Ball vs. Stick powders

Ask questions and share information about reloading.
Post Reply
User avatar
TEXAS222
Senior Member
Posts: 291
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2014 8:09 pm
.204 Ruger Guns: custom build AR 15-Rem 700 .204 VARMINT- .204 Kimber Pro Var
Location: Southeast Texas

Ball vs. Stick powders

Post by TEXAS222 »

I'm trying to educate myself on powder. I have quite an array of different powders that have been purchased or given to me. I'm reaching out to some of the advanced reloaders for their opinions on ball vs. stick powders for use in the calibers I load for, 204, 222, 223, 22-250, & 220 swift. I live & shoot on the Texas coast where the humidity is always extremely high & the weather hot but can have huge swings from 50 in mornings to 90 in afternoon but mostly 80-100. Seems like I shy away from ball powders but don't know why because they sure are easy to load. When loading ball, do magnum primers need to be used? Any comments/opinions would be appreciated. Thank you,
Jim D :help:
Bill K
Senior Member
Posts: 2607
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 10:00 am
.204 Ruger Guns: also now, a Savage switch bull barrel in 204R. 23 inch SS
Location: Lake Forest, Ca.

Re: Ball vs. Stick powders

Post by Bill K »

I use both ball and stick in various rifles, I just work with accurate loads and with in reason as to temp changes, in my area. Have had not issues that way. As for primers, most ball powders, for me, ignite just fine with standard small or large rifle primers. Bill K :)
Jim White
Moderator
Posts: 1467
Joined: Mon Nov 03, 2008 2:06 pm
.204 Ruger Guns: CZ-527, Remington 700 VLTHSS, Cooper Model 21, Remington 40x

Re: Ball vs. Stick powders

Post by Jim White »

For my varmint rigs, I use predominantly HODGDON stick powders. I do use ALLIANT in my 204 and Accurate Arms in my 221 FB. When I started this Rodeo with the 204 Ruger, I just started out with what I had on hand (N135, N540, RL15, H4895 and Varget} and that's what I've stuck with. The exception is my 221 FB which uses a ball powder because of availability issues with H4198 and RL7 at the time; it works great.

As far as heat effect, I can say for several years in my competition days I used AA2520 in a 308 LC case. I shot it in cold weather (teen's) and in the hot and humid summer weather in Camp Perry OH (low 100's0 and I never had any issues with it; none.

There are several articles on the web that deals with this issue, especially tests that involve those "temp insensitive powders" such as HODGDON's EXTREME line of powders. Heat affects those too, just not as much. One of the biggest culprits is leaving a round in a hot chamber. It doesn't matter what kind of heat insensitive powder one uses, in that scenario its going to heat up, its simple physics.

For you AR shooters, if you're not single loading I don't know what to tell you to overcome this problem; I suppose it depends on the specific activity. For my rat shooting, I use bolt guns but if I used an AR I'd still single load it, but that's just me. However, in another endeavor, like wild boar, I'd keep it chambered; regardless of type.

For my magnum pistols, I use ball powders exclusively, specifically W296 or H110. For my others generally they're a flake powder [Blue-Dot, Bullseye, Unique, WST, WSF] for the most part.

Don't know if that's an answer but hope it helps,

Jim
User avatar
Sidewinderwa
Senior Member
Posts: 648
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2005 9:39 am
.204 Ruger Guns: Savages
Location: Washington state

Re: Ball vs. Stick powders

Post by Sidewinderwa »

I personally switched to Hodgdon's extreme powders, when they shot well. The Long Range Pursuit guys did a demonstration using ammo from an ice chest verses ammo left in the heat. There was a difference in point of impact. I also use the powder type that gives me the best accuracy, stick verses round. Western powders are temperature insensitive but do not advertise it much. X-Terminator powder works well in some of my small calibers. I follow the books on magnum verses regular primers, just to be safe.
Image
Please, no Sidewinder today!
User avatar
TEXAS222
Senior Member
Posts: 291
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2014 8:09 pm
.204 Ruger Guns: custom build AR 15-Rem 700 .204 VARMINT- .204 Kimber Pro Var
Location: Southeast Texas

Re: Ball vs. Stick powders

Post by TEXAS222 »

Just the kind of information I was hoping for guys. Thanks and anyone else just jump in speak up. Jim, roger the hot chamber. I suspect that's a huge problem that some overlook. Glad to hear x-terminator is doing well, I was just given 8 brand new 1# jugs. Thanks to all,
Jim D :hail:
Bill K
Senior Member
Posts: 2607
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 10:00 am
.204 Ruger Guns: also now, a Savage switch bull barrel in 204R. 23 inch SS
Location: Lake Forest, Ca.

