Happy Thanksgiving!

I finally got a chance to confirm the velocities and accuracy of the above powders driving a RimRock 180 Hard cast LSWC w/ gas check .358"

I keep hearing that H110 is the "better" powder for 180 gr.
But I kept getting better results with 2400. I thought I got the rounds mixed up when I first tested this. So I went out and did it again, and yep, 2400 beats H110 in every combo I tried.
I wanted H110 to do better because I have a lot of it. And only 1lb of 2400.

In my 4" 686 with 2400 loaded slightly above published data and H110 at max I got the following on a rest at 25 yards.

H110 w/ CCI 550
13.5 gn
Avg 1083 fps (ES 61)
4 Inch groups
Cratered primers

2400 w/std Rem #1-1/2
More than 12.6 gn
Avg 1230 (ES 27 )
2 inch groups
no preasure signs

I have had similar results with 140 to 158 gr with 2400 beating H110 but not by this much.

Maybe its just my revolver?

Is anyone else getting this type of results from 2400 vs H110.
my 642 Airweight gets fed HS 6 and titegroup so I havnt tried it with these powders.
BTW , I seem to enjoy shooting the 180gr pills over all others. Its becoming my favorite load to shoot. Feels like a true magnum load without the sting. The penatration is extensive and I noticed the recoil of 2400 was much more pleasant too.

Dave

Hello, I have had similar results with the same bullet from rim rock in my 6" 686. 12.5 grains 2400 1171 fps av. 14 grains w296 1145 fps av. Same gun with 170 grain Keith swc 13.5 grains 2400 1167 fps av. 15 grains w296 1212 fps av.
I prefer the 2400 with lead bullets. I also think this gun runs a little slow for a 6"

Thats interesting. I wonder if the crimp is the reason for the slower speeds in your 6". Im using a heavy crimp with a Lee FCD.
12.5 gr in my 4" was still in the 1200ish.

BTW, where you getting the 170 gr Keith style? Is that from Rim Rock too?

I regard H110/W296 as a powder best used in 357 Magnum loads for a Rifle. Because even with a 158 grain jacketed bullet in a 6 inch revolver it's a bit of a "boomer". In addition it's slow enough that there is observable gas cutting in a revolver with this powder. My go to powder for Handgun loads ranges between Accurate #5 and #9 depending on the bullet weight because I've been lucky and "scored" a fair bit of #5 and #9 plus one lonely pound of #7. As for 2400, in my area that particular powder seems to be something you read about in Fairy Tales.

As for the accuracy issues noted, without using a handgun scope I am at least 8 years from being able to shoot a 4 inch group at 25 yards from a rest even if I'm cheating with reading glasses so I can see the sights. What I have observed is a 14.8 grain load of H110 with a 158 grain XTP will group at 1 inch at 50 yards from my 1892 Octagon Barrel Winchester 1892 using a rear tang peep sight and 1.63 inch from my Rossi M92 equipped with a 1.75X Nikon Monarch handgun scope. BTW, the Winchester was shot outdoors where my old eyes can still focus on both the target and the front sights with the assistance of a peep sight and the Rossi was shot indoors at a range that is a bit dark for optimum results. Have a 4 power scope on order for the Rossi just to see if I can improve those results a bit because 50 yards is a bit long for precision shooting with a 1.75 power scope.

I have found that results will vary by the revolver. Between 2400, 296/h110, IMR4227 and AA#9 one will be the velocity champ.

Using the 187 gr LSWCGC from cast performance in my 4 inch 686, AA#9 gave some 60 fps faster velocity at 1300 fps. With this type of bullet, I doubt you would notice any difference on game between a 1200 fps load and a 1300 fps load.

Probably 60% of the time 296/H110 wins the race by about 50 fps in most Magnum revolvers. That is why you need a chronograph.

Try an aperture on your glasses. Works well for my 65 year old eyes. The Merit is a good one or make your own like I do. Take a piece of electrical tape and punch a hole in it. You will have to determine the right size hole for your eyes. I put it in the top corner of my lens and just tip my head a bit when aiming.

Im afraid 2400 will go the way of lil'gun around here. I bought that lb in Alabama and wish I had bought more. I have never seen an actual bottle of Lil gun. But I hear they really did exist in the long long ago.

Thanks for the info. Thats what I figured, my revolver likes 2400. But I hear good things about AA#9. If icould get 1300 with the same chariteristics of 2400 I would use it. but I have never tried it, cuz I aint got none

Believe it or not Alliant's max recommended Blue Dot loading is hell on wheels with the 180-grain .357s from handguns. An American Rifleman article a few years back put the odd idea into my head, and now this load is the reason I keep Blue Dot around.

