I called Accurate About Solo 1000 load data.

[98sr20ve]

I just got off the phone with Accurate Powders. I went over a couple loads I have worked up. First is my 4.1 gr @ 1.130 OAL with 124gr FMJ. He at first said it was over pressure. Then I questioned the new data we all have which list 3.5 GR as MAX but also List 1025 FPS out of a 4 inch barrel. He said he had been quoting me lead data so he redid things. I could hear him typing in the background. Then he said it was a safe load based on my OAL and my FPS using a chrono. So I went on to the 3.6 gr 147gr @ 1.130 OAL load my friend Ron has been wondering about so much. He said that I (Ron) was not getting nearly the FPS he should be. BUT, that he was loading very long. All their data is at 1.100-1.114". He ran the numbers again and said "based on the FPS, that is a safe load". I asked him what he meant, because it sounds like he is using FPS as a guide to pressure. He said if you work it up on a chrono and don't try to exceed the FPS they have listed in their guide that FPS is a better indication of pressure in your gun. I am summarizing all this but still find it very interesting.

Old and New Data can be found in this thread.

http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=78983

[G-ManBart]

That makes sense. Pressure is pressure and if you're not getting the velocities they did you're either using a different barrel length, or something else is different...likely the pressure is different. Sure, some barrels are faster than others, but it's not usually a huge factor in handguns (and some of that may be that the slow barrels just don't develop as much pressure). So, if you aren't over their FPS I can see how it'd be a safe bet that you're within limits...or at least only slightly above them (still probably short of the really hot stuff you can buy). R,

Edited January 8, 2010 by G-ManBart

[twodownzero]

It's about time that they get realistic with us, so I'm glad to read this. I got data from their ballistician a while back that pretty much suggested that loading 147 grain 9mms with S1000 was idiotic, and if I did, and loaded anywhere near minimum charge to make minor in a 5" barrel, that I'd be well beyond what they'd publish as a maximum.

Strangely, that same load made minor in a 3.5" barrel and thousands upon thousands of them haven't blown up my friend's CZ or S&W, or my Glock, S&W, etc. I ws left to believe that someone at AA either made a huge mistake, or that I was really running a much higher pressure than I was aware.

Now I'm glad to know that making 900 or so FPS with a 147 grain bullet in a 9mm Luger from a 5" barrel is perfectly safe with Solo 1000, and I'll be happy to keep using it. In fact, Solo 1000 has become my favorite handgun powder ever...because it seems to work great for 9mm minor, .40 major, and .45 major. I couldn't ask for much better than that.

[kaiserb]

It's about time that they get realistic with us, so I'm glad to read this. I got data from their ballistician a while back that pretty much suggested that loading 147 grain 9mms with S1000 was idiotic, and if I did, and loaded anywhere near minimum charge to make minor in a 5" barrel, that I'd be well beyond what they'd publish as a maximum.

Strangely, that same load made minor in a 3.5" barrel and thousands upon thousands of them haven't blown up my friend's CZ or S&W, or my Glock, S&W, etc. I was left to believe that someone at AA either made a huge mistake, or that I was really running a much higher pressure than I was aware.

Now I'm glad to know that making 900 or so FPS with a 147 grain bullet in a 9mm Luger from a 5" barrel is perfectly safe with Solo 1000, and I'll be happy to keep using it. In fact, Solo 1000 has become my favorite handgun powder ever...because it seems to work great for 9mm minor, .40 major, and .45 major. I couldn't ask for much better than that.

I think we are the victim of ourselves and the product liability lawyers in this case. I have been running 3.5 gr S1000 with a BBI 147gr moly @1.145 OAL. It makes 133 PF (906 FPS) out of an M&P 9 Pro.

[98sr20ve]

That makes sense. Pressure is pressure and if you're not getting the velocities they did you're either using a different barrel length, or something else is different...likely the pressure is different. Sure, some barrels are faster than others, but it's not usually a huge factor in handguns (and some of that may be that the slow barrels just don't develop as much pressure). So, if you aren't over their FPS I can see how it'd be a safe bet that you're within limits...or at least only slightly above them (still probably short of the really hot stuff you can buy). R,

And their data is all out of a 4 inch barrel.

Also, I forgot to say. When we were talking I asked him how long it had been since this powder had been tested. His answer was "a very long time". With that said it's clear to me at least that the new data they released (the one with no OAL/Pressure/Primer data) is just some thing they decided to make up upon review of the old data. When we talked and I asked him a specific question about OAL he gave me the data from the intial Scotts Data that is way more realistic but does not include any 147gr data. I'm sticking with the old Scotts data. Based on my gun and chrono work it's pretty accurate.

[98sr20ve]

I don't know how to do a attachment. But I am talking about the data in Post 11 of the thread I linked in my first post.

