Selected shotgun powder burn rate source confusion!

[cpileri]

In another thread, i mentioned I was nto the best at determining powder burn rates. Well, here's why (attached pdf, I hope):

83066

The rates dont match up. plain and simple, or is it?
OK, the rates can change based on the cartridge.
But check out the huge discrepancy between sources for 410 powder: Hogdon has it between Longshot and 2400, where Ramshot/Western and reload bench have it way down below the 4227's.

They seems to agree on the faster powders, except for Hogdon putting E-3 at the top above titewad and Ramshot listing E-3 below reddot and above clays.
but generally between titewad and Unique, everyone seems to think they are 'fast' and the order is fairly consistent among chart-makers.
Herco seems to stay above 800X, Ok; whew!
Then we begin flip-flopping:
is Longshot above or below blue dot? depends on which you read.
is steel faster than 2400 or vice versa? but at least they both stay atop Lil'gun.
And are the 4227's faster or slower than 4759?
At least everyone agrees that Reloader-17 is the slowest, and in websites where it or Hogdon or Accurate 4350 appear, it lists Re-17 between them. See my pdf for clarification of my confusion!

So maybe someone can help me:

Is there a chart for these powders in 12ga and 20ga hulls, if that makes the rate change?
Or, can someone help me make sense of powder burn rates at all?

What good is conflicting data?

Is this burn rate (coupled with energy/gram, I suppose; that is the energy per mass of each powder, or how 'powerful' it is) only useful to experimenters?

Thanks!
C-

[SuperBlazingSabots]

Greetings Brother Cpileri,
Faster - Blue Dot, Longshot, 2400, A.Steel, Lilgun, 4227, 4759, IMR4350, A Reloader 17, Accurate 4350 -Slower.

Hoping it helps.

"An inventor fails 999 times, and if he succeeds once, he's in.
He treats his failures simply as practice shots. ~ Charles F. Kettering

Best regards,
Ajay
SuperBlazingSabots,com
BlazingSabots@Gmail.com
http://www.facebook.com/BlazingSabots?ref=hl[/url]
http://slugshooting.accountsupport.com/[/url] ... wforum.php
http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthr[/url] ... ot!/page1
http://www.shotgunworld.com/bbs/view...f=118&t=196961[/url]
http://www.deeranddeerhunting.com/fo...p?f=43&t=39246[/url]
http://www.go2gbo.com/forums/slug-gu...old-is-gold-!/[/url]
-Elite Group of Slug Shooter's
We all, who take slug loading seriously are a dedicated family, who have taken it upon ourselves to perfect our tech. We experiment to find better techniques and share our knowledge.
Location: New Jersey. USA / Frankfort, W.Germany / London, UK
-Elite Group of Slug Shooter's
We all, who take slug loading seriously are a dedicated family, who have taken it upon ourselves to perfect our tech. We experiment to find better techniques and share our knowledge.

[cpileri]

Thank, Ajay. Where did you source that info?
C-

[dverna]

I would not get my panties in a knot over one list that has a particular powder one or two places "out of sequence" with another list. What that demonstrates is those powders are probably pretty close on burn rate and, depending on the results of the testing that was done, one powder may have performed slightly better or worse than "normal". In terms of load development, that would mean you cannot expect much difference between those powders - at least not enough that we can discern.

I would hang my hat on what the manufacturers publish instead of some composite chart from a web source. If you see something really wonky, an email or call to the manufacturer could establish if an error was made in the publication or the reason they placed it where they did.

I have had good response from Ben at Alliant whenever I have had a question about their powders.

Don Verna

[OnHoPr]

Well obviously they're published loads.:???::veryconfu[smilie=s:

[SuperBlazingSabots]

Good morning, I got my chart from Hodgdon.com, powder's can also change from batch to batch a tiny bit.
Such is life.

"An inventor fails 999 times, and if he succeeds once, he's in.
He treats his failures simply as practice shots. ~ Charles F. Kettering

Best regards,
Ajay
SuperBlazingSabots,com
BlazingSabots@Gmail.com
http://www.facebook.com/BlazingSabots?ref=hl[/url]
http://slugshooting.accountsupport.com/[/url] ... wforum.php
http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthr[/url] ... ot!/page1
http://www.shotgunworld.com/bbs/view...f=118&t=196961[/url]
http://www.deeranddeerhunting.com/fo...p?f=43&t=39246[/url]
http://www.go2gbo.com/forums/slug-gu...old-is-gold-!/[/url]
-Elite Group of Slug Shooter's
We all, who take slug loading seriously are a dedicated family, who have taken it upon ourselves to perfect our tech. We experiment to find better techniques and share our knowledge.
Location: New Jersey. USA / Frankfort, W.Germany / London, UK
-Elite Group of Slug Shooter's
We all, who take slug loading seriously are a dedicated family, who have taken it upon ourselves to perfect our tech. We experiment to find better techniques and share our knowledge.

