[Littlewolf]

At a recent gun show, a vendor had various military surplus powders for sale. I understand these are canister powders and the same powder (WC844 for example) will not be consistent from lot to lot. The question is this, should each 8 pound container sold by the vendor be tested to work up an appropriate load OR could it be assumed that all the WC844 powder sold by this vendor on the given date was of the same lot? None of the 8 pound jugs is marked with a lot number so one cannot tell if it was from the same cannister.
I typically prefer to buy a brand name powder which is more likely to be consistent from lot to lot. My understanding is that military surplus powder may have significant variations.

LittleWolf

[GLOOB]

I've never purchased surplus powder before. I woulda thought it would be marked with a lot number, just like cannister powders. Even if it's pull down powder, seems like whoever divided the kegs into jugs woulda put a lot number on them.

Even if you got unmarked jugs or even known different lots, you could mix them together real well before you started working up a load.

[41 Mag]

With Surplus powders in general they are "NON CANISTER" powders and you can never assume anything, and checking your loads is much easier than removing blown cases or worse. They are blended up in ton sized batches for a specific criteria, and then used as such. Most of it is pull down but some is listed as new never used. If it wasn't used there is a reason, and it is usually due to it not meeting the specific criteria of the end user, being either faster or slower, or not hitting the correct pressure curve.

Personally I have several jugs of surplus which was purchased for specific purposes. Once they are gone I will find something else to use. At the time of purchase they wee still a "good" deal.

There are several folks selling the surplus powders in bulk, any of which your gunshow fellow could have purchased from or even all of them. If I WERE going to purchase it I would certainly be asking from where it came as well as when. If you have that you could contact the original seller and at least get a general idea of the burn rate, (faster or slower).

With the surplus stuff you have to also be watchful of things like temperature sensitivity, pressure spikes and even deterioration, as in some cases you simply have no clue as to when it was manufactured or how it has been stored. Years ago when it was $40-75 per 8# jug verses the higher prices of canister grade stuff it was a bit easier to swallow if you got a jug and found it wasn't going to work out for you, or ti headed south before you got to the bottom of the jug. Nowadays however with most of it hitting $100 or so per jug the factory fresh canister powders aren't so much over priced and knowing exactly what your getting to me is far more valuable.

There are thousands of folks out there who have loaded who knows how many rounds with it however, and are plenty happy with it. Like I mentioned I have several different jugs of it myself and use it quite frequently. Just thought I would add the info on it.

[ArchAngelCD]

If the powder you buy has no lot number you have to treat each jug as a different lot and work up data accordingly. It may work out that you get lucky and they are from the same lot but you can't assume that without it being marked. Sorry but then again, I think you already knew this just by the way you asked the question... lol

[FROGO207]

The surplus that I buy usually have a lot # on them. Still I will at least work up in 3 steps to the load I use when starting a new jug---always.:scrutiny: Just me:) also I do the same thing with same lots of regular propellant. I would recommend a full workup of each jug of unmarked surplus propellant for your safety. YMMV

[kingmt]

I wouldn't buy it if it didn't have lot numbers. Sounds like someone sloppy did it. It is hard to find a good deal on the stuff anymore. Most of what I have which is over 100# I gave about $4# for & none was over $10#.

[Littlewolf]

Appreciate the responses. My thoughts were in agreement with GLOOB in that mixing the same powder type such as WC844 into one well blended mass would be the best way to make several jugs consistently the same. It is understood that a workable load must be worked up from there. The reason to consider pulldown powder is that it currently is half the price of brand named powder (at least in our area).

[kingmt]

It is hard to mix dry powders to a perfect blend.

[GLOOB]

^ It would require a little creative thinking, for sure. How many pounds of powder can you fit in your tumbler? :) Yeah, it might not be worth it.

[kingmt]

I was thinking about that myself or a concert mixer. ;-)

[Ken70]

I read somewhere the military will take samples out of each batch of ammo and run tests on the powder; whether it's starting to breakdown. The stuff that is still "safe" but getting near the end will be a lot of the pull down powder you'll see. It's OK to use, just don't make the ammo you plan for long term storage out this powder. More useful for blasting ammo that you use in the next year or so....

