Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns Hogdon Universal powder?

I am on my last can of Unique. So I saw a recommendation for Universal because it is cleaner and meters will in a progressive press. I also did a search, and it looks like it uses the same data? Is that true? Just checking.
My application would be 44 special, 45 LC, probably 45ACP.


http://www.adi-powders.com.au/powder-equivalents/

I use universal in my .44 special. Only thing that I have ever used as I bought the pistol during the powder shortage, and this was what I found. Works good for me, through a lee progressive. Should add that I do not try for a max load. Might up it a little since I went to powder coating, but also maybe not. miles

Look at the Reloading Software section here and see my recent post about .44Mag/Spl Test Data. I posted chrono results for Universal powder in both .44 Magnum and Special loadings compared to loads of 10 grains Unique in a Magnum and 7.5 grains Unique in a Special. I too have been making the switch from Unique to Universal. I have not been able to find much detailed info about substituting other than some have said direct substitute is fine. I may be more analytical than many and I thought that may be basically true with a few combinations, but powders have different pressure spikes at different produced velocities. In asking for info on various forums, I got a few helpful answers and a bunch of smug smart ass crap answers, mostly telling me to go buy a reloading manual. As if I don't already have about a dozen and I do know how to read them. I also know how to look at manufacturers websites. So, I bought a chronograph and did some experimenting. Unfortunately, I have no way of measuring pressure, but I saw no signs of over pressure at all with my various test loads. Note that in my testing I used the same bullet, a .430" sized coated lead 240 grain Keith style from BayouBullets.com in both magnum and special cases.

I plan to do similar testing with .38 Special in both 2" and 4" barrels using Unique, Universal, and Titegroup powders in the near future.

I have and use both Unique and Universal in 44 Special and 44 Magnum. I don’t, however, use either as a maximum load powder. In my 44 Specials, I use the two powders interchangeably as I don’t try to magnumize the Special. With the 250 gr. Keith style SWC my load with either is 6.6 grains for 800 to 880 fps, depending on which gun I’m shooting. I do find that at that loading, Universal gives a bit more velocity than Unique so is likely generating a tad more pressure. However, since this is in the “standard” range for the Special, I don’t worry about the slight difference. I also use both powders as reduced load powders in my 44Magnums, not exceeding 1000 to 1050 fps.

In my experience, Universal is a bit cleaner burning than Unique, but in both cartridges Unique seems to be a tad more accurate.

I have used a good bit of AA#5 and WSF for my .38 & 45acp loads and they're a fine ball powder that measure great.

Universal is great for 850-1100 fps loads in the 44 mag and 45 colt.

Universal is a great replacement powder, I've used it for decades in multiple cartridges.

It DOES NOT use identical data to Unique, ADI's chart means that they are close to the same burn rate and should both work for the same purposes and charges will be similar.

Use the data here:

http://www.hodgdonreloading.com/data/pistol

He complains about being able to read and understand load books.
His load On special loads, 7.7 gr. of Universal seems to be equivalent to 7.5 grains of Unique.
Hodgdons for 240 grain cast in 44 special

BULLET WEIGHT240 GR. CAST LSWC
ManufacturerHodgdon
PowderUniversal
Bullet Diameter.430"
C.O.L.1.450"
Starting Load
Grains 4.9
Velocity (ft/s)721
Pressure8,000 CUP
Maximum Load
Grains 5.6
Velocity (ft/s)873
Pressure13,300 CUP

Holy sheep dip coming on and posting a load 2.1 grains over max published. The only manual that comes close is 1999 Speer at 6.8 😀 Still almost a grain over.

I have used it for years. Have not used much Unique, but a bunch of W231. Loads are near identical, but not exact. I don't use it in magnum loads.H110 or 2400 is more suitable, Usually I am in the 4.4 - 4.5 gr realm for target loads in a .357b case w/158 gr cast.

9mm with 125 or 115gr FNJ, I use 4.4 gr of either W231 or Universal, but drop the Universal to 3.3 gr for a147 gr bullet.

It is the cleanest burning handgun powder I have ever used. I run 300-400 rounds thru a semi or revolver with no sticking problems at all.With W231,about 300 is the most before I need to do some cleaning

Yes, many load data do indicate these ranges. After much investigation, I have concluded that these figures are formulated for 1920s era pistols. Knowledgeable gun writers/shooters such as Skeeter Skelton and Elmer Keith, particularly Skelton regularly used 7.5 gr. Unique in newer pistols. With the exception of Charter Arms, I don't think anyone is currently making a .44 Special pistol now and have not for quite a few years. I use this in a recently manufactured .44 Magnum S&W that is designed for Magnum pressures, not something that was used in the heyday of Bonnie & Clyde, which these referenced loads mentioned were published for. These .44 Special loads using 7.5 grains Unique or 7.5 - 7.7 grains Universal did not show any hint of over pressure whatsoever. No excessive case expansion - none were at the least tight at all in extraction - and no primer bulging. I have probably fired a 150 or so of these .44 Special loads through this gun before doing my chronograph test that I mentioned. If you don't believe my findings, there are plenty of people who post on the Campfire and Cast Boolits, etc., that will report the same from their experiences. Trust me, I was very concerned when I saw the published data that you referred to myself. I did a fair amount of research on the topic and I soon realized that something was not adding up about this. That this data is outdated is my conclusion and the reason being is that few pistols have been specifically chambered for Specials in many years.

