Hodgdon burn rate chart

[Matt_G]

I was looking at the Hodgdon site a little while ago and saw something in their burn rate chart that I think might be an error.

If you click this link (http://www.hodgdon.com/burn-rate.html) and look at that chart, they have Alliant Red Dot listed as #6 on the chart and Alliant Bullseye as #9.

Every other chart I have ever seen, and all loading data I have seen for these two powders, say that Bullseye is faster than Red Dot.
Has Red Dot changed that much or is this a typo on Hodgdon's part?
I think they may have just accidentally switched those two around.
Guess I will send them an e-mail and ask...

[watkibe]

I have always been under the impression that Bullseye was the fastest handgun powder. My Lee burn rate chart agrees with you. It has Bullseye as #4 and Red Dot as #7.

[mooman76]

Lee get's the load data they publish directly from Hodgdon. If you compare you will find it mimics it word for word or # for # as it is would be.

[GP100man]

i know the new "cleaner burning " red dot is hotter than my old stuff .

wish i had my own chronograph because i have old be also.

[fecmech]

If you look in the Alliant load guide they show lower max charges of Red Dot than Bullseye for almost all bullet weights in all the pistol calibers which to me indicates that they think it is faster than BE.

[Matt_G]

If you look in the Alliant load guide they show lower max charges of Red Dot than Bullseye for almost all bullet weights in all the pistol calibers which to me indicates that they think it is faster than BE.

Darned if you aren't right. I hadn't looked at any newer data, just older stuff.
I bought a 4lb. jug of Red Dot just a couple of months ago to use in the .45 Colt.
Dan Walker and others on this board had high praises for 6.5 grains of Red Dot pushing a 255 or 300 grain boolit.
Now I'm wondering how I need to modify that load, or if I even need too.

Any ideas when this major change to Red Dot happened?

[MT Gianni]

Few charts agree on everything especially if independent testing was done. I think the Lee chart was a cut and paste. Sometimes and somedays conditions cause things to vary from what we used to consider the norm. Always check charts and work up new burn rates was written for a reason.

[Firebird]

nitrocellulose (smokeless powder) burn rate varies with the pressure it is under while burning. So if one company tests at one pressure, and another company tests at another pressure, they can easily end up with different burn rates. Then when the burn rates are lined up on a chart, the order can also end up different.
When you actually fire a gun, the shape of the chamber (straight, tapered, bottle-necked) can also cause the burn rate to vary, as different shapes can concentrate/disperse the pressure of the gases as they flow out of the chamber, affecting the burn rate of the powder.
When you consider the chemical makeup of smokeless powder, the wonder is that powder companies can even hold tolerances closely enough to allow home handloading. Ammo factories buy powder by the rail-car load, pressure test each caliber, and adjust the powder level as needed. A process that is only now becoming possible at the home reloading level with the Oehler 43 and PressureTrace pressure sensor equipment.

[Rocky Raab]

It is true that no two burn rate charts agree. There is no one standard against which other powders are tested. Every company does it differently, and with a different standard. That's why they all say not to use burn rate charts to interpolate load data - and it's a VERY wise warning.

Powder can also change its apparent burn rate depending on lots of factors, including expansion ratio, bore diameter, primer choice, bullet friction and even case shape, to name only a few. None of those are mimicked in lab tests, so it's a wonder that burn rate charts and handloading results match up at all.

Finally, Lee does NO load testing at all. They do not have a test lab, as far as I know. Every single bit of their data is cut and paste, including original typos! And Lee might have added a few typos of their own, to boot. Lee data is valuable because it consolidates data from many sources, and there are some innovative and useful additions found nowhere else (like Lee's reduced load formula). But their data is neither original nor test verified.

[DLCTEX]

lists Bullseye fastest and Red Dot #4. I think it's a typo.

[Lloyd Smale]

anyway you look at it there awful close in burning speed

[armyrat1970]

I have always been under the impression that Bullseye was the fastest handgun powder. My Lee burn rate chart agrees with you. It has Bullseye as #4 and Red Dot as #7.

