changing powder with a similar burn rate

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

BJung

Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2021
Messages
761
Location
California
Has anyone run out of a certain powder and chose a powder next to it on the powder burn rate chart. Have you received similar results to your accuracy load in the end?
 
First question...yes. second question...sometimes.

I have a couple of rifles that show little brand loyalty when it comes to powder. Pretty much anything in the useful range with an established bullet and COL get me good results. I have others that are like asking your wife what she wants for dinner. Has to be just right, and you have to guess.
 
I reload 9mm for reliability more than for accuracy. When Green Dot powder became scarce I went to the faster-burning Red Dot. It worked just fine. I probably could have gone to 231 with similar results.
Sometimes you have to use what you've got.
 
I don't use burn rate to decide on my next powder. I go to data in manuals and powder websites to see if it has been tested and the numbers they came up with. Mostly I'm looking for the same performance to match my old powder or as nearly as possible. These days it's more likely to be what's available and not what you want.

I used AR Comp (.223) for years but switched to 748 when people started cleaning out the powder supply. Not even close on the burn rate chart. 748 is a lot slower.
 
Last edited:
Published "Burn Rate" charts reflect only the start of a powder's burn, which changes as pressure builds/burn progresses.
Moreover, "burn rate" is only one of five very different characteristics of a powder's injection of enegy/pressure in the barrel.
See https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...create-unpublished-loads.752605/#post-9480086

Do not do a simple substitution of one powder for another based on those charts.
 
Last edited:
Generally, yes. If, for example, the shop is out of Red Dot then I will try to use a similarly “fast” powder as long as published load data is available. (That’s how I ended up discovering 700x). But never try to substitute load data though.
 
Last edited:
BJung said:
Has anyone run out of a certain powder and chose a powder next to it on the powder burn rate chart. Have you received similar results to your accuracy load in the end?
Click to expand...

MEHavey said:
Do not do a simple substitution of one powder for another based on those charts.
Click to expand...

That's the Right Answer... ^^^

Having said that, it's possible to substitute and wind up in the same ballpark... Unique and Universal are one of those. However, right on the same chart, Unique is also right next to W244... and they are very much 2 different powders. Right next to Universal, is PowerPistol... which, again, is NOT even near Universal in how it behaves. (This using the burn rate chart provided by Hodgdon.)

Rifle powders are even a bigger barrel of monkeys... once you introduce things like bullet weights and barrel length, and the pressure differences behind them with a new powder.
 
Alliant 2400 vs Accurate #9 Powder in 357 mag seem about the same in accuracy? More testing needed. Delayed testing, WSPM problems.


Hodgdon burn chart & this guide helps choosing a new powder. http://www.adiworldclass.com.au/powder-equivalents/

Better to compare load data in the cartridge your working with, I think.

Comparing single based powder to double may have issues? IMR 4350 (single) & IMR Enduron 4451 (double contains nitroglycerin ) are close, but i choose to stay with 4350.
 
BJung said:
Has anyone run out of a certain powder and chose a powder next to it on the powder burn rate chart. Have you received similar results to your accuracy load in the end?
Click to expand...

I haven't run out of a powder and chosen one next to it, but I have gotten similar results with two different powders.

I use W231 in 45acp, and recently started using VV N320. Accuracy is close enough that I can't tell the difference, but the charge weight is 0.6 grains higher with the N320. The N320 also has more felt recoil and leaves the cases cleaner both inside and out. I will be dropping the charge of the N320 by 0.2 grains and probably won't buy anymore unless I can get a comparable price to the W231.

