Has anyone here ever tried any of this powder? I see where
it might be a replacement to my H4895...Possible or maybe..
I have never heard of it befor..Vatican or something
like that.Appreciate any info. on it...John:confused:
Printable View
Has anyone here ever tried any of this powder? I see where
it might be a replacement to my H4895...Possible or maybe..
I have never heard of it befor..Vatican or something
like that.Appreciate any info. on it...John:confused:
More like Hodgdon 414 or VV 150/550
no idea ?
What do you mean by "no idea?"
Since noone else has chimed in, my post was telling you that H4895 is faster than TU500. On this list(link below), with the lowest number being the fastest powder, H4895 is #110 and TU500 falls between #133 @ H414 and #134 @ VVN150. Much slower. Varget is #119 and R-15 is #129. Something to pay attention to is that IMR and H 4350 are #'s 137 and 140 respectively. So burn rates are only part of the equation but under normal circumstances poweder that far apart on the burn rate do not act as a direct replacement.
http://www.reloadbench.com/burn.html
Here are a couple of links that might help...
Burn rate chart showing TU5000 at 177...
http://hiwaay.net/~stargate/powder/powder.htm
and reload data for these powders...
http://www.balleurope.com/recharge/index.php?langue=en
Good luck
Gary
Good find Gary, I had heard it was an ok powder for the 260. The data you found shows that it is in fact the 25-06 through the 280 remington powder.
Is this powder even available in the states? I can't find it anywhere for sale.
The list I have has the following Ar2206h H4895 IMR4895 TU 5000 AA2460 None of the ones you listed..But I did try 110 with no good results at all...But I am using SMK 69 GR..nothing smaller....I appreciate your information...Quote:
Originally Posted by stangfish
Ace, I'm sorry but I am confused. I thought you asked about a powder as a replacement to H4895.
Your profile says NY. That means that within reason you have access to the same products as the rest of us. So to help clarify some things I want to get clear on a few things. What does the "list" represent? Are you looking at load data? Where did you get your "list"? What cartridge are you talking about?
There are some smart guys on this forum that may be not understanding what you are after either. After 30 years of living with one woman I can almost finish her sentences, other people not so much.
Disclaimer: This information was compiled from several sources, including information taken from the websites of each manufacturer and lists provided by other handloaders. This data is NOT intended for working up loads, nor should it be used blindly. Many of these are estimates, based on the best guess of individuals at the manufacturer or private individuals who handload extensively. Not all of the powders have even been verified to have existed. No accuracy or safety guarantee is made or implied, as this is for speculative purposes only. All standard handloading safety practices should be followed. Extra care should be taken with older powders, and they should be carefully evaluated for signs of deterioration.
"used by permission from handloading@yahoogroups.com"
Copied from the link above.
I think you would be hard pressed to find two burn rate charts that are even remotely close in order. I would start working with what ever components you can find and go back to H4895 if and when it becomes available again.
Gary is right. Not to mention that burn rates are only part of the story.