Leverevolution for 223 AI powder

[shaun1826]

I’ve seen the usual 8208 xbr and Varget discussed alot as being great powders for 223 AI. In searching I’ve seen a few people mention Leverevolution as a great powder, but not nearly as many as the 2 aforementioned powders. Just curious as to if there are other people out there using it and what your thoughts are? Leverevolution seems to have much better availability.

Best,
Shaun

 

[rweaver00geo]

With a heavy bullet I dont see why not. Johnny's reloading bench had a pretty good go with it in 556.

Cloning Mk262 - pt 8 - LeverEvolution and 2000-MR​

 

[shaun1826]

Anybody else using it?

 

[FuhQ]

It's essentially a spherical ball version of Varget. It's basically the same thing. The burn rates on the Hodgdon charts show it damn-near identical to Varget. I've tested it in place of Varget and got very similar results in a .308 Win pushing 168gr Nosler CC's from the same exact brass fired from the same gun, same primers, from the same batch, etc..., and only neck-sized for reloading. Results = Negligible variation.

I recommend working up the load of course, don't just drop it in, because each lot varies... So, do your load workup, but yes, it's very similar to Varget, just small spherical ball kernels, instead of extruded grains like Varget. In cases that have minimal capacity, like .223/5.56, 6.5 Grendel, etc... it works great for packing a compressed load in there when you have to seat long bullets deep to fit in the magazine.

Another good powder that gets overlooked is CFE-223. I use it alot for my 6.5 Grendel.

 

[Yondering]

It's essentially a spherical ball version of Varget. It's basically the same thing.

No it isn't. Not even remotely close, and there's a lot more going on than burn rate charts can tell you. Please don't spread bad information like this online. You may have found a particular combination that shows similar velocity per grain within Varget load data, but the pressure curves are not the same and Lever is capable of far higher velocity within pressure limits. As a point of fact from my experience using Lever in a bunch of different cartridges, maximum loads with Varget are generally in the neighborhood of starting loads with Lever. If you're using Varget data for Lever, you're not getting the benefits of what Lever can do, and only the downsides of a temp sensitive powder burning at low pressure.

To the OP - yes Lever does work well for 5.56, particularly heavier bullets about 65+gr since you'll run out of capacity before hitting max pressure or velocity with lighter bullets. There is no published Lever data for 5.56 at this point, but if you work up loads you'll find it's capable of higher velocity than any other powder in this application (and a number of others, it's actually a very versatile powder). Be aware with most loads you're giving up temperature stability in exchange for higher velocity potential and easy metering.

Also, Lever works best near max pressure; that's where you'll find low ES/SD and good accuracy, along with cleaner burning. If you're looking for Varget-level velocity, there are other powders that'll work better.

 

[FuhQ]

No it isn't. Not even remotely close, and there's a lot more going on than burn rate charts can tell you. Please don't spread bad information like this online. You may have found a particular combination that shows similar velocity per grain within Varget load data, but the pressure curves are not the same and Lever is capable of far higher velocity within pressure limits. As a point of fact from my experience using Lever in a bunch of different cartridges, maximum loads with Varget are generally in the neighborhood of starting loads with Lever. If you're using Varget data for Lever, you're not getting the benefits of what Lever can do, and only the downsides of a temp sensitive powder burning at low pressure.

To the OP - yes Lever does work well for 5.56, particularly heavier bullets about 65+gr since you'll run out of capacity before hitting max pressure or velocity with lighter bullets. There is no published Lever data for 5.56 at this point, but if you work up loads you'll find it's capable of higher velocity than any other powder in this application (and a number of others, it's actually a very versatile powder). Be aware with most loads you're giving up temperature stability in exchange for higher velocity potential and easy metering.

Also, Lever works best near max pressure; that's where you'll find low ES/SD and good accuracy, along with cleaner burning. If you're looking for Varget-level velocity, there are other powders that'll work better.

They might be dissimilar, according to Hodgdon, but that doesn't change the fact that they act damn-near identical. And they have proven to work very similarly for me in my tests...As well as MANY other people's tests, with similar results. The facts are, their burn rates are similar. And my test results were similar with the same charge weights in the same cartridge, same exact neck-sized brass, same primers, same bullets, seated to the same depth, in the same gun...Just 2 different powders with similar burn rates. Granted, neither were compressed loads, so...I can't give any conformation to your statements about pressure curves, etc... I don't own a PT-II.

