Considering accurate powders

[drklynoon]

I am considering breaking out of my comfort zone and trying some accurate powders, (as I can get them.) I have a great working relationship with hercules and IMR... wait a tick.... Alliant and Hodgdon. lol I'm thinking about expanding my horizons into the Accurate realm. I'll probably start with #2,5,7,9 and maybe trueblue. Has anyone found that these powders provide significant advantages in specific uses? Or would I be wasting my time and should stick with what I know. We all garner that working relationship over time and can pick out what loads from the book that are most likely to be the best just by our understandings of the charecteristics of the powder; however, this has led me down a narrow path. The only non herc, dupont powder that I use is tight group and have yet to be sold on it.

[rexherring]

I use a lot of AA#5 and #9. The #5 is a little slower than Unique and the #9 faster than H110. They both measure good and have not had any problems with them. My .45 ACP likes the #5 with heavy boolits and my .45 Colt Ruger loads like the #9. I've also loaded .38's and .380's with #2 and #5 and both worked nice.

[mikeyd23]

I also like Accurate, 2520 for .223 and Accurate #5 and #2 for 9mm, .38spl and .45acp with great results.

[uscra112]

Use AA#9 in mid-range loads (1400 fps) for plain base boolits on .25-21. Better S.D. over the Chrony than 2400 by a factor of two. Works well in larger cases, too, even up to .32-40. I also use it in .357 Magnum. Good stuff. Just wish it was easier to find at the LGS.

[mpmarty]

I use AA-9 for my 10mm loads. This is the cleanest burning powder I've ever used. Loaded in new Starline brass the fired cases are as clean inside as before loading. Amazing stuff and good velocity with 200gr boolits also.

[Kraschenbirn]

AA#5 for the .45 ACP with 225 & 230 gr. boolits. Also works pretty good for duplicating factory loads in the .44 Spl.

Bill

[Hardcast416taylor]

I`ve lost track of how many 8 lb. jugs of AA - 5 I have used for my pistols. I have long ago settled on AA - 2230 powder for my .223 and other rifle calibers. The .416 Russian Express round has shown a likening for AA - 2520.Robert

[**oneshot**]

My 41mag just loves #9, but can't get it local anymore. I also tried it in 357 with good results.

[drklynoon]

Hmm. Sounds like a pretty fair following. I like that #9 is cleaner burning and more flexible than 2400. It sounds like I need to get on the bus. I stay with cast for all my hanguns and it sounds like AA allows for more flexibility while still being clean burning creating better S.D.

[390ish]

AA7 is the best powder I have found for 38 super. I like 2 and 5 for 9mm Mak. 9 is good for heavy 38 super loads. They all meter very well. Was interested to read that Western (owns AA) Shilouette powder is the same powder as the old Winchester Action Powder, which is one of my olde favorites from the Clinton administration. Great powder.

[GH1]

I use #9 for my .357 loads. I like it because it's clean burning, meters consistently, and I can use standard small pistol primers. Additionally, #9 is a low flash powder, very suitable for low light situations.
When I used to load for .380 ACP I used #2 with good results. My 45-70 loads are with AA5744. Unlike #2 &#9,which are ball powders, 5744 is a bulky stick powder that does a very good job of filling the 45-70 cases. I like AA products.
GH18-)

[Marvin S]

I use several Accurate powders. One main reason is when they first came out they had the initial big red loading manual full of data for obselete calibers and cast boolits.

[stubshaft]

I buy #5 in 5lb jugs and use it with the same load data as Unique. I also use alot of #9 for sub-sonic 7.62X39 and Whisper loads.

[drklynoon]

Interesting. The couple burn rate charts I seen list #5 as a little faster than Unique but that doesn't say much to how it loads or the volume of it. That is interesting that it seems to perform similar to Unique. Heck I think I'm sold and I can even find it still and it's cheaper than the Hodgdon guys.

