I have loaded 231 in 38, 9 and 45 for many years. Today I was thinking of doing some 38's and took a look at the new data. The recommended load for a 158 gr swc has dropped almost 25%.
Changes in 231 Charges
- Thread starter max
- Start date
running iron
US Veteran
Max, I have noticed the same thing with regards to the 45 acp, but this is data from the powder companies while the bullet makers data is still pretty much the same as it was from what I've seen. I don't think they changed the recipe, they are just worried about law suits maybe. Also i don't think everyone is real careful and if you are at the old max and your scale is off it could cause problems. I don't know, but there is a much greater safety margin now days for sure. The only powder I'm aware of that has changed is 2400 as far as handguns go. I have also noticed that AA#5 gives me higher velocities than what Accurate Arms lists. This is the only powder I have used that gives higher than listed velocities in general. In the Lyman 3rd edition "Pistol& Revolver" handbook, a very good book, it lists for a 230gr. Speer TMJ bullet 5.2grs. of 231 as a starting load and ends with 5.8grs. While Hodgdon's max load is 5.3 grs. of 231. I always look at what the bullet makers list for their bullet for max loads.
Last edited:
What are you comparing it to? I have the Hodgdons 2009 "Manual" magazine and it is the same for the 38 158 SWC? On the web site.
OP
I am looking at older WW books and the current.
I see WW mentioned a lot. I gather it is Winchester but have never seen a Winchester manual?? Just what is listed on Hodgdons Is it something still available?. I have a 1997 Hodgdons paper "manual" but they did not have the Winchester name then, I will check it in the morning for HP 38 loads.
One of several disappointing things that happened when Hodgdon took over distribution of Winchester's powders is that the data for 231 was matched DOWN to HP38 data from the Hodgdon records.
The companies that put out pamphlets, manuals and websites do not re-shoot their data every year, which is why you can see the same data from year to year in their media. However, when another company takes on responsibility for publishing data for a line of powder they took over, they go to the ultra-safest data out there. (Same thing happening with Western Powders and Accurate Arms powders.)
Now, how did Hodgdon get the lighter data to begin with? Well, ugly truth is that W231/HP38/SMP231 has a rate that fluctuates pretty drastically over time. In the 26 years I've been using and buying it, I've had lots that wouldn't cycle the action on some of my 9mms until I got about .5 grs over the published max load... On the other hand, as you can see by the lighter load data, sometimes the lots come in a lot quicker -- closer to Bullseye or Red Dot, than where 231 usually sits.
The bottom line is, with a chronograph, close watching for pressure signs, and working up your loads a-new whenever you switch lot #s, I would pretty much ignore the published data.
If your current lot of 231 shows no pressures and gives "about-right" velocities with the old load, than keep using it. If it's a lot faster and showing flattened primers, than you know you've gotten ahold of a faster lot. If it's shooting slow and the cases are sooty, you may have gotten one of the rare slow lots.
At one time, I had several 8-lb jugs, some 1-lbers, and a large crate (100-lbs) of 231, and I seriously considered blending it all together in a cement mixer to give me ONE burn-rate of it and (hopefully) negate the extra-slow and extra-fast lots, but I never did...
The companies that put out pamphlets, manuals and websites do not re-shoot their data every year, which is why you can see the same data from year to year in their media. However, when another company takes on responsibility for publishing data for a line of powder they took over, they go to the ultra-safest data out there. (Same thing happening with Western Powders and Accurate Arms powders.)
Now, how did Hodgdon get the lighter data to begin with? Well, ugly truth is that W231/HP38/SMP231 has a rate that fluctuates pretty drastically over time. In the 26 years I've been using and buying it, I've had lots that wouldn't cycle the action on some of my 9mms until I got about .5 grs over the published max load... On the other hand, as you can see by the lighter load data, sometimes the lots come in a lot quicker -- closer to Bullseye or Red Dot, than where 231 usually sits.
The bottom line is, with a chronograph, close watching for pressure signs, and working up your loads a-new whenever you switch lot #s, I would pretty much ignore the published data.
