Hodgdon powder

[buffybr]

I stopped by our local Murdocks yesterday and was happy to see that they had a fair supply of powders.

They limit you to 2 cans of powder, so I picked up a can of Titewad and a can of H4831SC.

It wasn't until I got home that I noticed that the Net Weight of powder in each can was only 14 oz!

The cans are the same size as the ones that they sold for years filled with 1 lb of powder.

So is this Hodgdon's answer to the powder shortage? Pack less product into the same size can then raise the price. In other words, screw the consumer every way that you can.

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

What does it say on the can? 16oz/1lb or 14oz? If it says 16oz/1lb, then what they're doing is in fact illegal if its intentional. I'm sure they have a automated system for filling and weighing the amounts, and as such things can happen in the factory. Or maybe your store is pulling some shenanigans out back?

 

[brushmore]

The cans are 14 oz. They must have got the idea from the grocery store.

 

[enysse]

Just one more way, hunters are getting screwed.

 

[Mr. 16 gauge]

It's not just hunters/shooters....check out the packages in the grocery stores; you'll find that while the packages may be the same size, there is less product on the inside. A prime example are potato chips......open up a large bag and you'll see that they've "puffed up" the bag with air to make it appear "fuller" in the store. However, the weight is less than what it used to be. If you measure some containers, you'll find them to be slightly smaller (with resulting smaller contents), yet the price doesn't go down......it's all done to make the consumer think that they are getting value, when in reality, they arent.
Want another shock .....check and see where all those "American" powders are now made; IIRC, hogdon is now made in Australia & IMR powders are now being made in Canada. Nothing against Canadians or Aussies, but the company (hodgdon) has USA in big letters on the can (packaged in the USA), and the original country of manufacture in much smaller letters......again, not illegal packaging, but somewhat deceptive. Couple this with the fact that Hodgdon has seen fit to eliminate 3 great powders (PB, SR4756, and SR 7625...all to promote their "newer" powders, such as Longshot, which, IMHO, aren't nearly as good or versatile), and I am currently exploring other options. I've bought some Reloader 19 and some AA2700, and I am planning on trying some Reloader 22 when I find some.
I know this is now standard "practice" for just about all manufacturing companies, but I will show my displeasure by voting with my billfold (and I'm sure that Hodgdon doesn't give a rat's arse!)

 

[Roseman]

I'm confused. The powders are being advertized as 1 pound containers on web sites such as Precision Reloading.
Oh, I see on page 5 some are 14 oz.

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

I stopped by our local Murdocks yesterday and was happy to see that they had a fair supply of powders.

They limit you to 2 cans of powder, so I picked up a can of Titewad and a can of H4831SC.

It wasn't until I got home that I noticed that the Net Weight of powder in each can was only 14 oz!

The cans are the same size as the ones that they sold for years filled with 1 lb of powder.

So is this Hodgdon's answer to the powder shortage? Pack less product into the same size can then raise the price. In other words, screw the consumer every way that you can.

@buffybr
I know the U.S. # is different to the British ( a British # is 16 0unces) What is the U.S..
In OZ we get 500 gram bottle.
Bob

 

[Ridge Runner]

I stopped by our local Murdocks yesterday and was happy to see that they had a fair supply of powders.

They limit you to 2 cans of powder, so I picked up a can of Titewad and a can of H4831SC.

It wasn't until I got home that I noticed that the Net Weight of powder in each can was only 14 oz!

The cans are the same size as the ones that they sold for years filled with 1 lb of powder.

So is this Hodgdon's answer to the powder shortage? Pack less product into the same size can then raise the price. In other words, screw the consumer every way that you can.

Yes! You have to checkout the weight being sold. Same size containers, depending on the powder, are sold as 4, 5, 8, pounds.

I made that same mistake, thinking I was buying 8 pounds only to find out later I had only received 4 and 5 pounds.

I looked up the powder then realized I had only purchased 4 and 5 pounds instead of 8 pounds.

It's nothing more than a business ploy to save the company money and sell their product at a higher cost to consumers.

