Author |
Message |
< 16ga. Ammunition & Reloading ~ cold weather powder |
|
Posted:
Tue Dec 27, 2016 5:24 pm
|
|
|
Joined: 28 Mar 2006
Posts: 434
Location: New Brunswick,Canada
|
|
Any powders better than others for cold (below freezing) weather? |
_________________ A pointing dog and a 16GA -- It doesn't get better than this |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted:
Tue Dec 27, 2016 5:31 pm
|
|
|
Member
Joined: 15 Apr 2007
Posts: 9463
Location: Amarillo, Texas
|
|
Green Dot and Unique |
_________________
,
USAF RET 1971-95 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted:
Tue Dec 27, 2016 5:45 pm
|
|
|
Joined: 28 Mar 2006
Posts: 434
Location: New Brunswick,Canada
|
|
Thanks!! |
_________________ A pointing dog and a 16GA -- It doesn't get better than this |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted:
Tue Dec 27, 2016 5:58 pm
|
|
|
Joined: 16 Jul 2015
Posts: 2126
Location: Hudson,Wy
|
|
I have used 700-x, 800-x, Green Dot, and 4756 extensively in sub zero weather and noticed no problems killing birds at extended ranges. I have used Longshot in subzero conditions during the past year and report no problems.
Steel shot loads with Blue Dot seemed to have a lighter report and weaker recoil at 20 to 40 degrees below zero fahrenheit but I quit using the stuff 20 years ago anyway since I was getting great results with smaller quantities of 800-x and 4756.
That said I have never bothered to chronograph and compare my loads under such temperatures. Considering down range performance on live birds, I have never had cause to. Am I giving up a few fps? Perhaps, but not enough to obsess over. |
_________________ Only catch snowflakes on your tongue AFTER the birds fly south for the winter... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted:
Wed Dec 28, 2016 6:33 am
|
|
|
Member
Joined: 08 Aug 2011
Posts: 1946
Location: Central CT
|
|
Not to start any controversy, but there is no such thing as a cold weather powder.
There is such a thing as poor load data.
With good load data there isn't a powder available to us that won't work just fine down to temps you don't want to be out in. |
_________________ Mark |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted:
Wed Dec 28, 2016 8:49 am
|
|
|
Joined: 16 Jul 2015
Posts: 2126
Location: Hudson,Wy
|
|
He's got a good point. Most reputable data sources test the loads they publish at temperature extremes. If the load fails to be reasonably consistent, it doesn't make print. Lyman's and the powder company data publications are dependable. Some third party sources that hype up their own "boutique blends" need to be taken with a grain of salt. |
_________________ Only catch snowflakes on your tongue AFTER the birds fly south for the winter... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted:
Wed Dec 28, 2016 9:10 am
|
|
|
Joined: 21 May 2010
Posts: 603
Location: Victoria BC Canada
|
|
Mister Google will show many hits for temperature sensitivity, offering many erudite charts. After a bit of browsing, I couldn't find anything that would add much to this discussion. The most telling was an observation that it could be critical to bench rest or long range shooting, but was manegable. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted:
Wed Dec 28, 2016 9:39 am
|
|
|
Member
Joined: 12 Mar 2005
Posts: 6535
Location: massachusetts
|
|
DC has a point. Poor load designs, poor load data, and poor reloading practices never result in good load performance. But there's more to it than that. Misleading published information provided by reloading equipment manufacturers also contribute to the problem. Allow me to explain and follow on.
I've personally found that most cold weather load problems are caused by overly low average load pressures resulting from actual powder charge weights below those specified in the published load data and/or weak crimps. The problems can easily be avoided if we know why and how.
All smokeless powder manufacturers advise us that certain minimum average load pressures must be maintained to ensure their products produce reliably consistent burning characteristics under any conditions. Further, experience has shown me most ball powders require somewhat higher average load pressures than most flat flake and disc powders. Loads w/ average load pressures below these recommended levels may or may not perform okay in warmer temperatures, but it's almost a given they will not do so when temperatures dip below freezing. Just how it is folks.
Given that virtually all published load data is carefully developed and tested in ballistic labs using very accurate weight scales, the published powder charge weights are very specific, and must be adhered to in order to get proper load performance. Lighter powder charge weights always result in lower average peak load pressures. So load performance will be degraded to some degree. Again, just how it is.
Be advised. The throw weights listed in powder bushing charts published by reloading equipment manufacturers are always light and in some cases, overly so if the bushing charts are strictly adhered to. Actual thrown charge weights will always be below those required for load performance specified in the reloading data. Liability issues demand this in today's world.
So my best advice here is avoid selecting a powder bushing only by the published bushing charts. Always use an accurate reloading scale to carefully check weigh your initial powder drops when selecting a powder bushing. Simply select the actual bushing which throws within a 10th of a grain of the powder charge weight specified in the load data. Doing so will help you avoid squib loads and cold weather load performance issues.
Also, always select hulls w/ undamaged hull mouths and avoid using any with worn out crimp folds. Then always adjust your reloading press to get firm well formed crimps. Doing so will always help you get the best, most dependable performance from your reloads under any conditions. Hope my input helps. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|