does 2400 do anything AA#9 doesnt?

I'm almost out of 2400, and I learned AA#9 has some applications for my other calibers.

Does 2400 have any advantage over AA#9 in .44Mag?

AA9 is a ball propellant, flows better.

I've never used #9 but its burn rate and applications are just about the same as 2400 and all I've ever read about it has been good. I wouldn't hesitate at all buying some of it.

AA9 is a very fine grain and perhaps a bit denser powder that doesn't fill the case as well as 2400. They are both fine powders for magnum loads though in my experience it takes about 1.0 grain less of AA9 to get the same velocity as 2400.

I'm almost out of 2400, and I learned AA#9 has some applications for my other calibers.

Does 2400 have any advantage over AA#9 in .44Mag?
No advantages that I know of.

My question is, what applications did you feel the need to use AA#9 in that 2400 couldn't do?

2400 is more flexible than #9

How is the accuracy and consistency with 2400? AA#9 may not be as accurate with the same bullet in the same gun or it may be better. You will have to try it to find out.
You don't not want to buy 8lbs and discover the accuracy sucks.

Does 2400 have any advantage over AA#9 in .44Mag?

in my neck of the woods, the only advantages 2400 has is price and availability. It is on the shelf here, but I would have to order AA#9.

My question is, what applications did you feel the need to use AA#9 in that 2400 couldn't do?

10mm

AA#9 has one advantage over 2400...it has a lot less muzzle flash. If you are firing indoors or in low light you will notice a significant difference.

I have also got better velocities with accuracy in my 357's and 44 with #9. In my Blackhawk, with 158 gr. Xtreme Plated SWC, with CCI, Win, or Fed. primers; I found a load many years ago that just works beautifully. My GP100 likes it and so does my SP101. I never came close to finding "the load" with 2400. YMMV

#9 also works much better in the 30 carb. than 2400.

I have an 8 lb.er of #9, 1 lb. of W296, and no 2400 in my stock. That is how I express my opinion on the subject.

aa#9 has one advantage over 2400...it has a lot less muzzle flash

that's not a benefit! :D

Good to know though, thanks.

I guess can just use my Blue Dot for the times I want fireworks :evil:


Imma give AA#9 a whirl and see how it goes, heck even if it sucks, a pound of powder doesnt last that long when you're loading .44mag. thanks for the input everyone.

I prefer 2400. AA#9 shoots well. When I tested 2400, AA#9 and Blue Dot, Blue Dot leaded. Blue Dot worked with jacketed bullets, leaded with cast.

AA#9 is a good magnum powder and if it is cheaper than 2400 go buy it. My Dillion 550B powder measure does not like these ball powders as little powder balls roll between the slide bar and measure, gumming up the works. I have no such problems with 2400.

My "standard" 357 load is 13.5 grains 2400 with a 158 anything.

Smith & Wesson M27-2

158 LSWC 13.5grs 2400 R-P cases CCI primers

9-Oct-05 T = 64 °F

Ave Vel = 1273
Std Dev = 44.03
ES = 176.7
High = 1372
Low = 1195
N = 30

158 JHP (W/W) 13.5 grains 2400 R-P cases WSP
5-Aug-06 T = 103 °F
Ave Vel = 1196
Std Dev = 26.58
ES = 87.17
High = 1244
Low = 1157
N = 10

accurate
not difficult
to extract


158 LRN 12.0 grs AA#9 CCI500 Mixed cases
5-Aug-06 T = 104 °F
Ave Vel = 1278
Std Dev = 34.98
ES = 117.4
High = 1344
Low = 1226
N = 27

Accurate little or no leading


158 LRN 12.5 grs AA#9 CCI500 3-D cases
5-Aug-06 T = 104 °F
Ave Vel = 1348
Std Dev = 34.16
ES = 134.7
High = 1386
Low = 1251
N = 25

Very Accurate sticky extraction no leading


158 LRN 13.0 grs AA#9 CCI500 3-D cases
5-Aug-06 T = 104 °F
Ave Vel = 1360
Std Dev = 33.19
ES = 109.8
High = 1393
Low = 1284
N = 26
Very Accurate sticky extraction no leading



158 JHP 13.0 grs AA#9 R-P cases WSP

9-Oct-05 T = 64 °F

Ave Vel = 1156
Std Dev = 35.63
ES = 160.6
High = 1230
Low = 1069
N = 20

Very accurate


158 JHP (W/W) 14.0 grs AA#9 R-P cases WSP

9-Oct-05 T = 64 °F

Ave Vel = 1208
Std Dev = 27.65
ES = 89
High = 1255
Low = 1166
N = 24
Very accurate


158 LSWC Linotype 12.0 AA#9 Mixed cases CCI500

14 Oct 2008 T = 80 °F

Ave Vel = 1217
Std Dev = 52
ES = 224.9
High = 1346
Low = 1121
N = 29

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/SlamFire/Smith%20and%20Wesson%20Pistols/DSCN1755M27-2.jpg

Shot some 290's in the 44 Mag with AA#9. All loads were accurate but the recoil with 290's was heavier than I liked.

S&W M629-4 Stainless, 5" Barrel


290 LSWC 17.0 grs AA#9 CCI 300
21-Oct-00 T = 75 °F

Ave Vel = 1114
Std Dev = 22
ES = 79.62
Low = 1070
High = 1150
N = 21
Very accurate

290 LSWC 17.5 grs AA#9 CCI 300
21-Oct-00 T = 75 °F

Ave Vel = 1140
Std Dev = 17
ES = 63.18
Low = 1114
High = 1177
N = 18
Very accurate

290 LSWC 18.0 grs AA#9 CCI 300
21-Oct-00 T = 75 °F

Ave Vel = 1181
Std Dev = 24
ES = 110.3
Low = 1145
High = 1256
N = 17

Very accurate http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/SlamFire/Smith%20and%20Wesson%20Pistols/HogueXgriponM629-4sideviewDSCN6334.jpg

2400 conjures images of campfires, Elmer Keith and wonderful old sixguns with carved ivory stocks and engraving like the Triple-Lock, 1950 Target, pre-29's and the wonderful Croft #5. AA#9 does none of that. ;)

2400 is more flexible than #9
I agree,
I have experienced over pressure signs when down loading AA#9 were with 2400 it just quits burning.
I think 2400 is better suited for standard pistol primers, I read of folks having trouble in cold temperatures with AA#9 with standard primers.
Personally I really like AA#9 and will continue to use it.