And not that it really means much, but do a google search... Even on places like Accurate Shooter (where pro's and BR and comp shooters hangout), there's many folks who have had the same results as me.

 

[Yondering]

Granted, neither were compressed loads, so...

Good grief. The ONLY useful or accurate thing you said here was that last line, and it’s a huge point. You were comparing underpowered Lever loads to probably normal to max Varget loads.

Lever might act similar at low pressure, but that is all. Beyond that Lever is very different from Varget, which you’d know if you’d done some load workups and found max. Like I said, max loads for Varget are approximately starting loads for Lever.

For example with a 77gr Sierra in 5.56, Lever can normally hit around 2850 fps in a 16” and 2950 in a 20” safely with good brass life using LC. Varget can’t do anywhere close to that, because they’re not at all similar. Also here’s a small detail- those are compressed loads near or at max. Take Varget to max and see the difference.

It’s foolish to say powders are similar (or worse, that “Lever is basically a ball powder version of Varget”) based on a burn rate chart. Burn rate is not a constant (why do you think different burn rate charts disagree) and there’s more going on than just order in a list. These two powders perform very differently in full power loads, and you didn’t compare full power loads in each powder. You’ve completely ignored details like temp stability and density, and how they behave when pressures approach max.

If you want to say Lever is similar to something, that powder is CFE223. They still are not the same, but CFE223 is closer to Lever than anything else available to us. Varget has no similarities to either one.

 

[FuhQ]

Good grief. The ONLY useful or accurate thing you said here was that last line, and it’s a huge point. You were comparing underpowered Lever loads to probably normal to max Varget loads.

Lever might act similar at low pressure, but that is all. Beyond that Lever is very different from Varget, which you’d know if you’d done some load workups and found max. Like I said, max loads for Varget are approximately starting loads for Lever.

For example with a 77gr Sierra in 5.56, Lever can normally hit around 2850 fps in a 16” and 2950 in a 20” safely with good brass life using LC. Varget can’t do anywhere close to that, because they’re not at all similar. Also here’s a small detail- those are compressed loads near or at max. Take Varget to max and see the difference.

It’s foolish to say powders are similar (or worse, that “Lever is basically a ball powder version of Varget”) based on a burn rate chart. Burn rate is not a constant (why do you think different burn rate charts disagree) and there’s more going on than just order in a list. These two powders perform very differently in full power loads, and you didn’t compare full power loads in each powder. You’ve completely ignored details like temp stability and density, and how they behave when pressures approach max.

If you want to say Lever is similar to something, that powder is CFE223. They still are not the same, but CFE223 is closer to Lever than anything else available to us. Varget has no similarities to either one.

Take a breath. I guess all those professionals that also tested it and compared it Varget, and had similar results to mine, don't know shit either...

 

[6.5SH]

The other problem with a pat statement like that is one is temperature insensitive and the other isn't. If want to go a step further with the CFE comparison you have one that is very temp sensitive in hot weather (dangerously so).

 

[Yondering]

Take a breath. I guess all those professionals that also tested it and compared it Varget, and had similar results to mine, don't know shit either...

OK I'll make it simple for you:

You made a bad assumption based on limited data out of inexperience and ignorance. Please don't spread that around to others who also don't know any better. You can thank those supposed "professionals" for spreading it to you in the first place, and yourself for not understanding the context.

I understand that you found a particular working range where Varget and Lever gave similar results. But Lever is capable of much higher velocity than Varget and has very different characteristics when both are utilized to their potential. They are definitely not "basically the same powder".

-----------------

For the OP - in heavy bullet 5.56 loads, Lever will give you higher velocity than any other powder I'm aware of, and deliver very low ES/SD at those levels. I'm willing to share my own data for various bullets if you want some direction, but you'll need to work up your own loads of course. There is no published data for 5.56 and Lever, although you can see an example of it's potential in Hornady's 6mm ARC data.

