Grumpy old man...

[Stew0576]

By taking knowledge of others and building on it we advance the knowledge of all, this cannot happen without questions

 

[Olon]

 

[Jim Watson]

While I cringe at the posts "trying to learn to reload one question at a time on the internet" I don't mind questions to amplify the manual.

The "recipe hunt" is kind of jarring, but I understand the urge. In the Obama Panic, a friend was getting short of powder and did not know what to do. I showed him a list of 26 (!) powders with published data for 9mm P. The one remaining area dealer carrying components had two of them. He picked one and has stayed with it even after his previous standard was back in stock.

There are some allegedly helpful replies that I do not get.
Q: "I can get powders A, B, or C and bullets X, Y, or Z. What is a good combination?"
A: "Yeah, yeah, what you really need is some Brand E and Brand V."

I think I see more timid posts than wild hairs.

 

[kmw1954]

Choosing a powder for my first loads was difficult due to the sheer number of powders out there. I'm not complaining but if I started in 1970 picking a powder may have been a little easier. Here's an example. .38 special 158 gr. jacketed. First pic is Lyman 45th from 1970, second pic is Lyman 50th.
View attachment 907957 View attachment 907958

Even more striking is to look at how the data changed between published manual 45 to published manual 50 between those two powders listed in manual 45! Now what is the newbie to think?

 

[Jack Ryan]

The powders that I started with ... the WSF was a added later powder ....

View attachment 907886

I started with a sack of shot, a box of primers, bag of wads, and a 1# can of unique and I think that is about the only things I used for 10 years or more. When I ran out of ONE, I bought ONE of those. When a hull split, I threw it away. Nothing to figure out every time I loaded a box, no wonders, no worries. Killed a lot of pigeons with nothing more than that and a rock to throw on the barn roof.

 

[whughett]

It’s on occasions such as this that I sometimes wonder the worth of the world at ones fingertips. Not that the old fashion way of reading books was foolproof, but at least it forced the reader to accumulate knowledge as he went and come to conclusions based on that. In this our desire for instant answers era we are sometimes amazed to find there is indeed more than one answer and the one seeking that answers has no way of knowing which is the right one.
Just this old school guys take.

 

[PWC]

Even more striking is to look at how the data changed between published manual 45 to published manual 50 between those two powders listed in manual 45! Now what is the newbie to think?

Military taught many here to follow your last lawfull order (newest). I realize there are a lot of younger people here that never served, but by that age group, they are more technically adroit and can follow mfgr's instructions, on the I'net, including the front page safety disclaimers, and stop trying to second guess the reason for such disclaimers.

 

[whughett]

I started with a sack of shot, a box of primers, bag of wads, and a 1# can of unique and I think that is about the only things I used for 10 years or more. When I ran out of ONE, I bought ONE of those. When a hull split, I threw it away. Nothing to figure out every time I loaded a box, no wonders, no worries. Killed a lot of pigeons with nothing more than that and a rock to throw on the barn roof.

And don’t you wish you could buy that bag of shot for those prices today.

 

[Texas10mm]

Even more striking is to look at how the data changed between published manual 45 to published manual 50 between those two powders listed in manual 45! Now what is the newbie to think?

Some of those powders may have changed, but the testing method changed for sure.

 

[DukeConnor]

I have found if one searches the forums, their question has usually been answered a thousand times over.

Last week I was putting together info for 300BO subs with 208 fmj.

I never loaded subs before. A quick web search showed enough reading to keep me busy for a week. I didn't need to post the question.

On the other hand I have been so bored lately I'll read anything.

 

[Slamfire]

I'm going to have to disagree with you on this one from the quantity of nitroglycerin being single bass or double bass and several other factors including coatings have a huge impact on Burn rate characteristics. It's a lot more different than the color of the can. Form sphere, flake or ball is a huge factor on its own.

Made in the land of pines, brewed in the land of sky blue waters, and yet the beer was not that refreshing. Sure, lots of different ingredients, maybe even Indians dancing around the vats, but what really matters, is the pressure curve. The rest are misdirection's to make you think the stuff is special and unique. And, I don't see that.

In fact, Alliant told me AA2520, a double based ball powder, was blended to the pressure curve of IMR 4895, a single based stick powder. Over my chronograph, by charge the velocities were essentially identical. The selling point was better metering, but in my opinion, it did not result in improved accuracy on target, (accuracy was outstanding with both!) and I found AA2520 peaky and it left the gas system filthy.

