Look'in for AA#2200

[deerstalker]

anyone out there know of a supply of AA#2200, I got 1 keg left. And also looking for a load for 7-08 out of a 15" T/C for AA#2200. thanks Richard..

[hydraulic]

Deerstalker: I think AA2200 was a one time deal. I bought a case of 4 8lb jugs two or three years ago, but haven't seen it advertised since. I'm not sure about this, but I think AA was bought out by ?? Hogdens?? On the old cast bullet board someone said that it had been made for a military contract that had been cancelled. I shouldn't be posting all this stuff that I'm not sure of. I've been loading 25 grs. behind the Lyman 311413 in a 1903 Springfield and clocked it at 1700fps. Shoots clean and accurately.

[Johnch]

I still have 1 1/2 + 8lb jugs left from the 4 I bought .
10 of us went together and bought 10 cases .

AA2200 was a powder AA bought in the WET .
It was to load the 5.45x39 .

From what I know it is gone .

The match shooters found out it worked great for their loads .
And bought LOTS of it .

Johnch

[454PB]

For what it's worth, my experimentation and chronographing with AAC 2200 in everything from .222 Rem. to 308 Win. indicates it is roughly the same burning rate as H322. I bought 16 pounds of it, and like it so much that I wish I'd bought more.

[biggome]

AA-2200? I bought four or five jugs from a local supplier back when it was common and I thought it was going to be great stuff though a friend later warned me that he had read that it didn't do well downloaded to cast boolit velocities in .308.

I first tried it in .30/30 (which I shoot A LOT) loading 24 grains under a 31141, though it meters quite well, velocities were all over the place with a best of 1950 fps. I wasn't very thrilled with this since my 113 grain cast plinkers loaded with Herco were within 5 fps of each other.

I then tried it in 222 with 55 grain bullets (my ONLY condom bullet gun) and though not quite as wild as the .30/30, velocity spreads were quite unacceptable compared to the casefull of ancient H-380 loads (2720 fps) I had been shooting being within 2 fps of each other.

I can't say I have given AA-2200 any other chances to prove it's usefulness to me. It sure wasn't gonna give me 1/4" groups out of my 222 though it just might in my tired 'ole '94 Winch but I kinda doubt it!

Sound like you folks think it is great stuff, wish I could say the same, guess I could try a different jug or four.

Paul

[Scrounger]

Ball powders do not like to be downloaded, they respond by giving you poor ignition, as evidenced by your erratic velocities. It will shoot great if it is near max. Slowly and safely increase your loads and watch the velocities settle down and groups shrink. Except in rare cases, like .30-30 and small cases, it is not a good cast bullet powder. It is the powder of choice for me in .223 and jacketed bullets. Should work well on .30-30, .222, and .22 Hornet. AccurateArms has loading data for it. If you don't want it, make me a price.

[biggome]

Scrounger, I am well aware of the characteristics of ball powders and I don't feel I am streaching the boundries, also, please don't assume I was foolish enough to purchase four or five 8 pound jugs of it without having given the loading data a good study before hand. At $56.00 a jug I felt I needed to "get it while I can". I now wish I had bought 8 oz of it.

At 24 grains, my starting load with a 175 grain (sized and gas checked) boolit was only 1.5 grains less than the max listed load for a 170 grain jacketed bullet. My top velocity of 1950 fps was not exactly a "snails pace" for a .30/30 and not too far off from the 1993 fps shown for the max jacketed load. Most of the rounds I tested were in the upper 1800's to lower 1900's but not as close together as I had come to expect.

The 222 loads were reduced 1 grain (5%) from published max load, though the velocities were not too far below published figures they were just not close enough to each other to make me think they would ever get close enough to suit me.

I made no other attempts use my stock of AA-2200 since then, I guess I was a bit dissapointed after getting far greater than expected results from light charges of shotgun powder in the .30/30 and the performance of the near 50 year old powder I was using in the 222. Maybe some things just can't be duplicated much less improved upon!

Paul

[Flash]

I have one 8 lb jug left myself and use it for most of my small calibers. I called Accurate Arms back when it was circulated (1998 I think).....about it's burn rate and possible use in a specific caliber and they told me that it was surplus made for the Soviet bloc countries and when it's gone, it's gone! The Ruskies most likely used it in their 7.62x39's. Just another page in the firearm history.:violin: The jug might be a collectable item one day.

[TCLouis]

Who knows, depending on what N AL means this may work out to get you back some cash and rid of that AA2200.

LouisB

[Jumptrap]

I seem to recall that 2200 was Czech in origin. Now the original stuff is gone, perhaps some day a new supply....maybe under a new moniker, will come in. It is a great powder, I only bought 1 jug....wish I had gotten 4.

[biggome]

LouisB, I am north of Huntsville close to the state line just below Fayetteville TN.

Even though I was not happy with the powder I had not intended on getting rid of it since I had gotten such a good deal on it at the time and the fact that cheap powder is fast becoming a thing of the past. I feel that 2200 is very finicky (more so than most ball powder) and should be much more stable in just the right applications.

