Alliant Powder .. Worst answer ever from a powder company

[kdiver58]

I supplied Alliant the bullet, bullet type , case , primer, revolver, barrel length and the caliber (41 magnum)
And this was their reply .. So much for ask the expert ..

Load data is based on the bullet and its design, not the powder alone.
We suggest that you contact the manufacturer for data on their bullet.

Thanks,

Shoot Straight
DuaneVB
CCI/Speer/Alliant
2299 Snake River Ave.
Lewiston, ID

[JSnover]

What did you ask them?

[Outpost75]

So? They don't do pressure tests to order. Their published data is only a guide. They won't recommend a load they haven't tested. What did you expect?

[Char-Gar]

No manufacturer of reloading components will supply you load data for anything they have not tested in their lab. It is foolish to think they would do otherwise.

[dragon813gt]

They gave you the correct answer. They don't make the bullets so it's best to contact the bullet manufacturer. You must have been asking for something they haven't tested before. Post what you asked them and many of us will check our resources and may find a load for you.

[jmort]

Why is everyone so freaking scared to do some load development? Start low and move on up with caution. Here is what they publish for the 41 mag with 2400 and if you have a bullet anywhere from 200 to 220 you should be able to figure it out, if you don't have the two Speer bullets in question. I have a whole lot of manuals ans still have to work it out from time to time.

RELOADER'S GUIDE

Alliant Powder Reload Recipes


Recipe(s)







Caliber

Bullet

Case

Minimum OAL
(inches)

Bbl Length

Primer

Powder

Charge Weight
(grains)

Velocity
(fps)

Notes



41 Rem. Magnum
200 gr Speer JHP-SWC
Winchester
1.59
6
CCI 300
2400 (http://www.alliantpowder.com/products/powder/2400.aspx)
16.8
1,311
-


41 Rem. Magnum
210 gr Speer GDHP
1.575
1.575
6
CCI 300
2400 (http://www.alliantpowder.com/products/powder/2400.aspx)
19
1,223
-

[JSnover]

On the Alliant website under "Books and Instruction" you will find a link to the Speer Reloading Manual. In the "Resources" section they offer a downloadable Alliant Reloaders guide and will send you a hard copy if you wish.
I know these days you don't necessarily have to own a paper manual but if you did, you might already have an answer to your question.
Sorry. Just a pet peeve of mine.

[dragon813gt]

There are also a lot of old manuals available for dowload in .pdf format. I have over fifty of them in my Dropbox folder. And they were all free. Almost every Alliant manual from 1995 on is available this way.

[dtknowles]

I supplied Alliant the bullet, bullet type , case , primer, revolver, barrel length and the caliber (41 magnum)
And this was their reply .. So much for ask the expert ..

Load data is based on the bullet and its design, not the powder alone.
We suggest that you contact the manufacturer for data on their bullet.

Thanks,

Shoot Straight
DuaneVB
CCI/Speer/Alliant
2299 Snake River Ave.
Lewiston, ID

Did you ask for a load for their competitors bullets? Why would they give you a load for someone else's bullets? Did you ask for a cast bullet load? Did you tell them the alloy, hardness, lube, diameter? Did you think to ask them what they would think would be a good bullet and powder for you to use in your gun?

Tim

[376Steyr]

There are also a lot of old manuals available for dowload in .pdf format. I have over fifty of them in my Dropbox folder. And they were all free. Almost every Alliant manual from 1995 on is available this way.

A while back Alliant discovered their published loads for Blue Dot in the .41 Magnum were, to their embarrassment, over current pressure standards. Use older Blue Dot/.41 Mag data with caution.

[Boolit_Head]

Or was it that in today's litigious society they lowered the pressure standards for 41 magnum? It did not just happen with the 41. Some Green Dot 12 ga loads disappeared along with a few others. Some of the Blue Dot loads I used to shoot for 10mm are no longer in the books either.

[JSnover]

Or was it that in today's litigious society they lowered the pressure standards for 41 magnum?
Manufacturers might reduce their load data but I don't think that would change the SAAMI spec.

[dragon813gt]

Or was it that in today's litigious society they lowered the pressure standards for 41 magnum? It did not just happen with the 41. Some Green Dot 12 ga loads disappeared along with a few others. Some of the Blue Dot loads I used to shoot for 10mm are no longer in the books either.

