Smith & Wesson Forum

Go Back   Smith & Wesson Forum > Ammunition-Gunsmithing > Reloading
Forum Register Expert Commentary Members List


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-12-2011, 09:58 PM
jkc jkc is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 2,835
Likes: 1,259
Liked 600 Times in 339 Posts
Default W296/H110 interchangeable?

Read recent references suggesting that these powders are interchangeable --- what's the story?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-12-2011, 10:25 PM
Alk8944's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sandy Utah
Posts: 3,836
Likes: 205
Liked 1,046 Times in 578 Posts
Default

The "story" is that they are not interchangeable, they are identical, except for packaging. They are made by St Marks Powders in St Marks FL and are absolutely identical per one of their production engineers who I asked the question of several years ago.
__________________
Gunsmithing S&W since 1961
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-12-2011, 10:27 PM
SWCA Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 3,057
Likes: 107
Liked 372 Times in 181 Posts
Default

Oh no, here we go again.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-12-2011, 10:47 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: South East , PA . USA
Posts: 5,041
Likes: 486
Liked 1,523 Times in 838 Posts
Default

Any data differences are due to differences in loading or test methods , equipment , other componants(primers/cases/bullets) or normal lot to lot variation.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-12-2011, 10:52 PM
jkc jkc is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 2,835
Likes: 1,259
Liked 600 Times in 339 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragon88 View Post
Oh no, here we go again.
Nope, not necessary --- your comment prompted a search of this forum for previous discussions of this topic, and of course I found that this has been beaten to death, yet frequently resurrected, and I am now satisfied by a preponderance of the comments that these powders are indeed interchangeable, and because your post has prompted this conclusion, my attorneys have been instructed to include you among the named respondents to any action brought as a result of any damage or injury arising from any erroneous suggestions to which you may have been a party. Thank you.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-12-2011, 10:57 PM
Sprefix's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: 61N149W
Posts: 2,830
Likes: 1,190
Liked 962 Times in 491 Posts
Send a message via Yahoo to Sprefix
Thumbs up Yup.........

Alk8944 nailed it. 'Nuff said...........
__________________
Go big or stay home
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-12-2011, 11:12 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Rocky Mtns, CO
Posts: 937
Likes: 18
Liked 163 Times in 115 Posts
Default

If you go to the Hodgdon on-line Reloading Data Center and compare recommended loads for the two powder, you will find exactly the same data for both powders.

These aren't the only 2 powders that are identical.

Winchester 296 = Hodgdon H110

Winchester 231 = Hodgdon HP-38

Winchester 571 = Hodgdon HS-7

Winchester 540 = Hodgdon HS-6

I think there are others, but these are the ones I have on hand.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12-12-2011, 11:15 PM
SWCA Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 3,057
Likes: 107
Liked 372 Times in 181 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jkc View Post
Nope, not necessary --- your comment prompted a search of this forum for previous discussions of this topic, and of course I found that this has been beaten to death, yet frequently resurrected, and I am now satisfied by a preponderance of the comments that these powders are indeed interchangeable, and because your post has prompted this conclusion, my attorneys have been instructed to include you among the named respondents to any action brought as a result of any damage or injury arising from any erroneous suggestions to which you may have been a party. Thank you.
If problems arise, your own stupidity in handloading is your own fault. Thank you and good luck.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 12-13-2011, 12:16 AM
ArchAngelCD's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: PA, USA
Posts: 4,264
Likes: 174
Liked 956 Times in 627 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jepp2 View Post
If you go to the Hodgdon on-line Reloading Data Center and compare recommended loads for the two powder, you will find exactly the same data for both powders.

These aren't the only 2 powders that are identical.

Winchester 296 = Hodgdon H110

Winchester 231 = Hodgdon HP-38

Winchester 571 = Hodgdon HS-7

Winchester 540 = Hodgdon HS-6

I think there are others, but these are the ones I have on hand.
W760 = H414
And one of the Winchester shotgun powders is the same as a Ramshot powder but keep forgetting which.
__________________
Freedom is never free!!
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12-13-2011, 01:27 AM
Rule3's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Florida, NRA CERT RSO
Posts: 14,238
Likes: 4,096
Liked 4,063 Times in 2,252 Posts
Default

__________________
But Wait! There's More!
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 12-13-2011, 06:33 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Hoosier Land!
Posts: 4,389
Likes: 587
Liked 500 Times in 275 Posts
Thumbs down Um, REALLY?

