Trail Boss load availability.

S

Sweet Shooter

New member
Since I stopped hand loading, I'm missing being able to fill up a .223 case with Trail Boss topping it off with a 40gr v-Max. I'd like that load for cottontails... and for targets on the 50 yards line. Those that I had made are now gone. I don't miss the actual process of loading.

I'm wondering if there is a gap in the ammo market... why aren't there any commercially available reduced loads like that?

Would it be wise to petition someone here to load it for a fair price?
-SS-
 
What's your point? Trailboss is not a reduced load per se. Most cartridges can be filled up with it as long as the powder is not compressed. It's not like Blue Dot or pistol powders in a virtually case.
-SS-

Edit "... virtually empty case"
 
Last edited:
The point is safety.

Just because it fills the case does not mean it has the power needed to safely drive a small bore jacketed bullet out of the barrel. The danger is that pressure can drop off too quickly and the jacket can stick in the bore but the lead core continues out of the barrel leaving you with an obstructed bore.

TB is best used with lead bullets or FMJ's where the core cannot escape the jacket.
 
The OP's question goes to the question of if there's a market for such a load to be produced on a commercial basis by a manufacturer to substitute for his own handloads.

The technical question of if it "could" be commercially manufactured is not really a question... of course a reduced load could be developed that would be safe and reliable. It's a powder and bullet selection... not rocket science.


Willie

.
 
The ammo companies have apparently decided there is not enough market for such loads for them to bother with downloading even common calibers.
They probably think volume would be low, so they would have to set prices high, which would discourage people who say they want product at "a fair price."
 
That's the right answer... it's just a commercial decision, not a technical one.

Google "Gallery Load", which is the correct nomenclature for these loads. They have been loaded over the years, generally for military training purposes on inside ranges with high power rifles.

I ought to drag out the loading data for a .30-06 load that I used to load with .30 Carbine ball bullets... it was a fun cartridge to shoot. Been 30 years since I loaded any.

You know, though... I'd not considered using Trail Boss for much, but just read the loading data for it. Methinks it's time load up some lead bullets with it to shoot in my .450 NE Double Rifle just for fun. Reduced loads in the old heavy iron is always fun, and this powder looks like it would work fine without fillers (needed with other powders in the .450 Nitro Express). Thanks for the idea.


Willie

.
 
Last edited:
When I loaded it, I could get around 2000 fps with a 40gr V-Max. No recoil... it was like shooting a hot 22 mag, but more accurate. IMR told me personally that it was okay to fill a .223 case. Boy was it fun. Maybe I'll have to set the press back up...
-SS-
 
Safety is a big issue for ammo manufacturers, as are lawsuits. Willy is not the authority to proclaim correct answers. Why not write a letter to Winchester, Remington, etc. and ask?

I know all about Trailboss. I use it in 45 Colt with lead bullets.
 
Last edited:
@noelf2
Safety is a big issue for ammo manufacturers, as are lawsuits. Willy is not the authority to proclaim correct answers. Why not write a letter to Winchester, Remington, etc. and ask?

I know all about Trailboss. I use it in 45 Colt with lead bullets.
Click to expand...

Understood. But safety is a big issue with any ammo—Trailboss is not an experimental powder as you yourself know. I think Mr. Sutton's answer is valid. There's no reason why they don't bother to produce a round with TB other than money and marketing.

I think an email to request it should be in the offing. My OP was kinda-sorta seeing if anyone else felt like I did about it.

I have shot pounds of Trailboss .223 (not other bottlenecks yet though). I loaded it with all types of projectiles up to 60 gr (the rifle is 1x12 twist) the 60 grain shot a trajectory like a rainbow. But never a problem. I also understand that it is not a low pressure powder.

When I talked to IMR about it they said the reason they did not publish data for anything other than 55gr FMJ on their online calculator for that caliber is because they didn't see a problem with filling the case under any round. The golden rule is do not compress it. That's what they said. Justsayin'

Of course I'm not telling anyone here that I take responsibility for anything they attempt. I'm pretty sure there is always going to be someone capable of breaking something or hurting/killing themselves. That's Darwinian INHO.

-SS-
 
Reading:


"Safety is a big issue for ammo manufacturers, as are lawsuits. Willy is not the authority to proclaim correct answers. Why not write a letter to Winchester, Remington, etc. and ask?"

and

"There's no reason why they don't bother to produce a round with TB other than money and marketing."



Actually, what I said, as opposed to what words people are putting to my writing, is that there is no reason other than business economics why cartridge manufacturers do not load gallery loads as a normally available consumer product. There is 100% certainty that it could be done safely... it's BEEN done safely for decades for military rifle gallery cartridges. Tens of thousands of .30-06 gallery rounds were shot by the good old US Army over the decades... it's not new science.

I also never said that any of them would use Trailboss... any cartridge manufacturer doing this on a large volume production basis would likely use a powder designed for the specific use. Trailboss "as sold by the pound" would likely not be their choice.

Business is Business: Companies make what people buy. That's a universal rule. I stand by the answer that it's commercial decisions and not available powder that's the reason we cannot buy reduced powder charge, light bullet gallery cartridges in our local outlets.


The title of the original post is likely the issue here... the question should be "Why cannot I buy reduced powder cartridges that mimic the performance of what I have been handloading with Trailboss?" while leaving the powder selection open. It was within that paradigm that I answered what I answered.



Willie

.
 
Last edited:
there is no reason other than business economics why cartridge manufacturers do not load gallery loads as a normally available consumer product.
Click to expand...

Got any way to prove that besides "'cause I say so"? I'm not convinced.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top