It's not a pressure standard issue. What's happened is they now use piezoelectric transducers to measure pressure. This gives them a real time pressure curve. So if anything is dangerous in the curve they don't publish the load anymore. It's not simply a matter of peak pressure.

Blue Dot has always been a wonky powder. Creates a big flash and lots of noise. But it can go wrong quickly w/ it. I have little experience w/ it but it's like H110/W296 where it has a fairly small operational window.

[jimb16]

Look at 700x data for 20 ga. loads. Today, you won't find any listed. When I first started loading 20s, there were several loads listed. It wasn't peak pressure that caued the loads to be delisted. It was the speed of the pressure spike.

[kdiver58]

I was looking for load data for Power Pro 300-mp , their web page had nothing on 41 mag loads. Lee , Sierra and others provide loads for bullets they do not make or make molds for . I thought it was a very simple thing to ask under their "ask an expert link" When I have emailed Sierra for load data they sent me load data. I'm not afraid to develop loads I just feel a powder company would have better resources than I.

[John Boy]

Why is everyone so freaking scared to do some load development?
Lack of:
* Reference Library
* Powder Types
* Burn Rate Comparisions
* No Chronograph
* Range Time to develop
Easier to just make a post and give me the answer

[Gtek]

I grew up hearing the statement land of opportunity, I think it should be officially changed to land of liability. I have come to the realization that it is dangerous to recommend a restaurant!

[TXGunNut]

With enough manuals, either hard copy (my preference) or electronic and a fair bit of experience with a given powder and cartridge it's possible and sometimes necessary to SWAG a good starting load if all the components are suitable for the task at hand. That said, best advice is to read a manual and consult it often. Start low, work your way up carefully. Then read another, and another. If you can't find a manual that lists the load you're looking for then maybe it's best to use a load you CAN find published data for. With a dozen or so manuals at my disposal and 30+ yrs of experience at the loading bench I occasionally take a SWAG at a load but only after hours of research using published data and my load notes and of course; starting low and working up carefully.

[flyingmonkey35]

You'd be lucky to get a powder company to admit their powder explodes!

I agree with everyone else start low.

Or post your question here and I'll bet you'll get some load data close to what your after.

Sent from my Z970 using Tapatalk

[JSnover]

Lack of:
* Reference Library
* Powder Types
* Burn Rate Comparisions
* No Chronograph
* Range Time to develop
Easier to just make a post and give me the answer
And it's not wrong, I think the op just didn't approach it in the best way. Since Alliant didn't come through, post #1 should have included all pertinent data ("here's what I got, here's what I wanna do, whaddya think?").
Anyway, looks like it's straightened out.

[trapper9260]

What I do for a bullet make that I do not have the data for . What I do is just use the data of about the same weight and start low and work the load that the gun tells me. Like is stated the data is just a guide.Also Alliant is part of the ATK group and so is Spree and CCI and LC. there is some others but do not know off hand.That is why that if you look how the reply put down of the 3 company.

[kdiver58]

Even when I added the request for any data on their powder and their bullets this was the reply.. " Alliant has no tested load data for the 41 Rem Mag for while using the Power Pro 300-MP." I've been reloading since the 70's . I just find it odd that a powder company selling Magnum pistol powder has no data on it. I can go to Hogdon's web site and find loads of info. on their products. I wanted to try this powder and see if the gun liked it better. I still stand by my original post. I find their reply less than what I think they should supply given the information their competitors give. I have loads I am going to go shoot tomorrow. Developed using the SWAG method :) . I'd just like to have a little less G in the SWAG .. :)

[dtknowles]

Even when I added the request for any data on their powder and their bullets this was the reply.. " Alliant has no tested load data for the 41 Rem Mag for while using the Power Pro 300-MP." I've been reloading since the 70's . I just find it odd that a powder company selling Magnum pistol powder has no data on it. I can go to Hogdon's web site and find loads of info. on their products. I wanted to try this powder and see if the gun liked it better. I still stand by my original post. I find their reply less than what I think they should supply given the information their competitors give. I have loads I am going to go shoot tomorrow. Developed using the SWAG method :) . I'd just like to have a little less G in the SWAG .. :)

It seems that they could have provide more explanation than just the bullet deal. Like why they have not tested data for that powder in 41 mag. and if they expected to do 41 mag. tests eventually. I don't recognize the powder and I just checked the burn rate table from the 2016 Hodgdon annual. 300 MP or Pro Power are not listed Alliant Pro Reach is listed but no other Alliant Pro powders. I think they could have communicated better with you. If you are on the leading edge sometimes you have to blaze your own trail. It seems you might be "wearing out clothes nobody wears"

Tim

[Rodvan]

Judas Priest you guys, give him a break! He did exactly what many on this forum have said to do "contact the manufacturer." I got the same response from Alliant when I asked about load data for a 40 S&W with lead bullets. Weeks later I find another forum that had a email response from Alliant listing load data for several calibers including 40 S&W. Sometimes I think people respond to posts just to increase their post count...

