OP
bobthewelder
Member
And this brings us to why I have taken all you guys have said into consideration and have omitted the can of W296 from anything I own.
New to forum and S&W
- Thread starter bobthewelder
- Start date
Skip Sackett
US Veteran
Bob,
I have looked at Steve's data before. I noticed there is a lot of information on his page. Not a bad site. Just when someone posts a load, I want to know where it comes from.
He may tell us in the long dissertation on his homepage, I just haven't read it.
There is another site that has data and they post where it comes from. handloads.com
In their database there are a BUNCH of loads. Some are from "guests" but most are from a powder manufacturer. It is a good place to start for data from the web.
W296 (which is the exact same powder as H110) is a powder that is designed for use in magnum rounds. Surely you know someone that shoots one and reloads.
2400 has been used in the 38spl for years. It too is a powder that was formulated for magnum type of rounds, even reduced rifle rounds. The difference is in it's characteristics. 2400 has no problem, other than getting extremely dirty, when it is reduced. W296/H110 has some stiff warnings associated with it an reduced loads. That is why usually in manuals there is no minimum data for it. They give you only one load, the maximum.
FWIW
p.s. Don't get discouraged, friend. Doing the right thing isn't always easy, it's just always right!
I have looked at Steve's data before. I noticed there is a lot of information on his page. Not a bad site. Just when someone posts a load, I want to know where it comes from.
He may tell us in the long dissertation on his homepage, I just haven't read it.
There is another site that has data and they post where it comes from. handloads.com
In their database there are a BUNCH of loads. Some are from "guests" but most are from a powder manufacturer. It is a good place to start for data from the web.
W296 (which is the exact same powder as H110) is a powder that is designed for use in magnum rounds. Surely you know someone that shoots one and reloads.
2400 has been used in the 38spl for years. It too is a powder that was formulated for magnum type of rounds, even reduced rifle rounds. The difference is in it's characteristics. 2400 has no problem, other than getting extremely dirty, when it is reduced. W296/H110 has some stiff warnings associated with it an reduced loads. That is why usually in manuals there is no minimum data for it. They give you only one load, the maximum.
FWIW
p.s. Don't get discouraged, friend. Doing the right thing isn't always easy, it's just always right!
MakeMyNight
Member
Actually, My Speer reloading manual number #11 lists loads for 38 special +P using WW#296 and Speer 158 grain JHP/JSP bullets (9.8 grains to 10.7 grains of 296) and Speer 160 grain JSP bullet (9.5 grains to 10.9 grains 296.)
I've worked up 38 special +P loads for use in Ruger guns using WW#296 and 110 grain JHP Sierra bullets many moons ago. Those loads performed very much like Super Vel 38's.
Of course, the caveat here is the gun MUST be a strong medium or large framed revolver to use those +P loads. Don't think that I'd use them in a S&W J frame or Colt D frame.
Skip Sackett
US Veteran
I stand corrected.
Maybe a better way to put it would be, "It isn't a powder normally associated with use in the 38spl."
Maybe a better way to put it would be, "It isn't a powder normally associated with use in the 38spl."
I would suggest that the can of WW 296 is an excellent reason to by a S&W .357 Magnum revolver and .357 magnum brass.
Paul5388
US Veteran
If you had used a Super Vel bullet, it would have been almost identical. Lee Jurras commented once upon a time that he used a non-cannister H110 in his ammunition.
lafayne
Member
I have to agree with Bob. Such an investment in powder surely calls for another revolver purchase. The .357 seems logical.
Similar threads
- Locked