[35remington]

Since the answer to the question is "it doesn't really matter, and stick with published data" you won't have a problem, and any confusion is unnecessary. Burning rates change depending upon which gauge and shot weight and primer and wad are used. In metallic cartridges the same change can appear. Red Dot is faster than Bullseye in metallics, for instance, contrary to popular thought.

4759 is useless in most shotshell loads in 12 and 20 gauge......as is 4227 and 2400. In my 25-20, I find from fastest to slowest 2400, 4759, 4227. FWIW.

Do NOT try to make up a load looking at a burn rate chart. Great way to get yourself in lots of trouble. Powders listed next to each other can be fairly far apart in actual use, and similar charges may be greatly overpressure with one of the two compared powders.

[SuperBlazingSabots]

Good morning Remington, very well said, a lot more behind it.
Lets not forget, we are playing with fire!

"An inventor fails 999 times, and if he succeeds once, he's in.
He treats his failures simply as practice shots. ~ Charles F. Kettering

Best regards,
Ajay
SuperBlazingSabots,com
BlazingSabots@Gmail.com
http://www.facebook.com/BlazingSabots?ref=hl[/url]
http://slugshooting.accountsupport.com/[/url] ... wforum.php
http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthr[/url] ... ot!/page1
http://www.shotgunworld.com/bbs/view...f=118&t=196961[/url]
http://www.deeranddeerhunting.com/fo...p?f=43&t=39246[/url]
http://www.go2gbo.com/forums/slug-gu...old-is-gold-!/[/url]
-Elite Group of Slug Shooter's
We all, who take slug loading seriously are a dedicated family, who have taken it upon ourselves to perfect our tech. We experiment to find better techniques and share our knowledge.
Location: New Jersey. USA / Frankfort, W.Germany / London, UK
-Elite Group of Slug Shooter's
We all, who take slug loading seriously are a dedicated family, who have taken it upon ourselves to perfect our tech. We experiment to find better techniques and share our knowledge.

[cpileri]

That's interesting, because we sure talk a bit about 4759 here. The other's too.

But, yes, making up loads based on burn rate is dumb- you need to know everythign abt a powder before you can think fo doing that.
C-

[longbow]

Not having looked up your sources to see the whole chart, this may be some speculation but...

don't confuse comparative burn rates with actual combustion rates.

A comparative burn rate is just that ~ how fast the powders are compared to each other not how fast they actually burn in real time. I have several charts with varying numbers of powders listed so the powder of same name/burn rate will be in different positions relatively in each chart.

For instance one lists 260 powders, one lists 246 powder and one lists 131 powders. All the charts show Bullseye as faster than Red Dot and Red Dot faster than Green Dot but their locations in the charts are different because there are a different number of powders listed.

Also, these charts come with warnings like:

"Burn rate charts can never reflect the differences between powders in the correct proportion, and can only place powders in approximate burn rate envelopes.

NEVER USE THESE TO DETERMINE/CALCULATE LOADS - ALWAYS REFER TO REPUTABLE LOAD GUIDES/MANUALS."

With shotshell loading in particular, it is difficult and potentially dangerous to work up loads without pressure testing equipment and/or lots of experience and good judgment. And as we know good judgment comes from experience and a lot of experience comes from bad judgment.

Play but play safe!

Longbow

[bikerbeans]

"4759 is useless in most shotshell loads in 12 and 20 gauge......as is 4227 and 2400."

I agree with this statement for typical "shot" loads, but there are many who are launching heavy slugs using these powders.

BB

[cpileri]

True, and the slug thing is indeed what we are doing w them.

This is a pretty interesting thread. I think so anyway.
Thanks for participating!
C-

[bikerbeans]

C-

You guys keep posting about these slower burn rate powders for slugs and I may have to try them once my Blue Dot supply is exhausted. I will however, miss the shower of disintegrating nitro cards when I shoot these slow burners.:bigsmyl2:

BB

[35remington]

I did say "shotshell" did I not?

[OnHoPr]

C-

You guys keep posting about these slower burn rate powders for slugs and I may have to try them once my Blue Dot supply is exhausted. I will however, miss the shower of disintegrating nitro cards when I shoot these slow burners.:bigsmyl2:

BB

The essence of the slower powders such as 4759 does minimize the wad column inconsistencies. I just how it would ignite in temps from 0 to 20 degrees for late season hunting around the 40 to 45 parallel.

PS I have seen many published loads that didn't add up in most all/a lot of published load data since I got my 700 versa mec in "75" throughout the years.