Now that's odd. My Lee Modern Second Edition list Bullseye as #2 and Red Dot as #6. Either way Bullseye is listed as a faster powder but not that much difference.
Another thing about that chart. In my Lee Manual AA#2 is listed between Bullseye and Red Dot. According to that chart it is much lower on the list and slower? It even list Green Dot as faster than AA#2 but according to the Lee manual AA#2 is listed as a faster powder. Haven't compared any other listings but interesting.

[Matt_G]

Thanks for all the replies gents.

Lloyd, your right. Regardless they are pretty darn close.
Now I have never used burn rate charts to base any decisions on. It's just that the chart in my original post caught my eye and made me start asking questions.

I started looking through the older Alliant guides I have here. One from 1996 and one from 2000.
Depending on the application, sometimes the max load for Red Dot is equal to or heavier than the max load for Bullseye with a certain bullet/caliber combo.
Other times the max Red Dot load is less than the Bullseye load.
I also noticed that the latter is more often the case.
I had never noticed that before.

Many times the max Red Dot load will be as much as a full grain lighter than the Bullseye load, yet it will develop more pressure and usually less velocity.
Guess I just never looked at it that close.

So I would say there has NOT been a change in Red Dot, at least not a major one.
This does prove one thing that most knowledgeable reloaders have said for years though...

You can't extrapolate squat from a burn rate chart!

[Rocky Raab]

Yup.

When I'm dealing with an unknown or new pistol powder (I get advance samples from powder companies), I follow a very simple procedure: I'll load a few samples using established and published Bullseye DATA and then check the chronograph. I'll work up (or occasionally DOWN!) until I get the equivalent velocity that Bullseye would have given. I'll then know if the unknown is slower (or faster!) than Bullseye, and by about how much. The percentage shift of performance only works in that cartridge and with that bullet, but it is an indication of what to expect with other combos.

[zxcvbob]

Red Dot burns a lot faster than Bullseye. Bullseye has a much higher energy content (twice as much Nitroglycerin) so it takes less Bullseye, and the burn rate charts (including Alliant's) seem to try to take this into account and they shift Bullseye (and Power Pistol) considerably higher up the chart than their actual burn rates.

Bullseye actually should be between Green Dot and Unique, but if they put it their on their charts people would start with maximum Green Dot data and go up from there. :shock: That might actually work for some cartridges (like .357 Magnum) but not for most.

[StarMetal]

Depending on the cartridge and the loadings, there are instances where Red Dot and Bullseye cross paths.

Joe

[zxcvbob]

high praises for 6.5 grains of Red Dot pushing a 255 or 300 grain boolit.
That's a good midrange load for the 255. Not sure about the 300 though; the pressure there might be kind of high.

My favorite .45 Colt load is 7.5 grains of Promo (cheap version of Red Dot) with a 230 grain boolit. It would be too hot a load for a pre-war SAA or cheaply-made clone (but you could get to the same ballistics at much lower pressure using Unique or Herco.)

[35remington]

I've found that Red Dot burns faster than Bullseye in metallic cartridges, overall, so I don't think the burn rate chart is necessarily off one way or another. It depends on the application.

And, on average, Red Dot gets more velocity with the same amount or lesser amounts of powder. It seems to get fairly high velocity for the charge weight, which makes it economical.

[cbrick]

You can't extrapolate squat from a burn rate chart!

Exactly! A powder burn rate guide is just that . . . a guide. It is not a reloading manual.

As was mentioned in this thread a few times, many things change the exact burn rate of any given powder. Even the same loads using the same can of powder can be different when fired on a different day at a different temperature. A top end load that seems fine today could cause problems when fired tomorrow at higher air temps.

That's one reason to start low and work up if needed. It's one of two main reasons I'll rarely use ""top end"" loads, the second reason being that I rarely to never find the hottest load to be the most accurate.

Rick

[MakeMineA10mm]

nitrocellulose (smokeless powder) burn rate varies with the pressure it is under while burning. So if one company tests at one pressure, and another company tests at another pressure, they can easily end up with different burn rates. Then when the burn rates are lined up on a chart, the order can also end up different.

