Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Win 213 and HP-38

Discussion in 'Handloading and Reloading' started by Comrade Mike, Jun 25, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Comrade Mike

    Comrade Mike Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2013
    Messages:
    960
    I've always been told these were the same powder. Today I'm reading my new Hornady manual just to see what I can learn, and I see these two powders in different spots on the burn rate chart, win 231 being the faster one. What's the truth?
     
  2. Walkalong

    Walkalong Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2006
    Messages:
    46,749
    Location:
    Alabama
    Hodgdon says they are the same. The burn rate chart has to put them in somehow. In a burn rate chart two powders next to each other could be very close in burn speed, or not so much. It's just a guide.
     
  3. rcmodel

    rcmodel Member in memoriam

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2007
    Messages:
    59,082
    Location:
    Eastern KS
    The truth is that they both came out of the same bulk container from St. Marks powder company in Florida when Hodgdon packaged the powder at the Hodgdon, Winchester, & IMR packaging plant in Kansas.

    HP-38 & W-231 became the same in 2006 when Hodgdon took over Winchester powder distribution.

    The burn rate table you are looking at must be older then that.

    You will still see different data for the two in the same manuals.
    All that means is no recent testing is being published for old established calibers.

    But you won't see it in Hodgdon / Winchester data.
    It is exactly the same data for all calibers in Hodgdon data.

    rc
     
  4. Comrade Mike

    Comrade Mike Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2013
    Messages:
    960
    The chart is out of Hornady's 9th edition published in 2012.
     
  5. rcmodel

    rcmodel Member in memoriam

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2007
    Messages:
    59,082
    Location:
    Eastern KS
    But when was the chart first published??

    Hornady didn't run right out and do closed bomb tests on every powder available in 2011, just for an up to the minute burn rate chart for the 2012 reloading manual.

    rc
     
  6. ArchAngelCD

    ArchAngelCD Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2006
    Messages:
    22,120
    Location:
    Northeast PA, USA
    Like said above, W231 and HP-38 are identical powders except for the labeling. This has been verified by Hodgdon/ IMR/ Winchester and St. Marks Powder. MANY of us have contacted both to verify the truth of that statement, I suggest you do the same instead of believing or arguing with other reloaders on the Internet.

    Much of the data in load manuals today was shot a long time ago and most will not retest that data unless they have a very good reason. Current testing is done with new equipment and stated in PSI while the older data was stated in CUP. You will notice most of the data for newly released powders will be stated in PSI.
     
  7. ReloaderFred

    ReloaderFred Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2005
    Messages:
    5,825
    Location:
    Oregon Coast
    They are the same powder, period.

    On another subject, the title of this thread is exactly why I won't post loading data in open forums. I'm sure the OP meant Winchester 231 powder in his title, but it came out as 213. It's just too easy to make mistakes when typing, and data is too critical to withstand most mistakes.

    Hope this helps.

    Fred
     
  8. ArchAngelCD

    ArchAngelCD Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2006
    Messages:
    22,120
    Location:
    Northeast PA, USA
    I agree Fred, that's why on the rare times I do post data I add the warning, "Mistakes can and will happen when typing numbers so always verify the data for yourself."

    Very good point and example Fred...
     
  9. joneb

    joneb Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2005
    Messages:
    3,724
    Location:
    Oregon
    So W-231 and HP-38 are same since 2006. So the the question is How old is Your powder.
     
  10. ArchAngelCD

    ArchAngelCD Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2006
    Messages:
    22,120
    Location:
    Northeast PA, USA
    Actually, both were most probably the same powders even before 2006 but differences in lots and testing equipment showed slightly different data over the years. We can be completely sure they are the same since 2006 although I did read somewhere where Hodgdon said, "Both powders are the same and always have been." Unfortunately I can't remember where I read it so I can't link to it.
     
  11. rondog

    rondog Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    Messages:
    6,788
    Location:
    Commurado
    Win 296 and H110 are also the same, yes?
     
