Alliant Pistol/Shotshell
Alliant 2400
A magnum handgun powder with a long reputation in .44 Magnum and other magnum revolver cartridges. Also used in small-capacity rifle cartridges and .410 bore.
The magnum revolver powder everything else in that class gets measured against, and it earned that in the .44 Magnum behind heavy cast and jacketed bullets. It was born in the .22 Hornet and still belongs there, and it remains the standard answer for .410 slug and skeet loads. Trouble comes at the bottom of its range: run it well under the pressure it wants in a large case and it goes sooty, leaves unburned kernels, and becomes position-sensitive depending on how the charge lies against the primer in a long .44 or .45 Colt case. It also flashes hard, which matters far more from a short barrel at dusk than it does on paper.
- heavy .44 Magnum
- full-power .357 Magnum
- cast-bullet .45 Colt in strong revolvers
- .410 bore slug and skeet
- .22 Hornet
Who has Alliant 2400 today
Checked October 10Out of stock at every store we track
| Store | Size | Shelf | In hand /lb | Stock |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lohman ArmsHazmat charged, amount not published | 8 lb | $225.95 | $32.17 est. | Out |
| Lohman ArmsHazmat charged, amount not published | 4 lb | $118.95 | $37.60 est. | Out |
| Bruno Shooters Supply$26.95 hazmat + $19.95 ship | 8 lb | $413.99 | $57.61 | Out |
| Graf & Sons$23.50 hazmat per package | 4 lb | $200.99 | $59.61 | Out |
| Graf & Sons$23.50 hazmat per package | 8 lb | $488.99 | $65.81 | Out |
| Bruno Shooters Supply$26.95 hazmat + $19.95 ship | 4 lb | $220.99 | $66.97 | Out |
| Lohman ArmsHazmat charged, amount not published | 1 lb | $40.95 | $72.39 est. | Out |
| Graf & Sons$23.50 hazmat per package | 1 lb | $66.99 | $104.44 | Out |
| Bruno Shooters Supply$26.95 hazmat + $19.95 ship | 1 lb | $58.99 | $105.89 | Out |
“In hand” is the shelf price plus that store’s hazmat fee and shipping, spread over one container. Stock is checked once a day — confirm on the store’s page before ordering. Compare all powders →
Specifications
| Manufacturer | Alliant |
|---|---|
| Product family | Alliant Pistol/Shotshell |
| Status | Currently produced |
| Application | pistol, rifle, shotshell |
| Grain form | flake |
| Lee VMD (bulk density) | 0.0742 cc per grain · 0.87 g/cc |
| Burn-rate position | 63 of 198 (fastest = 1) — what this means |
| Typical cartridges | .44 Magnum, .357 Magnum, .22 Hornet, .218 Bee, .410 bore |
Grain shape
Fine flake with a thick web by flake standards — that wall thickness is why it lands at the slow end of Alliant's handgun list on essentially the same chemistry as the fast ones. The small grain size meters honestly through a revolver measure, but degressive flake behaviour means it wants a stout primer and real pressure to burn out; give it neither and the residue tells you.
Why geometry decides burn rate more than chemistry does: Shape Is the Product.
Originally developed for the .22 Hornet. Alliant still lists .22 Hornet and .218 Bee as secondary uses and calls it a shooter's choice for .410.
Burn rate
The slowest of Alliant's handgun powders and the bridge into the rifle range.
Chart agreement: DISAGREEMENT — Alliant's own Reloader's Guide orders Steel FASTER than 410 and 2400; this list, following the Hodgdon spine, orders them the other way. Ranked here per the Hodgdon chart used as this list's spine. Ranked by: Hodgdon, Alliant, Vihtavuori, Shooters World, Wolfe/LoadData.
Powders charted near it — neighbours on the chart are not substitutes, and adjacency tells you nothing about what charge either one takes:
- Hodgdon Longshot (position 60)
- Alliant 410 (position 61)
- Accurate TCM (position 62)
- Ramshot Enforcer (position 64)
- Vihtavuori N105 Super Magnum (position 65)
- Accurate No. 9 (position 66)
Sources
The specifications above come from Alliant's own published documentation, linked below. The two “RCM's read” sections are ours, not theirs — our assessment of what this powder is like to load, drawn from its published characteristics and from what handloaders consistently report. No manufacturer endorses them and no source below backs them. If you think we have one wrong, tell us — we would rather fix it.