Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Reloading
Slower Burning Powders ranked numerically by burn rate
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Veteran" data-source="post: 2825528" data-attributes="member: 118038"><p>Well, in curiousity, I took QL and I took the published load data from Winchester for 300 WM for the 200 Gr AB Nosler and I looked at the Burn rate chart which shows Staball HD in between Retumbo and IMR 8133 on Burn rate and I input a 24 inch bbl, COL of 3.34, for the 200 gr bullet, .308 caliber, and 80.5 grains, max load published for this set up and I tried to match the pressure of 59,200 and the MV of 2845 published by Winchester for Staball HD by varying Ba (burn rate). What I'm sorta concluding is that it appears that Staball HD is closer to Retumbo than to IMR8133 on Ba factor.</p><p></p><p>That means Ba is likely to be in the .32 to .33 range whenever QL finally gets around to publishing it. The comparison isn't perfect because I don't have the whole burn curve and I don't have the exact granular make-up and case fill rate precisely matching. But, It also maybe gives me some insight into something else. Hodgdons is trying with Winchester to come up with a temperature insensitive substitute for RETUMBO cause they are worried about future supply from ADI in Australia. That's a little bit of an intuitive leap, but it could well be so! Seems logical to me.........</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Veteran, post: 2825528, member: 118038"] Well, in curiousity, I took QL and I took the published load data from Winchester for 300 WM for the 200 Gr AB Nosler and I looked at the Burn rate chart which shows Staball HD in between Retumbo and IMR 8133 on Burn rate and I input a 24 inch bbl, COL of 3.34, for the 200 gr bullet, .308 caliber, and 80.5 grains, max load published for this set up and I tried to match the pressure of 59,200 and the MV of 2845 published by Winchester for Staball HD by varying Ba (burn rate). What I'm sorta concluding is that it appears that Staball HD is closer to Retumbo than to IMR8133 on Ba factor. That means Ba is likely to be in the .32 to .33 range whenever QL finally gets around to publishing it. The comparison isn't perfect because I don't have the whole burn curve and I don't have the exact granular make-up and case fill rate precisely matching. But, It also maybe gives me some insight into something else. Hodgdons is trying with Winchester to come up with a temperature insensitive substitute for RETUMBO cause they are worried about future supply from ADI in Australia. That's a little bit of an intuitive leap, but it could well be so! Seems logical to me......... [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Reloading
Slower Burning Powders ranked numerically by burn rate
Top