Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-18-2012, 22:30   #1
gofastman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: MN
Posts: 497
Powder comparison chart

Is there, or could we create, a powder comparison chart for various powders?

I'm not talking about a burn rate chart.

I'm just trying to make a way to put powders from various manufacturer into "classes"

Example:

800X~Longshot
AA#7~Power Pistol
AA#9~2400

Am I making any sense here?
__________________
You have reached the end of the internet.
Now go outside and play.

Last edited by gofastman; 03-18-2012 at 22:30..
gofastman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2012, 01:28   #2
preventec47
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 251
Quote:
Originally Posted by gofastman View Post
Example:

800X~Longshot
AA#7~Power Pistol
AA#9~2400

I sort of imagined Power Pistol to be more like AA#5
and Blue Dot to be more like AA#7 at least in terms
of burn rate. Then density must be considered but I
not exactly sure as I now realize that some chemistries
produce more energy per unit mass than others especially
in some of the newer rifle powders.

I dont think it ever will be possible to create any meaningful comparison charts unless we can do credible
pressure testing. Afterall, that is really the bottom line
( along with velocity) I've tried to find out what a
pressure testing setup would cost but cannot find
any accurate info.

Here is a pretty good comparison chart

10mm Reloading Forum



Last edited by preventec47; 03-19-2012 at 08:11..
preventec47 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2012, 17:12   #3
_The_Shadow
Ret. Fireman
 
_The_Shadow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Southeast, LoUiSiAna
Posts: 4,336
IMHO, I think LongShot would be on line with Blue Dot and 800X, why is because it is not a slow burning powder like AA#9
__________________
Southeast, LoUiSiAna
NRA Life Member
BASS Life Member
_The_Shadow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2012, 17:15   #4
gofastman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: MN
Posts: 497
thats pretty close to what I was after, thanks!
__________________
You have reached the end of the internet.
Now go outside and play.
gofastman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2012, 18:53   #5
preventec47
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 251
Quote:
Originally Posted by _The_Shadow View Post
IMHO, I think LongShot would be on line with Blue Dot and 800X, why is because it is not a slow burning powder like AA#9
To be honest, I personally placed Longshot in the chart
because it was missing and I looked at the
Hodgden created burn rate chart for
their own powders. They show that they believe
that Longshot is slower than HS7 and faster than
Lil-Gun. Now since HS7 is discontinued ( isnt it ?),
perhaps we should place Longshot where HS7 currently is. At least we should be able to trust a powder mfgr as to how their own powders compared to their other powders.
I agree the relationships shown in the chart between
different mfgrs powders create some questions in my
mind but also solve some problems.

I am not sure how I would test powders against one
another for relative burn rate but one approach that
comes to mind would be to take a given amount of powder
of 4 or 5 different brands and take the amount of powder
that would all shoot a 155gr bullet at say 1000fps

Then we would take the exact same amount of powder
and shoot 165gr bullets then 180 and then 200
and plot the velocities of the heavier bullets. I think
the slowest powders would have the fastest velocities
as the bullets got heavier.

Anyone have any other ideas on how to test burn rate ?

Take at look at the chart at Hodgdon Website
http://www.hodgdon.com/burn-rate.html

Based on that, I think we should move both HS7 and Longshot up one
space each.

How bout the relative speeds of BlueDot vs 800X and AA#7 ?
could they all be about the same ?

Again, I dont know how we can test for burn rate.

Last edited by preventec47; 03-19-2012 at 19:08..
preventec47 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2012, 20:26   #6
Yondering
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 563
Quote:
Originally Posted by preventec47 View Post
At least we should be able to trust a powder mfgr as to how their own powders compared to their other powders.
You need to understand that "burn rate" depends on a number of variables, which aren't specified unless you can get the test specifications. Pressure is one variable; burn rate will change depending on pressure. Powder A may "burn slower" in a low pressure cartridge than Powder B, but when the pressure goes up, A might become faster than B.

My thought is this: Don't worry about finding the perfect 10mm powder; it doesn't exist. We have lots of good powders that work well, and you should know which ones those are by this time. Try the best powders, and figure out which you like.
Yondering is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2012, 00:46   #7
Any Cal.
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 443
Along with what yondering said, some manufacturers measure burn rate in a fixed volume container, which can give relative burn rates, but then the relationship of one powder to another changes at different pressures and speeds.

From the little I have gotten to play with Longshot, it seems to be pretty close to a perfect !)mm powder. Dense enough that you can use a variety of bullets, high energy, fairly clean, good pressure curve, and I haven't heard of it metering too poorly. Oh, and it is fairly economical as well. My only real beef with it is that it doesn't seem to work my comp very well with book loads.and that visually it is dificult to tell an under or over charged load from the next one.
Any Cal. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2012, 05:54   #8
robert91922
Senior Member
 
robert91922's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Slovenia, Europe
Posts: 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by preventec47 View Post
To be honest, I personally placed Longshot in the chart
because it was missing and I looked at the
Hodgden created burn rate chart for
their own powders. They show that they believe
that Longshot is slower than HS7 and faster than
Lil-Gun. Now since HS7 is discontinued ( isnt it ?),
perhaps we should place Longshot where HS7 currently is. At least we should be able to trust a powder mfgr as to how their own powders compared to their other powders.
I agree the relationships shown in the chart between
different mfgrs powders create some questions in my
mind but also solve some problems.

I am not sure how I would test powders against one
another for relative burn rate but one approach that
comes to mind would be to take a given amount of powder
of 4 or 5 different brands and take the amount of powder
that would all shoot a 155gr bullet at say 1000fps

Then we would take the exact same amount of powder
and shoot 165gr bullets then 180 and then 200
and plot the velocities of the heavier bullets. I think
the slowest powders would have the fastest velocities
as the bullets got heavier.

