True blue
- Thread starter stemoo01
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Texas
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
Not just an additive in blackpowder, it is the oxidizer required for the reaction since neither of the other components can provide their own oxygen. Not so with smokeless powder using nitrocellulose and/or nitroglycerin, in that case it is provides a source of oxygen before the gases exit the barrel and find the oxygen they need. Your opinion on versatility is about the same as all your others.
I like the barley idea, I'm going to do that for sure.
So I'm about to load my first true blue for 45acp, behind a 230 grain rn fmj x-treme bullet.
Only thing is that the minimum load from ramshot is 800FPS. That's ok for now but I'd like to make some at around 720FPS later on.
Can it be loaded that light safely?
Only thing is that the minimum load from ramshot is 800FPS. That's ok for now but I'd like to make some at around 720FPS later on.
Can it be loaded that light safely?
True Blue will work better from mid-range and up in .45 ACP, but there's no safety issue at all in using Start Charges.
Can't remember what X-Treme recommends, jacketed or plated data but Western lists both using the SIERRA 230 gr. FMJ and the Berry's 230 gr. RN. Try one out and see how it works out. BTW, Lyman's data is fairly similar with a Start Charge of 6.4 grs. for the SPEER 230 gr. TMJ for 804 FPS from a 5" test barrel. The Max Charge is 7.2 grs. for 871 FPS @ 16,000 CUP using an OACL of 1.275" (SAAMI Max). Western loaded the SIERRA 230 gr. FMJ .2 grs. higher.
I don't load FMJ and tend to use data for the SIERRA 230 gr. FMJ in absence of specific JHP data. Lyman's data is pretty consistent with what I chronograph allowing for the slight velocity loss from a 4.5" barrel. Western's data seems right-on as well, they just loaded a bit warmer than Lyman. Not to worry since the Lyman load ran 16,000 CUP while the SAAMI limit is 19,900 CUP.
If you want to get the load well below 800 FPS you might want to try WST or something similar V-V N320 or its Vectan equivalent Ba 9 1/2.
So now you understand that it's part of the combustion process rather than a FLASH DETERRENT as you stated in post #18?
Are you in the ammo business? Really?
Here's the deal friend, post envy/ego is about the last thing that benefits those needing help and I've seen more of it than I'd like to. Unfortunately, a bit too much from Class 6 FFL holders.
So let me extend to you this invitation. If you see me state something incorrectly, I expect you or anyone else who catches it to correct it. I promise I'll do the same.
You can take my posts with a grain of whatever suits you, but becoming adversarial because you've had a couple of things now, being pointed out as less than factual, kinda smacks as someone being more interested in perceived status than the overall betterment of handloading.
If it's a matter of you not liking my politics, TS! This is the ammo & reloading subforum, not the political section.
Actually, your politics have nothing to do with my responses, it is your rambling nature that never address an issue directly. I try not to be overbearing but you appear to be one of the animals that must be led by the reins to the water and then dunked in to get a drink. Let's talk a little chemistry first since you seem to know something but since you ramble, it is hard to tell. I didn't get my master's in chemistry but I have spent a bit of time with a few good books on the subject. I'll admit my knowledge isn't perfect but referencing a few of those like The Preparatory Manual of Explosives and The Chemistry of Powder and Explosives sitting here next to me, my understanding is as follows.
1) Nitrocellulose and Nitroglycerin do not need an oxidizer to burn, or more properly deflagrate in the former and detonate in the latter. In other words, nitrocellulose, gun cotton, can deflagrate by itself
2) Blackpowder, which potassium nitrate is a main ingredient, not an additive, consists of fuel (sulfur and charcoal typically) and an oxidizer, potassium nitrate. To be clear, a main ingredient in this case means at least 50% of black powder is potassium nitrate, which for reference True Blue contains less than 1.5% potassium nitrate.
3) Most deflagration occurs with a fuel (also called a combustible) and oxidizer (also called a reducing agent). Notice that in #1 nitrocellulose doesn't require an oxidizer because it contains enough oxygen to support the reduction reaction itself
4) With blackpowder, the combustibles, when exposed to heat, would not result in the reaction you want, the oxidizer must be present for deflagration to occur.
5) Just to cover my bases, propellants can detonate under certain conditions, usually related to geometry and detonation is a distinctly different oxidation reaction.
6) Black powder can detonate, but with a velocity around 400m/s it is not in the same class as explosives (TNT, RDX, picric acid, etc) where 1000m/s is considered the floor for the difference between detonation and deflagration
Now that we are clear on a couple of things that you rambled about, let's put them together to support my points.
1) True Blue contains potassium nitrate
2) It is NOT a main ingredient, it is an additive
3) It is not required for the propellant to work
4) Many other powders, double and single base, do not contain it
5) Its work is done during the deflagration stage not combustion
Why is that important to flash?
1) Flash occurs when oxygen starved gas exits the barrel and encounters a relatively oxygen rich environment, in other words air, and combines with that oxygen to produce heat and flash that most term muzzle flash
2) Combustion, which is like deflagration, is a non-violent reaction where the oxidizer is always air, usually produces heat and light
3) Just to point out your technical inaccuracy when "schooling" me on the "combustion process", smokeless powder does not undergo a combustion process, it is deflagration
4) Further schooling, potassium nitrate cannot be part of a combustion process since combustion, by definition, is when the air is the oxidizer and therefore that rules out potassium nitrate being involved as an oxidizer in the process
5) The gases from deflagration, then produce flash in the open air, in this case I'm referring to the secondary flash to be technical, there is a primary one too that I'm not discussing but could if you'd like
6) The size of the flash will depends on many factors but one of the important ones will be the amount of fuel rich gas exiting the barrel and their heat (which the combustion process that produces flash in this case relies on)
7) The addition of an oxidizer to the deflagration process should reduce the amount of fuel rich gas in #5 and thus lessen the flash at the end of the process
So, why do I say that True Blue is flash suppressed compared to Power Pistol? Both are double base powders containing nitrocellulose and nitroglycerin but only True Blue adds potassium nitrate. That addition should help suppress flash by reducing the amount of fuel rich gas that will produces muzzle flash. Therefore, compared to Power Pistol, its flash is suppressed or dettered by an additive. That is what I said in post #18 and my reasoning behind stating it in more than a sentence, "friend".
While I admit that is different from flash suppression that is carried out using additives like potassium salts which also produce the desired effect. Some examples of those salts are potassium chloride or carbonate in case you are interested. Their function, and I haven't spent much time referencing this in literature, is not as an oxidizer during the deflagration process but as inhibitors to the hydrogen-oxygen combustion during secondary flash or catalysts for different reactions that do not produce flash. As a side not those salts do reduce flash at the expense of smoke, which may or may not be desirable. Regardless, potassium nitrate is an additive and it does reduce flash, which was also well documented by the Army in tests on reducing secondary effects in artillery shells in the 70s. While some may consider only the of salts like those mentioned above as flash deterrents, I do not as explained above.
