Load DataInline FabricationRepackboxTitan Reloading
Lee PrecisionMidSouth Shooters SupplyReloading EverythingRotoMetals2
Wideners
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 63

Thread: POSITION SENSITIVE POWDERS for pistols.

  1. #41
    Boolit Master

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA
    Posts
    2,138
    Quote Originally Posted by sargenv View Post
    Well, it must be an issue since Titegroup was designed specifically to NOT be position sensitive. I've been doing a lot of work with 41 mag light target loads, 38 super target loads, and 40 S&W target loads and have some specific powders that are sensitive to case volume and position sensitivity. I'd have to look at my data but except for a few fast burners or a few that fill the case up to 90%, I've found most powders to be position sensitive once the size of the case increases as a percentage.
    Have you done any testing with the Titegroup yet?...

    I was going to get a pound of it for the reason being discussed...

    Problem is, it isn't to be found in my area...

    But, I'm still going to try it if I can find it. I'm going to see if it will "out-do" Bullseye for extremely light loads...

    Good-luck...BCB

  2. #42
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    1,514
    Why would I want to quit trying to position the powder charge to the rear of the case? I see it as one of those "well it can't hurt" things. LOL

    I don't dissagree with your findings BTW. I just don't think in a case the size of a 38spl. you will see any sugnifacant difference when using Bullseye or any other similar burn rate powder.

  3. #43
    Boolit Grand Master
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Lincoln, Nebraska
    Posts
    6,063
    If you believe there will be no significant difference in a 38 Special case with "bullseye or other similar powders" you're already disagreeing with my findings. This isn't about feelings, but rather discovered facts from testing. You need to reread what was posted.........again.

    While we're on the topic, what fact sees to it that target shooters in sanctioned matches have lower than average velocity variation compared to standard 38 loads the average guy uses for casual work? Hint: it has nothing to do with the powder.

  4. #44
    Boolit Master


    williamwaco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Dallas Texas
    Posts
    4,690
    OK.

    I updated my tabulated results to include Bulls Eye in the .38 Special.

    Anyone who is interested can see my powder test results here:


    http://reloadingtips.com/pages/powder-position.htm
    First reload: .22 Hornet. 1956.
    More at: http://reloadingtips.com/

    "Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by letting the
    government take care of him better take a closer look at the American Indian."
    - Henry Ford

  5. #45
    Boolit Master

    Hamish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Edge of The Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge
    Posts
    3,569
    There has been a fertilizer wagon full of pontifications on this thread, but little in the way of actually answering the OP's question.

    For those who say that they have done testing on the subject, how about lightening up on the blathering, and actually identify the top three to five powders that have shown the least position sensitivity?

    Hmm?
    More "This is what happened when I,,,,," and less "What would happen if I,,,,"

    Last of the original Group Buy Honcho's.

    "Dueling should have never been made illegal in this country. It settled lots of issues between folks."- Char-Gar

  6. #46
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    1,514
    Quote Originally Posted by 35remington View Post
    If you believe there will be no significant difference in a 38 Special case with "bullseye or other similar powders" you're already disagreeing with my findings. This isn't about feelings, but rather discovered facts from testing. You need to reread what was posted.........again.

    While we're on the topic, what fact sees to it that target shooters in sanctioned matches have lower than average velocity variation compared to standard 38 loads the average guy uses for casual work? Hint: it has nothing to do with the powder.
    I guess if you call 10f/s significant then it must be.

  7. #47
    Boolit Grand Master
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Lincoln, Nebraska
    Posts
    6,063
    Motor and William have utterly, completely missed it.

    What kind of bullet did William use? What kind of bullet do match shooters use? How has William failed to prove his point by his selection of bullet? What influence does a wadcutter bullet have on case capacity and the ability of the powder to move around? Could this be the answer to the question I posed in post 43? Did I not predict William's results by so doing?

    I'm surprised I have to spell it out to this degree.

    Hamish, there's a lot of powder that are approximately equivalent....as in, not that bad. Look earlier in this thread for the mentioned bad ones.

  8. #48
    Boolit Grand Master
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Lincoln, Nebraska
    Posts
    6,063
    Lemme help you guys.

