Obscure Rifle Powder Data

[DarkFrenchCoffee]

I load for the following calibers:

.308 WCF commercial

7.62 x 51 NATO

.303 British

Bullet types: flat base; 150 - 165 and 174 grains.

Looking for data for the following powders:

AM47N (definitely supplied by Higginson)

44N (possibilly supplied by Higginson)

 

[NCsmitty]

Here's an address and # for contact of HIGGINSON POWDERS. Perhaps they can give you some data. I could find nothing relevant to the powders that you listed. Maybe someone who has actually used or aware of the powders can help, and chime in.

HIGGINSON POWDERS
223 Front Rd. East
Po Box 125
Hawkesbury, Ontario K6A2T1
613-632-9300



NCsmitty

 

[DarkFrenchCoffee]

Thanks. I have already sent an email to Higginson Powder. I was hoping someone out there had data on one or both powders. They are both very fine, short stick type rifle powders.

 

[DarkFrenchCoffee]

Obscure Rifle Powder Anwsers

HIGGINSON POWDERS INC.
2708 HIGHWAY 34
HAWKESBURY, ON K6A 2R2
TEL - (613)632-9300
FAX - (613)632-5666
www.higginsonpowders.com

Reply from original supplier, so I guess I found the information I needed.

AM 47N - Slightly faster than H-4350, use H-4350 data less 2 grains

44N - Burn rate between H-4895 & IMR 4895

--------------------------------------------------------

Now looking for data for rifle powder X2924, sold by AmmoMart a few years ago.

Forgot to mention this powder in original post.

 

[NCsmitty]

I'm glad that you were able to get some info on those powders. I'm always interested in obscure data, and I thank you for posting it back.

Like the Higginson powders, I don't have a clue on the AMMOMART powders either.
Maybe someone will be able to help.



NCsmitty

 

[Clark]

A good handloader should be able to quickly experimentally find a known powder equivalency for any unknown powder presented to him.

Herter's 164 ....... ah! close enough to Unique.

 

[DarkFrenchCoffee]

Some clearifications: "AmmoMart" is the precursor to Higginson Powders. The original owner, Mr. Higginson, did a great deal to support the shooting sports in Canada over the years. After he passed on, his son assumed leadership of the business and the trade name AmmoMart became Higginson Powders Inc.

The confusion about loading data starts with the fact that AmmoMart repackaged tons of surplus powders over many years. This was decades before anyone outside a University ever thought of Data Bases to track details.

Loading information for a small number of calipers was usually packed with the powder shipment but not always.

When a particular Lot# sold out that was usually it. Hence my questions to people on this forum hoping someone might be familiar with these powders. Higginson still have information on many of these powders but certianly not all.

Powder, bullets, barrels and bulk brass are virtually impossible for the individual to import from the United States at this time. One can do it, but it is very expensive, time consuming and often the supplier doesn't want to be bothered. Didn't intend to get into the politics.

 

[DarkFrenchCoffee]

Since I have roughly a pound of each powder ... by the time I work through the correct loading for each I will have more or less exhusted the powders and added considerable wear to my barrells.

Much more efficient to ask and find a starting point than to re-invent the wheel.

If one didn't know that 44N has a burn rate between the two 4895's, one could waste a lot of bullets and powder finding out.

I agree with you Clark that one should know how to work up a load with no data, I just
think it's usually not very effeicient to do so.

 

[Clark]

I bought 32 pounds of bulk IMR4895 that thinks it is H322.

 

[MtnCreek]

A good handloader should be able to quickly experimentally find a known powder equivalency for any unknown powder presented to him.

Herter's 164 ....... ah! close enough to Unique.

Clark,
Can we get some more info on this?
Thanks!

 

[Clark]

Quote:
A good handloader should be able to quickly experimentally find a known powder equivalency for any unknown powder presented to him.

Herter's 164 ....... ah! close enough to Unique.
Clark,
Can we get some more info on this?
Thanks!

I can imagine many ways to do it.
Maybe you can come up with your own.

Here is a powder density vs powder speed chart that helps visualize that slow powders are more dense:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec....e+at+the+top"+group:rec.guns#2e628b891f2decb9

Here is a powder density chart that is easy to use:
http://www.tacticoolproducts.com/powder.pdf

So density is a clue.

I have found powders that look the same and smell the same, but are not the same. Like Bullseye and Power Pistol [Bullseye 84]. But Power Pistol is more dense.

So if you have a library of powders, you may identify it with look, smell, and density.

But if it does not look, smell, and have the density of any powder you have, you can test it. Test it, not taste it.

I would put 2 gr of unknown powder and 158 gr LSWC in a 38sp case as well as 2 gr Bullseye in another case with 158 gr LSWC. If the recoil is the same, the powder is equivalent to Bullseye. If the bullet is stuck. pound it out and try 4 gr 2400 and 4 gr unknown. I would keep working toward slower powders until I got a match or an overshoot.

 

[DarkFrenchCoffee]

Dupex Loading

Reply to Clark - thanks for the URL's re. powder density.

Personally I am not comfortable with duplex loads, especially when working with unknown powders.

