I believe I have a very special rifle
- Thread starter Snakeoil
- Start date
L Ross
Well-Known Member
There are 84 pages of .25-20 information on the Marlin Owners Group. One of the acknowledged mild small game loads uses 3.1 grains of 231. I got some 60 grain bullets from JW and that is one of the loads I plan to try. My fantasies of Fall squirrel hunts got overwhelmed by 4 different extensions of Indian Summer and a lot more fishing.
Bret4207
At the casting bench in the sky. RIP Bret.
You don't have to do a hard crimp to improve consistency of ignition. I'm not taking about folding brass over! A light crimp or maybe a collet type "crimp" might help. But you have to watch for mangling the bullet. Or, just go to a faster powder if you have it on hand. I don't what 231 is like but it's worth a try since you have it. Trying to get a cartridge everyone has been trying to hot rod for 100 years toned down to 22WRF/25 Stevens territory seems to have it's challenges.
Did you try annealing and expanding a few GCs to see if that helps?
Did you try annealing and expanding a few GCs to see if that helps?
Snakeoil
Well-Known Member
No. If I have to start jumping thru hoops to be able to load for this cartridge, my interest will wane at a rapid rate. I did try to push a ball bearing into one GC using my thumb. Then I tried tapping it with a small hammer. It turned out that the bearing was exactly the right size to touch the ID and the bottom of the GC at the same time. What are the chances? It was the biggest ball I had in the basement. I might have a bigger one in the garage. I could machine something from drill rod or even mild steel and case harden it to open up the GCs a bit. Then it would be relatively easy to spread out the checks on my steel bench top and just go along with the punch and a small hammer and give them a tap. But I'm not there yet.
I would like to try a PB bullet of the same size. Gotta ask the boys at the club if anyone has a PB mold I can borrow. Making a breech seater is pretty easy. Just a case with an adjustable ram. I've made them for others. Bullets engrave so easily, that the camming action of the breech block is all I'll need. It could eliminate the crappy part of reloading process. No more GCs, neck sizing, M-die r bullet seating. Simply charge the cases and cap the end with florist foam. Oh yeah, would still have to size/lube bullets. But without GCs that would be a walk in the park.
Wind is blowing a gale today, so not the right conditions to go test more loads. Hope the wind calms down. Tomorrow is a .22 match at Wilton. If it is blowing like it is today, should make for some interesting scores.
I looked at the burn rate charts and at what powders I have in the cabinet. I specifically was looking for a fast powder that would meter better. 231 is a ball powder, which we know is a misnomer. It's really a flattened ball, making it more of a flake. But the kernels are smaller than Unique. Also have Clays and Universal. The plan is to go thru all the loading manuals I have to find load relationships between Unique and the other powders to pick starting loads for the other powders. I have some Win SuperLite, but they don't make it any longer, and discovering it works great in the Bee with cast bullets would just be a form of self-abuse. I also have some Heavy Pistol which is a Euro powder that I bought when I could not get 2400. It is supposed to be identical to Accurate 9. The company made A9 for Accurate and then I think they were sold off by Accurate. The containers are sealed and the burn rate is in the range of 2400 so not going to break the seal on one of the jugs unless everything else fails.
Snakeoil
Well-Known Member
Dug thru the various loading manuals I have. Not much info on reduced/cast bullet loads in anything close to .218 Bee. So, decided to try a different approach. Picked a pistol caliber that used all the powders I have. Turned out to be .38 special with a 110 JHP bullet. Unfortunately, the loads were for various velocities, but reasonably close to each other. Stuck them in an excel spreadsheet and made a few calcs.
First, calculated fps/gr. I know it is not a linear relationship. But my goal is to figure out starting loads, not duplicate velocities right off the bat. Then used that number to calculate a relationship to Unique. Basically, it's the ratio of Unique fps/gr to the other powders' fps/gr.
Armed with that, I then took my known Unique .218 Bee load/velocity and use that and the powder ratios from .38 special to calculate estimated powder ratios in the Bee case using the know Unique fps/gr in the Bee case. Powders react differently in different cases, so my goal was to try and account for that. Take a look at the fps/gr for Unique in Table 1 versus Table 2. The change in powder efficiency is striking. I'm sure it is a function of the .38 bullet weighing 2.8 times more than the .218 bullet.