[koehlerrk]

Alright boys, settle down... I'm gonna explain this to ya once...

Alliant is a company that makes and sells gunpowder.
They do this to make money.
They make money by selling their product at a price that is competitive with other companies offerings yet still priced above their cost of production.
Part of the production cost is evaluating this new powder and developing load data for it.

They can't test every powder in every cartridge.
Each cartridge and bullet combination requires many rounds be loaded and fired. Hundreds, perhaps thousands. For each cartridge. For each bullet. With exacting records.

This is neither a quick or cheap process.

So, to keep the final sales price low enough that consumers will buy their product, they have to pick and choose what rounds they do testing on. From the burn rate they have a list of cartridges it will likely work well in.

But that's not the test list. They are under pressure to cut cost where they can. So they compare the cost of testing to the profits they would expect for each round. Many rounds don't make the cut because there isn't enough demand. Put another way, they're not going to spend $100K in testing the 41 magnum if their research says they'll only make $50K selling that powder to 41 magnum reloaders.

The 41 magnum is a great round, but how many 41s are there vs 357s, 44s, etc?

That's why you won't get data from them. They don't have it, and can't justify the expense of developing it. So, you can whine, or you can develop your own data. Just be careful if you do that.

Thus endeth the lesson.

[JSnover]

I started loading in the pre-internet era and none of my friends were into it. Midway sold 'complete reloading manuals' from Loadbooks USA Inc (I see they have one for the .41 magnum) so I bought a couple, plus a few manuals from Sierra, Hornady, etc.
The first thing I learned was nobody has all of the data. Sometimes you have to ballpark it with your best guess, back it off a little and work your way back up to where you want to be. For me that was half the fun.

[jaydub in wi]

To the original poster, I also have a 41 magnum and considered using 300 mp. Alliant does not have data listed, but there is some for the 41 on loaddata.com. I don't know if you have a yearly subscription, but I do and could email data. These were loads listed in handloader magazine. Hope this helps..

[HangFireW8]

Or was it that in today's litigious society they lowered the pressure standards for 41 magnum? It did not just happen with the 41. Some Green Dot 12 ga loads disappeared along with a few others. Some of the Blue Dot loads I used to shoot for 10mm are no longer in the books either.

For the Bluedot/41 Magnum connection, I remember a crusading forum type (may not have been THIS forum) who hounded them until they retested, and low and behold, there really was pressure problems, just as he had said.

Their initial retraction was disappointing. Instead of publishing new data, they said not to use BD for ANY weight bullet in the 41 Magnum. We all know enough to know that's silly, but apparently they felt it necessary to do that in order to put the episode behind them.

Apparently they're sticking with that: http://www.alliantpowder.com/getting_started/safety/safety_notices.aspx

I don't agree with that, but I also don't agree with the OP about "worst answer". They simply won't speculate on untested combinations, and I wouldn't expect them to, either.

[kdiver58]

Alright boys, settle down... I'm gonna explain this to ya once...

Alliant is a company that makes and sells gunpowder.
They do this to make money.
They make money by selling their product at a price that is competitive with other companies offerings yet still priced above their cost of production.
Part of the production cost is evaluating this new powder and developing load data for it.

They can't test every powder in every cartridge.
Each cartridge and bullet combination requires many rounds be loaded and fired. Hundreds, perhaps thousands. For each cartridge. For each bullet. With exacting records.

This is neither a quick or cheap process.

So, to keep the final sales price low enough that consumers will buy their product, they have to pick and choose what rounds they do testing on. From the burn rate they have a list of cartridges it will likely work well in.

But that's not the test list. They are under pressure to cut cost where they can. So they compare the cost of testing to the profits they would expect for each round. Many rounds don't make the cut because there isn't enough demand. Put another way, they're not going to spend $100K in testing the 41 magnum if their research says they'll only make $50K selling that powder to 41 magnum reloaders.

