Accurate #9 input please

[WrongHanded]

I've recently come to realize that between .357 Sig, 10mm, .357 Mag and .44 Mag, A#9 may have a place in my stable.

If anyone has an input as to how it compares to 2400 and Power Pistol I appreciate it. Particularly in the case of 2400, how it compares in cleanliness and velocities in .357 on the 158-160gr range, and .44 with heavier bullets around 300gr.

Thanks!

Edit: Oh, and can it be used without magnum primers successfully?

 

[tightgroup tiger]

I've used it in .357mag and still use it in .41 Mag as a full power load. It seemed to be a little more harsh recoil to me than 2400 but not by much.
It is very accurate for me at maximum load.
Just watch for discrepancies' in load data at maximum load. Lyman's 49th has it at 17.7 , and about everyone else has it at 16.9 for max load with a 210 gr bullet so this may carry through to other calibers as well. I use the 16.9 for max in .41mag.
I believe AA9 is a good magnum powder, clean and accurate and I'll buy more of it when I see it again.
It also doesn't seem to have all the flash that 2400 has.

 

[fxvr5]

If anyone has an input as to how it compares to 2400 and Power Pistol I appreciate it. Particularly in the case of 2400, how it compares in cleanliness and velocities in .357 on the 158-160gr range, and .44 with heavier bullets around 300gr.

Velocity information is in your loading manuals.

 

[EricBu]

Shooter's World Heavy Pistol is the original AA9 (D037.02 from Lovex), and still the same spec as the now GD produced AA9. I use it exclusively now for 357 and 44 mag. Nice consistent and clean powder. According to the Shooter's World powder relationship chart, it's slightly faster than 2400.

 

[Lee Q. Loader]

Disclaimer: The load data below is safe for me in my revolver. please work up your own loads.

I bought #9 when I couldn't find 2400. I use both in full house 44 mag loads with a 240 grain Zero JSP.

I haven't found a load with #9 that's as accurate as my 2400 favorite load.
I like 20.8 gr of 2400, very accurate and gives a velocity of 1310fps from a 5.5" barrel.
In #9 my best load was 19.5 grs with the same bullet. I got better velocity, 1350 fps but not as accurate.
I have a lot of #9, and a lot of the Zero bullets so I'll keep working on finding a better load.

I agree with the above; #9 recoil feels a little more harsh that 2400.

I use WLP primers that state they are for standard and magnum.

 

[WrongHanded]

Velocity information is in your loading manuals.

That is true. And I have 4 to choose from. But it's nice to hear about real world experiences, rather than just lab results.

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

I've recently come to realize that between .357 Sig, 10mm, .357 Mag and .44 Mag, A#9 may have a place in my stable.

If anyone has an input as to how it compares to 2400 and Power Pistol I appreciate it. Particularly in the case of 2400, how it compares in cleanliness and velocities in .357 on the 158-160gr range, and .44 with heavier bullets around 300gr.

Thanks!

Edit: Oh, and can it be used without magnum primers successfully?

I use it with standard small rifle primers almost exclusively. I started with both No.7 and No.9 in the mid-90's as replacements for Blue Dot and IMR HS-7, respectively. I don't think I'd consider either one a good replacement for 2400 powder but either one is a good replacement for 800X, Blue Dot or HS-7/W571. I've never needed "magnum" primers with either one but I run them high on the pressure band, mostly in strong revolvers and carbines. Like other folks have said, No.9 is a little more flashy than 2400. What are you loading for? If PCC or longer barrel revolvers, No.7 might be a better choice.

 

[WrongHanded]

What are you loading for? If PCC or longer barrel revolvers, No.7 might be a better choice.

My immediate thought had been some more load development for .357 magnum, which is likely to be a 160gr LFN out of a 4.2" GP100. (I might just have to break down and buy some W296 one of these days.) But I also have some go-to range loads developed for a 300gr .44 mag, as well as 124gr .357 Sig, and 180gr 10mm. 3 different powders that could possibly be consolidated into one.

However, it's sounding like I might be better keeping PP and 2400 stocked, and switch out the Unique (10mm load) to PP when I run out. One of my 2400 loads is a working one. Same for one of my PP loads. I'm not really short on anything currently (except CCI 500's, which is another matter).

Oh, regarding barrel length, the longest in 5.5" and the shortest is 3.5", so nothing terribly long. Though I use 300-MP for some applications too.

 

[CarJunkieLS1]

AA#9 is fantastic in my Glock 40 10mm. I also use it in my AR pistol 10mm. Works great, accuracy is very acceptable, and velocity it exactly where I want without going full nuclear.