Re: Ball vs. Stick powders

Post by Bill K »

Just a side note Jim D. AA2230 will interchange with Xterminator, for you info. Many loading books and info, show it being the same powder. Bill K :)
User avatar
TEXAS222
Senior Member
Posts: 291
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2014 8:09 pm
.204 Ruger Guns: custom build AR 15-Rem 700 .204 VARMINT- .204 Kimber Pro Var
Location: Southeast Texas

Re: Ball vs. Stick powders

Post by TEXAS222 »

Thanks Bill, got it. 2230/X-terminator, same load data. Appreciate it. Not much mention about primers. In my moderate to hot climate, no need for magnum primers with ball powder? Just open for suggestions from you guru's. Thanks,
Jim D :hail:
Jim White
Moderator
Posts: 1467
Joined: Mon Nov 03, 2008 2:06 pm
.204 Ruger Guns: CZ-527, Remington 700 VLTHSS, Cooper Model 21, Remington 40x

Re: Ball vs. Stick powders

Post by Jim White »

When I was shooting AA2520 in my M1A I did-not use magnum primers and I never had any issues.
User avatar
Darkker
Senior Member
Posts: 225
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2012 3:35 pm
.204 Ruger Guns: Ruger Predator
Location: SE Washington

Re: Ball vs. Stick powders

Post by Darkker »

Here's some info you will want when anyone tells you that brand X's powder is or isn't magically extreme: It's not true, in the sense that they mean, or that you want to believe.

Here is how powders work in the real world.
Temperature insensitive powders are such, based around a specific set of design parameters. It is absolutely not a universal property. Not unlike burning curves, based upon what case you use them in. Here is your example, Varget.
Thales designed it's parent for use in 7.62 Ball ammo. So 144-155gr bullets in the 308 it is phenomenal, as was confirmed by testing done by Dr. Bramwell. However put it in the 5.56 with 55gr ball bullets, and it is a steaming pile of Dookie, in terms of temperature insensitivity. H335 very handily whuup'd it. Now I know what your are thinking "But Darkker, H335 was made for the 223; Hodgy says so". Hodgdon doesn't now, nor ever had made smokeless powder. They sold you a false premise on the insensitivity, flat lied about copper cleaners, don't publish nominal specs for what they sell, have changed suppliers without a PSA about lot variances, and don't actually do much modern pressure testing themselves. Take them for what they are, and not what they aren't. The patent date for WC 846 is in the mid-1930's. It had and still enjoys wide adoption in the 7.62. Hodgdon began selling that surplus labeled as Bl-c, then later Bl-c(2). WC 844 is the EXACT same formula as 846, but differs only on the "As-built" side. Olin originally voluntarily took the stuff that had 0.25% less CaCO(acid stabilizer) and called it 844. The segregation had absolutely nothing to do with burning rates or curves. Hodgy called 844's surplus H335.

So what is the difference between the two types of powders already?!!
Extruded has its burning rates controlled by geometry. Temp insensitivity confess from coatings primarily. Due to geometry controlling burning rates, it tends to age a little more safely than ball powder. There is less chance of run-away burning curves with shifting moisture content, and because of being perforated, acid accumulation tends to be less of an issue.
Ball powder has burning rates and insensitivity controlled all by coatings. Thus evaporation and moisture content can pay havoc with things relatively more than extruded.

So which is right?
Both.
Remember that powder is ONLY produced by Defense Contractors, and Government defense conglomerates. Their is only one private(non Gub'ment owned) powder plant in the entire USA, General Dynamics owns that. They make ball powder, it's faster and can be recycled without the need for virgin nitrocellulose. They currently supply something like 95℅ of all the powder that goes into the militaries small arms ammo. If you jump over to the Naval Warfare Testing Center data, you can see that there are a great many ball powders that are far far less temp sensitive, and over a greater temp range, than anything from Thales that Hodgy resells. Probably not surprising that Thales asked for powder tech help from GD down in their ADI plant in Australis...

So it all comes down to application, and what you really are using. After a pile of pressure testing and conversations with GD, I'm personally convinced the reason that Hodgdon doesn't list specs; is because they change inputs constantly. The reloader always has been a waste market, and Hodgdon doesn't hold a candle in the wind to the amounts these producers pump out. So it would seem they take, or buy toll milling for a general set of specs or burning rate. Then blend lots to get close enough to call it one of the names you know. I really doubt they call and ask for the formula from 1936 that they originally sold as Bl-c. They ask for a range and go forward.

Also don't get caught up in the "needing" of a magnum primer with ball powder. Remember that magnum primers are VERY new, and were spearheaded by Roy Weatherby. Even he didn't like shooting his cavernous cases loaded to full power. So he began seriously downloading them with very slow and old ball powders. Well, it should surprise no one that a 300WBY with a reduced load on the order of 40%, when hunting the top of the Rockies in sub zero weather; might need a blow torch to get to properly ignite.

Cheers
I'm a firm believer in the theory that if it bleeds, I can kill it.
User avatar
TEXAS222
Senior Member
Posts: 291
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2014 8:09 pm
.204 Ruger Guns: custom build AR 15-Rem 700 .204 VARMINT- .204 Kimber Pro Var
Location: Southeast Texas

Re: Ball vs. Stick powders

Post by TEXAS222 »

Wow. Thanks Darkker, that's a lot of information to ponder on & I will.
Jim D :salute:
Post Reply