The 41 magnum is a great round, but how many 41s are there vs 357s, 44s, etc?

That's why you won't get data from them. They don't have it, and can't justify the expense of developing it. So, you can whine, or you can develop your own data. Just be careful if you do that.

Thus endeth the lesson.

Hodgdon has no trouble doing it ..

[dragon813gt]

Hodgdon has no trouble doing it ..

Yes they do. I had to develop almost all the loads for my 327 Federals. They may publish data now but they didn't when it was first introduced. And even now they don't publish loads for the various cast bullet weights I shoot. This is just one example.

New powder + Obscure/Obsolete/Niche Cartridge = Back of the line for published load development

I have never seen a 41mag for sale at any LGS in my life. Granted I am only in my thirties. But I completely understand why they develop loads for 9mm/45acp/357......and then eventually the niche cartridges.

There was nothing wrong w/ Alliants response. They aren't going to give out load data if they haven't pressure tested it.

[pkie44]

Study the data available and you will see that you can use midrange 296-H110 data as a starting point.
Some data here.

http://ps-2.kev009.com/ohlandl/310/357-44_Bain_Davis/Handloader_274_Oct_2011.pdf

[BAGTIC]

Apparently they didn't say they didn't have any data for Power Pro 300-MP. They said they did have any 41 Magnum data. It is expensive working up reliable data for any cartridge. The .41 Magnum is not one of the more common cartridges. They may have concluded there would not be enough interest in that caliber for that powder to justify the expense of developing data.
They are a business not a charity. It may be difficult for some to accept in this 'Age of Entitlement' but neither they or anyone else owes any of us any data. Take what you can find from any source and consider yourself lucky.

[rhouser]

When I was working up Enforcer powder loads for the 327 mag with a 115 GC hard cast, the Ram Shot team was very supportive and would discuss pressure curves, characteristics etc with me. They asked that I give them my numbers where I ended up. All on phone and on line.

When I was working up loads for the 357 in a Coonan, I again had the support of the Ram Shot team who supplied me with unpublished data.

When I wanted to work with Alliant to build some 12 gauge lite slugs based around their Extra Lite powder, I was told that all they had were their published 12 Ga loads and no one should use their powder for anything else. Note: I now have a load for the 7/8 lee slug in 12 gauge with extra lite that is absolutely perfect for what I wanted.

I sent the Alliant team a return email that basically expressed my disappointment with their current position on working with the customers, but, that I understood that they were now a cookie cutter operation.

I wonder who discovered that Unique could be more than a shotgun powder? Has any one noticed that Red Dot is no longer a shotgun powder for 12 gauge?

I am 66 years old and I am still using blue dot for light 308 loads and shot 20/28 in my Casull when I couldn't find Unique. I still have my fingers and toes and hope to still have them when they put me in the ground. I understand the OP's frustration.

rch

[dubber123]

Interesting thread. I understand wanting to do things "Right" and contacting the manufacturers. I do a fair bit of looking first, but if I don't find what I need, I look at my burn chart and pick what I feel is a safe starting load and work up. I may be lucky, (doubt that), but I have never had a spooky moment doing it this way. If it's a powder that is on the fast side, I go extra slow, yes some do climb in pressure pretty fast. I have never had a "mild to wild" moment, they all have a curve, just work up, take notes and watch for it.

[9.3X62AL]

What Dubber said. When you load for calibers like 30 Luger and 7.65 MAS pistol, data is very scarce. You are on your own. Make haste slowly.

Handloading can be "recipe book cooking" if you so choose. Some folks' tastes get jaded, though--so we leave the reservation now and then and go on walkabout to explore new areas and see new things.

[jmort]

"Has any one noticed that Red Dot is no longer a shotgun powder for 12 gauge?"

In what world?????

http://www.alliantpowder.com/reloaders/powderlist.aspx?page=/reloaders/powderlist.aspx&type=2&powderid=4&gauge=12

[9.3X62AL]

"Has any one noticed that Red Dot is no longer a shotgun powder for 12 gauge?"

In what world?????

http://www.alliantpowder.com/reloaders/powderlist.aspx?page=/reloaders/powderlist.aspx&type=2&powderid=4&gauge=12

Yessir. I went through a WHOLE LOT of Red Dot in 12 gauge for many years of trap/skeet and bird hunting.....AA hulls, AA White wad column, 209 primers, 18.0 grains of RD, 1-1/8 oz of 7-1/2s or 9s. I guess the Clays Cats have cut back the shot weights to 20 gauge levels (7/8 oz) these days, but I went in the other direction 20+ years ago--I use 1-1/4 oz, still in 7.5 or 9, and have some #5 for late-season chukars. Herco handles this tasking quite well.

