» Advanced

Go Back   Shooters Forum > Handloading > Handloading Procedures/Practices
Register FAQ Members List Donate Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read



Like Tree5Likes

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-21-2012, 01:19 PM
montanaboy's Avatar
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Fountain Valley CA
Posts: 59
Hodgdon's CFE 223


Registered Users do not see the above ad.


Howdy fellas.

It’s Saturday afternoon in sunny Southern California the wife is at the hairdresser’s and I am bored as heck. However that does not mean I can’t come up with a dumb question or two, to wit…

Have any of you guys used Hogdon’s new CFE 223?

If we are to believe the advertisements it is the cleanest burning stuff known to man. The more you shoot it the cleaner your gun becomes. Just kiddin of course but would like to know what kind of results some of you good old boys have had.

CFE supposedly stands for "Copper Fouling Eraser." heh,heh

Last edited by montanaboy; 04-21-2012 at 01:22 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-21-2012, 09:30 PM
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: O'Fallon, MO
Posts: 276
I read a review of it which said that it won't clean a dirty, copper-fouled rifle, but it will keep a clean one pretty clean.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-22-2012, 06:42 PM
land&groove's Avatar
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: columbia plateau
Posts: 152
I bought a pound yesterday and started load development in my .223 Rem bolt gun.
Only have a few rounds downrange now, But I'll keep updating as things progress this week.
Smells like 'good' powder after firing.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-23-2012, 09:14 AM
recoil junky's Avatar
Elk Whisperer (Super Moderator)
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Craig CO. Elk Hunting Capitol of the World!
Posts: 4,616
It's supposed to be the next best thing to sliced bread. An old pharrt I know has tried it and says it's pretty good stuff but not as accurate as Benchmark. It does keep your barrel plretty clear of copper, but you still need to clean your rifle.

RJ
__________________
Keep your powder dry and when you go afield take the kids and please..........wear your seat belts.
I am the ORIGINAL recoil junky , often imitated, but never equalled.
Proud Father of a SoldierMedic in The 82nd Airborne 325thAIR White Falcons
IUOE Local #9
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-23-2012, 12:38 PM
Rocky Raab's Avatar
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Utah
Posts: 3,321
Folks, we have very nearly 200 different propellants to choose from today. There simply aren't any missing pickets in that fence. So to introduce anything new and exciting, companies are down to creating what I'll call "niche" propellants. Instead of general-purpose products, these new powders are very specifically targeted.

We have a powder designed for three or four lever-action rounds. We have a powder that duplicates a few factory magnum loadings. We have a powder that is what the factory actually uses in some cartridges. And now we have a powder that is so specific it has the name of the intended cartridge included in its own name.

Several existing powders already contain the tin or bismuth compounds that remove copper fouling - such inclusions are mentioned in the military contracts the powders were designed for. Its just that Hodgdon was the first to include that claim in its advertising. If you are a high-volume .223 shooter, this is probably a good powder to look at. If you shoot something else, it's probably not worth your time, effort or money.
nifrand likes this.
__________________
To see my books and articles, just Google my name.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-23-2012, 02:38 PM
montanaboy's Avatar
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Fountain Valley CA
Posts: 59
Great Post Rocky... thanks
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-25-2012, 10:54 AM
land&groove's Avatar
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: columbia plateau
Posts: 152
Just threw 100 rnds through my Ruger k77 mkII 223 Rem. Not as accurate as Benchmark, but seriously this is absoutley the cleanest powder I have ever fired!
When I pushed a patch of Butches through and let it set for 5 min. the next patch showed very little carbon and NO blue.
None.
Nada.
There seems to be tiny spheres mixed in with a fine ball powder. I don't know what is is, but I'm stepping out back to load and shoot some through my .308.
Keep you posted.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 04-26-2012, 09:01 AM
Darkker's Avatar
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Mesa, Washington
Posts: 1,680
Rocky is right-on with his post.
The Tin/Bismuth compounds are NOT a new military idea either, you can read about the French using them in Hatcher's Notebook.

At this point(I have been very busy, so I may have the number wrong at this moment) I am 99.9% sure that CFE223 is the very same powder as SMP-842. Which is the powder for the new all copper round, in the 5.56 Nato.

As Rocky stated they(compounds) have been in several powders for quite a long time. Win 748, 760 are two such that have had them for several decades. I am sure that there are others, just two that I am aware of.