If I wasn't so big into running initial loads over the chronograph I might have found that they shoot fine and they probably are close enough in my .30/30 to see little improvement in non bench rest accuracy with another powder. I had great expectations for 2200's use in my 222 but was quite disappointed of the groups with a near max published load. I was already getting velocities greater than I really wanted so upping the charge to see if it improved was not tried though I may do so in the future just for the hell of it but I have many other powders to experiment with. I try to keep velocities to a reasonable minimum in an attempt to preserve the excellent accuracy of my '55 vintage Marlin 322 (Sako short action with microgroove barrel) which is known for rather poor barrel life (which is why I wanted a ball powder with it's lower burning temps in the first place).

All having been said, if I were to get an offer for the powder I couldn't refuse then who knows what might happen? It is not like I have been using it to start leaf fires or anything.

Paul

[4060MAY]

I Data #68 or #79 is close, Natchez has them for 8#/$69.

[Marlin Junky]

anyone out there know of a supply of AA#2200, I got 1 keg left. And also looking for a load for 7-08 out of a 15" T/C for AA#2200. thanks Richard..

I'm about to try the stuff in a .358 with RCBS 35-200-FN. I do know for sure, based on burning near 8 pounds of it, that it is slower than Re7 and faster than 2230. There's only about a half dozen powders that qualify to fill that slot and I'll wager Ramshot X-Terminator data is pretty much interchangeable at the suggested starting load level.

MJ

P.S. Wow, I just noticed the age of this thread... oh well.

[No_1]

I know I have at least 1 jug (maybe 2) of this stuff. I worked up some 8MM loads using j-boolits when I first got it. It is a fast burning rifle powder. Loads for the same rifle using 4350 (I think) gave a good "hard shove" recoil where the data powder was a quick "snap" recoil if that makes sense. The loads with it were so accurate the gun was no fun anymore......
For those that have some but no load data for it, here is the data from AA ---> http://www.accuratepowder.com/datapowder_DP2200.htm
Print it while you can. This stuff has been gone a while and no telling how long the data will stay up on the net.

R.




I'm about to try the stuff in a .358 with RCBS 35-200-FN. I do know for sure, based on burning near 8 pounds of it, that it is slower than Re7 and faster than 2230. There's only about a half dozen powders that qualify to fill that slot and I'll wager Ramshot X-Terminator data is pretty much interchangeable at the suggested starting load level.

MJ

P.S. Wow, I just noticed the age of this thread... oh well.

[felix]

Just treat it as a fast 844 lot. That's all there is to it. I bet it is a "brand new" looking small-ball powder without ever seeing it. ... felix

[Marlin Junky]

Just treat it as a fast 844 lot. That's all there is to it. I bet it is a "brand new" looking small-ball powder without ever seeing it. ... felix

Yes, that's essentially what it looks like, but if one has never burned 844, then some canistered powder references are helpful.

MJ

[Buckshot]

Just treat it as a fast 844 lot. That's all there is to it. I bet it is a "brand new" looking small-ball powder without ever seeing it. ... felix


...........'Bout right. When I was working up loads for a 35 Rem on a SR Mauser action I tried some AA2200 from a jug I had on hand. I'd already tried WC846 and 844 (settled on 846 as THE powder with a 200 gr cast slug). Loading up with 2200 started taking me to places I didn't wanna go with a small ring Mauser and accuracy wasn't much in the area I considered reasonable.

...............Buckshot

[davwingman]

I used a bunch of AA2200 in 222 & 223 with 40 gr. jacketed bullets. Got some good accuracy & relativelty fast velocities. Had to be careful shooting max loads in the summer as it seemed to be somewhat temp sensitive. Still have a bit left that I plan to load for next summer's prairie dog trip.

[mike in co]

Scrounger, I am well aware of the characteristics of ball powders and I don't feel I am streaching the boundries, also, please don't assume I was foolish enough to purchase four or five 8 pound jugs of it without having given the loading data a good study before hand. At $56.00 a jug I felt I needed to "get it while I can". I now wish I had bought 8 oz of it.

At 24 grains, my starting load with a 175 grain (sized and gas checked) boolit was only 1.5 grains less than the max listed load for a 170 grain jacketed bullet. My top velocity of 1950 fps was not exactly a "snails pace" for a .30/30 and not too far off from the 1993 fps shown for the max jacketed load. Most of the rounds I tested were in the upper 1800's to lower 1900's but not as close together as I had come to expect.

The 222 loads were reduced 1 grain (5%) from published max load, though the velocities were not too far below published figures they were just not close enough to each other to make me think they would ever get close enough to suit me.

I made no other attempts use my stock of AA-2200 since then, I guess I was a bit dissapointed after getting far greater than expected results from light charges of shotgun powder in the .30/30 and the performance of the near 50 year old powder I was using in the 222. Maybe some things just can't be duplicated much less improved upon!

Paul

paul,

how much do you have left ??
i'll buy....if there is enough.
thanks
mike

[mstarling]

Paul,

I'd be glad to help make sure you get your money back out of the 2200. A couple of 8# jugs at $60 would make me VERY happy!