[Elkins45]

If the seller is a reputable guy he should be able to tell you where the powder came from and if it's all part of the same lot. Many of those sellers buy big lots and repackage them themselves.

[blarby]

If he can chime in, Ditchtiger has a lot of experience with milsurp powders.

His experience as related to me was all positive... mebbe we can sir him up outta the cage.....

[Hondo 60]

As Gloob suggested in post#2...

If you buy several canisters of the same powder, go ahead & mix 'em.
That way you work it up once.

I even do that for new powder.
If I buy 3 bottles, I mix all 3 together.
That way I don't have to worry about Lot numbers.

[SlamFire1]

I read somewhere the military will take samples out of each batch of ammo and run tests on the powder; whether it's starting to breakdown. The stuff that is still "safe" but getting near the end will be a lot of the pull down powder you'll see. It's OK to use, just don't make the ammo you plan for long term storage out this powder. More useful for blasting ammo that you use in the next year or so....

Absolutely true. Pull down powder came from ammunition that exceeded its shelf life. The "Go", "No Go" criteria is less than 20% of the original stabilizer left in the gunpowder. Under good storage conditions double based powders are expected to last 20 years and single based 45 years. That WC powder is double based.

Under less than good storage conditions, the shelf life can be a few years. See table one in this publication for how heat ruins powder.

Surveillance and in-service proof - the United Nations

http://www.un.org/disarmament/convarms/Ammunition/IATG/docs/IATG07.20-Surveillance_and_In-Service%20Proof(V.1).pdf


By the way, exposure to hot conditions raises pressures in ammunition. That surplus gunpowder could have spend the last ten years cooking its way in the Iraqi sunlight.

This is the result of an accelerated aging test:

INVESTIGATION OF THE BALLISTIC AND CHEMICAL STABILITY OF 7.62MM AMMUNITION LOADED WITH BALL AND IMR PROPELLANT

Frankfort Arsenal 1962

3. Effects of Accelerated Storage Propellant and Primer Performance

To determine the effect of accelerated isothermal storage upon propellant and primer performance, sixty cartridges from each of lots E (WC 846) and G (R 1475) were removed from 150F storage after 26 and 42 weeks, respectively. The bullets were then removed from half the cartridges of each lot and from an equal number of each lot previously stored at 70F. The propellants were then interchanged, the bullets re-inserted, and the cases recrimped. Thus, four variations of stored components were obtained with each lot.

Chamber pressures yielded by ammunition incorporating these four variations were as follows. These values represent averages of 20 firings.


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/SlamFire/Reloading/Old%20Gunpowder/Pressurevariationsduetostoragetempertures-1.jpg


As for lots, the lot numbers on surplus powders were created by the vendor who demilled the cartridges or the vendor who bought the drums. The powder in the drums could be from WWII, Korean War, Vietnam War, Panama Invasion, Iraqi War 1, ammunition, all mixed together. There is no reason to assume pull down powder is by year, or by anything but what random bunches of cases were pulled to fill that drum.

Always assume that different jugs of surplus powder have a different burn rate. I found that with surplus IMR 4895, loads with one "lot" would blow primers if I duplicated data from another "lot"

I bought surplus before I found that powder had a shelf life. I have had to toss about half of all the surplus IMR 4895 I bought because it went bad. It either fumed or caused case neck cracks in loaded ammunition.

For that reason, if surplus powder is a third of new, it might be worth buying, if it is more than half, it is not worth the risk.

