Major Powder Score, Includes 8# of "Mystery Powder"

[Alan in Vermont]

The first test firings are now history. The loads with "real" 4320 charges in the middle of listed charges in the Lyman 46th edition held no surprises. Primers were flattened all the way across, bolt lift was effortless.

The loads with the mystery powder were a little surprising. They displayed lower recoil & noise, as expected, but also flattened primers all the way across and one round out of the five had slightly sticky bolt lift. There was no evidence of unburned powder in the bore which I was expecting from a slow powder/light load condition.

Temps this morning were in the 40s with high winds & driven rain, not suitable at all for setting my chronograph up. Velocity checks will have to wait for better weather.

I may try some even lighter loads, working downward until I find where the primers are not flattened. Probably won't mean anything but I'm curious.

[Hick]

You can also look here http://www.ilrc.ucf.edu/powders/samp...?powder_id=429 to try to visually narrow down the list of possible powders. I did this with some mystery powder I found in my father-in-laws garage after he moved into a home.

[earlmck]

Verrry interesting Alan. You really need that chrono data now.

And thanks for that link Hick -- that has lots more powders than I had seen on other sites.

[Alan in Vermont]

+1 on thanks to Hick!

That's for sure on the need for velocity data. No good weather in the forecast until late this week. I really don't want to find out if Chrony skyscreens are waterproof or not. Mine has the remote readout so the bulk of the brain can sit undercover at the bench.

[rwadley]

There are methods of attempting to discover the burning rate of a "mystery" powder...

As mentioned, there are other methods and Ken Waters described on many many years ago.

What issue was that in?

[Treeman]

Hick's link is extremely useful. It helped me identify "mystery powder" in a bunch of handloads from a friends deceased father.

[BCB]

What issue was that in?

I honestly don't know. It may have been in a Handloader Issue or maybe a Rifle Issue or many even his Pet Loads writings. I was a long time ago I read it. I believe other writers have mentioned it also...

It involved starting with the fastest powders and working towards the slower ones...

'Bout all I can say as there might be a bit of controversy on that method. As I have come much more knowledgeable at reloading, sometimes I scratch my head at it also...

Good-luck...BCB

[Geezer in NH]

Fertilizer IMHO. My eyes are worth more than the savings, let alone fingers and face.

800 pounds, yes, send it out to a lab and get real confirmation what it

Screw with 8 pounds , NO

[JimB..]

Looks like 4320, similar density to 4320, but apparently has a much higher burn rate. I’d lay out a few lines to test relative burn rate against other known extruded powders, you may well have a magnum pistol powder. IMR 4227 comes to mind, isn’t it also a short grain extruded powder?

[Catshooter]

I once traded into a mystery powder. Twenty four pounds. Long stick powder, looked exactly like 4831.

Knowing full well that five grains of any powder would be well into safe territory, that's what I did in a .45 Colt case and fired it in my '94 Winchester. Boolit went about five inches down the bore.

So I proceeded to up the charge slowly until the case was full: the Keith chronographed at 450 fps. Felt pretty safe to move up into a rifle cartridge so I went to a Mosin. Started way low and worked up to a starting load for 4831. Bingo, right on the nose. So I call it 4831.

Your method and results may vary.


Cat