Question: ADI AR2208 (Varget) powder for 45-70

Reloading
21

Uh, apologies, completely forgot.

So basically most load data I saw was a bit suss… 50 to 55gr of AR2208 seemed like a lot of powder for the available volume I had to work with,

Here’s a 500gr slug that I made next to a (very over-crimped) dummy round. As you can see it takes up almost half of the case.

20190104_155644
20190104_155644900×1227 281 KB

I continued to research and stumbled on this forum/post:
(Can someone confirm that I won't blow my face off? 45-70 load [Archive] - Calguns.net)

Here is a quickload SIMULATION with a 500gr lee bullet:

Cartridge : .45-70 Govt. SAAMI
Bullet : .457, 500, LEE 457-500-F
Useable Case Capaci: 49.510 grain H2O = 3.215 cm³
Cartridge O.A.L. L6: 2.700 inch = 68.58 mm
Barrel Length : 18.0 inch = 457.2 mm
Powder : IMR 4064

Predicted data by increasing and decreasing the given charge,
incremented in steps of 2.273% 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

-22.7 79 34.00 1113 1375 14273 2800 68.6 2.171
-20.5 81 35.00 1147 1462 15371 2939 70.3 2.096
-18.2 83 36.00 1182 1552 16546 3079 72.0 2.024
-15.9 86 37.00 1217 1645 17803 3218 73.6 1.955
-13.6 88 38.00 1252 1741 19151 3357 75.2 1.889
-11.4 90 39.00 1288 1841 20595 3496 76.8 1.827
-09.1 93 40.00 1323 1944 22141 3633 78.3 1.767
-06.8 95 41.00 1359 2051 23806 3770 79.8 1.710 ! Near Maximum !
-04.5 97 42.00 1395 2160 25590 3904 81.3 1.655 ! Near Maximum !
-02.3 100 43.00 1431 2274 27509 4036 82.7 1.602 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+00.0 102 44.00 1467 2390 29574 4166 84.0 1.552 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+02.3 104 45.00 1504 2510 31797 4294 85.3 1.504 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+04.5 107 46.00 1540 2633 34194 4417 86.6 1.457 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+06.8 109 47.00 1577 2760 36782 4538 87.8 1.412 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+09.1 111 48.00 1613 2890 39579 4654 89.0 1.369 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!

IMR4064 is AR2208 equivalent (yes, yes, it’s not the same, but on ADI site it’s listed as equivalent, put your tampons away), anyhow, I thought this is good - check on powder.
Bullet - same as mine.
Barrel, mine is 20" but same same really.
Correction, mine is 18"

I started at 39gr and worked up to 42gr of ADI AR2208 in 0.5 grain increments. I found that all charges were accurate.

I did not observe any signs of pressure for all charges.

As you can see, there is a lot of unburnt powder, this is the same for all charges.

Off hand shooting is fine. Off the bench however, recoil was horrendous from around 40.5 grains. I shot a few more to test all charges, however I did not shoot all 41.5 and 42 grainers off the bench, because recoil was, shall we say, ‘noticeable’.

So, in conclusion:

  • Current load data of 50+ grains - I call bullshit on that, with caveat of seating depth. Bigger COAL could probably accomodate a little bit more powder (but only a little), but my H&R SB2 would not chamber this pills when seated above the max COAL spec.
  • I did not want to compress loads, however, came close. Compressed, perhaps, but with current results it’s useless and brings us to the last point;
  • ADI AR2208 is wrong powder for this bullet/barrel combination.
22

For future searches:

Cartridge : .45-70 Govt. SAAMI
Bullet : .457, 500, LEE 457-500-F
Rifle: New England (H&R) SB2 Handy Rifle
Barrel: 18"
Powder used: ADI AR2208 (varget)

23

I was loading 570gn cbe gas checks on top of ( i believe ) 40gn of ar 2206h in both my baikal double and my 1895. Quickload said ( allegedly) i was getting 1550fps. Recoil was quite manageable

24

Thanks, @Bigpete.

I will be picking some up next week, will do some development again.

25

Adventures in 45-70 land and 18" barrel continues.

Tried a few loads from 39 to 40 grains, in steps… Recoil is stout but manageable, after 40 rounds, most from bench (and about the same worth of slugs) I did have a tender shoulder. Close, but not as bad as 2208 feel.

Accurate.

I am still getting powder left in the barrel. Not as much as 2208, but it’s there and very noticeable. I think, most likely due to (a) maybe, 2006H is slower for the quantity used and my barrel length; and (b) using large rifle primers, where magnum primers would have done the trick.

At 40gr of 2206H cases and primers showed no signs of pressure whatsoever.

Next steps, I will try:

  1. Test with the same charge, but swap from large rifle to magnum large rifle primers; and
  2. Test midrange load using 2207 with large rifle primers; and
  3. Test midrange load using 2207 with magnum large rifle primers.

