I want to try 2400 but can't any, is Accurate #9 just as good or better?

[TMenezes]

Hi guys, as some of you know my favorite cartridges are the 45 Colt and 44 Special. So far all my loads have been low pressure cowboy loads on up to standard 14,000psi loads. I wanna work up some beefier loads, but not the super duty H110/Win296 type stuff. I have been looking for 2400 because I heard it downloads well and can be very accurate.

Trouble is I can't find any. My local guy does have Accurate #9 though. I was looking over the Accurate +P load data for 45 Colt and found they have a section that's limited to 20,000psi. That seems exactly what I was looking for, thing is I have never used #9 and haven't heard much about it. I hear all kinds of praise for the 2400 but Nada about #9. Anybody out there use it?

Let me point out I don't care which one is more powerful. Don't care at all about that, if outright power was my goal I would be looking at other powders. I want decent accuracy, flexibility over a range of pressures / bullet weights (200 to 250 for the 44, 250 to 310 for the 45) and clean shooting would be nice.

Thanks in advance for your thoughts / opinions :-)

[NHPaul]

I use aa#9 in 500 S&W full pressure loads and 400 corbon and 10 mm full magnum loads it burns much cleaner than w296 IMHO and it meters very nicely Your mileage may vary . AA9 and aa5 and trail boss are just about all I use when I can get them

[Reload3006]

Others much more qualified than I am probably will give you more accurate information but I have always considered AA#9 to be about the same as H110/WW296 and not that happy with being down loaded. Can you get Unique or HERCO or Or IMRsr4756 all 3 of these will give you decent mild to mid range loads. I have heard great things about Vitovouri powders too if any of them are available in your area.

[Wayne S]

On some burn rate charts # 9 is listed as just faster than 2400, on others it's just a little slower, I've used both in small capacity cases; 22 Hornet and a 30 x 38 Spl. case. In larger cases I'd be worried that # 9 might be position sensitive . What case are you wanting to try it in ??

[TMenezes]

I already have my light and medium power loads covered with IMR 700X. I am looking for a slower pistol powder for +P 45 Colt loads. 2400, 4227, and Accurate #9 are what I was looking at for that use.

[wiljen]

I'm a big fan of Bluedot in that role. It is a bit faster than the 2400, AA9, H110 series but still very capable of pushing a 255gr bullet to 1350 or so at less than 28,000 PSI. For a blackhawk or redhawk that will handle 35,000 or more it does fine. None of these loads being discussed would be advisable in the SAA or any clone thereof.

[mroliver77]

If you want to experience recoil Unique will get you 80 - 90% of where the slow burners will.
Go read some articles from the 20's and 30's era and they thought of Unique as a slow powder suited to high end loads.
Herco being somewhat close in burning rate will do it too.

RCBS cast bullet manual lists

10.1 Unique under a 255 gr boolit (boolit = lead)for 1166 in a RUGER ONLY load for 45 Colt.

11.7 Herco under a 200 gr boolit in RUGER ONLY 45 Colt

Plenty of snap for my tired ole wrists!

Bunch of reading on .44 spcl i borrowed from a member here.
http://www.goodrichfamilyassoc.org/44_Special_Articles/
Jay

[TCLouis]

I am assuming you are going to shoot these out of modern guns that can handle the "+P" pressures.

Seems you got answers to several different questions you did NOT ask.

If AA manual has load data it seems from the info here that it is time for you to go with the manuals data and lead the way.

http://www.accuratepowder.com/

[TMenezes]

I have tried Blue Dot and I liked it, just can't find with this ammo/powder shortage. I was using blue dot at 12.9gr as Alliant Manuel says for about 1,000 fps, which really is about all I needed. Its just within the 14k psi ratings for standard 45 Colt loads. Problem is I can't find any more of it.

My 45 is the full size Ruger BH. The only pistol powder (and I literally mean the only) even remotely local powder I can find is AA#9. And the dam gunsmith charged me $35 a pound for it!!! So I will try it and let you know what I think of it.