    Decant 4.5 grains Universal in a 38 Special case, the upper end of the standard velocity range. Use a 158 SWC like the Lee 158 TL SWC. Repeat the test. Get back to me.

  9. #49
    Boolit Master

    Hamish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Edge of The Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge
    Posts
    3,569
    As I previously stated, the man asked for the GOOD ones,,,,,,,,and you have stated voluminously and categorically, that you have done extensive testing on powder position sensitivity.

    So what were the 5 powders that showed the least position sensitivity in your testing?
    More "This is what happened when I,,,,," and less "What would happen if I,,,,"

    Last of the original Group Buy Honcho's.

    "Dueling should have never been made illegal in this country. It settled lots of issues between folks."- Char-Gar

  10. #50
    Boolit Grand Master
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Lincoln, Nebraska
    Posts
    6,063
    There's too many "ties" to pick 3 to 5 because many showed little difference and the list would include more than that.

    Generally, fast powders of high bulk like Red Dot and 700X and Clays and other large flake types do well. Ish. Bullseye is very decent considering its low bulk. Titegroup is pretty fair but not as good as its "insensitivity" label deserves. Given how dense it is it's a miracle it does as well as it does, but that's powder formulation making up for low density, apparently. Unique is not particularly good. Universal is horrible. As mentioned, HS-6 isn't that hot. Dense medium speed powders like Universal have a lot going against them.

    The problem with fast large flake powders is meterability......so they don't often get used for small charges in large cases due to said meterability, when it's a point in their favor in reducing the room in the case for them to shift around. The lower meterability is offset by reduced position sensitivity, so extreme spreads are as low or lower than denser better metering powders. When bulky powders of fast speed are weighed for each charge that's as good as you're gonna get in many instances when speaking of moderate loads.

    In a large, low pressure case, like 38 Special or 44 Special when run at the low SAAMI spec......there's nothing really good in terms of creating low velocity variation with a lot of case space. Just acceptable. I mentioned perfection in this area, or even close to it, is really not attainable when everything (large case, low pressure) is against you.

    It helps to know when to quit.

  11. #51
    Boolit Grand Master
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Lincoln, Nebraska
    Posts
    6,063
    If you want a finer metering powder of more medium-ish speed that is a better substitute for Universal as it is less position sensitive, try Power Pistol, but you'll have to put up with more blast in some loads.

  12. #52
    Boolit Grand Master
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Lincoln, Nebraska
    Posts
    6,063
    A final comment....I've never, ever received 900 fps from only 3.2 grains Bullseye. Nowhere close. 3.4-3.5 grains gets about 830-840 fps from my 4 inch K frame with the same bullet, so I suspect William also had more than 3.2 grains Bullseye in there.

  13. #53
    Boolit Grand Master
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Lincoln, Nebraska
    Posts
    6,063
    Here's some corroboration to my comment that 3.2 Bullseye is really, really unlikely to get 900 fps:

    http://www.hensleygibbs.com/edharris...adcutterQA.htm

    I am wondering what was in there. If it's more Bullseye than that, there's less velocity variation due to higher average pressures and less room for the powder to shift with the deeply seated wadcutter bullet. Exactly the conditions you want for low velocity variation.

    The aforementioned test was the way to get lowest possible velocity variation in the 38 Special....deeply seated bullet, hottish load. I've described to you how to get high velocity variation.

  14. #54
    Boolit Master

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA
    Posts
    2,138
    3.5 Bullseye...RCBS 38-148-WC...Model 10 four incher...721 fps...

    Good-luck...BCB

  15. #55
    Boolit Grand Master
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Lincoln, Nebraska
    Posts
    6,063
    Now I hafta say, BCB, your results are slowish, because my two inchers get 700-710 fps with 3.1 grains Bullseye and most deeply seated wadcutters and 770 fps or so with 3.5 grains. The Lee 148 isn't that much different than your bullet. Was yours seated to the crimp groove?

    My four inch would get more like 830 with your charge seated to the crimp groove. Mine is what would be later called a Model 10, but since it was made in 1952 it's a Military and Police.

  16. #56
    Boolit Master

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA
    Posts
    2,138
    Mine is the "V" model...

    It has always been way slow no matter what is put in it...

    I really don't shoot it much at all...

