FYI Burn Rate Chart

[Tommie]

I can understand missing a few of the competitor’s powders, but H414? Hope that’s a typo.

 

[1911nut]

Where’s IMR 4320?

 

[hunter67]

Read the post nut

 

[338 dude]

If you haven't already found it, Hodgdon has updated its burn rate chart. It includes LT powders, all the new Alliant powders, the Enduron powders and Winchester.

https://www.hodgdon.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/burn-rate-color.pdf

Great chart up-to-date info on new powders thank you very much

 

[GSS]

If you haven't already found it, Hodgdon has updated its burn rate chart. It includes LT powders, all the new Alliant powders, the Enduron powders and Winchester.

https://www.hodgdon.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/burn-rate-color.pdf

KMart / All,
Here is a related chart that sorts by "heat".
I do not have the source and I do not know exactly what the unit of measurement is for "heat" but it is easy to see what powders have more heat content than others.

One correlation I think would make sense but I certainty cant fully confirm may be cooler powders possibly could extend barrel life.
i do know I got longer life out of my last two service rifle barrels that have only been fed AR Comp than I have from any of the previous barrels that all lived on RL15

Anyway, Here's the chart I found.

 

[46and2]

KMart / All,
Here is a related chart that sorts by "heat".
I do not have the source and I do not know exactly what the unit of measurement is for "heat" but it is easy to see what powders have more heat content than others.

One correlation I think would make sense but I certainty cant fully confirm may be cooler powders possibly could extend barrel life.
i do know I got longer life out of my last two service rifle barrels that have only been fed AR Comp than I have from any of the previous barrels that all lived on RL15

Anyway, Here's the chart I found.

Thank you, I think this is alao very useful.

 

[jimmymac]

Thanks for sharing.

 

[1911nut]

IMR4320 has recently been discontinued. It may still be found on the shelves in some places, but is no longer manufactured.

Powder Valley has 8lb containers in stock.

I have a 1963 219 Donaldson Wasp unlimited bag gun that really likes 4320.

 

[LA50SHOOTER]

After studying the new chart, FOR ME, I would NOT use that chart! My experience with several of those powders have them W-A-Y out of place... Just my 2 cents>>>>like I said "for me"..

Ben, Just curious & because I do value your opinion. - Where does Alliant RL23 and RL 26 belong in your opinion and based on what cartridges.
I just managed to get my hands on 16 pounds of RL26 and I have a bunch of RL23 which I was planning to try in the 300 WSM with 215's & 230's. - Also any others that look out of place I wouldn't mind hearing about. And if you don't want to say in this thread then P.M. would be appreciated. - I can understand not wanting to be part of a "hornets nest".

- Thanks, - Ron -

 

[46and2]

Ben, Just curious & because I do value your opinion. - Where does Alliant RL23 and RL 26 belong in your opinion and based on what cartridges.
I just managed to get my hands on 16 pounds of RL26 and I have a bunch of RL23 which I was planning to try in the 300 WSM with 215's & 230's. - Also any others that look out of place I wouldn't mind hearing about. And if you don't want to say in this thread then P.M. would be appreciated. - I can understand not wanting to be part of a "hornets nest".

- Thanks, - Ron -

FWIW,
I know you are not asking me but I have a lot of experience in 23 and 26 in a few larger capacity cartridges.
IMO 23 belongs slightly before RL22 and RL26 belongs right behind RL25.

 

[LA50SHOOTER]

FWIW,
I know you are not asking me but I have a lot of experience in 23 and 26 in a few larger capacity cartridges.
IMO 23 belongs slightly before RL22 and RL26 belongs right behind RL25.

So, your experience shows (in a few larger capacity cartridges) 23 being a faster burning rate than 22.
And 26 being just a tad slower than 25.

Correct ?

What cartridges if you don't mind saying.

- Thanks, - Ron -

 

[46and2]

25 slower than 26, 22 slower than 23.
6.5-284 Norma
300WM
270Wby
264WM
6.5 WSM
7mm RM
7mm WSM
270wsm ( this one eats RL26 as a staple diet in 3 different barrels but couldn't get enough RL25 in the case to overpressure. )

 

[ShootDots]

Ben, Just curious & because I do value your opinion. - Where does Alliant RL23 and RL 26 belong in your opinion and based on what cartridges.
I just managed to get my hands on 16 pounds of RL26 and I have a bunch of RL23 which I was planning to try in the 300 WSM with 215's & 230's. - Also any others that look out of place I wouldn't mind hearing about. And if you don't want to say in this thread then P.M. would be appreciated. - I can understand not wanting to be part of a "hornets nest".

- Thanks, - Ron -

Hello Ron! My personal opinion on RL-23 is that depending on the lot of H4831sc (you can have "slow" lots or "fast" lots) RL-23 can be noticeably faster or "fairly" close to it. EXAMPLE #1: In MY .300wsm, 2910-2920 gave me the best accuracy. However, I changed over to RL-23 and it took 64.5grs to reach 2905, where it shot the best. BUT to get to the 2915 load it took 65.8grs of H4831sc to get there. EXAMPLE #2: In a 7mm S.A.U.M. I had, I ran the 180 Hybrids with 60.0grs of H4831sc to get to 2960 where it shot great. RL-23 came out at the same time and I gave it a shot. After MUCH discussion with an Alliant Tech, I ran it with the same powder charge(s) as the H4831sc. At 60.0grs of RL-23 I had an EXTREMELY stiff bolt lift! You could never operate "up with H4831sc" as far as charge weight is concerned. I believe the "new" chart that has RL-23 slower than either H4831sc or EVEN RL-22 is way off base! RL-26 is much the same as RL-23 on "the chart". You will notice that RL-26 is listed as SLOWER than VV N170! NO WAY POSSIBLE! VV N170 is about in the middle of H1000 and Retumbo! They also have it listed as slower than RL-25>>>another "misplacement" if you will. RL-25 is not very far from H1000 in my opinion. I believe that RL-26 is a "shade" slower than VV N165 but only marginally. I don't mind putting this out for "public consumption" as these observation(s) of mine are based on actual shooting, not keyboard assumptions..

