#9 Powder

[cwlongshot]

has anyone found #9 to be sensitive to compression?

I have been shooting 14 g behind a 165 g bullet and last night loaded 10 165 Federal HST and noticed that two where little long... I pulled and checked powder. It was dead on but the bullets where a few thousandths longer.

This load has never shown pressures, but it has me wondering.

CW

BTW, MAG PRIMER is used.

[Ridgerunner665]

I don't think you can get enough #9 in a 10mm case, with any bullet, to get you into serious trouble.

I believe it does reach max pressure with heavier bullets, burns too clean not to, but there just isn't room to go over much.

[sqlbullet]

Plenty of load data out there for compressed charges, so I wouldn't be super concerned.  I think Wade has reported issues in the past keeping bullets from creeping with some of the compressed max loads.  The powder pushed the bullets back out some unless they had a very heavy crimp.  I also think he had to get a special seating stem to keep from crushing hollow point bullets with some loads they were so compressed.

I could be mis-'membering though.

[The_Shadow]

Yes I did experience the bullet backing out with heavy compressed AA#9 (the older spherical microbeads) when trying to work with the Barnes 140 grain TAC-XP, 12.6 was all I could stuff...

Since I have been studying the pull-downs and powders it has been shown that Accurate Arms and Accurate powders under Western Powders now, have changed formulations over the years.  #9 used to be 100% microbeads, now it is mostly a flattened ball powder.  The forensic database http://www.ilrc.ucf.edu/powders/search.php showed several blends for #9

Accurate Arms-No. 9 New Blend
Ref#727 No 9 Blend 118/92 IMI No7 20%, WC 820 80%
Ref#739 No 9 Blend 106/94 WC820 90%, WC 350 10%
Ref#517

Ref#626

Ref#733


The newest formulation shown for Western Powder 10/26/15


This is why it makes powder identifications a little more difficult, but we can work through this easier with newer info. 

[cwlongshot]

This is the older formulation for sure. (Said 11.99$) 

CW

[gator378]

Yes I did experience the bullet backing out with heavy compressed AA#9 (the older spherical microbeads) when trying to work with the Barnes 140 grain TAC-XP, 12.6 was all I could stuff...

Since I have been studying the pull-downs and powders it has been shown that Accurate Arms and Accurate powders under Western Powders now, have changed formulations over the years.  #9 used to be 100% microbeads, now it is mostly a flattened ball powder.  The forensic database http://www.ilrc.ucf.edu/powders/search.php showed several blends for #9

Accurate Arms-No. 9 New Blend
Ref#727 No 9 Blend 118/92 IMI No7 20%, WC 820 80%
Ref#739 No 9 Blend 106/94 WC820 90%, WC 350 10%
Ref#517

Ref#626

Ref#733


The newest formulation shown for Western Powder 10/26/15


This is why it makes powder identifications a little more difficult, but we can work through this easier with newer info. 

I found 13.0 g of AA#9 max for my reloads. Otherwise seating depth becomes a problem. with 200 grain XTP