Secret squirrel superformance powder

N

Nosler guy

New member
Hey all,

Just wanted to drop a little note about that secret squirrel ball powder known as Superformance. It's no surprise that there's a lot of confusion and discussions about this powder and what it works for. The first thing I'll bring up is the reason there is little data on the stuff. This is due to an agreement between Hodgdon and Hornady that no data will be advertised on the powder unless it out performs other powders by about 60 fps. The truth is it will work for several calibers including the 270 with heavier bullets and 30-06 as well. It's all about that burn rate. I'm gearing up for a test run in a 243 55 gr nos bt. There's no data for this load because the slow burn rate requires more powder to reach velocity than will fit inside a standard case. But all cases are made equally right? Not even close, a good piece of brass like norma and nosler are lighter, more consistent and have a larger combustion chamber making less pressure and more volume for powder. This being said, it should be plenty possible to fit 53-54 gr of the ball powder and get that dinky little projectile up to speed (3900-4000 fps) on another note 70 gr bullets chronograph pretty close to advertised with sd's in the 15 range in a 243. I hope this helps and if it doesn't feel free to send me questions or even a nasty gram if you disagree.
 
Superformance

NOS:

I'm with you on the Hodgdon SP powder. I've just started loading some different cals. for it using data extrapolated from W-760/414 thru R-17 and H-4350; Starting low and working up. LOOKS PRETTY PROMISING.

WILL.
 
NG:
I have been checking my loads over an OEHLER 35P since obtaining one upon my return from GULF 1 in '91.
All testing is done at 12' from the first (start) screen..Either handgun or rifle.

I used to give out my loads, but I don't any more, as I tend to load on the hot side with some of my stuff. I will say, however, that the lowest [ES/SD figures and accuracy] tend to come toward the max to over-max loadings, including moderately to heavily compressed loads, and I don't want to be responsible for anything which may harmful/dangerous to anyone else's firearms due to using my data.
I know [that] you did not ask for this bit of info, but thought I'd throw it in.
Good luck in your load work-up.

WILL
 
Will-j,

A good practice is to give the distance from the muzzle to the half-way point between your start and stop screens (or, in your Oehler's case, the distance from the muzzle to the check screen). That's the average distance between your start and stop screens, which is where the bullet will have been when it had an instantaneous velocity your measurement most closely corresponds to. The advantage to reporting it this way is that it makes it irrelevant what what your actual screen spacing was (1 ft, 2 ft, 4 ft, 8 ft, whatever). SAAMI velocities, for example, are always given as 15 foot velocities, but their standard actually puts the start screen at 5 feet and the stop screen at 25 feet for the old 100 kHz clocked break wire chronographs.

I will be interested to see what happens to pressure from SP when a strain gauge goes on one of these chambers. I want to know whether the more progressive burning helps or hurts with the reflected secondary spike readings associated with slow powders and light bullets. I can come up with rationales for either case, depending on how the powder was formulated or shaped to do what it does.
 
U N; With the 12'/start screen distance I automatically set the middle/proof screen at 14' with a 4' total screen spacing, for now.
While not the 15' as used by SAMMI, it is easier to set up and for all intents and purposes, is "Close enough for layman's work"... To paraphrase someone's original ditty.
Seriously though; I'm working on an 8' and possibly a 12' spacing for more accurate readings, but screen alignment is a little more difficult with the longer spacing, so for now, 4' is adequate. I fully realize I will never get as accurate as SAMMI with my setup, but for now 'close enough' is good-enough for me.. A few FPS one way or another is of no importance to me. With 3 (avg) different firearms in the same chambering , with results varying by more than just a few FPS and too many chamberings to keep count, I'd found long ago that each one is a separate entity with its own preferences and optimum load data. However, given the avg. results from all collected data and differences in equipment used, my results are not that far off from published data. A little higher here, a little lower there, close enough.

I do appreciate the info though as each post helps me to stay on top of the loading game and keeps me aware of possibly something I may have missed or taken for granted through the years. A majority of the time, I check and triple-check myself and I've caught myself in some errant [miscalculations]and loading procedures, so I definitely appreciate any help.. Getting older is certainly no fun.. I was told once, long ago. "There are old reloaders, and there are foolish reloaders. But there are no old, foolish reloaders. I think I'd like to stick around long enough to check that out as much as possible.
I'd like to think [Not foolish am I]

You have a good weekend... What's left of it.

WILL
 
Will,

You are correct about the setup issues. I have taken to removing the bolt from a rifle and setting it up on target on bags with a laser bore sighter installed. I then use the light from the bore sighter on my palm held in the middle of the screen opening to line the screens up. It saves having to go back and forth from the bench to check progress.

I also have a yellow plastic chamber safety flag I set into the open breech of the rifle on the bags that has the words "Remove Bore Sighter First" printed on it. I've seen a couple of photos of what is left of the barrels of those who forgot to remove them before firing.

Nothing wrong with 14' or any other distance as long as the chronograph is triggering properly there. The value of the information is in figuring muzzle velocity. Obviously it matters more for the military 78 foot velocity measurements.

Have a good rest of the weekend yourself,

Nick
 
I've used the laser bore sighter also. I attached Saran Wrap to the screens to line up the centers and all was fairly well until trying to line up everything with the 100yd target. The 4' spacing was easiest, and it saves ammo [sighting in and *chronoing* together] especially with supplies as they are now.
The 8' and 12' spacings seemed to be a little more consistent with the figures, but way harder--near impossible to line up w/ the 100yd target....New screens will attest to that.

But, we'll get it all figured out. In time.
Catch you later.

WILL.
 
Will,

Myself and the professional lab junkies full heartedly agree. Compressed loads take away several variables that negatively affect accuracy. Ultimately it depends on what musical note, or (node) your barrel likes best. There has been some unrecorded testing done in several calibers done where the strain gauge readings were in the 70k area in 60k barrels but, as you said, no one wants to be responsible for some goofball blowing his face off. Said testing may or may not have included blending pistol and rifle powder in a rifle cartridge.

I did do some testing with superforn and 55gr bullets with a mag primer in a 6mm 22 in barrel. Results were 3960 fps and sd's in the 18 range. Pretty average for ball powder but an SD of 18 can easily be 4" drop variation at 400 yds so, as can be expected, you've got a 400 yd coyote killing round with little chance of salvaging a pelt.
 
I had bad experiences with superformance powder. I tried duplicating the 75 grain load for .243 advertised on the cansiter and it fell way short of its claim. I also tried it in my .300 win mag with 180 ssts an in my .243 with 100 btsps....got up to full speed but I have one word to describe what it did....ERRATIC! We're talking an extreme spread of 200 feet per second with all loads tried. I'm glad to hear some are having success with it...I did not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top