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
WARNING - 4955
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="Calvin45" data-source="post: 2771250" data-attributes="member: 109862"><p>Thanks for sharing! And for not just assuming there's nothing to my observations.</p><p></p><p>I agree…non-linear is a fantastic way to word this, and it is indeed true about any pressure curve…but some powders absolutely are less linear than others, with an exponential jump 4955 is one of them, in my conclusion. Non-linear x 10, while the boring old single bases are much more predictable (I tested 4 other powders also in 1 grain increments like an idiot - old reliable imr 4064 progressed very consistently and "linear", more predictable than any of the others)</p><p></p><p>I also did a stupid thing treating a 243 like a belted magnum regarding ladder increment sizes and acknowledge that.</p><p></p><p>I will say, what you're saying about published burn rate not matching your experience at all and being different from cartridge to cartridge is something I've also experienced with SUPERFORMANCE powder - I give up on pinning it down, it's a progressive burn rate double base so it's just a little weird - even hornady acknowledged it's got a narrow window of optimal performance but wheee it works it really works. That's been my experience with it. It's either entirely unsuitable for an application or it rules the roost! <img class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" alt="🤣" title="Rolling on the floor laughing :rofl:" src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f923.png" data-shortname=":rofl:" /></p><p></p><p>This also seems the case with 4955 a bit - the burn rate I've experienced is entirely at odds with what's published on charts and the quickload data that quiet Texan was kind enough to share also reflects a powder that has a much slower burn rate than what was revealed to be the case upon actually shooting the stuff and reading the chronograph</p><p></p><p>In my experiences it's faster than 4831</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Calvin45, post: 2771250, member: 109862"] Thanks for sharing! And for not just assuming there’s nothing to my observations. I agree…non-linear is a fantastic way to word this, and it is indeed true about any pressure curve…but some powders absolutely are less linear than others, with an exponential jump 4955 is one of them, in my conclusion. Non-linear x 10, while the boring old single bases are much more predictable (I tested 4 other powders also in 1 grain increments like an idiot - old reliable imr 4064 progressed very consistently and “linear”, more predictable than any of the others) I also did a stupid thing treating a 243 like a belted magnum regarding ladder increment sizes and acknowledge that. I will say, what you’re saying about published burn rate not matching your experience at all and being different from cartridge to cartridge is something I’ve also experienced with SUPERFORMANCE powder - I give up on pinning it down, it’s a progressive burn rate double base so it’s just a little weird - even hornady acknowledged it’s got a narrow window of optimal performance but wheee it works it really works. That’s been my experience with it. It’s either entirely unsuitable for an application or it rules the roost! 🤣 This also seems the case with 4955 a bit - the burn rate I’ve experienced is entirely at odds with what’s published on charts and the quickload data that quiet Texan was kind enough to share also reflects a powder that has a much slower burn rate than what was revealed to be the case upon actually shooting the stuff and reading the chronograph In my experiences it’s faster than 4831 [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Reloading
WARNING - 4955
Top