One way to "calculate" the highest and best use for a certain powder is to look at pressure-tested data where that powder provides higher velocities in a certain cartridge/bullet combination. Since even with 140-grain bullets, Reloder 26 velocity lags far behind several other powders in the .264, a reasonable guess (no calculation needed) would be that with 100-grain bullets the pressure wouldn't be anywhere near optimum for the powder's design parameters.
But since you're apparently the only person on earth who knows anything about pressure-testing, that wouldn't mean much to you.
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.” John Steinbeck
Funny you should ask that, because if you knew jack [bleep] about propellant chemistry, you'd know that temp stability and nitroglycerin content has been an issue all the way back to Alfred Nobel trying to pawn Ballistite off on the French government in the 1880s. They were't as foolish as he'd hoped, spotted the stability problem, and stuck with the single base nitrocelulose Poudre B and thus got the first working smokeless cartridge. The Italians were more gullible and bought Nobel's mistake and lost 5 years jacking around with it until they invented Solenite which is still laughably unstable by modern standards but at least could be used.
So the role of nitroglycerin content has been understood for right at about 130 years now. Except by you. I guess some subjects just aren't covered in clown college
So there are no chemistry labs that you’re affiliated with that have any evidence of RL26 or TAC generally being terribly temp-sensitive. Roger.
Thanks for the history lesson, which contains nothing new. Not sure why you’d assume I was unaware of the history of smokeless powder. Then again, you make a lot of faulty assumptions.
Well for starters you might run the .264WM/100gr partition in Quick Load at which point you would find that RL-26 is in the 5 fastest powders, load density will be close to 100%, and it'll burn 100% in a 24" barrel. That combined with Alliant's recommending it for use in magnum rifles might get one thinking about whether it was an ideal powder for that particular bullet/cartridge. And it is, producing excellent accuracy and velocity. The only problem is that it's too temp unstable for all-weather use. Were it not for that, RL-26 would be great. As it is, RL-23 is a better choice despite being slower in that application and no more accurate.
Thanks for the history lesson, which contains nothing new. Not sure why you’d assume I was unaware of the history of smokeless powder
Because you've exposed your ignorance on the subject repeatedly in this thread. Why exactly would I expect you to know literally anything given what you've failed to know so far?
I guess some subjects just aren't covered in clown college
Apparently they're covered very well in a**hole college.
I deal in facts. That makes some people uncomfortable, which is perfectly fine by me. That's the great thing about facts - they're still true no matter what a clown like Jordan says. He can flop around in his big shoes and red nose all he likes, and the combustion chemistry of double based powders doesn't give a flying [bleep] what he thinks. It'll just be what it is, I'll be right, he'll be wrong, and life will go on.
I guess some subjects just aren't covered in clown college
Apparently they're covered very well in a**hole college.
I deal in facts. That makes some people uncomfortable, which is perfectly fine by me. That's the great thing about facts - they're still true no matter what a clown like Jordan says. He can flop around in his big shoes and red nose all he likes, and the combustion chemistry of double based powders doesn't give a flying [bleep] what he thinks. It'll just be what it is, I'll be right, he'll be wrong, and life will go on.
Goonga la goonga...
Screw you! I'm voting for Trump again!
Ecc 10:2 The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but that of a fool to the 24HCF.
Wow did this thread ever go south! I don’t even remember what my original question was, or if there’s any valuable information to be gained from this post anymore.
So without getting into a pissing match and attacking somebody else personally, can we please be adults and just answered these questions?
I need temp resistant powders for 6.5 Swede and .358 win. The 6.5 Swede I think I have covered with H4350. What is a good temp resistance powder to use with the 358?
Thanks for the history lesson, which contains nothing new. Not sure why you’d assume I was unaware of the history of smokeless powder
Because you've exposed your ignorance on the subject repeatedly in this thread. Why exactly would I expect you to know literally anything given what you've failed to know so far?
Your credibility up against those guys is a joke...