The other thing to be aware of is the amount of gas (really pressure and duration at the gas port) it generates, if you're shooting an AR. A rifle tuned for Varget, 8208, or other stick powders like that tends to be pretty overgassed with full power Lever loads, and that can be a deal breaker for a lot of applications unless you're willing/able to tune the rifle for Lever loads. Some combinations are worse than others of course.

 

[FuhQ]

OK I'll make it simple for you:

You made a bad assumption based on limited data out of inexperience and ignorance. Please don't spread that around to others who also don't know any better. You can thank those supposed "professionals" for spreading it to you in the first place, and yourself for not understanding the context.

I understand that you found a particular working range where Varget and Lever gave similar results. But Lever is capable of much higher velocity than Varget and has very different characteristics when both are utilized to their potential. They are definitely not "basically the same powder".

You know what...I'm going to let you have this one... Because I'm tired of hearing you slapping away on the keyboard. You have NO idea about my experience and what I do and don't know. All you know is what you assume. And as a matter of fact, I tried Lever many years ago, before I ever googled it. Nobody even told me about it. I found it on the shelf at my LGS when everything else was gone. TONS of Lever sitting there. So I went home, did some research. Found it was similar to Varget in burn rate, bought a jug tried it. Worked great for me as substitute for Varget in that load. I haven't tried it many other things, but all the bullet weights I've tried, it was very similar to Varget, even in the higher thresholds with heavier bullets at compressed Varget load charges.

I never meant to insinuate it's the exact same powder, else it wouldn't be named something entirely different. But can it function in the same rolls? Sure, from my tests it can. CFE-223 is slightly slower than Varget in my tests, and works great in my 6.5 Grendel and 5.56 loads.

Now, as far as temp stability, I haven't tested Lever and CFE much in big swings. I have tested Varget extensively in all conditions...Along with many other powders. The worst of the bunch for me was Alliant Reloader 19 and 22 being the worst offenders of temp sensitivity. Hell, there were plenty of times I couldn't even H1000 or Retumbo to stabilize...

 

[shaun1826]

@Yondering

I would be interested in your loads over whatever bullets you have tried Leverevolution in. I have a new 1:7 twist Bartlein barrel being finished at 22” for a bolt gun and will be fireforming with 60 Vmax’s then using 75 A-max’s for all of my shooting for awhile as I found 2,400 of them recently. I will be shooting suppressed.
Thanks

 

[Yondering]

@Yondering

I would be interested in your loads over whatever bullets you have tried Leverevolution in. I have a new 1:7 twist Bartlein barrel being finished at 22” for a bolt gun and will be fireforming with 60 Vmax’s then using 75 A-max’s for all of my shooting for awhile as I found 2,400 of them recently. I will be shooting suppressed.
Thanks

I'll send you a PM. I do have some 75gr A-max data but that bullet didn't shoot well at all in the 1:8 twist Tikka I was testing it in, so you'll have to adjust it for your needs. The best load seemed to be around 2900 fps though. I assume you must be shooting these in a bolt gun then, with that bullet?

 

[shaun1826]

Yes, I’m doing an Impact action build. I also just found that Hodgdon lists load data for 224 Valkyerie for Leverevolution.

 

[DarinC]

I’d love your load data as well, to be used as a starting point/reference of course

Thank you!

 

[Mike Casselton]

No it isn't. Not even remotely close, and there's a lot more going on than burn rate charts can tell you. Please don't spread bad information like this online. You may have found a particular combination that shows similar velocity per grain within Varget load data, but the pressure curves are not the same and Lever is capable of far higher velocity within pressure limits. As a point of fact from my experience using Lever in a bunch of different cartridges, maximum loads with Varget are generally in the neighborhood of starting loads with Lever. If you're using Varget data for Lever, you're not getting the benefits of what Lever can do, and only the downsides of a temp sensitive powder burning at low pressure.

To the OP - yes Lever does work well for 5.56, particularly heavier bullets about 65+gr since you'll run out of capacity before hitting max pressure or velocity with lighter bullets. There is no published Lever data for 5.56 at this point, but if you work up loads you'll find it's capable of higher velocity than any other powder in this application (and a number of others, it's actually a very versatile powder). Be aware with most loads you're giving up temperature stability in exchange for higher velocity potential and easy metering.

