Where is "same as" coming from????

[Bailey Boat]

Maybe it's the new generation of reloaders that recently flooded the sport but I'm seeing an alarming trend when people say "so and so powder is the SAME as such and such powder".

If they were the same they would have the same name!!!! Powders may have a similar, or close to similar burn rate but to say they are the SAME is WRONG!!!! I'm almost afraid that like most of the kids today that have no behaviour standard we're "raising" a generation of reloaders that don't appreciate or understand the dangers of the sport...... Flame on.....

 

[kestak]

Greetings,

It is a gooooood thing! They will blow themself up and finallym the primer shortage will be over!

Seriously, we have a guy at the club who blew up 2 1911 and a 7 WSM rifle. I saw him shooting a Ruger 9mm and it was recoilling like a 45ACP with enough flame to light a cigarette at 6 inch on the side of the pistol. He came and showed us a case to ask if it was overload: Crattered primer with double holes. We look at each other and one said : Nah! You're fine! :banghead:

I always say that you can laugh at ugly people but not at idiots. An ugly person still can become less ugly but idiots stay idiot all their life....

Thank you

 

[Walkalong]

Normal in any endeaver when there is an influx of new folks. They will learn, and hopefully not the hard way.

 

[Lee Roder]

Sometimes however

powders ARE the same, e.g. 231 and HP38, despite names which are not.

As always, don't believe everyting you read or hear, do your own research

 

[Nate1778]

Don't you mean "Same as and so forth"

Seriously I do beleive it has more to do with an election than it does with "newbs". Powder and primers got eaten up by ole timies and newbs alike. People couldn't find "Brand A" so they asked what was "Brand A's" substitute. I do agree, you can't fix stupid, but with a little research one should be able to find a safe compromise. There are probably as many "stupid" experienced reloaders as there are "ignorant" newbs. Mind you a newb has ignorance on his side, and ignorance is fixable, stupidity is not.

 

[MADDOG]

I think it is really bad when someone says "this is my favorite load so load yours same as me". I have several books that give good data for reloading all different types of loads. I will use the books before I'd use what someone else wrote.

 

[The Bushmaster]

Yup...W-231 and HP-38 are the same. That's why Lyman's 48th Edition lists W-231 starting load at 4.4 grains and a maximum load of 6.1 grains and HP-38 starting load at 3.5 grains and a maximum load of 5.8 grains. This data is for a 185 grain JHP in .45 ACP.

When saying that one powder is the same as another. one should also state that this "hard and fast" rule has exceptions and one had better look the load up before stating such drivel...Every time that I have noted that both powders are listed for a particular caliber in my list of 6 reloading manuals they ARE different. Yes...I know what the manufacturers say...BUT...I'm the one dropping the powder in the case and firing it in MY firearms. I WILL insure I have it right by looking it up...

 

[KAB55]

On Hodgon's site, every load I looked at for W231 and HP-38 were exactly the same. I assume the differences that you are seeing in other manuals is due to different test conditions. I'll trust Hodgdon's data, since they are the ones that sell the stuff. They also state on their site that they are the same powder.

 

[freakshow10mm]

No it's because it's the same exact powder, just rebranded. Think of it like the GMC Yukon XL and the Chevrolet Suburban. Same exact vehicle, just rebranded.

Alliant Technologies and St Marks Powder Co are the only two domestic gunpowder manufacturers in the US. Hodgdon is a distributor, then sell it they don't make it. Winchester uses St Marks Powder. Hodgdon also buys St Marks Powder and brands it under their name.

Winchester is the only OEM ammunition manufacturer that sells their factory powder to handloaders on the consumer market. The WST, WST, 231 (SMP-231), 748 (SMP-748), etc are all St Marks Powders and are the exact same powder Winchester uses in factory Winchester loads and repackages for sale to handloaders.

So, both Hodgdon and Winchester, and others, buy powder in massive quantities from St Marks Powder company and sell them as their own brand. They often times buy the same exact powder and market them under different names, like my Suburban/Yukon XL example. A lot of powder comes from overseas like England (the RG4895 is IMR4895 but SAAMI has tighter lot to lot variation control than CIP does), Belgium, and Australia.

The following powders are the exact same powder in every respect.

H414 is W760
HP-38 is W231
H110 is W296
Varget is ADI 2208, made in Australia by ADI
H335 is WC844, the military powder for the 5.56 NATO but lacks the flash suppressant that WC844 has

The Winchester numerical labels are carried over from the St Marks Powder numerical labels. SMP-748 is the same powder as W748. SMP 224 is the "new" Winchester Auto Comp and has been used in several Winchester factory loads for years. They finally decided it has benefit to consumers for handloading so they marketed it under Auto Comp brand.

