Is there an updated and complete one anywhere?

Seems that most are missing many of the new powders.

This is the most current I've seen:

https://www.hodgdon.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/burn-rate-color.pdf

Thanks for posting that link. I printed out a copy because we dinosaurs are kinda set in our ways with the old school powders and it's interesting to see where some of the "newbie" powders fit into the general scheme of things like burn rate.

I like the Western Powders chart. It actually shows burn rates in relation to other powders rather than just a linear list going from fastest to slowest. The chart is on the last page (112).

Western Powders Burn Rate Chart

They still don't show RL26.Very little data fort it also.

Lots of Reloder 26 data in the new Speer and Sierra manuals

Most serious reloaders have been using QuickLoad for years. The era of needing comprehensive reloading data is over, and that has to be affecting manufacturer's behavior. Since data doesn't drive sales any more (real performance as shown by QL and temp stability do) why bother?

QL doesn’t give ‘real performance’, it gives a modelled prediction. Chronographs give real performance data, and most manufacturers use them along with actual pressure measurements, not just predictive data, when publishing reloading manuals.

Actually at this point new manual writes dry lab it with QuickLoad - witness the Berger manual. But keep on thinking someone's pressure testing those loads for you

I could not disagree more. I've used QuickLOAD long enough to know NOT to rely on it as my only data source. It does not output load data, it outputs computed solutions that may or may not be accurate.

Straight out of Berger's Cautionary Statement available on the web: "The loading data in this manual has been developed using a combination of handloading software and live fire testing." I wouldn't say they do or do NOT do any pressure testing based solely on that.

You might take a look at the NORMA burn chart. Nothing else like it anywhere out there. Priceless for wildcatting and unpublished load combinations. It uses IMR4350 as the baseline. Then rates the powders both ways from there, listing relative PRESSURE in addition to relative velocity. Unfortunately, it hasn't been updated for a while. We have been subjected to a virtual blizzard of 'new and improved' powders in the last few years.

It should be noted that the “burn rate charts” do not test the rate of burning in a firearm, but in a “bomb” chamber. The question is, how does this test method relate to the burn rate in actual firearms? Perusing pressure-tested load data shows that two powders with adjacent chart positions can switch rate places in different cartridges, or even with different bullet weights in the same cartridge.

Most charts don’t show how much faster one powder is than an adjacent powder in the chart; they may be virtually the same, or they may differ quite a bit, we don’t know. These charts are interesting, but they shouldn’t be used as a definitive guide to powder performance - IMO anyway.


.

That's why they are called "Relative Burn Rate Charts". Caveat emptor definitely applies.

Nah, scratch that. Many of us serious reloaders have learned NOT to rely on Quickload.

Your points are well taken, and you are correct. However, two good charts are exceptions to the statement above, and are my favorites for that reason: the Western Powders chart, and the Lapua chart. I keep that Western chart on my reloading room wall, although I do wish they'd update it with the newest powders.

As mentioned above, burn rates are not absolutes, but the Western chart gives a pretty good visual of the relative burn rate compared to other powders.

https://www.accuratepowder.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/burn_rates.pdf

http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2014/01/powder-watch-n133-lt-32-and-norma-powders-available-now/