Does anyone have comparison Data for 231 and it's predecessor 230? I've got an older Sierra
loadbook with some decent 230 loads in 32 S&W I would like to try.

That is scary. They are not the same powder or even very similar. I sure would not try to transmogrify old 230 data into 231 loads.

Why not just use actual 231 data?

Lyman recommends 231 and says
.32 S&W 77 gr LRN
1.9 gr W231 = 641 fps
2.2 gr W231 = 821 fps MAXIMUM

They also recommend not reloading for top-breaks at all. Lawyerese, maybe.

If you have an older .32 S&W Long do not exceed the SAAMI pressure standards.

However, I have modern .32's (stainless steel 631 chambered for .32 H&R Magnum) and I use either RCBS's 98 gr SWC or a 100 gr Keith style bullet from the Cast Boolit Group buy that I regularly load 2.8 grs of Win 231. This is NOT overpressure when used in .32 S&W L cases in a modern revolver chambered for .32 S&W L IF that revolver was made after 1950 or so when S&W started heat treating their revolver cylinders.

NOTE: Do NOT get creative. This is NOT for break open revolvers or old junk revolvers. It is only for modern, solid frame revolvers of S&W, Colt, and Dan Wesson.

I have not pressure tested these loads so they are used at the owners discretion.

Dale53

Thanks Guys, I don't have a current Lyman Book. I've have never used anything else in pistol loads other than Alliant Powders, Bullseye ,Unique, Herco. Except for Win. Super field for .45 acp and 9mm ball. I'm using Bullseye for the 32 S&W long and thought maybe the 231 would meter better.

W231 is a very versatile powder. I use it for any load where Bullseye would be appropriate. W231 and BE are not identical, W231 is slower burning, but they are close enough to be useful in each other's place. Plenty of loading data for W231.

W230...faggeddaboudit. If you have a container of it, unless you bought it new, the contents could be anything, so my best advice would be to use it in the garden and then you can brag to everyone about why your plants look so good.

quote:

Originally posted by arthur52:
Thanks Guys, I don't have a current Lyman Book. I've have never used anything else in pistol loads other than Alliant Powders, Bullseye ,Unique, Herco. Except for Win. Super field for .45 acp and 9mm ball. I'm using Bullseye for the 32 S&W long and thought maybe the 231 would meter better.

You can get load data for Hodgdon/IMR/Winchester powders from the Hodgdon Load Data site.

quote:

Originally posted by arthur52:
Does anyone have comparison Data for 231 and it's predecessor 230? I've got an older Sierra
loadbook with some decent 230 loads in 32 S&W I would like to try.

Let me reiterrate what Jim said. I've used both powders and 230p is MUCH faster than 231, depending on what lot of 231 you have.

There is no way to correlate 230 to 231, and the misfortune of naming the powders so similarly misleads people in this way... I'd either find something to use that old 230 for, with appropriate 230 load data, or ship it to me, because I have load data in my notes for it from the old days... (None for 32s though, sorry...)