[winelover]

I like Accurate powders and have been using them since their introduction. The first powder I tried was AA2520, it does exceptionally well for me in two different 308's and a 243W, with J-words. I also use AA4350 with 338W, 270W & 243W. Currently working with AA5477 and cast in a 338W Mag. Shooting one hole, ten shot groups, @ 55 yards. Need to see what it does at 100 yards. Recently picked up a pound of AA7, works fine in 9mm and 125 grain cast, haven't tested it for accuracy though.

Winelover

[Rocky Raab]

Been using Accurate powders for several decades. Now that Western has taken them over, the powders will be much more consistent from jug to jug - which was definitely not the case before. Very good powders in general.

The old red manuals should NOT be used for load data. Many loads in it were overly warm. Use ONLY the free .pdf you can download from their website.

[rexherring]

Interesting. The couple burn rate charts I seen list #5 as a little faster than Unique but that doesn't say much to how it loads or the volume of it. That is interesting that it seems to perform similar to Unique. Heck I think I'm sold and I can even find it still and it's cheaper than the Hodgdon guys.

I've seen some burn rate charts on this too. They're wrong though, it's slower than Unique. I can shoot 11 grs of #5 in my .45 Colt BH but would never do that with 11 grs of Unique. Personal experience on that one. But very safe if you use Unique load data in most pistol calibers.

[drklynoon]

Rex, I'm thinking that they may have a different process for retarding the speed of their powder than Alliant. Maybe #5 is faster but a little less energetic due to shape or coating or something. This would give the impression of it being slower than Unique yet cleaner burning due to it's speed. I could be full of it but that would be my guess. I'm looking forward to giving it a try.

[rexherring]

Rex, I'm thinking that they may have a different process for retarding the speed of their powder than Alliant. Maybe #5 is faster but a little less energetic due to shape or coating or something. This would give the impression of it being slower than Unique yet cleaner burning due to it's speed. I could be full of it but that would be my guess. I'm looking forward to giving it a try.

I'm sure some have different ways to test. I've been looking online and out of the 8 charts I looked at it was 50/50 for it being faster or slower. LOL

I'm just saying that in my experience with pistol loads using both powders over several years, #5 is slower and lower pressure per grain in my loads. What will flatten a primer with Unique won't with the same load of #5. Out of a longer barrel or bottlenecked round could be different. But either way, both good powders.

[drklynoon]

Cool, I'm looking forward to trying some different things. It's not like I need to or anything I have really good success with alliant for pistols and imr for rifles but a little change isn't a bad thing, right?

[drklynoon]

So I put in an order. I got some true blue, 2495, and AA #7 on the way. Midsouth had some #5 but I couldn't bring myself to pay the hazmat for one powder. I also purchased some reloader 7 to try in some things and a 5 pounder of trailboss, my .45 colt is hungry lol.

[Marvin S]

Been using Accurate powders for several decades. Now that Western has taken them over, the powders will be much more consistent from jug to jug - which was definitely not the case before. Very good powders in general.

The old red manuals should NOT be used for load data. Many loads in it were overly warm. Use ONLY the free .pdf you can download from their website.
Hmmmm. I will take that under advisement. The big LEE manual borrowed most all data from the big red manual.

[Aunegl]

I've burned a lot of Accurate powders over the years, when I lived in NM. I've used #5, #7, 1680, 2460 etc. Then I moved to KS and lived a couple miles from Hodgdons corporate offices. Accurate powders were a little harder to find, for some reason.

[Olevern]

AA#7 for 32 H&R magnum flat shooting (read: warm) jacketed fox and 'yote loads.

[drklynoon]

olevern, you read my mind lol. I'm planning on trying to work up a load of #7 for my .32 mag with a 314008 NOE 115 gr. boolit. Load data is scarce but I'm thinking of starting at 5 gr.

[FergusonTO35]

I've burned more #5 in .38 Special than all others combined. Try 5.8 grains under a 158 grain boolit. This is a standard pressure load that actually outruns the old FBI +P load by 20 fps and is very accurate.

[Olevern]

olevern, you read my mind lol. I'm planning on trying to work up a load of #7 for my .32 mag with a 314008 NOE 115 gr. boolit. Load data is scarce but I'm thinking of starting at 5 gr.

drklynoon,
I haven't used the 115's in the H&R cases yet, although I have started working up loads with them in my 327 Blackhawk (sadly discontinued already). And...I am flying in uncharted territory with my 85 and 90 grain jacketed bullets with AA#7; past the recommended loads so I will not share them.
Suffice it to say that the manual loads are maxed out with the cheap, weak H&R revolvers in mind and I am using Ruger Single six's.

