 10% powder lot-to-lot burning rate variation using nominal charge
Data for burning rate increased by 10% relative to nominal value:
+Ba     87    57.00   2835    3569   65222   8609    100.0    1.229 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Data for burning rate decreased by 10% relative to nominal value:
-Ba     87    57.00   2624    3058   45439   9219     99.0    1.421</span>






Thanks for posting the quick load data. I sent Ben, from Alliant an email and advised him to double check his data. Haven't heard anything back. I may have to try the RE17 again at some point. I don't have all that much RE19 in hand and I use it in my 270 WSM as well. I'll try the 4831 sc too, if I can lay my hands on some.

Thanx again
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/02/2015 at 18:08
tejas View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman


Joined: March/08/2010
Location: Lone Star State
Status: Offline
Points: 353
I came across my old thread while I was researching something else, so I figured I might as well update it.
I ended up using Barnes 200 gr LRX bullets instead of the Accubonds.
59.5 gr Reloader 17
Federal GM215M primer
COL 2.945

That chronos at 2850 fps and is pretty damn accurate too. I don't remember where I got that data but I've fired a bunch of them with no problems. 
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/03/2015 at 13:51
Steelbenz View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar
ROLL TIDE ROLL

Joined: January/03/2006
Location: Heart of Dixie
Status: Offline
Points: 4914
I use RL-17 in my 308 with 208 Amax bullets 47.5 grs
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Similar Threads: "RE-17"
Subject Author Forum Replies Last Post
Savage Mark II 17 Mac 2 Johnny Coffin Rimfire / Airgun 1 1/15/2005 2:37:52 PM
BSA Sweet 17 bsparr Rimfire / Airgun 1 1/27/2005 9:29:14 PM
BSA sweet 17 vs BSA 22 special rocketbarney Rimfire / Airgun 6 7/23/2005 9:58:02 PM
Scope For 17 Rem. ruger62 Varmint Scopes 3 2/14/2006 1:11:36 PM
BSA Sweet 17 and Sweet 22 Urimaginaryfrnd Rifle Scopes 5 5/24/2006 2:14:43 PM
17 HMR Scope? GaryO Rifle Scopes 5 5/30/2006 3:01:58 AM
Bushnell 3.5-10x36 for 17 HMR treeshepherd Rimfire / Airgun 0 10/4/2006 8:55:19 AM
Scope for .17 hmr Ruger 77/17 CoyoteCaller Rifle Scopes 4 10/6/2006 3:58:00 PM
sweet 17 CD82 Varmint Scopes 14 1/5/2007 7:31:55 PM
17 hmr gixxergirl Rifle Scopes 3 1/11/2007 6:40:15 AM


This page was generated in 0.328 seconds.