 

[Murray Brook]

@ShootDots
Your findings mirror what I have found when using RL-23 & 26 in several cartridges. What I previously posted. What 46and2 also found.

 

[ShootDots]

@ShootDots
Your findings mirror what I have found when using RL-23 & 26 in several cartridges. What I previously posted. What 46and2 also found.

This is why I did not "PM" Ron. I believe that this chart is "far enough off base" that "the public" needs to know that these are glaring inaccuracies and shooters ought to be aware of this. Your "mirrored findings" just reiterate the need to assert caution in reading this chart. Thank You! P.S.: These are only a few of the "misplacement's" on this chart!

 

[LA50SHOOTER]

Hello Ron! My personal opinion on RL-23 is that depending on the lot of H4831sc (you can have "slow" lots or "fast" lots) RL-23 can be noticeably faster or "fairly" close to it. EXAMPLE #1: In MY .300wsm, 2910-2920 gave me the best accuracy. However, I changed over to RL-23 and it took 64.5grs to reach 2905, where it shot the best. BUT to get to the 2915 load it took 65.8grs of H4831sc to get there. EXAMPLE #2: In a 7mm S.A.U.M. I had I ran the 180 Hybrids with 60.0grs of H4831sc to get to 2960 where it shot great. RL-23 came out at the same time and I gave it a shot. After MUCH discussion with an Alliant Tech, I ran it with the same powder charge(s) at the H4831sc. At 60.0grs of RL-23 I had an EXTREMELY stiff bolt lift! You could never operate "up with H4831sc" as far as charge weight is concerned. I believe the "new" chart that has RL-23 slower than either H4831sc or EVEN RL-22 is way off base! RL-26 is much the same as RL-23 on "the chart". You will notice that RL-26 is listed as SLOWER than VV N170! NO WAY POSSIBLE! VV N170 is about in the middle of H1000 and Retumbo! They also have it listed as slower than RL-25>>>another "misplacement" if you will. RL-25 is not very far from H1000 in my opinion. I believe that RL-26 is a "shade" slower than VV N165 but only marginally. I don't mind putting this out for "public consumption" as these observation(s) of mine are based on actual shooting, not keyboard assumptions..

Excellent Feedback Indeed and I truly appreciate this. - I've had 23 for a while and not used any yet & then just got 16 pounds more. - Same with 26. - (I was lucky enough to find the 26 about 10 days ago). - This is valuable information being shared and by you and the other gent's reaffirming what your saying. - I realize that I will need to start off at a "reasonable" place and that also everything on Q/L is not 100% carved in stone. - Also, I didn't realize v/v-N170 was as slow as you've pointed out either.

Again Thank You All for Sharing Your Experience on these powders.

- Ron -

 

[Ned Ludd]

Powder Valley has 8lb containers in stock.

I have a 1963 219 Donaldson Wasp unlimited bag gun that really likes 4320.

Just passing along what I was told directly from IMR about one month ago. I had an application for which it might have worked, but decided to try something else upon hearing it wouldn't be available in the future.

 

[1911nut]

Just passing along what I was told directly from IMR about one month ago. I had an application for which it might have worked, but decided to try something else upon hearing it wouldn't be available in the future.

I found you’re correct, 4320 shows up discontinued on most websites.

I would like to try VV N135 to replace 4320 in my Wasp but there’s no data. I’m shooting 28.5 g of IMR 4320 with a 52g bullet. I would appreciate suggestions on how to get a safe starting load of N135. It’s my understanding that burn rate tables should not be used to make such conversions.
This is the only data I have for the Wasp:

https://press.hornady.com/assets/site/hornady/files/obsolete-data/219-donaldson-wasp.pdf

 

[Ned Ludd]

I found you’re correct, 4320 shows up discontinued on most websites.

I would like to try VV N135 to replace 4320 in my Wasp but there’s no data. I’m shooting 28.5 g of IMR 4320 with a 52g bullet. I would appreciate suggestions on how to get a safe starting load of N135. It’s my understanding that burn rate tables should not be used to make such conversions.
This is the only data I have for the Wasp:

https://press.hornady.com/assets/site/hornady/files/obsolete-data/219-donaldson-wasp.pdf

I only use a burn rate chart as a rough guide to possible powders that fall within a certain region of the chart that might be useful for a given application. I don't think there is any useful information in such a chart with regard to relative charge weights and conversion between different powders. For that kind of a conversion, I rely more on QuickLoad. Further, even with solid inputs such as COAL, case volume, etc., I generally start testing at a charge weight well below QuickLoad's prediction/output for safety reasons. Sorry - I realize that isn't very helpful, but starting low and working up cautiously is about the only advice I can offer for your situation.

 

[1911nut]

I only use a burn rate chart as a rough guide to possible powders that fall within a certain region of the chart that might be useful for a given application. I don't think there is any useful information in such a chart with regard to relative charge weights and conversion between different powders. For that kind of a conversion, I rely more on QuickLoad. Further, even with solid inputs such as COAL, case volume, etc., I generally start testing at a charge weight well below QuickLoad's prediction/output for safety reasons. Sorry - I realize that isn't very helpful, but starting low and working up cautiously is about the only advice I can offer for your situation.

Thanks Ned, I’ll have to check out Quickload.