It would be very easy to just use the powder I'm currently using and also the ignition methods that I've also used in the past. For that matter I could have stayed with my 30 yr. old CVA. I wanted to go in-line. I was looking at an all-weather 20 for my wife to use as a trail gun because she was encoutering so many grouse on her rides. I discovered .50 cal. Huntsman inlines, Stainless even. I got one and started paying attention to all of the things being written about them ,their strengths and weaknesses. Others showed me improvements ,they got me thinking of more improvements,and I have follower all and became impressed with the knowledge and experience of all those folks. It has settled down a lot with the addition of the MU -NEF breech-plug but a couple of people mentioned a perceived weakness in the system, that being the possibility of too much power in 209 primers . It was proven that the different brands and types of 209s had a fairly wide range of power and that ,along with other variables in lods and loading procedures might explain the occasional "flyer" Two solutions seemed possible;one was to run through all of the different 209 types. I would leave that to the other owners who were well into it already. The other was to expand on the .25ACP ignition idea. I heard of a .244 experiment that had promise but was limited to small rifle primers in all of their varieties. I thought instead of the .243 whch,in different brands used small rifle and large rifle primers. This allowed a very wide range of ignition power sources. The breech plug on an NEF won't allow such chambering so I'm looking for a round whose chambering would fit in an NEF breech plug and would have the strength to allow its primer pocket to be enlarged to a large rifle size. Another avenue would be to find a pistol round for reaming a chamber that happened to have the rim and base dimensions of a .243 which I could cut off to the pistol round length. Or,like you said,I could just change powders! Ken