I can't comment on rifle since I only started loading it last year and haven't tried to many powders.

chris
 
Well, let me put it this way. I'm reloading for an early production Arisaka T99. I used the Ken Waters' Petloads to choose a powder and N203 and N204 performed well through it. R15 and R19 are about the same powder according to this article. But after a few testings and the Pandemic. Finding more Reloader 15/19 is hard to find. And so, I chose IMR 4350. For one my Hornady manual lists it as a powder can generate the highest MV. Plus, it was available so I snatched it up. Many T99 shooters use IMR 4064 or IMR 4895 and the MV at the high end of the chart is close to the T99 posted MV. From one burn rate table I looked like, the next slowest burn rate after 4064 would be AA2520, then R15 and then N-203. Yes, I'm sticking close to R15 and N-203 because Waters' also lists 4350 as a decent powder but 4064 has high pressure. As I recall from testloads decades ago, I used 4064 or 4895 and the pressure was high. I think most of my question has been answered but let me rephrase my question, If N-203 was producing target load accuracy with decent pressure for me, would a deviation closest to in on a burn rate chart give me the next best accuracy load compared to those farther from it? Which direction would you go if you had a choice of powders, faster or slower?
 
Recent charts have dropped part of the name from publication. They used to be called "Relative burn rate charts" and "Relative" has been dropped. Burn rate charts (at least the ones I've seen) do not tell you the speed of the powders just which are faster or slower than others. Powder #29 could be faster than powder #30, but how much? Close enough to use #29's data? How much slower is #47 than #48? (random numbers).The best use for a burn rate chart is to find a powder either faster or slower than what is currently used and go to a reloading manual and get specific load data for that powder...
 
mdi said:
They used to be called "Relative burn rate charts" and "Relative" has been dropped.
Click to expand...

That's why I like this chart best... it shows a more relative relationship between powders than just a numerical list. Any powder list, of course, is a generalization, but the first time I saw this chart, it really changed my thinking on burn rates and how I viewed powders. Granted, it doesn't tell you anything on HOW a powder does it's job...

https://accuratepowder.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/burn_rates.pdf
 
The OP didn't ask but I think it ought to be said: choosing a powder - or group of powders - involves so much more than where each option places on a "burn rate chart" that it's almost the LAST piece of information to review before making a choice. In other words, forget the burn chart and look at the commonly-used powders for your chosen bullet. You can find authoritative load tables for bullets and powders in a variety of places.
 
GeoDudeFlorida said:
The OP didn't ask but I think it ought to be said: choosing a powder - or group of powders - involves so much more than where each option places on a "burn rate chart" that it's almost the LAST piece of information to review before making a choice. In other words, forget the burn chart and look at the commonly-used powders for your chosen bullet. You can find authoritative load tables for bullets and powders in a variety of places.
Click to expand...
I choose my first powder by reviewing load tables and other publications first. I use that particular powder. But now with the shortage, I want to know what my options are for less popular powders next to the one I'm using in the burn rate chart. Lyman lists a very interesting quality and that is chamber pressure. Can I assume right that chamber pressure doesn't follow burn rate?
 
BJung said:
Has anyone run out of a certain powder and chose a powder next to it on the powder burn rate chart. Have you received similar results to your accuracy load in the end?
Click to expand...

No and No.

BJung said:
I choose my first powder by reviewing load tables and other publications first. I use that particular powder. But now with the shortage, I want to know what my options are for less popular powders next to the one I'm using in the burn rate chart. Lyman lists a very interesting quality and that is chamber pressure. Can I assume right that chamber pressure doesn't follow burn rate?
Click to expand...
Good question! Yes and No.

For instance...
.32H&R Magnum.jpg
from: Lyman's 3rd Ed of the revolver and pistol loading handbook

You can find published, tested, modern data that has .32H&R magnum lead loads with powders ranging from Bullseye and W231 on the "fast" end down to Blue Dot and IMR Hi-Skor 800Xon the "slow" end.

Bullseye and W231 are in the same vicinity on that chart and are known to be good substitutes for each other but NOT in any kind of 1:1 ratio. Accurate No.2, Red Dot, and TiteGroup are all on the same line of Western's burn chart but are known to have very different characteristics under pressure. Hi-Skor 800X, No.7, VV N350, and Blue Dot as also on the same line but are not even really very similar in how they work under pressure in a loaded cartridge.

upload_2022-10-15_16-37-34.png

It's like the old kid's game: Look at the two pictures posted. "Can you spot what's missing?"

