Question about W296

[JSmith]

For a 240gr JHP .44 Rem Magnum load Hodgdon gives a starting load of 23gr and maximum of 24gr. That's not a lot of room. What happens when loads are over/under those limits? Incomplete/sooty burning? Detonation? Or something else?

 

[Fine Figure of a Man]

W296/H110 meter very well so 1/10th gr accuracy is easy with a decent powder measure. Over max charge will of course raise pressure. Supposedly light charges can also cause high pressure with W296. Not sure I believe it but there are plenty of other good powders for mid and light loads.

 

[Starter52]

Do not underload W296 powder. It's a great powder, one of my favorites, but I use it for full power loads only.

 

[Walkalong]

Downloading W-296 will get incomplete burn and poor ballistics.

Going over tested data will be over pressure and is not wise to do.

W-296 likes a mag primer.

I agree that is a small window.

 

[Varminterror]

Some manuals default to “do not reduce H110/W296 loads more than 10% below max.”

10% of a ~20grn load is only ~2 grns below max.

Ignition can become inconsistent.

 

[mcb]

I have tried to like W296/H110 and other than 410 shotgun shells I have almost always found something I like better. For 44 Mag with a 240gr JHP bullet I got the same velocity using nearly half the mass of powder using IMR 800-X. It resulted in noticeably less recoil and significantly less muzzle blast than W296/H110.

That said if you're loading that 44 mag load with W296/H110 for a carbine it does very well. Going from a 6.5 inch revolver to a 16 inch carbine W296/H110 get a significantly bigger bump in velocity than my favorite 800-x load.

 

[cheygriz]

For a 240gr JHP .44 Rem Magnum load Hodgdon gives a starting load of 23gr and maximum of 24gr. That's not a lot of room. What happens when loads are over/under those limits? Incomplete/sooty burning? Detonation? Or something else?

Never go under the starting load with a slow powder. Filthy at best, kaboom at worst.

Just load 23.0, 23.5 and 24.0 and see which your weapon likes.

 

[Slamfire]

I don't know, and, I am not interested in being a beta tester and finding the point at which, my firearms go kaboom. I did conduct my own tests, based on load recommendations, and I am going to say, in 44 Magnum, that either 24.0 or 24.5 grs of H110 or W296 will work well with a 240 grain bullet.

After this set of tests, I decided there was absolutely no difference between W296 and H110. This was before those rascally inprint gunwriters let us know, something they knew for decades, that there was no difference between the two.

S&W M629-4, 5" Barrel 

240JHP R-P 24.0 grs H110 Midway cases WLP  
9-Oct-05 T = 66 °F   
  
Ave Vel = 1228  
Std Dev = 21.47  
ES = 70.16  
Low = 1268  
High = 1197  
N= 22   

 
M1894 Marlin Ballard Barrel
   
240 Nosler JHP 24.0 grs W296 WLP Fed cases  

Ave Vel = 1725   
Std Dev = 7   
ES = 21   
Low = 1715   
High = 1736    
N = 5      

240 Nosler JHP 24.5 grs W296 WLP Fed cases  

Ave Vel = 1752   
Std Dev = 12   
ES = 28   
Low = 1735   
High = 1763    
N = 5     

240 Nosler JHP 24.0 grs H110 WLP Midway cases  
    
Ave Vel = 1710   
Std Dev = 3   
ES = 9   
Low = 1705   
High = 1714    
N = 5     


240 Nosler JHP 24.5 grs H110 WLP Midway cases  

Ave Vel = 1745   
Std Dev = 12   
ES = 45   
Low = 1723   
High = 1768   
N = 10      

240 Rem JHP 24.0 grs H110 WLP Midway cases  

Ave Vel = 1719   
Std Dev = 10   
ES = 29   
Low = 1705   
High = 1734    
N = 10

 

[GRIZ22]

Light charges of slow burning ball powders can raise pressures drastically. This is called secondary explosion effect and something ballisticians are not sure why it happens. I had my doubts about it until I saw it happen.

That said I use 296 for full charge loads in 44 magnum, 357 magnum, and 30 carbine with good results.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

W296/H110 performs best at the upper end of the pressure range and should be ignited with a magnum primer. It is an outstanding powder for full power ammo but not good at all when downloaded. Like already saud, it is very erratic when downloaded, incomplete burn, dirty, pressure spikes and probably some other nasty stuff too.

Do Not use a standard primer with W296/H110.

 

[Walkalong]

Just load 23.0, 23.5 and 24.0 and see which your weapon likes.

Yep.