Quote:
Originally Posted by jkc View Post
Nope, not necessary --- your comment prompted a search of this forum for previous discussions of this topic, and of course I found that this has been beaten to death, yet frequently resurrected, and I am now satisfied by a preponderance of the comments that these powders are indeed interchangeable, and because your post has prompted this conclusion, my attorneys have been instructed to include you among the named respondents to any action brought as a result of any damage or injury arising from any erroneous suggestions to which you may have been a party. Thank you.
Well, Let me be clear: Add my name too!

Are you serious that you are going to come on a gun forum, go to the reloading section, ask a question that has been asked over and over (a simple web search or forum search "the search function is your friend" applies here) and then threaten someone with possible legal action because of their answer? REALLY?

That ought to get you lots of help in the future, friend!

Listen, I will just use this defense:

Quote:
Originally Posted by MDaly View Post
I work for Hodgdon powder Co. We have Hodgdon powder, Winchester powder and IMR powder.

I can tell you, that H110 and W296 are exactly the same powder and they have always been exactly the same powder. Not similar, or like but exactly the same powder. It is produced, put into large drums and then repackaged into consumer units of both H110 and W296.

This should clear up the issue but if there are those who do not think I am telling the truth or want to discuss this further call 800-622-4366 ext 110 Monday - Wednesday next week and we can talk about it.

Mike Daly
Or this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by MDaly View Post
My name is Mike Daly. I am the Customer Service Manager for Hodgdon Powder Company. I was asked to come on here and difinitivly answer a question concerning H110 and Winchester 296.

I do not intend to debate with anyone. I do not have time to monitor this thread for activity or for follow up questions so I intend to be clear about my answer. If anyone wants to discuss this topic or any other, contact Hodgdon Powder Company at 800-622-4366,

Are H110 and W296 the same powder?

Yes, they are the same powder. They have always been the same powder. The only difference between H110 and 296 is the label. Even back when we had nothing to do with Winchester Propellants, H110 and 296 were the same powder. The powder is made in bulk in the only ball powder plant in North America. Some powder from the bulk lot goes into cans with H110 labels and some gets a Winchester label.

Why do you see data from the same company for both powder that do not match? Sometimes the data is completed days, moths or even years apart. If a different lot# of bullets, primers or brass is used, the data will be different. If a different person shoots the data, it will be different. if it is shot on a different day, the data will be different. It is unlikely that the can of 296 in a lab is the same lot# as the can of H110 allowing for some slight variation between lot#s.

OK, this should end this thread although I doubt it will. You have the number if you want to discuss it further.

Mike

MDaly
Doesn't make a lot of sense to threaten someone with legal action when the Customer Service Manager from the company that markets the powders has made these very public statements.

Just sayin'
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 12-13-2011, 06:35 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Hoosier Land!
Posts: 4,389
Likes: 587
Liked 500 Times in 275 Posts
Thumbs up DUH!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rule3 View Post
Yeah, as a suggestion, if you find yourself beating a dead horse, by all means, um, dismount!
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 12-13-2011, 08:30 AM
rewster's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 602
Likes: 9
Liked 25 Times in 8 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jkc View Post
Nope, not necessary --- your comment prompted a search of this forum for previous discussions of this topic, and of course I found that this has been beaten to death, yet frequently resurrected, and I am now satisfied by a preponderance of the comments that these powders are indeed interchangeable, and because your post has prompted this conclusion, my attorneys have been instructed to include you among the named respondents to any action brought as a result of any damage or injury arising from any erroneous suggestions to which you may have been a party. Thank you.
Did you leave off the smilys by mistake ?
__________________
regards....roger (no sig)
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 12-13-2011, 09:55 AM
dickttx's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Fort Worth
Posts: 474
Likes: 115
Liked 95 Times in 64 Posts
Default

If you haven't read or heard it before it is new to you. Most people aren't born knowing all things.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 12-13-2011, 11:08 AM
Rule3's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Florida, NRA CERT RSO
Posts: 14,238
Likes: 4,096
Liked 4,063 Times in 2,252 Posts
Default

Hey Skip,

I do believe JKC's post was a joke.
__________________
But Wait! There's More!
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 12-13-2011, 12:05 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Hoosier Land!
Posts: 4,389
Likes: 587
Liked 500 Times in 275 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rule3 View Post
Hey Skip,

I do believe JKC's post was a joke.
Hey, partner, he is a big boy, let him speak for himself. Neither of us needs someone running interference for us. If I misread that, and he was joking, then, hey, I am big enough to apologize. If it was a dig, well, really, if it is a joke, it is a poor one given our current sue happy society.