Now that I’ve been pretty specific in supporting my case on flash suppression, which by the way if you check the MSDS on Power Pistol you’ll note it does NOT contain anything that I am aware of with my knowledge level that would result in flash suppression like in the case I have made for True Blue. My position is predicated on what knowledge we can glean from the MSDS sheets since I don’t have access to the exact chemical formulae for any powder that we are discussing. If you have the exact formulae, please post them because that might very well throw cold water on my position.
As far as your opinions that I take with a grain of salt, let me expound on that subject. You, referencing me using the offensive term “buddy”, try to take me to task for saying that Power pistol is as versatile as True Blue. Since opinions are based on internal standards, I cannot have the same criteria for my opinion as you do without us getting into a very specific discussion which as I have pointed out is difficult with your rambling methodology.
Your example of versatility is getting single digit SD in 45ACP and the ability to load the same powder in 454 Casull. You are right, a powder that can do both is versatile, but do you know what? I don’t care because True Blue does not deliver performance that most consumers, remember my business is making ammunition, want out of their 454. Enforcer, for example, will deliver about 200FPS more than True Blue, at 10k psi lower than True Blue. Those are straight out of Ramshot’s (Western’s) data and not my results or data. That’s not even comparing True Blue to superior powders for the 454 caliber outside of Ramshot's offerings. Now, go into the market selling a load 200FPS slower than your competitors and tell me how much 454 Casull you sell versus Double Tap or Buffalo Bore. Let me know when you go out of business so I can buy your equipment, “friend”.
My posts have nothing to do with envy or ego, when I said that Power Pistol was as versatile as True Blue it was referencing the cartridges that I thought the OP was concerned with like 9mm, 40S&W, and 45ACP. The same cartridges I consider True Blue and Power Pistol appropriate for loading. In almost any cartridge but 454 Casull, which you pulled out of thin air, Power Pistol and True Blue are great powders and very similar in their ability to produce good velocity at safe pressure. That’s just my opinion based on my own criteria after testing both in many cartridges to find what I believe to be the best load for my needs, both personal and professional.
I offered my opinion as a help, not to push up points as a Class 06 FFL holder, which by the way I do not hold and is of no relevance in this discussion except for probably explaining your motivation for snarky responses to my posts. I've opened my shop to multiple members here before to help them learn to load at zero benefit to me. I've sold components at cost to people on this forum when they couldn't get them elsewhere at zero benefit to me. I've helped members on this forum setup their loading presses so that they would stop buying ammunition from me and load it themselves. What have you done lately for members of this fourm other than try to discredit my posts here?
I've rarely, if ever to my knowledge outside this post right now, directly said that I even own an ammunition business. I prefer not to because it invites responses from people who enjoy the one-upmanship games you seem to want to play and I'm not on this forum to promote what I do professionally. If you want to extend a branch, that's fine but following it up with a TS statement is hardly what I would consider good faith.
Lastly, not to be one-sided, I did type once that Ramshot/Accurate/Western "manufactured", I should have said "packaged and distributed" but since most people in these types of forums don't care that PB Clermont, ADI, St. Marks, Explosia, or any of the many other companies who actually manufacture the powder that Western/Accurate/Ramshot/Hodgdon/Wincheter/Olin/Whoever distributes to them. I'll give you that one but understanding the chemistry of smokeless powder deflagration, not combustion as you called it, has little to do with the safe manufacture and sale of ammunition. It helps, but it is hardly vital to the business.
1) Nitrocellulose and Nitroglycerin do not need an oxidizer to burn, or more properly deflagrate in the former and detonate in the latter. In other words, nitrocellulose, gun cotton, can deflagrate by itself
2) Blackpowder, which potassium nitrate is a main ingredient, not an additive, consists of fuel (sulfur and charcoal typically) and an oxidizer, potassium nitrate. To be clear, a main ingredient in this case means at least 50% of black powder is potassium nitrate, which for reference True Blue contains less than 1.5% potassium nitrate.
3) Most deflagration occurs with a fuel (also called a combustible) and oxidizer (also called a reducing agent). Notice that in #1 nitrocellulose doesn't require an oxidizer because it contains enough oxygen to support the reduction reaction itself
4) With blackpowder, the combustibles, when exposed to heat, would not result in the reaction you want, the oxidizer must be present for deflagration to occur.
5) Just to cover my bases, propellants can detonate under certain conditions, usually related to geometry and detonation is a distinctly different oxidation reaction.
6) Black powder can detonate, but with a velocity around 400m/s it is not in the same class as explosives (TNT, RDX, picric acid, etc) where 1000m/s is considered the floor for the difference between detonation and deflagration
Now that we are clear on a couple of things that you rambled about, let's put them together to support my points.
1) True Blue contains potassium nitrate
2) It is NOT a main ingredient, it is an additive
3) It is not required for the propellant to work
4) Many other powders, double and single base, do not contain it
5) Its work is done during the deflagration stage not combustion
Why is that important to flash?
1) Flash occurs when oxygen starved gas exits the barrel and encounters a relatively oxygen rich environment, in other words air, and combines with that oxygen to produce heat and flash that most term muzzle flash
2) Combustion, which is like deflagration, is a non-violent reaction where the oxidizer is always air, usually produces heat and light
3) Just to point out your technical inaccuracy when "schooling" me on the "combustion process", smokeless powder does not undergo a combustion process, it is deflagration
4) Further schooling, potassium nitrate cannot be part of a combustion process since combustion, by definition, is when the air is the oxidizer and therefore that rules out potassium nitrate being involved as an oxidizer in the process
5) The gases from deflagration, then produce flash in the open air, in this case I'm referring to the secondary flash to be technical, there is a primary one too that I'm not discussing but could if you'd like
6) The size of the flash will depends on many factors but one of the important ones will be the amount of fuel rich gas exiting the barrel and their heat (which the combustion process that produces flash in this case relies on)
7) The addition of an oxidizer to the deflagration process should reduce the amount of fuel rich gas in #5 and thus lessen the flash at the end of the process
So, why do I say that True Blue is flash suppressed compared to Power Pistol? Both are double base powders containing nitrocellulose and nitroglycerin but only True Blue adds potassium nitrate. That addition should help suppress flash by reducing the amount of fuel rich gas that will produces muzzle flash. Therefore, compared to Power Pistol, its flash is suppressed or dettered by an additive. That is what I said in post #18 and my reasoning behind stating it in more than a sentence, "friend".
While I admit that is different from flash suppression that is carried out using additives like potassium salts which also produce the desired effect. Some examples of those salts are potassium chloride or carbonate in case you are interested. Their function, and I haven't spent much time referencing this in literature, is not as an oxidizer during the deflagration process but as inhibitors to the hydrogen-oxygen combustion during secondary flash or catalysts for different reactions that do not produce flash. As a side not those salts do reduce flash at the expense of smoke, which may or may not be desirable. Regardless, potassium nitrate is an additive and it does reduce flash, which was also well documented by the Army in tests on reducing secondary effects in artillery shells in the 70s. While some may consider only the of salts like those mentioned above as flash deterrents, I do not as explained above.
Now that I’ve been pretty specific in supporting my case on flash suppression, which by the way if you check the MSDS on Power Pistol you’ll note it does NOT contain anything that I am aware of with my knowledge level that would result in flash suppression like in the case I have made for True Blue. My position is predicated on what knowledge we can glean from the MSDS sheets since I don’t have access to the exact chemical formulae for any powder that we are discussing. If you have the exact formulae, please post them because that might very well throw cold water on my position.
As far as your opinions that I take with a grain of salt, let me expound on that subject. You, referencing me using the offensive term “buddy”, try to take me to task for saying that Power pistol is as versatile as True Blue. Since opinions are based on internal standards, I cannot have the same criteria for my opinion as you do without us getting into a very specific discussion which as I have pointed out is difficult with your rambling methodology.
Your example of versatility is getting single digit SD in 45ACP and the ability to load the same powder in 454 Casull. You are right, a powder that can do both is versatile, but do you know what? I don’t care because True Blue does not deliver performance that most consumers, remember my business is making ammunition, want out of their 454. Enforcer, for example, will deliver about 200FPS more than True Blue, at 10k psi lower than True Blue. Those are straight out of Ramshot’s (Western’s) data and not my results or data. That’s not even comparing True Blue to superior powders for the 454 caliber outside of Ramshot's offerings. Now, go into the market selling a load 200FPS slower than your competitors and tell me how much 454 Casull you sell versus Double Tap or Buffalo Bore. Let me know when you go out of business so I can buy your equipment, “friend”.
My posts have nothing to do with envy or ego, when I said that Power Pistol was as versatile as True Blue it was referencing the cartridges that I thought the OP was concerned with like 9mm, 40S&W, and 45ACP. The same cartridges I consider True Blue and Power Pistol appropriate for loading. In almost any cartridge but 454 Casull, which you pulled out of thin air, Power Pistol and True Blue are great powders and very similar in their ability to produce good velocity at safe pressure. That’s just my opinion based on my own criteria after testing both in many cartridges to find what I believe to be the best load for my needs, both personal and professional.
I offered my opinion as a help, not to push up points as a Class 06 FFL holder, which by the way I do not hold and is of no relevance in this discussion except for probably explaining your motivation for snarky responses to my posts. I've opened my shop to multiple members here before to help them learn to load at zero benefit to me. I've sold components at cost to people on this forum when they couldn't get them elsewhere at zero benefit to me. I've helped members on this forum setup their loading presses so that they would stop buying ammunition from me and load it themselves. What have you done lately for members of this fourm other than try to discredit my posts here?
I've rarely, if ever to my knowledge outside this post right now, directly said that I even own an ammunition business. I prefer not to because it invites responses from people who enjoy the one-upmanship games you seem to want to play and I'm not on this forum to promote what I do professionally. If you want to extend a branch, that's fine but following it up with a TS statement is hardly what I would consider good faith.
Lastly, not to be one-sided, I did type once that Ramshot/Accurate/Western "manufactured", I should have said "packaged and distributed" but since most people in these types of forums don't care that PB Clermont, ADI, St. Marks, Explosia, or any of the many other companies who actually manufacture the powder that Western/Accurate/Ramshot/Hodgdon/Wincheter/Olin/Whoever distributes to them. I'll give you that one but understanding the chemistry of smokeless powder deflagration, not combustion as you called it, has little to do with the safe manufacture and sale of ammunition. It helps, but it is hardly vital to the business.
Rant's? How the hell did you get that last post in under the 10K word limit?
Whatever excuse you want to list for calling the powder suppliers, manufacturers, well I'd already forgotten about that one. Nonetheless, it does kinda point out the burr under your saddle.
To be completely honest, I didn't read your entire last post because you've already shown a proclivity for the CYA syndrome.
Specific to this thread where my aim was constructive criticism rather than breaking anyone's ego, I simply stated that PP is not as versatile as True Blue. The OP, whom I don't mean to drag into this, pointed out that he is less than enthralled with PP's flash. Then there's the matter of True Blue being nearly twice as dense and far finer grained, well, that might mean something to those who would care to make a direct comparison. If they load on a progressive press, those differences might be even more significant.
To make it easier on everyone, contact Western yourself to see if they state that True Blue is chemically treated for low flash. There is a specific category for powder coatings in the chemical composition of gunpowder. The addition or use of potassium nitrate is not one of them. Powders stated as being chemically treated for low flash will describe a chemical coating in most cases, depending on how much info the powder supplier yields.
It is not uncommon for very fine grained and dense sphericals to yield low flash where the physical size of the granules is part of the equation in controlling flash, i.e. True Blue, AA#7, or the former Vectan SP-2. All double-based powders where nitroglycerin is added to a nitrocellulose base. All of Alliants flake powders are double-based where PP has has a higher amount of nitroglycerin added than most. Without a chemical coating as in the case of BE-86, the physical size of the flake propellant can't come close to controlling flash compared to doube-based sphericals.
Then we have the V-V single-based, fine cut extruded powders that control flash better without a need for chemical coatings. Both from the chemistry of nitrocellulose as well as small physical size. One reason I thought that NobelSport/Vectan producing powder like Ba 9 1/2 that appears identical to V-V N320 while Ba 7 1/2 being identical data wise to N350 might be worthwhile information to handloaders in general.
Specific to True Blue, I've pointed out 2 perfect examples of extreme pressure uniformity characteristics with the 5.7 X 28mm which is why True Blue was developed in the first place for FNH, and then the 7.62 X 25mm Tokerev. Other powders might be capable of higher velocity, but none more pressure stable. The truly remarkable thing about True Blue is that it doesn't matter if it's loaded in a low pressure cartridge like the .45 ACP or even .380 up to higher pressure with the large magnums where the .454 Casull still has the highest pressure max.
Check and see if any of these cartridges are loaded as warm with PP as they are with True Blue. As far as the .45 ACP, saying that PP is marginally good is one thing. It's far from being the choice for target loads or self-defense loads. I'm completely prepared to list actual chronographed data and statistics vs. mere speculation.
Simply stated, anyone who would use or recommend PP for defense loads . . . it's like the comedian said, they need a sign! A 2 word sign with the first letter being D and the second A.
Glad you Googled, but you should have done that before stating the Potassium Nitrate is added to gun powder to control flash.
Whatever excuse you want to list for calling the powder suppliers, manufacturers, well I'd already forgotten about that one. Nonetheless, it does kinda point out the burr under your saddle.
To be completely honest, I didn't read your entire last post because you've already shown a proclivity for the CYA syndrome.
Specific to this thread where my aim was constructive criticism rather than breaking anyone's ego, I simply stated that PP is not as versatile as True Blue. The OP, whom I don't mean to drag into this, pointed out that he is less than enthralled with PP's flash. Then there's the matter of True Blue being nearly twice as dense and far finer grained, well, that might mean something to those who would care to make a direct comparison. If they load on a progressive press, those differences might be even more significant.
To make it easier on everyone, contact Western yourself to see if they state that True Blue is chemically treated for low flash. There is a specific category for powder coatings in the chemical composition of gunpowder. The addition or use of potassium nitrate is not one of them. Powders stated as being chemically treated for low flash will describe a chemical coating in most cases, depending on how much info the powder supplier yields.
