Titegroup powder

[enine]

A quick skim of my books tells me 2400 is a magnum powder so probably overkill for target shooting.
For target shooting I'm seeing 357 loads for non magnum such as titegroup, universal, unique from Hornady and Lee.

I think someone mentioned above, titegroup is usually not recommended unless the recommendee is known to be experienced, detail orientated, etc since it takes a very small amount. It could be easy to overlook a double charge even in smaller 9mm cases so when you move up to 357 you have to look good for that little bit of powder way down in there to make sure they are not overloaded. Usually powders requiring more volume are recommended as they fill up more of the case making it easier to spot an overcharge.

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

I bought titegroup because it seemed to very versatile and it was cheaper than others that were available. I looked at comments on it and saw it was being used for 38, 9mm and 45 acp and those are the ones I'm interested in most. But several users mentioned 357, too. When I didn't see it in the manual, that seemed strange.

Well, as has been said many times, always reference multiple sources. I found several sources with loading data in print and online. Have you considered getting a subscription to Handloader magazine? It’s fairly entertaining and occasionally informative. Buy a salt lick with your subscription.

 

[jski]

Yes.

So burn rate isn’t really important?

A slow burning powder would still be burning when the bullet is exiting a short barrel. With a fast burning powder, most of the powder will be spent when the bullet exits. The former results in most of the powder being spent for a large, loud muzzle blast.

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

So burn rate isn’t really important?

Here we go again. Conclusion jump of approximately 200 light years.
@jski please just read the statement again. Out loud. Read it twice if necessary. The powder which results in the highest velocity with a long barrel will also result in the highest velocity in a short barrel. That statement doesn’t speak to recoil, accuracy, efficiency or economy. It’s simply a summation of the fact that powder burns in the case and forces expanding gases down the barrel until runs out of barrel or gas producing elements.

 

[jski]

Here we go again. Conclusion jump of approximately 200 light years.
@jski please just read the statement again. Out loud. Read it twice if necessary. The powder which results in the highest velocity with a long barrel will also result in the highest velocity in a short barrel. That statement doesn’t speak to recoil, accuracy, efficiency or economy. It’s simply a summation of the fact that powder burns in the case and forces expanding gases down the barrel until runs out of barrel or gas producing elements.

So, which is better: a powder that’s 80% burned when the bullet exits the barrel or a powder that’s 20% burned when the bullet exits?

I would think that an 80% burn would produce a greater velocity than a 20% burn.

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

So, which is better: a powder that’s 80% burned when the bullet exits the barrel or a powder that’s 20% burned when the bullet exits?

I would think that an 80% burn would produce a greater velocity than a 20% burn.

Seems pretty obvious this question can only be answered by careful and thorough unbiased testing. Let us know what you find out.

 

[jski]

Seems pretty obvious this question can only be answered by careful and thorough unbiased testing. Let us know what you find out.

Well I was hoping to learn from other people’s experience. That’s usually the smart thing to do.

 

[P Flados]

jski,

I know it sounds weird, but it is true that in almost all normal cases, the powder that is fasted in a long barrel will be fastest in a short barrel. There could be a few weird cases where two powders are very close in performance that it might not be true, but again this is rare and not really significant. You may also find a few cases where a different result would occur if your "short" barrel is less than a "normal" barrel length.

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

Well I was hoping to learn from other people’s experience. That’s usually the smart thing to do.

But you also have to listen and think. A fast burning powder develops less high velocity gas - it’s expending itself rapidly rather than building force - and cannot accelerate the projectile for long. The slower powder is producing more gas at a constant expansion rate and will not expend itself until after the projectile has left the barrel
Frankly I don’t even want to guess which orifice produced that 80-20 comparison but it doesn’t come from any burn tables or data sheets I’ve ever seen. Making up numbers to create a disagreement is not seeking knowledge.

 

[jski]

But you also have to listen and think. A fast burning powder develops less high velocity gas - it’s expending itself rapidly rather than building force - and cannot accelerate the projectile for long. The slower powder is producing more gas at a constant expansion rate and will not expend itself until after the projectile has left the barrel
Frankly I don’t even want to guess which orifice produced that 80-20 comparison but it doesn’t come from any burn tables or data sheets I’ve ever seen. Making up numbers to create a disagreement is not seeking knowledge.

Incredible! Let’s not be so sensitive.

Yes, I chose the numbers strictly to illustrate a point. Never intended for them to be taken as representative of some actual data.

 

[jski]

jski,

I know it sounds weird, but it is true that in almost all normal cases, the powder that is fasted in a long barrel will be fastest in a short barrel. There could be a few weird cases where two powders are very close in performance that it might not be true, but again this is rare and not really significant. You may also find a few cases where a different result would occur if your "short" barrel is less than a "normal" barrel length.

Thanks for the dispassionate logic.

 

[9mmepiphany]

A slow burning powder would still be burning when the bullet is exiting a short barrel. With a fast burning powder, most of the powder will be spent when the bullet exits. The former results in most of the powder being spent for a large, loud muzzle blast.

