does 2400 do anything AA#9 doesnt?

Status
Not open for further replies.

gofastman

Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2010
Messages
1,062
Location
MN
I'm almost out of 2400, and I learned AA#9 has some applications for my other calibers.

Does 2400 have any advantage over AA#9 in .44Mag?
 
I've never used #9 but its burn rate and applications are just about the same as 2400 and all I've ever read about it has been good. I wouldn't hesitate at all buying some of it.
 
AA9 is a very fine grain and perhaps a bit denser powder that doesn't fill the case as well as 2400. They are both fine powders for magnum loads though in my experience it takes about 1.0 grain less of AA9 to get the same velocity as 2400.
 
I'm almost out of 2400, and I learned AA#9 has some applications for my other calibers.

Does 2400 have any advantage over AA#9 in .44Mag?
No advantages that I know of.

My question is, what applications did you feel the need to use AA#9 in that 2400 couldn't do?
 
How is the accuracy and consistency with 2400? AA#9 may not be as accurate with the same bullet in the same gun or it may be better. You will have to try it to find out.
You don't not want to buy 8lbs and discover the accuracy sucks.
 
Does 2400 have any advantage over AA#9 in .44Mag?

in my neck of the woods, the only advantages 2400 has is price and availability. It is on the shelf here, but I would have to order AA#9.
 
AA#9 has one advantage over 2400...it has a lot less muzzle flash. If you are firing indoors or in low light you will notice a significant difference.

I have also got better velocities with accuracy in my 357's and 44 with #9. In my Blackhawk, with 158 gr. Xtreme Plated SWC, with CCI, Win, or Fed. primers; I found a load many years ago that just works beautifully. My GP100 likes it and so does my SP101. I never came close to finding "the load" with 2400. YMMV

#9 also works much better in the 30 carb. than 2400.

I have an 8 lb.er of #9, 1 lb. of W296, and no 2400 in my stock. That is how I express my opinion on the subject.
 
aa#9 has one advantage over 2400...it has a lot less muzzle flash

that's not a benefit! :D

Good to know though, thanks.

I guess can just use my Blue Dot for the times I want fireworks :evil:


Imma give AA#9 a whirl and see how it goes, heck even if it sucks, a pound of powder doesnt last that long when you're loading .44mag. thanks for the input everyone.
 
I prefer 2400. AA#9 shoots well. When I tested 2400, AA#9 and Blue Dot, Blue Dot leaded. Blue Dot worked with jacketed bullets, leaded with cast.

AA#9 is a good magnum powder and if it is cheaper than 2400 go buy it. My Dillion 550B powder measure does not like these ball powders as little powder balls roll between the slide bar and measure, gumming up the works. I have no such problems with 2400.

My "standard" 357 load is 13.5 grains 2400 with a 158 anything.

Code:
[SIZE="3"]Smith & Wesson M27-2					
	
158 LSWC 13.5grs 2400 R-P cases CCI primers		
					
9-Oct-05	T = 64 °F				
					
Ave Vel =	1273				
Std Dev =	44.03				 
ES  =	176.7				 
High  =	1372				 
Low  =	1195				 
N =	30

158 JHP (W/W) 13.5 grains 2400 R-P cases WSP		
5-Aug-06	T = 103 °F				
Ave Vel =	1196		 		
Std Dev =	26.58				 
ES  =	87.17				 
High  =	1244				 
Low  =	1157				
 N =	10				 
					
accurate					
not difficult 					
to extract

					 
158 LRN   12.0 grs AA#9 CCI500 Mixed cases 		
5-Aug-06	T = 104 °F				
Ave Vel =	1278		 		
Std Dev =	34.98				 
ES  =	117.4			 
High  =	1344			 
Low  =	1226				
 N =	27				 
					
 Accurate little or no leading				
					
	
158 LRN   12.5 grs AA#9 CCI500 3-D  cases 		
5-Aug-06	T = 104 °F				
Ave Vel =	1348		 		
Std Dev =	34.16			 
ES  =	134.7			 
High  =	1386				 
Low  =	1251				
 N =	25				 
					
 Very Accurate	sticky extraction	no leading			
					
					
158 LRN   13.0 grs AA#9 CCI500 3-D cases 		
5-Aug-06	T = 104 °F				
Ave Vel =	1360		 		
Std Dev =	33.19			 
ES  =	109.8			 
High  =	1393				 
Low  =	1284				
 N =	26				 
 Very Accurate	sticky extraction	no leading			
					
				
					
158 JHP 13.0 grs AA#9 R-P cases WSP			
					
9-Oct-05	T = 64 °F				
				
Ave Vel =	1156			
Std Dev =	35.63				 
ES  =	160.6				 
High  =	1230				 
Low  =	1069				 
N =	20				 

Very accurate					
					
			
158 JHP (W/W) 14.0 grs AA#9 R-P cases WSP		
					
9-Oct-05	T = 64 °F				
				
Ave Vel =	1208			
Std Dev =	27.65			 
ES  =	89				 
High  =	1255				 
Low  =	1166				 
N =	24				 
Very accurate					
				
					
158 LSWC Linotype 12.0 AA#9 Mixed cases CCI500 	
	 				
14 Oct 2008 T =  80 °F				
					
Ave Vel =	1217				
Std Dev =	52				
ES =	224.9				
High =	1346				
Low =	1121				
N =	29[/SIZE]

DSCN1755M27-2.jpg

Shot some 290's in the 44 Mag with AA#9. All loads were accurate but the recoil with 290's was heavier than I liked.

Code:
[SIZE="3"]S&W M629-4 Stainless, 5" Barrel	
				
				
290 LSWC 17.0 grs AA#9 CCI 300			
21-Oct-00	T = 75 °F			
				
Ave Vel =	1114	 		
Std Dev =	22			
ES =	79.62	 		
Low =	1070			
High =	1150			
N =	21			
Very accurate				
				
290 LSWC 17.5 grs AA#9 CCI 300			
21-Oct-00	T = 75 °F			
				
Ave Vel =	1140	 		
Std Dev =	17			
ES =	63.18	 		
Low =	1114			
High =	1177			
N =	18			
		Very accurate		
				
290 LSWC 18.0 grs AA#9 CCI 300			
21-Oct-00	T = 75 °F			
		 		
Ave Vel =	1181			
Std Dev =	24	 		
ES =	110.3			
Low =	1145			
High =	1256			
N =	17			
				
		Very accurate		[/SIZE]
HogueXgriponM629-4sideviewDSCN6334.jpg
 
Last edited:
2400 conjures images of campfires, Elmer Keith and wonderful old sixguns with carved ivory stocks and engraving like the Triple-Lock, 1950 Target, pre-29's and the wonderful Croft #5. AA#9 does none of that. ;)
 
2400 is more flexible than #9
I agree,
I have experienced over pressure signs when down loading AA#9 were with 2400 it just quits burning.
I think 2400 is better suited for standard pistol primers, I read of folks having trouble in cold temperatures with AA#9 with standard primers.
Personally I really like AA#9 and will continue to use it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top