[GLOOB]

As for lots, the lot numbers on surplus powders were created by the vendor who demilled the cartridges or the vendor who bought the drums. The powder in the drums could be from WWII, Korean War, Vietnam War, Panama Invasion, Iraqi War 1, ammunition, all mixed together. There is no reason to assume pull down powder is by year, or by anything but what random bunches of cases were pulled to fill that drum.
What the original source(s) are doesn't matter. The point is that if the two jugs have the same lot number, you can presume they were filled from the same trough. You would then only have to work up one time to get a reasonable assurance that the other jug will act pretty much the same. I'm sure there are some morons out there, but most vendors who demil a ton of cartridges aren't going to put 5 different kinds of powder in five different jugs and mark them all with the same lot number. It's usually going to mean that w/e junk they put from w/e multiple sources in one jug, it's the same junk in the other.

The lot number on a canister powder serves the same purpose. The only reason it is there is to tell you that what's in one jug of powder is from the same batch as another, or not.

I do the same thing with my reloads when I make large batches that won't be shot up in the near future. I mark that batch with the date. No matter how many individual boxes/bags I keep that batch of ammo in, it is all marked with the same number. It doesn't matter to me what the actual date was when I reloaded it (at least not in the next 30 years). The number just serves to show me which reloads were made in the same batch (regarding die settings, powder throw, components, humidity that day, or whatnot). Even if I was too lazy to record, say, OAL, all I have to do it measure a few cartridges, and I'll know what the rest are. So the lot number is extremely useful, even if it doesn't tell me the specs of the load. A random number would serve me just as well, and I have indeed sometimes marked my reloads with a random lot number, just because.

[Swampman]

I would strongly suggest that anyone attempting to mix different lot numbers use a glass mixing container and stir with a wooden spoon to avoid static electricity
I would also urge that no one use a brass tumbler to mix powders since most tumbler bowls are plastic and can build up a static charge from the friction of the contents being tumbled. The static charge could conceivably cause ignition of the "fines", wiith disastrous results.
in addition, tumbling could also remove deterrent coatings on the powder causing pressure spikes.

[jcwit]

most tumbler bowls are plastic and can build up a static charge from the friction of the contents being tumbled. The static charge could conceivably cause ignition of the "fines", wiith disastrous results.


Ahhhhh! They ship powder in plastic containers, right?

in addition, tumbling could also remove deterrent coatings on the powder causing pressure spikes.

Not going to happen any more than tumbling loaded rounds being detrimental.

[hentown]

I'm using 844, exclusively, now for .223 reloading. I'm loading a little heavier than I do when I'm loading H335. Friend of mine is a commercial ammo manufacturer, and he gets his 844, which is what he uses for .223, from the same supplier I use.

Best deal I ever got on rifle powder was back when you could get 8# of AA2200 data powder for $48, shipped. I finally ran out about a year ago.

[Swampman]

jcwit-
The term "plastic" covers a lot of territory. When Alliant or Hodgdon buy powder containers they don't just say "send us some plastic bottles", they specify HDPE containing graphite. This allows the powder bottle to release any static charges built up by the powder they contain (which also contains graphite, partly to keep it free flowing and prevent clumping, but also for its ability to conduct static electricity). The HDPE used to package powders is also formulated so that it doesn't react with powder or the solvents it contains. For more info on this, read Skeeter Skelton's "Skeeter's Cowkiller Loads".

If you want to blend powder in plastic bowls or use a case tumbler to do so, knock yourself out, but a glass or ceramic bowl, stirred with a wooden spoon, WILL NOT build up a static charge, the plastic that you seem to prefer can.
I'm not saying that use of a plastic container to mix powder is going to instantly cause it to burst into flames, but when you consider that kitchen type plastics aren't designed to reduce static OR resist chemical attack by powder, I can't understand why anyone would use it rather than glass or ceramic, unless they object on some sort of moral or religious grounds. There's no benefit to using a plastic bowl (unless you have some that you haven't mentioned) and several possible downsides.

Mixing large quantities of powder loose in a tumbler seems like an even worse idea. I submit that if you used this method and something went seriously wrong, you'd earn at least a runner up position on this years Darwin awards.

Why don't you try contacting the manufacturers of several brands of tumblers and see how many would advise/approve of using their product to mix bulk powder?
I'm guessing it'll be a very short (like nonexistent) list.

