Some more about the new powder

caroby said:
I believe this... The Canadian General Dynamics produced powder is SMALL in diam and length as Boyd states.. Or for those used to any PD lot of Dupont IMR8208 or T powder / T32 otherwise known as Thunderbird, the powders are Identical except for the New Canadian made powder is not quite as BLACK in color...

Shot 2015 some more this Wed... Good greef It's good..! One of my 22PPC barrels PERKED UP..! Tune was here and here... An here... Amazing!
:D
cale
Click to expand...

Is the Canadian General Dynamics the same company that makes the Submarines for the US Navy?
 
ballpowder said:
What we shouldn't all forget is this new powder isn't new. It's been around in it's current form for 2 1/2 years evidently. So one must wonder what else in this burn rate is right under our noses. I personally have tinkered a bit with IMR 3031 and X-Terminator. But, in addition to those two RL7, RL10x, H335, IMR 4198, both 4895's, and even Benchmark need revisiting or just run threw paces huh? IMR 3031 is awesome with a chargemaster to do the dirty work....


Tim
Click to expand...

It's been interesting to see the growth in ChargeMasters at the shoots :).
 
Chargemaster

The things are kinda funny, we tried the Lyman and found it didn't like fluorescent lighting. Then tried the Chargemaster and it broke. Now searching for another one hopefully like new/used. Not critical for survival but pretty awesome when dealing with IMR powders or H50BMG:rolleyes:


Tim
 
SGJennings said:
The portion of General Dynamics, the Fort Worth Division, that made the F-16 was sold to Lockheed in 1993.
Click to expand...


Things change............. Even faster the last 15 or so years........ For the good and bad....

Fortunatly this powder "design" has "come back" from the past and been done right by the actual manufacture. Looks darn good so far..! Lotta Aggs an Two Gun an Three Gun an Four Gun 's... Too see....IF its got IT.

cale
 
Boyd Allen said:
If you find powder that is Accurate 2015, labeled as having been made in Canada, it is the identical physical shape and chemical composition as what may be called something like T32


I did a density comparison between the Canadian 2015 and some 2004 133. They were virtually identical in that respect.
Click to expand...

Boyd,

I am curious as to what the actual composition is; do you have any info?
Both the Western Powders and the IMR MSDS hold very little information.

A bit like apples and oranges (2015 and 133); I am quite doubtful that even if they weighed the same, that they have the same composition.

Thanks


Ken
 
Last edited:
I don't have any information about the chemistry of the latest 2015 or LT32.

I do have some information about someone's success shooting the new 2015.

My friend Marg Garin had a good weekend at Phoenix (Dec 1-2). Shooting both days of a two grand 1-200 yd. five shot unlimited match. She won one of the grands, shooting Canadian 2015 and Berger's Column bullets. Her Saturday morning aggregate was spoiled by extensive research by her and her husband Paul, who shared a rail and bench, on the extent to which perforating your first wind flag enlarges group sizes. (I have it on good authority that they were about 4") That same afternoon, she placed a close second to Tom Libby, and looking at her overall performance, I think that she would have had a really good chance at the "two gun". I think that this is a stellar performance for a relatively new shooter, who has probably been spending more time practicing for her cowboy shooting than with the rail. (cross training?)

http://benchrest.com/showthread.php?84978-Arizona-Invitational-5-Shot-Unlimited-December-1-2

One little tip, that will help prospective users, is that you should plan on cleaning (with bronze brush) between groups, and short stroking the back half of the bore, with an IOSSO loaded nylon brush, at day's end, at a minimum. (One can become spoiled from shooting 133, as compared with just about any other powder.)
 
Last edited:
Thanks Boyd

Boyd Allen said:
I don't have any information about the chemistry of the latest 2015 or LT32.

I do have some information about someone's success shooting the new 2015.

My friend Marg Garen had a good weekend at Phoenix (Dec 1-2). Shooting both days of a two grand 1-200 yd. five shot unlimited match. She won one of the grands, shooting Canadian 2015 and Berger's Column bullets. Her Saturday morning aggregate was spoiled by extensive research by her and her husband Paul, who shared a rail and bench, on the extent to which perforating your first wind flag enlarges group sizes. (I have it on good authority that they were about 4") That same afternoon, she placed a close second to Tom Libby, and looking at her overall performance, I think that she would have had a really good chance at the "two gun". I think that this is a stellar performance for a relatively new shooter, who has probably been spending more time practicing for her cowboy shooting than with the rail. (cross training?)

http://benchrest.com/showthread.php?84978-Arizona-Invitational-5-Shot-Unlimited-December-1-2

One little tip, that will help prospective users, is that you should plan on cleaning (with bronze brush) between groups, and short stroking the back half of the bore, with an IOSSO loaded nylon brush, at day's end, at a minimum. (One can become spoiled from shooting 133, as compared with just about any other powder.)
Click to expand...
Do you know the lot #? and the weight of the load?
 
I do know that it probably wasn't the first lot. As far as charge weight, they do not shoot a hot load, and I determined that the lot that I tested was about two Harrell's numbers slower than my '05 133. (I have not tested the powder that they are using.) About all that I could do with mine was to get into the 3,350 range with a long drop tube and a slow drop. If that is where your normally shoot, I suggest that you use a chronograph to find a load that gives a similar velocity to what is working with your current powder, and tune from there. Personally, I think that if the necessary cleaning regimen is followed, that the current 2015 may have a lot to recommend it, and is certainly worth trying. It certainly is easier to throw than 133.
 
Thanks again Boyd.Your experience must have been with lot 3. I had the exact same experience. Even with a long slow drop there was too much compression for me. However: Arround 3300 or a little less worked good. Which, forever reason, works better in my guns. That said : Using lot 1 is a different story,it was a little over a grain faster. I now go with weight because I discovered that clicks on Harrels can vary on different throwers. I dont think a load variation of a tenth one way or other matters in our game. but I can rely on weight more than clicks. By the way lot 1 was much more accurate for me
 
Also you are 100% correct on the cleaning. Not a problem for me because I'm not spoiled by 133. I dont think any thing will shoot any cleaner.but I'm not smart enuff to keep it in tune.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top