Once I had estimate ratios of the fps/gr of each power in comparison to Unique, I picked a target velocity of 1400 fps and then calculated the powder charge using the fps/gr for each powder, including Unique.
Here are the numbers. Table 1 is the load data I found for .38 special using a 110gr JHP bullet. Table 2 takes the numbers and generates the charge weight for my target velocity of 1400 fps. Yellow cells in the tables are the calculated data.
So, now it is a matter of making up 5 rounds for each powder to get chrono readings for the loads. Then it is a matter of coming up with a ladder test for each powder based upon those chrono numbers. I might find I won't need to do all the powders if one of them turns out to be a gem.
First, calculated fps/gr. I know it is not a linear relationship. But my goal is to figure out starting loads, not duplicate velocities right off the bat. Then used that number to calculate a relationship to Unique. Basically, it's the ratio of Unique fps/gr to the other powders' fps/gr.
Armed with that, I then took my known Unique .218 Bee load/velocity and use that and the powder ratios from .38 special to calculate estimated powder ratios in the Bee case using the know Unique fps/gr in the Bee case. Powders react differently in different cases, so my goal was to try and account for that. Take a look at the fps/gr for Unique in Table 1 versus Table 2. The change in powder efficiency is striking. I'm sure it is a function of the .38 bullet weighing 2.8 times more than the .218 bullet.
Once I had estimate ratios of the fps/gr of each power in comparison to Unique, I picked a target velocity of 1400 fps and then calculated the powder charge using the fps/gr for each powder, including Unique.
Here are the numbers. Table 1 is the load data I found for .38 special using a 110gr JHP bullet. Table 2 takes the numbers and generates the charge weight for my target velocity of 1400 fps. Yellow cells in the tables are the calculated data.
So, now it is a matter of making up 5 rounds for each powder to get chrono readings for the loads. Then it is a matter of coming up with a ladder test for each powder based upon those chrono numbers. I might find I won't need to do all the powders if one of them turns out to be a gem.
Ian
Notorious member
I believe you have made a major error right off the hop, more on that in a minute. It's fun to extrapolate from all the powder handbooks and reloading manuals, but computer modeling might be the better answer and tell you some other things that are useful like amount of propellant burnt and the shape of the pressure curve.
From experience in a whole bunch of cartridges it looks like your Universal prediction is pretty close. Clays is a little low and Win 231 a little high, it's actually about like Universal in smaller cases. If you can meter 2.5 grains of Clays Taco Shells reliably you're a better man than me.
You're playing in the 9-16K pressure range which is definitely Unique or faster territory unless you have a much heavier bullet or far less case capacity.
About the error: Your target with the 38.5 grain NOE bullets and 4.0 grains of Unique has 1744 fps written by it, not 1400. This agrees with Quickload vs. 6.0 of 2400 and your velocities, proportionately but not exactly due to me having to extrapolate things myself not having bullet length, seating depth, case capacity to overflow in grains of water, etc., and I can't remember what your barrel length is so I put in 24". You also lose some velocity due to leaks without the gas checks.
What I get from QL with default data and Lyman 37-grain bullet:
Clays, 2.5 grains, 1,573 fps @ 13KPSI peak pressure, very spikey curve (pressure peaks at 1/2" bullet travel).
Win 231, 1,780 fps @ 12.7KPSI peak pressure, peak at 1" of bullet travel.
Universal, 3.2 grains, 1,705 fps @ 10.5KPSI peak pressure, peak at 1.2" of bullet travel.
Unique, 3.3 grains, 1,709 fps @ 9.3KPSI peak pressure, peak at 1.2" of bullet travel but curve falls off more slowly than Universal, which is how the two always compare. Plus the Universal will always burn more cleanly.
From experience in a whole bunch of cartridges it looks like your Universal prediction is pretty close. Clays is a little low and Win 231 a little high, it's actually about like Universal in smaller cases. If you can meter 2.5 grains of Clays Taco Shells reliably you're a better man than me.
You're playing in the 9-16K pressure range which is definitely Unique or faster territory unless you have a much heavier bullet or far less case capacity.
About the error: Your target with the 38.5 grain NOE bullets and 4.0 grains of Unique has 1744 fps written by it, not 1400. This agrees with Quickload vs. 6.0 of 2400 and your velocities, proportionately but not exactly due to me having to extrapolate things myself not having bullet length, seating depth, case capacity to overflow in grains of water, etc., and I can't remember what your barrel length is so I put in 24". You also lose some velocity due to leaks without the gas checks.