I may be a overly cautious, but I also avoid handling bulk powder on cold, low humidity days, if I get shocked when I touch a doorknob, I'm not going to pick that day to blend or repackage a bunch of powder.
In addition, I always wear safety glasses while at the reloading bench, even when I'm just trimming unprimed cases, so maybe I'm just a wimp.

[blarby]

So, yet another use for old powder bottles.

Mixing surplus military pulldown powders.

And I thought I was cool for taking the labels off of Hodgdons powder bottles and making bumper stickers out of them.

Huh.

Moving along........ Lemme throw my coppers in, because its late, and I'm bored.

Why don't you try contacting the manufacturers of several brands of tumblers and see how many would advise/approve of using their product to mix bulk powder?
I'm guessing it'll be a very short (like nonexistent) list.

I think if you asked anyone if they should mix powders period, regardless of what you were gonna do it in- except in an unbelievably tooled up laboratory testing environment, with proper pressure testing equipment for the results.... you'd probably get a similar result.

Making a test run for each lot of powders in 5 whole grain weight increments takes what.......... 10 rounds, 2 for each grain weight ?

If you really wanted to, you could just use 2 grain weights, something near max, and something near min- of what you ASSUME this powder is, and call it good.

4 whole cartridges- wow. The last milsurp powder I saw came in 8 Lb jugs...that 4-20 rounds not a substantial investment either way.... even if you only got it in 1 pound bottles.

You aren't making "sniperrific" ammo out of this bulk, probably degrading as we discuss this, military pulldown powder anyway.

I think mixing "hypothetically powder type A, of assumed origin and date of manufacture and decomposition" with "hypothetically powder type B, of assumed origin and date of manufacture and decomposition" gets you "hypothetically powder type AB, of assumed origin and date of manufacture, and now completely unknown decomposition and stability" Nothing more, possibly something less. It certainly does not give you a better powder "D" of known and calculated properties.

If you did this with my baking flours- I would throw you out of my kitchen, and not make you bread ever again.

I say "hypothetically" because unless its got a powder factory sealed stamp on it, thats all it is- hypothetically AA2500, or bulletpumper800x, or whatever you either assume, or deduce, it to be. I would trust a 3rd-6th party vendors' sticker/stamp application monkey about I___I <- that far. And thats assuming you trust the monkey's banana thrower of a source.



Meh, again, its only 2 coppers- YMMV.

[jcwit]

If you want to blend powder in plastic bowls or use a case tumbler to do so, knock yourself out, but a glass or ceramic bowl, stirred with a wooden spoon, WILL NOT build up a static charge, the plastic that you seem to prefer can.


Are you implying I'm mixing powders? Never said I did or that I intended to do so, all I said is that they ship powder in plastic bottles, nothing less, nothing more.

Glass can and does at times build up a static charge, at least I've seen grains of powder clinging to the sided of the glass container I was using, mayhap I'm one in a million. Remember rubbing a glass rod with a piece of fur in elementary science?

There's no benefit to using a plastic bowl (unless you have some that you haven't mentioned) and several possible downsides.

Never mentioned any kind other than what the manufactures ship powder in.

In addition, I always wear safety glasses while at the reloading bench, even when I'm just trimming unprimed cases, so maybe I'm just a wimp.

So? I wear safety glasses whenever I'm awake, they're called prescription glasses and in todays world are required to be safety glass or its equivalent.

Hey, If you wish to blend powder, stir powder or whatever, have at it, store it in any form of container you wish. It least now I know "I guess" that they use graphite to make powder bottles black, maybe. Must be true, I read it on the internet.

[jcwit]

I think mixing "hypothetically powder type A, of assumed origin and date of manufacture and decomposition" with "hypothetically powder type B, of assumed origin and date of manufacture and decomposition" gets you "hypothetically powder type AB, of assumed origin and date of manufacture, and now completely unknown decomposition and stability" Nothing more, possibly something less. It certainly does not give you a better powder "D" of known and calculated properties.

If you did this with my baking flours- I would throw you out of my kitchen, and not make you bread ever again.