I do not recommend you go past the published data.

[drklynoon]

I completely understand your position on that sir. I too refuse to recommend any load that is not published. It makes little sense to recommend loads such as these due to differing guns, cases, primers, boolit tension and hardness. I am using a SSM .32 mag as well and am looking forward to load experimenting. There is very little published data on a 115 boolit in a .32 mag because of the saami 20,000 limitation. I am going to attempt to get close to that limit with very slow incremental work but I am hoping to get 900 FPS without putting any real strain on any component. If it looks to be an unrealistic goal then I may stop short. As for the .327 I liked it sorta. I haven't bought one because I was always wondering if it would make it. I saw the guns that ruger was offering it in and thought they were not utilizing the cartidge to its full capability. I did not know they made a Black Hawk for it. That is probably a fun little gun. I wonder about the report of the round as well. I always hated the sound of a .30 carbine in a blackhawk and assumed the .327 would be similar. Anyway thanks for the response.
Nathan

[Rocky Raab]

In my experience, the three more "earbleeding" revolver rounds are the the 327, 357 Mag, and the 30 Carbine, in that order, with the 30 Carb being worst. The reason is simple: all three rounds develop their peak pressure just as the base of the bullet clears the cylinder. The cylinder gap releases that extreme pressure, which reaches us as a sound wave. I suspect that the 357 Maximum might have been even worse, but I have never fired one.

Most other cartridges actually reach peak pressure (and essentially cease powder burn) before the bullet even leaves the case mouth. Peak pressures are lower and are dropping before any gas is released at the gap. That's why they have much milder reports.

[rexherring]

In my experience, the three more "earbleeding" revolver rounds are the the 327, 357 Mag, and the 30 Carbine, in that order, with the 30 Carb being worst. The reason is simple: all three rounds develop their peak pressure just as the base of the bullet clears the cylinder. The cylinder gap releases that extreme pressure, which reaches us as a sound wave. I suspect that the 357 Maximum might have been even worse, but I have never fired one.

Most other cartridges actually reach peak pressure (and essentially cease powder burn) before the bullet even leaves the case mouth. Peak pressures are lower and are dropping before any gas is released at the gap. That's why they have much milder reports.

My friends .357 Max Dan Wesson was Loud for sure but not as earbleeding as my BH .30 carbine. Probably a close second.

[NuJudge]

I like #7 for .40 S&W with 175 and 180 gr bullets. It gives decent ballistics, fills the case and it is cheap.

[parisite]

Accurate 4100 and Ramshot Enforcer (same powder) is the best magnum handgun powder I've ever used. So versatile there is even published loads for 45acp for it. Very low flash and magnum primers are not required.

It is one notch slower burning than AA#9.

[drklynoon]

Hmmm I'll keep that in mind parisite. I don't shoot a lot of heavy loads but I do like a nice flexible powder. I've been using H110 in my .357's and 44's maybe a change is in order.

[rintinglen]

Frequent unavailability and lack of lot to lot consistency pretty much put me off the band wagon for Accurate powders. Had a fling with them when they first hit town because they were about a buck a pound cheaper than Hogdon or Hercules, but swiftly became disenchanted. The price soon climbed into parity or beyond with the other brands and I never quite got the consistent accuracy from No.2 That I got from WW=231 and Bullseye. I did like No.5 for 9mm loads though.
The frequent absences from the shelves also did little to endear the brand to me. No good working up a great load then mot being able to make any cause you can't find the powder.

[detox]

Their 1680 was once a great 22 Hornet powder, but they changed suppliers and accuracy went downhill quick. I have a good old bottle and a bad new bottle of 1680 and you can see the grain size difference. I have some older 5744 that was made about 15 years ago and I bet you newer lots shoot differently. Accurate powders have concistant lot to lot inconsistancy from my own personal experience.