Explain Powder Selection Criteria to Me Please

[MAsSiVe MeDiC]

Personally I would be ecstatic if any of the industry’s recognized publishers started testing and providing data for shorter barrels than the perineal 20”-26”, perhaps maybe 16”-18” or even as short as 10”-14” utilized by AR platforms. It’s my understanding they’re rather popular in this day and age and somewhat in common use. Just sayin…

 

[David Milisock]

I usually just use the powders listed under a cartridge in my reloading book, but how do I know what other cartridges the powder can be used for? For example, I bought Accurate 2460 for 55 Gr. hollow point boat tails in .223 Remington because it was listed in my Hornady manual. It worked fine for that cartridge.

This is what it says on the can: Accurate 2460 is a fast burning, double-base, spherical rifle powder that is a slower derivative of the AA2230 powder. It is suitable for small and medium sized caliber applications but with slightly higher loading densities than AA2230. It provides an additional option for shooters to fine tune and optimize loads and combinations with calibers ranging from the 223 Rem to the 308 Win. 2460 is within the threshold limit for M14 systems. Made in the USA.

I found a load on the Accurate website using 2460 in a 30-30 Winchester for 110, 150 and 170 grain projectiles. There isn't one for the 6.5 Creedmoor using 2460. The velocity of the .223 Remington is closer to the Creedmoor than the Winchester, but the Winchester bullet weights are closer to the Creedmoor. It just seems odd that there isn't a load for the 6.5 CM. Is it possible to work up a load for that powder in 6.5 CM without any published starting point?

This is the description of Accurate 2700 powder: Accurate 2700 is a medium burning, double-base, spherical rifle powder that is ideally suited for the 30-06 Springfield and other medium capacity calibers such as the 22-250 Remington, 220 Swift, and the 243 Winchester. 2700 provides excellent velocities and performance in the Winchester Super Short Magnum cartridges. Made in the USA

It seems very close to Accurate 2460.

What determines which powders are more suitable for certain cartridges and unsuitable for others?

I've been hand loading for over 50 years and I've had to develop loads for cartridges that had become obscure or weights of projectiles that were not supported by the manufacturer.

My first suggestion is to obtain as much published data on cartridges as possible, the book Cartridges of the World is an example, great data on case capacity in grains of water. Get as much reloading data (old and new) as possible and as many manufacturer produced powder burn rate rate charts as you can get your hands on. All this data becomes cross reference material.

The first thought is what type of action, auto, bolt, falling block, what strength does the action have, what age is the action? Lots of parameters to think of there.

Then there's case capacity, caliber, projectile weight, expansion ratio, action strength all juggled onto your note sheet. Research case capacities equal to (the closer the exact capacity the better) your cartridge, research caliber equal yours and bullet weights equalmto yours, then research all the available load data establishing the fastest and slowest powders used with those combinations.

The concept being that powders listed on up to date burn rate charts inside your established fast slow parameters may be viable.

I used these procedures to develop 500 grain 60,000 PSI loads for the 450 Marlin in a bolt rifle, based on published data for cases of nearly identical capacity, the 45/70 government and the wildcat 458 x 2. I also used the same procedures to develop a 173 grain 30-06 load duplicating the post WWl load the M1 Garand was designed for because the military shifted to the M2 Ball and the powder, ( I believe it was the old IMR L15 powder) was discontinued.

Be safe start low but I suggest test loads never under 60% case capacity as detonation can occur and testing in a safe environment. Tie the firearm down, remote firing from a protected environment.

 

[Ernest T]

Thank you for the replies. I've never reloaded anything without using published data. But...I've wondered about data that has holes in it -- why? I've seen bullets listed with powders that leaves a gap in the middle like this. There is a load for 100, 115 and 140 grain bullets, but not 120 or 130. Is there an issue with the missing bullet and powder combo, or is it that no one has tried it out? Thanks for adding to my education.