if HP-38 and W231 are the same....


PDA






1KPerDay
December 23, 2011, 03:41 AM
... Why does my hornady reloading handbook of recent publication list different max and starting charges for them?

If you enjoyed reading about "if HP-38 and W231 are the same...." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
GooseGestapo
December 23, 2011, 05:42 AM
Simply put; Different lot#'s, different testing techniques, different component mixes.

Hodgdon, who markets the powder under both labels states they are the same! I've seen the 110lb kegs of Win231 used by Precision Delta of Ruleville, MS to load their ammo in the mid 1990's. They carried an HP38 lot# label besides the Winchester label !!!

Lot to Lot variation is a common occurence with chemical products such as gun powder. Each manufacturer uses differnent techniques to minimize the variation, however it does exist.

I've shot many, many pounds of HP38/Win231. I've seen a modest variation in both density and burning rates. Not enough to change my loads, but enough to know that sometimes velocity drops off a little, and charge weights may vary a couple of tenths of a grain, up and down.

I bought an 8lb keg of #231 in 1997. I shot 3 National records (tied perfect scores), won several "stage" events at the NRA PPC Nationals, won matches at several "regional" matches and place high in overall; shot an outright national record that still stands from that keg. Haven't been able to duplicate the results with any lot# of Win231 or HP38, or even with Alliant "Bullseye" which is my other "go-to" powder for pistol accuracy....
And we are talking about several different guns, too. 9mm as well as .38spl.

Sure wish I'd bought about 100lbs of that lot#!

GP100man
December 23, 2011, 07:51 AM
Marketing ploy !! everybody will opt for the "faster" fps powder ,but if ya research a bit tou`ll find the 1 with the heavy max is the fastest .

Then of course different lots & testing techniques come into play .

Wonder what Hodgdon will do when they run out of WW231 labels ????

bds
December 23, 2011, 08:57 AM
When I got verification that HP-38 was the same exact powder Hodgdon was licensed by Winchester (http://www.hodgdon.com/history.html) to sell, I tested it and got the same results as W231. Hodgdon lists the same exact load data for both W231 and HP-38. Since then, I always used the two interchangeably and post with "W231/HP-38". BTW, HP-38 usually costs less and is usually in stock while the more popular W231 is often sold out.
In March 2006, Hodgdon Powder Company and WinchesterŽ Ammunition announced that WinchesterŽ branded reloading powders would be licensed to Hodgdon.

9mm - 125 GR. SIE FMJ Winchester 231 Start 4.4 gr (1009 fps) 24,600 CUP - Max 4.8 gr (1088 fps) 28,800 CUP
9mm - 125 GR. SIE FMJ Hodgdon HP-38 Start 4.4 gr (1009 fps) 24,600 CUP - Max 4.8 gr (1088 fps) 28,800 CUP

40S&W - 165 GR. SIE JHP Winchester 231 Start 4.8 gr (946 fps) 28,100 PSI - Max 5.3 gr (1001 fps) 32,500 PSI
40S&W - 165 GR. SIE JHP Hodgdon HP-38 Start 4.8 gr (946 fps) 28,100 PSI - Max 5.3 gr (1001 fps) 32,500 PSI

45ACP - 200 GR. CAST LSWC Winchester 231 Start 4.4 gr (771 fps) 11,000 CUP - Max 5.6 gr (914 fps) 16,900 CUP
45ACP - 200 GR. CAST LSWC Hodgdon HP-38 Start 4.4 gr (771 fps) 11,000 CUP - Max 5.6 gr (914 fps) 16,900 CUP