[leadman]

I spoke with Ben at Alliant some time back about the 300MP in the 41 mag. He said they had not done any testing for the 41 mag. and recommended I read Brian pearce's article on the 41 and 300MP. I had already read it so used Brian's loads which proved to be good and safe in my guns. I went a couple of grains higher than Brian in my Ruger SBH Hunter and got some outstanding velocity and accuracy. I was using the RCBS 215gr SWC plain base.
Previously I had spoke with Ben about Blue Dot and cast bullets in my 41 mag for mid-range loads. I did load BD and boolits in my 41 and spoke with Ben again with the velocity and case expansion results. He agreed my load seemed to be safe from the info I gave him. He did state that the higher end loads were more prone to having pressure issues. Alliant has not and probably will not do any new testing of the 41 mag. Testing costs money and we all know how broke all the powder companies are, Right! LOL.
If the OP wants to PM me I will provide him with the info I have on 300MP in the 41 mag.

[Tar Heel]

Referencing BD...Be careful with this propellant in the 41 Mag. It is prone to pressure excursions. There are much better propellants to use like WW296 or H110 or AA9.

[9.3X62AL]

Blue Dot has been noted for occasional "squirrelliness" since it came onstream in the mid-1970s. I recall an article published by Bob Milek soon after the powder's introduction regarding its usage in the 357 Magnum revolver. He noted odd and intermittent pressure spikes when his loads were fired in -35* weather. The fuel was originally developed for use in shotguns--a very different internal ballistic environment than a magnum revolver cartridge. Yet another case of MAKE HASTE SLOWLY.

[Fishman]

Kdiver, I think you have a point with your first post. Their response is generic and really doesn't even address the real issue, they have no data for a magnum pistol cartridge using their own powder.

Condescending previous comments aside, and there were several, it's fine for a company to have limited data, they just need to respond effectively.

Example: My office manages the fish populations in area lakes. We don't manage the parks around them. Yet we get calls about park reservations and just about anything you can imagine. My crew members COULD respond like the gentleman from Alliant, OR they can be helpful. "I'm sorry, we don't manage the parks around Lake X, but these people do and here is their number." Or "I'm sorry, we don't regulate the duck hunting at Lake Y, but these people do, the drawing is in August, and the website is . . .".

So in the case of Alliant, "I'm sorry, that is a relatively new powder and we haven't developed loads for every cartridge. While we haven't tested loads and can't tell you what is safe and what is not for that cartridge, you could check with your bullet manufacturer to see if they have data"

This is the minimum I would expect. They are a Customer Service rep after all.

[sargenv]

Blue Dot has been noted for occasional "squirrelliness" since it came onstream in the mid-1970s. I recall an article published by Bob Milek soon after the powder's introduction regarding its usage in the 357 Magnum revolver. He noted odd and intermittent pressure spikes when his loads were fired in -35* weather. The fuel was originally developed for use in shotguns--a very different internal ballistic environment than a magnum revolver cartridge. Yet another case of MAKE HASTE SLOWLY.

Most of the people who used Blue Dot for loading shotshells also noted that it had a tendency to be sensitive to Cold weather and you lost performance as the weather turned in that direction.. I think that this was one reason they developed Alliant Steel to be temperature insensitive..

[nvreloader]

IMHO,

This is another reason for getting Quickload to add to your reloading room,
as you can find/check powders/load data that there is no or little info for,
new powders that have just come out etc.

Yes, the program costs some funds, but that makes it worth what you paid for it,
as you can run "before tests" to see what the results will do.

There is lots of info to be gained, ONCE you know and understand QL.

Here is a some info on Quickload,
http://www.6mmbr.com/quickload.html

Tia,
Don

[dragon813gt]

IMHO,

This is another reason for getting Quickload to add to your reloading room,
as you can find/check powders/load data that there is no or little info for,
new powders that have just come out etc.

Yes, the program costs some funds, but that makes it worth what you paid for it,
as you can run "before tests" to see what the results will do.

There is lots of info to be gained, ONCE you know and understand QL.