What I get from QL with default data and Lyman 37-grain bullet:
Clays, 2.5 grains, 1,573 fps @ 13KPSI peak pressure, very spikey curve (pressure peaks at 1/2" bullet travel).
Win 231, 1,780 fps @ 12.7KPSI peak pressure, peak at 1" of bullet travel.
Universal, 3.2 grains, 1,705 fps @ 10.5KPSI peak pressure, peak at 1.2" of bullet travel.
Unique, 3.3 grains, 1,709 fps @ 9.3KPSI peak pressure, peak at 1.2" of bullet travel but curve falls off more slowly than Universal, which is how the two always compare. Plus the Universal will always burn more cleanly.
Snakeoil
Well-Known Member
Ian, thanks for doing the deep dive on my numbers. I've never done this before so any input from the experienced is appreciated. Here's my feedback to your comments.
I know what the target says. But my goal is still 1400 fps because my experience has shown that slower tends to tighten up the groups with cast bullets. I realize that my chrono numbers are higher than what the Lyman manual has for 4 gr of Unique. But because I was relying on that book and similar publications for my starting data, I used the velocity for 4 gr of Unique from the Lyman CBH. I was getting a bit punchy after spending quite a bit of time playing with Excel. I just realized that I did not include a table that was my starting point for the .218 Bee numbers that I used. The fps/gr number for Unique in Table 2 above came from a 4.0 gr Unique load in Lyman's CBH that did 1685fps. Yes, that is lower than what I saw on my chrono. But I used it to stay consistent with the other data.
I am using Gas Checks. That's the GC in my posts. My barrel is 26-3/4" long.
Thanks for the data from QL. You left out the charge weight for 231. Can you please provide when you get a moment? Thanks.
I'm chuckling over your Clays comment. That's pretty much how I feel about Unique. I don't have a lot of Universal. But enough to make some test loads.
The 1400 number in Table 2 is straight input by me. It's my target and the charge weights are calculated using that and the fps/gr numbers. I know it's crude, but it's all I have.
Interesting that 3.3gr of Unique is still in the 1700 fps range. I know that the pressure curves cannot be linear. And given how fast the powder burns, 0.7gr probably does not make that much difference in the bump the bullet gets.
If you are willing to run some numbers for me in QL, tell me what you need and I'll provide it if I can.
Thanks. This is fun. I enjoy this much more than posting about sucking leaves in "Whatcha doin' today?".
I know what the target says. But my goal is still 1400 fps because my experience has shown that slower tends to tighten up the groups with cast bullets. I realize that my chrono numbers are higher than what the Lyman manual has for 4 gr of Unique. But because I was relying on that book and similar publications for my starting data, I used the velocity for 4 gr of Unique from the Lyman CBH. I was getting a bit punchy after spending quite a bit of time playing with Excel. I just realized that I did not include a table that was my starting point for the .218 Bee numbers that I used. The fps/gr number for Unique in Table 2 above came from a 4.0 gr Unique load in Lyman's CBH that did 1685fps. Yes, that is lower than what I saw on my chrono. But I used it to stay consistent with the other data.
I am using Gas Checks. That's the GC in my posts. My barrel is 26-3/4" long.
Thanks for the data from QL. You left out the charge weight for 231. Can you please provide when you get a moment? Thanks.
I'm chuckling over your Clays comment. That's pretty much how I feel about Unique. I don't have a lot of Universal. But enough to make some test loads.
The 1400 number in Table 2 is straight input by me. It's my target and the charge weights are calculated using that and the fps/gr numbers. I know it's crude, but it's all I have.
Interesting that 3.3gr of Unique is still in the 1700 fps range. I know that the pressure curves cannot be linear. And given how fast the powder burns, 0.7gr probably does not make that much difference in the bump the bullet gets.
If you are willing to run some numbers for me in QL, tell me what you need and I'll provide it if I can.
Thanks. This is fun. I enjoy this much more than posting about sucking leaves in "Whatcha doin' today?".