I understand what you believe, but how would that exclude the powder producing the highest velocity in a longer barrel not also producing it in a shorter barrel?

Would it not follow logic that a powder still burning would still be creating pressure to propel the bullet to higher velocity?

 

[jski]

I understand what you believe, but how would that exclude the powder producing the highest velocity in a longer barrel not also producing it in a shorter barrel?

Would it not follow logic that a powder still burning would still be creating pressure to propel the bullet to higher velocity?

Interesting questions. I’d have to see the pressure curve along the length of the barrel:

• If it were to peak midway, I’d think the bullet would begin slowing down because there’d be less force pushing on it.
• If the pressure curve were growing along the length of the barrel, I’d think the bullet would be accelerating until it exited.

 

[tightgroup tiger]

If it were to peak midway, I’d think the bullet would begin slowing down because there’d be less force pushing on it.

It does in some long barreled 22s with low powered ammunition because of the small amount of expanding gasses.

If the pressure curve were growing along the length of the barrel, I’d think the bullet would be accelerating until it exited.

Not the pressure curve so much but the expanding gasses, and yes it will continue to accelerate until it leaves the barrel if the expanding gasses are still expanding.

The powder is supposed to be burned up with in an inch or so of the chamber and the expanding gasses that are the result of the deflagration continue to grow as the bullet goes down the barrel and keeps accelerating it until the moment it exits the barrel in almost all cases.

The powder that makes the most gas (slow burning powders) will make the most velocity. The only time this isn't true would be if you are shooting say a pistol with a 1" or less barrel. There you may get into a situation where a faster burning powder may make more velocity than a slower burning powder due to the slower burning powder not having the time to get up to pressure.
You rarely see pistol barrels under 1 7/8".
Hope this helps some.

 

[Walkalong]

Reality is that the powder that gets the most velocity for a longer barrel will also get the most from a shorter barrel, no matter what we think or is logical to us. Your idea that a faster powder will get more velocity from a shorter barrel and vice versa is a common misconception that comes up here fairly regularly.

Want to talk efficiency? Now that's another subject. Top velocity? It will be a slower powder. "Medium" speed pistol powders are used a lot in magnums because they can get a lot of the velocity with lesser (Sometimes sharper) recoil than more of a "slow" speed powder.

ALL of the powders are incredibly fast, we just break them down by "fast", "medium", "slow" etc, to help us understand their usefulness/application.

 

[lordpaxman]

and i've been sitting here and looking over the 49th lyman manual and i found that none of the charts for .357 magnum have any info for titegroup.

When I didn't see it in the manual, that seemed strange.

HTTPS://Www.hodgdonreloading.com
It’ll give you published recipes for .357Magnum and Titegroup. Let us know how it goes! Good luck.

 

[Nasty Canasta]

Tight Group was the first powder I ever used, mostly because it had 45 Colt load data on the label that I was just starting to reload. Been a fan ever since, I don’t think there’s a more economic powder out there-a little bit goes a long ways. I’ve loaded everything from 32ACP up to 454 Casull & some subsonic 223 rounds too. At low levels it seems a bit dirty but at higher levels it seems to run cleaner & it meters very accurately through the auto drum I’m using. I’ve got 8lb jugs that will keep me going for a long time.

 

[JJFitch]

Depends on how you look at it, but the powder that gives the most speed from a long barrel will give the most speed from a short barrel as well.

Looking for less flash? Use a powder with flash retardant, but yea, TG should make a nice light plinker for any barrel length.

Some powders that will give satisfactory performance in 6" barrels and dismal performance in 2" barrels is due to burn rate (time)! Some slower powders fail to burn completely in short barrels therefore slower velocity!

Smiles,

 

[2ndtimer]

Some powders that will give satisfactory performance in 6" barrels and dismal performance in 2" barrels is due to burn rate (time)! Some slower powders fail to burn completely in short barrels therefore slower velocity!

Smiles,

I guess someone needs to test some fast burning powders vs. slow burning powders with varying barrel lengths. I trust data (facts) over feelings (faster burning powders should be faster out of short barrels than slower burning powders). Again, we are discussing velocity, not efficiency or accuracy. And personal experience has shown that the advantage in velocity of slower burning powders is enhanced by barrel length, the slower burning powders still provide higher velocities than faster burning powders, even out of shorter barrels. The difference is less with shorter barrels, but velocity still favors the slower burning powders provided the cartridge has sufficient case capacity to reach maximum pressure.

 

[Walkalong]

Some powders that will give satisfactory performance in 6" barrels and dismal performance in 2" barrels is due to burn rate (time)! Some slower powders fail to burn completely in short barrels therefore slower velocity!

Smiles,

Only if you use a powder that is simply too slow/not suitable for the caliber, but a slow pistol powder will give you more velocity than a fast pistol powder in 2" barrels, period. Again, it may not be as efficient as far as FPS per grain of powder, but it will be faster. That in no way means it will be a good load, it may not be, but that's always true.