In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Options
Hodgdon Benchmark powder?
MosinNagantDisciple
Member Posts: 2,612
How does this stuff compare to H4895 and similar powders? Does it perform better or worse? What is the ideal cartridge to use this in?
This stuff is about the only rifle powder the local gunshop sells (there were a couple units of h4895, priced at $24 a pound instead of the $19 per pound of Benchmark. Ideally I would like to use Benchmark instead of paying through the nose for 4895.
This stuff is about the only rifle powder the local gunshop sells (there were a couple units of h4895, priced at $24 a pound instead of the $19 per pound of Benchmark. Ideally I would like to use Benchmark instead of paying through the nose for 4895.
Comments
From a promotional piece:
"Hodgdon Powder Company is the leader in gunpowder and has introduced Benchmark, a precision rifle propellant, new this year. As the name implies, it is developed for precision cartridges. Benchmark powder is suited for bench rest and varmint cartridges like 222 rem. 6mm, 22ppc, 6mmBR, and my favorite, 223 Remmington. Benchmark powder works well with 308 caliber light to medium weight bullets and is also a good choice for 30-30win.and more.
Benchmark is a very short and fine extruded powder, which is suited for powder measures on progressive presses to deliver exact weight every round."
Based on what Hodgdon has released as their goals for this powder, the largest market for this powder was supposed to be those rabid benchrest folks who buy powder by the ton and burn out barrels by the end of one season. That's not what I've been seeing, in fact I haven't seen a lot of movement towards this powder by any part of the market and that might be a mistake on our part.
The primary use was supposed to be the 6mmPPC, 22 PPC, 6BR, etc. for the target shooters. But Benchmark doesn't seem to have made that many inroads with the finicky bench shooters. This can be attributed to a couple of simple reasons. Benchrest folks buy powder in large quantities and it may take them several years to catch up with the newer releases unless a powder is truly spectacular in performance. Which is the second point, this powder is not proving to be spectacular, at least not to the point where shooters are selling their current powder supply in order to buy Benchmark.
I tried it in the small capacity target cartridges and didn't see any dramatic improvement, in fact it was about even, so that tells me I can stay with what I have. But what it doesn't prove is the better use as far as I'm concerned; bigger case capacities for larger diameter bullets. Starting with .308 Win. and the lighter bullets, Benchmark gives good performances but go up in caliber to the .338 Federal and the obsolete .358 Win. and you see some very good comparisons to existing powders. It seems to do well in the .35 Whelen and the wildcat .375 Whelen with the lighter bullets but it's too hot for the .338-06. Go bigger yet and try this powder in cases such as the .416 Chatsworth-Taylor or the .458 Win. Mag. and you'll see where this powder belongs.
It is easy to meter and very consistant overall. I didn't take time to check out the claims of temperature insensitivity so I can't say.
It is 'faster' than the H-4895 and burns with a little better efficiency.
Best.
As a relative question to this I hope, How do you think it would compare in The TCU cartridges? I have burning up 4895 and XMR2015 in the two different weights I shoot from my 7mm TCU. But wondered about what you think about this. Thanks,
When comparing these three powders in the T/CU case (.223 Rem.), it really depends on the bullet weight. This powder group is the opposite of the abstract issued by Hodgdon where Benchmark functions better with light bullets in the example cases. In the 7mm T/CU it's the heavier bullets that gain in performance. I was loading 162 gr. AMAX into a very similar case and getting less drift and better energy transfer than if I went with the lighter bullets. The powders were ranked 2015 best, Benchmark second and H-4895 third. This certainly makes Benchmark a viable powder choice but I see the 2015 being better with the heavier bullets. The test I would make would be for accuracy and wind drift at the ranges you need to shoot.
Best.
I'll give that a shot. I've been using the 2015 with the 100gr. bullets and getting 2350 out of my 14" barrel. And 4895 with 140 gr. bullets. and getting around 1950-2000. Never tried it the other way around. Probably will get a pound of Benchmark to see how it performs. I'm thinking about getting a 6mm or 6.5mm and have another caliber to work with there. -Thanks
I had no idea you were shooting a bullet so light in a 14" barrel and that changes the complexion of the situation. I don't want to interfer with your loads as they are currently but in retrospect, I would suggest a faster powder for the 100 gr. bullet. Even the 2015 is pinch slow for that light of a bullet in the .223 case. Benchmark is way too slow and inefficient for that combination. I don't know what you have on hand but you could consider:
Re-7
H-4227
V V N-120
If you do try the 162 gr. AMAX, I think from the standpoint of efficiency, you could do just as good if not better with the 2015. This isn't about more velocity since the barrel length is the controlling factor for that in this case. It's about not wasting significant amounts of powder with each shot. With the cost of components going up every day, wasting 10% of each load seems to be a bit much in my opinion.
Best.
Thanks for the information. I'll look into that. As you mentioned the cost of stuff going up...and the airlines taking my fun money away...it really does matter how much goes down the barrel. The 4895 with 140's is doing pretty good. I think I only load them to 25.5. I don't have a muzzle brake so not really into pounding my hands. I know another shooter who likes the 154's. I always had questions about the 162's stabilizing, and since I like so much in my 7x57 I never even tried them. I will give that a shot. Thank you again