I'd like the benefit of YOUR experience with IMR 7828

[RiverRider]

I'be been using H4831SC for quite a long time in several rifles. I'm not dissatisfied with it in any way, but I wonder if I've been leaving some performance potential on the table. My nephew decided to start reloading earlier in the summer and wanted to load for his .270 Winchester and could find no 4831 (I won't let him into my stash...he isn't real good about remembering debts sometimes but I still wanna help him out) so I laid in a jug of IMR 7828. I figured I might try it since I've got 8 pounds on hand.

I load one bullet and one bullet only in my rifles...that's an attempt to keep life simple and eliminate the need for adjusting zero and I enjoy the benefits of the practice. My bullet choices are made and each rifle is dedicated to a particular purpose or set of purposes. Here's what I'm using in the rifles I am considering for trials with 7828:

6mm-284: 95-grain Partiton

.280 Remington: 150-grain Partition

.25-06: 85-grain Ballistic Tip

I've looked at these cartridge and bullet combinations using QuickLOAD and it tells me there are gains to be had in terms of velocity, but I have no idea what to expect accuracy-wise and I'd like to hear of first-hand experience using 7828 in these combinations. Thanks.

 

[SJB358]

I have used 7828 a good bit in the 243, 270WSM, 7mm Rem Mag, 300 Win Mag, and the 7mm WSM. To me, and from what I can tell, it performs almost identically to RL22 (I used the SSC version of 7828).

I am an avid RL22 user and love the stuff, but with the recent powder shortages and such, I have given a good look at converting to IMR7828SSC since it produces nearly identical velocity and accuracy in the rifles and cartridges I use RL22 in. To me, it is the same.

I tend to think it works very well with the heavier bullet weights. I also tried it in my 264 Win Mag, but it was edged out by RL25 in that application, but I could have easily been happy with the results I received with 7828, it would have just been a little slower FPS.

I think it's a great powder and even if I do not switch to it from RL22, I may begin stocking it on my shelf.

 

[Dwh7271]

I use it so far in the 7 RM and the 6.5-06.
Like Scotty said, I went to it in the 7 due to the fact I ran out of RL22 and couldn't find any. It's good stuff. Pretty much equal in velocity and accuracy.
In the 6.5-06, Quickload liked it, I had some on hand so I'm using it. Good velocity and accuracy.
I load it with the 160 AB in the 7 Mag, and with both the 125 PT and 130 AB in the 6.5.

 

[PJGunner]

I was at my LGS a while back looking for some Re22 to try in my .280 Rem. None on the shelf. Infact there were only two cans of IMR7828SSC. That was it. I looked in the Nosler manual and they showed a velocity loss of a whole 10 FPS, big whoopie so I bought the 7828SSC. No data in the Nosler manual for the AccuBond long range bullet so I used data for the 150 gr. AccuBond and worked up fro the starting load to the max load. Best accuracy came at 2800 FPS which is what Remington factory ammo puts out in my rifle so I kept on going up in charges stopping at the Nosler max for a velocity of 3010 FPS which is a nice place to be. From the looks of the brass I probably could go higher but I'm happy with that level of power. That's the good news. The bad news is accuracy sucks big time. I'm going to have to play with seating depth and see if that improves things.
Results with that bullet in my 7x57 are just a crappy so I'm not sure if it's the bullet the rifle or me having a few bad days at the range. That does happen on occasion. I like the powder so scrounged up two more cans plus a can of the regular 7828 to see if they really are the same. :wink:
Paul B.

 

[jimbires]

I was using 7828 in my sons 243 before the ssc version was made . it worked well with 100 gr partitions . the standard and short cut versions are supposed to be exactly the same , I don't know I've never used the ssc . the ssc would be my choice for small capacity cases , but I'd prefer the standard cut for large cases . I like my case to be full or slightly compressed . the big problem I had with the standard cut powder in the 243, with 100 gr bullets , was the powder was highly compressed . it was compressed enough that the powder would push the bullet back out enough to cause problems . I learned to run them through my seating die again the next day . after being seated the second time the case length would stay where I wanted .