Here are the powder/pressure comparison by burn rate listed on Hodgdon's burn rate chart (http://www.hodgdon.com/burn-rate.html). Note the higher max pressures on faster/slower burning powders compared to W231/HP-38:
165 GR. SIE JHP Hodgdon Clays .400" 1.125" 3.5 851 29,900 PSI - 3.9 897 33,300 PSI
165 GR. SIE JHP Hodgdon Titegroup .400" 1.125" 4.6 961 27,000 PSI - 5.1 1047 33,600 PSI
165 GR. SIE JHP Winchester WST .400" 1.125" 4.5 916 26,400 PSI - 5.1 995 33,300 PSI
165 GR. SIE JHP Winchester 231 .400" 1.125" 4.8 946 28,100 PSI - 5.3 1001 32,500 PSI
165 GR. SIE JHP Hodgdon HP-38 .400" 1.125" 4.8 946 28,100 PSI - 5.3 1001 32,500 PSI
165 GR. SIE JHP Hodgdon Universal .400" 1.125" 5.1 976 26,800 PSI - 5.6 1061 32,900 PSI
165 GR. SIE JHP Winchester WSF .400" 1.125" 6.3 1055 28,100 PSI - 6.7 1115 32,700 PSI
165 GR. SIE JHP Hodgdon HS-6 .400" 1.125" 7.3 1013 28,700 PSI - 8.0 1098 32,700 PSI
165 GR. SIE JHP Winchester AutoComp .400" 1.125" 6.5 1037 25,600 PSI - 7.1 1124 31,500 PSI


Marketing ploy !! everybody will opt for the "faster" fps powder ,but if ya research a bit tou`ll find the 1 with the heavy max is the fastest .
I have been testing AutoComp in 40S&W as it produces the highest velocities at much lower chamber pressures (AutoComp's start velocity is comparable to Titegroup's max velocity but at much lower chamber pressure - 33.6K PSI vs 25.6K PSI :eek:). If you have pressure concerns for the "higher pressure" 40S&W reloads, you might want to checkout AutoComp.

165 gr Sierra JHP Hodgdon Titegroup .400" OAL 1.125" Start 4.6 gr (961 fps) 27,000 PSI - Max 5.1 gr (1047 fps) 33,600 PSI
165 gr Sierra JHP Winchester AutoComp .400" OAL 1.125" Start 6.5 gr (1037 fps) 25,600 PSI - Max 7.1 gr (1124 fps) 31,500 PSI

zeke
December 23, 2011, 10:06 AM
Some of the loads listed in various manuals were developed/tested years, even decades ago? If memory serves, most of the older manuals consistently had 231 a touch slower than hp-38. Some of us attribute this to a coating being applied to one of them, even if they may have been the same powder in bulk.

Now hodgen just lists them the same, with the same pressures. Am not of the belief any powder would get exactly the same velocity or pressure in 2 different tests, they appear to just transfer the hp-38 tests to 231 now.

The Bushmaster
December 23, 2011, 11:12 AM
Ever thought that they may be different powders? At least that's how I treat them and have for years. The difference between lots is very little in these modern times. Years ago maybe, but now.....

RandyP
December 23, 2011, 01:03 PM
There is no "if' they are the same - they ARE the same powder, simply poured into different containers.

You should absolutely NOT take my word for it, the good folks at Hodgdon will answer your e-mail to them with that response.... just like they did when I e-mailed them and asked. I don't have the list handy but there are a few HP/Win powder pairs that also are the same powder/different container.

rcmodel
December 23, 2011, 01:06 PM
Every manual published has not reshot all the data in it in the last few years.

Hornady apparently hasen't got a round tuit yet.
Hodgdon has.

rc

J_McLeod
December 23, 2011, 01:15 PM
There is no "if' they are the same - they ARE the same powder, simply poured into different containers.

You should absolutely NOT take my word for it, the good folks at Hodgdon will answer your e-mail to them with that response.... just like they did when I e-mailed them and asked. I don't have the list handy but there are a few HP/Win powder pairs that also are the same powder/different container.
I saved the message when I emailed them. I agree with Randy, Don't take our word for it Hodgdon will answer your email promptly with something like this.

There are a few powders that have or do share names, and data. These powder are the same as shown below. THE SAME. Exactly, made in the same plant, the same. The only difference in the name on the label.



231 = HP-39

540 = HS-6

571 = HS-7

760 = H414

296 = H110



These represent instances where the same product is marketed under 2 names. This started years ago when Winchester did not want to be in the powder business. Bruce Hodgdon decided to purchase WWII surplus powders in burn speeds used by Winchester and sell them to the public. Later, when military surplus supplies of these powders were exhausted, Bruce purchased the same powders in new production. Eventually, Winchester decided Bruce was making too much money on those powders and Winchester brought them out under the Winchester name. It has been this way for many years.