    BCB

  17. #57
    Boolit Grand Master
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Lincoln, Nebraska
    Posts
    6,063
    It's not converted from 38 Smith and Wesson, is it? That would explain the low velocities. Oversize chamber and barrel.

  18. #58
    Boolit Master

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA
    Posts
    2,138
    It says "38 Smith & Wesson Special CTG" on the barrel...

    It was my great aunt's and she worked at a railroad postal station. I think it might have been issued to her, or at least she carried it with her...

    Don't know the history for sure...

    BCB

  19. #59
    Boolit Buddy
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    SW ND
    Posts
    324
    Good thread and info. I like posts #8,27,34,50 and 51. They summarize it.
    In my testing w my revolvers I do 10 round minimum on cronograph sessions. I like to see ES 40 or less or get as close to 10 SD as I can. As stated before lower pressure makes it harder. Higher easier in most cases. Primers make a HUGE difference.

  20. #60
    Boolit Man
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Southern Minnesota
    Posts
    95
    I agree with all of what "35remington" has said.

    I load a lot of light to mid-range cast bullet loads in both handgun and rifle calibers. One day I was testing some loads in my 45 colt Ruger, shooting ten shot groups looking for an accurate load. I noticed early on in the testing the first shot from a cylinder of five tended to be noticably low and out of the group. I realized those first shots were after loading the gun, barrel down, then raising it to level and firing. The next four rounds were all fired with the gun remaining level. The powder was forward in the cartridge for the first shot after loading and the following four most likely in the bottom of the cartridge.

    This problem prompted me to take a hard look at the powder position sensitivity issue. I started with the 38 Spl., 357 Mag., 44 Mag. and 45 Colt. Now I was using only the low to mid-range loads with all the powders tried. Everything from Bullseye, Win. 231, Titegroup, Unique and several other powders.

    Bottom line resulting from hundreds of rounds fired, is I don't believe there is any powder that isn't position sensitive in the cartridges I have listed when the powder fills only about 25% or even less of the available space. Powder forward always has the least velocity and prints lower on the target. Powder to the rear always has the higherest velocity and prints higher. Powder in the bottom of the cartridge falls in between.

    Before anyone wants to jump all over my findings, consider there are countless variables besides just the powder or powder position to be considered. My type of primers, crimp, brass, bullet diameter, hardness, seating depth and other things are what I usually use and don't vary them much. Yours may be vary different from mine and your results may be different, that is if you are willing to do enough testing to see for yourself.

    Again, I say when the powder uses 25% or less of the available space, there is no powder that isn't position sensitive. As the powder volume increases, the powder position sensitivity problem becomes less. Remember the loading manuals often suggest a load should have powder charges at 80% or more for best results. Most of us know why.

    My rifle cartridge loads with cast bullets are subject to the same problem. Most of these loads shoot best with powder to the rear. My Unique loads using Remington 9-1/2 primers do best for accuracy with the powder rolled to the bottom in a level position. Some I use a tuft of poly fill so I don't have to position the powder for firing.

    I have used corn meal on top of the powder with the pistol cartridges I listed, with good results. I use the amount that will fill the case to the bottom of the seated bullet without any compression. This prevents the powder from mixing with the corn meal. One of my 357 Mag. loads is 3.5 grains of 700X under a 148 grain wad cutter. Groups at (50) feet were running 1-1/2 to 2" until I positioned the powder to the rear. Groups shrunk to less than 1". Using the corn meal produced ten shot groups of one ragged hole 3/4" outside to outside of the groups. I have fired these loads from the same box a year later and they still perform the same. No problem with the corn meal ruining the powder.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Abbreviations used in Reloading

BP Bronze Point IMR Improved Military Rifle PTD Pointed
BR Bench Rest M Magnum RN Round Nose
BT Boat Tail PL Power-Lokt SP Soft Point
C Compressed Charge PR Primer SPCL Soft Point "Core-Lokt"
HP Hollow Point PSPCL Pointed Soft Point "Core Lokt" C.O.L. Cartridge Overall Length
PSP Pointed Soft Point Spz Spitzer Point SBT Spitzer Boat Tail
LRN Lead Round Nose LWC Lead Wad Cutter LSWC Lead Semi Wad Cutter
GC Gas Check