What percentage variation are powder manufacturers required

[buck460XVR]

Now.... that's a test I'd like to see.

Following that logic, and assuming the continued deterioration...or perhaps 'change' would be a better term... with powder that is 10, 20, 50 years old would be completely off the reservation as far as burn rate.

Could very well be. The point I was trying to make tho, was not that the deterioration was dramatic or excessive, but that it would most likely be ever so slight, similar to the differences in burn rate lots. That same ever so slightly difference in burn rates is not going to take a "safe" load and turn it into a "kaboom". Manuals tell us to start at the given "start" powder charge and work our way up till we discover excessive pressure. How many folks follow that? How many of those same folk can tell what is "excessive" pressure till they blow their gun up?

Again, we buy powders from reputable sources knowing they do everything they can to make their powders as consistent as possible. They diligently do this for ethical reasons and liability. While there are minute variations in exact burn rate, they are moot(IMHO) as compared to other variations that happen during the reloading process. Published manuals also give a "margin" of error in recipes to account for these. In the past, I did the "back down and rework" loads every time I changed lot numbers. What I found is that the slight difference the change in lots made, was no more than the difference in two different batches of the same components made at different times. Others may have different experiences and should do what makes them fell safe. I feel safe using similar powder charges when starting with a new can of powder. Basically because I do not load to beyond max published levels and my experience shows me it's not necessary with what I reload for and with. Pretty much the same with primers. The differnce they make does not make a load unsafe, nor does it drastically change accuracy. A change of projectiles is different.

 

[old heeler]

Could very well be. The point I was trying to make tho, was not that the deterioration was dramatic or excessive, but that it would most likely be ever so slight, similar to the differences in burn rate lots. That same ever so slightly difference in burn rates is not going to take a "safe" load and turn it into a "kaboom". Manuals tell us to start at the given "start" powder charge and work our way up till we discover excessive pressure. How many folks follow that? How many of those same folk can tell what is "excessive" pressure till they blow their gun up?

Again, we buy powders from reputable sources knowing they do everything they can to make their powders as consistent as possible. They diligently do this for ethical reasons and liability. While there are minute variations in exact burn rate, they are moot(IMHO) as compared to other variations that happen during the reloading process. Published manuals also give a "margin" of error in recipes to account for these. In the past, I did the "back down and rework" loads every time I changed lot numbers. What I found is that the slight difference the change in lots made, was no more than the difference in two different batches of the same components made at different times. Others may have different experiences and should do what makes them fell safe. I feel safe using similar powder charges when starting with a new can of powder. Basically because I do not load to beyond max published levels and my experience shows me it's not necessary with what I reload for and with. Pretty much the same with primers. The differnce they make does not make a load unsafe, nor does it drastically change accuracy. A change of projectiles is different.

I agree with you but there is no liability.

This is from Hodgdon.

Hodgdon® Powder, IMR® Powder and Winchester® Powder expressly disclaim any and all warranties with respect to any and all products sold or distributed by them, the safety or suitability thereof, or the results obtained including, without limitation, any implied warranty of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose and/or any other warranty. Buyers and users assume all risk, responsibility and liability whatsoever for any and all injuries (including death), losses or damages to persons or property (including consequential damages), arising from the use of any product or data, whether or not occasioned by seller's negligence or based on strict liability or principles of indemnity or contribution. Hodgdon®, IMR® and Winchester® powders neither assume nor authorize any person to assume for it any liability in connection with the use of any product or data.

 

[Charlie98]

Could very well be. The point I was trying to make tho, was not that the deterioration was dramatic or excessive, but that it would most likely be ever so slight, similar to the differences in burn rate lots. That same ever so slightly difference in burn rates is not going to take a "safe" load and turn it into a "kaboom".

A change of projectiles is different.

I got you... makes sense. I have a phrase I use now and then... expectations of your handloads. The way I handload .45ACP, for example, it's unlikely I would see a difference in powder lots, primers, brass, or any of it... but with a change of bullet, I have. The caveat to that would be stacked tolerances... introducing a particularly hot lot of powder, with a particularly hot lot of primers, etc, etc, which might take a load near or at max over the edge. The combination of those factors is almost endless... and you would drive yourself bonkers trying to accommodate for all factors. But then, there are the benchrest guys who actually try to lasso control of all of that... so, it really is a matter of... expectations.