  12. ArchAngelCD

    ArchAngelCD Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2006
    Messages:
    22,120
    Location:
    Northeast PA, USA
    YES

    As are:
    W540 = HS-6
    W571 = HS-7
    W760 = H414
    And one of the Win shotgun powders = Silhouette
     
  13. Slamfire

    Slamfire Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2006
    Messages:
    7,579
    Location:
    Alabama
    Mind you, these are blended powders. Burn rate of powders vary by lot, even though the manufacturer is trying to make each lot the same as the last. The powder manufacturing process is so variable that I have heard claims that lots vary around 20% about a mean. That is why some lots of military surplus IMR 4895 seem to burn as slow as IMR 4064 or as fast as IMR 3031. For us, the powder company blends fast and slow lots, and I was told by Accurate Arms the industry standard is 10% variation from the mean for blended powders.

    So what this means is that reloading manuals will have different pressures for the same charge weights of H-38 and W231 if they used cans that were from different blended lots. Another issue, and one the public does not have data , it turns out that pressures vary quite a bit given the same powder charge. I have seen information on the 3 sigma and it is eye opening to find just how much pressures vary. Given a naturally wide standard deviation, lets say 5,000 psia, and given a small sample size, lets say ten rounds, the average pressure of ten shots can vary quite a bit, which would make one think there is something different between test results, when the differences between the averages is something you would expect from randomness.

    What I find is funny is how for decades our “experts” the gunwriters have been making canyons out of the small differences between powders. As an example, I have an article by Ken Waters, from Handloader I think, and he was testing powders and bullets for the 45 ACP. He says in the article that due to the poor performance he got from W231 he gave up on the powder, just awful stuff, but HP-38, that was one of the best for low to medium pressure loads. Since now we know that both powders were identical, how did he find any difference between the two?

    Was his condemnation of W231 due to lack of free samples from Winchester?, or can’t Ken shoot straight between magazine changes?

    And why are these “experts” considered “infallible ” by the shooting community?
     
  14. Arkansas Paul

    Arkansas Paul Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2009
    Messages:
    7,391
    Location:
    Central Arkansas
    Only difference is the price. I don't know why, but W231 seems to be a couple dollars higher. I was at Bass Pro in Springfield MO a couple weeks ago and they had both. I had been looking for a long time for either one. The HP38 was $24.99 and the W231 was $26.99. I would have got the W231 if that's all they had, but grabbed 2# of the HP38 and saved a few dollars. Don't know why its like that.
     
  15. RandyP

    RandyP Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    Messages:
    1,270
    Location:
    Illinois
    Win 231/HP-38 is the only powder I use - when I first started I found the easiest way to get a reputable answer was to e-mail Hodgdon directly - Their customer service rep responded quickly and assured me the 2 were the exact same powder and any published data for one could be used for the other.

    I also HIGHLY recommend that you don't take my (or any other internet stranger's) word for it - send them an e-mail yourself and be certain.
     
  16. dickttx

    dickttx Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2011
    Messages:
    954
    Location:
    Fort Worth
    I only use HP38, in the 8# jug. Have always saved $8 per jug over 231 (maybe $16 now?). Easier for a forgetful old man.
    Using Hodgdon's web site you can't go wrong on the loading info.
     
    Last edited: Jun 26, 2013
  17. Arkansas Paul

    Arkansas Paul Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2009
    Messages:
    7,391
    Location:
    Central Arkansas
    ^ Didn't see any 8# jugs, so don't know about that. I need to start buying by the 8# jug though. It's like darn near getting a pound for free.
    If I'm totally out of powder and 231 is all they have, I'll pay the extra $2, but with both on the shelf, I don't know why anyone would buy the Winchester powder. I guess they're just not aware that they come out of the exact same production.
     
  18. Walkalong

    Walkalong Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2006
    Messages:
    46,749
    Location:
    Alabama
    Zip is a good substitute if you cannot find W-231/HP-38.
     
  19. Arkansas Paul

    Arkansas Paul Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2009
    Messages:
    7,391
    Location:
    Central Arkansas
    That's good to know. I was without for a couple months. I made do with Bullseye and Unique, but would rather have had something along the lines of 231/HP38. I found some Ramshot powders in stock too.
     
  20. dickttx

    dickttx Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2011
    Messages:
    954
    Location:
    Fort Worth
    I got my last two 8# jugs from PV in April and December, 2012. A little ahead of the rush.
    Also 10K of primers in April, October, and December. Still sitting pretty good.
    Wish I had more bullets though.
    I placed my last order on Dec 30 and they were shipped 1-16-13. A little slower than normal, but not bad.
    Things really went south shortly thereafter.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page