Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Calvin45" data-source="post: 3052874" data-attributes="member: 109862">I have VERY rarely heard of it that a powder that gives the highest velocity in a given cartridge/bullet combo in a longer barrel gets outrun by a different powder in a shorter one with the same cartridge/bullet.&nbsp; It does happen I&#039;m sure, especially with some of the &quot;weird&quot; progressive burn rate powders like rl26, 17, SUPERFORMANCE, and for sure if we&#039;re talking long pistol length barrels shooting full rifle cartridges like those TC contenders or savage strikers and such that&#039;s a different ball game too, but it&#039;s very much the rule that regardless of barrel length, the powder that gives the highest velocity does so across the spectrum.&nbsp; There are exceptions to every rule no doubt but the amount of actual chronograph verified data where you&#039;d have a cartridge with two different loads with 2 different powders loaded with the same projectile and the slower burn rate one yielded higher mv out of a long barreled rifle and the faster burn rate one outran it out of a 16-22 inch barrel is almost nil.&nbsp; I&#039;ve seen such actual proof of this widely accepted and repeated claim (that faster burn rates outperform slower ones in short barrels where they don&#039;t in long ones) exactly ONCE on this forum and to be honest couldn&#039;t beleive it but was sure glad I saw it.&nbsp; It does happen but it&#039;s rare as hens teeth haha.&nbsp; One thing tho that I can DEFINITELY vouch for in regards to the practicality and benefit of faster than typical burning powder in shorter than typical barrels for a given chambering is the reduction in muzzle blast and flash.&nbsp; Back when I was more or less a one gun deer hunter with a 22 inch barreled 270 even I found this out.&nbsp; Even from that 22 inch barrel the fastest absolute velocity for 130-150 grain bullets for me was with RL22, h4831, and even the slow burning IMR7828.&nbsp; In fact based on my experience I concluded that the boring old 270 has untapped potential using compressed loads of powders of slower burn rates than typically found in the manual, with 150 soft points i had no trouble exceeding 2950 fps with compressed loads of 7828.&nbsp; But she was LOUD and she breathed serious FIRE!!!! <img class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" alt="🤣" title="Rolling on the floor laughing&nbsp; &nbsp; :rofl:" src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f923.png" data-shortname=":rofl:" /> The loads worked up with imr 4064 and 4350 were never as fast as those ones but, for only being 100-200 fps slower, they sure kicked less, concussed less, and flashed less.&nbsp; As much as it kills me to admit it I&#039;m sure the deer wouldn&#039;t have noticed the difference.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Calvin45, post: 3052874, member: 109862"] I have VERY rarely heard of it that a powder that gives the highest velocity in a given cartridge/bullet combo in a longer barrel gets outrun by a different powder in a shorter one with the same cartridge/bullet. It does happen I’m sure, especially with some of the “weird” progressive burn rate powders like rl26, 17, SUPERFORMANCE, and for sure if we’re talking long pistol length barrels shooting full rifle cartridges like those TC contenders or savage strikers and such that’s a different ball game too, but it’s very much the rule that regardless of barrel length, the powder that gives the highest velocity does so across the spectrum. There are exceptions to every rule no doubt but the amount of actual chronograph verified data where you’d have a cartridge with two different loads with 2 different powders loaded with the same projectile and the slower burn rate one yielded higher mv out of a long barreled rifle and the faster burn rate one outran it out of a 16-22 inch barrel is almost nil. I’ve seen such actual proof of this widely accepted and repeated claim (that faster burn rates outperform slower ones in short barrels where they don’t in long ones) exactly ONCE on this forum and to be honest couldn’t beleive it but was sure glad I saw it. It does happen but it’s rare as hens teeth haha. One thing tho that I can DEFINITELY vouch for in regards to the practicality and benefit of faster than typical burning powder in shorter than typical barrels for a given chambering is the reduction in muzzle blast and flash. Back when I was more or less a one gun deer hunter with a 22 inch barreled 270 even I found this out. Even from that 22 inch barrel the fastest absolute velocity for 130-150 grain bullets for me was with RL22, h4831, and even the slow burning IMR7828. In fact based on my experience I concluded that the boring old 270 has untapped potential using compressed loads of powders of slower burn rates than typically found in the manual, with 150 soft points i had no trouble exceeding 2950 fps with compressed loads of 7828. But she was LOUD and she breathed serious FIRE!!!! 🤣 The loads worked up with imr 4064 and 4350 were never as fast as those ones but, for only being 100-200 fps slower, they sure kicked less, concussed less, and flashed less. As much as it kills me to admit it I’m sure the deer wouldn’t have noticed the difference. [/QUOTE]

Verification