Mike Daly

Cutomer Service Manager

Hodgdon Family of Fine Propellants

Hodgdon Smokeless Powder

IMR Powder Company

Winchester Smokeless Propellants

GOEX Blackpowder

RandyP
December 23, 2011, 02:40 PM
One typo noted above - Win 231 = HP-38

J_McLeod
December 23, 2011, 05:03 PM
That was Hodgdon's typo.

RandyP
December 23, 2011, 05:13 PM
Goes to show ya' why I never try to type out a load recipe and post it for all to see. It is obviously VERY easy to type the wrong thing. When in doubt? Check it out.

cfullgraf
December 23, 2011, 05:32 PM
I read a few years ago that one of the reasons for different data in the past was that Winchester did not want it apparent that the various pairs of powders were the same. So, the powders had different data, safe I am sure, but different. By marketing them as different powders, Winchester felt it would not lose sales. Folks would feel one worked better for them and therefore would maintain some brand loyalty.

Maybe hearsay, but knowing how consumer goods companies operate, I would not doubt it.

Kind of like the Chevy engines in Oldsmobiles, Pontiacs, and Buicks in the seventies and eighties. GM wanted folks to think they were still getting their Rocket V8s in their Oldsmobiles.

1KPerDay
December 23, 2011, 06:31 PM
Thanks guys.

1KPerDay
December 23, 2011, 06:38 PM
Another question: are the lawyers really getting this bad? Hornady's manual says 3.5-3.6 grains max for 90-100 grain jhp loads in .380... hodgdon says 3.1 max for 100 grain and 3.2 for 95 grain.

I've noticed over the last few years the "never exceed" or "max" numbers have been steadily dropping in multiple sources. Is it because reloaders sort of treat that number as a soft ceiling or is it because people really blow themselves up with 3.5 vs 3.2? Seems silly to me... but I don't really know what source to trust anymore.

RandyP
December 23, 2011, 09:03 PM
What has happened is that the new digital pressure testing machines are in place at some test facilities and they give better results than the older protocols.

It is also a reality that WE hire those lawyers too often to sue companies for truckloads of $$$$ after WE do something stupid with their products. Beats accepting personal responsibility for our actions.

rcmodel
December 23, 2011, 09:17 PM
Prior to 1969, Winchester-Olin made all their ball powder in East Alton IL.
In 1969 Olin acquired a tract of swamp land south of Tallahassee, Florida between the St. Marks river and the Gulf Coast. All Winchester-Olin ball powder production was moved there at that time.

In March 2006, HodgdonŽ Powder Company and Winchester Ammunition announced that Winchester branded reloading powders would be licensed to Hodgdon and packaged & sold through the Hodgdon facility south of Kansas City.

Prior to that, W-231 packaged by Winchester was packaged by St. Marks FL.

Where Hodgdon got it's HP-38 before 2006 I don't know, but it was packaged south of Kansas City.
But even if they got it from Winchester-Olin / St. Marks, it was not from the same lot numbers being packaged by Winchester in Florida.

Thus, the different load data for the two powders up until 2006, when Hodgdon begin packaging it all, out of the same shipping container lot numbers.

I do agree that the switch from copper crusher (CUP) to electronic transducer (PSI) pressure testing has lead to lower MAX charges in some calibers.

And Hornady data has traditionally been lower then Speer and other data for as long as I can remember.

rc

Jim Watson
December 24, 2011, 01:08 AM
And somewhere in there, Olin sold the St Marks plant to General Dynamics.

And, strangely enough, IMR powder manufacture was moved to Canada in 1976 and after some switcheroos of ownership, the IMR plant ended up belonging to General Dynamics.
The US distributor is Hodgdon.

Oh, yeah, Accurate powders are now labeled Made in USA. The only Ball process powder mill in the country is St Marks.

If you enjoyed reading about "if HP-38 and W231 are the same...." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!