[Lloyd Smale]

aa9 is defineatly slower then 2400. Its about half way between 2400 and 110. Its charateristics are closer to 110 though. Its a powder that likes mag primers, doesnt like downloading and is real clean burning. If your running top end or near top end loads in mag handguns it doesnt get much better. If your more interested in mid range loads stick with 2400 or even hs6

[JSH]

I have heard through the grape vine that aa9 formula has changed. The breech seating guys were all having issues with the new powder from speaking to them.
I have an early 8 lb jug of #9 and it clones my jug of wc820.
I have another jug of wc 820 that is virgin and picked up some what later and it clones 2400.
Both the above "clones" as I call them were shot over the chrono with same loads in the same gun and were mirror images on paper as well.
Jeff

[TMenezes]

OK so I bought a pound of #9 and loaded up some shells with 15gr of powder under the Lee 310gr bullets. I am really looking forward to finding out how they shoot this weekend :-)

[outdoorfan]

aa9 is defineatly slower then 2400. Its about half way between 2400 and 110. Its charateristics are closer to 110 though. Its a powder that likes mag primers, doesnt like downloading and is real clean burning. If your running top end or near top end loads in mag handguns it doesnt get much better. If your more interested in mid range loads stick with 2400 or even hs6


I don't doubt what you say at all, but it seems the pound of aa9 that I have is faster than the pound of 2400 that I just shot up. Testing in 357 mag, 4 inch.

[gofastman]

I don't doubt what you say at all, but it seems the pound of aa9 that I have is faster than the pound of 2400 that I just shot up. Testing in 357 mag, 4 inch.

From my use with it in 10mm, It seems to me like AA9 is faster

[Lloyd Smale]

sure shouldnt be. Are you basing it on the velocitys your getting or pressure signs. Just because a powder gives more velocity compared to another at the same charge weight doesnt nessisarily mean its faster burning. In my experience 2400 will ALLWAYS give pressure signs well before aa9 does using the same charge weights. My testing puts it about dead nuts in the middle of 2400 and 110. Its one of my favorite handgun powders and i know ive loaded at least a 100lbs of it through the years and have done it in everything from the 32mag to the 500 linebaugh and 50 beowolf

Where you really notice the differnce is in bigger cases. In the small cases like the 32 mag 3220 ect the differnce might only be a grain of powder but in the big cases it really shows itself. For example i just looked at my data for my two 500 linebaughs. Useing a 440 grain bullet i have notes that same 26 grains of 2400 is max, 29 aa9 and 33 grains of 110 is max. Another example is my 330 grain 44 mag blackhawk loads. 19 grains of 2400 is max, 21 grains of aa9 and 24 grains of 110. Some of these are very much max loads so if your going to actually try them PLEASE work up to them, because there safe in my gun doesnt mean there safe in yours.

[outdoorfan]

I was testing a 180 grain boolit in the 4-inch. I tried 12.6 grains and 13.9 grains. The 13.9 grain load was only a few fps faster. And I remember reading on this forum that aa9 can/will do that once the maximum practical load is reached. I was able to load 2400 up to 14.5 grains (highest tested, and over max) and got 1400 fps out of it.

That's not extensive, but it gave me the feeling that aa9 was faster in my gun.

However, I did load 14.5-15 grains aa9 in my 16 inch Rossi 357 and got some crazy velocities out of it. Too much pressure and accuracy sucked, though.

[Lloyd Smale]

are you guys using mag primers. Ive got some strange results with it using standard primers myself. It to me is harder to ignite then even 110 and i use only mag primers anymore and for the most part cci350s. I dont know how it acts in a 357. The 357 is something i rarely fool with. To me its allways been just a loud 38 special. Not that good for hunting. About the only real use for it is a self defense gun. If i want noise and recoil ill step up to a 44 or if i want that power level ill do it in a 44 special with much less muzzle blast.

[outdoorfan]

I haven't tried mag primers. Maybe that was it.

[gofastman]

I was using WLP's

[uscra112]

I'll take #9 over 2400 any day, and all night, too. As for it's not being happy in reduced loads - many top Schuetzen shooters use #9 at 1/2 its' normal pressure in the .32-40 and .32 Miller, and get better standard deviations than 2400. Using pistol primers, too. My own .25-21 rifle bears this out. Velocity SD for 2400 typically 12-18, SD for #9 is typically single digits, sometimes below 6 fps. Accuracy is better, too.

[TMenezes]

Well I shot some 300gr slugs at the bowling pins last week. AA#9 burned nice and clean even though the Manuel showed I was only 17k psi. Sadly I only got to shoot a few rounds before a park ranger came over and said the range was closed for the weekend.

