Hogdon CFE 223 & CFE Pistol Frosting Bores?

Hi Folks,

When the CFE 223 was debuted, I read an in depth article where the writer used a bore scope.

The writer gave all of the benefits, but noted that the powder left the bore with an unusual “frosted” appearance after the gun was fully cleaned. Has anyone else noted this?

In lead bullet shooting (muzzleloading, BPCR, handguns) I have always understood that having mirror polished bore was a good thing. I am wondering if this “frosting” will in the long run be detrimental to a bore. I haven’t seen any more about this written or mentioned.

The CFE powders appear to be very versatile, easier to clean up after, and provide good accuracy. That little voice in the back of my head keeps saying, “Remember that frosted comment”. I’d like to try some CFE, but am still reluctant.

Best wishes, Marc

I did some looking just now, and it was a Dick Metcalf article. I mis-spoke. He said it was dull afterwards. Here is the quote....

"There was essentially zero copper fouling left by the CFE223 handloads. Even the area around the internal gas port, which usually draws considerable fouling in AR barrels, was free of any trace of copper residue. So was the leade into the rifling at the rear of the bore, where rifling compression pressure on the bullet is at its highest and hottest. The only thing I noticed was that the bore surface seemed to be somewhat dull and less reflective compared to its surface when freshly cleaned."

So, have any of you shot CFE a lot, and scoped afterwards?

Many thanks, Marc

I've never noticed it in CFE Pistol. Bore seems as shiny as ever. I've probably shot around 50K 9mm rounds loaded with CFE.

I shoot both CFE P and CFE R a lot in fact it has become my only powder except for my 357 mag loads. I don't have a bore scope just a bore light and the bores in all my guns clean up fine. He says, bore surface seemed to be somewhat dull and less reflective compared to its surface when freshly cleaned. Very true I think a freshly clean bore always looks the best. Don

Supposedly the way these powders work (and this technology actually goes back to the very beginnings of smokeless)
is to include a small amount of a metallic salt (like tin dioxide, etc.).
The tin, bismuth, etc. combines with the vaporized copper to form much more brittle alloys that then chip or rub off during fire the next time.
This could leave a small amount of this alloy depending on it's composition and the nature of the bullets used.
Some solvents may not completely dissolve the remains as well.
The powder folks are pretty secretive about the exact nature of the additives but tin was used starting way back in the first IMR powders ever made.
The CFE and Enduron powders all now include something like this.
The reason they were originally taken out of the military powders could be attributed to the shortage of tin during WWI or it's cost.
They can also reduce the over-all efficiency of the powder by taking up a little room that could be used for actual powder.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decoppering

Now that you mention it, I've noticed it in the muzzle of two 357s, both stainless. The bores didn't shine up with extra cleaning so I polished one with white rouge. Didn't make any difference and didn't want to get more aggressive. Doesn't seem to have any lasting effect.

The only thing I noticed was that the bore surface seemed to be somewhat dull and less reflective compared to its surface when freshly cleaned.

Click to expand...

I would suggest that you read this statement again more carefully. Because as written he is stating that the bore had a dull finish after shooting. In addition I would interpret that reference to it's appearance when freshly cleaned as meaning that simply cleaning the bore restores it to a nearly new appearance. BTW, I will also say that bit was rather poorly written and easy to misinterpret. So it may be 50/50 that either you or I could have misinterpreted that sentence.

As a user of both CFE Pistol and CFE223 I can report that it does make it easy to clean up a barrel to a like new appearance. Both powders also meter very very well. Not quite as well as H110 or Accurate #5 but very nearly as well. I can also report that my Shilen Barrel equipped AR15 is still shooting to sub 3/8 MOA levels after about 1200 rounds downrange. However that is a stainless steel barrel and if there are any corrosive compounds it these powders I would expect a stainless barrel would prove to be more resistant to corrosion. As for the CFE Pistol, currently the only caliber I use this powder with is 380 ACP, which may seem an odd choice until you look at the load tables for the 380. In my Sig Sauer P290 I haven't noted any issues with the condition of the bore but I've only run about 400 rounds through the P290 at this point. BTW, I confirmed last weekend that the P290-380 won't function reliably with any load below 2/10 grains under the absolute maximum and is actually more accurate with loads right at maximum.

The only downside I can report concerning CFE223 is that it plain won't function well with Nosler 60 grain Ballistic tip bullets at ANY charge level. Because the CFE makes cleanup real easy and because it meters wonderfully I really wanted it to work with these Nosler bullets. Unfortunately after testing loads at 1/10 grain increments from minimum to maximum I can only conclude that it just plain doesn't work with the Nosler bullet. Why this is the case I have no idea at all. However best accuracy produced with CFE223 was only 2 MOA and worst cast was at the maximum charge that produced 12 inch groups at 100 yards. Note, this same bullet loaded with Varget will shoot under 1/2 inch all day without even trying hard. Yeah, I am still scratching my head over this. If anyone had told me that a bullet loaded to a specific velocity would have drastically different accuracy with just a change in the powder I would have walked away thinking they were nuts.

On the plus side, with the 68 grain Hornady HP Match bullet CFE223 and Varget are basically interchangeable with 23.7 grains producing nearly identical accuracy and velocity. BTW, the Varget seems to have a slight edge in accuracy but at most the difference is only 1/16 inch at 100 yards and the observed difference may simply be due to how well I was shooting.

I've used CFE Pistol in old guns like the P.08, and C96. I've also used it for cast bullet loads in a 03A3. No problems with frosting or any type of bore damage were noted.

Tin was not removed from powder until the later 20s early 30s They were the 1/2 powders I think. The tin fouled the bore but was used as a mitigating agent from the erosion of the bore from the early rifle powders.Even our early IMR powders were pretty erosive but not as bad as that British crapola. From what I have been able to find out the compound used in the CFE and Enduron powders is a type of ammonia. But it is a tightly held "secret" supposedly developed for the military. It was used from the beginning, so I have been told, by factories loading the 204 so they didn't have the problem that the original 17 Rem had. Prior to the first WW jackets on bullets were cupronickel. And they had their own fouling problems