The point I iwas trying to make was with the charcoal. According to what I understand(which is limited), charcoal is a necessary ingredient of BlackPowder?? And it is the charcoal that causes the "Smoke" in blackpowder?? Correct??

So if the sub's do not require charcol. And charcol is only added to make smoke appear. But that smoke is totally unnecessary for the actual combustion of the powder. Then the charcoal is only added for effect. So therefore the powder that adds charcoal for "effect" only should be listed as "smokeless Powder". Since the smoke is NOT necessary for combustion.

So basically these advanced powders are a less powerful smokelss powder. And therefore SHOULD NOT be considered as a sub. For Black Powder(Since smoke is a required effect of blackpowder). These powders should be considered as low power subs. for smokeless powder. But definitely not as a sub for BL since the charcoal is not a "necessary" ingredient for combustion.

I think these powder mfgs. are just trying to skirt around laws of states that do not allow smokeless powder in MZ's. But why else should the powder smoke. If not for "effect" only.

I realize this is just for discussion. But from what you other guys are saying. You could just as easily use a powder like Trail Boss as a sub also. Except it does not smoke?? Just an opinion. Tom.