Dumb question on Green Dot "Where's the load data"

Status
Not open for further replies.
E

Encoreman

Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2006
Messages
759
Location
on the edge, Tn.
Hi all, I have searched for quite some time trying to find some load data using Green Dot in 9mm,.38,.357 and .45. Evidently Alliant doesn't think this shotgun powder works good in pistol calibers as they give no listings. I have manuals, but none that I have has hardly any green dot recipes. I have always heard not to trust Speer Manual # 8 , is there something crazy wrong with it? And if so it looks like they would have had to redact it or something. Thanks for any help, Mac
 
As a related bit of info, I once used Green Dot for some 20 ga target loads. The data I used was from a non-Alliant generic shotshel reloading manual dome the early 2000s. (Lyman maybe) I loaded these shells around 2009 so the data was a few years old.

I cannot remember the grain weight but one thing led to another and I posted the load data I used on Shotgun World. More than a few piped in and said that was a bit over Max. I told them the source and they concurred that it was still borderline dangerous data. Then they specifically said Green Dot had been problematic with shooters who used inserts for shooting different gauge shells in the same guns.

I never trusted nor used Green Dot ever again and still won’t because there is apparently bad load data out there for it.
 
Encoreman said:
Hi all, I have searched for quite some time trying to find some load data using Green Dot in 9mm,.38,.357 and .45. Evidently Alliant doesn't think this shotgun powder works good in pistol calibers as they give no listings.
Click to expand...
Welcome Aboard !

That's not good thinking. You simply don't have enough data to arrive at that conclusion.

1) Not every powder can be used in every caliber. Some can be used, but often several others offer much, much better accuracy or aspects of reloading safety. As a powder company, why would you lead your customers towards inaccurate or finicky uses of your product, when you know the results are sub-standard ??

2) None of the powder companies publish ALL their reloading data. If they did their web pages would be so big you couldn't find anything. If you suspect some load data is missing, then what you need to do is pick up the phone and call them. Every time I do this, a nice email arrives in several days with 4 or 5 pages of load information.
.
 
Dunno about Green Dot, but many loads were "pulled" for Blue Dot back on the 90's. Speer actually replaced manuals on shelves with updates. We were told bad data, powder went from ok to dangerously high pressure with very little variation in charge weight.

That said, I used Blue Dot for 10mm loads before ammo or data was available... Seemed ok to me. Maybe it was lawyeritis
 
Encoreman said:
Hi all, I have searched for quite some time trying to find some load data using Green Dot in 9mm,.38,.357 and .45. Evidently Alliant doesn't think this shotgun powder works good in pistol calibers as they give no listings. I have manuals, but none that I have has hardly any green dot recipes. I have always heard not to trust Speer Manual # 8 , is there something crazy wrong with it? And if so it looks like they would have had to redact it or something. Thanks for any help, Mac
Click to expand...

I use green dot in all those calibers and several others.
I have a lot of old green dot that's why I use it.

Old manuals are the best source for data.
 
I'm not a green dot user but am pondering something with the suggestions so far.

If you're using data that is 16 years old (2004 year mentioned) is it possible something has changed with the Alliant powder formula? I know when using manuals that are actually "old" people have said the formulas has changed on some powders. But, some of the manuals in those conversations were from the 70's and 80's. How often does this happen (if at all) and besides the "lawyeritis" could there really be something to the lack of data now versus then?
 
This is a common Internet Trope, but if they changed the powder that much, it seems they would have to change the name.

I got most of a caddy of Green Dot for a low price from a guy who didn't want to move gunpowder to a distant new house.
I shot most of it in 9mm and it worked fine.
 
My Speer #11 show some (a few) Green Dot loads in the calibers you mentioned, but more in the larger lower pressure calibers (44 Special, 44 Magnum w/swaged bullets. 45 Auto and 45 Colt).

Some powders will work well in a variety of calibers, but some calibers, some applications, better than others. I think Green Dot fits that description. Very good shot shell powder, and so-so hand gun powder. I believe "popularity" is a factor also. If "hand gun" use is slow, perhaps the manufacturer pushed an other application

As far as "new and improved", changing a powder drastically; I've read on a few occasions that powder manufacturers keep each succeeding batch of powder to within 4% of the standard for a particular powder. If a major change is made, then the powder is renamed or a huge advertising campaign to alert users of possible load data changes. So, the loads I used for my powder purchased in 1989 will be safe for the same powder I purchase in 2020...

The largest change has come from improved pressure testing equipment. A previous method of testing pressure was seeing how much a powder charge squished a piece of copper (a bit more involved than that, but same principle) and today electronic sensors give a much more accurate and consistent testing method.

But, I have a couple thoughts concerning this thread; I find a load in my manuals before I purchase any components so I rarely (never?) have any problems finding data. If a specific powder is not listed in the majority of my manuals, I figger there is a reason, either a performance issue of even a "business decision" (I don't believe in lawyer intervention in powder manufacturing/testing data).

Whew! Got pretty long winded on this post/opinion, didn't I?
 
earlthegoat2 said:
As a related bit of info, I once used Green Dot for some 20 ga target loads. The data I used was from a non-Alliant generic shotshel reloading manual dome the early 2000s. (Lyman maybe) I loaded these shells around 2009 so the data was a few years old.

I cannot remember the grain weight but one thing led to another and I posted the load data I used on Shotgun World. More than a few piped in and said that was a bit over Max. I told them the source and they concurred that it was still borderline dangerous data. Then they specifically said Green Dot had been problematic with shooters who used inserts for shooting different gauge shells in the same guns.

I never trusted nor used Green Dot ever again and still won’t because there is apparently bad load data out there for it.
Click to expand...
Green Dot works real well in 20 gauge 3/4oz loads.

