N 135

[rjtfroggy]

I can't help that. I saw it recently but not at the moment. They've all been hard to get at times. Alliant will kill themselves with price alone. Wanna know what works in case you stumble upon it...there ya go. If not, figure it out yourself. Lol! Confused as to what you want from anybody...other than$20/lb powder everywhere. Me too!

At this point in my life it has nothing to do with the price. 72 years old I'm going to do what I enjoy doing, but I don't want an overload of powder that is marginal at best for what I want to do.
Over the past 4 months I have bought 24 lbs. of 135 and was just trying to see if anyone has found a load for the 30BR with it, if not I'll get some N130 for when I run out of 4891. I could always fall back on 4895 if need be (have 14 lbs. of it).
So for the time being I'm good to go, just looking to the future so I don't get caught like I did with 8208, and yes I still buy primers at $95 a 1000.

 

[JimPag]

Is anybody using N135 in a 30BR, and if so how are your results?
I've been using it in my 30x47 with very good results, 41gr. at just over 3,000 fps with a SD of 8, 120gr bullet.
According to the books it can also be used for 6BR, but I can't try it until I get my barrel.
If it is compatible with a 30x47 and a 6BR why not the 30BR. I have a little over 20lbs. and would like to start consolidating powders and try to get down to one that is obtainable almost always.
What are your thoughts?

Too slow Rog in a 30BR. It use to be the go to Powder in the hunter class years ago when it really was the hunter class not the Bullshit today of using 30BR's. VV reformulated it years ago and it never shot has good as it use to in the 30x44's 46's and 7's. Years ago I experimented with at least a dozen powders for a 30BR, RL7, AA2015BR, 2015XMR, H4198, IMR4198, N130, 133,135, AA2250, H322, H335, N200 & 201, LT30&32 and Win680. That 680 was a disaster. Highest FPS I ever recorder 3600 with a 115 but way too fast. Wrecked a few new cases. Loosened the primer pocket after one firing so bad the primers fell out on their own. I use that Jag2 that Sid built me in 2016 which is a modified 30x47 and N133 worked the best in that case for me. Won a good amount of wood with that cartridge and only use it at 200 and 300 yards and meters. Usually use between 43.5 and 44 grains with early on Bart's 112's or later on my own 112's and usually am getting between 3225-3240 fps.

 

[divingin]

I'd be cautious with respect to the VV powder files in QuickLoad. In my hands, they seem more than a bit "off". For example, a QuickLoad file for an N135 load in .223 Rem yields a fill ratio almost 10% higher than the same charge weight of H4895, even though H4895 has similarly sized kernels.

Does grain size = grain weight? I always assumed that density of the powder mix had a lot to do with fill capacity. Sure, smaller kernels will pack more efficiently, but are all powders of equal kernel size roughly equivalent in fill rates?

 

[Ned Ludd]

Does grain size = grain weight? I always assumed that density of the powder mix had a lot to do with fill capacity. Sure, smaller kernels will pack more efficiently, but are all powders of equal kernel size roughly equivalent in fill rates?

No, kernel grain size and grain weight/density are not the same. But in the case of N135, it's reasonably close in size and weight to H4895. The amount by which the QL-predicted fill ratio and velocity values differ for the two powders seems to be much greater than would be accounted for by any small difference in bulk density. In the loads with the two powders I mentioned previously, the fill ratio predicted for H4895 was 89.8%, the fill ratio predicted for N135 was 99.5%. The human eye can easily see the difference between two cases side-by-side that are filled to ~90% capacity versus almost 100% capacity. The N135 cases were not that different visually in term of the fill ratio than the H4895 cases, vertainly not by a difference of almost 10%. Further, velocity with N135 was substantially faster than predicted by QL using the factory preset burn rate (Ba), to the tune of 50-100 fps faster. So as I stated previously, something seems to be off with some of the VV powder files in QL. I am not the only person to notice this. QL predictions with VV powders such as N135 and N140 are certainly "better" once the burn rate has been calibrated such that predicted and actual MVs match for a given charge weight, but the discrepancy in fill ratio is unaffected merely by changing the burn rate file.