 

[Oldtrader3]

I have been using IMR 7828 for 20 years? I now use the SSC version for my .270 Win, 7mm Rem Mag, .340 Bee with heavier bullets. I also always use Fed 215 primers with IMR 7828 SSC and I use approximately factory COAL. All three of my calibers shoot groups of about .75 @ 100 yards and 1.50 at 200 yards. This is over the last 20 years. I still use 7828 because it is consistent, lot to lot, and it is easy to find, even when RL22 disappears.

 

[Guy Miner]

In the 1980's I found happiness with 7828 in the .300 Win mag with 200 gr bullets...

Problem was, I wasn't hunting anything that required such a combination back then.

Guy

 

[elkeater2]

I use it with 120 gr. Hornady HP's in my 25-06, and Encore with 28" barrel. 56 gr. IMR7828 as suggested by QL a couple years ago. Accuracy is <MOA, case life is good.
EE2

 

[rodell]

I use it exclusively in my 257 Weatherby and 300 Weatherby loadings. No problem finding accuracy.

 

[FOTIS]

I have used tons in my Weatherbies over the years. Good powder, love the SSC version. I put is between RL22 and RL 25

 

[RiverRider]

Thanks for the responses so far.

I'm thinking there's a good chance the .280 and the 6mm-284 will respond favorably given the bullet weights I'm using, but I'm not so sure about the .25-06 shooting the 85-grain BT. Has anyone found issues or deficiencies shooting lighter bullets pushed with 7828?

I could just go try it myself to find out, but like I said...why reinvent the wheel?

 

[Oldtrader3]

I do not think that you will get a consistent burn with 7828 and lighter bullet. The powder is too slow!

 

[REDGREEN]

I have had excellent results with IMR 7828. Great velocity and accuracy with very little deviation. Not as temperature sensitive as the Reloader 22 and consistent with different lot numbers too. You'll like it just fine.

 

[Oldtrader3]

I also have used 7828SSC for 20 years and had excellent results but only with cartridges that have a sufficient barrel to case volume ratio to burn this powder efficiently. This means to me, the three rifles that I mentioned with heavy bullets

 

[magothy1]

I can't recall who, but someone told me it did better in .25-06 with 100 gr bullets and up. Seems to be the case for me so far. The 7 mm Rem mag loves the stuff with 140 Etips and 150 NBTs, excellent accuracy.

 

[Vince]

I tried it in my 6.5x284 but found it to be very erratic. IMR 4350 seemed to be a more forgiving powder for me.

Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk

 

[Oldtrader3]

I used IMR 7828 in the .25-06 but with the 120 gr Partition bullet. I got good velocity and small groups. I used IMR 4350 for the 100 grain bullet in the .25-06.

 

[nvbroncrider]

Yeah 7828 is great in my 280AI and 6-284. For the 280 150-175 your not gonna find a better powder unless your rifle likes RL-22 or MRP better but those are all really close.

 

[FOTIS]

For your 6mm-284 it will work very nicely. However I fear it might be a touch slow for your 280

 

[RiverRider]

I used Re22 in another .280 I had some years back and it worked well but I went with H4831. In my current .280, I tried Magnum (too slooooow!) and H1000 and again opted for H4831. I thought H1000 was just *on the verge* of working well and it might have had I been able to get another grain and a half under the bullet. I kind of expect the same result with 7828, per Fotis.

In my 6-284, I think it will work well. I'm nowhere near a full case using H4831 in that one and the bullet is not so light per caliber...in contrast to what I'm running in my .25-06. I may try it to see just how deficient it is (in the .25)---fully expecting total failure. Well hey, expectations of failure have been met with surprising success on occasion, so why not? I won't be holding my breath though!

Thanks for all the great comments.