Comments on: Get Latest Powder Burn Rate Chart HERE

By: Plato

Plato — Sat, 12 Dec 2020 17:31:44 +0000

VV N130 is on there twice (#77 and #82).

By: Urban Trainer

Urban Trainer — Tue, 10 Nov 2020 14:55:15 +0000

This is kinda useful, although if it were kept up to date and properly checked for information accuracy based on whatever methodology they are using to evaluate, it would be a very useful and appreciated quick reference card of powders… which is what I’ve thought it was suppose to be until I started seeing the editing mistakes, omissions and what more experienced reloaders than I have said about the questionable order.

With all the powders out there currently, I know it would be no small task, but I would love to see this list cleaned up and made relevant with current products and a defined methodology by experts.

By: Jim Long

Jim Long — Fri, 25 Sep 2020 16:05:10 +0000

Not only that but here we have N130 listed twice and in 2 entirely different positions.

By: Jim Long

Jim Long — Fri, 25 Sep 2020 15:45:15 +0000

I believe that Silhouette is placed in an entirely wrong position.
I think it’s much slower than HS-6 but here it’s listed as higher.
The Western site has the chart with the correct position.

By: Mark Richmond

Mark Richmond — Sun, 07 Jun 2020 04:57:35 +0000

Vihtavuori N130 is listed as #77 and #82. I’m betting that #77 should be N120, which doesn’t appear in the chart, though I’d have expected it to be higher.

By: Alan D Huss

Alan D Huss — Sat, 02 May 2020 22:09:28 +0000

I create test fixtures. So there is no real data here. This chart just tells me who is fastest and who is slowest, but not by how much. What is your method for determining Burn Rate? Is the burn rate Grains/Second, BTU’s? How is it measured? How much do these powders differ in their burn rates?

By: Bill Turnbull

Bill Turnbull — Thu, 16 Apr 2020 18:23:27 +0000

W748 seems to be too far down the list. Is this a typo? I’m a little confused.

By: Robby

Robby — Fri, 07 Feb 2020 20:43:49 +0000

Sir,

I am currently looking for an adequate rifle powder with a slower burn rate than the one that I am using for my.30-30 Ackley Improved. I desire to get the same performance or about from the 37 grains of IMR3031. The problem that I am encountering from this load is described in the following paragraph.

Problem: With exception to performance, fire formed cases are expanding at the base of the

case upon firing. This is causing much difficulty in extracting and ejecting the spent shell casing.

Question: Can I use an IMR powder with a slower burn rate at an increased load i.e. 38 – 39.4 grains (max) to get about the same performance as the 37 grains of IMR 3031 ?

I currently have on hand IMR 4350, IMR 4064 and IMR 4831. Which one of these would be adequate enough time o get about the same performance as the 37 grains of IMR 3031 fired behind a 150 grain .30 caliber bullet?

Thank you
Robby Robinson
San Antonio Texas

By: Robby

Robby — Fri, 07 Feb 2020 20:38:51 +0000

Sir,

Problem: With exception to performance, fire formed cases are expanding at the base of the

case upon firing. This is causing much difficulty in extracting and ejecting the spent shell casing.

Question: Can I use an IMR powder with a slower burn rate at an increased load i.e. 38 – 39.4 grains (max) to get about the same performance as the 37 grains of IMR 3031 ?

I currently have on hand IMR 4350, IMR 4064 and IMR 4831. Which one of these would be adequate enough to get about the same performance as the 37 grains of IMR 3031 fired behind a 150 grain .30 caliber bullit?

Thank you
Robby Robinson
San Antonio Texas

By: John Halsell

John Halsell — Sun, 19 Jan 2020 00:22:53 +0000

Can you put Alliant Reloader 16 into this chart?