Also, Lever works best near max pressure; that's where you'll find low ES/SD and good accuracy, along with cleaner burning. If you're looking for Varget-level velocity, there are other powders that'll work better.

Based on the couple of burn rate charts I've looked at it appears to be very close to B-LC2.

Have you made any comparisons directly to it?
If so, how close is the performance?

ETA: I've used B-LC2 in 30-30, 223 and 308 AR-10.
It was over gassed in the AR.

 

[Yondering]

Based on the couple of burn rate charts I've looked at it appears to be very close to B-LC2.

Have you made any comparisons directly to it?
If so, how close is the performance?

ETA: I've used B-LC2 in 30-30, 223 and 308 AR-10.
It was over gassed in the AR.

Lever does appear to be in the same ballpark for burn rate, although CFE223 is still the closest IME. I don’t have any direct load data comparisons to BLC2 but Hornady’s 224 Valkyrie data does have all three of these powders. For most of the bullet weights in that data, BLC2 and Lever run really close grain for grain but Lever has a higher ceiling. That’s another good example where burn rate doesn’t tell the whole story.

The 88gr data has something weird going on with Lever though that doesn’t match up with the other bullet weights, easy to see if you look at the relationships between it and other powders. Could be a case capacity issue I guess, but it’s also possible the data is messed up. Hard to know without more info, and I don’t load the Valkyrie.

An important point though is that Lever really behaves a bit differently than anything else I know of; I’ve heard that it’s probably a blend of several different burn rates, and whether that’s accurate or not, it does give a good impression of it’s behavior. It generally seems to have a higher ceiling than other similar powders, but it also tends to settle down at max pressure and gives really good consistency instead of spiking and going wild like some others. YMMV of course.

 

[Yondering]

I’d love your load data as well, to be used as a starting point/reference of course

Thank you!

Ok I’ll send you a pm.

 

[Mike Casselton]

Lever does appear to be in the same ballpark for burn rate, although CFE223 is still the closest IME. I don’t have any direct load data comparisons to BLC2 but Hornady’s 224 Valkyrie data does have all three of these powders. For most of the bullet weights in that data, BLC2 and Lever run really close grain for grain but Lever has a higher ceiling. That’s another good example where burn rate doesn’t tell the whole story.

The 88gr data has something weird going on with Lever though that doesn’t match up with the other bullet weights, easy to see if you look at the relationships between it and other powders. Could be a case capacity issue I guess, but it’s also possible the data is messed up. Hard to know without more info, and I don’t load the Valkyrie.

An important point though is that Lever really behaves a bit differently than anything else I know of; I’ve heard that it’s probably a blend of several different burn rates, and whether that’s accurate or not, it does give a good impression of it’s behavior. It generally seems to have a higher ceiling than other similar powders, but it also tends to settle down at max pressure and gives really good consistency instead of spiking and going wild like some others. YMMV of course.

I grabbed an 8lb container for a buddy a couple of weeks ago for his 18" 6 ARC.
Like most ball type powders, it was ho hum until he got very near max charges.
He said the velocity was crazy good. ES/SD numbers the best he'd seen.

His description reminded me of how H-380 works in the 22-250.

 

[Yondering]

I grabbed an 8lb container for a buddy a couple of weeks ago for his 18" 6 ARC.
Like most ball type powders, it was ho hum until he got very near max charges.
He said the velocity was crazy good. ES/SD numbers the best he'd seen.

His description reminded me of how H-380 works in the 22-250.

Just to clarify- are you talking about Lever or BLC2?

I shoot the 243 LBC which is one of the 6mm Grendel variants that came before the 6 ARC, but effectively the same thing. That’s been my observation with Lever too in this cartridge for all bullet weights above 90gr, and it’s all I use any more. The performance is pretty amazing.

 

[Mike Casselton]

Lever. Sorry for the confusion.
Typing on a phone is something I hate, but I use it more than anything else.
Sometimes being brief causes the cornfuzzling.

 

[Gtscotty]

Ok I’ll send you a pm.

I'd like to see it too if possible, just picked up a jug of Lever to try in 6mm ARC, but I'd love to find cross applications in my .223 and Grendel as well.