Accurate #2 Questions


PDA






bluetopper
February 12, 2013, 06:22 PM
Never tried #2 powder and am going to buy a batch and try it out. I'm guessing it is a stellar performer in 38 Spl and 45acp, as good as Bullseye, 231, Titegroup, or Clays, is this correct?

One question I have, does #2 powder pressure spike like Clays and Titegroup?

If you enjoyed reading about "Accurate #2 Questions" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
ATLDave
February 12, 2013, 06:31 PM
I've been using AA#2 in .38 148gr wadcutters. Feels like a typical fast-burning powder, and load data shows very light/small charges. I'd guess, yeah, easy to make a bomb with an overcharge due to pressure spikes.

bluetopper
February 12, 2013, 06:47 PM
I ask because some fast burning pistol powders do not pressure spike, like Bullseye for instance. Pressure goes up incremently and consistently to correlate with increasing charges of powder.

However some fast powders reach a certain point in amount of charge weights then pressure goes through the roof all of a sudden.

ljnowell
February 12, 2013, 08:53 PM
I ask because some fast burning pistol powders do not pressure spike, like Bullseye for instance. Pressure goes up incremently and consistently to correlate with increasing charges of powder.

However some fast powders reach a certain point in amount of charge weights then pressure goes through the roof all of a sudden

All smokeless powders do that, its nota function of any 1 in particular. Pressure vs. charge weight is not a linear equation.

Having said that I load several pounds of AA#2 per year in 38spcl, 45acp, 40S&W, and even 45colt. What kind of bullet weight and caliber are you looking at?

NWcityguy2
February 12, 2013, 08:58 PM
I don't have pressure measuring equipment but I have never seen as signs of overpressure using #2 in 9mm or 45acp.

rfwobbly
February 12, 2013, 09:48 PM
No2 does have problems in some powder measures due to particle size. It's famous for leaking if you don't have a tight fitting powder measure.

ArchAngelCD
February 12, 2013, 09:52 PM
I know what you're asking and no, I've never heard on AA#2 being prone to pressure spikes like Clays can. Accurate's ball powders are fairly stable and although I have not use AA#2 much I have used a lot of AA#5 with no signs of pressure spikes either.

bluetopper
February 12, 2013, 10:14 PM
Thanks for the info AACD, yes Clays and others from my experience are quite prone to spiking and I shy away from them.

Looking forward to loading up cast bullets in 38 and 45acp with some #2.

Walkalong
February 12, 2013, 10:30 PM
AA #2 is pretty forgiving as far as pressure spikes at the top end of data. I like it a lot. It's the poor mans N320. It's great stuff with lead or plated in .38 Spl and .45 ACP for anything but top velocities.

BullfrogKen
February 12, 2013, 10:47 PM
No 2 is great for light loads.


However, I have friends who were hard-core IPSC competitors who gave themselves tendonitis using Bullseye and Clays trying to make major using a powder that could do it the most economically - meaning with the least amount of powder. And those mentioned will do that.


It would be awesome in 38 Special and light .45 loads. You might have to get a reduced recoil spring to cycle a .45 with it, which is a good idea for light loads in a .45 ACP. Just be sure to work out a method to do it. I have a 1911 I shoot 9mm, 38 Super and 9x23 through the same gun. I have separately marked guide rods and springs to go with them when I make a change.

You don't have to go to that extreme, but something where you have a tiny fishing tackle box that you labeled and know what spring is in the 1911 at the time is a good way to track it.


You won't have that concern in a 38 Special.

Mike 27
February 12, 2013, 11:17 PM
Works great. I use it in 9mm, and 38spl. It does tend to leak from the Lee powder measure but works fine in my LNL and meters very well. I am a big fan of AA powders. I use BE as well but they both work very well.

ljnowell
February 12, 2013, 11:40 PM
It would be awesome in 38 Special and light .45 loads. You might have to get a reduced recoil spring to cycle a .45 with it, which is a good idea for light loads in a .45 ACP. Just be sure to work out a method to do it. I have a 1911 I shoot 9mm, 38 Super and 9x23 through the same gun. I have separate marked guide rods and springs to go with them when I make a change.


