Thread: Quickload powder assumptions

I got a reply (finally) from the Quickload developer Hartmut Broemel regarding powder burning rate factors for ADI powders.

The ADI data is different to the Hodgdon equivalents, seeing as how they are the exact same powder I wanted to know why. Maybe something was lost in translation (he’s very German) but in the end he said:

“please use the Hodgdon Data for ADI powders”

He is a man of few words.

So that means refer to this list to make sure your ADI powder has got the right level of oommppff, in the QL model select the Hodgdon equivalent.

AS30N=Clays
AP50N = (No Hodgdon)
AS50N = International
AP70N = Universal
AP100 = (No Hodgdon)
AR2205 = H4227
AR2207 = H4198
AR2219 = H322
Bench Mark1 = (No Hodgdon)
Bench Mark2 = BenchMark AR2206 = (No Hodgdon)
AR2206H = H4895
AR2208 = Varget
AR2209 = H4350
AR2213 = (Discontinued)
AR2213SC = H4831
AR2217 = H1000
AR2225 = Retumbo

My loads with ADI always go faster than modelled, as the burning rate factor for the powders is lower than I think it should be. When I select the Hodgdon equivalent instead, velocity is closer to the chrono and drops data. This will be part of the reason why. Hope this helps someone, sorry haven’t searched to see if its been covered before.

Thanks for that...hadn't spotted the difference in QL.

It is different with some, not the 2217 I'd been playing with...I agree though best just use the H equiv:

The reason Hartmut wants us to use the Hodgdon data is:

"I have no more connection to ADI Lab, and also do not know changes made in production. here in Europe there are no ADI powders to verify."

Bottom line, he hasn't tested ADI powders, either for a long time, or ever, not sure. Like I said he's a man of very few words, he doesn't really seem to like email!