It is not uncommon for very fine grained and dense sphericals to yield low flash where the physical size of the granules is part of the equation in controlling flash, i.e. True Blue, AA#7, or the former Vectan SP-2. All double-based powders where nitroglycerin is added to a nitrocellulose base. All of Alliants flake powders are double-based where PP has has a higher amount of nitroglycerin added than most. Without a chemical coating as in the case of BE-86, the physical size of the flake propellant can't come close to controlling flash compared to doube-based sphericals.
Then we have the V-V single-based, fine cut extruded powders that control flash better without a need for chemical coatings. Both from the chemistry of nitrocellulose as well as small physical size. One reason I thought that NobelSport/Vectan producing powder like Ba 9 1/2 that appears identical to V-V N320 while Ba 7 1/2 being identical data wise to N350 might be worthwhile information to handloaders in general.
Specific to True Blue, I've pointed out 2 perfect examples of extreme pressure uniformity characteristics with the 5.7 X 28mm which is why True Blue was developed in the first place for FNH, and then the 7.62 X 25mm Tokerev. Other powders might be capable of higher velocity, but none more pressure stable. The truly remarkable thing about True Blue is that it doesn't matter if it's loaded in a low pressure cartridge like the .45 ACP or even .380 up to higher pressure with the large magnums where the .454 Casull still has the highest pressure max.
Check and see if any of these cartridges are loaded as warm with PP as they are with True Blue. As far as the .45 ACP, saying that PP is marginally good is one thing. It's far from being the choice for target loads or self-defense loads. I'm completely prepared to list actual chronographed data and statistics vs. mere speculation.
Simply stated, anyone who would use or recommend PP for defense loads . . . it's like the comedian said, they need a sign! A 2 word sign with the first letter being D and the second A.
Glad you Googled, but you should have done that before stating the Potassium Nitrate is added to gun powder to control flash.
Last edited:
Enough said, it explains you, your off-topic rambling, and a misunderstanding of the deterrent coatings on powders. Look in the mirror if you want to see what your "comedian" was talking about and keep Google to yourself, I prefer real references from knowledgeable authors.
I liked the true blue.
The finer and seemingly less sticky (when emptying the powder hopper) grain was nicer than the power pistol, it shot really well & whilst I've not cleaned the pistols seemed to be shooting pretty clean. There wasn't as big of a flash, pretty close to factory loads.
Glad I bought some & will likely use it again in future.
However, I would like to be able to load closer to 720FPS for .45. You could probably guess from that rather specific number that I'm looking to load for 165 power factor, 125 for 9mm would be great, but that's for another day.
So it sounds like WST, V-V N320 or Vectan Ba 9 1/2 is where I should look. Any differences between these? Or other suggestions?
The finer and seemingly less sticky (when emptying the powder hopper) grain was nicer than the power pistol, it shot really well & whilst I've not cleaned the pistols seemed to be shooting pretty clean. There wasn't as big of a flash, pretty close to factory loads.
Glad I bought some & will likely use it again in future.
However, I would like to be able to load closer to 720FPS for .45. You could probably guess from that rather specific number that I'm looking to load for 165 power factor, 125 for 9mm would be great, but that's for another day.
So it sounds like WST, V-V N320 or Vectan Ba 9 1/2 is where I should look. Any differences between these? Or other suggestions?
First, I had a few beers when I saw your thesis and had little interest in reading it at that time. Now that I have, looks pretty much like a high school book report on a single subject with incorrect conclusions made by the writer rather than actual fact. Trying to mince words like a main ingredient excludes it from being an additive to the chemical process, not sure I get that one.
"Many other powders don't contain it." Speculation where you have no idea about which powders do contain potassium nitrate and those that don't.
Somehow you got it in your one dimensional, elementary focus on deflagration that it is not part of the combustion process.
To state that you didn't get your "Masters" in chemistry is crystal clear. What is not is how you arrived at your conclusions that are nothing but speculation that you thought would get you out of the hole you had previously dug for yourself. So what is your "Masters" in, basketweaving?
As far as the single digit SD defense loads I've made, I'm more than glad to share them with anyone interested and they come in more flavors than just .45 ACP. I have one 9 X 19mm load with a 125 gr. RN-SWC poly-coated bullet over True Blue that gives an SD of 3! .357 Short Barreled Magnum loads where I test with a 2 3/4" Speed-Six? Can do.
I don't typically reproduce an exact data load, but when I started using 200 gr. XTPs, it just so happened that Ramshot gave a load for it in the #3 manual using True Blue, FED 150, WIN case @ 1.220" OACL where Standard Deviation was listed at 6. I replicated the load except for the slightly longer OACL of 1.225" and brass with mixed headstamps. SD was still 6! For my defense loads I increased the charge by .2 grs. while SD only rose to 7.
Furthermore, how did you or could you arrive at a conclusion that PP (Practice Powder) is as versatile as True Blue. I wouldn't have disputed that statement without the observations I've made since Ramshot powders were introduced. Likewise, I was using PP since right after it was introduced where the ads said it had been used to load MILLIONS of 9mm rounds for the US Military. First time I shot a load at night, all I could think was, Oh my God, I hope not! Hopefully they were using a chemical coating to control flash with the military load! Talk about giving away your position while screwing up your visual acuity. Now I'll speculate because IMO, it was the BE-86 version that Alliant finally saw fit to release.
It also seems that your experience with PP vs True Blue would run around 100 to 1, and the fact they you evidently never noticed the great disparity in muzzle flash, or bulk density while True Blue is easily less than 1/10th the granule size of PP, combine that with the bulk density of .935 grams/CC and even you should be able to figure out which is best for metering, and especially in progressive machines.
Your posts remind me of the old saying, "if you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with BULLSHIT."
Last edited:
stemoo, you probably know that when loading for power factor you must include a margin of error that can be based on the Standard Deviation of your load. So, for a 165 PF you'll likely be loading closer to 170 PF where a single digit SD may keep your average velocity above the 165 minimum. At 170 PF with a 200 gr. RNFP or SWC, cast or polycoated is what I use, you'll need 850 FPS average velocity. True Blue can be used for that depending on how good the SD is from YOUR pistol. 9 x 19mm, not so much for 125 PF. The 9mm load I mentioned that gives an SD of 3 was with the Blue Bullet's 125 gr. RN-SWC (discontinued but available from SNS Casting) used 6.2 grs. of True Blue, a CCI-500 primer and an OACL of 1.142" that you'll need to confirm is not too long for your chamber/throat/leaded, etc. 10 rounds over the chrono showed avg velocity at 1122 FPS with an Extreme Spread of 12 and an SD of 3. PF is 140 and maybe higher than you'd like. It is, however, a tackdriver!
I'm not going to recommend WST for 9mm simply because Hodgdon says not to while at the same time using it throughout the data for loads in .40 S&W. Both are 35,000 PSI cartridges. That's not to say I haven't done it and many comp shooters continue to use it with cast and poly-coated bullets. On occasion when friends and relatives start out shooting handguns or get a compact for CC, I make light loads for them. One such 9 X 19mm load is 4.7 grs. of WST with the aforementioned Blue Bullets 125 gr. RN-SWC, avg. velocity is 1027 with an SD of 13 using an OACL of 1.142"/29mm. PF is 128 and this was simply a trial load. At 128 PF you'd definitely want a lower SD than 13. Increasing the charge slightly should put you at or below 10.