I do think my AA9 is on the faster side of what AA9 used to be, because I'm using 13gr in Starline Brass and am over 1300fps. And 1450 in my 10.5" AR pistol. I'm seeing upwards of 13.5-14gr needed to break 1300 in other people's pistols. Everything I've shot has been 180gr bullets.

My 6.5" S&W 610 revolver is over 1300fps with AA9 and a 200gr XTP. I'm loading long and 13.4gr AA9 is something like 1320fps. AA9 gives me everything I want and don't really have to stress my brass to get it.

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

My immediate thought had been some more load development for .357 magnum, which is likely to be a 160gr LFN out of a 4.2" GP100. (I might just have to break down and buy some W296 one of these days.) But I also have some go-to range loads developed for a 300gr .44 mag, as well as 124gr .357 Sig, and 180gr 10mm. 3 different powders that could possibly be consolidated into one.

However, it's sounding like I might be better keeping PP and 2400 stocked, and switch out the Unique (10mm load) to PP when I run out. One of my 2400 loads is a working one. Same for one of my PP loads. I'm not really short on anything currently (except CCI 500's, which is another matter).

Oh, regarding barrel length, the longest in 5.5" and the shortest is 3.5", so nothing terribly long. Though I use 300-MP for some applications too.

In a 4-5" barrel, unless you're pushing a heavier bullet than a 160gr., No.9 is going to act more like Blue Dot than Power Pistol. Rude but effective. W296 in a short barrel is downright obnoxious. A waste of nitrogen molecules.

No.7 is more polite than No.9 and you'll get as much or more velocity compared to Unique but not compared to 2400 or PP. If you can still get them, you're already using the best powders for the job.
Maybe consider trying some Accurate 4100/Ramshot Enforcer in the .357Mag and .44Mag. I've been real happy with 4100 for a while and Enforcer is the same powder.
I don't shoot or load for 10mm or .357Sig so I'll not comment on them.

 

[N555]

Another one to consider is Alliant 410.
It's about as fast as 2400, if I remember correctly for 44mag use 2400 load data but minus 1gr. Its single base so it burns really clean, it's not really on anyone's radar.
It's slower than AA9, I loaded up a 9x19 full of it as a test to see is it slower or faster than AA9 once and for all, as there was disagreement on the Internet. Yeah definitely slower, more like what I would expect if I loaded a 9x19 full of 2400.
Midway (they don't have any in stock) says it's a flake powder but if I remember correctly more like a stick powder, if it's a flake then it's super chunky flake.

 

[.38 Special]

I used it in the .357 and .44 Magnums before I discovered the grand old loads built with 2400. Truth be told, velocity was at least as good with #9, and it was cleaner burning. In my memory, accuracy wasn't as good - but that actually was before my competition days, and I wasn't as good!

As my supply of 2400 approaches zero, I have been playing with #9 again. I'm not ready to make any official pronouncements - and my heart always will lie with 2400 - but #9 is a very good powder.

PS. I haven't used anything but standard primers with it so far, and have had no reason to think magnum primers would be an improvement.

 

[Shak3s1977]

I use #9 in both 357 mag and 44 mag. Great metering powder that also burns clean. I use it with mainly plain base cast bullets in both calibers. I also use non magnum primers in both calibers. I have loaded the 357 mag with magnum primers, but saw no noticeable difference, so I usually just use regular primers.

My father uses it in 357mag and 10mm. I think it will always be on our shelves.

 

[dh1633pm]

I use No 9 in 357. Works well enough. Have a couple pounds left.

 

[sparkyv]

I agree it'd fit well in your reloading cabinet for those calibers. I prefer 2400, especially in 44 Mag as I've tested 2400 more and developed proven 2400 loads in my revolvers. I use AA#9 with both standard and magnum primers. The one thing I don't like is the spherical powder form which meters extremely well, but is so fine it leaks in all my measures except my Uniflow. It works great for me in the 460S&W Mag, not so much in my 10mms.

I've recently come to realize that between .357 Sig, 10mm, .357 Mag and .44 Mag, A#9 may have a place in my stable.

If anyone has an input as to how it compares to 2400 and Power Pistol I appreciate it. Particularly in the case of 2400, how it compares in cleanliness and velocities in .357 on the 158-160gr range, and .44 with heavier bullets around 300gr.

Thanks!

Edit: Oh, and can it be used without magnum primers successfully?

 

[BJung]

I've reloaded my .357 using AA9. My accurate load using it recoils so hot that I wonder if my frame will eventually stretch or crack. Whatever the case, I'm confident that bullet will make a good impact on the business end of the bullet's destination. I've never used 2400 but have read it's the standard .357 powders are compared to.