Ramshot Silhouette is WAP. WAP is discontinued and Ramshot is now distributing the powder under it's brand label as Silhouette. It's the exact same powder in every respect.

This is not speculation this is documented fact. Call Hodgdon and Western Powder. They will tell you the exact same thing they told me which is stated above. Educate yourself before you accuse others of giving out misleading information.

 

[kestak]

Greetings,

What manufacturer sells WC844? Could not find it at powdervalley.

Thank you

 

[Walkalong]

WC844 sells as surplus. Places like Pats reloading.

 

[Mal H]

Bailey Boat - do you have an example where someone has stated "so and so powder is the SAME as such and such powder"? If the instance is not one of the posts where a powder is indeed the same as another powder, as several have already pointed out, then we need to correct the information in that post.

For example, if someone says "AA #2 is the same as Bullseye so you can use the data for either", they would be flat wrong and the poster would need to be called on it. In fact, since this data will live for several years, erroneous info like that should be deleted from the data base.

So - please show us threads or posts that are in error.

 

[Steve C]

No it's because it's the same exact powder, just rebranded......So, both Hodgdon and Winchester, and others, buy powder in massive quantities from St Marks Powder company and sell them as their own brand. They often times buy the same exact powder and market them under different names, like my Suburban/Yukon XL example. A lot of powder comes from overseas like England (the RG4895 is IMR4895 but SAAMI has tighter lot to lot variation control than CIP does), Belgium, and Australia.

I think an important factor is missing in your description of how canister grade powder sold to reloaders if formulated. If it was as simple as buying bulk powder in 50 gal drums and pouring it into 1 lb cans, anyone could sell powder for reloaders. To follow the Suburban/Yukon analogy, while they're very close and some would call then "the same" there's still some subtle slight differences like payload.

Ammunition manufacturers buy bulk powder from the powder manufacturers and determine the burn rate and "load" for each particular bulk batch in their own lab to attain the pressure they desire for the ammo they're loading. They do this because the powder manufacturing process has enough variability that the same type powder will have different burn rates from one production batch to another.

Canister grade powders that are sold for reloading have a standardized burn rate. The company that sells this powder buys in bulk from the same manufacturers that the ammo companies do BUT they blend different lots of the same bulk powder to achieve this standard burn rate. This is why you can use the same load data even though you pick up a new can of powder. While the manuals will say that different cans of powder require a new load work up because of variability in burn rate, in general the technology of the canister grade powder companies is good enough so that it is seldom an issue.

So while two particular powders may be the "same" in base bulk powder, the standardized burn rate used may be slightly different which explains the difference in load data. "Same" doesn't necessarily equate to "identical".

The maximum and start loads for Hodgdon HP38 have always been lower than W231 in every manual I've seen in the last 30 years when listed for use with the same bullet. When Hodgdon took over the marketing of Winchester powders they simply assigned the lower charge level of HP38 to W231 which essentially is downloading W231 by 1 to 2 tenths of a grain so the load data remains safe. IMO this was a marketing ploy to "even up" the competition between the 2 very similar powders and not an indication that they are identical unless Hodgdon now controls the blending of the 2 powders and have changed the standardization of W231. In which case why maintain the seperate name rather than just printing both designations on the same bottle?

 

[freakshow10mm]

Internal ballistics testing of powder has little to do with burn rate of canister versus non-canister and more to do with how the manufacturers load ammunition. The ballisticians from Western Powder have told me it's a myth that the powder sold to OEMs is different than is sold to handloaders. They have said if an OEM is using AA #5, it's the same #5 you'd buy in your local shop with the same burn rate, consistency, etc. It might not be called #5, just like Winchester Auto Comp is SMP-224, but the Win AC is the same SMP-224 Winchester uses in their factory .380 ACP ammunition.

 

[Bailey Boat]

Mal, without going back through a couple of years worth of threads I can't "quote" one specific post off the top of my head but I HAVE seen it stated in that manner in numerous threads over time. The purpose of my thread was to draw out conclusions from others that have seen the same thing, and it seems to have worked to a degree. And I agree it will remain in the archives forever and possibly be used by someone in the future but what to do????

 

[Deavis]

In which case why maintain the seperate name rather than just printing both designations on the same bottle?