I have a Ruger Bisley 44 special, and I feel comfortable with up to 25000 CUP. I generally run 7.0 grains unique with 240 cast, so I was thinking the same for Universal. I have AA #9 for heavier work. And a Ruger Bisley in 44 mag and 45LC for even more horsepower. Manuals tend to be way conservative for 44 special, due to some older weaker guns. Again I am just looking to be safe with moderate under 25000 cup loads in a Ruger.

http://www.goodrichfamilyassoc.org/44_Special_Articles/Brian%20Pearce%20on%20the%2044%20Special.pdf

http://www.goodrichfamilyassoc.org/44_Special_Articles/Ruger%20Lipsey%2044%20Special.pdf


http://reloadammo.com/44sloads.htm

Thank you for posting those in-depth articles. They confirm my findings about .44 Special load data.

Thank you for an intelligent post. I was wondering if this fellow was really just going to use Unique load data for Universal.
Also, 44spl IS a 14Kcup cartridge. Some internet forum 44spl loads are really light 44mag loads in stubby 44spl brass - never pressure tested.

Henry,

Have you found them to be interchangeable?

I doesn't take long looking at manuals to see that they are
similar powders useful in the same applications.

Identical? No.
But I'm fairly certain someone was looking at Unique when they
developed Universal. Consider the name even.

Most book loads are probably closer comparing one to the other,
than the differences for Unique loads over the last 50 years.
Whether you different manufactures books, or different editions.
Heck, search a bunch of H110/296 loads. They will vary quite a bit,
even though they are the exact same powder.

Ironic really.
Consider the amount of precision we employ in our hobby.
Then realize how much variance there can be in the component
That makes the whole thing work!

The more one learns about the whole shooting thing, and the
infinite variables not in our control, the more you wonder how
it can work so well.

I used it for a few years for the 44 Special and 44 mag loads....just didn't meter well for me....however....it was very good in my 28ga shotgun loads!

deflave:
As to your question if I found Universal to be the same load data as Unique, let me be very careful with my answer: I refer you to my test results that I posted on the Reloading Software section a couple of days ago. The post is titled .44Mag/Spl Load Data, or something similar to that. What I did was compare my current "go to" loads for .44 Mag - 10 gr Unique & 240 gr coated lead SWC and for .44 Spl - 7.5 gr Unique & 240 gr coated lead SWC, to equivalent amounts of Universal. I shot 3 or more examples of all the loads tested over a chronograph and recorded the results for each. The Universal loaded cartridges were loaded in increments of .1 grains up and .1 grains down from the direct base test load. All loads were shot at the same session, so there was no variance in weather conditions. All powder charges were weighed on an electronic scale and Remington primers were used on all loads. Brass was used, mixed headstamp, and very clean before loading. All loads were fired from the same gun, a S&W M-69 4.25" barrel. As to the magnum load of 10 gr Unique, I found that velocity was the same as 10 gr Universal. As to the special load of 7.5 gr Unique, I found that velocity was equivalent to 7.6 or 7.7 gr Universal. Accuracy with the special load of Universal was noticeably best with 7.7 gr Universal. Was it actually the load, or was it me taking better care with the shots?
Either way, I really liked the 7.7 gr special load with this gun/bullet combination.

Note that this test was only a comparison of these two powders in these two loads in .44Mag/Spl. I don't claim that equivalent performance in other cartridges such as .38 Spl, 9 MM, etc., will give the same close performance. However, I have heard that similar results in .38 Spl can be had. I intend to do a similar experiment with .38s in the future using both a 2" and a 4" barrel and both 158 gr coated lead SWCs and 138 gr. coated lead solid base WCs. I have to wait on my bullet order to be delivered and find the time to put it all together. I will post results after I do the test. Keep in mind that although these two powders do have very similar burn rates, they probably have different pressure spike points depending on charge size, bullet weight, case capacity, etc., etc. All I can say for sure at this point is for my "go to" loads for .44Mag/Spl they are interchangeable. I make no claims for any other loadings. BTW - Universal is much cleaner burning than Unique (aka "Kingsford"). Best Regards to all.

This is correct, even though Terry posted some good articles which also pointed out that no manufacturers produced those Kieth loads until Ruger came out with the Blackhawk and S&W the 29. Why? Because there were 44 specials made between 1907 and the time they were introduced.
So 50 years of production of handguns that may or may not be able to handle 18,800 psi. This is also the reason that Hodgdon lists 5.6 grains under a 240 @ 13,300 cup as max. 700 cup isn’t much room.
Terry’s posted articles also name the sources they used for their data. 1 being Hodgdons and 1 being Speer 12, the 6.8 I got was Speer 13 but Speer dropped Universal from their online data.
I have 2 set rules.
1. for posting load data for any gun is that if I can’t quote at least two valid source’s that has the load I am using listed, or if I am over the max listed I won’t divulge that load as it’s safe only in my guns.
2. Never ever use a load listed on the internet by an individual that I can’t find in at least 1 preferably 2 known sources for that load. But even then I start low and work up.
Now if the guy wants to publish it I have no problem until they start making out that 2 grains over is safe for ALL 44 specials or whatever then that’s not good. Mainly comparing what you can do with a stout Blackhawk or a Model 29 to what you can do with a 1910 revolver is just stupid.

Universal works well in .45Colt and .45acp. No help with .44 spl. Work good in .38 spl also. To me, it's very close to Unique in .45 Colt use and .45acp. As has been mentioned, Universal meters better, Unique may be a bit more accurate. It really is a toss up, they're that close.

Yes to that.

Universal is similar to Unique because it's intended to be. I consider it basically an "improved Unique" so to speak, in that pretty much anything Unique is good for, Universal will also do with better metering and cleaner burning.

With that said I still have a lot of Unique (even an unopened 4 lb cardboard canister from the Hercules days) to use up, but end up using Universal most of the time. They are very close to each other in performance and load data.