Here is a some info on Quickload,
http://www.6mmbr.com/quickload.html

Tia,
Don

Slight problem w/ that. New powders aren't added right away. There is a long list of powders I have that aren't listed in Quickload. And it's not like they are all new ones. SR4759 is not listed and that powder was around for a long time before being recently discontinued.

I agree that Quickload is a tool that people should use. It's also a computer program so it's garbage in, garbage out. It has limitations like anything else. I would be a lot happier if they added powders fairly quickly after being released. As it is now it takes far to long.

[nvreloader]

Dragon813gt,

Every 12-18 momths, QL puts out an updated disc with the new powders/cases that HB has tested,
as he helped me with unique my wildcat as I was in uncharted waters.

You will not find SHOTGUN type powders listed in QL, as these are normally tested to 15,00 psi for shotshells only,
when loaded for use in cartridges, like Blue Dot, they produce erratic psi and other problems,
there are a few that are listed, like Unique, 2400 etc that are cross over powders, that work in both areas.

QL had the newest RL powders listed before the Alliant site has info,
like RL 23/RL 26 and Norma 217 powders etc.

Yes, I would like to see SR 4759 listed as it is a very fine powder for reduced loading,
but Trail Boss seems to fill that notch OK for now.

YMMV,

Tia,
Don

[dragon813gt]

Like I said, I have a long list of powders not listed. Their updates don't include powders that have been out for a long time and new ones. Shotgun powders are used for pistol loads all the time and pressure tested data is listed for them in a lot of manuals. Their omission limits the use of the program.

[wrench man]

Hodgdon has no trouble doing it ..


Yes they do.


I called Hodgdon about Leverevolution in the 356 Winchester, consider it a TOTAL waste of ten minutes of my life!, the only thing I can say is that they actually answered the phone and I talked to a human being.[smilie=b:

[farmersamm]

Guys........Let's get real here:mrgreen::mrgreen:

Some serious liability at stake. The manufacturers won't stick their necks out.

You're experienced reloaders, and know what to look for when developing a load.

Find the "basement" load, and work up.

Primers are your friend.

170006Look at a low pressure load, and judge how much primer flow you're getting from hotter loads.
170007170008Compare it to an unfired primer, and see if you're starting to get nervous.

The best alternative is to look at a load for a heavier bullet. The loads are less for heavier stuff. Start here, and work up. If you're getting close to a published load for something close to your bullet weight...........stop. It isn't about bragging rights, it's about keeping your investment in one piece.

The Chrono......buy one, use it. It's the only cheap way for most handloaders to have some idea of just what's coming out of the barrel.

Revolvers are tricky, hard to tell when to stop. Just get close to some published load, and quit.

Semi auto pistols are a bit easier. Just start low, and keep increasing until the action cycles properly. Then quit.

All loads can compare to factory loads if you wish, as long as you use a Chrono to verify the velocity for the caliber/bullet weight. This can change though, if you're using a high energy powder. The energy pulse can be devastating if it's too fast for the gun. Stay with listed powders in your caliber/gun

Anyways:mrgreen: You wouldn't be into this if you weren't a lead head, or a semi moron:mrgreen: I qualify on both counts:mrgreen:

Bottom line, be careful and conservative, and have a good time.

[TXGunNut]

I must admit I understand the OP's frustration. The .41 Mag is a classic cartridge with a loyal following. Not exactly my cup of tea but the powder in question does seem well suited to the cartridge. I hope they track the inquiries and use the data to help decide which cartridge to test next.
Face it, as a group we're not exactly a broad segment of the market and we like to get off the beaten path but we're a loyal group and we like to shoot, sometime we like to shoot a lot. That ought to count for something.

[Newtire]

I supplied Alliant the bullet, bullet type , case , primer, revolver, barrel length and the caliber (41 magnum)
And this was their reply .. So much for ask the expert ..

Load data is based on the bullet and its design, not the powder alone.
We suggest that you contact the manufacturer for data on their bullet.

Thanks,

Shoot Straight
DuaneVB
CCI/Speer/Alliant
2299 Snake River Ave.
Lewiston, ID
They don’t make bullets that they give data for say, 2400 or Unique yet they give load data for those powders…. So, why can’t they give data for MP 300? I have a pound of it that I would like to check out in a .41 mag too. So, what’s the big deal?

