Important info about Tin Star vs. Trail Boss for reduced loads

Status
Not open for further replies.

John Ross

Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2003
Messages
534
Location
St. Louis
Thoughts on TinStar powder compared to Trail Boss

Here's some info some may find interesting. Doing some checking with Quickload, two things become apparent.

First, the people who claim that TB is safe at 100% loading density in any cartridge are probably correct, except perhaps in the very weakest, junkiest firearms made originally for BP loads.

Doing a quick check of a .50 BMG round with an 800 grain bullet seated only .200" deep, 85 grains of TB is 100% load density, and gives 38,200 PSI and a muzzle velocity of 1520 FPS in a 26" barrel. Interestingly, raising the bullet weight to 2000 grains raises the pressure only a bit, to 39,500 PSI with M.V. of 978 FPS. Going for full-on crazy with a bullet of 7000 grains (one pound) gives 40,200 PSI and 525 FPS. This is all with the same 85 grain powder charge.

Second, according to Quickload, TinStar has almost exactly the same burning characteristics as TB on an identical weight basis. A charge of 85 grains of TinStar gives similar numbers as TB in these .50 BMG examples, and simulations on other cartridge/caliber combinations I have tried give similar results.

HOWEVER, and this is a very big deal, TinStar is much less bulky than TB. A charge weight that is 100% density with TB is only 67% density using TinStar. If we raise the charge with TS to 100% in our three .50 BMG examples, we get a charge weight of 126 grains and pressures of 66,000 to 68,000 PSI. This is not enough to bother either a Browning MG or a good bolt gun in this caliber, but it's an indication that TinStar carries some serious risks for the handloader with either a cavalier attitude or incomplete information. I'll explain:

Let's switch to the .45 Colt cartridge with 250 grain cast bullet. A charge of 8.9 grains of Trail Boss gives 100% loading density, 16,000 PSI, and 900 FPS out of a 5" barrel. This is 2,000 PSI above SAAMI Spec, but probably not enough to damage an original Colt.

Things get scary when we switch to TinStar. The same 8.9 grain charge gives only 67% loading density but a pressure of 17,400 PSI. Raising the load density to 100% gives us 13.5 grains of TinStar which gives a pressure of 38,000 PSI. Bye-bye original Colt...

TinStar is an interesting powder that can be used for reduced loads in modern guns by shooters who want more oomph than TrailBoss can deliver, but IMO in these cases there are always better choices.

As an example, a 100% density TinStar load in my beloved .500 S&W (24.5 gr.) with my 400 grain Alley Cleaner bullet gives 1200 FPS at 50,000 PSI. At an 80% loading density (19.6 gr.), we get 1060 FPS at 34,600 PSI. Neither of these loads will hurt the gun, but a powder like Ramshot Enforcer will give 1200 FPS at 23,000 PSI, the same velocity as the top TinStar load at less than half the pressure.

Even if TinStar were half the price of other powders, I don't think I'd ever use it. I think we're going to see some original Colt SAAs (and others) blown up with this powder by folks who mistakenly believe they can treat it like Trail Boss...
 
John Ross said:
Even if TinStar were half the price of other powders, I don't think I'd ever use it. I think we're going to see some original Colt SAAs (and others) blown up with this powder by folks whomistakenly believe they can treat it like Trail Boss...

I have TinStar on order for subsonic .450 BM loads because I want more "oomph" to cycle the bolt. I have masses of Trail Boss that I'll probably never use since I sold off my USFA .45 Colt revolvers and prefer H110 for my Blackhawks, Redhawk, Super Redhawk Alaskan and Marlin rifle, all chambered for .45 Colt/.454 Casull.

As for folks blowing up their Colt SAA revolvers due to their ignorance and/or incompetence.... I assume that you're not blaming VV for that.
 
The OP is referring to people experimenting with doing their own data, not published data, which is misleading, as it can be read as a condemnation of TinStar powder. As long as published data is followed, it's no more dangerous than any other powder for it's intended purpose.

He's posted this same post on other forums as well...

Hope this helps.

Fred
 
The makers of Tin Star don't claim you can fill any case and call it good like Hodgdon does with Trail Boss. I'm not sure why the OP mentions filling the cartridge with Tin Star.
 
The OP is referring to people experimenting with doing their own data, not published data, which is misleading, as it can be read as a condemnation of TinStar powder. As long as published data is followed, it's no more dangerous than any other powder for it's intended purpose.
This was the point I was going to make, but Fred beat me to it.

Neither plays well with plated or jacketed in pistol calibers IMHO. Lead only. I haven't tried Tin Star in any rifle calibers, where I have done so with Trail Boss.

I guess the point is, different powders are, well, different. Follow load data and any tips/warnings for the actual powder you are using.

It can serve as a warning for those who may carelessly think, oh, it's like Trail Boss and then start jamming brass full of it without actually checking load data and recommendations for it, like they should for any powder. Carelessness can get us hurt when reloading.

Y'all be careful out there. :)
 
What "exactly" is 100% case density?? Is that 100 % full? If so then it is not correct as TB should not be compressed. I have no idea about Tin Star,

Quickload is nothing but computer "algorithms", guess it fun for playing with numbers, but is in no way actual confirmed testing.
 
What "exactly" is 100% case density??
Duuno, I have always used "Load Density", so 100% Load Density would be full up to the base of the bullet. IMR says never go past 100% load density/don't compress Trail Boss. I do not know if that warning holds true with Tin Star, I would have to research it. I would assume so unless I saw otherwise from Vihtavuori.
 
Duuno, I have always used "Load Density", so 100% Load Density would be full up to the base of the bullet. IMR says never go past 100% load density/don't compress Trail Boss. I do not know if that warning holds true with Tin Star, I would have to research it. I would assume so unless I saw otherwise from Vihtavuori.

Sorry, I meant LOAD density. Not enough coffee!!:oops:

https://faq.nosler.com/index.php?action=artikel&cat=37&id=52&artlang=en


https://imrpowder.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/trail-boss-reduced-loads-r_p.pdf
 
100% loading density is commonly taken to mean full up to the base of the bullet, no airspace, no compression.
This is not the same thing as density of loading as used by the old Powley Computer slide rule.

I fail to see a problem. You can buy Trail Boss and load it to Trail Boss specifications, or you can buy Tin Star and load it to Tin Star specifications. Making stuff up and using Hodgdon data for Vhitavuori powder will not end well.
 
This just illustrates the distinction between powders having the same application and using the same data. Sometimes people mix those two things up. The OP is a fine explanation of a particular example of two powders with similar applications not sharing data.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top