Hodgdon Burn Rate Chart (HS6, AC, CFE)

[d_striker]

Like many on here, I've always thought that the Hodgdon burn rate chart was incorrect in its listing of HS6 being faster than Autocomp and CFE.  It's easy to assume that since the charge weights of HS6 are much higher than AC and CFE, it had to be slower.

 

I spoke with Chris Hodgdon recently about this.  He told me that the burn rate charts ARE correct.  He said that HS6 was developed in the 1960's and is much older "technology" than AC and CFE.  HS6 does not burn as efficiently as CFE.  So while CFE takes less powder to make the same PF as HS6, it actually is slightly slower burning.  CFE was developed using modern technology and burns very efficiently.

 

Another interesting fact he shared with me is that CFE and AC are different powders.  He said while the burn rate is very close, they are definitely different powders.  CFE is not simply AC with the special copper fouling coating.  Like many, I always thought they were the same powders.

 

Just thought I would share.

 

[bigboy69]

I noticed with CFE I need to use more than WAC.

 

I have some major PF loaded with WAC at 7.3g under a 125blue bullet that is at 180PF

With 7.5 of CFE my PF was like 174.0 PF with ethe same bullet buth 9mm

[HoMiE]

On 1/18/2019 at 3:11 PM, d_striker said:

Another interesting fact he shared with me is that CFE and AC are different powders.  He said while the burn rate is very close, they are definitely different powders.  CFE is not simply AC with the special copper fouling coating.  Like many, I always thought they were the same powders.

 

Good to know they are not the same.