[Castaway]

I called Alliant about loading the 45 cal, RCBS 270 grain bullet with Unique. They referred me to RCBS. Called RCBS, they referred me to Alliant. Called Alliant, and explained the run around. They then gave me a load limit, which when compared to Brian Pierce’s article on the bullet, was a full grain less

[jonp]

It's not a pressure standard issue. What's happened is they now use piezoelectric transducers to measure pressure. This gives them a real time pressure curve. So if anything is dangerous in the curve they don't publish the load anymore. It's not simply a matter of peak pressure.

Blue Dot has always been a wonky powder. Creates a big flash and lots of noise. But it can go wrong quickly w/ it. I have little experience w/ it but it's like H110/W296 where it has a fairly small operational window.

Larry Gibson, i think it was, explained this at length some time ago. Blue Dot was fine in 41Mag then it wasnt with better measuring equipment and reports of detonations either real or imagined. I nwver had a problem using it in either of my Blackhawks.
Quite a number of powder/bullet combos have been reduced.

[dbosman]

They didn't grow up building stuff because they had to, and didn't grow up reading the multitude of materials people over fifty five had available.
Most never had a chemistry class with a teacher who was willing to work outside the school board approved book.

In high school, when some of us got caught making fireworks, the punishment agreed to by parents, principal, and teacher, was we had to write up our plans and do the compounding by working out the exact chemistry of our planned mixtures. To be verified by the chemistry teacher. When testing, the principle and chemistry teacher came out to supervise. Weighing chemicals on lab scales made for better bangs. They knew we weren't going to stop. So we had be learn to make them correctly and safely. That chemistry teacher had his PhD in chemistry and had working in industry before deciding to become a teacher. One of his earlier students went on to work for one of the powder companies and a previous middle school class he taught had made 10 ft tall rockets which were fired on school grounds, too.


Why is everyone so freaking scared to do some load development? Start low and move on up with caution.

[P Flados]

Of all of the powders I have considered for magnum use, 300 MP was about the most notable for lack of load data.

The burn rate is good for several of my guns and price / availability were attractive.

This was years ago and the load data situation does not seem to have gotten any better. I do not mind some amount of focus on popular rounds first, but then stopping before getting at least one or two loads for well known rounds is poor support for the reloading community as a whole.

I also find Alliant's current on-line load data info to be among the least satisfying. They do not give pressure values and they have removed so many loads (even where they did have good modern data with pressure values in psi).

[Newtire]

I, like most of us here I suppose, depend on advice from mostly the "sages" on this board to steer me in the right direction. If that means going to a manual or article and following safe loading practices, then that's pretty much what I do. I guess calling Alliant might be a good idea. I already have some good loads using other powders so, for now I'll stick with what I know works.

Thanks, by the way, all of you shooters who have helped me out in the past. I really appreciate it!

[oldblinddog]

A few thoughts,

300-MP is a good substitute for SR4759.

Unique is a rifle powder. Always has been. Always will be. Some say it works in pistols and shotguns too.

Do you think gun writers get more “help” than the general public?

[downzero]

Manufacturers might reduce their load data but I don't think that would change the SAAMI spec.

True, but technology has shown their loads to be unsafe. The ORIGINAL .357 Magnum loads are no longer published. The powders aren't different. The technology to realize they were never safe has since been developed.

[Daekar]

True, but technology has shown their loads to be unsafe. The ORIGINAL .357 Magnum loads are no longer published. The powders aren't different. The technology to realize they were never safe has since been developed.

Does this mean that there have been lots of kabooms that I have never heard about?

I do wonder about this stuff... I mean, does this imply that the 38-44 hardware used to develop the loads in the first place wasn't up to the task? Or perhaps that the engineers underestimated the action strength required for safely controlling the original loads? Or that they used inaccurate data when determining that required strength? The definition of the word "safe" is probably a bit fuzzy here.

Doesn't matter a hill of beans to me, the only hot 357 loads I shoot are in guns rated for far more pressure than the average 357 gun is...

FWIW, the reality is that the load manuals are only giving suggestions and they don't necessarily deserve the sacred treatment they receive. Conservative approaches are necessary regardless of whether the book says things are OK. I have loaded some minimum loads which shot fine in one gun and showed pressure signs in another. You better believe I learned that lesson in a hurry. Correlate to that is the fact that some guns are stronger, shoot with less pressure, or whatever, given the same components, and the book values will leave safe loads outside your options.

Besides, what are you supposed to do to shoot basically any custom boolit mold or heavy or light for cartridge boolits in general? You have to extrapolate and use tools like QuickLOAD, then do careful testing.