Last edited by Darkker; 06-30-2012 at 07:22 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 04-26-2012, 07:15 PM
land&groove's Avatar
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: columbia plateau
Posts: 152
Darkker, SMP-846 sounds about right, however CFE 223 is WAY cleaner than Win 748! The ''secret ingredient'' in CFE 223 really does work, but out of my .223 rifle It's not as accurate as Benchmark, Varget, or even 748 for that matter. As I'm not currently shooting a S.A.W., and do not hope to be anytime soon, I think I'll stick to Benchmark.
My .308 is a horse of a different color. This 700 has always copper fouled, and if I can get acceptable accuracy for Big Game, this powder may replace RE-15 as my primary powder for this rifle. (RE-15 & BLC 2 remind me of cleaning my Hawkin 50 cal. with black).
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 04-27-2012, 05:27 AM
Rocky Raab's Avatar
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Utah
Posts: 3,321
Ramshot TAC may be the .308 and .223 powder for you. It has a copper reducer and an anti-flash additive, is in the "748/BLC2/H335" burn rate area, is spherical - and is usually a bit less expensive than other powders. I've gone 200+ rounds in a .223 with no need to clean whatsoever.
__________________
To see my books and articles, just Google my name.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 04-27-2012, 08:07 AM
Darkker's Avatar
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Mesa, Washington
Posts: 1,680
Quote:
Originally Posted by land&groove View Post
Darkker, SMP-846 sounds about right, however CFE 223 is WAY cleaner than Win 748! .
It has been my experience(in my 308 & 223's) That 748 is a loose powder fouler(not copper) at LOW pressures only. Using my Speer, multiple Hornady, Lee, Nosler, AND HODGDON data, Win 748 info is HORRIBLY low pressure. You can verify this at Hodgy's site.
Sierra's manual #5 lists 748 for the 175 SMK(308) at (for my gun) relatively current pressures.

If you are running full pressures(not max) then the powder burns quite cleanly, IMO.
I like 748 for accuracy, no copper fouling, and much cooler barrel temps, compared to Varget.

YMMV
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 04-28-2012, 09:24 AM
land&groove's Avatar
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: columbia plateau
Posts: 152
Rocky, thanks fr the info on Ramshot Tac. That's one of the powder lines I need to investigate next.
Darkker, I'm not sure what to think about 748 anymore. Why is there only ONE recomended load for each bullet weight on hodgdons website? Why is there no data for "light" bullets in that same database anymore?
For many years this used to be my go to powder for .223, but anymore I'm a bit confused?
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 04-28-2012, 04:01 PM
MZ5's Avatar
MZ5 MZ5 is online now
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Arizona, USA
Posts: 1,702
Quote:
Originally Posted by land&groove View Post
...about 748... Why is there only ONE recomended load for each bullet weight on hodgdons website? Why is there no data for "light" bullets in that same database anymore?
Because Olin isn't supporting the powder properly, and Hodgy doesn't feel like stepping up/in to support it, either. They're probably paying via contract for Olin to support it, so I can see where it would grate on them to be doing the work Olin is supposed to be doing.

Happily, at least Sierra and Lyman are still doing a good job supporting it. I do think Sierra got a FAST lot of the stuff for their 223 testing, though, as I don't believe I've ever had a lot as fast (run out of pressure room at such low velocities) as that. Their 308 lot seems closer to average.
__________________
"A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have." --Gerald Ford
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 05-04-2012, 01:23 PM
Darkker's Avatar
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Mesa, Washington
Posts: 1,680
L&G,
Yes, it is a "contract issue" as MZ5 stated.
The last time I spoke with Hodgy about it a few months back.
According to Hodgdon, the deal is that they(Hodgdon) have to promote and distribute the Winchester named products; while Ohlin/Winny have to provide the product support(data, etc). As Ohlin has not been doing that(according to Hodgy) Hodgdon stopped posting the (now old) data on file, asked for current data and what they recieved; they posted to their website.

