Opinions on powders for progressives

[Petrol & Powder]

.....And by "Progressives" I mean reloading presses that perform multiple functions with each pull of the handle NOT bedwetting liberals that think they are enlightened.

A long time ago, in a galaxy far far away....I used Unique when reloading 38 Special on a single stage press. All was well in the world and I experimented with different powders. I learned a lot, including the fact that others had already blazed a trail and I didn't know nearly as much as I thought I did. At some point I got a Dillon 550B progressive press and found that WW231 flowed and metered fairly well through the automated powder measure. 231 became my 38 Special powder with some small runs with other powders. I tended to buy a lot of 231 and that reinforced my opinion that I was doing at least something right.

The bottom line is I use WW231 because:
1. It meters well.
2. I have it! (lots of it)

I'm happy with 231 in 38 Special but I'm wondering if others have input about powders suitable in a progressive press? I like Unique (a lot) but I don't get the consistent charge weights from my measure and I have used AA#5 and AA#2 with decent results (but find 231 available more often)

Thoughts? Opinions? Experiences?

[35remington]

The suitable powders depend more upon the powder measure you're using than the fact that you're using it on a progressive press. Nonuniformity of charge throw weight can happen when loading them one at a time just as easily. Poor manipulation of the powder measure or inadvisedly "doing other things" less than uniformly while dispensing powder can cause variation to be excessive as well. .

An important factor is cavity shape.....in other words, for a given charge volume, is the cavity long and skinny or short and squat like a tuna can? Long and skinny reduces shear area but increases the chance large flake powder can bridge in the cavity and fail to fill it completely if you go too far in the "skinny" direction. Short and squat reduces powder bridging but increases shear area, which can increase the charge to charge variation.

Powder cavity shape constantly fights these variables. Unique can be metered with accuracy provided you don't go too far one way or another, or too low in charge weight.

I can dispense a large flake powder like Red Dot in 45 ACP such that shot to shot variation of velocity is equal to or less than W231.....and I use less powder to get the same velocity. That may not be true for 380 Auto loads given the measure I am doing it with, but for a bit larger charges it is just fine.

One must somehow be able to quantify just what is "good enough" in terms of powder throw consistency....and chronograph variation is the very best way to do so.

[williamwaco]

Your points 1 and 2 seem to be all the justification I would need.

I too like Unique but in .38 special, I actually use Bullseye and AA2

I don't wory about inconsistent charge weights.

I find that factory wad cutters charge weights vary just as much as mine.

[BruceB]

As a general rule, I use easy-metering powders such as the ball-SHAPED ones in rifle loads. Some "ball" powders are re-shaped from spherical form to flake or whatever.... 231 is one of these, made via the ball-powder PROCESS even though it's not ball-SHAPED. " Ball powder" is a name denoting the process of manufacture, and NOT THE SHAPE OF THE POWDER GRAINS.

During my long M1A project, I once loaded a good-sized batch of .308/7.62NATO on the Dillon 550 with *IMR 4831*... a stick powder.

I did this very carefully, checking each and every charge visually, and weighing a lot of them. In this run, over a hundred rounds I believe, EVERY charge was dropped by the Dillon measure quite accurately. I did this as an experiment, and it proved-out.

I'd still recommend GREAT CAUTION in using such powders in a progressive, but at least in my 550 the powder "ran" very nicely.

[pmer]

I have a Hornaday progressive and Titegroup and Alliant 300 MP meter with little to no variance. 2400 is real good and H335 meters great too.

[Petrol & Powder]

35remington - Thank you, that was articulated well and exactly what I was seeking. I found that my other powder measures "like" certain ranges of volume and you explained that perfectly.


One must somehow be able to quantify just what is "good enough" in terms of powder throw consistency....
/\ Two big thumbs UP !


Williamwaco - ditto, thank you and just for kicks, what do you think od AA#2?

[prs]

231, TightGroup, and ball types flow like water in my Lee LM with the pro auto disc. I do use a baffle. Smaller charges of Unique or Red Dot require a trick to drop precisely. The trick is to gegtly rap the side of the powder hopper a dozen or so times with pencil drum stick fashion before loading to settle the powder, the rap it again as the cavity is in fill position, and yet again when activated by powder through die. It is really not much trouble, but my Unique keg is full and me 231 & TG kegs are going fast.

prs

[wv109323]

Winchester advertised that WW231 metered better than its biggest rival Bullseye. Small grained powders seem to meter better due to the "shear" of the powder measure. The larger the cross sectional area of the cavity of the powder measure the less accurate. If the cross sectional area of the powder cavity increases with powder weight the less accurate the larger charges will be. The other thing to consider is that the powder flows or that the entire powder charge drops thru the often restricted powder tube. A powder suitable for a .30 caliber thrown charge (large powder tube) may not be suitable for a .22 caliber.
Dillon makes an adapter so that a different powder measure can be used on their 550 machine. The powder measure shown(IIRC) is a RCBS. Dillon says that it is for using "stick" powder in their progressive to load rifle cartridges. The Dillon powder measure increases the "shear" area of powder as the powder charge increases. The RCBS powder measure has the same cross sectional area of "shear" regardless of powder charge.
The true danger is if the powder bridges and all of the powder does not flow into the case on one or multiple cases. Then on one round the powder that is bridged and the regular charge flows into the case. This can cause a serious and dangerous overcharge.
In short I use a lot of ball powder in my progressives.

