45 ACP and Unique and the Lyman Manual

[hossfly]

Gotta be honest with you I'm thinking you might want to be careful with the loads listed in the lyman manual with Unique. I'm getting MUCH more speed out of the loads than Lyman says I would and the snappiness backs it up. Just thought I'd let people know. Be careful.

 

[Charlie98]

Which Lyman manual?

I'm curious... what is the load you are shooting that you believe is snappy?

 

[Anchorite]

What number manual?

 

[Rimfire McNutjob]

There's been more then a few threads over the last few years suggesting "new" Unique is not quite the same as the Hercules stuff of old. I'm not sure where Alliant is having it made these days ... ADI maybe?

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

There's been more then a few threads over the last few years suggesting "new" Unique is not quite the same as the Hercules stuff of old. I'm not sure where Alliant is having it made these days ... ADI maybe?

As far as I know it is still made here in Florida at St.Marks.
If I recall the only thing Alliant changed had to do with flash suppression.

FWIW I’m still using loads I was taught in the 70’s. And they are still just the same as back then, too. I may change by a quarter grain up or down when I change lots but that’s kinda inconsequential in a handgun load.

I’m curious about this too. I have Lyman’s/Ideal manuals back to the 1950’s and the common loads for Unique in .45ACP haven’t changed much.

 

[ballman6711]

If I recall the only thing Alliant changed had to do with flash suppression.

Could changing the amount of flash suppressant require changing the data? I imagine it could if it was added or reduced in sufficient quantities, but would they do that?

What doe's everyone think?

chris

 

[Jim Watson]

As far as I know it is still made here in Florida at St.Marks.

Still? Never was, is not now. St Marks makes only Ball powder and Unique is a flake.
I don't know all the corporate history, but it is made at the ATK plant in Redford, Virginia.

 

[StrawHat]

I would think, if they are still using the name Unique, Bullseye, Blue Dot, Sharpshooter or whatever that any recipe that involves that powder had better work. Otherwise, the company is misrepresenting the powder. Minor variation, lot to lot, has always been the norm but drastic variation is not acceptable.

Kevin

 

[AJC1]

I know there has been at least 2 reformulations resulting in a burn rate still within the industry acceptable window to keep the same name. Hard core unique users can probably give you dates....and what the intention of the change.

 

[PapaG]

I have bottles/cans of Unique from the 50s all the way to present production. Never had a problem but I never use it for top loads. Handgun, cast bullet rifle and shotgun.

 

[Charlie98]

FWIW I’m still using loads I was taught in the 70’s. And they are still just the same as back then, too.

I'm not quite that old... I've only been loading Unique in the .45ACP since the mid '80's. FWIW, a number of sources have changed their data... and not just with Unique, although I know most of those because that's my primary handgun powder. The Speer #11 listed 6.9grn Unique for a 230grn FMJ bullet, but the #14 knocked that down to a more realistic 6.5grn Unique. Back Home, Years Ago, I loaded that 6.9grn load... it was a handful... and it didn't take me long to bring my load down to a more reasonable 6.5grn load... which I've been loading ever since. I don't think the 6.9grn load was unsafe, but it was sure pushing max pressure... at least with what they used to measure pressure back in the day. I feel a lot of data correction has been the move to better testing methodology and equipment, testing the newest incarnations of their respective powders.

I don't know if Unique ever went to flash suppression... I DO know it was reformulated in the mid '90's or so to be 'cleaner burning.'

 

[Jim Watson]

At the time, Alliant said that the "reformulation" was to screen out the fines.

 

[JmacD]

'cleaner burning.

Wow! What was it like before that?! lol still pretty dirty in my experience.

I’ve noticed several Lyman loads are hotter than many others. Any cross references?

 

[AJC1]

Wow! What was it like before that?! lol still pretty dirty in my experience.

I’ve noticed several Lyman loads are hotter than many others. Any cross references?

There are definitely some warm Lyman loads. The only other company that had testing as diverse as Lyman was western. The bullet companies just test their own as expected.

 

[Charlie98]

Wow! What was it like before that?! lol still pretty dirty in my experience.

Have you ever bought a box of cereal, cake mix, soda... whatever... that says 'new and improved!!!' on the box. You try it and think... tastes the same to me! That's 'cleaner burning' Unique. The degree of cleaner burningnessness is miniscule, they would have had to completely reformulate Unique into something else to get it to burn clean... it is what it is. FWIW, I'm not one of these people that bellyaches about how 'dirty' Unique is, nor how 'it meters soooo poorly' out of a measure. At the end of the day, Unique is a fantastic powder, even considering some of it's warts.

The Dan Wesson loves Unique... and wears that 'dirt' with a badge of honor!

 

[JmacD]

FWIW, I'm not one of these people that bellyaches about how 'dirty' Unique is, nor how 'it meters soooo poorly' out of a measure. At the end of the day, Unique is a fantastic powder, even considering some of it's warts.

Ditto.

 

[PO2Hammer]

Gotta be honest with you I'm thinking you might want to be careful with the loads listed in the lyman manual with Unique. I'm getting MUCH more speed out of the loads than Lyman says I would and the snappiness backs it up. Just thought I'd let people know. Be careful.

Are you using the exact bullet and OAL listed in the Lyman data?
How much more velocity?

 

[Charlie98]

There are definitely some warm Lyman loads. The only other company that had testing as diverse as Lyman was western.

...which is why you start low and work up into your comfort zone.

I've always thought Western had some pretty, uh... robust... data, too. They certainly have their moments...

 

[Anchorite]

I have bottles/cans of Unique from the 50s all the way to present production. Never had a problem but I never use it for top loads. Handgun, cast bullet rifle and shotgun.

Ditto.

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

Still? Never was, is not now. St Marks makes only Ball powder and Unique is a flake.
I don't know all the corporate history, but it is made at the ATK plant in Redford, Virginia.

You’re right! I was thinking about W231. Mea culpa.

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

At the time, Alliant said that the "reformulation" was to screen out the fines.

The fines - a.k.a. Bullseye.

The old rumors were that Bullseye was floor sweepings of Unique production; back in the L-R days, before Hercules. My maternal grandfather was an accountant and admirer of the thrift of 19th century production.

 

[buck460XVR]

My question would be if the ammo was loaded to the COL from the manual or if it was different. Setting the bullet deeper than book OAL will increase velocities and recoil as will setting it longer and having the bullet touch the lands.

 

[Charlie98]

The old rumors were that Bullseye was floor sweepings of Unique production; back in the L-R days, before Hercules.

I think that thought occurred to the good people at Lake City... last few boxes of LC ammos looked like it had been swept up off the floor.

My question would be if the ammo was loaded to the COL from the manual or if it was different.

The devil is in the details... unfortunately, the OP has been MIA since he pulled the fire alarm...

 

[.45Coltguy]

Yep, OP seems to have wandered off, but, what bullet weight? Jacketed or cast? OAL? Powder charge? Clarification needed.

 

[25-20 WCF]

I would think, if they are still using the name Unique, Bullseye, Blue Dot, Sharpshooter or whatever that any recipe that involves that powder had better work. Otherwise, the company is misrepresenting the powder. Minor variation, lot to lot, has always been the norm but drastic variation is not acceptable.

Kevin

This demonstrates a lack of understanding of how propellants are made. “Burn rate” has only an indirect relationship with how a powder performs in a rifle/pistol cartridge. The “burn rate” is determined in a “ laboratory bomb” device which does not replicate a firearm. Identical “burn rates” may perform the same as, or differently than each other in a firearm. Powders are not developed for particular cartridges. This is perfectly acceptable as it has been the norm for over a century.



.