If your current lot of 231 shows no pressures and gives "about-right" velocities with the old load, than keep using it. If it's a lot faster and showing flattened primers, than you know you've gotten ahold of a faster lot. If it's shooting slow and the cases are sooty, you may have gotten one of the rare slow lots.
At one time, I had several 8-lb jugs, some 1-lbers, and a large crate (100-lbs) of 231, and I seriously considered blending it all together in a cement mixer to give me ONE burn-rate of it and (hopefully) negate the extra-slow and extra-fast lots, but I never did...
MDaly
Member
Actually, we are not afraid of law suits. Why should we be? In more than 60 years of producing data we have never been sued over published data.
What you see in published data from the powder companies and most bullet companies is no more than a report of what happened with 1 set of components, fired thru a SAAMI test barrel, by 1 person, on one 1 specific day, under 1 set of ambient conditions. If any of these is changed, the answer is different. As a matter of fact, shooting the same ammo on consecutive days will give a different set of data for each day.
Most of us in the industry follow SAAMI standards in regard to our test equipment. The barrels are custom made to a very tight tolerance and they are mounted into a Universal receiver. Each barrel is referenced with SAAMI standard reference ammunition to determine the + or - correction factor of the barrel. The brass is calibrated in a special fixture so that we know the correction factors to use for our test brass. Our piezo electric force transducers are calibrated and certified by an outside laboratory to insure accuracy of the readings. We use Oehler System 83 programing and hardware as it is the standard in the industry for gathering pressure and velocity data.
There could be many, many reasons why you might see data move up or down. The older the data, the more the chance it will change. Think about primers. The primers made years ago were not as efficient at igniting the powders. The improved technology let's us see true pressure as it really exists. The crusher system (CUP and LUP) are not accurate at high or low pressure as the collapse rate of the metal crusher varies under differing pressures. It is not uncommon to look at CUP data vs. PSI data and see that the crusher could not capture the accurate max peak pressure. It is very possible that different bullets, brass or primers were used when the data was reshot. Think of the difference in results if a Hornady bullet is used for one set of data and a new set of data is shot changing the bullet to a Barnes bullet. Both are good bullets but very different in the pressure they produce.
The company introducing a new cartridge asks the SAAMI Technical Committee to review the desired working pressure in PSI or CUP or both, velocity range, and dimensions. An agreement is reached and we move on with the process
Historically, old cartridges used the crusher system exclusively. Later, cartridges were introduced with both systems and some older cartridges were given piezo system standards. Today, almost everything is done piezo electric. Some older cartridges are still using the crusher system. Some labs choose to work with the crusher system as it is cheaper. Either system can be used as long as a standard exists.
Of course, anyone can bring out any cartridge they want loaded to any level they want and not use SAAMI. Not everyone is a member. It just makes things more difficult for everyone when there is no set performance standard.
As for formula changes in Winchester branded powders. Nope, it has not happened since we took over the marketing and distribution of Winchester smokeless propellants. The powders remain made in the same plant, by the same people, to the same formula as they have been for many years.
I really don't spend much time on this forum so it is probably a waste of time to ask me any questions here. BUT, if anyone has any questions or wants to ask any questions about Winchester, Hodgdon, IMR, GOEX powders, feel free to call me on my dime. 800-622-4366 M-Thu, 7:00 AM to 5:00 PM Central time. If you don't get an answer it's because we get lots and lots of phone calls tis time of year. Keep trying and you will get through. Ask for me and tell me you saw the number on the S&W forum.
Mike Daly
Customer Satisfaction Manager
Hodgdon Powder Company
What you see in published data from the powder companies and most bullet companies is no more than a report of what happened with 1 set of components, fired thru a SAAMI test barrel, by 1 person, on one 1 specific day, under 1 set of ambient conditions. If any of these is changed, the answer is different. As a matter of fact, shooting the same ammo on consecutive days will give a different set of data for each day.
