I was on Amazon.com and found some Vihtavuori powders for sale. But they were listed as not made in Finland like I thought. No they were listed as made in......China. Wonder if it's just some of the powders or are all of them now made there?
Printable View
I was on Amazon.com and found some Vihtavuori powders for sale. But they were listed as not made in Finland like I thought. No they were listed as made in......China. Wonder if it's just some of the powders or are all of them now made there?
A friend bought one, expensive and overall not really appropriate for what he wanted to use his reloads in. Said the quality was excellent however he wasted his money for the cal/rifle he wanted to use it with.
I left him a message to call me as I would like to post what the issue was if he used it.
The N140 he bought is too slow burning to use in a gas piston system.
It worked well in his AR .223 as it is direct impingement. He did say accuracy with this powder was slightly improved.
Apparently N140 is too slow burning to use in a M14/M1 Garand/M1a1 as it will pound the crap out of the piston. The powder pulse it too long and pounds the piston which in turn drives the action rod too hard and too fast.
He told me the Hornady reloading book recommends it as the best for accuracy. This issue had is not a reflection on the powder you just must buy the proper powder for what you are reloading.
I use N140 for my Garand in .308. Works well. With a 147 grs FMJBT I have good accuracy, good primers (no overpressure) and perfect cycling.
Normally I prefer Lovex S060-2 because it works as well and costs 40% less. But N140 is absolutely ok for me.
Read that Vihtavuori was now owned by Nammo, the parent co of Lapua.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce McAskill
I agree 100% with Ovidio, but mine is a 1943 Garand in 30-06. I tried reducing the load to see if I could provoke a cycling error. Result - it functioned flawlessly right down the minimum recommended load for a 30-06 caliber.
It seems that in the Garand, the reduced pressure from a reduced powder charge is pretty well compensated by a longer time from the bullet passing the gas take-off hole to exiting the muzzle. In other words, the impetus given to the piston remains within a range that maintains reliable cycling.
However, this only applies to the Garand, NOT the M14/M1A1 or whatever that unsatisfactory successor was called, with its gas vent much further back from the muzzle. Garand got it right first time. What followed was IMOH, what in Germany is called "Verschlimmbesserung".
Verschlimmbesserung.... I haven’t heard this one in eons.
Thank you for reminding me!!!:rofl::rofl::rofl:
Can I take a guess ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ovidio
Tried to make better..........
But Failed to do so, making it Worse ? :runaway:
Yes. It is almost impossible to translate. I would dare a "downgrading upgrade".
Talked to my friend again about N140 and believe me he takes being anal in reloading to levels I wouldn't consider. It should not be used in the rifles I listed in post #2. I know many will disagree however he does research and development that boggles my mind. A once fired case to finished reload is 21 steps IIRC.
He told me after much research N140 will damage the OP rod and you probably won't notice till it is too late. Those rifles need a powder that burns at the same rate as H4895 or faster and N140 does not do that. ( I just called him and left a message as I think I remember what the powder is but not positive and will correct the XX when I hear back) N140's burn rate is too slow and this is evident from any burn rate chart. He is going to try N135 as he believes it may be OK.
When it comes to reloading I listen to people who are diligent in what they do as they have experienced the good, bad and ugly. I am going to the range today with a friend who is head and shoulders above most people in handgun cal. reloading. I listen to him as for years shot over 40,000 rounds of handgun all reloaded so knows what he is doing.
I know one of those types. After a bore-scope investigation, he told me that my original Winchester 94 in 3240 was only fit for a display cabinet, not for shooting. But my WIN94 doesn't understand German and therefore continues to shoot as well as I can point it (well OK, perhaps that's not so good any more).Quote:
Originally Posted by enfield303t
So in which competitions does your friend participate, and how well does he place? I'm not being sarcastic, but there are some shooters who are so wrapped up in load fiddling, that they lose contact with actual shooting performance. I have a 6mm BR that will produce an 0.2 MOA group at 100 meters. Unfortunately, my PWF is larger than that. In other words, I am the limiting factor, and even if the rifle could produce 0.1MOA mounted on a lead sledge, that would hardly produce any visible improvement in my scores.
Twice as much time spent in practice under competition conditions would help me more than twice as many steps in producing "perfect" ammo. There is an old saying " a bad workman always blames his tools". Certainly, some spend more time optimizing their tools that actually learning to use them to best effect. OK, I'm old-fashioned.
Getting back to the 30-06 (or .308 for more modern types), I think it is not correct to conflate the Garand with its .308 successor, as the distance between the muzzle and the gas port on the Garand is much shorter than on the M1A. So where the Garand op-rod receives a short "puff", the MIA gets a comparatively "slow blow". Still, I appreciate the warning and will seriously consider N135 - which, by the way, is the fastest powder in the Vihtavuori loading tables for 30-06 with 130gn or heavier bullets.