 

[ZG47]

H4831SC is actually AR2213SC from Australia. Under that brand: propellant has been loaded to 500g, 1kg and 4kg nett weights; but the smallest size has been discontinued because those containers are supplied to a range of chemical companies but ADI was the only one using that size.
Therefore, we have a reverse situation with the minimum ADI propellant weight doubling. By the bye, Hodgdon labelled containers have been seen on the ADI filling line which only makes the situation more confusing.
It would make more sense if Hodgdon went to metric weights. NB How many members can tell me which U.S. federal agency standardised on the metric system at its inception and has been going for a good two centuries?

 

[CBH Australia]

@buffybr
I know the U.S. # is different to the British ( a British # is 16 0unces) What is the U.S..
In OZ we get 500 gram bottle.
Bob

Just wait till they can work out how to reduce it!
Bundaberg Rum and other reputable spirits started years ago dropping 50ml going back to 700ml. They did raise the alcohol from 37.5% to 40%, go figure. I bet there are a few old books here will remember that happening, it’s just over 20 years ago.
Then Cadbury chocolate started down that line, Ahhh,
Keep an eye on ADI, if the freight and price rises were not enough it’s seems there will be change,

 

[ZG47]

Yes! You have to checkout the weight being sold. Same size containers, depending on the powder, are sold as 4, 5, 8, pounds.

I made that same mistake, thinking I was buying 8 pounds only to find out later I had only received 4 and 5 pounds.

I looked up the powder then realized I had only purchased 4 and 5 pounds instead of 8 pounds.

It's nothing more than a business ploy to save the company money and sell their product at a higher cost to consumers.

Maybe you should get your missus to buy components. They pull that stuff all the time with supermarket ‘specials’.

 

[Wyatt Smith]

Was it both powders or just the tightgroup. I know that some low density powders come in the same size bottle but weigh less than 1 pound.

 

[Hunter4752001]

Hodgdon don't make powders. They purchase powders under contract from various manufacturers and have them labelled as Hodgdon. The decision on labeling, quantity etc is Hodgdon's.
ps. A 500 gram container would actually be approx 17.6 ounces, ie more, not less, than a 1 lb bottle.

 

[Hogpatrol]

H4831SC is actually AR2213SC from Australia. Under that brand: propellant has been loaded to 500g, 1kg and 4kg nett weights; but the smallest size has been discontinued because those containers are supplied to a range of chemical companies but ADI was the only one using that size.
Therefore, we have a reverse situation with the minimum ADI propellant weight doubling. By the bye, Hodgdon labelled containers have been seen on the ADI filling line which only makes the situation more confusing.
It would make more sense if Hodgdon went to metric weights. NB How many members can tell me which U.S. federal agency standardised on the metric system at its inception and has been going for a good two centuries?

I'm guessing it's the Department of Health, or some such medically related agency.

 

[ZG47]

I'm guessing it's the Department of Health, or some such medically related agency.

Think sailing

 

[Hogpatrol]

Think sailing

There's a U.S. federal agency that controls sailing? Which one?

 

[ZG47]

There's a U.S. federal agency that controls sailing? Which one?

Sailing as in navigation, as in charts as in hydrographic survey!

 

[Hogpatrol]

Sailing as in navigation, as in charts as in hydrographic survey!

Interesting. Way ahead of the times and smarter than those still using a measuring system based on barley corns (the U.S. and others).

 

[ZG47]

A logical decision for the time, given variation in measuring standards. Pratt and Whitney had fun just before WWI when they did a test run at Lithgow of the SMLE production line they had built for the Australian government. The parts did not match BECAUSE Enfield Lock had its own version of the inch!

 

[Hunter4752001]

The parts did not match BECAUSE Enfield Lock had its own version of the inch!

Arms manufacturing being one of the oldest manufacturing industries, often used dimensions, thread pitches and all manner of "standards" well before the development of engineering standards in the wider community hence the need for the "Enfield Inch" and some of the weird threads encountered on Lee Enfields etc. In Europe, Paul Mauser did his design sketches in metric, and then converted to Imperial approximations because his machine tools were made in England (which explains some of the odd dimensions, Whiworth thread forms and non-standard TPI). Threads on Siamese mausers are a combination of German Mauser (psudo-whitworth) and Japanese armoury specials designed prior to the adoption of either imperial or metric measuring systems.