I am searching for a new load for my S&W 629. I've noted that 2400 powder is frequently mentioned for use with cast bullets. I have not seen it mentioned in the commercial manuals, e.g. Nosler, Speer, with jacketed bullets.

Has anyone used 2400 powder with jacketed 240 grain bullets?

Thank you for your time.

Don Adams
Roscommon, MI.

2400 is one of my preferred powders for 357, 41 and 44. There is a load listed at the Alliant website for your bullet with 2400.

So to answer your question, yes.

I have used 2400 for .44 Mag 240 Grain Jacketed Bullet Loads for years for Revolvers & My Ruger .44 Carbine.

Ditto on the 2400 and jacketed 240 grain bullets. I also use the Alliant recipe.

Rosco, try Lyman, Speer and Hornady. They all list 2400 loads for jacketed bullets.

Thank you for the responses. I bought two Value Pack Boxes of Nosler 240 grain softpoints back in the days of the components shortage. The Nosler Manual indicated that H110 was the most accurate powder, and that's what I used.

I am not at all happy with the groups I get with this bullet/powder combination. Nosler does not list 2400 in the Manual.

My revolver shoots very nice groups with 240 grain cast sws, with charges of Unique that vary from 7 to 10 grains. I did want to develop a jacketed load, hence the post.

Thank you again.

Alliant Powder - Reloader's Guide
I thought this was a standard load. It works well for me.

the hornaday 158 xtp in 357 and 240 xtp in the 44 mag shoot great out of my smith 686 and ruger redhawk with a stout load of 2400, out to 100yds. also with my win. 44 mag rifel and the marlin 357 rifel i can strech that out alittle farther. also 2400 is not a problem when the temps. start droping

Nothing at all wrong with using 2400 with jacketed bullets. The reason why so many reloaders mention 2400 with lead bullets, 2400 was developed when there was nothing other than lead bullets being used for handgun ammo. And before that, Bullseye was the pistol powder, Unique was the shotgun powder and 2400 was the rifle powder...

__________________
Freedom is never free!!
SWCA #3437

2400 if fine behind jacketed bullets.
H110 has a little bit of an edge on it in this role however.
the reason you see Cast and 2400 combinations as prevalent as they are is because 2400 works so brilliantly with cast. where H110 might cause leading with a cast load, more often than not 2400 solves the problem.
it does its job just as well behind jacketed bullets and lends itself better to tailoring a load as it can be reduced a good bit farther than H110

__________________
it just needs more voltage

22 gr. of 2400 is my 100 yrd. model 29-2-- 8 3/8 magnaport load with a 2 1/2 x7 Burris scope--lead gas check or jhp 240 gr. Also for my 700 Remington bolt 44 & my Marlin 1894 20" 44 rifle. 17 1/2 gr. of 2400 is a good load with a 240 lead bullet & easy on leading. 22 gr. of 2400 is a full case load with a 240 gr. bullet so you dont worry about overcharge with a good gun. A Lyman reloading manual will have everything you need.

I suggest you find some better manuals. The first 3 I picked up showed several loads for 2400 and jacketed bullets in .44 Magnum. As a mattrer of fact, 2400 was the first powder I used in .44 Mag. with jacketed bullets when I began loading the round in '80. Use it for bullets 200 JHP to 240 JSP & JHP.

My 2 favorite loads for over 40 years.....for the .44 Mag.
22.5gr 2400
23.5gr H110

both with a Sierra 240gr JHC

Terry

I use 2400 in my .357 's and my 44's .Not only is it accurate and gives plenty of velocity all achieved with non magnum Federal primers that go off every time on a tuned action...........

I'm curious why anyone would go to a bullet manufacturer for load data when the powder maufacturer [Alliant] has a website specifically for that purpose.
Alliant Manuals

tlen, bullets from different manufacturers may have different characteristics, such as slightly differing jacket alloys, different diameters (e.g. .44's can come .429 or .430), and different amounts of bearing surface, all of which would have an effect on friction in the bore and, consequently, pressure. A maximum load with one manufacturer's bullet may result in overpressure with that of another.
A powder manufacturer may provide data for a generic bullet weight, but the user is still expected to follow the warnings and good practice,
reducing the load 10% and working up to maximum. I think it's unpracticable for a powder manufacturer to test a particular loading for a particular caliber with a specific bullet weight, given the number of bullets of that caliber and weight that may be out there.

When was H-110/W-296 released? One of my old Speer manuals (might be #8) shows hotter 2400 loads than H-110.

I started loading in 1978 and H110 was around then and it was a surplus powder. I may still have one of the square black & red paper containers somewhere. W296 was available about that time also and was manufactured by Olin. Back then they were two different propellants and, as a matter of fact, W296 even smelled different than H110. That said, data for the two was so similar that it was, for all intents and purposes, identical. Over the years, the H110 containers went from saying "surplus" to "newly manufactured" and then nothing. Today, H110 and W296 are the exact, identical propellants made in the same location but with different packaging.

Maximum charges of H110/W296 will almost universally give significantly higher velocities than A2400 with the same case & bullet. Usually, they get the accuracy edge also. In addition, perceived recoil with H110/W296 seems lower than A2400. Finally, you won't get those hard little unburned kernels of propellant all over and in your gun when using H110/W296.

Some folks criticize H110/W296 because it is not suitable for reduced loads and, in fact, must be used exactly as listed in Hodgdon's data. Maximum charges should not be reduced by more than 3%-which is atypical to most other propellants. It also requires a magnum cap plus high neck tension (bullet pull) and a very firm roll crimp. The neck tension is BY FAR the more important of the two. In view of the fact that I find these to be superior propellants, it is a non-issue for me. I have never had a leading issue when using these propellants with plain base cast bullets of high quality.

For what it's worth.



Bruce

Be careful with that top load, as 2400 in recent years is slightly faster than it used to be. In the 70s, I wore out a Model 29 with 22/2400 and it was a max load then. Today it would be too much; just my experience, no slight on anyone who uses this load above.

I had this exact same experience in my first 29-2, I had the gun overhauled at the factory twice before I learned my lesson. I still use 2400 for my max loads but have cut it back a little, and that particular 29-2 gets nothing but reduced Unique and Bullseye loads these days.