V-V N320 and Ba 9 1/2 are identical powders according to the data from Lapua/V-V and Vectan. N 320 runs around $37/# at Grafs while 9 1/2 is $24.99 for 1.1# or $22.72/#. There are a number of powders that work well, but few are more popular with comp shooters than N 320 and since you can get 9 1/2 for $14.28/# less, that's a pretty easy choice for me. Other powders worth considering are ZIP, W231 and AA#2 that's a very lofty spherical like WST. Ramshot Competition is another, but I haven't used any as yet. All of these powders are sphericals with the exception of V-V N320 and Ba 9 1/2. They are fine cut, single-based extruded powders. I'll definitely be trying 9 1/2 as well as 7 1/2 which is the equivalent of V-V N350. I've been using V-V 3N37 for about 25 years and continue to keep some around. Performance wise, there's not enough difference between 3N37 and N350/Ba 7 1/2 to sneeze at.
As an example with 124 gr. JHPs that might be competition worthy, the NOSLER 124 gr. JHP over 5.0 grs. of W231 gives me an avg velocity of 1040 FPS, ES of 15 and SD of 5 using a slightly shorter OACL of 1.122"/28.5mm. 10 rounds were chrono'd from my 4.14" SR9 and PF is 129. The Montana Gold 124 gr. JHP over 4.8 grs. of ZIP gave me a 10 round avg. of 1060 FPS, ES of 32 with an SD of 8. OACL is 1.142"/29mm. PF is just above 131. I'd probably try that one for minor PF.
I've also loaded the ZERO conical shape 125 gr. JHP and the Precision Delta 124 gr. JHP. None of these bullets including the NOSLER should be used in defense loads. Expansion is slight or non existent with agood bit higher velocity. These are strictly comp bullets, IMO and you can add the 125 gr. Hornady Hap to the list as that's what it is intended for.
Also, Graf & Son's is the US Importer/Dealer for Vectan. As I've mentioned before, this is a recent development and so far they've only had 1.1# cannisters and they're sold out of all of the Vectan pistol powders last I checked. Hopefully larger cannisters will come in the future.
Last edited:
I'd not considered 200gr over true blue. Interesting idea, might give it a go at some point. I believe the reason for settling on 230 grain was due to having a few issue's with factory 200 & the opportunity for less felt recoil at the same PF (you're right, my plan was to load a little above 165)
So it looks like I'm gonna need to find some vectan ba 9 1/2.
Apologizes for the newby question, but am I right in assuming 'sphericals' to look like power pistol & 'fine cut extruded' to be similar to true blue?
So it looks like I'm gonna need to find some vectan ba 9 1/2.
Apologizes for the newby question, but am I right in assuming 'sphericals' to look like power pistol & 'fine cut extruded' to be similar to true blue?
No apology necessary. Power Pistol and all of the Alliant double-based powders are cut flake. As an example, Power Pistol is a larger flake cut version of Bullseye and how it derives its slower burn rate.
I use the term spherical to stay honest, some simply call them "ball powders", but since the "ball powders" are most often flattened, spherical is the correct term. If you take a hard look at True Blue, and its granules are so small that you may need magnification, you'll notice that the granules come close to being truly round. Another Ramshot powder I like and use in 9 X 19mm with 124 gr. JHPs is Silhouette. It is also a spherical. Not quite as dense as True Blue with larger granules. Large enough that you can see that they are flattened. W231 and ZIP are similar and WST is one of the lowest density sphericals I'm aware of. THat can be a positive for the relatively light charges in .45 ACP because of greater case-fill.
The V-V N300 series are fine-cut, single-based extruded propellants as are the Vectan counterparts. Single-based simply means that the powders are made from nitrocellulose with no nitroglycerin added. Most are extremely pressure stable, but that improves as the burn rate slows down, i.e. N350 is more stable than N320. My fascination with 3N37 comes from Vihta Vouri calling it a "Match Grade" propellant and the same is true for 3N38 that's just slightly slower burning. They state that these powders are not true N300 series powders, and as best I can tell, that would be from nitroglycerin being added to the nitrocellulose. For high velocity loads in 9 X 19mm, .40 S&W and other high pressure cartridges, N350/ Ba 7 1/2 is a very good powder choice.
If you load magnum revolver rounds, Ba 6 1/2 = N110 where the only reason I haven't used it before was strictly price. I will be trying Ba 6 1/2. Ba 7 1/2 for high velocity 9 X 19mm and 9 1/2 for light poly-coated bullet loads in .45 ACP.
I won't be giving up True Blue anytime soon, though. IMO, there is not another double-based powder in existence that can do so many things so well.
I turned on my DB filter so I'm not sure why you would go to something like Vectan. If you didn't like flash on Power Pistol, WST (and WSF) will probably not make you happy. With a 200 and 165PF, you would need 825FPS (check my math). With a 5 PF cushion, 850FPS. This is some older data but you could go in the 7.5 zone.
I don't have any 230s running that slow with True Blue, I would use a powder like Titegroup, HP-28, or even Bullseye for something that slow. The former pair would give you something close
You can go down, but ensure that you get consistent ejection and cycling with your gun. HP-38 is position sensitive, it isn't awful in 45ACP but be aware of that if you choose to try it. Titegroup would serve you really well. Titegroup would be a great powder for what you are doing, it meters extemely well, is very position insensitive, and has a low charge weight for the velocity it provides.
Even doing as low as 4.2gr, which is slower than you want, Titegroup still keeps the SD under 20. My notes say that it was very mechanical and weak but cycled that 1911 without an issue. That was a very modest 1911, so the fact that it cycled consistently was a good sign.
On the sphericals question, there are a couple of formats for powder. Ball Powder is a trademark of Olin and so others use the term spherical to describe powder made that way. They look like little balls. Then you have flattened balls or sphericals, where they "roll" them out after they are formed in the ball process. They look like irregular circles.
Extruded, whether fine cut, regular, super short cut, is literally extruded like Play-Doh through the squisher when you were a kid. The extruded shape is cut into the sticks, maybe perforated depending on the use. IMR rifle powders jump to mind right away, they are little sticks or varying length and diameter. Flakes are thin cuts of an extruded powder, 800-X jumps to mind when I think of a flake powder, looks like little wafers. Bullseye is an example of a really small flake, hard to tell it isn't a ball but it predates the ball powder process by a few decades IIRC.