 

[Walkalong]

Light charges of slow burning ball powders can raise pressures drastically. This is called secondary explosion effect and something ballisticians are not sure why it happens

And something they have not been able to duplicate in a lab.

But still, when the powder company tells you not to reduce loads with one of their powders, don't. They don't want you to get poor performance and stop using it/tell others it's no good, and of course they want you to use it at safe pressure levels.

 

[Galil5.56]

I liked the old Winchester published data, where I recall 25 grains of WW296, a 240 grain jacketed bullet, WW primer and stern bolded warnings saying Use as printed without reduction, with a heavy crimp/bullet pull. I shot a lot of these rounds with fine accuracy, and plenty of power. Still like H110/WW296 best for full power .44 mag loadings.

 

[Blue68f100]

The W296/H110 when it first came out the load manuals said "DO NOT REDUCE". load as printed. Then 3 yrs later the manuals said you could reduce 3% from max and that was it. I think some manuals ignore this warning and used 10% or greater. This powder requires a HEAVY CRIMP too for a complete clean burn. It's my goto powder for full house Mag loads.

 

[Slamfire]

And something they have not been able to duplicate in a lab.

Laboratory's are not transparent, they don't publish everything, and there is no reason not to believe "what happens in the lab, stays in the lab". That being said, gunpowder does not burn nice and evenly like a candle. Maybe someday we will see pressure curves that show what is going on inside the case at all locations, and then I believe we will see localized pressure increases within the case that could cause pressure spikes.

I do believe as a general rule, it is better to have a case full of powder, no air gaps, or as little air gaps as possible. I also believe that a compressed charge is better than a loose charge. And this is all based on the premise that combustion will be more consistent under these conditions. However, it is certainly not happening in my handguns as I am using charges of Bullseye, Unique, AA#5 that do not fill the case. I believe that as long as I stay with well characterized loads, I won't have problems.

 

[Fine Figure of a Man]

This powder requires a HEAVY CRIMP

Yep, in 44mag the crimp can be the difference between poor and excellent performance with 296/110.

 

[Walkalong]

Laboratory's are not transparent, they don't publish everything, and there is no reason not to believe "what happens in the lab, stays in the lab".

No argument there, although I see no reason for them to hide a fact like that. If it is indeed a phenomenon that can be reproduced I would think they would warn us and show examples. Maybe not of course.

And I agree, stay within published and "well characterized" loads, and your chances of having an issue is very small to none assuming we do our part.

When we use very light non published loads with fast powders, especially in large cases, we are on our own, but of course there have been million (Billions?) of those loads fired.

Reduced rifle loads with bottle necked calibers seem to be a much bigger issue safety wise when trying to download.

Stick with published data for W-296/H-110 and it will give you very good velocities and accuracy, as many people know. It just doesn't like being downloaded and likes a mag primer with plenty of neck tension and a good crimp.

 

[Slamfire]

No argument there, although I see no reason for them to hide a fact like that. If it is indeed a phenomenon that can be reproduced I would think they would warn us and show examples. Maybe not of course.

There is hardly any disagreement here. I don't believe these are altruistic institutions or people. Instead, they are profit maximizing institutions. They have told us not to cut the loads and that should be enough. There is no profit spending time and effort publishing results, making arguments, trying to convince reloaders not to do something dangerous, especially as certain types are not going to change their minds or their practices no matter what information is put out there. We have been told, and based on the number of inexplicable blowups out there, I believe there is more behind this then just a "guess". Powder combustion is extremely complicated, I don't think modeling or even particle physics is at the level where the combustion event can be perfectly computer simulated. Our level of understanding of this phenomenon is about the same as the understanding of cholera in the 1850's. The board that took the handle off the Broad Street Pump did not have a conception of germs, were not convinced in disease transmission through water, but, they took the handle off the pump. Sometimes you have to take a leap of faith, and sometimes later, you find out why you were right. Or wrong.

 

[Walkalong]

Fair enough.

 

[Salmoneye]

According to Hodgdon, H110/W296 do not have an issue with SEE (Secondary Explosive Effect)...

Down-loading them CAN cause incomplete burn, and stuck bullets...

Following a stuck bullet with another round will wreck your day...

This is why Hodgdon insists on a firm crimp, and mag primers...

Until their latest redesign, this was on the entry page to the reloading section of the Hodgdon online data pages:

Reduce H110 and Winchester 296 loads 3% and work up from there. H110 and Winchester 296 if reduced too much will cause inconsistent ignition. In some cases it will lodge a bullet in the barrel, causing a hazardous situation (Barrel Obstruction). This may cause severe personal injury or death to users or bystanders. DO NOT REDUCE H110 LOADS BY MORE THAN 3%