Steve Anderson Posted April 10, 2002 Share Posted April 10, 2002 It seem like most of the top shooters prefer fast powders in their stock/limited guns, and I wonder what I'm missing. I did an a/b/c comparison with w231, titegroup, and power pistol, and found power pistol to feel much softer and smoother. Granted, this test was at 125 PF in the 9mm, but the difference was clear to me. Do I have a different preference, or is it that some powders feel better than others, and not that all fast powders feel better than all slower powders? Are the preferencs different in open comped guns? Thanks in advance, Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benos Posted April 10, 2002 Share Posted April 10, 2002 Steve, I've never heard of "power pistol," so no help there. Basically, the theory is - fast burning powders will produce less "felt recoil" in a pistol without a compensator because the burn time is faster. Slower burning powders tend to exert a "longer push" on the gun instead of the fast burning powders quick "bang and it's over" recoil. Conversely, slower burning powders work better the compensator better because the pressure remains high in the comp, whereas a fast burning powder would not have any residual pressure left to "work" the comp. Did that make any sense? be Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Anderson Posted April 10, 2002 Author Share Posted April 10, 2002 That confirms the theory I had in my head. Power Pistol is made by Alliant, and it's about 5-10 "rungs" down the burn rate chart fron titegroup. It's chief advantage is its ability to generate high velocity at low pressures in 9 and 40. I like it a lot, but no one else seems to. I will try some "clays" to see if I can replace sliced bread, but I guess the slower recoil may just feel better for me..Titegroup was my least favorite in feel, more of a smack than a push. I just ordered some slide glide today, so I'm anxious to try that, too. Thanks again, Steve P.S. 1 - I won my classifer this weekend in production for the first time. Feels good! P.S. 2 - I got called a gamer at the range this past week for the first time. Should I be proud? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted April 10, 2002 Share Posted April 10, 2002 Steve, Some of the GlockTalk reloaders seem to like Power Pistol. Guys shooting 10mm seem to like it (TDean?). Might be some Power Pistol fans in the reloading section of 1911forums.com as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TDean Posted April 11, 2002 Share Posted April 11, 2002 Never tried PP, use TG exclusivley though. Love the stuff...can't get enough of it....sprinkle it on my steak....brush my teeth with it....mmmmm! This thread has echos of "light -vs- heavy" recoil spring discussions. Bottom line Steve, if you prefer the softer recoil in your blaster put a 20# recoil spring in and use a slow powder. If you want to keep the sights on target better during rapid fire, use fast powder with a 14# spring. Do some experiments....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbear38S Posted April 11, 2002 Share Posted April 11, 2002 I don't think you can really evaluate recoil without shooting a few stages. Whenever I A/B new loads and I'm thinking about recoil, they all feel stiff - because I'm looking for it I suppose. If I'm thinking about movement and shot placement, I don't notice the recoil one bit. After shooting a few stages and not concentrating about how a load feels, I come away with an impression that a load feels faster or slower, the gun kicks harder or less. That's the only way I can really decide which is better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Anderson Posted April 11, 2002 Author Share Posted April 11, 2002 TDean, I will gladly trade the softer impulse for a flatter shooting gun. Damn, I didn't pay attention to the "flat factor." I was focusing on feel. The other poster is probly right about shooting a stage to fully evaluate all the characteristics. Time for more comparisons! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted April 11, 2002 Share Posted April 11, 2002 Good point...the clock doesn't lie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos Posted April 11, 2002 Share Posted April 11, 2002 Try the faster powders - by all means - I use and endorse straight Clays in .40 and .45, though I don't load for 9x19 so not sure if the benefits will be as great in 9mm as in the bigger bores. I also like the VV and Vectan powders, but if powder selection is limited in your immediate buying area, traditional US company fast burners include Bullseye, 231/HP-38 (close but not identical product) and Titegroup. Can't recomend Reddot - used pounds and pounds of it in 12 gauge - filthy stuff no matter how you load it. Clays was my salvation in 12 ga and .45. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick Sweeney Posted April 11, 2002 Share Posted April 11, 2002 I agree with the rest of the crowd, set up stages, or run standard drills, and compare the results and not just the feel. As for the why, recoil (mathematically) is the total of the weights of the ejecta and their velocities. Powder is (depending on the source of the equations) deemed to leave the muzzle at 4,000 or 4,700 fps. So, 4.5 grains @ 4,700 vs. 5.4 gr @4,700 explains some of the felt difference. (Ignore for the moment that a slower-burning powder would have a higher muzzle pressure and thus a higher exit velocity and greater jetting thrust.) However, the second of Mr. Newtons laws doesn't help us much in sorting out what slide mass, spring rate, the actual burning rate and curve peak of the powder, and just how much force it takes to unlock the mechanism. Shoot for score and ignore the feel is my approach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Anderson Posted April 11, 2002 Author Share Posted April 11, 2002 Kyle, I just realized last night we shoot at the same club in circleville. Small world... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benos Posted April 13, 2002 Share Posted April 13, 2002 I feel compelled to say this Well, like everything else, these decisions are influenced by your temperament. Pat's preference - Shoot for score and ignore the feel - makes total sense for an "ST." ST's filter incoming data by way of the five senses, and then make decisions based on logical conclusions. Conversely, "NF's" receive incoming information by way of the illusive quality of Intuition, and then decide how to proceed with by "what feels right." Man, talk about non-tangible (NF) - that's why ST's usually excel at sports... be Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Dunlop Posted April 14, 2002 Share Posted April 14, 2002 Brian, ST's NF's? Pardon my ignorance, but what do they stand for, thanks, P.D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Schwab Posted April 14, 2002 Share Posted April 14, 2002 Phil, I believe it was Duane Thomas who posted an excellent desciption of the personality types awhile back in this forum. I was unable to find his post, but this website should help you: http://www.keirsey.com/sixteenroles.html Hope this helps. Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Dunlop Posted April 14, 2002 Share Posted April 14, 2002 thanks Bill! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick Sweeney Posted April 15, 2002 Share Posted April 15, 2002 That would also explain why my Tae Kwon Do Master was always on the outs with the old school Koreans here in the US and back home. He didn't give squat about tradition when it came to technique, and we'd spend the Sunday afternoon classes (black belt level, anyone could attend, but it won't be slowed down for you) analyzing and adapting the old and new. We spent a series of weekends analyzing Aikido, and worked out techniques to dismember anyone who tried it. The fun series were the footsweep Sundays, where we'd watch Mr. Shim at 140 lbs sweeping the biggest guys you'd ever see off their feet. Analytical, thorough, merciless. He didn't want us to fight in tournaments not because he was afraid our techniques would be "shown up." His position was that we'd learn bad habits. He was right, as I found out when I entered a full-contact tournament and was disqualified for "excessive contact." I'd have won (as a 175lb 1st Dan in Heavyweight)if I'd followed the rules. But it would have meant turning down such beautiful opportunities to dish out pain to sloppy 3rd & 4th Dans. Can the knowledge be applied to the IPSC vs. IDPA argument? Yes, but both would suffer. (Edited by Patrick Sweeney at 6:11 am on April 16, 2002) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Kline Posted April 16, 2002 Share Posted April 16, 2002 Patrick, very interesting. I heard the bad things about going 50% or lower has on real life situations. We try not to do this in Defensive Tactics in Law Enforcement, but sometimes they had to cause the weak would never make to the streets to work. Sorry for thread drift. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benos Posted April 18, 2002 Share Posted April 18, 2002 Phil, There's also some Temperament links on my main web site (not that anyone knows where that is here: http://www.brianenos.com/pages/links.html be Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now