Alliant 300MP

  • 2.7K Views
  • Last Post 21 February 2011
J.Louis posted this 10 November 2010

In testing the new Alliant 300MP I started low and worked my up to the velocity my bullet has liked over the years and verified the accuracy on a sighter target. I then shot three ten shot groups at 200yds. Target 1 group size .811, Target 2 group size 1.186 and Target 3 group size 1.921. Target 1 Hi 1477.1, Lo 1466.0, SD 3.7, CV .25%, MAD 2.8, CV .19%, ES 11.1 Average Velocity 1472.2. I did not experience any unexplained shots which has been typical with other powders. The mirage was picking up as I moved through each 10 shot target. The vertical remained the same for all three targets but the horizontal grew due to my inability at times to correctly read the mirage. I was shooting with a couple of friends one of which shoots a 32 based on the 32-20 case via Paul Shuttleworth and this powder did not work for him. In my search for a new powder I also  had on hand some newly purchased AA4100 to try. This powder did not work for me as I could not get a handle on controlling the vertical which was extreme. My shooting buddy gave it a run for the money in his 32-20 and it performed extremely well shooting back to back 10 shot groups with very minimal vertical and outstanding accuracy as well as group size. The AA4100 out performed his AA-9 by quite a margin. I shoot a CPA Traditional Model 52 in 32-40, Dell 59C, Rem 91/2 Primers, Bullet Breach 10 thous. beyond the start of the lands, 1/16 cork wad inserted into the breach seater and seated behind the base of the bullet. Due to the increased air space created by my increased seating depth my powder charges are usually higher than what is typical. The above chronograph data and the load I have settled on for future testing is 14.4 grains of 300MP. The bullet used was the Hoch 322-200 tapered cast 1-25 and weighs 207.9 cast at 800 degrees. Barrel is a 28 inch half octagon Douglas premium with a 1-15 twist.

J.Louis

Back to top

Attached Files

Order By: Standard | Newest | Votes
4060may posted this 11 November 2010

After reading about your testing on the ASSRA sight and now posting here, I decided to give it a try, I have two breach seating rifles, both Ruger's one in 32-40 and one in 32 Thompson, the 32-40 is  1-14twist Douglas barrel with a 1deg throat for seating the other is a rifle built by Larry Thompson and Tim Mather, is is a double set trigger no.3 Ruger with a breach seat only chamber, the case is the same dia as the bullet..the barrel is Douglas 1-16 twist.. the moulds were made by Jerry Barnett, one is 183gr at 1-30, and the other is 203gr 1-30, pan lubed with Darr lube/STP not sized

I normally shoot WC680 in the No.3 but it is no longer available and AA1680 just isn't the same, I started using WC820 in both rifles and the accuracy has returned, but now I am almost out of WC820 and am looking for a replacement...

Went to the range yesterday, No.1 Ruger, 32-40, Douglas 1-14 twist cut the same as the Varmint barrel removed from the action, I think 26” long

Started with 13.6 gr, ended up with 14.2 gr with floral foam wad on the end of the case, to prevent dumping the powder in the action, really a bad situation with a Ruger No.1.. only had time to shoot 100yds, first group was 5 shots 1.1", the second group was 6 shots .680 round, as the charge went up the powder burned cleaner, at 14.2 gr the group was 5 shots .75 high .310 wide

I did get to shoot 5 rounds at 200yds, but there wasn't a round target, just a painted 200M chicken, so I shot at the nose, three rounds were touching and two went low 1.5"

Looks like this may be the powder,  thanks for the heads up.

My friend uses No.9 and WC820 in his Enfield and M39 Finn, he tried this powder yesterday and was impress with the consistency of it....

One thing tho, this powder is a REALLY FINE Ball powder, wonder if it will work in a loose powder measure...

Attached Files

J.Louis posted this 11 November 2010

Congratulations!

I am currently using 14.4 Grs. with an average vel. of 1474 and I am still in the testing stages as I now have 8lbs on hand.