| 45ACP | TRUE BLUE | 7.5 | . 451 200GR IFP - MGB | LPP - #300 - CCI | GLOCK 21 (45ACP) | OF - 45ACP - GENERIC | 842.3 | 9.1 | 33.3 |
| 45ACP | TRUE BLUE | 7.8 | . 451 200GR IFP - MGB | LPP - #300 - CCI | GLOCK 21 (45ACP) | OF - 45ACP - GENERIC | 864.3 | 8.4 | 26.6 |
I don't have any 230s running that slow with True Blue, I would use a powder like Titegroup, HP-28, or even Bullseye for something that slow. The former pair would give you something close
| 45ACP | TITEGROUP | 4.8 | .451 230GR FMJ - ZERO | LPP - #150 - FEDERAL | FIRESTORM 1911 (45ACP) | OF - 45ACP - GENERIC | 761 | 14.6 | 48.4 |
| 45ACP | TITEGROUP | 4.7 | .451 230GR FMJ - ZERO | LPP - #150 - FEDERAL | GLOCK 21 (45ACP) | OF - 45ACP - GENERIC | 762.7 | 8.9 | 25.2 |
| 45ACP | TITEGROUP | 4.7 | .451 230GR FMJ - ZERO | LPP - #300 - CCI | GLOCK 21 (45ACP) | OF - 45ACP - GENERIC | 766.3 | 11.6 | 31 |
| 45ACP | TITEGROUP | 4.8 | .451 230GR FMJ - ZERO | LPP - #150 - FEDERAL | GLOCK 21 (45ACP) | OF - 45ACP - GENERIC | 766.7 | 13.6 | 49.2 |
| 45ACP | HP-38 | 5.4 | .451 230GR FMJ - ZERO | LPMP - NCLPM - WOLF | FIRESTORM 1911 (45ACP) | OF - 45ACP - GENERIC | 767.7 | 15.8 | 56.9 |
You can go down, but ensure that you get consistent ejection and cycling with your gun. HP-38 is position sensitive, it isn't awful in 45ACP but be aware of that if you choose to try it. Titegroup would serve you really well. Titegroup would be a great powder for what you are doing, it meters extemely well, is very position insensitive, and has a low charge weight for the velocity it provides.
| 45ACP | TITEGROUP | 4.2 | .451 230GR FMJ - ZERO | LPMP - NCLPM - WOLF | FIRESTORM 1911 (45ACP) | OF - 45ACP - GENERIC | 682 | 18.3 | 55.5 |
Even doing as low as 4.2gr, which is slower than you want, Titegroup still keeps the SD under 20. My notes say that it was very mechanical and weak but cycled that 1911 without an issue. That was a very modest 1911, so the fact that it cycled consistently was a good sign.
On the sphericals question, there are a couple of formats for powder. Ball Powder is a trademark of Olin and so others use the term spherical to describe powder made that way. They look like little balls. Then you have flattened balls or sphericals, where they "roll" them out after they are formed in the ball process. They look like irregular circles.
Extruded, whether fine cut, regular, super short cut, is literally extruded like Play-Doh through the squisher when you were a kid. The extruded shape is cut into the sticks, maybe perforated depending on the use. IMR rifle powders jump to mind right away, they are little sticks or varying length and diameter. Flakes are thin cuts of an extruded powder, 800-X jumps to mind when I think of a flake powder, looks like little wafers. Bullseye is an example of a really small flake, hard to tell it isn't a ball but it predates the ball powder process by a few decades IIRC.
For one thing, V-V N320 has proven exceptional for comp loads skirting the 165 PF as close as possible.
True Blue can definitely be used with 200 gr. cast or poly-coated, the question is how light? Speaking from experience rather than conjecture, I'll list 2 loads with 7.2 grs. of True Blue. With a 200 gr. Cast RNFP loaded to 1.210" OACL, velocity was 839 FPS with an ES of 44 and SD of 13. With the Missouri Bullet's 200 gr. SWC loaded at 1.240", velocity was 911 FPS with an ES of 32 and an SD of 9. Nothing wrong there except for the 182 PF. That's as light as I've loaded witrh True Blue and 200 gr. cast. At 7.4 grs. with a 200 gr. cast RNFP, velocity was 861 FPS with an ES of 39 and an SD of 12, OACL was 1.210".
Not dissimilar than performance with WST. In this case, it's better to load to higher pressure with a slightly fast burner like WST/N320/Ba 9 1/2 than to load DOWN with a powder like WSF. Here's an example of a WST load loaded toward the top end with the Mo. Bullet Co. 200 gr. SWC at 1.240" OACL. At 5.0 grs. of WST velocity was 879 with an ES of 38 and an SD of 9. That would be a PF of 176. Remember, I'm quoting velocities from a 4.5" barrel.
One pretty good True Blue load I have is with the Blue Bullet's 200 gr. poly-coated RNFP. 7.3 grs. produced 874 FPS with an ES of 29 and SD of 9, but you can expect slightly higher velocity from most 5" barrels.
Another WST load that might be the ticket from a 5" barrel is 4.8 grs. with the Bullet Works 200 gr. SWC, again at 1.240" and from my 4.5" SR45. Velocity is 841 FPS, ES is 29 with an SD of 9. That's 168 PF, so if velocity slightly increased from a 5" barrel while maintaining the single-digit SD, might be worth a look if you can find WST. I just ran out.
Deavis is obviously confusing extruded rifle propellants with fine cut extruded, single-based pistol powders. They are as fine cut as the size of some sphericals and calling them "stick" is misleading. I don't know why some people insist on giving "expert" advice when they have so little. Regarding Flash, anyone who would compare WST to Power Pistol hasn't used much WST, and since we're talking about comp loads, what difference would it make anyway. Then, one reason TiteGroup is not commonly used for comp loads is its higher "Heat of Explosion" that produces more smoke with cast bullets and can cause melting of the base in some cases, which of course produces leading.
One thing about True Blue though. Regardless of SD, loads can be exceptionally accurate. I only have 1 target handing on the wall in my office and it's nearly a 1 hole group in the bull fired offhand. That was with the 200 gr. AZ. RNFP loaded with 7.7 grs. @ 1.210" for 891 FPS with an ES of 38 and SD of 13. PF would be 178 which may or may not be ideal for the particular shooter. On the burn temp thing, True Blue happens to be one of the coolest burning handgun powders you can use. That can be confirmed by the QuickLoad program.
So, I don't necessarily want to discourage you from trying True Blue with 200 gr. cast or poly-coated and some comp shooters even prefer 230 gr. cast over 200 gr. cast and claim less felt recoil. I haven't done 230 gr. cast with True Blue, so I can't help you there. You might also want to have a look at what comp shooters are actually doing over at Brian Enos' forum.
True Blue can definitely be used with 200 gr. cast or poly-coated, the question is how light? Speaking from experience rather than conjecture, I'll list 2 loads with 7.2 grs. of True Blue. With a 200 gr. Cast RNFP loaded to 1.210" OACL, velocity was 839 FPS with an ES of 44 and SD of 13. With the Missouri Bullet's 200 gr. SWC loaded at 1.240", velocity was 911 FPS with an ES of 32 and an SD of 9. Nothing wrong there except for the 182 PF. That's as light as I've loaded witrh True Blue and 200 gr. cast. At 7.4 grs. with a 200 gr. cast RNFP, velocity was 861 FPS with an ES of 39 and an SD of 12, OACL was 1.210".
Not dissimilar than performance with WST. In this case, it's better to load to higher pressure with a slightly fast burner like WST/N320/Ba 9 1/2 than to load DOWN with a powder like WSF. Here's an example of a WST load loaded toward the top end with the Mo. Bullet Co. 200 gr. SWC at 1.240" OACL. At 5.0 grs. of WST velocity was 879 with an ES of 38 and an SD of 9. That would be a PF of 176. Remember, I'm quoting velocities from a 4.5" barrel.