__________________
Now go make God proud...

My favorite load for the 185gr LSWC gas check is 14gr of W296, CCI 550 magnum primers. IIRC it's around 1150fps out of my 6.5" Ruger Blackhawk.

Yes the 170 Keith is rim rock, I also use it with HS6 for a 38+p woods load with good results. I am using a fairly heavy roll crimp on the 357 ammo and have gone further for testing and did not get any increased velocity so I backed off some to extend brass life.

Wow, I was just thinking about Blue dot when I saw your post. Bought some about a year ago and never opened it. I have loading for 300BLK for a while and Blue dot was never a high performance powder for 300 but could be used. Just never did.

Do you or anyone have a 158gr load for Bluedot? Is it good for Hard cast? I got quite a few cheap 158rs id like to try out with this powder. Hate to wast my 180s just incase its not the cat's meow.

It's great with hard cast, but not what I would use with 158s-sorry.

__________________
Now go make God proud...

Ok, fine then

There is little published data out there it seems for Blue Dot and 180gr but this is what I see as a reasonable full house load.

180 grain with gas check. Im thinking 9.0 to 9.5 gr Blue Dot.

Am I in the ball park?

Alliant used to say 9.7 with a jacketed 180-this is what I use with a Tennessee Valley Bullets hard cast. Standard primer.

__________________
Now go make God proud...

Just looking at the data, depending on bullet weight and type in many loadings 2400 gives up very little to H110/296 and in some loadings might even have a little velocity edge. I wouldn't mind having some of the slower stuff, but 2400 does anything I need and doesn't require a magnum primer.

__________________
"He was kinda funny lookin'"

I will probably use most of my H110 to load .44 Mag loads for my Marlin carbine.
I have 2400 and 300-MP for mag revolvers.

The great thing about the "Dot" powders is you can load all the handgun loads with them.
Red Dot is a great substitute for Bullseye. Sometimes you use a hair more, sometimes you use a hair less. Depends on the cartridge and load.
Green Dot gives you the medium burn rate for standard pressure loads, and Blue Dot gives you magnum pressures/performance.

They aren't the best for all loads, but they will load them all.
If only I'd stockpiled Green and Blue Dot a couple of years ago.

The fact that 2400 doesn't require a magnum primer is one reason I like it.

__________________
What would Jim Cirillo do?

We all have our favorites but mine is AA4100, it's one notch slower than #9 and the same powder as Ramshot Enforcer.

__________________
Where we go one, we go all

For years my go to powder for maximum loads in the M19
and the new 686 6" barrel revolvers was Blue Dot.

I did not buy 2400 until last year when I could not find any BD.
Both loads are about equal with a standard load of powder with
todays data out of the manuals but if you use the higher
pressure loads in the older manuals......
2400 beats out all the powders I have tried with a 158gr Jhp bullet.
I have not tried the maximum load as yet but a 98%
load is getting 1340 fps in my latest testing, which I will
probably call good enough.

I do not do bowling pins or "Steel" so I have not loaded any
bullets heavier than a 158gr lead or copper bullet, yet.

I don't waste 2400 on lead bullets, since I can get 1320 fps out of some faster powders at almost half the amount of powder
needed for 2400.

For some odd reason I just bought a large keg of Enforcer. Never used it but there was a bit of data on the jug. Gonna have to try it out. Only reason was I was at the gun show and there it was. 40 bucks. Hope it works well..But heck..it was cheap!! Like me. I also got a lb of 300MP..it was really cheap Hope it works well.

A note of caution for Blue Dot.

Towards the top of the range it goes from mild to OMG in a hurry, so be cautious.

Cold weather affects it too. It gets more energetic in extreme cold, so be aware.

I prefer W296/H110 for magnums, but in the .357 I find 2400 to be overall better. Why this is I don't know but it is.

Powder availability being what it is these days, we have to use what we find. I believe this will have a fortunate side effect in opening our eyes to what we might not have used previously.

OTOH, I have my favorites and prefer to stick with them.

Totally agree on cold weather and Blue Dot. And on avoiding load data that's published nowhere but the Speer # 10. But I use Alliant factory load data that was taken from their site that was published in the American Rifleman and, having chrono'd it in different temps, I feel pretty good about it. That said, I see Alliant doesn't presently have that data up on its site . . . so maybe you're right.

A dear departed friend (and Forum member) used to say that the only proper use of Blue Dot was as flower fertilizer . . .

__________________
Now go make God proud...

I've had better results with 357mag using 2400 and IMR4227 vs H110/W296/AA#9.

That is with a S&W and Ruger revolvers. With my model 92 Rossi and Taurus revolvers, I've had slightly better results with W296.

TrueBlue and BlueDot both work about the same but are not interchangable with other calibers.

LOL!

Same thing I used the better part of a pound for. Grew some really good swiss chard.