H 110 vs. W 296 in .44 Magnum, which gives best accuracy?

[Marksman]

I am going to load some hunting ammo for my Ruger 77/44 .44 Magnum
and will be using Hornady 240 gr. XTP bullets. My powder of choice is H 110, due to the continuing powder shortage I'm not sure that I'll be able to find any. My question is this, since H 110 and Win 296 are considered ballistic twins is there much difference when loading one powder versus the other? So far I have found neither of these powders, I was able to find some Blue Dot. Has anyone loaded Blue Dot under 240 XTP's? Were you able to develop accurate loads using Blue Dot?

 

[dennis40x]

H110 and W296 are one in the same. There is no difference other than lot variation.

 

[Skip Sackett]

Since you live in the "GREAT WHITE NORTH".........

Blue Dot may not be the best because of the cold weather we encounter here in Hoosier Land!

It has been noted for years and years that Blue Dot is extremely temperature sensitive below freezing. Worse as it gets colder than that. Pressure spikes are the "norm" with this power in the winter.

If it were me, and I wanted H110/W296 and it wasn't available, I think I would use Accurate Arms #9 next and then 2400. Lil' Gun is my powder of choice for those loads at present but I am becoming increasingly apprehensive as I check out some of the information coming out lately.

Have you done any tests as far as accuracy with that rifle yet? I had a friend who's dad couldn't get anything better than 6" groups @ 100 yards with one.


FWIW

 

[Marksman]

I have some ammo loaded with 2400 and Unique, I'll continue to hunt for H 110 and W 296 and forget about Blue Dot.

 

[H Richard]

H110 and W296 are identical, and made by the same manufacturer. I prefer AA#9, or IMR4227 for full power loads.

 

[DonD]

Lil' Gun is my powder of choice for those loads at present but I am becoming increasingly apprehensive as I check out some of the information coming out lately. FWIW

What have you heard about LilGun? Hodgdon is very bullish on that powder. Thanks, Don

 

[ArchAngelCD]

I'll add my voice to the rest, W296 and H110 are the same exact powders and it's been verified by Hodgdon.

As for Lil'Gun, according to the load data when using a 180gr bullet in the .357 Magnum Lil'Gun will deliver the highest velocity of any powder while producing the least pressure. I don't know how that's achieved but it's true. On the other hand, in a .44 Magnum there really is no bullet weight where that's completely true and with lighter bullets there is actually more pressure than with W296/H110. However, when you load a 210gr bullet even though the velocity is slightly higher with Lil'Gun so is the pressure. When you load a 240gr bullet the pressures and velocity is almost exactly the same so if you can find Lil'Gun I see no reason not to use it, especially since it's a clean accurate powder. By the time you get to a 300gr bullet the pressures are starting to drop (by a slight margin) but so are the velocity numbers. IMO using Lil'Gun in a .44 Magnum will produce no significant advantage like it does with heavy bullets in the .357 Magnum but in turn it's not a disadvantage either.

IMO W296/H110, AA#9, 2400, 4227, Lil'Gun and Enforcer will all do a good job in both the .357 Magnum and .44 Magnum. It all comes down to what you and your handgun likes best. Also IMO reloaders use the product from the company they are most comfortable with. If they like Accurate Arms powders they are likely to use AA#9 for Magnum loading. If Alliant is their preference than 2400 will probably be their choice and so on. Personally I use W296/H110, 2400 and Lil'Gun for my Magnum loading depending on the application.

 

[Treeman]

Lil' Gun is my powder of choice for those loads at present but I am becoming increasingly apprehensive as I check out some of the information coming out lately.

FWIW

Come now Skip, you who cavort with abandon in regions where angels fear to tread (Speer#8/SR4756) surely must not be discouraged by a few erosion rumours?- I admit that there are some daunting posts regarding lil gun and forcing cone erosion but the powder has been out for years and except for the recall of one batch it has been loaded a lot without problems. I 'm concerned but skeptical about the supposed gun damage.

 

[running iron]

I just got some 2400 and could not find 296 or 110. 2400 will work very well and AA#9 is also a very good choice if you can find it. I'd try to stick with the slower burning powders if you can.

 

[sonny]

Lil' Gun is my powder of choice for those loads at present but I am becoming increasingly apprehensive as I check out some of the information coming out lately.
FWIW

Bob Baker (Freedom Arms) has written that his company has seen numerous barrels damaged by using Lil Gun. They did comparison studies using the same gun and H-110 and Lil Gun, chopping off the barrel and rethreading as they went through the experiment. Heavy loads of Lil Gun heated up the gun to the point of actual metal flow, apparently due to the increased proportion of nitroglycerin in Lil Gun.
I like H-110 for heavy loads and 2400, HS-6 and Unique for lighter loads.
Sonny

 

[Littledragon777]

I have been loading AA#5 in my Super Redhahk using XTPs and they have been delivering exceptional accuracy for me.

 

[Skip Sackett]

Quite a choice of words!

cavort with abandon

I 'm concerned but skeptical about the supposed gun damage.

