IMR 7828 vs. IMR 7828 ssc
- Thread starter TBASTIAN
- Start date
OU812
Handloader
- Apr 18, 2006
- 2,099
- 2
Yes.
- Thread starter
- #3
OU812
Handloader
- Apr 18, 2006
- 2,099
- 2
Your welcome. I use both in my 340 Weatherby but prefer the SSC for metering and fill ratio.
G
Guest
Guest
Just about the only codicils I'll place on these two powders being equal are:
Case fill is lower with the ssc version. That's an advantage in some cases where the regular cut would be highly compressed, and the ssc version is at or just over 100%.
Velocity across multiple lots of each type, in the same few rifles, has been notably higher (50-100fps) with the ssc version. I believe the kernel size leads to a slightly faster burn rate, but in light of the progressive nature of this powder's burn cycle, I don't think it matters in a pressure sense. I see no signs of increased pressure except the velocity, and I attribute that to a slightly faster burn rate, though not fast enough to cause unsafe pressures.
Work up carefully (as I'd advise with any powder) and you'll find the ssc to be highly useful. I've stopped buying the regular version altogether.
Case fill is lower with the ssc version. That's an advantage in some cases where the regular cut would be highly compressed, and the ssc version is at or just over 100%.
Velocity across multiple lots of each type, in the same few rifles, has been notably higher (50-100fps) with the ssc version. I believe the kernel size leads to a slightly faster burn rate, but in light of the progressive nature of this powder's burn cycle, I don't think it matters in a pressure sense. I see no signs of increased pressure except the velocity, and I attribute that to a slightly faster burn rate, though not fast enough to cause unsafe pressures.
Work up carefully (as I'd advise with any powder) and you'll find the ssc to be highly useful. I've stopped buying the regular version altogether.
gerry
Ammo Smith
- Mar 1, 2007
- 6,851
- 1,635
When I tried both in my 264 WM the results were pretty much identical. Working up carefully as mentioned is good advice.
CMBTshooter
Handloader
- Jun 8, 2011
- 479
- 0
I bought a pound of 7828 SSC out of frustration with RL-22's lack of performance in my rifle and the fact that I couldn't find any of it to work with. Best thing I ever did. I love it in my 300 Win Mag with 190 CCs. I have a pound of regular 7828 for 220 PTs, hopefully it will work out just as well.
Also heads up, Powder Valley has IMR 7828 SSC in one pound and eight pound containers right now.
Also heads up, Powder Valley has IMR 7828 SSC in one pound and eight pound containers right now.
Oldtrader3
Ammo Smith
- Nov 6, 2009
- 8,406
- 5
I have noticed that also. Many stores still have IMR 7828 SSC because most reloaders have never used it. As you found out, it works well as a substitute for RL22.
Woodycreek
Handloader
- Aug 2, 2007
- 2,240
- 0
Just started using 7828ssc in the 338-375 Ruger with great results.
nvbroncrider
Handloader
- Aug 20, 2011
- 3,085
- 4
It's a good versatile slow burning powder I really like using it because it meters great and burns clean.
I've used both and found them real alike on the chrono.
But I've also seen posters have experience like Dubyam where they were different.
So, I guess its like any powder...lots can vary a bit.
I really like the ssc in certain cases especially w/light bullets.
I've got a tack driving 130 ttsx load in my 300 win mag at about 3550....and its plumb full of ssc.
But I've also seen posters have experience like Dubyam where they were different.
So, I guess its like any powder...lots can vary a bit.
I really like the ssc in certain cases especially w/light bullets.
I've got a tack driving 130 ttsx load in my 300 win mag at about 3550....and its plumb full of ssc.