Most of us in the industry follow SAAMI standards in regard to our test equipment. The barrels are custom made to a very tight tolerance and they are mounted into a Universal receiver. Each barrel is referenced with SAAMI standard reference ammunition to determine the + or - correction factor of the barrel. The brass is calibrated in a special fixture so that we know the correction factors to use for our test brass. Our piezo electric force transducers are calibrated and certified by an outside laboratory to insure accuracy of the readings. We use Oehler System 83 programing and hardware as it is the standard in the industry for gathering pressure and velocity data.
There could be many, many reasons why you might see data move up or down. The older the data, the more the chance it will change. Think about primers. The primers made years ago were not as efficient at igniting the powders. The improved technology let's us see true pressure as it really exists. The crusher system (CUP and LUP) are not accurate at high or low pressure as the collapse rate of the metal crusher varies under differing pressures. It is not uncommon to look at CUP data vs. PSI data and see that the crusher could not capture the accurate max peak pressure. It is very possible that different bullets, brass or primers were used when the data was reshot. Think of the difference in results if a Hornady bullet is used for one set of data and a new set of data is shot changing the bullet to a Barnes bullet. Both are good bullets but very different in the pressure they produce.
The company introducing a new cartridge asks the SAAMI Technical Committee to review the desired working pressure in PSI or CUP or both, velocity range, and dimensions. An agreement is reached and we move on with the process
Historically, old cartridges used the crusher system exclusively. Later, cartridges were introduced with both systems and some older cartridges were given piezo system standards. Today, almost everything is done piezo electric. Some older cartridges are still using the crusher system. Some labs choose to work with the crusher system as it is cheaper. Either system can be used as long as a standard exists.
Of course, anyone can bring out any cartridge they want loaded to any level they want and not use SAAMI. Not everyone is a member. It just makes things more difficult for everyone when there is no set performance standard.
As for formula changes in Winchester branded powders. Nope, it has not happened since we took over the marketing and distribution of Winchester smokeless propellants. The powders remain made in the same plant, by the same people, to the same formula as they have been for many years.
I really don't spend much time on this forum so it is probably a waste of time to ask me any questions here. BUT, if anyone has any questions or wants to ask any questions about Winchester, Hodgdon, IMR, GOEX powders, feel free to call me on my dime. 800-622-4366 M-Thu, 7:00 AM to 5:00 PM Central time. If you don't get an answer it's because we get lots and lots of phone calls tis time of year. Keep trying and you will get through. Ask for me and tell me you saw the number on the S&W forum.
Mike Daly
Customer Satisfaction Manager
Hodgdon Powder Company
running iron
US Veteran
That is why I prefer to use the bullet maker's data, a .429. .4295 and a .430 size bullet should have different data. Look at the Remington Golden Saber bullet, it has it's own data because of it's bearing surface being different. I don't think you can say that you are not concerned with law suits, that just doesn't make sense to me. You have no choice but to be conservative. The powder companies have to look at the worst case applications.
Where did you find load data for the Remington GS bullet?. I use their factory loads and just bought some bullets to load myself. None of my manuals list the GS bullet. Mostly just XTP's and Gold Dots
nicky4968
Member
- Joined
- May 31, 2003
- Messages
- 1,788
- Reaction score
- 1,065
- City & State/Province
- Littleton, Colorado, USA
On what other forum could you find answers to questions from industry representatives?
Not only do we have the resource of many members with years of experience, we have the resource of members with access to materials and instruments we have only read about.
This is why I prefer this site to all others.
Not only do we have the resource of many members with years of experience, we have the resource of members with access to materials and instruments we have only read about.
This is why I prefer this site to all others.
running iron
US Veteran
I sent you all the information but for anyone else It's in the "The Complete Reloading Manual for the .45 A.P.C.". They compare a lot of bullets and show bullet makers data as well as powder companies data. This was in the Accurate Arms Powder section. There is conflicting data when you start to compare, so it's wise to chronograph your own findings, but as far as AA goes, they seem to have a better grip on what their powders will do. They used a 1911 with a 5" barrel for their tests according to them.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
