Relitive Quickness?

[Krag 1901]

After looking for Burn Charts on powders I ran across this article on Chuck Hawks page.

In it he discusses Relative Quickness and give his calculation for various powders. I haven digested this and he has another article by the same author, Roberto Serino on the subject.

https://www.chuckhawks.com/powder_burning_speed.htm

Could be of interest to the CB crowd.

I was most interested in the RQ of 4198 and RL10x range of powders as I am experimenting with them, in .30 cals.

[Krag 1901]

One thing I found interesting is that Relative Quickness and Burn Rate are different ways to evaluate powders. What I am experimenting with is that by using less quick powders can I get higher velocities and better accuracy than with say, 700x or Red Dot.
I postulate that a relationship of RQ and SD may exist that will allow us to chose powders for application. This can be useful if selecting powders and compareing them for different calibers, say .243 vs .45.

Of course the proof and utility of these musings will be found at the target.

[uscra112]

Buy a copy of Quickload software and you'll learn more than you ever thought you could.. There's a lot more to powder performance than "quickness".

Yes, slower powders will beget you more MV and at lower peak pressures, too.

https://www.neconos.com/quickload-ba...tion-software/

[Burnt Fingers]

I'd love to buy a copy of Quickload.

But until the powder database is updated there's no reason to spend the money.

[uscra112]

It was updated just about 1 year ago. No, they haven't included some of the "extreme" powders. Does it matter?

[Krag 1901]

I'd love to have a Quick Loads, but I'd rather spend my money on primers and powders to experiment.

However the reason I posted the article is to give a different perspective on Burn Rate Charts. From the numbers in the artical I've gained a new interest in 4895. Which had been one of my go to powders due to it's flexibility. With my new 314299 mold coming on line, I may get out the 1917 and use some of the '06 again. 4895 seems like an ideal partner to the 200 gr boolet.

[uscra112]

By comparing several different powders and charges in QL, I can heartily agree that 4895 looks ideal for energetic hunting loads in the Krag, without firing a shot. Admittedly QL cannot show with any certainty whether it will work well at lower pressures. Some powders do, some don't.

I also can say without equivocation that Varget and RL-15 have pressure/time curves virtually identical to 4895 when loaded to around 2000 fps. behind a 200 grain bullet..

There's headroom in those loads. Peak pressure is a modest 29,000 psi. Push the pressure up to 40,000, and you get another 240 fps in the Krag if your bullet can stand it. Seating depth of course matters. I use .325 for the 311299, so assumed the same for yours.

4064 is close. 3031 might be better for reduced loads. Ditto RL-7 and 1680.

Honestly, I have as much fun tweaking the model as I do shooting. It's doing all that math and more, with no effort on my part, YMMV of course,

[Burnt Fingers]

It was updated just about 1 year ago. No, they haven't included some of the "extreme" powders. Does it matter?

Are IMR Red, IMR Target, IMR Blue in the database?

How about CFE Pistol?

It does matter if you use those powders.

[uscra112]

Not as of my last update. I personally don't get excited over these new powders. The old standbys works fine for me.