As far as powder deterioration, and for that matter powder lots... again, there are a zillion factors that would contribute to variances in burn rate, most likely undetectable to most of us... unless we are just looking for it.

 

[buck460XVR]

I agree with you but there is no liability.

This is from Hodgdon.

Hodgdon® Powder, IMR® Powder and Winchester® Powder expressly disclaim any and all warranties with respect to any and all products sold or distributed by them, the safety or suitability thereof, or the results obtained including, without limitation, any implied warranty of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose and/or any other warranty. Buyers and users assume all risk, responsibility and liability whatsoever for any and all injuries (including death), losses or damages to persons or property (including consequential damages), arising from the use of any product or data, whether or not occasioned by seller's negligence or based on strict liability or principles of indemnity or contribution. Hodgdon®, IMR® and Winchester® powders neither assume nor authorize any person to assume for it any liability in connection with the use of any product or data.

Most general disclaimers will not protect a manufacturer from product liability. Manufacturers often try to avoid taking responsibility for their products by inserting a written disclaimer. But a product liability disclaimer does not usually work as a shield for the manufacturer in cases when you purchased a defective product. Thus, powder companies strive to keep powder as close as possible to the product used to create their published recipes.

 

[mdi]

In addition to Rule 3's post primers will also show a variation from lot to lot. I saw videos on primer manufacturing and the filling step I saw was done by a human. So, besides the small variations in chemicals used to produce the compound, a human (fallible) is filling the cups I would expect to see variations there too, lot to lot....

 

[AJC1]

In addition to Rule 3's post primers will also show a variation from lot to lot. I saw videos on primer manufacturing and the filling step I saw was done by a human. So, besides the small variations in chemicals used to produce the compound, a human (fallible) is filling the cups I would expect to see variations there too, lot to lot....

I have read how OCD reloaders weigh and weight sort primers. Not this guy but there are people who do.

 

[buck460XVR]

In addition to Rule 3's post primers will also show a variation from lot to lot. I saw videos on primer manufacturing and the filling step I saw was done by a human. So, besides the small variations in chemicals used to produce the compound, a human (fallible) is filling the cups I would expect to see variations there too, lot to lot....

I have read how OCD reloaders weigh and weight sort primers. Not this guy but there are people who do.

From what I understand, "Match" primers are those produced by the most experienced workers as they are considered the most consistent at making them. No other difference. Still, it comes down to, how much inconsistency/variation is there? Is there any way that the inconsistency will take any load considered otherwise "safe" to an "unsafe" level?

 

[Hangingrock]

I have been reloading for forty-five plus years. I have a verity of reloading manuals but basically stay with Lyman manuals. Simply put I don't go to the maximum data. Since I no longer shoot high-power rifle competition and or hunt, we no longer reload for rifles. As for handguns (9X19mm, 38Spl, 44Spl and 45ACP) we utilize Dillon progressive reloading presses. Since its range ammunition there is no need to go to the maximum powder charges. As for primers CCI - Federal & Winchester are satisfactory with out changing powder charge weights for our range/target ammunition. When we reloaded for rifles it was basically on Redding single stage press with powder charges dispensed from a Redding powder measure topped of with charge weight weighed on a scale.

 

[AJC1]

From what I understand, "Match" primers are those produced by the most experienced workers as they are considered the most consistent at making them. No other difference. Still, it comes down to, how much inconsistency/variation is there? Is there any way that the inconsistency will take any load considered otherwise "safe" to an "unsafe" level?

In rifle the percentages help moderate any change. 25 grains in a case with a hot or cold primer would change a lot less than a 9mm with 4.5 grains of tightgroup. So if you stacked problems with a hot primer and the extra .1 grains of powder in the throw tollerance you might find yourself out of the pressure band unknowingly or unwillingly. At that point safe or unsafe would come down to condition of the fire arm. Oddly enough in a 9 that would almost never be a problem unless your pushing the envelope with +p loads and have a short chamber.