I say "hypothetically" because unless its got a powder factory sealed stamp on it, thats all it is- hypothetically AA2500, or bulletpumper800x, or whatever you either assume, or deduce, it to be. I would trust a 3rd-6th party vendors' sticker/stamp application monkey about I___I <- that far. And thats assuming you trust the monkey's banana thrower of a source.



Yup, Yup, and Yup!

Only time I ever mix powders, if you want to call it that is when I have a few grains of powder "A" and I pour it into a new bottle of powder "A". By a few grains I mean 2 to 3 grains by weight. I seriously doubt 2 to 3 grains added to 7000 grains and shook up is going to change anything to any measurable amount. But I might be wrong for the first time.

[hentown]

I just can't imagine any good reason for mixing different types of powders. There are so many good powders available, with which one can do just about anything, relative to load development, that mixing powders just seems spurious to me.

[ArchAngelCD]

Spurious indeed and most probably very dangerous.

[GLOOB]

jcwit is 100% correct.

Glass isn't the end all be all of static proof materials. Some plastics, like HDPE, are fairly comparable in this regard. Also he's 100% correct in his assumption that carbon is added to the HDPE in powder bottles to block light, and nothing more. You can test this yourself. Stab the bottle with a multimeter, with the points as close as you can get them without touching. There is NO conductivity, not even in the mega ohm range. In static reducing plastic bags or foams, conductivity is easily measured in this fashion, even across several inches. IOW, there's nothing particularly special about a powder bottle. HDPE is chosen for its high level of impermeability to solvents and gases and for being shatterproof.

Oh, there are safety issues, of course. I wouldn't wanna mix 20 lbs of powder indoors. Outside with proper precautions, no problem. A tumbler full would probably make a flame 10 feet high, but it wouldn't blow up. Handling powder is safer than handling gasoline.

[Swampman]

The "mixing" refered to is the mixing of different LOTS of the SAME powder, not mixing different TYPES of powder.

[GLOOB]

^ Yeah, but on second thought, I wouldn't do this with large amounts of pulldown powder for one reason. If one of your lots goes bad from age, you only lose one lot. If you mixed them, you lose it all!

[blarby]

LOTS of the SAME powder,

You presume, assume, or deduce. Pick your poison.

There is no way to actually be certain of that, barring equipment I have some certain doubts any of us actually have access to. Specifically, a mass spec.

For that matter, there really is no way to be certain its all of the same stuff in one jug, unless :

its got a powder factory sealed stamp on it

or you

trust a 3rd-6th party vendors' sticker/stamp application monkey

a lot more than

I___I <- that far.

But, in the end, its you powder, your money, your guns, and your fingers.

All we can do is offer *occasionally* opinions you might not have otherwise considered, based on mistakes you might not have had the chance to make yet- nor purposefully want to make if you can avoid them.

[GLOOB]

For that matter, there really is no way to be certain its all of the same stuff in one jug
This is good argument FOR thoroughly mixing surplus powder.

You have a lot of valid points. But if you're going to assume surplus powder could very well be a mix of substantially different powders that should not be mixed, then you'd be dumb to buy it in the first place.

If a seller says his powder is WC844, and it looks like WC844, and he has repeat customers, and you worked up the load to find that it performs like WC844, then why get your panties into a wad over the what ifs? If you don't trust surplus powder, then don't buy it. If you trust it as long as it's unmixed with other lots of the SAME powder from the SAME seller, then you're really crazy to trust that seller. So you are afraid he is pulling different powders that are completely different that what he says it is and blending each lot up himself to make it work like the powder he's claiming it to be? And you would trust that mystery blend.... so long as you didn't unwittingly mix it with any real WC844?

For that matter, there really is no way to be certain its all of the same stuff in one jug, unless its got a powder factory sealed stamp on it
1. Even those guys make mistakes. Recalls happen. If you're using a moderate load and/or work up your hot loads on every new lot, you won't have a problem.

