It may be instructive to note John Braddock's 'A Memoir on Gunpowder
' of 1832 (https://books.google.fr/books?id=6i...AEwBXoECAgQA Q
) in which he reports upon the state of gun powder manuacturing in India for the Honourable East India Company. In this he is most rude about the quality of Bombay powder compared to that made in Allahabd. Reporting it as 'barbarous
' and 'their best and highest ranges are only half the distance of the other Indian powders
This demonstrates the range of performance that can come from variations in the performance of gunpowder mills and in this case between those of a well funded Company with access to all the materials it could need and the capital to invest in machinery etc. and with the sole purpose of making military quality powders.
If Bombay powder was 'barbarous
' in 1832 the Mexican powder was likely to be beyond Mr Braddock's vocabulary to describe it's weakness.