The pressures are not as far off as the velocity changes might indicate. e.g. W231 starting load produces 777fps at 12,500CUP vs. IMR Hi-Skor 800X starting load which produces 889fps at 12,400CUP. "Only" 100CUP different in pressure, but 112fps difference in velocity. But if you look at the burn chart, assuming your favorite powder for 85gr. LRN .32H&R is with recently discontinued IMR 800X, and given how hard Blue Dot has been to find, it just seems to make sense from looking at the burn chart to switch to the much more plentiful Accurate No.7 or never went away VVN350. Right? Okay, but, where's the pressure-tested data? You might have to look up articles by Brian Pearce to find some "Pet Loads" - and that's fine but, what if Brian Pearce didn't recommend either No.7 or N350 for .32H&R Mag? Do you go up the chart and try Longshot? HS-6? Herco? Been done and the results are NOT what you get with 800X.

Bottom line: using a burn chart - and they are all slightly different which means consistency from test-to-test is almost nil - to find a replacement powder is the LAST step in the process and not always one to take because it rarely bears fruit. Use the loading data tested and published by authoritative sources and it's hard to go wrong.
 
During the 2012 powder shortage I couldn't find Bullseye for my 38 special target loads ...
but spotted 3 cans of Red Dot on the dealer's shelf . Not a bad stand in for Bullseye ... similar results . I have since stocked up on Red Dot it's useful in many cast bullet loads
Then I remembered IMR 700-X that we used for target 45 acp loads back in the 70's - 80's ...
Not a bad stand in either ... I had a can on the powder shelf and brought it out to use during this shortage . Plenty of data and not a bad stand-in for Bullseye .
Local dealer had new shipment and Sale of Accurate Powders , I had never used any Accurate powders but here they were and on Sale ! I knew from readings that Accurate #2 was in the same burn range as Bullseye and Accurate #5 was close to Unique , so I grabbed two cans of each and rather like the stuff in the limited amount of loading I've done with it .
These powder shortages are forcing me to use other powders beside the Bullseye - Unique -2400 I had used for 35 years and never changed because they were always available .
Truth be told ... I still prefer Bullseye in Target loads but if I can't get it or Unique or 2400 there are many other powders out there that can step up and fill the gap.
When powders returned to the shelves awhile back I bought Titegroup , HP-38 , Accurate #7 and more 700-X , Bullseye , Unique and Red Dot ...
I believe I now have a lifetime supply of powder !

Before you buy any powder ,,, make sure you have plenty of reliable loading Data ...
If you don't have data ...then the powder is useless .
Gary
 
Last edited:
BJung said:
I choose my first powder by reviewing load tables and other publications first. I use that particular powder. But now with the shortage, I want to know what my options are for less popular powders next to the one I'm using in the burn rate chart. Lyman lists a very interesting quality and that is chamber pressure. Can I assume right that chamber pressure doesn't follow burn rate?
Click to expand...
Choose your second powder the same way you chose your first. If it is not commercially available, go to the next powder. Burn tate charts are waaaay to "general" for load data.

There are everal posts above saying trying to use a burn rate chart for determining a new powder is a bad idea, I agree...
 