Do we really need to answer that question? I guess we do. It is called branding and it is is used all over the world to increase the price of one brand of a commodity over another brand of the same commodity. There are plenty of examples of this phenomena, for instance in LCD televisions. Guess how many manufacturers there are of the actual LCD panel used in the TV. Same thing, go look at the prices of the powders.

When Hodgdon took over the marketing of Winchester powders

Hodgdon did not just take over the marketing of Winchester powders, they bought the rights to the powder. They control both production and marketing.

 

[freakshow10mm]

Hodgdon did not just take over the marketing of Winchester powders, they bought the rights to the powder. They control both production and marketing.

Hodgdon does not have rights to the powder and they do not control production. St Marks Powder Company, a General Dynamics company, controls production. Hodgdon owns the marketing and distribution rights to the Winchester powders. Winchester still owns the name and everything associated with Winchester powders, but they licensed the marketing and distribution to Hodgdon Powder Company. Big difference between what you say and the facts.

In March 2006, Hodgdon Powder Company and Winchester® Ammunition announced that Winchester® branded reloading powders would be licensed to Hodgdon.

 

[Jim Watson]

Yup. Likewise Hodgdon bought out IMR Powder of New York. But that was just the US distributor, the powder is manufactured in Canada. By a General Dynamics subsidiary, as happens.

Hodgdon DID buy up Goex lock, stock, and barrel, so to speak. BPCR shooters are watching closely to see how they allocate resources between real and fake powders.

 

[freakshow10mm]

When Hodgdon bought IMR, they bought them and everything associated with them. IMR is now a Hodgdon company 100% controlled in the US by Hodgdon Powder Company.

 

[Jim Watson]

Where are they making IMR powders, then?

The Expro - SNC-TEC- General Dynamics OTS Canada plant is still right there in Valleyfield, Ontario, making propellant powders for military and sporting applications.

 

[Mal H]

Bailey Boat - so when you said, "Maybe it's the new generation of reloaders that recently flooded the sport but I'm seeing an alarming trend ..." you were remembering posts from the distant past? It sounded like you had recently seen something that needed correcting.

 

[ranger335v]

"Maybe it's the new generation of reloaders that recently flooded the sport but I'm seeing an alarming trend when people say "so and so powder is the SAME as such and such powder". "

Naw. After some 45 years of reloading I can testify that it's a recurring thyme but it may well be somewhat more frequent today. Still, it's only a confirmation that "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing." Noobs in most any field start humble but quickly "graduate" to knowing almost everthing.

At that point, either the Darwin effect kicks in and elimates the wild, know all reloaders from the gene pool OR they eventually learn enough to know they really don't know much after all. If they survive to that point, THEN they can actually start learning!

The self made (book learning) "experts" are easy to spot; they have an answer to every question, it will be "conventional wisdom" applied incorrectly and are pretty dogmatic that their position is the only correct one, all the time, no exceptions. Can't be wrong after all, they read it in a magazine or some guy in a gun store told them the straight story! Usually they are harmless and just funny but sometimes they are truly dangerous. Even then, we can't stop them, can we?

 

[nulfisin]

Kind of an insult -- and wrong to boot

I'm new to handgun, but not rifle, loading. So, when I saw a conflict between the load data for HP 38 and Win 231 in different manuals, I contacted Hodgdon. Hodgdon specifically told me -- as they tell everyone else -- that the two powders are the same. Maybe some homework would do for old- and newtimers alike before hurling insults.

 

[Kernel]

We had a new reloader on this sight just a couple of days ago who thought RL-7 and RL-15 we the exact same thing because a sales associate a Cabelas told him so. He's very lucky there's not a rifle bolt protruding from his forehead.

7 = 15

That's the "new math" today. Don't over think things. No consequences for being wrong. It’s all relative. All the kids go home with a trophy that says “Thanks for participating”.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

Well, there are powders which are exactly the same but sold by different companies. The plant at St. Marks makes both Winchester W231 and Hodgdon HP-38. Before Hodgdon became the distributer for IMR and Winchester powders there was no good reason to divulge that fact. Now it no longer matters so Hodgdon/ Winchester/ IMR has now admitted several of their powders are exactly the same. If you check the Hodgdon Load Data Site you will see the data is also exactly the same too.

Those powders are:
W231 = HP-38
W296 = H110
W540 = HS-6
W571 = HS-7
W760 = H414

BUT, don't take my word on this, write Hodgdon/Winchester and ask them for yourself. They will verify it's true in writing and no company will put anything in writing that's untrue because of all the lawsuits that are all too common these days.