Last edited:
fiver
Well-Known Member
the low powder amounts almost always suck people in when they start dealing with the little 22 cal barrels.
something like 4grs. of red-dot in the 223 case will run a 50-55gr. bullet out at 2-K without even trying.
look at the peak pressure distances shown above 1/2 or 1" away in a 224 diameter hole really isn't much more than a case full of powder gas, and a good portion of it is actually the primer moving things.
the other way around to get what you want is with a too slow powder.
in my 25-20 i actually use a book.
it's my book of loads i made up by doing silly stuff.
in it under 25-20 is a load consisting of Accurate's 2230 and a magnum primer with a Rapine mold's plain base 72gr bullet that's tumble lubed.
it's not sized, just lubed.
i load them on my dillon 550 with a 30 carbine powder funnel, it doesn't open the neck it just flairs the mouth.
i think your probably looking for something simple like this.
but the road to get there took me some time to figure out.
anyway, as another comparison.
i like to use Imr-4895 in my 223.
that same load also works very well in my 22-250 and in my 220 swift.
same bullet, powder, primer etc.
i point that out because other cases like the hornet or K-hornet might point you in the right direction.
something like 4grs. of red-dot in the 223 case will run a 50-55gr. bullet out at 2-K without even trying.
look at the peak pressure distances shown above 1/2 or 1" away in a 224 diameter hole really isn't much more than a case full of powder gas, and a good portion of it is actually the primer moving things.
the other way around to get what you want is with a too slow powder.
in my 25-20 i actually use a book.
it's my book of loads i made up by doing silly stuff.
in it under 25-20 is a load consisting of Accurate's 2230 and a magnum primer with a Rapine mold's plain base 72gr bullet that's tumble lubed.
it's not sized, just lubed.
i load them on my dillon 550 with a 30 carbine powder funnel, it doesn't open the neck it just flairs the mouth.
i think your probably looking for something simple like this.
but the road to get there took me some time to figure out.
anyway, as another comparison.
i like to use Imr-4895 in my 223.
that same load also works very well in my 22-250 and in my 220 swift.
same bullet, powder, primer etc.
i point that out because other cases like the hornet or K-hornet might point you in the right direction.
Ian
Notorious member
Well, it IS a bullet casting/shooting site after all...
3.6 grains Win 231/HP-38, sorry for the omission. To fine-tune Quickload, I'll need:
I use 2.4 grains of Titegroup in the .223 under a 75-grain powder coated bullet to get 1030 fps. Maximum thwop for minimum report and bullet flight noise using a suppressor. It's tough to get the little ones slowed down.
3.6 grains Win 231/HP-38, sorry for the omission. To fine-tune Quickload, I'll need:
- Case volume to overflow in grains of water. A resized case is fine, put a plug of beeswax in the primer pocket or just use a fired case. "card" off the water as flush as you can to the case mouth.
- Case length
- Bullet length
- Cartridge overall length
- That's about it. I have bullet weight, barrel length, and the powders you have on hand. Things like alloy type, crimp, neck tension, and how the bullet is situated vis a vis the throat affect shot start initiation pressure and thus burn curve and velocity but not very much. It can get to the point of figuring how many faeries can dance on the head of a pin.
I use 2.4 grains of Titegroup in the .223 under a 75-grain powder coated bullet to get 1030 fps. Maximum thwop for minimum report and bullet flight noise using a suppressor. It's tough to get the little ones slowed down.
Ian
Notorious member
LOL Lamar, I already thought of the filler/propellant combo when I was seeing 20% case fills with the fast pistol powders.
How's this? 16 grains of Retumbo at light compression gets 1340 fps....at 6KPSI. IOW it probably won't even light but will smolder and then auto-detonate like a case full of Bullseye. 14 grains of 4831 is good for 1400 at 6KPSI, but only 85% case fill. Might work, but I kinda have my doubts. Then there's 16 grains of Reloder 22 for 100% and 1600 fps at 9KPSI...now THAT one I'd be OK to try since I have a good bit of experience doing stupid stuff with that powder under compression in bottlenecked cases way too small for it and a titch of buffer (like 2750 fps with a 170-grain, paper patched bullet in the ol' .270 Winchester). That's cookin' and it was probably within 10K of max pressure.
Ooooh, buffer. Let's not go down that rabbit hole just yet.