When you actually fire a gun, the shape of the chamber (straight, tapered, bottle-necked) can also cause the burn rate to vary, as different shapes can concentrate/disperse the pressure of the gases as they flow out of the chamber, affecting the burn rate of the powder.

When you consider the chemical makeup of smokeless powder, the wonder is that powder companies can even hold tolerances closely enough to allow home handloading. Ammo factories buy powder by the rail-car load, pressure test each caliber, and adjust the powder level as needed. A process that is only now becoming possible at the home reloading level with the Oehler 43 and PressureTrace pressure sensor equipment.


It is true that no two burn rate charts agree. There is no one standard against which other powders are tested. Every company does it differently, and with a different standard. That's why they all say not to use burn rate charts to interpolate load data - and it's a VERY wise warning.

Powder can also change its apparent burn rate depending on lots of factors, including expansion ratio, bore diameter, primer choice, bullet friction and even case shape, to name only a few. None of those are mimicked in lab tests, so it's a wonder that burn rate charts and handloading results match up at all.


Lloyd, your right. Regardless they are pretty darn close.

I started looking through the older Alliant guides I have here. One from 1996 and one from 2000.
Depending on the application, sometimes the max load for Red Dot is equal to or heavier than the max load for Bullseye with a certain bullet/caliber combo.
Other times the max Red Dot load is less than the Bullseye load.
I also noticed that the latter is more often the case.
I had never noticed that before.

Many times the max Red Dot load will be as much as a full grain lighter than the Bullseye load, yet it will develop more pressure and usually less velocity.
Guess I just never looked at it that close.

So I would say there has NOT been a change in Red Dot, at least not a major one.
This does prove one thing that most knowledgeable reloaders have said for years though...

You can't extrapolate squat from a burn rate chart!

All of the above is outstanding, except for the last sentence, kind-of. (It's right with the word "extrapolate" in there, but burning rate charts are useful gizmos, as I'll explain.)

I think it is healthier to look at burning rate charts as a way of grouping certain powders together. I have at least 12 or 13 burning rate charts (from different companies) and when you add in the generations of many of these company's changes, I may have as many as 35-40. What I've learned by studying them over time, is that certain numbers of powders fall into groups. (And, yes, even though Lapua publishes this exact kind of chart, I'm taking credit for also thinking this through, because I had this worked out before I ever got a Lapua chart...) :mrgreen:

For example, it is obvious that Red Dot and Bullseye, have a certain amount of cross-over. Other powders you might find in this zone are: VV N320, Clays, Solo 1000, Nitro 100, Titewad, e3, VV N310, WAALite, and Norma R1. I put all of these powders in the same group. I do NOT use them to develop or extrapolate load data from one another, BUT, if I'm loading a certain application, and the powder I typically use isn't performing like it should, I'll look at the others in that group. Generally (but not 100% of the time) starting loads are safe when switching from one powder to another within a group, but this MUST always be backed up by published load data. If there's a complete absense of published data, I generally go down about 5% below the starting load (for pistol powders) in the same category and start there.

This has come in handy with the 10mm, because once one figures out the group that works best in 10mm, one can experiment to find the powder that performs best. This is how we came upon 800X, a powder few would have thought of in conjunction with a high-performance semi-auto pistol round. AA#7, HS-7, VV 3N37, AA#9, and Blue Dot all work well in the 10mm, and 800X is in the same group... Just turns out in the 10mm shape & size case with the common bullet weights we shoot in the 10mm, 800X was the rocket... That's how a burning rate chart can help you.

[armyrat1970]

Yup.

When I'm dealing with an unknown or new pistol powder (I get advance samples from powder companies), I follow a very simple procedure: I'll load a few samples using established and published Bullseye DATA and then check the chronograph. I'll work up (or occasionally DOWN!) until I get the equivalent velocity that Bullseye would have given. I'll then know if the unknown is slower (or faster!) than Bullseye, and by about how much. The percentage shift of performance only works in that cartridge and with that bullet, but it is an indication of what to expect with other combos.

Rocky what do you mean by advance samples? And if I read you right, how do you aquire them? Is this some privilege to a certain few or available to all?