Anyone have any other ideas on how to test burn rate ?

Take at look at the chart at Hodgdon Website
http://www.hodgdon.com/burn-rate.html

Based on that, I think we should move both HS7 and Longshot up one
space each.

How bout the relative speeds of BlueDot vs 800X and AA#7 ?
could they all be about the same ?

Again, I dont know how we can test for burn rate.
I checked that Hodgdon burn rate table 3 or 4 times, but can't find Vihtavuori N105 which is somewhere between V. 3N38 and V. N110. I noticed that because it's my favorite powder for 10mm/200gr loads.
__________________
Better be judged by twelve than carried by six.
robert91922 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2012, 12:43   #9
hubcap500
Senior Member
 
hubcap500's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Iowa
Posts: 239
Thanks for the chart. Very helpful and informative. Do you remember where you got it?

Quote:
Originally Posted by preventec47 View Post
Here is a pretty good comparison chart

10mm Reloading Forum

hubcap500 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2012, 14:02   #10
preventec47
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 251
Yes I think I do remember.

I think I need to move Longshot up beside Pro Reach and
remove HS7 entirely since it was discontinued over five years ago.

There are at least five different burn rate charts on the Internet
but I think this is the overall best. It could be improved if the powder
densities were listed along side each powder.


PS it came from the Alliant website :-) Alliant is part of a multi company
gun related conglomerate called Western something something etc.

Last edited by preventec47; 03-20-2012 at 14:08..
preventec47 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2012, 19:10   #11
Yondering
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 563
Quote:
Originally Posted by preventec47 View Post
It could be improved if the powder
densities were listed along side each powder.
I've noticed you seem to be really interested in powder density lately. Personally I don't think it's a very useful measure, unless you're trying to calibrate settings on a charge bar.

Perhaps a more useful measurement would be "energy per volume", since that would tell more about the velocity potential, along with burn rate. Energy per volume doesn't correspond with density, because smokeless powders can be many different formulas, with different amounts of energy in each.
Yondering is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2012, 19:24   #12
preventec47
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 251
Yondering, you make a very good point as two grains
of TNT has more explosive energy than five grains of
black powder.

But lets assume both of the above loads generated
the same identical pressure and all powder was burned.
The greater overall density load would produce the faster
velocity because at the same internal bore pressure
The extra mass of the gas produced (I think) would result
in a more sustained and longer push on the bullet before
pressures began to drop as the bullet traveled down the
barrel. SO, I dont think density is completely irrelevant.
I believe we can see examples of this with the AA#9
powder because it is so much denser than any other mfgrs
powder with close burning rates.
preventec47 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2012, 19:51   #13
Yondering
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 563
Quote:
Originally Posted by preventec47 View Post
The extra mass of the gas produced (I think) would result
in a more sustained and longer push on the bullet before
pressures began to drop as the bullet traveled down the
barrel.
I see where you're coming from, but I disagree. Density doesn't correspond to burning rate or energy output very well.

For example, there are many rifle powders that are much slower than AA9, but less dense. AA9 would give a shorter, faster burn than a rifle powder loaded to the same pressure limit, if you had a case with sufficient capacity.
Yondering is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2012, 02:30   #14
preventec47
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 251
I dont think I explained it very well. this has nothing to
do with burn rate and and maybe is only indirectly associated with total energy. ( if the velocity of one load is greater than another cant we say that load has greater total energy? )

I am just saying that a greater mass of gas vs a smaller mass of gas will push on the bullet longer and thus have a greater velocity. This is referred to in internal ballistics as greater area under the pressure curve.

If all the powder burns in a case, then the heaviest charge will be converted to the greater mass of gas which will be identical in mass whether gaseous or solid.

In my prior example, two different loadings that have
the same peak pressure, the one with the greatest mass
of gas will have the larger area under the pressure curve.
( and greatest velocity ... ALWAYS )

The idea of rifle powders being either slower or less dense
is just not relevant.
preventec47 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2012, 10:35   #15
Any Cal.
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 443
You are really over thinking it. Look in a manual and see what works best. Typically a heavy charge of slow powder gives the best velocity, but in a 10 the case capacity and barrel length limit the usefulness of the axiom. If you load to saami specs, it is only going to make a difference of a few fps between a good powder and the perfect one.
Any Cal. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2012, 13:06   #16
Any Cal.
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 443
Here is a way to illustrate why I say that for the most part, you should just look in a manual.

In a .44 Mag, there are a LOT of powders that can be used. Loaded to full pressure, with a 300g bullet, some good ones are #9, H110, MP300, 5744. Looking at the chart, you can see that they are all slow powders, and you may make some assumptions about them. You could look at powder density charts and see that #9 and H110 are almost identical. You may be able to find out on the net that H110 and MP300 are very, very similar.

Once you start shooting though, H110 clocks the highest velocity. #9, which should have been similar, comes quite a ways behind. So does 5744. MP-300, I have read, doesn't do anything different. As it turns out, #9 just doesn't build the 'bang' that H110 does, 5744 is just too slow, and MP300 requires more case capacity for better results. Interestingly enough, in most manuals, H110 shows the best speed...

When you go to the 10mm, the chart shows HS7, the precursor to Longshot, as 1 step above #9 in speed. When loading and shooting Longshot though, it behaves like a faster powder(more like 7625 than #9), using considerably lower charge weights to get more velocity. There are too many variables to pick out a powder by concentrating on one or two design parameters.
Any Cal. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2012, 13:12   #17
scccdoc
Senior Member
 
scccdoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,390
Any info on how "clean' various powders burn? DOC
scccdoc is offline   Reply With Quote

 
  
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:38.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 847
245 Members
602 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,672
Aug 11, 2014 at 2:31