Literary license allows for you to make such a statement but nothing could be further from the truth. I cavort without abandon, dear friend! Simply treading on paths already trod. If I was to cavort with abandon I would go even higher than the Speer #8!

I guess I too am a bit skeptical about the supposed gun damage but then again, I'm not using Lil' Gun in revolvers too much. Most, 99.9% of my 44Mag loading is for Marlin 1894 lever guns.

FWIW

 

[Skip Sackett]

Heavy loads of Lil Gun heated up the gun to the point of actual metal flow,

Was this in the 44Mag or another caliber?

 

[semperfi71]

H-110 and 296 will give different levels of accuracy in the same handgun with the same loads.

Plus one handgun will shoot 296 more accurately and then another handgun will prefer H-110.

Therefore I respectfully disagree with those here who say that both powders are one and the same.

Same goes for any other powder.

If you want the most accurate "magnum" load for your .44 magnum handgun then you must get all the various "magnum" powders and try each one with all other components remaining the same.

I would not advise Bluedot. It now appears it is very unreliable in pressure and supposedly the manufacturer has even advised not to use it in .41 Magnum loads at all.

I hope this helps.

 

[Skip Sackett]

semper,

I think you need to have just a tiny bit more information given to you. H110 & W296 ARE THE EXACT SAME POWDER according to the manufacturer.

It isn't OUR opinion, it is THEIR information given to the public. Call Hodgdon. Speak to the technician, his name is Mike. He will verify that they are the same powder. That's not to say that there isn't variations between lots and in that manner you may have accuracy differences, no more than from lot to lot of any powder.

Don't believe us, check it out for yourself. Just a simple phone call and you will know for sure.

Hope this helps.

 

[Gun 4 Fun]

Skip-
I have been in contact with Bob Baker of Freedom Arms myself. He assured me yesterday that the trouble with Lil'Gun was with other high intensity rounds as well as the .454. I asked him, because that is/was my favorite powder in my .475 Linebaugh. I won't be using it anymore after hearing their experiences with it. It only took a couple hundred rounds to ruin one mans barrel. It was replaced for the third time before they got it figured out.

Sonny's post is right on, and that same info is posted on another forum that Mr. Baker visits.

 

[Gun 4 Fun]

semper,

I think you need to have just a tiny bit more information given to you. H110 & W296 ARE THE EXACT SAME POWDER according to the manufacturer.

It isn't OUR opinion, it is THEIR information given to the public. Call Hodgdon. Speak to the technician, his name is Mike. He will verify that they are the same powder. That's not to say that there isn't variations between lots and in that manner you may have accuracy differences, no more than from lot to lot of any powder.

Don't believe us, check it out for yourself. Just a simple phone call and you will know for sure.

Hope this helps.

This is correct.

Also, 231 and HP38 are the exact same powder. It all comes from the same dispenser. It simply goes into different canisters, depending on which brand they are running that day.

I have talked to Mike myself, on several occasions, and he said that the differences between any of these powders in performance, is only the difference between lots and that, that is normal.

 

[Treeman]

Skip, -Yes,'twas definitely literary license and satire-I've read enough of your posts to know that you use caution out in the handloading hinterlands. I'm bummed by these reports re lil gun. I have worked up some dandy loads with it.

 

[Skip Sackett]

NO PROBLEMO, Friend!

Skip, -Yes,'twas definitely literary license and satire-I've read enough of your posts to know that you use caution out in the handloading hinterlands. I'm bummed by these reports re lil gun. I have worked up some dandy loads with it.

I'm having some personal issues with the Lil' Gun information as well. I WANT to use it because of the performance increase BUT struggle with the LOGIC behind having a powder that is going to do damage to my "babies", so to speak.

I did some investigation on developing loads using it for my 44mag, which for the most part are for rifle loads, so it makes sense to me to use it.

The forcing cone issues are common for ALL ball powders at magnum levels, from what I know. Case in point: H110/W296 and 357Mag loads in M28s that friends of mine have. Lots of top strap erosion and such with that powder too. Haven't heard anything bad about AA#9 or 2400 though. Maybe, just maybe, we will all go "backwards" and start using the old workhorse 2400 for our magnum loads after all!

 

[fredj338]

semper,

I think you need to have just a tiny bit more information given to you. H110 & W296 ARE THE EXACT SAME POWDER according to the manufacturer.

It isn't OUR opinion, it is THEIR information given to the public. Call Hodgdon. Speak to the technician, his name is Mike. He will verify that they are the same powder. That's not to say that there isn't variations between lots and in that manner you may have accuracy differences, no more than from lot to lot of any powder.

Don't believe us, check it out for yourself. Just a simple phone call and you will know for sure.

Hope this helps.

It is true today. Back before Hogdon bought Win. powders out, they were diff. only slightly but diff. TOday's lots are the same & use the same data.
I load & shoot a lot of 44mag over the eyars & like H110 but only for full power max loads. For a little broader load range, I like 2400, especailly w/ lead bullets. I have recently bought some AA#9 I want to try but would be happy loading full power stuff w/ H110 or 2400.