Thanks for your input, but..........we will wait to hear what he says for himself.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 12-13-2011, 12:44 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: NC Montana
Posts: 746
Likes: 64
Liked 294 Times in 129 Posts
Default

Yeah, but are you suuuuuuure they're the same?
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 12-13-2011, 01:34 PM
dla dla is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 644
Likes: 83
Liked 135 Times in 90 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jkc View Post
Read recent references suggesting that these powders are interchangeable --- what's the story?
Well after watching all these old codgers throw their dentures at each other, I thought I'd help you out: yes they are the same. Enjoy them both. For some reason I find H110 on the shelves easier than W296, so that's what I buy most.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 12-13-2011, 01:45 PM
Rule3's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Florida, NRA CERT RSO
Posts: 14,238
Likes: 4,096
Liked 4,063 Times in 2,252 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skip Sackett View Post
Hey, partner, he is a big boy, let him speak for himself. Neither of us needs someone running interference for us. If I misread that, and he was joking, then, hey, I am big enough to apologize. If it was a dig, well, really, if it is a joke, it is a poor one given our current sue happy society.

Thanks for your input, but..........we will wait to hear what he says for himself.
Easy now, I read it as sarcasm. No need to get all huffy.
__________________
But Wait! There's More!
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 12-13-2011, 02:16 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Hoosier Land!
Posts: 4,389
Likes: 587
Liked 500 Times in 275 Posts
Default

Huffy? DUDE, if you think that is huffy! You ain't seen huffy YET!
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 12-13-2011, 08:26 PM
jkc jkc is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 2,835
Likes: 1,259
Liked 600 Times in 339 Posts
Default

Evidently, drollery and sardonic humor are not as easily recognized here in the Reloading forum, as they are, say, in The Lounge. In future, I'll try to remember to use those silly emoticon smiley face things as a clue to when I'm just kidding.

Thanks for all the well-informed replies, by the way.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 12-14-2011, 05:29 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Hoosier Land!
Posts: 4,389
Likes: 587
Liked 500 Times in 275 Posts
Default

Well, it is a bit disconcerting when our hobby is being attacked in every venue known to man with the threat of legal action because of some "thing" or another and then have someone come to the part of the forum and "joke" about doing just that.

If it was truly humor, I didn't see it, and for that I apologize. When dealing with handloading/reloading I am a bit sensitive when I don't know if folks are kidding. Of course, the lounge is full of jokers, and of my post count, there may be one or two posts outside of this section of the forum so.............I can't really tell you what goes on there.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 12-14-2011, 08:18 AM
rewster's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 602
Likes: 9
Liked 25 Times in 8 Posts
Default

Well, I for one am glad that is settled. Maybe, now, we can get back to HP-38/Win231 and it's interchangeability !!
__________________
regards....roger (no sig)
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 12-14-2011, 09:07 PM
sheriffoconee's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Watkinsville, GA
Posts: 1,847
Likes: 0
Liked 80 Times in 30 Posts
Default

I just want to know if W296 or H110 are suitable for bear defense loads???
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 12-14-2011, 09:56 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: CA
Posts: 536
Likes: 17
Liked 53 Times in 32 Posts
Default

I would stay away from 296 or 110 loads and stick to +P loads in a 9mm or .38 special for bears (much more powerful) Just kidding Always fun to read another 296/110 post.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 12-14-2011, 10:07 PM
jkc jkc is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 2,835
Likes: 1,259
Liked 600 Times in 339 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sheriffoconee View Post
I just want to know if W296 or H110 are suitable for bear defense loads???
Possibly, but what species of bears, and if it's so-called "black" bears you're concerned about, we'll need to know which color phases you may encounter, to proffer an informed opinion... These bears, as you may know, are not interchangeable...