I am fairly certain there’s a good load somewhere here, between 1 and 3. After which, will see if I can chronograph this bitch. I am determined to get those 500gr+ zombie-dinosaur slayers working!

Interesting observation
Max calculated charge of Trail Boss (that’s unique to my case capacity and my seating depth) is actually noticeable too, unlike in any other calibre I ran TB through. Something around 308 off-hand type of feeling. Little unexpected and surprising. I expected something below 223 felt recoil. Anyhow, just an observation.

26

Maybe there’s simply not enough barrel length to get a complete burn on such a beefy cartridge…

Have you played around with it any more?

27

AR 2207 is an often recommended powder for .45/70, but I have to say I haven’t been impressed with 405gr LRNFP projectiles using pretty much any variation of the lead-suitable published loads (27-31gr).

Funnily enough Unique seemed to work quite well, but honestly I’ve been getting the best results with Trailboss.

28

I think you are 100% correct. I am certain it’s the short barrel.

29

I got a bottle of 2207 and magnum primers. Just haven’t had the chance to load it.

2208 is not it, to be honest, even if it all burned up, the recoil for a heavy hitter with that powder is beyond what it should be. However, in the name of science, I will try magnum primer and smaller 2208 load.

…but will be testing 2207 with standard and magnum primers, see how we go.

30

I have used TrailBoss, pushing 500gr projectile, works fine. But not enough oomph for fun at max TB charge.

Re: bullets, I am going to try some 300-something grain Hornady, I have a box of that. And 500gr cast - see how we go. Will have some time over the break to load and have a go. I like these experiments.

31

Sounds like a plan with the TB and lighter bullets. 200g is a significant difference so YB might throw them further than 20m… lol…

Is 2207 the fasted powder listed for it?

32

No, I am not going back to TB for 45-70… TB is reserved for milsurps that I don’t want to stress more than they should be.

re: 2207 - nfi, think so, seems like it’s the go to for 45-70 in all its rebranded forms around the world. So it has that going for it.

33

I found TB to be rather shite for anything over 350gr. Not enough oomph. Bullets don’t really stabilise properly. At least out of a Henry. Not to mention trajectory that was borderline comedy.

34

Got a little bored today, thought I would start messing with 45-70 load development again and decided to do some desktop analysis, before I start fiddling in the cave.

I haven’t measured my velocity, but I have crept up to unholly levels of charge volumes and recoil. And I from looking at what people are getting with similar charge, there seems to be a consensus on 500gr cast bullets at around 1500fps.

So is it worth it… Found some kinetic energy calculator (http://www.shooterscalculator.com/bullet-kinetic-energy.php) and decided to see what would be an optimal thumper in 45-70. Keeping in mind, I am working with a short barrel, I thought I am going to go with what people report to be typical velocity 1500fps-ish and then add some other common bullet weights and at minimum recommend charge and use that velocity.

Weight (gr) Velocity (fps) Energy (ft/lbs)
500 1500 2498
325 2242 3628
400 1915 3258

Really, should have done that before, 500gr sounds like a fun idea, but noooo… Bummer. :confused:

And of course there’s a silver lining, order a different mould and doing some casting :slight_smile:

35

…kind of unexpected to be honest. I would have thought it’d carry a lot more oompf. Mmm still deceptive. More reading and I am looking at the HITS (https://www.chuckhawks.com/rifle_hits_table_syn.htm and http://firearmshistory.blogspot.com/2013/01/measuring-effectiveness-of-cartridges.html) score which suggests 500gr is heaps better for killin`

W V D HITS
500 1500 0.458 2553.890495
325 2242 0.458 1612.773334

Arghhh this is doing my head in.

36

So bigger bullet better killi’n but less energy :crazy_face:

37

They score highly on the funometer though, so fuck science!

38

Considering a 1000ft/lbs is a bench mark for killing you would seem to be well over that mark :grinning: More like a 185 grn in a 308 doing top speed thats going to stop stuff quick. I dont need to tell you that getting a 500grn lead weight from 0 to moving takes a bit of energy (like a shit load of energy ) and going slow a smaller bang next to you head in pretty thin walled steel pipe is a much more life prolonging exercise.

2 Likes
39

When first developed the .45-70 Gov. was loaded with a 405 grain bullet over 70 grains of blackpowder. It was discovered in later developments that a 500 grain bullet was more accurate and had a longer effective range than the 405 grain bullet.
Look up the “Sandy Hook tests 1879”
As for recoil, a heavier bullet will give noticeably more recoil than a lighter one. Try 20gr of 2205 over a 370 grain cast RNFP. I found it to be quite accurate and mild on recoil. Took 7 out of 10 silhouette pigs @ 300m off-hand once. :wink:

3 Likes