One pretty good True Blue load I have is with the Blue Bullet's 200 gr. poly-coated RNFP. 7.3 grs. produced 874 FPS with an ES of 29 and SD of 9, but you can expect slightly higher velocity from most 5" barrels.
Another WST load that might be the ticket from a 5" barrel is 4.8 grs. with the Bullet Works 200 gr. SWC, again at 1.240" and from my 4.5" SR45. Velocity is 841 FPS, ES is 29 with an SD of 9. That's 168 PF, so if velocity slightly increased from a 5" barrel while maintaining the single-digit SD, might be worth a look if you can find WST. I just ran out.
Deavis is obviously confusing extruded rifle propellants with fine cut extruded, single-based pistol powders. They are as fine cut as the size of some sphericals and calling them "stick" is misleading. I don't know why some people insist on giving "expert" advice when they have so little. Regarding Flash, anyone who would compare WST to Power Pistol hasn't used much WST, and since we're talking about comp loads, what difference would it make anyway. Then, one reason TiteGroup is not commonly used for comp loads is its higher "Heat of Explosion" that produces more smoke with cast bullets and can cause melting of the base in some cases, which of course produces leading.
One thing about True Blue though. Regardless of SD, loads can be exceptionally accurate. I only have 1 target handing on the wall in my office and it's nearly a 1 hole group in the bull fired offhand. That was with the 200 gr. AZ. RNFP loaded with 7.7 grs. @ 1.210" for 891 FPS with an ES of 38 and SD of 13. PF would be 178 which may or may not be ideal for the particular shooter. On the burn temp thing, True Blue happens to be one of the coolest burning handgun powders you can use. That can be confirmed by the QuickLoad program.
So, I don't necessarily want to discourage you from trying True Blue with 200 gr. cast or poly-coated and some comp shooters even prefer 230 gr. cast over 200 gr. cast and claim less felt recoil. I haven't done 230 gr. cast with True Blue, so I can't help you there. You might also want to have a look at what comp shooters are actually doing over at Brian Enos' forum.
Last edited:
I almost forgot, for posterity in case anyone wants to follow the logical discussion of flash suppression, here is a more apples to apples comparison of a family of powders.
The MSDS sheets for Bullseye, Power Pistol (Bullseye 84), and BE-86 are all identical except that BE-86 contains two substances at less that 1.5%. The first is potassium nitrate and the second is potassium sulfate. BE-86 is the only one claiming to be flash supressed. There are no sidelines about spherical/ball vs. extruded/flake here, they are all extruded flakes within the same line-up. In this case, compared to True Blue, there is the addition of a potassium salt to the mix, but potassium nitrate is also present. It isn't needed in Bullseye or Power Pistol, so its addition to BE-86 points to part of the strategy for reducing that powder's flash in addition to the potassium sulfate.
The MSDS sheets for Bullseye, Power Pistol (Bullseye 84), and BE-86 are all identical except that BE-86 contains two substances at less that 1.5%. The first is potassium nitrate and the second is potassium sulfate. BE-86 is the only one claiming to be flash supressed. There are no sidelines about spherical/ball vs. extruded/flake here, they are all extruded flakes within the same line-up. In this case, compared to True Blue, there is the addition of a potassium salt to the mix, but potassium nitrate is also present. It isn't needed in Bullseye or Power Pistol, so its addition to BE-86 points to part of the strategy for reducing that powder's flash in addition to the potassium sulfate.
For posterity's sake, post something relevant to this thread. Do we need to be concerned with flash in competition that takes place in daylight?
Again, your post is meaningless due to its irrelevance. Shoot loads at night or at an indoor range. Everything becomes self explanatory at that point.
Something else for posterity's sake: if you make and sell ammunition, it should be avoided like the PLAGUE!
If you want to rebut, post some frickin' real world data instead of your MSDS hyperbole or something copied and pasted. Double-based sphericals like True Blue are nearly twice as dense as as flake.
You don't understand one damn thing you've posted about fine cut extruded. More than likely your actual experience is 0!
I've been burning V-V 3N37 since it first became available in the US around 1990. I've been loading with Ramshot Silhouette since I first learned that it is WAP that Winchester dropped and Ramshot re-introduced as Silhouette. Compare the 2 powders side-by-side and it's hard to tell a visual difference.
Last edited:
Probably not, honestly it's just a preference, unless I'm explicitly trying to make fireballs
.Is there any performance cost to suppressing flash?
That's the problem, I really like true blue but I can't load it low enough with a 230gr projectile, hence the vectan ba 91/2
Sounds like another one to try, not sure I like the sound of mechanical but no harm in giving it a go
Yeah I read something about higher bullet weights having less recoil for the same power factor.
stemoo, WST doesn't come close to giving offensive flash. If it's allowed at your range, it's always a good idea to test your loads at night.
For plinking or comp. type loads I'm not concerned about flash. But, then again, I don't use double-based flake powders. Been there, done that. Since True Blue is nearly twice as dense as power pistol, all you need to do is throw some charges and compare the uniformity of the thrown charges to any other powder you might be considering. I also use 2 very dense and fine grained spherical rifle powders and at around 25 gr. charges, there is less than +/- .1 grain variation meaning there simply is no need to trickle powder charges. In handgun loads where you'll be using lower charges you may see absolutely no charge-weight variations and that can include very dense and fine grained sphericals for magnum handgun loads where you may be throwing similar charges as 5.56mm NATO, somewhere around 25 grs., i.e. .44 Magnum depending on bullet weight.
There is no performance cost with a chemically treated powder like Silhouette. I use it and V-V 3N37 with 124 gr. JHP +P type defense loads in 9 X 19mm. Performance is very similar with maybe a slight advantage going to Silhouette. 3N37 has the advantage if you load 147 gr. JHPs up to +P type velocity. I made such loads for my P-226 that doesn't have chamber-length restictions as some others do. The same is true for my SR9 and I recently got some AA#7 from Western to test. The last I used was the Czech made version and now it's made in the US. I will be doing a project soon to see if there's any difference between the 2 versions. AA#7 is one of the very best for pushing 147 gr. JHPs Super-Sonic. V-V 3N38 shows data for 1207 FPS at STANDARD Pressure with the 147 gr. XTP, but a minimum OACL of 1.142"/29mm is req'd and a good many 9mm pistols do not allow for such lengths. From the testing I've done so far with 124 gr. JHPs, the new American made AA#7 is showing higher velocity which I will try to nail down as far as burn rate between the 2. From everything I've been told, the American made AA#7 is supposed to be an exact duplicate of the former Czech made version. Either way, it's a great powder for high performance 9 X 19mm loads with great accuracy. Right now there are only 3 handgun powders treated specifically to control flash. Ramshot Silhouette, Hodgdon CFE Pistol, both sphericals, and BE-86 which is a double-based flake powder.