By the way, whichever powder you choose, the .22 Hornet is inadequate for any color phase ...

Last edited by jkc; 12-14-2011 at 10:12 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 12-15-2011, 12:40 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: central florida
Posts: 318
Likes: 3
Liked 64 Times in 38 Posts
Default

hmmm! Always check your manuals regardless! Powder companies do not always use the same bullets to test their powders. just because H110 and W296 is reported to be the same powder does not mean one should interchange them without due caution. always refer back to the source!
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 12-15-2011, 05:35 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Hoosier Land!
Posts: 4,389
Likes: 587
Liked 500 Times in 275 Posts
Default

Reloading rule #1: If you change a component, any component, reduce load and work back up to an acceptable level.

Granted, the suggested 3% for these two powders doesn't give you much room to reduce but, that is a good thing, in my opinion.

Listen, physics being what it is, and this is just me, but, I don't think you can get enough H110/W296 in a case that is designed for a magnum load to blow up a gun by creating too much pressure.

Double or triple charges of a fast powder? Oh, yeah, now that can be done pretty easily.

In most cases (as in instances) a full charge of H110/W296 is going to fill the case (cartridge) almost to the base of the bullet. By the time you put enough in it to hit the bottom of the bullet, there isn't enough added to get the pressure to twice what the cartridge is rated for which is what SAAMI says is supposed to be the rated burst pressure of the firearm designed for that cartridge.

Can you get to pressure signs? Yeah, you can get flattened primers and sticky extraction but at that point, you are still nowhere near twice cartridge pressure.

Can you blow up a gun with H110/W296? Sure! Run a reduced load, have a squib followed by a round that goes off at its full reduced potential and you are going to test your frame pretty well.

Now, I need to qualify this statement a bit but, I don't load for the 454 Casul, 460 S&W Mag, so I cannot speak to those cases.

Just my thoughts on the matter though.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 12-15-2011, 06:38 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: columbus, ohio usa
Posts: 557
Likes: 63
Liked 128 Times in 56 Posts
Default

In the next-to-most recent Lyman manual, under .44mag, it lists a max of 24.5 gr. of H110 under a 240gr. JHP and 23.5 gr. minimum.

I loaded a batch of an even 24 gr. and got flattened primers and sticky cases in my 629 Classic DX. I looked up the parameters for W296 and it listed a min. of 23 gr. I went with that for my next batch since both powders are the same. The primer and case issues went away.


Oddly enough, that load was the favorite of both my 629 Classic DX and my Marlin 1894. Go figga!
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 12-15-2011, 08:03 AM
rewster's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 602
Likes: 9
Liked 25 Times in 8 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sheriffoconee View Post
I just want to know if W296 or H110 are suitable for bear defense loads???
First you'll have to tell us what caliber the bear is using and what he wants to defend against !
__________________
regards....roger (no sig)
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 12-15-2011, 11:48 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Hoosier Land!
Posts: 4,389
Likes: 587
Liked 500 Times in 275 Posts
Talking

Quote:
Originally Posted by rewster View Post
First you'll have to tell us what caliber the bear is using and what he wants to defend against !
Now THIS is funny! hahahaha
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 12-17-2011, 03:29 AM
Nemo288's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: PDR of Dane County
Posts: 815
Likes: 49
Liked 232 Times in 140 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by beach elvis View Post
In the next-to-most recent Lyman manual, under .44mag, it lists a max of 24.5 gr. of H110 under a 240gr. JHP and 23.5 gr. minimum.

I loaded a batch of an even 24 gr. and got flattened primers and sticky cases in my 629 Classic DX. I looked up the parameters for W296 and it listed a min. of 23 gr. I went with that for my next batch since both powders are the same. The primer and case issues went away.


Oddly enough, that load was the favorite of both my 629 Classic DX and my Marlin 1894. Go figga!
I have stepped back one grain on my W296 loads as of recent.
The accuracy is the same or better and the pressure is "normal".
These are .44 loads. 23 instead of 24 under a 240. 26 instead
of 27 under a 200.
Why tickle the dragon?