[farmbif]

ive used I dont know how many pounds of Alliant powders over the years and probably have dozens of pounds in the bunker but they sure are not too responsive to providing off book load data or even entertaining prospect of working up new loads. in contrast is western powders technicians that have in the past been very responsive to providing info when asked. all powders go kaboom but having safe load data is paramount. my view and opinion of Alliant went way down hill after asking them for safe 41 mag data with their then new 300mp with the all common 210 gr bullet. I bought into the new 300 mp big time after trying it in 357 and 44. back when things were normal in the stores and you could get whatever you want at fair price, I started getting on bandwagon of new powders I guess about when I became more aware of hodgdon with temp stable replacements for 4895, 4350, 4831. so when new powders showed up I was all about trying them.
be86- great powder with lots and lots of load data from alliant, 300mp another very promising powder for what it was designed for--load data seriously lacking from alliant. sport pistol--why even try it when they can't even give me load data for 300mp. in the future I will be less likely to try new powders from Alliant while hodgdon/imr/winchester and now western powders all under the same umbrella corporation keeps putting out new products and new load data all the time.

[downzero]

Does this mean that there have been lots of kabooms that I have never heard about?

Besides, what are you supposed to do to shoot basically any custom boolit mold or heavy or light for cartridge boolits in general? You have to extrapolate and use tools like QuickLOAD, then do careful testing.

I'm not sure if you were under the impression that all unsafe/overpressure loads would cause a kaboom, but they won't and don't. Every gun has a substantial safety margin built into it; obviously a magnum cartridge would have to have a substantial safety margin to hold up to years of full pressure magnum loads.

What it means is that there were long-published loads that were believed to be within the engineered pressure limits that turned out not to be with newer measuring equipment. Which negates the oft-given answer that it was in response to litigation or the threat of litigation.

I also think it makes more sense. I'm not aware of any tort case ever filed anywhere that was against a powder company for a published load. I'm not saying there aren't any, but everyone knows that handloading is potentially dangerous and I'm not aware of any cases anyway.

I do my own load development just like you. I try my best to rely on published information as much as possible and keep my "extrapolation" as little as possible, comparing sources. I can also say that I've destroyed some brass in the process; for some wildcats what seems like it'd be okay isn't always okay. In rifles, blowing them up usually isn't the concern, but stretching the brass to the point of it being unusable isn't uncommon for me at all.

Quickload is a great resource as well. Not perfect, but probably better than inference from published data, especially if your cartridge is quite a ways outside the box, so to speak.

[Tar Heel]

It's not a pressure standard issue. What's happened is they now use piezoelectric transducers to measure pressure. This gives them a real time pressure curve. So if anything is dangerous in the curve they don't publish the load anymore. It's not simply a matter of peak pressure.

Blue Dot has always been a wonky powder. Creates a big flash and lots of noise. But it can go wrong quickly w/ it. I have little experience w/ it but it's like H110/W296 where it has a fairly small operational window.

Back in the mid 80’s I learned that BD was a very fickle powder. I no longer use BD since my pressure excursion with it in handgun cartridges. It may be a fine powder in a shotshell so I have resolved to leave it all for the shotgunners among us.

[P Flados]

It is my understanding that part of what the newer test methods showed were undesirable short duration "spikes". I seem to recall that Larry Gibson has found some loads with Herco with such behavior.

At one time, ammo & guns relied on proof testing. Copper/lead crusher testing was an attempt to better quantify and standardize margins between safe and unsafe loads. However, the way that crusher testing was used was later found to be be much less effective at ensuring safe margins than desired.

We need lab grade testing with good equipment to ensure powder / cartridge / bullets combinations are "well behaved".

Tools like Quickload are very helpful when the desired powder has been shown to be "well behaved" for the application and the powder is in the database. 300MP has very limited test data and it is not in the Quickload database.

When I was looking at 300MP it was to get away from H110/WW296 (I used them for years but eventually decided they were too finicky for my liking). Lil gun has a less than sterling reputation and I really did not want to go from the frying pan to the fire. Eventually I found some powders that do the job and seem more predictable. WC 680 (milsurp version of AA 1680) that is a little slower and Heavy Pistol (very similar to AA #9) that is just a little faster.

300MP might have been a great fit for my needs, but the lack of data and not being in Quickload are big issues for me.

[robg]

didn't they want to work up a load for you ,why would they?