It's a good starting place......but that's where it ends.
Powders right next to each other on the chart I consider very, very different. They can have very different bulk densities and other properties and/or chemical makeup that are much different...for Example:
Power Pistol and Unique
Blue Dot, Longshot or 2400
And so many variables go into the end product (a safe, accurate, clean and consistent load) that the answer is no, I don't believe powders right next to each other on the chart have any correlation in that regard. They just have a similar burn speed and/or pressure curve, and are suitable in similar calibers (generally speaking)
 
BJung said:
I choose my first powder by reviewing load tables and other publications first. I use that particular powder. But now with the shortage, I want to know what my options are for less popular powders next to the one I'm using in the burn rate chart. Lyman lists a very interesting quality and that is chamber pressure. Can I assume right that chamber pressure doesn't follow burn rate?
Click to expand...
I find that a very interesting question and the reason I become at odds with the chart. If it takes 2 grains to achieve the same pressure as 3 the 2 grain powder is obviously faster IMO. The issue is that observation applies to that loading. The closed bomb test they use to make their portion of the chart is nothing like the case you load into. So the relative is to each other based on a situation nothing like what your loading. Then you get into powder burn characteristics that due to fun things they add are nothing alike, the new powders being less predictable. I am currently testing #9 vs shooters world heavy pistol that is claimed to be the same. I'm not done, but there not the same.
 
MEHavey said:
Published "Burn Rate" charts reflect only the start of a powder's burn, which changes as pressure builds/burn progresses.

Moreover, "burn rate" is only one of five very different characteristics of a powder's injection of enegy/pressure in the barrel.

Do not do a simple substitution of one powder for another based on those charts.
Click to expand...
This is true - https://www.chuckhawks.com/powder_burn_rate.htm

Consider this ... Powder burn rate is determined using "closed bomb" test with same testing variables. But when we reload, we use different variables like bullet weight/diameter, seating depth/bullet setback, powder charge/metering variance, mixed range brass with differing case wall thickness and resized case length (To produce different amount of neck tension) ... combined with powder forward/air gap in front of flash hole for semi-auto when chambered vs 100% case fill charges that contact with flash hole ... all will affect how powder charge will burn inside the case.

This Ramshot chart shows that even a single reloading variable of OAL going from 1.160" to 1.080" could increase pressure by 6,000 to 10,000 PSI depending on caliber.

index.php


We do not load our rounds to the same SAAMI max average pressures (Heck, even published load data do not show same max average pressures for max charges that can vary by 5,000 PSI ;)). When we load for accuracy of loads to produce smaller groups (especially for lighter target loads) that could differ by 5,000 to 7,000 PSI from start to max charges, we will often use different pressures that will affect powder burn rate inside the case.

So I have considered "relative burn rate charts" that can vary in listing of powders depending on source and used them as reference while conducting my own powder work up and range testing. Just because a powder is listed next to another powder doesn't mean they are same in burn rate rather they could be faster/slower burning or similar but do not tell us how they will actually burn inside case under different variables.

Charlie98 said:
it's possible to substitute and wind up in the same ballpark... Unique and Universal are one of those
Click to expand...
Having said all above, during the "Great Shortage" of 2013, I was forced to test different powders to identify substitute powders for my preferred powder selection that were "unobtainium" and we arrived at the same/comparable powder thread for our reference in chasing down usable alternate powders - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...-under-different-labels.890893/#post-12318114

So instead of simple listing of powders that doesn't tell me how one powder "behaves" relative to other powders, I decided to cluster powders by the way they behave when loaded and shot from my own powder work ups/range tests while referencing different powder burn rate charts - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...-and-discussions.778197/page-11#post-12415502

Faster burning pistol powders:

E3 - Competition - Nitro 100 - N310 - Norma R1

Red Dot/Promo - IMR Red - Clays - 700X - Bullseye - Vectan Ba 10 - IMR Target - TiteGroup - Vectan AS - Am. Select - Solo 1000 - WST - International - Trail Boss - N320 - Sport Pistol - Vectan Ba 9.5 - No. 2 - Clean Shot/Lovex D032.03

W231/HP-38 - Zip - Green Dot - IMR Green - W244


Slower burning pistol powders:

Unique - Universal - IMR Unequal - Vectan Ba 9 - BE-86 - Power Pistol - N330 - Vectan A1 - Herco - Vectan A0 - WSF - N340 - 800X