[SCOTT50CAL]

Not to hijack the thread but ill give you $75 cash per jug Paul.

[Crash_Corrigan]

Scrounger:

Art, I cannot believe that you want to buy some more of that powder. Remember I have seen your reloading room next to the garage and you seemed to have enuf powder to last for the next 20 years on that steel shelf. You must love that stuff. I bought an 8 lb jug some years ago and used it in my 22-250 and now in my .223 and it gets the job done at a decent price.

[mstarling]

I dropped a note to the Accurate ballistician the other day asking for AA2200 loading data for 6.8 SPC, and if AA2200 was going to be reintroduced. He sent me the data, and indicated that reintroduction was planned but they weren't sure when it would occur.

Sure won't be as cheap as it was the first time!

Mike

[ELFEGO BACA]

I was happy with 2200 for my high power rifle competition using a AR15.

[mike in co]

i saw several hints at the source of this powder in this thread.

czech yes
but 7.62x39, not the smaller 5.45.( it was built for 7.62x39, but when the country changed to the smaller 5.45 they cancelled the contract without taking delivery....thus one very large lot of milsurplus powder hit the market at screaming prices).

we bought cases and cases of this powder....$36 per 8# jug.....4 to a case and just cases on cases. almost all shot in 223. i still have some...maybe 3 or 4 jugs.

mike in co

[felix]

I think it is here now as a reformulated H322 by the Aussies. Early tests by the BR crowd say it is one grain slower than the earliest H332/8208/Thunderbird lot in the PPC cases. This is because they used the early powder sent back to Hodgdon from BR horders as the model to duplicate exactly, and not taking into account the natural deterioration of age which couldn't be determined as to how much so by the Aussies. Otherwise it would be spot on. It has been reported that the Aussies used their single base formula which includes the temp maintenance chemical so the powder would be that much more stable than the original. If there is acceptance amongst the crowd, that powder will be forth coming in quantity to go around. ... felix

[casper_zip]

Hey there:

I'd love to buy more of this. This came to be one of my "go-to" powders. I use it in everything from 221 Fireball to 45-70. Never had any problems. I love this stuff. Wish I'd bought a ton back then.

casper_zip

Anyone got some to sale, holler back.

[spqrzilla]

I think it is here now as a reformulated H322 by the Aussies. Early tests by the BR crowd say it is one grain slower than the earliest H332/8208/Thunderbird lot in the PPC cases. This is because they used the early powder sent back to Hodgdon from BR horders as the model to duplicate exactly, and not taking into account the natural deterioration of age which couldn't be determined as to how much so by the Aussies. Otherwise it would be spot on. It has been reported that the Aussies used their single base formula which includes the temp maintenance chemical so the powder would be that much more stable than the original. If there is acceptance amongst the crowd, that powder will be forth coming in quantity to go around. ... felix


I think you are refering above to the reintroduced IMR 8208 from Hodgdon.

[felix]

That is correct. ... felix

[TCLouis]

No1
Western had dropped the 2200 loading data from the site, but all it took was one email askng that it be put back on line and it was there in a couple of days.

They try their very best to be helpful as near as I can tell.

[fryboy]

" SPECIALS!!!!
We've got it back now!!
Special reintroductory price for a limited time only!!
Accurate 2200 in the 1 Lb. canister at $16.00
and the 8 Lb. at $116.00!! "

http://www.powdervalleyinc.com/

it's in their current specials

[Heavy lead]

dang, you could buy that stuff for 60 bucks a couple of years ago.

[fryboy]

dang, you could buy that stuff for 60 bucks a couple of years ago.

wished i'd had the funds to buy more back when it came out !!! pretty sure that it'll be similar to the old but i bet it is different , it was my first powder purchase over 20#lolz

[excess650]

Several of us split a couple of cases back when it was availabe and cheap. I use it in my 38-55 for hunting loads, have used in the 32-20, and am now using it in the 30-30.

38-55 load for my rebored/rechambered Savage 1899 30-32gr WLR under 280gr Lyman 375449. Another lister chrono'd the load at 1775fps at 32gr. It seems pretty mild pressure wise despite the largish chamber.

I don't even know why I tried it, but 15-15.5gr under the 115gr Lyman 311008 shot small groups at 50 yards, and again appeared mild(32-20).

In my 336CB 30-30 I'm using RP cases, F210, 175gr Saeco #315 sized .311". I started at 22gr and worked up in whole grain increments. 23gr shot sub 1" for 5 shots at 50 yards with iron sights. 25gr was about 4.5", but it settled down to 1.1" at 26gr. Even 26gr pressures seem fairly mild, but velocity should be 2000+ fps. 22gr might have been 70% density, and burned cleanly. I saw no evidence of erratic presure with any of these loads.

I'm thinking it should be good in the 35 Remington, but don't want to punish myself by using it in the 45-70.

I'll do more testing and see if magnum primers help or not. In the mean time, I can save my 5744 for larger cases.