To date this load is working very well and I have found that I only have to adjust a tenth of a grain either up or down to keep it in tune.

J.Louis

Attached Files

4060may posted this 11 November 2010

If it stays warm enough here, I will get out next week for more tests.. Chrono if I remember to put in the car..

Attached Files

J.Louis posted this 28 November 2010

I changed by breach seating depth to 2.187 from the back of the case and I had to drop my charge to 13.7grs to keep it in tune. Less case volume equates to less powder required to achieve the same velocity.

Last Friday I had a very interesting conversation with Barry Darr and Paul Schuttleworth ( CPA Rifles ) on the subject of seating depths and I must say the change I made based on their recommendations was a definite improvement.

J.Louis

Attached Files

4060may posted this 28 November 2010

I haven't been able to get out yet. been busy shooting Silhouette matches and Muzzleloader round ball matches and now it's 28* outside. The ML matches are from a heated building 35yds OH. what a hoot, groceries are the prizes... The oldest continuous gun club in Ohio, founded in 1812.. back to the 300mp Has anyone figured the burning rate of 300MP yet, in the little testing i have done it seems close to WC680..

How far is the bullet from the end of the case?  on my 32-40 it's .040 and not fully in the rifling, this gun has a breech seating throat, on the 32 Thompson it is .020 and fully engraved, this gun doesn't have a breech seat throat near as I can tell, I have never done a chamber cast.. The case has a 1” straight section the dia of the bullet. .321, as is the groove. I have tried using larger bullets but the case acts like a sizing die..Larry said it was an experimental chamber, I am not sure how many he built.

Would you divulge the conversation, I am interested..maybe i can get one up on “Buffalo Chips” Jerry DeVaudreuil

Chuck

Attached Files

J.Louis posted this 28 November 2010

300MP is a little slower burning than H110. None of the powders in this burn speed range are considered clean, but compared to its competitors, 300MP compares favorably.

Thanks for your note and have a nice day.

Ben Amonette Consumer Service Manager Alliant Powder Company

M

Attached Files

J.Louis posted this 28 November 2010

Chuck I just posted the approx. burn rate per my e-mail from Alliant.

Based on the Max. case length of 2.130 for the 32-40 I am .057 beyond that point. My rifle is also chambered for breach seating and I am using the Hoch 322-205 tapered bullet. My barrel is a Douglas premium with a groove dia. of .320 My current load utilizes the Rem. 91/2 Primers of which I have been using for several years now and I did have a chance to play around with the CCI 200 Mag primers but not long enough to provide a positive or negative opinion.

J.Louis

Attached Files

Michael Petrov posted this 20 February 2011

Thanks for the information regarding 300MP. I have gone from 4227 to AA-No.9 with good results but have been looking at 300MP.

My objective is using new powders is to find one that is CONSISTENT from lot to lot. When 4227 went from DuPont to IMR I spent more time trying to find the sweet spot than I did shooting.

I shoot plain base lead in single-shots most of the .32-(33)-40 class.

Attached Files

J Louis posted this 20 February 2011

Michael I have a more extensive post on my results with 300MP on the ASSRA Forum you might have to go back a couple of pages to catch up with it.

J.Louis

Attached Files

Michael Petrov posted this 21 February 2011

Thanks, I'll put on my helmet and flack jacket and sneak a peek.

Attached Files

Michael Petrov posted this 21 February 2011

J.Louis,

OK I went over and read your stuff, very interesting.

I have a couple of questions. I'm what many would call a traditionalist and shoot rifles with original Ballard actions. Do you have any idea of the pressure or pressure signs with the 300MP?

Being someone old school I have never used anything except large pistol primers in my schuetzen rifles. I was taught (right or wrong) that the pistol primers were easier on the older softer barrel.  This has worked well for the last four decades so I'm a little reluctant to change.

Your thoughts on the subject?

Attached Files

Close