No. 5 - Auto Pistol/Lovex D036-03 - True Blue - HS6 - AutoComp - Ultimate Pistol/Lovex D036-07 - CFE Pistol - Silhouette - 3N37

N350 - 3N38 - IMR Blue - W572 - Blue Dot - No. 7 - Major Pistol/Lovex D037-01 - Vectan Ba 7.5 - Pro Reach - Long Shot - 2400

Enforcer - No. 9 - Heavy Pistol/Lovex D037-02 - 4100 - Steel - Norma R123 - N110 - Lil'Gun - W296/H110 - 300-MP - 11FS - Vectan Ba 6.5 - H4227​

Charlie98 said:
However, right on the same chart, Unique is also right next to W244... and they are very much 2 different powders ... using the burn rate chart provided by Hodgdon
Click to expand...
This is perfect example of burn rate charts how it could be misleading.

If you look at my "cluster" groups, W244 is in the same cluster as W231/HP-38 as I would consider W244 to be slightly slower burning than W231/HP-38. And Unique is much slower burning powder that behaves differently than W231/HP-38, especially for lighter target loads.

W231/HP-38 (#28, #29) listed before but near Unique (#31) just means they are faster burning than Unique ... And proximity of their listing on the chart doesn't mean they are "comparable" in how they behave when loaded and shot - https://hodgdon.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/burn-rates-2015-2016.pdf

BJung said:
Has anyone run out of a certain powder and chose a powder next to it on the powder burn rate chart. Have you received similar results to your accuracy load in the end?
Click to expand...
I did find some powders that worked pretty similar.

BTW, these are same exact powders sold under different labels and I post on THR with a slash like W231/HP-38 as their published load data are identical:

- Winchester W231 and Hodgdon HP-38
- Hodgdon HS-6 and Winchester W540
- Hodgdon HS-7 and Winchester W571
- Ramshot Silhouette and Winchester WAP
- Ramshot Enforcer and Accurate 4100
- Hodgdon 4227 and IMR 4227
- Winchester W296 and Hodgdon H110
- Accurate 2230 and Ramshot X-Terminator
- Accurate 2520 and Ramshot Wild Boar
- Alliant RL15 and Norma 203B
- Winchester W760 and Hodgdon H414
​
But there are other powders that "behave" similar/comparable but have different published load data that I found to be usable substitute powders:
  • W231/HP-38 and Zip - Walkalong reports Zip to be very comparable to W231/HP-38.
  • W231/HP-38 and Green Dot - Green Dot required .2 to .3 gr more powder charge than my W231/HP-38 loads and produced slight less accuracy.
  • WSF, BE-86 and Herco - For 40S&W, WSF was my match powder choice for meeting USPSA major power factor and also used it to load "duplicate" defensive JHP rounds for practice using same Gold Dot/Golden Saber bullets due for higher velocities it produced but found BE-86 to be comparable while producing greater velocities and accuracy. I also found Herco to be very usable for 40S&W in producing accuracy while burning clean (Inside the case clean).
  • Titegroup, N320, Sport Pistol, IMR Target, Vectan Ba 9.5 - Titegroup, N320 and Sport Pistol are favored powders by match shooters and if one was not available, I would not hesitate to grab another as substitute. I also liked accuracy produced by IMR Target but unfortunately, it is no longer produced. Less known/familiar powder is Vectan Ba 9.5 and it "behaved" similar so if you are in the region of world where Ba 9.5 is available but other powders are not, it would be a good substitute.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

joneb
  • Locked
Powder burn rates ???
Replies
5
Views
711
Idano
I
S
  • Locked
powder equivalency question
Replies
23
Views
2K
witchhunter
W
Q
  • Locked
AA2200 powder burn rate....
Replies
1
Views
995
steve4102
steve4102
S
  • Locked
Primer burn rates?
Replies
13
Views
6K
BADUNAME27
B
H
  • Locked
Pressure & Powder ?
Replies
8
Views
593
redneck2
redneck2
Back
Top