Are you guys using faster burning powders for hammer hunters as well or just the absolute hammers?
-
If you are being asked to change your password, and unsure how to do it, follow these instructions. Click here
Hammer Bullets Pressure Testing Results
- Thread starter RockyMtnMT
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
RockyMtnMT
Official LRH Sponsor
Depends on the cartridge. Usually when you look at data powders that are on the faster side of the listed bunch will be in order. If there is plenty of case space with the slower ones they can also perform pretty well. Because the copper bullet is longer and will likely take up extra case space and had lower engraving pressure the slower powders are likely to run out of case space before you can get to pressure.
RockyMtnMT
Official LRH Sponsor
Yes.
MagnumManiac
Well-Known Member
Not me!
I learnt long ago now that 2 things are necessary for pressure reduction with long bullets, bore rider designs and HBN coating.
I just don't have the need for an expanding copper bullet, my CNC bullets is for smashing steel only. Brass is slipperier than copper too.
Cheers.
MagnumManiac
Well-Known Member
This statement by Hodgdon is absolutely laughable!
They DO NOT, and NEVER HAVE made a single kernel of powder!
They buy it, package it and distribute it…PERIOD.
Another thing, their data is sourced ELSEWHERE or from QL…
All the powder with the Extreme brand, H1000 etc, is made here in Australia and always has been, except for the original H4831 that was copied.
All powder lots are tested with a calorimeter bomb, this is NOT the same as a cartridge within a barrel, it tests heat, pressure and time. I have asked for the results, powder amounts used and have been told it is not for public information, it is proprietary and private and will never be released, I was an employee there at the time. So, yes the powder is tested, but not by Hodgdon.
Cheers.
MagnumManiac
Well-Known Member
Do you own pressure testing equipment or do you just tout that a PREDICTION tool is gospel?
Just curious.
Cheers.
Yeah that's what we were getting at, Folks taking it as the Gospel
Hey guys, If you have less x sectional area across the whole length of the bullet that contacts the lands, and then the barrel rifling, isn't as simple as
the frictional pressure normally lost and converted to heat with normal bullets is just less, so if you had even equal initial pressure, and less friction, velocity would end up being more because friction is less?
If indeed you can even experience lower initial pressures, and then you have less friction, then its a no brainer. You should get higher velocity from a hammer of the same weight if it has less cross section and or less cross section down the whole length of the bullet contacting the rifling.
the frictional pressure normally lost and converted to heat with normal bullets is just less, so if you had even equal initial pressure, and less friction, velocity would end up being more because friction is less?
If indeed you can even experience lower initial pressures, and then you have less friction, then its a no brainer. You should get higher velocity from a hammer of the same weight if it has less cross section and or less cross section down the whole length of the bullet contacting the rifling.
Where in their statement do they say they make powder? I also don't see where they say they don't source their information elsewhere?
What makes their statement laughable?
No and No. However if you do not view the GRT tool nor the work the gent Steve quoted is doing as credible then what is the point of this whole post to show hammers have lower start pressure.
Lou
Seems like w this new data, one ought into QL and change the initial pressure to 1400 or 1500 range and then history match using that to actual chrono velocities. I bet it would be fairly easy to make it all track.
It's not that easy