[Rocky Raab]

It's because my writing specialty is handloading. And also because I've been known to buy breakfast for Chris Hodgdon at the SHOT Show, LOL!

Over the years, I've gotten pre-production or first-run samples of what would eventually be called Clays and Universal Clays from Hodgdon, American Select from Alliant, and TAC and X-Terminator from Western (Ramshot). Been offered a few more, but they were for cartridges larger than I shoot, so I couldn't realistically test them.

In return, I send them back all my test load results (good and bad) and a courtesy copy of the article I write. They do NOT make changes to the article or results or review them in any way. I send them only so they'll have an advance look at what will be printed.

I usually end up testing a powder in three or more cartridges, several bullet weights in each and up to what I call "above maximum" load levels. I spend all my own components and many trips to the range. No guarantee the article will ever get printed, either. If not, I'm simply out all I spent to do the tests.

Still think it's a sweet deal?

[armyrat1970]

It's because my writing specialty is handloading. And also because I've been known to buy breakfast for Chris Hodgdon at the SHOT Show, LOL!

Over the years, I've gotten pre-production or first-run samples of what would eventually be called Clays and Universal Clays from Hodgdon, American Select from Alliant, and TAC and X-Terminator from Western (Ramshot). Been offered a few more, but they were for cartridges larger than I shoot, so I couldn't realistically test them.

In return, I send them back all my test load results (good and bad) and a courtesy copy of the article I write. They do NOT make changes to the article or results or review them in any way. I send them only so they'll have an advance look at what will be printed.

I usually end up testing a powder in three or more cartridges, several bullet weights in each and up to what I call "above maximum" load levels. I spend all my own components and many trips to the range. No guarantee the article will ever get printed, either. If not, I'm simply out all I spent to do the tests.

Still think it's a sweet deal?

Sounds like a deal to me. Why not drop a little question to offer say 1/4lb. sample containers, at a resonable price of course, to the consumer soo's we can try before we decide to buy a full pound or more. Many would be able to try more different powders before making a decision on what works best for them. Just a thought.

[Rocky Raab]

Hodgdon used to do that. They offered a "sample pack" of several powders in small cans. The problem was that stores wouldn't stock them. Too much shelf space taken up or something. So the consumer wanted it, the supplier was happy to offer it, but the middleman crimped the pipe.

[cbrick]

Hodgdon used to do that. They offered a "sample pack" of several powders in small cans. The problem was that stores wouldn't stock them. Too much shelf space taken up or something. So the consumer wanted it, the supplier was happy to offer it, but the middleman crimped the pipe.

I think the retailers are more than happy to stock what the customers want but there is another consideration, at least in my area.

Here the fire regulations limit the reloading store (of which I am a part owner - tiny part) to a maximum of 200 pounds of smokeless in the building at one time. NO black powder in the same building. We had to build an additional secure building to keep the 8 pound cans and the black in the range office.

Given the number of powders available today and only a few of each in stock you get to 200 pounds really fast.

Rick

[Rocky Raab]

Thanks, Rick. You are correct, of course. That's why I hedged with "or something."

[armyrat1970]

I think the retailers are more than happy to stock what the customers want but there is another consideration, at least in my area.

Here the fire regulations limit the reloading store (of which I am a part owner - tiny part) to a maximum of 200 pounds of smokeless in the building at one time. NO black powder in the same building. We had to build an additional secure building to keep the 8 pound cans and the black in the range office.

Given the number of powders available today and only a few of each in stock you get to 200 pounds really fast.

Rick

Yeah I understand. Bummer. It would be nice if we had that option though.

[morme@gte.net]

I want to try Red Dot in my 10mm Delta Elite. 4.5 grains seems like a good place to start for a 180g plated lead flat point bullet.

Any suggestions, or experience? I have used the same load as my standard 200grain .45ACP load for years.

[Ricochet]

Alliant gives a relative burn rate for each of their powders on their web page, with Bullseye = 100%. They claim Red Dot, Promo and E3 all = 94%. But that's just under the controlled conditions of burning in their standard calorimetric bomb test. I've noticed many loading manuals give lower charges of Red Dot than Bullseye for pistol cartridges. Not always.