What if some one buys some mis-labled W835 at a gun show ... the stuff is a very slow ball powder that works quite well in medium size cases of normal bore diameter. Winchester strongly reccomend you use only the specified components and data with this powder.

Use a reduced load in large capacity case with small bore diameter and you will very quickly find out what "pressure excursion" refers too ...

Mixing powders might make things worse, or it might mask the danger signs.

Guess we can agree to disagree on this one. I really feel duplex loading, when one powder is unknown, is what the Air Force would refer to as "non habit forming".

 

[ljnowell]

This is going to go downhill quickly. Clark, I don't thibk you should be advocating the things you do for handloaders over the net when you don't know thier skill level. Much of what you do is very unsafe.

 

[MtnCreek]

Clark, Thanks for the good info.

Mr. Nowell, You do make a good point. That said, it does somewhat remind me of public schools allowing the slowest children in the class to set the pace.

 

[ljnowell]

Mr. Nowell, You do make a good point. That said, it does somewhat remind me of public schools allowing the slowest children in the class to set the pace.

There are always PMs that can be used for more off the books techniques. Also, a disclaimer isnt a bad idea either. The problem becomes when a guy totally new to reloading comes in and thinks something is a good idea because a long time member suggests it. Attempting to match powder by recoil that way is absolutely unsafe.

 

[kingmt]

Clark thank you for the info & answering the question as it was. I do agree that some of your postings that I have read are unsafe for some but I would hope if they are using powder to start with they at least know there skill level. I hate when someone else decides what is & isn't safe for me. I can't even find fertilizer within 100 mile drive of me & when I ask for it I get comments like "it's people like you that cause these problems". Really? All I did is ask for fertilizer. I so wish people would get away from being so scared.

 

[kingmt]

You know I read that Hitler was afraid of people having knowledge also & even burnt books to try to stop it. He sure made that a safe place for him & his people. Didn't he?

 

[DarkFrenchCoffee]

agreed

 

[ljnowell]

You know I read that Hitler was afraid of people having knowledge also & even burnt books to try to stop it. He sure made that a safe place for him & his people. Didn't he?

So I am hitler now because I dont agree with posting unsafe pracctices for all top see? You should either delete that or explain it because it sure seems to be a pretty tasteless remark.

 

[Sport45]

I would put 2 gr of unknown powder and 158 gr LSWC in a 38sp case as well as 2 gr Bullseye in another case with 158 gr LSWC. If the recoil is the same, the powder is equivalent to Bullseye. If the bullet is stuck. pound it out and try 4 gr 2400 and 4 gr unknown.

Clark is not suggesting that anyone try a duplex load. What he (plainly to me, anyway) said was to put 2gr of the unknown powder under a 158gr LSWC bullet in one case and compare the recoil to a 158gr LSWC bullet loaded over 2gr of bullseye in another case. If the bullet sticks, repeat the experiment using 4gr of the unknown in one cartridge and 4gr of 2400 in the other.

Wouldn't be much need for two 158gr LSWC bullets if he was mixing the powder into one case.

 

[Seedtick]

Clark is not suggesting that anyone try a duplex load. What he (plainly to me, anyway) said was to put 2gr of the unknown powder under a 158gr LSWC bullet in one case and compare the recoil to a 158gr LSWC bullet loaded over 2gr of bullseye in another case. If the bullet sticks, repeat the experiment using 4gr of the unknown in one cartridge and 4gr of 2400 in the other.

Wouldn't be much need for two 158gr LSWC bullets if he was mixing the powder into one case.

+1

Exactly. No Duplex. It was plain to me.

Seedtick

 

[ljnowell]

+1

Exactly. No Duplex. It was plain to me.

Seedtick

Plain to me too, but using recoil to guess the burn rate of a powder is not something to advocate to beginning reloaders, or any really for that matter.

 

[kingmt]

So I am hitler now because I dont agree with posting unsafe pracctices for all top see? You should either delete that or explain it because it sure seems to be a pretty tasteless remark.

I'm not sure how you thought I was calling you Hitler but sorry you took it that way.

To explain it: I was just using an extreme example to show how simple this is.

I don't agree with restricting knowledge. I hate the idea of collages. I believe knowledge should be free to anyone willing to learn. The internet has been great for free information.

 

[Sport45]

The internet has been great for free information.

It's also great for free disinformation.

Always check data and techniques against multiple sources.

 

[kingmt]

It's also great for free disinformation.

Always check data and techniques against multiple sources.

True! So... So.... True!

It can also travel fast. I think there is more of a problem with misinformation though. Example is I read on here countless times that Hodgdon is used as a reference to support the statement reduced loads will blow up your gun. I think they are referring to the *warning* "Reduce H110 and Winchester 296 loads 3% and work up from there. H110 and Winchester 296 if reduced too much will cause inconsistent ignition. In some cases it will lodge a bullet in the barrel, causing a hazardous situation (Barrel Obstruction). This may cause severe personal injury or death to users or bystanders. DO NOT REDUCE H110 LOADS BY MORE THAN 3%." which is stating you will stick a bullet. I do believe they just read it wrong but it spreads fast.