[Love Life]

Polish out your Dillon powder measure and it will drop many powders very accurately. Well, except for 800X.

[Petrol & Powder]

wv109323 - 10-4 on the "shear" area of different powder measures. My Redding BR measure works well with stick type powders, in fact it works well with most powders. The Dillon measure has a powder chamber that changes the size of the shear line based on volume. It's a good design within a small window of charge weights but it's more susceptible to variation with large grained powders because of the bigger shear surface area. I agree that ball type powders work a bit better with the Dillon setup. As BruceB pointed out, BALL powder isn't always BALL. That's a name for the process but 231 grains are flattened spheres and seem to flow well through powder measures.

I'm really in the "good enough" camp most of the time but I'm open to suggestions and tips.

[historicfirearms]

I made a little vibrator out of one of those small personal desk fans. Clipped a portion of one of the fan blades so it runs out of balance. This helps me get more consistent powder drops with flake powders. I just let the fan run sitting on my reloading bench while I'm reloading. I can feel the vibrations with my fingers at the top of the measure.

[Silver Jack Hammer]

I used Bullseye, Unique and Blue Dot in my Dillon 550 with no problems what so ever. Have been for years.

[pmer]

I think the powder dispense operation of a progressive press is pretty different compared to loading single stage. Loading single I would use a culver style Lyman 55 measure for big stick powders like IMR4064 and could use multiple taps depending on how full the hopper is. Then use a RCBS cylindrical style for flake and ball powders. The Lock N Load uses a cylindrcal type throw with a choice of pistol and rifle chambers.

But to run a progressive, the measure has one chance to get it right and I can't do the extra taps and clunks or whatever to help get a more precise throw. I bet polishing a Dillion slide bar would be a good idea.

[Bonz]

I just purchased some Ramshot Silhouette to feed my Hornady LNL. The powder is like fine sand and meters extremely well. I also like Alliant PowerPistol for great metering but not as good as the Silhouette. All the other powders that I have tried don't meter as well. The worst that I have ever tried is probably BlueDot.

[grampa243]

i use a 550B with any and all powders... even with cutting on powders like IMR4198 I found the the charges weighed in so close that i didn't worry anymore.

now with flake and and long grain powder i did find that it can take 3-5 cycles of the measure to ''settle in'' (don't tap or shake the hopper anymore then normal use does as this can cause heavy charges)

now if you are working up test loads set the measure a little low and trickle your final charge.

[ROGER4314]

To keep costs under control, I standardized my rifle powders on IMR 4895. That worked great until I loaded .223 on my Dillon 550. That powder is cylinder shaped and it bridges badly in the tiny neck of the .223. Now, if I load .223 on the Dillon, I use 748 for its easy metering. If I load .223 on the Rock Chucker, I use the IMR 4895.

Flash

[bosterr]

I had been loading Win 231 for 45 ACP since the 80's, first loading with a Lee Pro 1000 then a RCBS Piggyback and now a Dillon Square Deal B. My routine has always been to tap the measure just below the plastic tube appr. 12 times on each side to settle the powder. I agree that 231 measures quite well. Set to throw 5.2 gr. the most variation I would get is only .1 gr. Since my supply of 231 got pretty low I I began looking for something that would shoot a little better in my 5" Kimber. I read a lot of good things about Red Dot, so I bought a pound. My starting point, I decided would be 4.9 gr. I started out loading 100 rounds, weighing the charge every 10 rounds. The highest deviation I got was up to 5.2 gr. At the chronograph, that .3 deviation was worth 43 fps extreme spread in both the 3" Kimber and the 5". To me .3 gr. variation sounded huge! BTW 922 fps average in the 5 " and 820 fps average in the 3 ". I built a solid rest that fits the dust shield just ahead of the trigger guard to try to eliminate some of the human factor and found that Red Dot was noticably more accurate for me than 231. When my supply of Red Dot gets low, I may try something else. I borrowed some Power Pistol from my brother and found it varied as much as Red Dot, similiar accuracy, but needed 6.5 gr. to get the same velocity.

[Petrol & Powder]

All good input.
I too like IMR4895 for rifle but I confine rifle reloading to a single stage press and a Redding measure. Sometimes I set the powder measure to throw a charge slightly lower than what I want and use a powder trickler to bring it up to the desired weight but I never brother doing that with handgun cartridges.
With any powder in the Dillon measure, I find that I must throw several charges before it settles down. Some powders like 231 settle down and the measure then throws very consistent weights after that but some aren't as consistent. I must say that the variations are probably well within the "good enough" range that it likely doesn't matter much. (as pointed out by several prior posters)
I guess the bottom line is that within a certain "window" of charge weights, the powder measure on a progressive press is well up to the task for most handgun cartridges with most powders. The smaller grained powders probably have an advantage in an automatic progressive measure.

[FergusonTO35]

I have long found that Bullseye and the Hodgdon pistol (not pistol/shotgun) powders meter the best, at least through my Lee Auto Disk and RCBS Uniflow. With Hodgdon's Titewad, Titegroup, and even H110 I couldn't make them more consistent even with a hand trickler. Accurate #2 and #5 work great too.