Barlett's #105

[Marlin Junky]

I should have tried this powder while Jeff had it in stock but there was always other powders I needed more. Now I'm wondering how this stuff performs through the powder measure and over the chronograph. Supposedly, Jeff will restock in the not too distant future. I know Jeff's website says #105 is a flake powder similar to AA#5 in burning rate, but there are big kernel flakes and tiny kernel flakes. Is #105 a small kernel flake that meters like egg-timer sand... I hope... don't lie now :)

Thanks,
MJ

[TCLouis]

of the #105 and for all intents and purposes it is just like the PS11 and AA#5 that I have. Meters well in the Dillon and RCBS.

[Marlin Junky]

TCLouis,

Thanks for the reply. You guys are going to start hating me 'cause I ask lots of nit-picky detail oriented questions. I want to throw 10 +/- .005 :mrgreen: grain charges. Can I do it with my RCBS powder measure? Is there anyway you could take a close up macro picture of the stuff next to a tiny grain ball powder like AA#7 or AA#9 or WC-820 or something else you might have that flows well?

Thanks,
MJ

[MikeG]

I like how the #105 shoots, but it does not meter consistantly through my Hornady powder dispenser. I have to weigh every charge.

Mike G.

[Marlin Junky]

Mike,

Weighing every charge is exactly what I don't want to do, I'm hoping Scot 453 will do what I need it to do. So far it looks pretty good at 9.0 grains with a 197 grain PB but I would like to get another 100 fps out of it. I'll take a look at 10 grains hopefully next week.

WC-820 is also surprisingly good with this boolit but it seems to need a little filler to perform at its best.

Thank you...
MJ

[KYCaster]

I got a jug of #105 from Bartlett last fall and I'm really disappointed with it. AA#5 has always worked fine for me in 45ACP so I figured #105 would be a much cheaper alternative.........WRONG!

The first problem I encountered is the burn rate is nowhere close to AA#5 like Jeff advertised. I got the starting load for a 230RN out of the AA book and loaded ten just to see where to start. First round over the Chrony went 1110fps. I then tried the starting load for AA#2 and it matched the book figures exactly, so I worked up my load with AA#2 data.

After I got the load worked out, I tried to load a couple hundred rounds of match ammo. That's when I found out it doesn't meter worth crap. Its kind of frustrating when you're trying to crank out a sack full of ammo real quick.

You can see in the pic, this stuff doesn't look like any AA powder I've ever seen, lots of clumps and strings and odd shaped flakes. I didn't have any AA#2 or #5 on hand to compare it too, that's AA#9 at the bottom and the #105 at the top.

I'm tempted to use up the rest of this jug to fertilize my tomotoes.

Jerry

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v321/KYCaster/000_0335.jpg

[Marlin Junky]

KYCaster,

Thanks for the great input and humorous commentary. IMHO, Bartlett's #105 looks like crap. Thank you for saving me time and money.

Much obliged,
MJ

[9.3X62AL]

Similar sitch with some "#107" I got from Bartlett, advertised as equivalent to AA-7. Now, THAT part is correct--it matches up pretty close with AA-7 ballistically in the 32 Magnum and 7.62 x 25, weight for weight. But, it REFUSES to flow in my RCBS Duo-Measure--at all. The disk-like flakes are thick and huge, and defy the Lee spoon set to throw accurate loads. In the 7.0 grain-class loads used in these applications, I got .25-.30 grain variations with the spoons.....so the loads got scaled. Pretty labor-intensive for handgun ammo, methinks.

I had the same idea Jerry had for an end use of the #107.......might be a little "hot" for vegetables, maybe better on the lawn for bare spots.

[David R]

I apreciate those posts. What is that stuff cordrite? :)

David

[Lloyd Smale]

send it my way and ill feritlize the back stop of my range with it!
I got a jug of #105 from Bartlett last fall and I'm really disappointed with it. AA#5 has always worked fine for me in 45ACP so I figured #105 would be a much cheaper alternative.........WRONG!

The first problem I encountered is the burn rate is nowhere close to AA#5 like Jeff advertised. I got the starting load for a 230RN out of the AA book and loaded ten just to see where to start. First round over the Chrony went 1110fps. I then tried the starting load for AA#2 and it matched the book figures exactly, so I worked up my load with AA#2 data.

After I got the load worked out, I tried to load a couple hundred rounds of match ammo. That's when I found out it doesn't meter worth crap. Its kind of frustrating when you're trying to crank out a sack full of ammo real quick.

You can see in the pic, this stuff doesn't look like any AA powder I've ever seen, lots of clumps and strings and odd shaped flakes. I didn't have any AA#2 or #5 on hand to compare it too, that's AA#9 at the bottom and the #105 at the top.

I'm tempted to use up the rest of this jug to fertilize my tomotoes.

Jerry

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v321/KYCaster/000_0335.jpg

[frank505]

I need fertilizer much more than that yooper does here in the desert. Please send it too me, but if lloyd already has it, Lloyd can I have some too?

[rbstern]

Looking at the photos, it's no surprise that it meters poorly...look at the variety of shapes in that little batch!

[PatMarlin]

That stuff looks like a nasty batch of droppings swept off the floor.. :confused:

[Leftoverdj]

Bartlett has sold at least two different powders as #105. I got some of the first batch and it is a very fine ball powder that looks very much like the AA 9 shown above. He's sold two different powders as #102 as well, a ball and a flake.

[StanDahl]

Seems like you could screen the stuff to get the big boogers out of it, huh?

On second thought, I just looked at my batch of 105 - Lot #71195 - it's just a few months old. Mine looks pretty much the same and it might not be easy to to screen those thin flakes.

I made a little gizmo to help settle the powder in the powder measure. I found a little electric motor at an electronics supply store. It's approx. 3v and it's got an offset weight on the shaft that causes it to vibrate. I hooked it up to a power supply and mounted it on a block of wood, and a screw or double-sided tape could attach it to the top of my Lee Perfect. Haven't tried it yet though. Could someone else make one and report back soon? Just kidding - maybe I'll get to it tomorrow - if someone reminds me. Stan

[StanDahl]

Well, no one asked for it - mostly because this thread went stale and reached its ultimate conclusion long ago - but I did it anyway. And, like everyone said it would, Bartlett's 105 meters like potting soil in my Lee ProAutoDisk. That's even when using my new pre-space-age powder settler. I don't have any screens the right size to sift that stuff, so I just poured it into the measure and went at it.

The same set-up with Unique powder delivered all charges within ±0.1grain of the setting, and 95% of those were within 0.1 grain (3.2 - 3.3 grains with the 0.43cc disk).

Conclusion - I've got 5lbs of powder to dip and weigh. Stan

[Lloyd Smale]

You know me Pal. IF its mine its yours but i dont think hes giving it up yet.
I need fertilizer much more than that yooper does here in the desert. Please send it too me, but if lloyd already has it, Lloyd can I have some too?