[jcwit]

The dealer/supplier that I buy surplus/pulldown powder from has been in business for decades. I trust the man as to what he sells. I seriously doubt he is the one that pulls down the powder, its probably done by the military or a contractor working for the military.

If perchance he would not be selling what he says he is selling he would long since been gone.

[LennieT]

When changing from one lot of 844 to another I start at the bottom of the recommended charge for H335 and work up the load. I load rounds with the exact same charge weight in H335 and 844. I then shoot the 844 and H335 rounds from two different rifles (one bolt, one gas) over a chronograph. Once I get what I am looking for I use that load data until that lot of 844 runs out.

So far, the H335 has consistently generated velocities that are 2 to 4% higher then the 844. Guessing that little margin of safety is why the vendors suggest using H335 load data when working up loads for 844 surplus.

This discussion does raise the question about lots. Are the lot numbers, if provided, arbitrary?

Lennie

[blarby]

You have a lot of valid points. But if you're going to assume surplus powder could very well be a mix of substantially different powders that should not be mixed, then you'd be dumb to buy it in the first place.

Just to be clear, I don't use surplus powders.

I have no use for ingredients that are already degrading to the point where their original recipients have decided they've ( the ingredients ) "expired" and should be removed from use.

For the sake of discussion, lets say you have ten lots of ......2400...not a cited source or proven example, but we'll use it anyway.

This 2400 has come from 10 separate lots of ammunition, all with different dates of manufacture.


The "pulldown operator" for lack of a better term, determines that all 10 lots are charged with 2400, and dismantles and labels all of the ammunition accordingly.

I'm not sure that they do keep them separate, im not also sure that they don't.

I do not believe that mixing any of these lots of 2400 would create an unsafe compound, but if they were mixed, your chances at being able to calculate stability are essentially zero.

Even if they are separated, some "lots" of military ammunition can extend the entire length or width of an arms depot- experiencing vastly different storage conditions, even within the same "lot".

For that, and other, reasons- the actual physical properties and calculated degradation of these powders would be nearly impossible. Mixing them further- I really can't say what that would do. Im not a chemist, nor a physicist. My wife went to school for that, not me.

As I said- you aren't making "sniperrific" ammo with this anyway, and its obviously not recommended for long term storage. Two very good reasons I don't, and wont, use surplus powder.

1. Even those guys make mistakes. Recalls happen.

Yup, and if something goes wrong, I know exactly who to go to first- with the stated belief that they will make it right- as they can trace, source, and confirm independent laboratory testing of their powder and its properties.

If you're using a moderate load and/or work up your hot loads on every new lot, you won't have a problem.

No arguments there. I think thats kinda the whole point :)

[Jim Watson]

kitchen type plastics aren't designed to reduce static OR resist chemical attack by powder, I can't understand why anyone would use it

Especially not RCBS and Dillon. But they do.
There are various reasons given not to leave powder in your measure, things like exposure to UV and the risk of forgetting what you put in there.
But also, there are several grades of powder that will rot the cheap plastic those major makers use in powder measure hoppers.
I don't know if there is a transparent plastic that is as resistant as the tempered glass that Star used but it would be worth looking.

[jcwit]

I will add that I have used surplus powders on and off for 40 years now. Yet to have a problem using them. I do work up a new load with every new 8 lb. jug when opening. No I never mix powders other then as I said a few grains left from one jug goes into the new jug, a few grains equals less than what it takes to load 1 cartridge. In the case of a rifle cartridge say 30 cal carbine it would amount to 14 grains max to 56,000 grains. Doubtful that those 14 grains would have any impact on the 56,000 grains.

[blarby]

Doubtful that those 14 grains would have any impact on the 56,000 grains.

Unless its grains of salt, I'd agree with that :D

[Littlewolf]

Interesting reading. Never thought my post would generate this volume but I thank you all for giving your opinions to consider. I've yet to do anything due to being occupied with other endeavors but plan to see what the first jug looks like soon.

Littlewolf.

[FROGO207]

As a side note I do not load the surplus up to use for storage ammo per say. I will use it up within the next year and monitor the canisters as I go watching for trouble.