|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
June 10, 2012, 09:58 AM | #1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 17, 2011
Posts: 124
|
Alliant Unique Powder - Label Change
Started reloading again a year ago. Picked Unique because it seemed a good all round powder, similar to Universal I used back in caveman times. Last two trips to pick up a new supply, everyone was out of stock. Then I realized they changed the label from orange (new cleaner) to grey with an old look.
What gives? Is this the same formula, do I need to redo my new custom load data? |
June 10, 2012, 10:11 AM | #2 |
Junior member
Join Date: January 24, 2010
Location: South West Riverside County California
Posts: 2,763
|
Unique load data has never changed. Even real old "dirty" formula has same properties as current production. It is "cleaner", especially if loaded mid to mid-high levels.
|
June 10, 2012, 10:12 AM | #3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 25, 2001
Location: Alabama
Posts: 18,541
|
They have changed the label more than once over the years, the powder formulation remains the same.
|
June 10, 2012, 10:20 AM | #4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 17, 2011
Posts: 124
|
Tnx, that is good to know.
|
June 10, 2012, 03:06 PM | #5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 17, 2006
Location: TX
Posts: 513
|
I've a couple of big jugs of Unique less than a year old; both have orange labels. And yes, the formula hasn't changed except for "cleaner." Use the same load data.
__________________
If you want to shoot...shoot...don't talk! Tuco USAF Munitions 1969-1992 RVN 1972-1973 |
June 11, 2012, 08:50 AM | #6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 16, 2008
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 11,061
|
They changed the label to make me look like an idiot. I pawed all through the powder section then ask the clerk, who promply pointed to several cans that I had been moving around trying to find unique.
__________________
Kraig Stuart CPT USAR Ret USAMU Sniper School Distinguished Rifle Badge 1071 |
June 11, 2012, 09:34 PM | #7 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 17, 2011
Posts: 124
|
Good to know I'm not the only one to get thrown for a loop. I had to of moved it looking for the big orange label too. Probably twice.
|
June 11, 2012, 10:03 PM | #8 |
Staff
Join Date: March 4, 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 21,063
|
Seargeant,
The only thing that puzzled me about your first post is the "caveman days" comment. Unique is one of the oldest powders available, having been, by some accounts, introduced as early as 1890 by Laflin and Rand as their "Infallible" powder, the name later having been changed either by DuPont, who bought L&R, or by Hercules, the company that resulted from DuPont's divestiture of that business. Universal, on the other hand, is actually rebranded AP70N from ADI in Australia, and is the more modern and cleaner burning powder. Many have gone in the opposite direction you have, and switched to Universal in place of Unique to avoid Unique's well-known tendency to meter irregularly in some measures because of its large flake size. Alliant changed the Unique manufacturing process in the 1990's to reduce it's fouling, so the fouling improvement is not so great now as it was originally, but the flakes are still fairly large.
__________________
Gunsite Orange Hat Family Member CMP Certified GSM Master Instructor NRA Certified Rifle Instructor NRA Benefactor Member and Golden Eagle |
June 11, 2012, 10:41 PM | #9 |
Junior member
Join Date: January 24, 2010
Location: South West Riverside County California
Posts: 2,763
|
Just had a way too long thread on the metering issue. For many, myself included, it is a non-issue.
|
June 13, 2012, 09:54 AM | #10 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 25, 2001
Location: Alabama
Posts: 18,541
|
Quote:
|
|
June 13, 2012, 11:38 AM | #11 |
Staff
Join Date: March 4, 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 21,063
|
My mind is probably playing tricks on me, but I thought the flakes looked different. May just be my imagination, though. Been a few years since the last old can was gone. If they just cleaned out the finings, my guess is a lot of loose graphite went with it. That certainly spreads around a good bit.
__________________
Gunsite Orange Hat Family Member CMP Certified GSM Master Instructor NRA Certified Rifle Instructor NRA Benefactor Member and Golden Eagle |
June 13, 2012, 07:12 PM | #12 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 17, 2011
Posts: 124
|
Since Universal is similar to Unique. Maybe I will buy some to play with next time. Even pull out my old "reload by hammer" kit.
|
June 15, 2012, 10:16 PM | #13 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 10, 2005
Location: Central , OR
Posts: 1,888
|
Quote:
|
|
June 17, 2012, 11:12 AM | #14 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 3, 1999
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 2,991
|
Some of us did not get better accuracy with universal which is why we switched back to Unique. I admit universal is more consistent measurement but on paper Unique worked better "for me" with lead in many calibers.
__________________
10mm and 357sig, the best things to come along since the 38 super! |
June 18, 2012, 09:40 PM | #15 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 10, 2005
Location: Central , OR
Posts: 1,888
|
Quote:
|
|
June 19, 2012, 10:41 AM | #16 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 27, 2007
Posts: 5,261
|
Quote:
Excellent answer! I have been using Unique and Bullseye for more than 20 years. I have measured the velocity, examined the extreme spreads and standard deviations, compared with other powders, such as the ball powder AA#5, and found no improvement in accuracy or velocity spreads with the "better" throwing powders. Delusional thinking extends to reloading. People think that better metering means better accuracy. That makes sense, better control of a variable must mean better control of the process, right?. Unfortunately, it does not. You have to shoot the load and measure the accuracy and velocity and often you will find that you are controlling a variable that makes no difference on paper.
__________________
If I'm not shooting, I'm reloading. |
|
June 19, 2012, 10:49 AM | #17 |
Staff
Join Date: March 4, 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 21,063
|
A gun showing preference for a particular powder is not at all uncommon. Many times it is tied to particular bullets and load levels, but sometimes it's across the board. Unfortunately, the only way to find out if your gun has such a preference is to try different powders. I've had good luck with Universal, but I can't say I've seen any accuracy difference between it and Unique in mid-range to +P level loads for the 1911; nor in the .44 Special. I've not compared them in any of the various thirty-six caliber handguns I have.
__________________
Gunsite Orange Hat Family Member CMP Certified GSM Master Instructor NRA Certified Rifle Instructor NRA Benefactor Member and Golden Eagle |
June 20, 2012, 08:33 PM | #18 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 17, 2011
Posts: 124
|
My cavemen days meant when I was reloading way back when with an hand kit and hammer. Could not afford much back then.
I think trying universal or another powder with the bullets and guns one shoots is a good idea. Although Unique seems to work good with everything I shoot, does not mean that there may be a more optimal powder for a certain gun bullet combination. Thanks for all the great input. |
June 21, 2012, 07:34 PM | #19 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 24, 2008
Location: GATOR COUNTRY HA HA HA!
Posts: 721
|
Just had a way too long thread on the metering issue. "[For many, myself included, it is a non-issue.]"
Same here No Problems Y/D
__________________
There's a GATOR in the bushes & She's Callin my name >Molly Hatchett< |
June 22, 2012, 09:29 PM | #20 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 10, 2005
Location: Central , OR
Posts: 1,888
|
I would easily get a .2gr + or - variation with Unique, one charge maybe 5.2 and the next would be 5.6gr. when 5.4gr is the max load this variation would bother me. I can throw AA#5 with no detectable variation so I use that instead.
|
|
|