Powder position

Just found my original 2006 note from shooting 38 revolver tipped up or down prior to the shot.

Old news, but here it is anyway

Speer 158 LRN, 3.7 231, individual shots

Tip up-powder back 764, 733, 744, 740, 739, 705

Tip down-powder forward  564, 619, 523, 606, 607, 623

A sustained string with no deliberate tipping the velocity avg was right in between the two above

I have found this to be true in all large capacity cases, with low volume charges. I "think" faster burning powders are more forgiving. Case position, thus powder position matters. IMO, this is "one" of the reasons that Ransom Rest testing yield good results. Position never starts "low" and in most cases, muzzle is rocked up/back then gently eased forward before each shot. Low volume charges are settled the same with each shot.

Sounds like a good reason for Titewad !
TRAIL BOSS!!!

May I ask what powder was used in the test?

Jack,

The data you show are consistent with what I know about effect of powder position in both rifle and pistol, i.e., "powder up" or "powder down".  Further, the average for velocities you show are statistically significantly different, and beyond what we would expect for good reloading practice.  Perhaps we should pay more attention to pistol position when we shoot slow fire with a revolver at 50yds where precision is critical to help ensure consistent position of powder and get it back against the primer.

BE Mike wrote:May I ask what powder was used in the test?

231
Which I understand to be quite position sensitive.

I notice this because of the difference in the audible report, mostly the same, but sometimes up and sometimes down. It’s distracting especially a low report, but I take great care in measuring and checking powder delivery. I am very limited in powder choice, Vectan 9, 9.5 and 10. I’m using a cast 158 bullet with 3.2 of Vectan 9.5. I will try Vectan 10 which is comparable to Bullseye. Tilting up would get the attention of the RO during a target competition though.

Sometime I should shoot on target these powder positions and see the results.

Well, I don't recommend we shoot like cowboys .

In my thought experiment, my 38 Spl ammo is in the box, bulllet down, and thus the powder is forward. I load the revolver which is slightly pointed down, adjust grip et al., raise gun to target, so powder forward/level is likely favored.  I fire, pistol recoils so powder is likely now back against the primer/level for remainder of shots, depending on how the revolver is handled between slow fire shots.

A good test would be to have fc60, a careful tester who has the tools and talent, load 38 Spl or 32 long in the barrel tester, with powder forward or back.  Maybe it won't matter - one less thing to think about.

Wonder if a small blob of cotton added on top of powder charge would aid in consistency?

That has been used especially in cast bullet loads for bottlenecked rifle cartridges.  In more modern times Dacron batting has been preferred for years and you don’t need much.  Just a small tuft about what you can pinch off the roll of batting.  It was never popular in pistol loading because a different powder or primer can alleviate the issue AND the volume of ammo created.

I thought that Trail Boss was developed to overcome this problem. As I understand it, it is a “puffed up” powder intended to fill cartridges with light loads.

2.8gn of WST in a .38SPL case would need a large amount of, "puffing up"!

Trailboss is half the density (twice the volume) of WST & Bullseye. It fills the case a lot more than any of the other powders. Using Trail Boss, 5gr will fill the case and you risk compressing the powder when seating the bullet. I understand Hodgdon made it for Cowboy shooters so it would be impossible to double charge a 38 case and blow up an original revolver or lever action rifle from 100+ years ago.

Here are my measurements of powder densities relative to TB from when I characterized my powder measure with the common powders I had on hand.

Trail Boss       100.0%
Clays             148.5%
Solo 1000      163.2%
N310             178.9%
N320             179.5%
WST              180.2%
N330             201.3%
Bullseye         204.1%
HP38             234.5%
Power Pistol   244.2%
Titegroup       256.2%

In my experience Titegroup is particularly sensitive to position in the case, which makes sense as it it the densest of the powders I use.

According to this powder density chart from Lee Precision Accurate #5, CFE and Li'l Gun are even more dense than TG, but they are not common in target loads. Unfortunately the chart doesn't include Trailboss. The other powders line up reasonably well with my measurements, so I trust its validity.

Wonder if any accuracy tests were done with Trailboss vs WST and/or Bullseye?

jwax wrote:Wonder if any accuracy tests were done with Trailboss vs WST and/or Bullseye?

I have tried Trail Boss. I have been unable to get it to group as well as Clays, BE, WST, VV N310, VV N320 or W231 in ,38 spl or ,45 ACP. Since Trail Boss did not group as well, for me, I was unconcerned about how it chroned.

I wasn't able to get Clays to group as well as BE, WST or N310 in my guns and reloads. For me, Trailboss is nearly as accurate as the others. Everyone's experience is a little different.