deteriated powder

CBA Member

RicinYakima posted this 02 January 2015

As powder decomposes, it becomes weaker. I would try it. But it will continue inside the case, so don't keep it around long. Ric

Attached Files

CBA Member

Dirtybore posted this 02 January 2015

If you still have TFS, issue #222, March-April 2013, read “Do Smokeless powders Deteriorate with Age, by Mustafa Curtess. Then if you have TFS, issue #224, July-August 2013, read “More on Old Powder", by John Rhodes. The article is on page 5 and explains how he salvaged some old powder and then tested it to make sure it was still good. This author let the cronograph decide what was good and what wasn't.

There is also two article in TFS issue #223, “Powder Deterioration” by Richard Thornburg and “More on Powder Deterioration” by Fred Davis. These two articles go into some depth into powder deterioration and Fred did not recommend salvaging powder as the top two authors did.

Read the articles and you decide.

Attached Files

Standard Member

Notlwonk posted this 02 January 2015

I have about 2 containers that I've repackaged because of rusting cans. Use the newer plastic 'cans', completely remove the old label and relabel with powder type, lot number and reason for repacking.

Attached Files

Standard Member

bandmiller2 posted this 03 January 2015

I took the high road and pulled the bullets, the sour powder is spread on the garden. I'am past the point in my life when I just want to make noise, I want repeatable accuracy. I have powders I bought 40 years ago that still perform, batches of powder vary. Frank C.

Attached Files

Standard Member

M. W. Curtess posted this 11 January 2015

All the deterioration I've encountered was in metal, or partially metal cans. A major part of my report was to ask what the solvent is - and how to replace it = no response. However, the chrono didn't suggest any reduction in velocities, so I re-canted it into plastic, labelled with the necessary info. Maybe a decade ago, I bought 2 big plastic jugs of surplus “pull down” SR4759 @ something like $10 / lb. No telling what its age or history is, but it is fresh power as far as performance is concerned. I hear it is no longer being made, so still having a jug & a half of that irreplaceable powder gives me a warm fuzzy feeling.

Attached Files

CBA Member

Dirtybore posted this 20 January 2015

M. W. Curtess, your lucky to have a couple of pounds of that SR4759. I have but one can and only recently became aquainted with it. It works wonders in my 7x57 Mauser. What powder will take its place or should I ask, what powder will duplicate its perforence?

Attached Files

CBA Member

RicinYakima posted this 20 January 2015

No powders duplicate its performance except surplus Accurate MP5744, now worth its weight in gold. You have three choices: Reloader 7, slower, or Al2400, faster, or new 5744 and clean the bore every 10 shots. For smaller cases, 218 Bee, 25/20 R or 256 Win Mag, you can replace with IMR4227. SR4759 was unique and will not be replaced since we are not making a lot of 20 MM grenade rounds for the military any more.

Attached Files

CBA Member

Dirtybore posted this 20 January 2015

I've already tried Reloader 7 and it didn't perform in the 7X57, 98 Mauser as well as SR4759. I also tried 2400 and it was deffinitly a second best.

Attached Files

CBA Member

RicinYakima posted this 21 January 2015

Yep, that is my position also. When I talked to them at the SHOT show last year, it was just that they did not sell enough and it was one of their most expensive powders to produce. RIP. Ric

Attached Files

Standard Member

M. W. Curtess posted this 21 January 2015

To Dirtybore, Heh! Heh! - I'm delighted to say that I have more than “a couple of pounds” of SR4759. More like 1 & 1/2 gallons of it. I'm sad to say that nothing duplicates it - not even close-. I'm convinced that its advantage for CB purposes is its bulkiness. It comes to mind that IMR 4227 is close in burning speed, and used close to the same charge weights & performance in the free IMR loading guides, but 4227 had a load density problem in 30-30 and larger BN cases, but is nice as a “light magnum” powder in magnum handgun cases. At the time I began casting, SR4759 was listed as discontinued in some loading guides, but had been re-introduced, just wasn't caught up to the demand yet, and was hard to find, so I had struggled with other powders (largely unsuccessfully) before I found & tested 4759. (= instant satisfaction!) One of the existing powders I was beginning to have some success with was the (original?) MP5744. I think I invented a couple of new cuss-words when I tried the “duplicate” replacement version(s). That was also the era when (supposedly “conservative") Brit Prime Minister decided to disarm her people, and closed down the Government-owned ICI Power manufacturing, so there went another excellent line of CB propellants (the “Scot-Brigadier” line). Their 4197 was only one number away from our 4198 - but miles away in terms of performance with CB's. (I still have 2 lbs of AA “Data 4197", which was the last of the bulk original, re-labelled and marketed by Accurate Arms) I reserved it, thinking that if nothing else worked I would at least have some to test (which would prove I had a powder problem) but I can't bring myself to actually use the very last dregs after which it will be gone forever.

Attached Files

CBA Member

Dirtybore posted this 25 January 2015

Thanks C W Curtess, Bummer!

Attached Files

Standard Member

M. W. Curtess posted this 25 January 2015

I use mostly mil-surp ball powders for everything SR4759 can't handle. They were cheap in gallon jug quantities and the suppliers at that time would usually eat the hazmat gouge if you ordered 4 or more jugs (mix or match). I got a lot of 4895 (the only stick powder I bought - aside from 4759) I lucked out and got a lot real close to IMR cannister, so load guides are useable. Problem (?) is: That here again I have a lot of powders that I really don't know its age & history, so “deterioration” is always a concern. At least it all came in good quality polymer containers, and still smells good. Another ballpowder I have a lot of and use a great deal is WC820. I learned about it in a TFS artical (which suggested it was a replacement for Rel 7 = obvious typo) but since I had it, I learned to use it. Some help in the military loading info in the last part of “Cartridges Of The World", enough to get me started, and once I worked it up in everything and got it in my loading notes, WC820 has been very, very useful. It has load density deficiencies also, for Cb's, but seems to ignite easily enough to overcome that considerably. There again: a wonderful “light magnum” handgun powder and hard to beat in 22Hornet & 32 H&R Mag. There again: When was mine manufactured and where has it been in the meantime?