I respectfully disagree. There is no reason to change springs to use AA#2 in a 45, none at all. Accurate's load data, at the very bottom of the data. for a 230gr cycled my Officers 1911, full size sig 1911, glock, xd, etc. Unless you are trying to load 700fps or less target loads like that, there is no reason to change springs. AA#2 is capable of making GI hardball specs while still being in non +p range without an undue recoil.

BullfrogKen
February 12, 2013, 11:56 PM
I've never used #2 for .45 ACP. All I can tell you is guys I knew who shot IPSC and wanted to make major with practice loads using economical powders with similar burn rates shot enough to give themselves tennis elbow and tendonitis. And this wasn't just one or two guys. Most of the club did that to themselves back in the 80's using Bullseye and Clays.


Do what you want. These guys shot 100-200 rounds a week, every week in practice. They all suffered from it until they switched powders.

I've no doubt #2 will push a load that'll make a 1911 work. It's a matter of how much you shoot it. Unless you compete and practice enough to stay competitive I'm sure you'll never notice it.


Shoot 5,000 rounds a year doing it, and you'll notice your wrists, hands and elbows barking at you at the end of the year.

ljnowell
February 12, 2013, 11:59 PM
I've never used #2 for .45 ACP. All I can tell you is guys I knew who shot IPSC and wanted to make major with practice loads using economical powders with similar burn rates shot enough to give themselves tennis elbow and tendonitis. And this wasn't just one or two guys. Most of the club did that to themselves back in the 80's using Bullseye and Clays.


Do what you want. These guys shot 100-200 rounds a week, every week in practice. They all suffered from it until they switched powders.

I've no doubt #2 will push a load that'll make a 1911 work. It's a matter of how much you shoot it. Unless you compete and practice enough to stay competitive I'm sure you'll never notice it.


Shoot 5,000 rounds a year doing it, and you'll notice your wrists, hands and elbows barking at you at the end of the year.

So you have never used it in 45 acp, yet are advising the need to change springs? I DO SHOOT 5k a year in 45acp, almost entirely with AA#2. I go through more than 5lbs of it a year. 3/4s of that is in 45acp.

I was entirely respectful in my post and yours is definately less than so. "do what you want?"

I shoot IDPA and bullseye comp with AA#2 in 45acp, I feel qualified to give that opinion. You do not. I hope the OP realizes that a bolded name doesnt equal experience.

NWcityguy2
February 13, 2013, 01:04 AM
Shooting a fast and economical powder doesn't give you tendonitis, that just makes no sense. It would sooner be something in the drinking water before it would be an obviously correct choice of powder for 45acp. #2 cycles 1911s with stock springs in them just fine as well.

RE-15
February 13, 2013, 06:42 AM
It is bottled perfection in .380 lead loads.

Ky Larry
February 13, 2013, 06:56 AM
I shoot AA#2 with 200gr LSWCs in my stock Kimber Custom Defender II .45ACP. No problems. Also works fine in 9mm and .38Spl blasting loads with lead bullets. Just be careful you don't double charge a case.

kerreckt
February 13, 2013, 08:02 AM
I tried it in 38spc. 9mm. and 45acp. I loaded 200 each and then went back to using Titegroup. Accurate #2 did not give me the accuracy that I have with Titegroup. I didn't tell my sons about the change and they both asked me if I had done something to the guns. They were no longer hitting POA. That confirmed my experience. Titegroup is accurate and clean. It is in my guns, anyway. YMMV

BullfrogKen
February 13, 2013, 09:10 AM
So you have never used it in 45 acp, yet are advising the need to change springs? I DO SHOOT 5k a year in 45acp, almost entirely with AA#2. I go through more than 5lbs of it a year. 3/4s of that is in 45acp.

I was entirely respectful in my post and yours is definately less than so. "do what you want?"

I shoot IDPA and bullseye comp with AA#2 in 45acp, I feel qualified to give that opinion. You do not. I hope the OP realizes that a bolded name doesnt equal experience.


Yup, that's right. I competed with 38 Super, so I never felt compelled to work around the margins with the .45 ACP. You'll notice I mentioned two times that light loads using No 2 might require a recoil spring change.

I didn't say you couldn't get No 2 to push a round fast enough to get the 1911 to cycle.

I didn't even say you'll need another recoil spring.

I said this -
It would be awesome in 38 Special and light .45 loads. You might have to get a reduced recoil spring to cycle a .45 with it, which is a good idea for light loads in a .45 ACP.