It strikes me as a little odd that the data provided would be such low pressures. What I suspect is that what was posted is just backed-off to low pressures, because no one(Ohlin/Hodgy) has bothered to test any recent lots of the Winchester powder being made in St. Marks(Not Ohlin's mill anymore). As MZ5 stated, I believe that Sierra(don't have the lyman book) has current data. I haven't had time this year yet to test the 223 data; Just using the old time stand-by of 26.6 grains with a 55gr. In my AR that is definitely NOT a max load, 26.6 cycles the action so softly that I didn't think it actually cycled the first few shots. However in my 308, I think that Sierra's data is spot-on.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 05-13-2012, 10:51 PM
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: California
Posts: 207
to speak on fouling. I agree with those who say higher pressure in some powders cause less fouling. I shoot 25gr of H4198 (max) with a 50gr bullet. almost no fouling to speak of. i clean every 100 - 200 rounds and most of the time I feel like Im cleaning for the sake of cleaning.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 05-14-2012, 03:20 AM
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Mooresville, IN
Posts: 9,020
Quote:
Originally Posted by varminter View Post
to speak on fouling. I agree with those who say higher pressure in some powders cause less fouling. I shoot 25gr of H4198 (max) with a 50gr bullet. almost no fouling to speak of. i clean every 100 - 200 rounds and most of the time I feel like Im cleaning for the sake of cleaning.
This has been my experience with various powders for all kinds of guns. You're going to wind up cleaning your gun because it needs it...or for the sake of cleaning. That's why I've never really worried about whether or not a powder is "clean" or "dirty". My guns will be cleaned, regardless.
__________________
Ask me about QDMA.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 05-14-2012, 07:24 AM
rifter's Avatar
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Northwest Illinois
Posts: 932
Quote:
Originally Posted by land&groove View Post
Darkker, SMP-846 sounds about right, however CFE 223 is WAY cleaner than Win 748! The ''secret ingredient'' in CFE 223 really does work, but out of my .223 rifle It's not as accurate as Benchmark, Varget, or even 748 for that matter. As I'm not currently shooting a S.A.W., and do not hope to be anytime soon, I think I'll stick to Benchmark.
My .308 is a horse of a different color. This 700 has always copper fouled, and if I can get acceptable accuracy for Big Game, this powder may replace RE-15 as my primary powder for this rifle. (RE-15 & BLC 2 remind me of cleaning my Hawkin 50 cal. with black).
Curiosity compels me to ask if by chance you have a rough bore in that 700? Every rifle I've ever owned with a rough bore has been a bear to keep copper fouling out of. You might try hand lapping it to polish it up. That helps quite a bit.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
Illinois State Rifle Assoc.
U.S. Navy Vietnam

Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice - Barry Goldwater
When Injustice becomes Law, Resistance becomes Duty - Thomas Jefferson
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 05-14-2012, 08:37 PM
land&groove's Avatar
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: columbia plateau
Posts: 152
Rifter, my 700 was probably the last barrel that was done before they changed reamers!
Never hand lapped a barrel, how do you go about this?
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 05-14-2012, 10:24 PM
rifter's Avatar
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Northwest Illinois
Posts: 932
Quote:
Originally Posted by land&groove View Post
Rifter, my 700 was probably the last barrel that was done before they changed reamers!
Never hand lapped a barrel, how do you go about this?
While I've not physically done it myself (always let my gunsmith do it), here's a link to an article that explains the process. You can also do "fire lapping" which is essentially the same idea except you do it by shooting specially prepared bullets.

Lapping A Rifle Barrel
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
Illinois State Rifle Assoc.
U.S. Navy Vietnam

Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice - Barry Goldwater
When Injustice becomes Law, Resistance becomes Duty - Thomas Jefferson
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 05-20-2012, 10:32 AM
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: California
Posts: 207
Read up on lapping. there is alot of great information in theses forums on the subject. i would personally firelap it but its your descision.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
204 or 223 in TC contender? oldred Single-Shot Rifles 31 06-22-2014 07:40 AM
Lubing 223 cases for a Progressive loader Dusty42597 Handloading Equipment 11 12-08-2009 02:19 PM
Thought I'd share some 223 brass weight info flashhole Handloading Procedures/Practices 5 11-29-2009 03:12 PM
which calibre?? 222 vs 223 bunny_busta Rifles and Rifle Cartridges 18 02-21-2009 11:27 AM
Loading the 223 Remington - powder choices flashhole Handloading Procedures/Practices 31 07-20-2008 05:57 PM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:38 PM.

< Contact Us - Shooters Forum - Archive >

 
 

All Content & Design Copyright © 1999-2002 Beartooth Bullets, All Rights Reserved
View Privacy Policy | Contact Webmaster | Legal Information
Website Design & Development By Exbabylon Internet Solutions
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2