Is 2400 dirty?

[Bass Ackward]

I read an article while I was still in the military that I can't recall where I found it. In that article, they talked about government contract classes for powders. Years ago the contract speed known as WC820 was a very broad contract. Powder companies could bid on this contract offering any powder between HS-7 on the fast side down to 4227 on the slow end.

Then the government tightened the contract standards. As a result one powder met the new standard. That was AA#9 which is why you see so much of it now being pulled from stock. And I believe that some HS-7 is floating around listed as a "fast batch" of WC820. Strangely enough Europe adopted the same contract standard but added the kicker that the powder must cut metal (copper) fouling. They added that to all their contracts for small arms.

So all of a sudden Hogdgen is out in the cold and they come up with H-108 which meets this new requirement. Alliant says that 2400 is too dirty and needs cleaned up, but it mysteriously was speeded up and danged if it didn't become contract eligible for the 820 class. Add some tagament for bore fouling to act as a lube and cut metal fouling and whamo, it qualifies for Europe's specs too.

So when someone says that a ball powder is burning cleaner than a stick powder of roughly the same speed which just flies in the face of common logic, in this case they might be right. Because this is older powder before the fouling requirement.

Now guess why Hogdgon came out with H-112? Yep, to qualify for the next contract class slower which was also narrowed. And they told you it was for the reloaders benifit too. The government market drives powder sales and excess production is sold to the civilian market to keep the plants operating.

[Billwnr]

I shoot 2400 in my 1903 Springfield and notice the POI migrates starting and the groups get bigger starting about 25 rounds. I clean and it goes back to where the rifle is sighted in for.

I shoot in the CBA military competition so POI and small groups are important for me. I clean between relays.

2400 is a very accurate powder in my rifle.

[XBT]

I use 2400 in all my cast rifle loads with very good results. If it’s dirty, I have never noticed.

Using 2400 in revolvers I get some unburned particles in the barrel, so in those I changed to a faster powder.

[StarMetal]

XBT stated exactly what I was trying to say. I had meant in revolvers, so it looks like someone else found the same results I did, in revolvers.

Joe

[Char-Gar]

Billwrn... It is not uncommon for the point of impact to wander a mite as the barrel accumulates fouling and it gets hotter. That is why we don't start a match with a clean barrel and hopefully we can fire a couple of "fouling shots" to warm the barrel a mite.

How do you know your increasing group size is due to the powder and not some other factor like the lube, barrel heating and bedding pressure, or shooter fatigue? All of which are known causes of groups getting larger as shooting continues.

I have shots lots of 2400 behind cast bullets and have not observed groups to open up after a couple of dozen shots.

[swheeler]

Bass , what makes you think Hodgdon held or holds any military contracts, they have never made any powder- except Pyrodex? The powders marketed by Hodgdon, were all military surplus numbers, when the stockpiles of surplus ran low Hogdon contracted manufactures to make it for them, Olin-win did all the sperical numbers, Hogdon just picked the lot speed, same as the surplus they had been selling. Or did I miss something in your post?
Scot

[StarMetal]

I'll have to tag along with Scot, only powders I'm aware that Hodgdon makes is the Pyrodex line.

What info do you have Bass?

Joe

[swheeler]

I also believe the "first" powder he offered for sale was Surplus 4895(read IMR 4895)He purchased 50K pounds of it from Uncle Sam ,150 pound kegs were 30.00 plus shipping, and the first spherical powder he ever offered was BB Ball(1952?) WC852 NW- of course we still buy iy as H380, and thats Olin-man, then there were the extruded from Scotland up till 1990 or so , then the new EXtreme lines made in Australia.

[Billwnr]

Billwrn... It is not uncommon for the point of impact to wander a mite as the barrel accumulates fouling and it gets hotter. That is why we don't start a match with a clean barrel and hopefully we can fire a couple of "fouling shots" to warm the barrel a mite.

I have shots lots of 2400 behind cast bullets and have not observed groups to open up after a couple of dozen shots.

This is after the 5 fouling shots. It takes that to get the gun shooting to POI. About 25 rounds and groups open up and the POI starts to migrate upwards. It can slowly move up to 3 inches. After cleaning and the fouling shots it goes shoots to the original POI.

This rifle does not shift POI during matches. Usually to shoot 40 shots for record I end up with 85-95 shots fired downrange.

I clean it between each relay.

[Bass Ackward]

Bass , what makes you think Hodgdon held or holds any military contracts, they have never made any powder- except Pyrodex? The powders marketed by Hodgdon, were all military surplus numbers, when the stockpiles of surplus ran low Hogdon contracted manufactures to make it for them, Olin-win did all the sperical numbers, Hogdon just picked the lot speed, same as the surplus they had been selling. Or did I miss something in your post?
Scot

Scott,

I know about Hogdgon and about years ago.

I was using the existance of H-108 as an example. It was really how to focus on why 2400 changed burn rates and burn properties. How old was 2400? Can slower powders burn clean? Unique was claened up without materially moving it's burn rate. Then why was 2400 speeded up? That was my point.

[StarMetal]

Bass,

You made it sound like Hodgdon made some of their own powders. Did you change your tune or did we interpret your post wrong?

About the new Unique. I've been shooting Unique for over 30 years. When they changed to a slightly cleaner burning formula it DID change the burning rate. Very little, but still a change. It's a tad faster. My standard 45 Colt load, for my Ruger Blackhawk, is the 255 RCBS SWC over 9.0 grs of Unique. It was a nice mild, but not wimpy, plinking load. Out of my Smith Model 25 it gave between 900 to 1000 fps. Well with the new cleaner Unique the 9.0 had become alittle more then a mild load, it has gotten some oomph to it now. Not in the magnum class mine you. I've also noticed a change in my 45acp load too.