So far I am liking Accurate powders, they really do meter like water. Unfortunately they can also leak out of your powder measure a bit as the grains are very small. #7 didn't leak much, #9 leaked just a bit more. But every time I checked the charges never varied by even .1 of a grain.

So I went home and loaded up some more ammo, this time switching to 250gr slugs. Used 17.5gr AA#9 and 15gr of AA#7, both of which are about 20k psi according to Accurate and Lee manuels.

Really looking forward to trying these loads this weekend. Load development in Ca takes so long as there's limited range time available :-(

[evan price]

I like #9 in 44 mag with a Winchester large pistol primer (can be used for reg or mag loads). Tiny little balls and it seems to be leaky in the auto disc but it works great in my magnums.

[Maximumbob54]

I've just started using AA #9 in .357 magnum and you MUST use a magnum primer if you actually want to hear bang instead of click from all of them. But I have to say that AA #9 may indeed be my 2400 killer. I may need to see about using AA #9 in some of my cast milsurp rifle loads in place of 2400 as that is now the last reason I keep 2400 around.

[DeanWinchester]

2400 has been nonexistent everywhere lately. I just lucked up and cleaned an older gentleman out of his small stash. I picked up 4 one pound cylinders that had never been opened. They were the old blue cardboard tube canisters. They were marked $9 each. Wonder how long it's been since they were that much? Lol

[HangFireW8]

A good substitute as long as the remaining case volume is small. In other words it'll work great with cast in 44Mag but not 30'06.

[smkummer]

The hornandy manual I have lists a charge of AA9 with the 255 SWC bullet at 950 within 14,000 pressure. I have some but have yet to use it because I stop at 900 FPS with Unique as its all I need for 100 yard shooting.

[Char-Gar]

AA9 is a good powder and interchanges with 2400 for use, although the powder charges won't interchange point for point. Treat each powder as a different critter.

When you reach the top end loads, there is a little difference between the two. While both tend to spike pressure, the AA9 will take a bigger spike. So ease up to the top in small increments that you don't find yourself over the red line by the spike.

[uscra112]

A good substitute as long as the remaining case volume is small. In other words it'll work great with cast in 44Mag but not 30'06.

Not really true. The ASSRA boys use #9 in the .32-40 case at well under 50% load density, and get very good accuracy. I do it myself in a .25-21 Stevens, and get better S.D. numbers than 2400, by a goodly margin. That load is tailored to plain base boolits, and is only 37% of the case capacity. It fires every time, too, using pistol primers.

[TMenezes]

I tried AA #7 and #9. Loved em both. #7 seemed not to spill much at all, #9 spilled just a bit, but not bad from my Lee auto disk.

The #7 seemed great for mid range loads, but the #9 was much more capable of magnum power. Even though my loads are fairly mild compared to others I have seen. My favorite so far was 17.5gr #9 with a 255gr plain based cast boolit with a Federal Magnum primer. Going to try around 18gr next time.

The 300gr loads were good but really more power than I needed. I may work up heavier loads for hunting later on, for now these loads are just fun for blasting bowling pins :-)

[Messy bear]

hey guys
thing to remember is no.9 has changed 3 times that i know of. the new stuff is very flexible. better at reduced loads than many ball powders.

[MT Gianni]

I stuck a bullet and tied up my cylinder with AA9 in the 44 special. I used book loads from Accurate loading manual #1. i will not use it in low pressure loads.

[Lloyd Smale]

aa9 if anything in my experience is a worse powder to use for reduced loads then 110. You can get buy doing it but you really should consider only using 350 ccis to light it off when reducing it.

[Bullshop Junior]

Print off a powder burn rate chart and see where it lands at. I've used it before in a few guns but it's been a few years and I don't remember much about it. Seems like I used it in my 45 colt quite a bit though.

[Messy bear]

the NEW no.9 is much more flexible than older versions. i cronographed some loads for a guy once that had a 45 colt w 4 5/8 ". when he told me the load i prepared for big hollow booms if it went at all and stuck bullets. it was a 310 gr with 16 or 16.5 gr no 9 AND a cci 300. velocities where in the upper 800's and e. s. that werent too bad. remember it has changed. call western to find out if yours is new or old.

[Ohio Rusty]

I will be trying Blue Dot in some .357 loads to see how well it does Vs. 2400.
Ohio Rusty ><>