[Tom E]

I like Solo 1000 but the load data seems to be a mystery.

"old data": 38 spec, 6" barrel 148 LWC (tgt) 1.200 oal 2.6 gr 829 fps

from my 6" 14-7 (38 spec): 148 hbwc 1.165 oal 2.8 gr 730 fps (typical "seated flush" 148 hbwc load)

My results with Solo 1000 in 45 acp also give much lower velocities than the "old" data but my results are from a revolver (S&W 625).

"old" data is from the link in post #1

Edited January 8, 2010 by Tom E

[twodownzero]

It's about time that they get realistic with us, so I'm glad to read this. I got data from their ballistician a while back that pretty much suggested that loading 147 grain 9mms with S1000 was idiotic, and if I did, and loaded anywhere near minimum charge to make minor in a 5" barrel, that I'd be well beyond what they'd publish as a maximum.

Strangely, that same load made minor in a 3.5" barrel and thousands upon thousands of them haven't blown up my friend's CZ or S&W, or my Glock, S&W, etc. I was left to believe that someone at AA either made a huge mistake, or that I was really running a much higher pressure than I was aware.

Now I'm glad to know that making 900 or so FPS with a 147 grain bullet in a 9mm Luger from a 5" barrel is perfectly safe with Solo 1000, and I'll be happy to keep using it. In fact, Solo 1000 has become my favorite handgun powder ever...because it seems to work great for 9mm minor, .40 major, and .45 major. I couldn't ask for much better than that.

I think we are the victim of ourselves and the product liability lawyers in this case. I have been running 3.5 gr S1000 with a BBI 147gr moly @1.145 OAL. It makes 133 PF (906 FPS) out of an M&P 9 Pro.

My experience with 3.5 S1000 and 147 grain LTC bullets showed very similar numbers from the same firearm.

http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?...c=79442&hl=

Edited January 8, 2010 by twodownzero

[RevKAB]

Has anyone loaded up low velocity 9mm with 115 gr polymer coated lead bullets (Blue Bullets)?  With Solo 1000

Edited March 24, 2020 by RevKAB
missed info

[AHI]

powder was discontinued several years ago 

many people liked it .but most have moved on to better and available powders.

 

[open17]

Solo had significant variation lot-to-lot, to the point where many production runs were rejected because they were

out of spec.  and they took it off the market.  Any time I bought a jug that was a different lot I had to chrono it and adjust.   

Darned stuff varied from 3.9-4.3 gr for the same 170 PF in my 45 acp/230 gr match load.     

[MemphisMechanic]

It was a great powder. I still have an unopened 8 pound jug of it I will use someday. But as stated… You really have to start at minimum and work your way up each time you open a new bottle. You never know exactly what density or burn rate you’re going to get.

 

I never loaded 115 grain with it, but the loads I did work up are shown in the table below.

 

[Lightningfrod]

I have a 8 lb jug of Solo 1000 that i bought 12 year’s back. I can’t find any data on it. 

[zzt]

On 1/5/2021 at 1:56 PM, Lightningfrod said:

I have a 8 lb jug of Solo 1000 that i bought 12 year’s back. I can’t find any data on it. 

 

Here is the old data.  Accurate 2003 Reloading Guide.pdf

 

[zzt]

On 1/5/2021 at 1:56 PM, Lightningfrod said:

I have a 8 lb jug of Solo 1000 that i bought 12 year’s back. I can’t find any data on it. 

 

And the new can be found here.  http://www.accuratepowder.com/load-data/  

Edited January 8, 2021 by zzt

[ArtyG]

I am confused.

 

My research is that Scott solo 1000 was made in Spain and Scott went under?

Alliant solo 1000 is a different formulation and burns slower which causes higher pressure in hand loads using old loading data.  I loved old Scott solo 1000 and have looked for new better powder.  Any suggestions are very welcome.

 

And, if you know the real story on old solo 1000 vs Alliant solo 1000, please educate me.

[Joe4d]

17 hours ago, ArtyG said:

I am confused.

 

My research is that Scott solo 1000 was made in Spain and Scott went under?

Alliant solo 1000 is a different formulation and burns slower which causes higher pressure in hand loads using old loading data.  I loved old Scott solo 1000 and have looked for new better powder.  Any suggestions are very welcome.

 

And, if you know the real story on old solo 1000 vs Alliant solo 1000, please educate me.

I dont think there was ever an Alliant Solo 1000,  Accurate  Solo 1000 ?
well any powder gonna need updated load data especially if MFG has changed. But if it is slower it would generate less peak pressure, not more. Either way, use recent data 

 

[OPENB]

Accurate bought Scott, and rolled their powders under that brand. Long time ago. I haven’t seen any Solo 1000 in forever. 45 guys loved it.