Started playing with R.D. the other day. Saw an article that said fill the case with powder, cut that in half and load. Supposedly gives a 'safe' load. So my BO case is 8.5 gr to the shoulder. 1/2 is 4 and change. Ran 4.8, OK. If I filled to mouth, probably 12 which would give 6. Next to try. 13gr is the load for 30-30/308/3006 doesn't quite hold up. GRT modelling with hp-38 in BO comes out about the same (no RD in GRT). Others tried RD in BO, about the same load I used. Worked for them. Still not enough gas psi to operate AR.
Powder burn rate
- Thread starter burbank.jung
- Start date
JonB
Halcyon member
Powder shortages:
Powder substitutions has become a common discussion, that cyclically comes up, due to certain events.
Back in the day, when I had limited supplies, I had investigated powder substitutions, I did use burn rate charts, usually several different ones. That is the first part of an investigation. Then with a group of powders written on a notepad, I would go to the LGS or gunshow and look to see what is available.
With the group narrowed down, I look through a dozen or so reloading manuals, new and old, to see what's published. If you don't have any, seek out a mentor that does have them,,,and then begin collecting them yourself, they show up in the strangest places, for pennies on the dollar.
Then I do some internet searching...that is self-explanatory.
By this time, I would have enough info to start a thread for all the experts here, and am able to make it sound reasonably logical.
Lastly, we seem to be in a time, where powder companies are discontinuing some favorite powders, and are making new powders, This takes the investigation to a hole 'nuther level, because there is little data for new powders, and even fewer experts that have tried them. So if you don't have the experience with testing, you are probably wise, not to do so. I know that it's the last thing I would want to do, with my limited experience.
Powder substitutions has become a common discussion, that cyclically comes up, due to certain events.
Back in the day, when I had limited supplies, I had investigated powder substitutions, I did use burn rate charts, usually several different ones. That is the first part of an investigation. Then with a group of powders written on a notepad, I would go to the LGS or gunshow and look to see what is available.
With the group narrowed down, I look through a dozen or so reloading manuals, new and old, to see what's published. If you don't have any, seek out a mentor that does have them,,,and then begin collecting them yourself, they show up in the strangest places, for pennies on the dollar.
Then I do some internet searching...that is self-explanatory.
By this time, I would have enough info to start a thread for all the experts here, and am able to make it sound reasonably logical.
Lastly, we seem to be in a time, where powder companies are discontinuing some favorite powders, and are making new powders, This takes the investigation to a hole 'nuther level, because there is little data for new powders, and even fewer experts that have tried them. So if you don't have the experience with testing, you are probably wise, not to do so. I know that it's the last thing I would want to do, with my limited experience.
L Ross
Well-Known Member
Find the original recommendations for "The Load" by Ed Harris. He never suggested 13 grains for the .30-30 and perhaps not even the .308. I shot the RCBS 30-150-FN gas check over that 13.0 grain charge of Red Dot in the .30-06 and got 1,630 fps on a chronograph if that helps.
Bret4207
At the casting bench in the sky. RIP Bret.
Weren't you the guy throwing out old material last spring, something about "I don't do nostalgia."?
Bret4207
At the casting bench in the sky. RIP Bret.
IIRC Harris said the case had to have at least the capacity and caliber of the 7x57.
Bret4207
At the casting bench in the sky. RIP Bret.
And I don't understand why they are doing that. I've heard rumors, on the internet of course, that most commercial powders have a military/industrial use and that the commercial reloading market just isn't big enough to support what would amount to tiny runs of powders. It doesn't make sense to me since there are so many powders out there.
Anyone have the straight scoop?
I keep my old Lyman manuals. By old I mean 80s era. I use them so I Keep them, if they sat on a shelf collecting dust they would go.
JonB
Halcyon member
My understanding is, the newer powders are designed to be cheaper to make. Powders that get the Axe are one's that sales are slumping or they are expensive/difficult to make and they have a reasonably good replacement that's cheaper/easier to make.
I did read this on the internet somewhere, so it must be true.
RicinYakima
High Steppes of Eastern Washington
Money!!!!!!!!! New powders are cheaper to make.
fiver
Well-Known Member
actually it's the new Enduron powders that are being axed.
if all they wanted was cheaper and faster to make powders they'd build a new ball powder facility somewhere and change them all over.
you can pretty much make them all the way from number-1 to number 100 with slight changes in size and coating.
heck they could create a different powder for pretty much everything from the 25 acp to the 340 weatherby, and make it optimized for specific bullet weights in each case if they wanted to.
they won't, but they could.
if all they wanted was cheaper and faster to make powders they'd build a new ball powder facility somewhere and change them all over.
you can pretty much make them all the way from number-1 to number 100 with slight changes in size and coating.
heck they could create a different powder for pretty much everything from the 25 acp to the 340 weatherby, and make it optimized for specific bullet weights in each case if they wanted to.
they won't, but they could.
462
California's Central Coast Amid The Insanity
I thought they were the future, what with their temperature insensitivity, enviro-friendliness, etc., and the conventional IMR powders would become extinct. Could it be that handloaders aren't buying the hype, or don't want to go through another load development process, or are stodgy and hardheaded to change?
fiver
Well-Known Member
they said it was due to low sales.
well.
if you ain't puttin any on the shelf the sales volume is gonna suffer some.
i bet if all they were putting out for the last couple of years was enduron powders their sales would go high enough.
anyway, they were intended to cover the european regulations and be sold here also, they ain't even been seen in europe so no sales there and nobody was really getting into them here much [shrug]
i also dimly recall something about the manufacturer having a hard time making enough of the stuff as an excuse too.
well.
if you ain't puttin any on the shelf the sales volume is gonna suffer some.
i bet if all they were putting out for the last couple of years was enduron powders their sales would go high enough.
anyway, they were intended to cover the european regulations and be sold here also, they ain't even been seen in europe so no sales there and nobody was really getting into them here much [shrug]
i also dimly recall something about the manufacturer having a hard time making enough of the stuff as an excuse too.
RicinYakima
High Steppes of Eastern Washington
They are all made in Australia, but the IMRs are made in Canada. Quite a price difference, I would think.
Missionary
Well-Known Member
Right now.. Just home made BP that I know of. Might be some "improvised" mixes that could pass for propellant.
RicinYakima
High Steppes of Eastern Washington
St. Marks Powder is a subsidiary of General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems manufacturing ball propellant in Crawfordville, Florida.
Almost all ball powders sold in the US are from St. Marks. Exceptions are Norma and some Eastern European companies.