Attached Files

CBA Member

Dirtybore posted this 02 February 2015

I had two cans of IMR 4320 and they were getting rather old. One was rusty on the inside and of course, the powder had a redish like rust dust throughout. I poured each can of powder into a different clear plastic jar by slowly pouring the powder through a plastic funnel. The static electricity in the funnel made most of the rust dust stick to th efunner and with lots of whipings, that dust was removed. After the powder was in the plastic jar, I rolled the powder around and was able to wipe out more rust dust from the sides of that plasctic container. So, I had one can that was old and a second can that was old and contaminated with rust dust. I loaded each powder into my 250-3000 cartridges and took them to the range. What follows is the cronograph readings. IMR 4320, both cansOld can Old Rusty can2673 26732729 26612650 26812703 26772706 267613461/5=2692 fps 13368/5=2673 fps difference = 19 fps79 deviation 20 deviation difference = 59 So which powder is bad? Both or neither? I don't have a new can to compare these older ones to but both cans appear to be the same. So in my thinking, the rust dust doesn't dictate that a powder is bad but it should be checked against a non-rusty batch. For what it's worth, the load was 34 gr of IMR 4320 under the Hornady 87 gr 25 caliber bullet. The average difference between the two cans being only 19 fps, I'm going to continue to use both powders.

Attached Files

Standard Member

M. W. Curtess posted this 02 February 2015

I cleaned and tested the rusty powder more as a matter of curiosity - than the replacement value of the powder. I had previously begun disposing of a case of old Hodgdon “Universal Clays” membrane-sealed 1lb plastic cans, which had been stored in a barn (labels were beginning to fade & discolor). Its value as a plant fertilizer was questionable - but it is a charming theory. I worked up to the “never-never, ever-ever exceed” manufacturer's book loads, and in fact was already exceeding them because my CB's are somewhat heavier than those published. Performance (in a modern Marlin 45 Colt rifle) was wimpy, erratic, and incredibly dirty-burning. Down to the final 3 cans, I finally faced up to the simple fact that my results had been classic symptoms of under-loading, so I began cautiously working further up. Barely 1.0 gr more, and Bingo! - simply GREAT results! Then I bought a fresh can for comparison and could see no difference. One wonders how this could happen, considering that we are told repeatedly that manufacturer's data is produced by Ballisticians, Engineers, using state-of-the art lab equipment, etc (which I am inclined to respect), but still -----------------?

Attached Files

Standard Member

M. W. Curtess posted this 02 February 2015

Occurs to me that we are actually discussing “contaminated” propellants, and not really “deteriorated” ones. And as far as published loading recommendations are concerned, it is probably best to bear in mind that us few CB shooters are not very highly-targeted as propellant consumers. I often wonder if the data we are given is actually ballistically tested - or just exterpolated from the lab data derived from jacketed projectiles? My chrono results commonly vary considerably from those printed (and always well on the low side, too). So (when given at all), might the pressure figures be equally suspect?

Attached Files

Standard Member

bandmiller2 posted this 02 February 2015

M.W. I have always considered any safe load with a jacketed bullet to be safe with a cast slug, same weight, mayby not accurate but safe. Frank C.

Attached Files

Standard Member

M. W. Curtess posted this 02 February 2015

That has been more or less my experience, also, even tho I rarely try for the maximum velocities most reloaders commonly seem to do. The day I decided to look into the subject of bullet casting, I first went to my local public library. One (of two!) books was by Earl Naramore. Published 1937 (the year of my birth) in which he wrote that substituting a CB for jacketed data, pressure would be less and velocity greater. To this day I have been unable to verify that theory. Inspecting bullets from the berm and jacket fragments , the blackened groove segments suggest that no gas seal is actually being achieved. I also notice that in barrels in which jackets have been fired, usually have bright lands and darker grooves. New barrels in which I have never fired a jacket, years and uncounted hundreds of CB's later, both lands and grooves remain mirror bright. This suggests to me that CB's DO seal (and if they don't, gas-cutting & alloy fouling result). From this, I suspect that CB pressures are NOT necessarily lower? I have never been attracted to the notion that it is desireable to find ways to shoot CB's at “jacketed” velocities. Considering how efficiently Europeans slaughtered each other (and natives of their far-flung “colonies") for a century or so, and how we slaughtered our millions of Bison (and the natives who largely subsisted on them) in only a decade or so with lead bullets (and blackpowder!), it never occurred to me that CB' are just inherently inferior, and I have enjoyed my exclusive interest in CB's immensely - with no excuses or apologies to anyone. Now if someone would just form up a “Jacketed Bullet Association” so our site wouldn't be so cluttered up with jacketed interest and material - my life would be complete!

Attached Files

CBA Member

Dirtybore posted this 04 February 2015

I just did the rust removal trick from an old rusty can of IMR 4320 and after loading it and a can of old but not rusty powder in my 250-3000, I shot them over a cronograph. Both the old powder and the old rusty powder shot the same velocities as each other. This tells me, both powders are probably good. I don't have a new can of that powder to compare it to. In any case, the two powders shot the same, the old rust can and the old non-rusty can.

Attached Files

deteriated powder

Categories

Search

Popular Tags

This Weeks High Earners

Hot Topics