How's this? 16 grains of Retumbo at light compression gets 1340 fps....at 6KPSI. IOW it probably won't even light but will smolder and then auto-detonate like a case full of Bullseye. 14 grains of 4831 is good for 1400 at 6KPSI, but only 85% case fill. Might work, but I kinda have my doubts. Then there's 16 grains of Reloder 22 for 100% and 1600 fps at 9KPSI...now THAT one I'd be OK to try since I have a good bit of experience doing stupid stuff with that powder under compression in bottlenecked cases way too small for it and a titch of buffer (like 2750 fps with a 170-grain, paper patched bullet in the ol' .270 Winchester). That's cookin' and it was probably within 10K of max pressure.
Ooooh, buffer. Let's not go down that rabbit hole just yet.
fiver
Well-Known Member
Rl-22 hmm.
i probably have a few ounces of that left after doing some scoop and vibrate and seat a bit more 0-6 loads.
i don't think he needs a buf,hmm plain base.
maybe some 3031 though.
jus messin with you snake,, but the slow powder is worth thinking about, your only gonna burn 14-16grs.
i probably have a few ounces of that left after doing some scoop and vibrate and seat a bit more 0-6 loads.
i don't think he needs a buf,hmm plain base.
maybe some 3031 though.
jus messin with you snake,, but the slow powder is worth thinking about, your only gonna burn 14-16grs.
Snakeoil
Well-Known Member
Ian, here is info you need to run the numbers.
- Case volume to overflow in grains of water. A resized case is fine, put a plug of beeswax in the primer pocket or just use a fired case. "card" off the water as flush as you can to the case mouth.
- Case holds 18.1 grains of water. Could not get it to be flush with the edge of the mouth. Meniscus could not be defeated. Figure maybe 18.2 as a fudge factor.
- Case length
- Case is 1.332 inches
- Bullet length
- Bullet is .415. GC is 0.009 thick. So bullet with GC should be 0.424 inch
- Cartridge overall length
- I've been using 1.600 OAL
- That's about it. I have bullet weight, barrel length, and the powders you have on hand.
- Gave you the wrong barrel length. Length from back of breech to muzzle is 26.5 inches
- Things like alloy type, crimp, neck tension, and how the bullet is situated vis a vis the throat affect shot start initiation pressure and thus burn curve and velocity but not very much. It can get to the point of figuring how many faeries can dance on the head of a pin.
- In an attempt to count the fairies:
- alloy is 20:1 lead/tin
- No crimp
- Neck tension is 0.002 inch
- Thanks again for doing this.
Ian
Notorious member
QL has 18.0 grains of water, not far off.
So first, let's compare what you KNOW to what QL predicts:
2400 powder Actual Predicted
6.0 grains 1,585/1,576 1,773
5.5 grains 1,493/1,447 1.640
5.0 grains 1,294 1,506
Unique powder Actual Predicted
4.0 grains 1,744 1,975
Disregarding the WILD ES from the 2400 loads (not burning worth diddly) and the very limited data, it appears there's a pretty consistent ~200 fps discrepancy between QL and your particular rifle/loads/chronograph calibration. We'll just go with it because that's what we have for now.
So, if you want 1400 fps with the powders you have on hand, here's the data from QL that predicts 1600 fps with weights rounded to the nearest tenth of a grain.
Unique: 2.9 grains 7.7KPSI
Universal: 2.8 grains 8.7KPSI
Win 231: 2.9 grains 9.2KPSI
Clays: 2.5 grains 13.7KPSI
I think I'd go with Clays. When you get under 12KPSI nothing except real gunpowder burns well.
So first, let's compare what you KNOW to what QL predicts:
2400 powder Actual Predicted
6.0 grains 1,585/1,576 1,773
5.5 grains 1,493/1,447 1.640
5.0 grains 1,294 1,506
Unique powder Actual Predicted
4.0 grains 1,744 1,975
Disregarding the WILD ES from the 2400 loads (not burning worth diddly) and the very limited data, it appears there's a pretty consistent ~200 fps discrepancy between QL and your particular rifle/loads/chronograph calibration. We'll just go with it because that's what we have for now.
So, if you want 1400 fps with the powders you have on hand, here's the data from QL that predicts 1600 fps with weights rounded to the nearest tenth of a grain.
Unique: 2.9 grains 7.7KPSI
Universal: 2.8 grains 8.7KPSI
Win 231: 2.9 grains 9.2KPSI
Clays: 2.5 grains 13.7KPSI
I think I'd go with Clays. When you get under 12KPSI nothing except real gunpowder burns well.