I use True Blue in my .45 ACP JHP defense loads and it's exceptional. I've tried Silhouette with fair but not impressive results. I'm getting low on True Blue, so recently when I bought some 230 gr. XTPs, I decided to see if Silhouette might be better suited to the heavier bullet. My targeted velocity was 875 FPS and using an OACL of 1.230", 7.8 grs. of Silhouette chrono'd 878 FPS with an ES of 39 and an SD of 11 for 10 rounds over the chrono. I had previously done expansion and penetration tests at 7.6 grs. and the load passed my requirements while it was evident that the bullet could expand a bit better, hence the bump to 7.8 grs.
Like I said, check out Brian Enos forum, the handloading section specifically, and you'll see what top competitors are using in their handloads. There are actually a good number that work well for loading just above 165 PF. Personally, I can't tell much difference between shooting 230s and 200s when both are loaded to the same PF. That could be, however, the excellent recoil handling properties of my SR45 that has a very low bore axis. I'd rather shoot warm loads through it than trough a 1911.
Get opinions on TiteGroup from others. The #1 complaint you'll read about is excessive smoke and in some cases leading. One of the reason's I'm interested in testing Vectan Ba 9 1/2 is that it is single-based and judging from others using V-V N320, uniformity and accuracy are about as good as it gets. I mainly got into WST because of a very experienced loading friend on another forum and the fact that I could find it. I may get around to testing Ramshot Competition because it is also a very lofty spherical in terms of case fill to weight. From there down to around W231/HP38 and ZIP, there are plenty of good powders and I'm not particularly fond of very fast burners and the only reason I haven't used Competition as yet. But for light gaming loads, it will work fine for that. For me, there are just too many advantages in using spherical powders or single-based extruded over flake. Metering definitely being one of them.
For plinking or comp. type loads I'm not concerned about flash. But, then again, I don't use double-based flake powders. Been there, done that. Since True Blue is nearly twice as dense as power pistol, all you need to do is throw some charges and compare the uniformity of the thrown charges to any other powder you might be considering. I also use 2 very dense and fine grained spherical rifle powders and at around 25 gr. charges, there is less than +/- .1 grain variation meaning there simply is no need to trickle powder charges. In handgun loads where you'll be using lower charges you may see absolutely no charge-weight variations and that can include very dense and fine grained sphericals for magnum handgun loads where you may be throwing similar charges as 5.56mm NATO, somewhere around 25 grs., i.e. .44 Magnum depending on bullet weight.
There is no performance cost with a chemically treated powder like Silhouette. I use it and V-V 3N37 with 124 gr. JHP +P type defense loads in 9 X 19mm. Performance is very similar with maybe a slight advantage going to Silhouette. 3N37 has the advantage if you load 147 gr. JHPs up to +P type velocity. I made such loads for my P-226 that doesn't have chamber-length restictions as some others do. The same is true for my SR9 and I recently got some AA#7 from Western to test. The last I used was the Czech made version and now it's made in the US. I will be doing a project soon to see if there's any difference between the 2 versions. AA#7 is one of the very best for pushing 147 gr. JHPs Super-Sonic. V-V 3N38 shows data for 1207 FPS at STANDARD Pressure with the 147 gr. XTP, but a minimum OACL of 1.142"/29mm is req'd and a good many 9mm pistols do not allow for such lengths. From the testing I've done so far with 124 gr. JHPs, the new American made AA#7 is showing higher velocity which I will try to nail down as far as burn rate between the 2. From everything I've been told, the American made AA#7 is supposed to be an exact duplicate of the former Czech made version. Either way, it's a great powder for high performance 9 X 19mm loads with great accuracy. Right now there are only 3 handgun powders treated specifically to control flash. Ramshot Silhouette, Hodgdon CFE Pistol, both sphericals, and BE-86 which is a double-based flake powder.
I use True Blue in my .45 ACP JHP defense loads and it's exceptional. I've tried Silhouette with fair but not impressive results. I'm getting low on True Blue, so recently when I bought some 230 gr. XTPs, I decided to see if Silhouette might be better suited to the heavier bullet. My targeted velocity was 875 FPS and using an OACL of 1.230", 7.8 grs. of Silhouette chrono'd 878 FPS with an ES of 39 and an SD of 11 for 10 rounds over the chrono. I had previously done expansion and penetration tests at 7.6 grs. and the load passed my requirements while it was evident that the bullet could expand a bit better, hence the bump to 7.8 grs.
Like I said, check out Brian Enos forum, the handloading section specifically, and you'll see what top competitors are using in their handloads. There are actually a good number that work well for loading just above 165 PF. Personally, I can't tell much difference between shooting 230s and 200s when both are loaded to the same PF. That could be, however, the excellent recoil handling properties of my SR45 that has a very low bore axis. I'd rather shoot warm loads through it than trough a 1911.
Get opinions on TiteGroup from others. The #1 complaint you'll read about is excessive smoke and in some cases leading. One of the reason's I'm interested in testing Vectan Ba 9 1/2 is that it is single-based and judging from others using V-V N320, uniformity and accuracy are about as good as it gets. I mainly got into WST because of a very experienced loading friend on another forum and the fact that I could find it. I may get around to testing Ramshot Competition because it is also a very lofty spherical in terms of case fill to weight. From there down to around W231/HP38 and ZIP, there are plenty of good powders and I'm not particularly fond of very fast burners and the only reason I haven't used Competition as yet. But for light gaming loads, it will work fine for that. For me, there are just too many advantages in using spherical powders or single-based extruded over flake. Metering definitely being one of them.
Last edited:
I carved out a few minutes to run some 230s over the chronograph today. Loading 5.4gr of True Blue, CCI300, 1.240", OF brass, 230gr FMJ I got an average velocity of 642.8FPS with an ES of 20.5FPS. No issues at all, fed and functioned flawlessly in my G21 even at that reduced loading. Super easy shooter, tosses brass a few feet but clears the weapon well.
So, you should be able to make a 230gr loading at the velocity you want with True Blue. Depending on your barrel length, you could start at 5.8gr and probably end up near 700FPS and then tune it up a tenth of a grain at a time until you hit your magic number in your gun. Every gun is different, but if you have anything approaching stock you should be able to run True Blue with your 230s.
Staff online
-
VaqueroMoving stuff to the gas prices thread.....
Members online
- Vaquero
- Johnny Diamond
- ggiovanni
- Fullretard
- Skip
- Texan79423
- zackmars
- justintime99
- southtexaspilot
- iMac
- brashears9567
- ZX9RCAM
- Army 1911
- leVieux
- Spcwolf
- TX14239
- WAA
- Me
- texcross
- Texasgordo
- MG987
- Darkpriest667
- Sasquatch
- aeasley10
- Bade_Millsap
- Mescobarrpls
- RevolverGuy
- no2gates
- digger
- D0ntTr3@d0nM3
- kbaxter60
- Grumps21
- Tmag109
- Big Dipper
- OSCAR-!
- TexasFlash
- rl96ss
- John Galt
- CodyK
- Polkwright
- Mike_from_Texas
- Buffalo Bob
- ShootTheBreeze
- ARJ DEFENSE
- Otto_Mation
- Whalercohasset
- Txhighlander
- webb971
- King76
- Coonan357