There are many powders available, and even if you divide them into pistol and rifle powders, there are still many of them in each category. There is not a lot of good information available in the manuals or online or even from the powder manufacturers' websites about what would make a particular powder better or not so better for a particular application. The manuals often have a section with a blurb about each of many powders. Those blurbs are superficial and if you read more than a few of them you start seeing the same wording used over and over again. Go to the websites for the manufacturers and you see the same thing. IMR, Hodgdon, and Winchester all have powder profiles on their websites and none of those really tell you much except rifle vs pistol (or, shotgun -- but then some of those are good for pistol, too) and a general range of calibers that the powder can be used for. Even reloading articles in the various magazines don't tell the readers WHY a particular powder is better or not so better for the applications being described.

Charles Petty, an inprint gunwriter whom I respect, when testing one of the 1911's du jour, just stated there are too many "45 ACP" powders to test!" And it is true, you could load a different brand of 45ACP powders each day, and maybe do it for a month before repeating. (Maybe February, not a leap year, or a lunar month?)

I think the term is elastic marketing where the differences between products are less than the differences in advertising claims.

 

[Coop45]

What's the matter, don't trust Colonel's and Generals?

Nope, they are politicians.

 

[blue32]

They need to do what I did when I began reloading in 2009; search function for question thats already been answered to infinity and turn head slightly and wince on the trigger pull of that first reload.

 

[Targa]

I don’t disagree that most, if not all things, can be answered with a google search. So why post/ask anything? Why have forums?

 

[kidneyboy]

I don’t disagree that most, if not all things, can be answered with a google search. So why post/ask anything? Why have forums?

There are forums so the grumpy old men have something to complain about. It's kind of self serving.

 

[forty_caliber]

I don’t disagree that most, if not all things, can be answered with a google search. So why post/ask anything? Why have forums?

So that Google can index our content and provide search results.

.40

 

[Targa]

^^Exactly...

 

[GT1]

The forum is huge, the search works well, there is no question on general reloading that hasn't been answered time and time again.
If they have not bothered to read a manual(the first half with all the words in it) then I don't have a lot of patience either.
All you can really do it point out they are going to get hurt or hurt someone oblivious to their ignorance that is unlucky enough to be near them at the range.

We aren't discussing golf swings. You don't usually get a do over when you make a mistake or don't understand why the process is carefully followed.

 

[kmw1954]

Some of those powders may have changed, but the testing method changed for sure.

You know that and I know that but someone just starting might not which could cause much confusion.

 

[irishlad]

[QUOTE="buck460XVR, post: 11466190, member:

As i and many others have said several times. No one is forcing anyone to click on a thread that asks "which powder". Like with telemarketers, we all have the right to ignore them. If you answer the phone and get roped into taking a "quick" survey, it's your own dam fault and no one wants to hear you whine about it."


+1

 

[PWC]

Testing methods be damned. Follow the current mfgr's data to be safe. It isn't necessary to know how a clock works to tell time. After you gain experience loading and understand the process why's and how's; then if you want to deviate/interpolate (and we all do it) understsnding we believe we have minimized risk. Usually we get away with it, sometimes not. Google search shooting "kabooms", or amy specific firearm kaboom.

 

[Jack Ryan]

And don’t you wish you could buy that bag of shot for those prices today.

Heck in the old days I would have shot sand before I paid what it cost now.

 

[AJC1]

Made in the land of pines, brewed in the land of sky blue waters, and yet the beer was not that refreshing. Sure, lots of different ingredients, maybe even Indians dancing around the vats, but what really matters, is the pressure curve. The rest are misdirection's to make you think the stuff is special and unique. And, I don't see that.

In fact, Alliant told me AA2520, a double based ball powder, was blended to the pressure curve of IMR 4895, a single based stick powder. Over my chronograph, by charge the velocities were essentially identical. The selling point was better metering, but in my opinion, it did not result in improved accuracy on target, (accuracy was outstanding with both!) and I found AA2520 peaky and it left the gas system filthy.



Charles Petty, an inprint gunwriter whom I respect, when testing one of the 1911's du jour, just stated there are too many "45 ACP" powders to test!" And it is true, you could load a different brand of 45ACP powders each day, and maybe do it for a month before repeating. (Maybe February, not a leap year, or a lunar month?)

I think the term is elastic marketing where the differences between products are less than the differences in advertising claims.

So I will agree got powders that are specifically made to clone another powder most likely have a very close burn rate curve. If that is the standard of your observations then your conclusion would be right. But there are a lot of powders that don't come even close to each other.

 

[JimKirk]

Knowledge is not what I Know .... but it is Knowing where to find what I do not ....

 

[CoalTrain49]

I guess what sticks in my craw is when folks ask about loading different "CALIBERS" when they really mean "CARTRIDGES".

Yes, I'm a grumpy old man sometimes..

You might as well get used to it. Caliber is what I hear most of the time these days when a person is actually trying to say cartridge. All that tells me is they've never actually read the glossary of a reloading manual and probably never will.