Snakeoil
Well-Known Member
Thanks. A guy at the club suggested Clays, too. Said it burns very clean, which to me says it burns efficiently.
He also mentioned something else when I mentioned 231. He said it can make your barrel rust. I'd never heard such a thing I my guess is his specific circumstances created the rust. Said he used is .22-250 chuck hunting and put it in the cabinet without cleaning. Came back a week later or so to clean it and a patch down the barrel revealed surface rust. My guess is the rifle was out on a humid day or it was a cold day and when he brought it in the house, moisture condensed in the bore. Have you ever heard of 231 causing rust?
It is interesting to see that my guestimator spreadsheet antics hit the Clays number right on the money. I don't think I have very much, but enough to do some testing.
Chrono is relatively new. But others have questioned its accuracy. I might talk to the maker to see what they say. I have a friend with a Lab Radar. Of course expensive does not translate directly to accurate. But it would be interesting to compare them. Another friend bought the same chrono I have and we could set those two up and shoot over them to compare. I have a Competition Electronics Pro Chrono DLX. Talks to my cell phone. So convenient. I did do a pretty involved .22 RF test of various brands earlier this year and the velocities for .22 HV and SV rounds seemed to line up with what you would expect. So, that tends to say the chrono is reasonably accurate.
Getting back to powders, what about something faster, like Bullseye or Red Dot? I've got some Bullseye.
He also mentioned something else when I mentioned 231. He said it can make your barrel rust. I'd never heard such a thing I my guess is his specific circumstances created the rust. Said he used is .22-250 chuck hunting and put it in the cabinet without cleaning. Came back a week later or so to clean it and a patch down the barrel revealed surface rust. My guess is the rifle was out on a humid day or it was a cold day and when he brought it in the house, moisture condensed in the bore. Have you ever heard of 231 causing rust?
It is interesting to see that my guestimator spreadsheet antics hit the Clays number right on the money. I don't think I have very much, but enough to do some testing.
Chrono is relatively new. But others have questioned its accuracy. I might talk to the maker to see what they say. I have a friend with a Lab Radar. Of course expensive does not translate directly to accurate. But it would be interesting to compare them. Another friend bought the same chrono I have and we could set those two up and shoot over them to compare. I have a Competition Electronics Pro Chrono DLX. Talks to my cell phone. So convenient. I did do a pretty involved .22 RF test of various brands earlier this year and the velocities for .22 HV and SV rounds seemed to line up with what you would expect. So, that tends to say the chrono is reasonably accurate.
Getting back to powders, what about something faster, like Bullseye or Red Dot? I've got some Bullseye.
Last edited:
Ian
Notorious member
Red Dot is 2.5 grains at 11K for predicted 1600 fps.
Bullseye is 2.6 grains at 8K. BE has a very short rise but long burn curve, something that fools a lot of people who think it's flashy-fast. Unique also has a long burn curve.
Titegroup is about like Bullseye but has a short burn curve. Unique is about like Universal but has a long burn curve. You get more velocity for less pressure with the Alliant powders, but more residue and more muzzle pressure. If you mess around with all of those in various cases you can tell that anyway, it's just neat to see the graph from QL that confirms the burn characteristics. My old version of QL doesn't have Titewad or WST, those might be candidates too.
Bullseye is 2.6 grains at 8K. BE has a very short rise but long burn curve, something that fools a lot of people who think it's flashy-fast. Unique also has a long burn curve.
Titegroup is about like Bullseye but has a short burn curve. Unique is about like Universal but has a long burn curve. You get more velocity for less pressure with the Alliant powders, but more residue and more muzzle pressure. If you mess around with all of those in various cases you can tell that anyway, it's just neat to see the graph from QL that confirms the burn characteristics. My old version of QL doesn't have Titewad or WST, those might be candidates too.
fiver
Well-Known Member
titewad IMO burns pretty close [as in overlaps] in rate to red-dot, but.... yeah.
it does leave some mummies behind which tells me it burns on the longer time frame too.
wst is one i haven't messed with, i'm still working on a couple pounds of AAP [which was about the shortest lived Win. powder ever]
it does leave some mummies behind which tells me it burns on the longer time frame too.
wst is one i haven't messed with, i'm still working on a couple pounds of AAP [which was about the shortest lived Win. powder ever]