---
Nemo

Last edited by Nemo288; 12-17-2011 at 03:31 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 12-17-2011, 07:57 PM
ArchAngelCD's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: PA, USA
Posts: 4,264
Likes: 174
Liked 956 Times in 627 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by trauma1 View Post
hmmm! Always check your manuals regardless! Powder companies do not always use the same bullets to test their powders. just because H110 and W296 is reported to be the same powder does not mean one should interchange them without due caution. always refer back to the source!
That makes no sense at all. If the powders are the same they are the same. No matter what you should always work up loads when using new components but the powder itself is the same no matter what label is on the jar. Only lot number variations will exist. W296 and H110 is exactly the same powder, CASE CLOSED for the 100th time!!!
__________________
Freedom is never free!!
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 12-17-2011, 08:07 PM
NKJ nut's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,257
Likes: 83
Liked 57 Times in 32 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ArchAngelCD View Post
That makes no sense at all. If the powders are the same they are the same. No matter what you should always work up loads when using new components but the powder itself is the same no matter what label is on the jar. Only lot number variations will exist. W296 and H110 is exactly the same powder, CASE CLOSED for the 100th time!!!
Correct. It's just a matter of which label you like best. personally I like the one that costs a little less.

Anyone who thinks there is a difference needs to visit Hodgdon's site. Bring us back a list of all the calibers where you encounter different data for H110 and W296 on that site. Same for HP38 and W231 and some more.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 12-17-2011, 08:26 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Hoosier Land!
Posts: 4,389
Likes: 587
Liked 500 Times in 275 Posts
Default

Are you trying to say that we cannot discuss the possibility that there might be or possibly a bit of difference?

Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 12-17-2011, 08:46 PM
NKJ nut's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,257
Likes: 83
Liked 57 Times in 32 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skip Sackett View Post
Are you trying to say that we cannot discuss the possibility that there might be or possibly a bit of difference?

No, I just invited anyone to use the Hodgdon data, to show us that difference. I am still waiting right along with you

If that isn't good enough, call Hodgdon and ask them. If that isn't enough to convince anyone that they are the same powders, then I don't know what would.

Got to go; getting ready for the big Y3K panic
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 12-18-2011, 03:57 PM
ArchAngelCD's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: PA, USA
Posts: 4,264
Likes: 174
Liked 956 Times in 627 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skip Sackett View Post
Are you trying to say that we cannot discuss the possibility that there might be or possibly a bit of difference?

Not at all only that it's been done so many times already I can't imagine anything different could be added to the conversation. Opinions can be changed, facts are just that, facts...
__________________
Freedom is never free!!
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 12-18-2011, 05:15 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Hoosier Land!
Posts: 4,389
Likes: 587
Liked 500 Times in 275 Posts
Default

Yeah, I know, I was just being silly. Excuse the attempt at humor!
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 12-18-2011, 09:41 PM
NKJ nut's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,257
Likes: 83
Liked 57 Times in 32 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ArchAngelCD View Post
Opinions can be changed, facts are just that, facts...
True enough about facts, but they can be ignored. Don't ya' think?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
622, 629, cartridge, winchester

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
Reloading Thread, W296/H110 interchangeable? in Ammunition-Gunsmithing; Read recent references suggesting that these powders are interchangeable --- what's the story?...
LinkBacks (?)
LinkBack to this Thread: http://smith-wessonforum.com/reloading/221550-w296-h110-interchangeable.html
Posted By For Type Date
94 Winchester trapper loads in 45 LC | Ammunition & Reloading | Texas Hunting Forum This thread Refback 08-15-2014 09:17 PM
94 Winchester trapper loads in 45 LC - Texas Hunting Forum This thread Refback 11-22-2013 12:59 AM

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
125 JHP, and H110 lazy Reloading 5 12-14-2011 11:28 AM
IMR4227 or W296 for 50AE Chubbs103 Reloading 1 12-11-2011 12:26 PM
329pd Blast Shield erosion with W296 dla Reloading 9 03-07-2010 01:40 PM
41 Mag, LSWC, W296 Need Help leas327 Reloading 18 12-07-2009 05:45 PM
H110/W296 Observations Tell Sackett Reloading 25 11-30-2009 07:50 PM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3
smith-wessonforum.com tested by Norton Internet Security smith-wessonforum.com tested by McAfee Internet Security

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:09 PM.


S-W Forum, LLC 2000-2015
Smith-WessonForum.com is not affiliated with Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation (NASDAQ Global Select: SWHC)