D4064SSC vs. D4064... um, non-SSC?

kodiakjack

kodiakjack

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
17   0   0
Location
WMU 90
Is there any practical difference between “super short-cut” powders and regular extruded powders? Does it burn a tad faster because of the extra surface area?
 
yes and no.

If the powder was just cut, and nothing else was done, in theory it would burn a bit faster.

The SC products sold are made to duplicate the canister non-cut versions.

In an experiment with SC, nothing was done except cutting kernels shorter, and the result was a burn rate similar to the base powder. The normal lot to lot variations were larger than the effect of SC.
 
The short cut will be well received here... regular D4064 takes up a lot of space. Every load I worked up is quite compressed.
I'm a big Varget fan, so the faster D4064 powder with larger kernels is a bit perplexing to load...the cases are full but a little shy on velocity.
 
Hitzy said:
The short cut will be well received here... regular D4064 takes up a lot of space. Every load I worked up is quite compressed.
I'm a big Varget fan, so the faster D4064 powder with larger kernels is a bit perplexing to load...the cases are full but a little shy on velocity.
Click to expand...

Does the D4046 have longer kernels than IMR4064? Or the same? Or is the SC meant to better simulate actual IMR4064?
 
Ganderite said:
yes and no.

If the powder was just cut, and nothing else was done, in theory it would burn a bit faster.

The SC products sold are made to duplicate the canister non-cut versions.

In an experiment with SC, nothing was done except cutting kernels shorter, and the result was a burn rate similar to the base powder. The normal lot to lot variations were larger than the effect of SC.
Click to expand...


Ok. So you’re saying the D4064SSC will likely perform and meter more similarly to IMR4064 than the regular D4064 would?
 
kodiakjack said:
Ok. So you’re saying the D4064SSC will likely perform and meter more similarly to IMR4064 than the regular D4064 would?
Click to expand...

I believe the SSC stands for super short cut which should meter better than standard IMR4064 but as far as burn rate goes D4064SSC should be close enough to actual IMR4064 to use the same data. Although CanAm says to work up your own load at 10% less than IMR4064 data.

I bought 10lbs of D4064SSC and am not sure how I'm going to proceed with it. I typically use QuickLoad to create load data for these Dominion powders. I'll make up a series of loads going up in .5 gr increments, then chrony all of them and tune the IMR4064 burn rate data to average out across the different loads. Once that is done, I save the data under it's own name and it's very easy to use.


Here's a question for Ganderite, or anyone else who uses QuckLoad,

This D4064SSC will likely have a different volume in the case to adjust in addition to burn rate in order to be correct. Any thoughts on the best way to measure that out?? I have a bottle of IMR4064 on hand... perhaps just visually compare volume of both to each other with the same weight. I suppose I'd have to dump the loads into a full measure of water and compare the volume of overflow to do it properly? Would there be a better way?

Sorry for the thread jack. I may make a new thread for QuickLoad guys.
 
I just got my D4064SSC in the mail 10 min ago! Check it out.

Sorry for the skewed images. Phone camera.

View attachment 139898

View attachment 139899

View attachment 139900

View attachment 139901

I don’t know about D4064 but from what I have on Hand I can say the current production IMR4064 and the D4064SSC seem to be the same cut and presumably a very similar burn rate. The old can of IMR4064 is definitely a much longer cut and would likely have a different density per grain of charge. Clearly some chrono testing with equal charges is needed.
 
MuthaFunk said:
I just got my D4064SSC in the mail 10 min ago! Check it out.

Sorry for the skewed images. Phone camera.

View attachment 139898

View attachment 139899

View attachment 139900

View attachment 139901

I don’t know about D4064 but from what I have on Hand I can say the current production IMR4064 and the D4064SSC seem to be the same cut and presumably a very similar burn rate. The old can of IMR4064 is definitely a much longer cut and would likely have a different density per grain of charge. Clearly some chrono testing with equal charges is needed.
Click to expand...


Interesting.

I have a plastic jug of IMR4064 that looks like it has longer grains like your older can does.

I took a pic a while back. I’ll see if I can find it.
 
MuthaFunk said:
I believe the SSC stands for super short cut which should meter better than standard IMR4064 but as far as burn rate goes D4064SSC should be close enough to actual IMR4064 to use the same data. Although CanAm says to work up your own load at 10% less than IMR4064 data.

I bought 10lbs of D4064SSC and am not sure how I'm going to proceed with it. I typically use QuickLoad to create load data for these Dominion powders. I'll make up a series of loads going up in .5 gr increments, then chrony all of them and tune the IMR4064 burn rate data to average out across the different loads. Once that is done, I save the data under it's own name and it's very easy to use.


Here's a question for Ganderite, or anyone else who uses QuckLoad,

This D4064SSC will likely have a different volume in the case to adjust in addition to burn rate in order to be correct. Any thoughts on the best way to measure that out?? I have a bottle of IMR4064 on hand... perhaps just visually compare volume of both to each other with the same weight. I suppose I'd have to dump the loads into a full measure of water and compare the volume of overflow to do it properly? Would there be a better way?

Sorry for the thread jack. I may make a new thread for QuickLoad guys.
Click to expand...

No comment. I am not familiar with Quickload.

I assume it is used to help you calculate a good Start point for a load. In this case, we know where to Start. With 4064 data. The proof is the velocity.
 
Ah maybe not. Now that I see the pic, looks closer to your newer stuff.

https://i.imgur.com/rQEbnQv.png

rQEbnQv.png
 
The regular D4064 is not overly long and meters well. I have some of the SC version on the way to compare.
It is good powder in everything I've run it in so far.
 
Hitzy said:
The regular D4064 is not overly long and meters well. I have some of the SC version on the way to compare.
It is good powder in everything I've run it in so far.
Click to expand...

“Super” Short Cut made me think it would come out almost looking like ball powder, but MuthaFunk’s photo makes it look pretty comparable to regular 4064. I’d be curious to see your comparison between the two dominion powders when your jug shows up.

Not that any of it really matters, just curious.
 
kodiakjack said:
“Super” Short Cut made me think it would come out almost looking like ball powder, but MuthaFunk’s photo makes it look pretty comparable to regular 4064. I’d be curious to see your comparison between the two dominion powders when your jug shows up.

Not that any of it really matters, just curious.
Click to expand...

+1!
 
I have not used 4064 for a long time. But I recall it being a long kernel, much like 4831.

Somewhere I have my Expro data sheet (the Canadian maker of IMR powders) and I recall that 4895 and 4064 were the same powder with different cut lengths.

The longer cut of 4064 helped it fill cases better. It filled a 308 perfectly and left less airspace in a 3006.
 
Last edited:
I just did a little experiment by filling the same 7.62x55 Swiss case with both the old longer grain IMR4064 and the new Short cut version. I was able to get 2 extra grains in when filling up to the top of the neck.

Not exactly scientific but interesting to note. In quickload it shows a significant difference when the internal volume of the case is different. That’s one of the reasons seating depth can make such a difference. Anyway, I figure it’s worth noting that the SSC will leave a little more space in the case.

I’m curious if the shorter kernels will ignite better and compensate for the extra spare volume in the case and give the same velocity with the same charges or ?
 
Last edited:
Raider_1966 said:
Keep me posted I’d like to try this powder the cost is tempting. Just a bit of a concern of the space in a small case like 223.
Click to expand...

The SSC should be better... I was getting compressed loads at 22gr in 223 with D4064, where I was expecting that around 24gr.
Not that compressed is a bad thing however.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom