Anybody else thinkin RL-17 is the new "do all" powder?

[Doyle]

We worked up some loads for my short barreled (18.5") .260 using RL-17 and Hornady 129grn SPs. Playing with Quickload, this combination gave the best theoretical results. Since I was already invested in this powder, I started playing with Quickload to see what other calibers I could use it for. To my surprise, it seems to be the most "universal" powder I have ever seen. Quickload shows it to be an ideal powder for everything from my 7mm-08 15" Encore pistol barrel to a 24" 30-06 to even a 24" .35 Whelen. The one thing I did notice was that RL-17 seems to work best when the bullet choice for that particular caliber was towards the heavy side of the range (fine with me - I like the better BC anyway). I tried substituting other powders that people have reported as their "pet loads" and Quickload showed RL-17 being equal or superior in almost every instance.

Of course, Quickload data is based on math. I'd love to hear from people who have actually used it at the range to see what it really does.

 

[PawPaw]

Reloder 17 is supposed to have the same burn speed and powder density as H4350, another very versatile powder. I've never used either powder, but my wife's sister shoots a custom .260 based on a Remington 700 action. Her husband did the work-up and got better consistency with H4350, but that's in her rifle with her barrel. She's shooting a 120 grain Nosler BT at about 2950 fps and has very good luck with that rifle and load.

I'm sure that RL17 is a fine powder. I use 15 in the .308 and 19 in the .30-06 with excellent results.

 

[Doodlebugger45]

I know the stated velocity numbers are pretty impressive. It's supposed to be about the same burn rate as 4350, which is very versatile except it is supposed to give higher velocities. However, I bought a pound of it awhile back and I have not been impressed with accuracy. I bought it mainly for the 270 WSM and 325 WSM but I also tried it in my .243 and 7 mm mags. I don't measure velocity, so I don't know what it did there but the accuracy was just mediocre compared to other loads I had developed for those rifles. I haven't given up on it just yet. There's always a lot of variables to try out when you experiment with a new powder.

 

[Doyle]

I just ran a Quickload test of RL-17 against H4350. My barrel length is 18.5" so that's what I'm using for a reference length. No adjusting OAL or seating depth and using a 129grn Hornady SP bullet.

Max SAAMI pressure is 60191. I kept increasing the load until the next higher .10 grn would push it over pressure.

Max load with H4350 is 44.4 grns. This give a load volumn of 103.2% so its slightly compressed. Percent burn is 96.75% and muzzle velocity is 2703fps.

Max load with RL-17 is 43.1 grns. This give a load volumn of 93.4%. Percent burn is 99.8%. This appears to mean the RL-17 has a slightly faster burn rate. Muzzle velocity is 2762.

Seems that it's pretty much a tossup - at least in theory and with the short barrel.

 

[Zak Smith]

It is denser and "effectively" slower than H4350, so you can get more velocity at a given max pressure.

I have used it extensively in .260 over the last two years, and my associates have used it extensively in .260 and 7mm WSM. Our results have been excellent. Barrels that used to be limited to 2800 with a 139gr Scenar can now shoot closer to 2900, or a bit over.

The only criticism I have heard from some shooters is the powder's temperature sensitivity; however, I have not had a problem with this myself.

 

[old roper]

I've been shooting it about 4yrs now and in my rifles it's been hit or miss. Right now it's my go to powder in the 284,270WSM,30-06 and it's shot good in 300WSM,280AI so-so in a 7x57,280 and couldn't get published velocity in another 30-06 with 150,165,180gr bullets.

Here is a comparison on a 284 using R-17/H-4350
http://www.6mmbr.com/gunweek095.html