 

[canoe on the yukon]

Fred,

I respectfully disagree.I believe that H110 and W296 have ALWAYS been the same.Same powder but marketed by two seperate companies.The fact that two companies later merged has nothing to do with the contents in the cans.

 

[BruceM]

H110 was a surplus powder used by the military for M1 carbine ammunition (according to Hodgdon). W296 was a similar propellant developed by Olin for use in .410 shot shells among other things. In the beginning, they were slightly different but so close that, for all intents and purposes, loading data was identical as were the requirements that it be used only in full power loads. The two even smelled different. Once the supply of surplus powder ran out in the early 1980's, that all changed.

When I started using it in the late 1970's, H110 worked better for me with cast bullets while W296 was the ticket for jacketed. That is now a moot point.



Bruce

 

[canoe on the yukon]

I stand corrected.I used H110 (a couple of pounds)in 1970 and a few years later,used W296.

I still have a Sierra manual printed in 1970 which gives data that is IDENTICAL to today except for the fact that 50 FPS along with the accompanied charge weight is cut off from the top end.

Example.....In 50 FPS increments,charge weights are listed up to 1450 FPS where the current manuals only go up to 1400 FPS.

 

[colo native]

Keith's load 24,24,24.+ 240 gr pill, 24 gr, 2400...

 

[canoe on the yukon]

Keith's load 24,24,24.+ 240 gr pill, 24 gr, 2400...

I'm not sure I follow you.Keith's recommended load in the 44 magnum is quite well known......Keith's bullet design of a 250 gr SWC/22 gr of 2400,standard large pistol primer.

Where are you getting "24" from?

 

[Skip Sackett]

??????????????????????????????????????

H110 was a surplus powder used by the military for M1 carbine ammunition (according to Hodgdon).

Bruce, when H110 is sold as a surplus powder, or rather it's equivalent, it is called WC820. I have a gallon jug of the stuff that is pulled down from 30 Carbine ammo.

Here is a picture:

You can also get some surplus powder that is called WC297. Here is an advertisement from Pat's reloading site.

WC297 Virgin, (Little slower than WC296) This OEM powder is used by commercial loaders use for 357-44 Magnum, 89.99 for 8 lbs.

Surplus powder is surplus powder, never to be compared to cannister powder. Although, the lot I have of WC820 is said to load like H110 or AA#9, depending on who you ask.

What I liked about this powder is that it was cheap! $8 per pound. Oh, no muzzle flash either!

 

[Skip Sackett]

Here is Keith's data!

I'm not sure I follow you.Keith's recommended load in the 44 magnum is quite well known......Keith's bullet design of a 250 gr SWC/22 gr of 2400,standard large pistol primer.

Where are you getting "24" from?

Here is a picture of Keith's data. Notice the 44Mag loads. 22gr Hercules 2400.

Notice this too, not everything he recommends is a "smoking hot" load! We tend to get a mental image of him shooting full house loads every time he touched a firearm.

Nothing could be further from the truth. Have you ever shot 4.0gr of Bullseye under a 250gr bullet? Talk about pussycat loads! No one ever talks about that though!

 

[colo native]

I'm not sure I follow you.Keith's recommended load in the 44 magnum is quite well known......Keith's bullet design of a 250 gr SWC/22 gr of 2400,standard large pistol primer.

Where are you getting "24" from?

Lyman book43 pg 149 235gr pb 16gr 2400= 1090
25gr 2400= 1580
235 is very close to 240, so I call it 240
I do not recomend any using this load, but as it is, it was published before lawsuits run amock...

 

[BruceM]

"Bruce, when H110 is sold as a surplus powder, or rather it's equivalent, it is called WC820. I have a gallon jug of the stuff that is pulled down from 30 Carbine ammo."

That may very well be so. All I can say is that after Hodgdon's "Surplus" supply ran out, the new cans read something like Reformulated H110" or "Newly Manufactured H110". At one time I had a really old container from the "reformulated" version but I doubt I still have it of the bottom shelf of my reloading bench. I know that WC820 is very close but have never actually used any. I also do not know if WC820 is canister grade or if you have to work up new loads after each jug is depleted.

Bruce

 

[Skip Sackett]

Not Keith's load.

Lyman book43 pg 149 235gr pb 16gr 2400= 1090
25gr 2400= 1580
235 is very close to 240, so I call it 240
I do not recomend any using this load, but as it is, it was published before lawsuits run amock...

I think the point that canoe was speaking to was this: "It may be a load, just not Keith's".

If you look at the picture I posted above, you will see his loads.

235 isn't 250gr like his bullets are designed to be so .........

Let's keep apples, apples and Keith's loads, Keith's loads.
There already is a misnomer in a ton of bullet names in regards to this. Another point I think canoe was trying to speak to. (Sorry for speaking for you, canoe! Correct me if I'm wrong!)