Printable View
Started reloading for my war babies recently, using H110 and 110 grain Sierra and X-treme bullets with CCI 400 SRP. Encouraging results so far, but I am down to the bottom of an old can of powder. How old? Dunno, but it is priced $16.79. I have more H110, plus LilGun, and IMR4227. Should I keep going with H110, or has anyone had good results with the other 2 mentioned powders. Or are there any others? Haven't seen any H110 for sale in my area, northern Calif., in over a year.
I used IMR 4227 but it's not as easy to use with a powder measure as H110 is. Still, I used it effectively for years.
H110 and W296 are the exact same powder. They were marketed separately for years before Hodgdon became the distributor for Winchester powders. Both are made by St. Marks powder in Florida. These are the original powders for the 30 Carbine and these deliver the highest velocity.
H4227 and Lil Gun will also work. They just deliver slightly less velocity. Not enough to matter. With today's hard to get powder situation, use whichever you can find.
The Hodgdon website has data for all these powders.
Take Aim at Rifle Reloading Data | Hodgdon Reloading
Excellent, excellent info to find out. That's why we're here.Quote:
Originally Posted by no4mk1t
For those that doubt this, you can look at the data on the Hodgdon website and see that the charge weights and pressure/velocity data are identical for both powders.
If you need further convincing, email the Hodgdon tech folks and ask them. They will tell you it is so. This was once a industry secret as Hodgdon did not advertise that their "Spherical" powders were the same as Winchester's Ball powders.
My Hornady manual shows the same thing. However the two Speer manuals I have shows the max charge to be a grain different. I've seen data from other sources that show a difference as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by no4mk1t
Could be different lots of the same powder. Look at a selection of different manuals and they will all be slightly different for the same powder no matter which powder you pick.Quote:
Originally Posted by vintage hunter
Don't doubt it at all, just never heard it before...
Probably has more to do with varying jacket hardness and bearing surface lengths of the bullet from one brand to the next. Another factor could be slight differences in the bore/chamber dimensions of the test guns used.Quote:
Originally Posted by no4mk1t
Anyway, my point is even though the two powders may be identical in all aspects don't take it for granted the charge weights will be interchangeable for all brands of bullets of a given weight.
Check the data for that particular bullet before loading.
Absolutely agreed.Quote:
Originally Posted by vintage hunter
My understanding regarding these powders being exactly the same is that in recent years, that's true. Previously, they were different and that's why you see differences when looking in the older reloading manuals. The same goes for HP-38 and Win W-231 - used to be different, but now identical. - Bob
Varget and IMR4895 are also very, very close too.
And try to find 231. Also add H4895 to the Varget and IMR. they are like 7 spots different on the burn chart
I use 2400 and it works great. (I use bulk Armscor 110 FMJ's or Sierra SP 110's) My dad uses it as well, and has been loading for the M1 carbine for 20+ years.
I also was lucky enough to get a pound of WC820 surplus pulldown powder out of the very last batch from gibrass.com (original .30 carbine military powder)
The WC820 gives me the most consistent velocities in .30 Carbine and 7.62x25 out of several different powders I have tried to work up loads with. It also meters like water, it is some super fine stuff.
I've only tried a few loads with the Armscor bullets, but noted the accuracy was very good. I missed out on the WC820, but continue to look for it at Gunshows. Are you using 13.0 grains of it with your loads? Thanks! - Bob
I have tried 12.5 and 13 gr and both did well. My batch was supposedly closest to H110 speed. Now I am wishing I had bought two of them!
I have seen people who claim they use this powder in cast rifle loads, but I don't think I'll be trying that. I mostly use 2400 for that.
I have several reloading manuals and all show different min/max loads for the identical powder/bullet. Look at a older manual and it usually is a much higher max. load than a newer manual, why?? Personally think that companies have serious liability concerns and who knows if their lawyers get involved.Quote:
Originally Posted by vintage hunter
I have discussed this issue with friends that reload and we believe liability must have something to do with it.
I agree about liability being a concern, but the powders now are not identical to what they were earlier, even though their names are the same. Need to look too, as to the difference in brands of cases, primers, bullets, and OAL the provider of the manual used in their test loads. I believe that may have been covered earlier in the thread. - Bob
My area is swamped with IMR 4227. I'm shooting a little over 12 grains cleanly and accurately in my Winchester. If you are interested in the exact load, I can look tonight. I can't remember off the top of my head since I am stuck at work right now. If you are interested PM me.
I've been shooting 15 grains of WW296 for 30 years using 110 grain FMJ of various manufacture and 100 grain Speer plinkers. It's clean, meters perfectly, is reliable and accurate.
Just about any slow pistol or shotgun powder will work with the 30 carbine. Some are better then others. Some have been around since the beginning in 1941 like 2400 and IMR 4227. The Winchester powders we all use today like H-110 are really a 50's developed powder that have their roots back during WW2 when Western Powder developed the ball powder. If your looking for which powder Varget is closest to it's not IMR 4895 or H4895. It's IMR 4064 that it's almost identical too.
I use AA # 9. I load to get 1980 to 2000 FPS. my carbine shoot way better than I can see anymore.
I took the advice of JasonA and others and started testing IMR4227. So far it seems to give better accuracy than H110. After burning through 2 years of range trips and keeping records, 4227 is looking good. Even though it is harder to meter than H110, I like it, and so does the Underwood. Thanks for all the shared knowledge.
I used to use the Lee scoops for loading .30 carbine with 4227 IMR. It worked just fine and didn't take too long.
Lee scoops? Hmmm. Sounds like I should get them and try it out. They might be useful, one way or the other. Been using a RCBS Uniflow, then the trickler on a 505 scale. Not very fast, but I am confident about the charges that way. Thanks for the tip.
I'm loading AA # 9. I get pretty good results with it plus i have almost 8 pounds of it.