Joe

[NVcurmudgeon]

Scott,

I know about Hogdgon and about years ago.

I was using the existance of H-108 as an example. It was really how to focus on why 2400 changed burn rates and burn properties. How old was 2400? Can slower powders burn clean? Unique was claened up without materially moving it's burn rate. Then why was 2400 speeded up? That was my point.

Bass, I don't know why 2400 was speeded up. Understand that it was created for the then-new .22 Hornet cartridge and the name refers to the sensational velocity obtainable using the new powder. That would make it a product of the early thirties.

[swheeler]

John, got ya. I don't know why 2400 was speeded up, actually I didn't know it was. My understanding is that it was created for the then newly released 22 hornet and the number 2400 stood for the velocity atainable from this cartridge.

Scot

[StarMetal]

We're not talking about alot of speeding up, of course don't take much in the gun world with the pressures powders make. I think Alliant changed their formulas alittle when they changed to a cleaner burning powder. Use to be old Elmer Keiths 44 mag load was 22 grs of 2400 powder with a 240 cast bullet. Well, that still works today, BUT it's HOT!!! Not real real real hot, but hotter then when Elmer used it. Read my previous post about Unique, I'm positive it speeded up some too. Also with Elmers load if you substituted a bullet that weighed 245 grs that would have made his load alittle hotter back then too, when the 2400 was burning alittle bit slower. Maybe it's the deterrent coating they put on the powder, maybe they changed that to give a cleaner burn. I bet Alliant knows.

Joe

[Bass Ackward]

Bass,

You made it sound like Hodgdon made some of their own powders. Did you change your tune or did we interpret your post wrong?

Joe

Joe,

We? You got a mouse in your pocket?

Understand that you don't have to manufacture something to bid on a contract. If you have the product (or rights to a product), you can always sub the work out should you win the contract. But if you are sitting there with only H110, you aren't in the game.

So yes. You mis-read again. Surely you don't think I could have been wron., .... wr..., ....w.r.o.., WRONG!!!!!!!!!

And just so you know Joe, Elmers load is duplicated pressure wise (34,000) from 19.7 grains of the "new" 2400. So 22 grains is slightly hot at a little over 40,000.

[StarMetal]

Bass,

So with todays 2400 Elmers load would be 2.3 grains more then you need.

Bass I think you bait us into these traps you set by not giving the FULL details. Why didn't you say all that in the first place? We're too busy casting, loading, shooting, BSing, to figure all that stuff out for ourselves.


Joe

[NVcurmudgeon]

A friend, Hollerman, was in the habit of using Elmer's classic load in his robust Ruger Super Blackhawk. When he finally ran through his Hercules 2400 and switched over to Alliant 2400, he reported sticky cases and vigorous recoil. A two grain reduction made for a harmonious outcome. My main use of 2400 is in milsurp rifle loads. Pressures appear to be so mild in that application that I never noticed any difference!

[Char-Gar]

A gunwriter (John Taffin) did some testing when the Alliant version of 2400 came out and found it took a 6% reduction in powder to give the same pressure and ballistics as the Hercules version.

That makes Elmer's loads of 22/Hercules 2400 into 20.68/Alliant 2400. I always found Elmers loads of 22 grains of Hercules 2400 to be a little to hot for some pistols, so I used 21 grains for many years. I now load 20/Alliant 2400 and do just fine.

I droped my standard .357 Magnum charge to 14.5/Alliant 2400 and the 158 Thompson GC bullet.

I don't have access to sophisticated ballistics testing equipment, but Taffin's 6% figure is good enough for most any purpose.

[BruceB]

Amazing, how we often manage to arrive at the same conclusions, even though we're many miles apart.

I ran out of Hercules 2400 while still living in the Northwest Territories (late '90s). My tried and true .357 load in my 6" M27 S&W had been 15.0 2400 behind the SAME 358156 Ray Thompson design. That 15.0 load with new Alliant 2400 immediately gave sticky extraction, so I dropped it to 14.0 where everything was fine, and edged it back up to 14.5 grains, where it is still fine, easy extracting, and an all-round nice high-speed .357 load. Our four S&W .357s agree....!

Similar situations developed in our two Super Blackhawk .44s, and the one remaining runs nicely on 21.0/new 2400 behind the RCBS 44-250KT. We used a lot of H110 with 429244 boolits, and it worked very well as far as velocity and accuracy were concerned. (What a FLASH, though!) After our silhouette days were over, I reverted to 2400 because of its friendly nature and ease of ignition.

I dislke reducing my 2400 loads very much, and my reduced loads in both calibers use quicker-burning powders.

[Bass Ackward]

Bass,

So with todays 2400 Elmers load would be 2.3 grains more then you need.

Bass I think you bait us into these traps you set by not giving the FULL details. Why didn't you say all that in the first place? We're too busy casting, loading, shooting, BSing, to figure all that stuff out for ourselves.


Joe

Joe,

No. When I write I tend to assume people understand what I do. That's why I write so poorly. I wish that I had a better ability to express myself, but you all seem to figure it out.

And as some guys tell you, reduce the load. Quickoad says 19.7 grains. but seating depth can move that all over the place as you see others post different information. The important point is to understand one is different from the other. I still have and work with both so I have to be careful. But I still have about 8# of old Unique left and it loads same from my use. But I use it for lower stuff too. Nothing like a slabby where .1 grain would be noticable. Glad you said something. From everything I had read, it is interchangeable.