As to using new formulations with old formulation data - that may, or may not, pose some risk depending on hoe close the old formula and new one compare; if Alliant dropped it from their data resources, there must have been a good reason. With so many other powders out there for the OP's list of handgun cartridges - many of them being shotgun powders, why not use what the current data calls for?
 
SlowFuse said:
If you're using data that is 16 years old (2004 year mentioned) is it possible something has changed with the Alliant powder formula?
Click to expand...
mdi said:
As far as "new and improved", changing a powder drastically; I've read on a few occasions that powder manufacturers keep each succeeding batch of powder to within 4% of the standard for a particular powder. If a major change is made, then the powder is renamed or a huge advertising campaign to alert users of possible load data changes. So, the loads I used for my powder purchased in 1989 will be safe for the same powder I purchase in 2020
Click to expand...
I posted the 2004 Alliant load data and 1999 Winchester load data is pertinent even after Hodgdon was licensed in 2006 to sell Winchester powders under their label (W231 became same powder as HP-38, W296 same as H110, etc.).

And as mdi posted, lot to lot variations can happen but powder manufacturers will work on formulation and blending to keep the powder burn characteristics and charges close to published load data.

Ultimately, it is up to the reloader to review all available published load data to use them as reference for our load development, particularly with powder work up/work down using the working OAL that works with our pistols and barrels.

And there are other factors like pressure testing variables used to produce published load data as published load data can vary quite a bit depending on testing variables used (Bullet type/nose profile/length/diameter, brass, primer, OAL/seating depth, barrel groove diameter, barrel length, etc.).

When I noticed Lyman #49 showing much higher 40S&W start/max charges (Lyman start charge was Hodgdon max charge), I looked into why and found Lyman used .401" groove diameter test barrel instead of more typical .400". So now I tell people to slug their barrel and if it is larger sized at .401", to reference Lyman load data but if it is more typical .400", to reference more conservative load data like Hodgdon - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/powder-recommendations-for-40s-w.869086/#post-11516903

index.php
 
Last edited:
George P said:
Alliant dropped it from their data resources, there must have been a good reason.
Click to expand...
We have discussed this question several times and while improvements in pressure testing procedure may have facilitated revision of published load data, there are other reasons.

What we have noticed when referencing various current and older load data is that older load data had more lead and FMJ/RN load data while newer/current load data had more JHP/HP/FP/FN load data.

This does not mean the older load data is now obsolete rather if older test data is still applicable for the bullet/powder manufacturers, there is no reason to repeat the testing of same bullet/powder and may explain why newer published load data show different bullet types not listed in older published load data.

Some manufacturer like Hodgdon/Speer lists both older test data using CUP pressures along with newer test data using PSI in their published load data while Alliant and others tend to focus more on newer test data with greater emphasis on JHP/HP bullets (But when Alliant released BE-86 and Sport Pistol, that trend seemed to have changed as wide range of bullet types were tested and included in the current published load data).

So as many THR members usually recommend, for load development with a new bullet and/or powder, it is "best practice" to reference all available published load data to closely match the bullet type/OAL/diameter as possible for our powder work up/work down (And to consider reducing start/max charges if using shorter than published OAL/bullet seating depth).
 
index.php


Encoreman said:
Evidently Alliant doesn't think this shotgun powder works good in pistol calibers
Click to expand...
While I never cared for Green Dot due to large flake powder size that metered less than consistent for me (My preferred powder metering is .1 gr variance), during the last "Great Component Shortage", popular powders were nowhere to be found and I ended up testing Green Dot when I was looking for suitable/close replacement for W231/HP-38 - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...s-and-discussions.778197/page-7#post-10094185

Before Sport Pistol was released, Green Dot was closest powder in burn rate to W231/HP-38 that Alliant offered and I found Green Dot to be usable for most of my 9mm/40S&W/45ACP loads while requiring .2-.3 gr more powder charge. Accuracy was OK but good enough for range practice use, likely from powder metering variance from large flake size. But if Green Dot was all that was available, I would gladly use it for my 9/40/45 loads.

And I think this is why Alliant decided to make Sport Pistol, to release a powder in the Titegroup/N320/W231/HP-38 burn rate range that burned clean and metered well, particularly for match shooters as when I shot USPSA in the 90s, I hardly met a match shooter who used Alliant powder with the exception of occasional Bullseye/PowerPistol users.
 
Last edited:
Green dot works well in cast 38 special. In 357 it makes for pretty light loads.
The accuracy node is very small.
 
Lee's reloading manual is a good source for Green Dot. Also Ken Water's Pet Loads. I bought a pound and haven't used it much due to the metering problems.
 
I load all my Trap loads with Green Dot, and tried a box of 230 FMJ with 5.0 gr. of it. Very close to my 5.0 gr. Bullseye load. I don't need to worry about metering, I use Lee dippers into the pan.
 
I loaded 158 grain 357 mag ammo with it in 2010-2011.

It worked nicely
 
I used to use a lot of this back in the day but it overlapped other powders and I stopped.

But, refresh my memory. Green dot is a flake powder? Like, Unique?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

D
  • Locked
Green Dot loads for plated .40 S&W ?
Replies
5
Views
872
Dudedog
Dudedog
H
  • Locked
red/green dot in 45 colt
Replies
17
Views
6K
Walkalong
Walkalong
T
  • Locked
Green Dot 380 data
Replies
16
Views
3K
Sundancer2004
Sundancer2004
W
  • Locked
Green Dot 9mm Luger Data
Replies
6
Views
5K
bluetopper
bluetopper
Texas10mm
  • Locked
What happened to Green Dot?
2
Replies
35
Views
2K
George P
George P
Back
Top