And that's true for any light load in a semi-automatic handgun.


I'll never have a baby, but I don't need to deliver a child to trust a woman when she says it hurts.


Nearly a dozen hard-core IPSC competitors at my local club complained about giving themselves tennis elbow and tendonitis after using two powders for their full-power practice loads - Bullseye and Clays. Most of them thought it was just the price they paid shooting 10,000 rounds a year. Some guys even switched to 38 Super hoping to alleviate it.

One of them got fed up with trying to keep track of different powders and loads. So he stopped loading anything but what he competed with. Those symptoms weren't there at the end of the year, while everyone else was taking ibuprofin and suffering those same aches.

He suggested the other fellas try it, and they saw their symptoms go away, too.


You may never even notice it. A couple of these guys were nationally-ranked competitors back in the 80s and 90s, the group practiced together every week, and several of them traveled across the country to shoot matches on the weekends. Those who weren't as dedicated to the sport never suffered those symptoms.


However, I'll readily admit none of them tried that with No 2. Accurate powders just weren't on the radar back then. Too few shops carried it around here.

Art Eatman
February 13, 2013, 12:17 PM
Seems to me that it's a "type of recoil" thing. A sharp jolt vs. more of a push. I did the old 5.8 grains of 231 with a 200-grain lead SWC when I did my IPSC thing, back in 1980-1983. I usually shot an average of around 400 rounds a week. I continued that rate after I moved out to the desert; "Front sight, press" helps with shotgunning for doves.

But, the difference might not be readily noticeable when you're focussed on practicing. One of those subtle things that creeps up on you over time.

Not worth arguing over, of course. Just something to consider if aches and pains show up. No pain? Hey, I'll take luck over skill, anytime. :)

Walkalong
February 13, 2013, 12:22 PM
I would not put AA #2 in the category of Clays and Bullseye as far as burn speed. In low pressure rounds like .38 Spl and .45 ACP it is much slower than those two powders and slower than it shows on most burn rate charts.

The affect on the shooters who put high round counts down range? I cannot say, but I would think it would be more forgiving than Clays or Bullseye.

One question I have, does #2 powder pressure spike like Clays and Titegroup?
Based on velocities given as loads are worked up to max compared to Clays, no. Tightgroup I cannot say for sure, but it has a rep for being a bit spiky towards the top. AA #2 simply does not do that at .45 ACP pressures.

BullfrogKen
February 13, 2013, 12:47 PM
I would not put AA #2 in the category of Clays and Bullseye as far as burn speed. In low pressure rounds like .38 Spl and .45 ACP it is much slower than those two powders and slower than it shows on most burn rate charts.

Good to know.

I'm a big fan of No 5. I started using that back in the late 90's for .45s, 40 S&W and 38 Specials when it hit the local shops. I never felt compelled to use anything faster. I've used No 7 in moderately powered 38 Super and No 9 in magnums/heavy 45 Colts.

I do know No 2 is quite popular because you can get more rounds per can with it. I just never went that way with how I load ammo.


I bought a pound of Titegroup back during the first stock-out craze just so I'd have something that would let me continue to shoot and would spread out farther than most powders. I've never even opened it.

ljnowell
February 13, 2013, 12:50 PM
Nearly a dozen hard-core IPSC competitors at my local club complained about giving themselves tennis elbow and tendonitis after using two powders for their full-power practice loads - Bullseye and Clays. Most of them thought it was just the price they paid shooting 10,000 rounds a year. Some guys even switched to 38 Super hoping to alleviate it.

And neither of those involved AA#2. The fact is AA#2 doesnt exhibit any of those issues. See the posts above by others who use it, including walkalong. You can talk about tendonitis in competitive shooting all you want but none of that applies to this, and it never did. I'm not even sure why you brought it up.

Had you not brought that up and had you not said I've no doubt #2 will push a load that'll make a 1911 work. It's a matter of how much you shoot it. Unless you compete and practice enough to stay competitive I'm sure you'll never notice it.
I may not even have replied again. That statement does imply that in order to get a good load you would have horrible recoil, etc.

You can talk around it all you want but we all caught the meaning of your posts.

BullfrogKen
February 13, 2013, 01:40 PM
lj, I have got no interest in bickering over this.


Have a nice day!

If you enjoyed reading about "Accurate #2 Questions" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!