I wasn’t able to find 2400 which is my go-to powder for my .38 special Heavy Duty reloads. I settled on 296 which I found at Midway but then immediately had doubts after reading that 296 really isn’t suitable for the .38 special. I remembered that I had two old reloading manuals that my brother had given me. I was surprised to find .38 special loads in both using 296. In the Sierra 2nd edition they list 11.6 and 12.1 gr. 296 with 158 gr. bullets. The 12.1 is listed as a max load. The Speer #10 manual lists 10.7 and 9.8 gr. of 296. The 10.7 is designated as a +P load. I was wondering if anyone has any experience with these loads or any advice using 296 in the .38 special. I want to emphasize that I’m using 296 to develop loads for my Heavy Duty only. I’m trying to duplicate the same performance I’ve gotten from 2400. Thanks in advance.
Winchester 296 For .38/.44 HD
- Thread starter keithpip
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
I think 296 requires pressures very near magnum loads of 35,000 PSI for the .357. .38/.44 .38 SPL loads are way below that. But I suppose you could load .38 brass to that level if you dare.
296 and H110 are the same powder. Hodgdon doesn't list H110 for 38 Special even in +P loads but does list it for 357 Magnum. The older reloading manuals seem somewhat less conservative than current ones which may explain the use of 296 for 38 Special. Since you're loading for an HD using the older published 296 loads shouldn't be a problem.
That said, I use Titegroup and HP38 for 38 Special even in my HDs.
296/H110 works great in the 22 Jet though and the 300 Blackout too.
Jeff
SWCA #1457
That said, I use Titegroup and HP38 for 38 Special even in my HDs.
296/H110 works great in the 22 Jet though and the 300 Blackout too.
Jeff
SWCA #1457
STORMINORMAN
Member
If the OP could describe the desired performance using 158gr bullets he was getting using 2400 it would perhaps make commenting a bit easier...?
Cheers!
Cheers!
"I was wondering if anyone has any experience with these loads or any advice using 296 in the .38 special. I want to emphasize that I’m using 296 to develop loads for my Heavy Duty only. I’m trying to duplicate the same performance I’ve gotten from 2400."
As a match director for IDPA, I answered this question about 20 yrs , "Legal but not advisable." After a person tried this and other questioned loads, I can say from observation that it will NOT give you the same performance as 2400. I use 296 for .410 shotgun and .357 full loads for hunting. Reduced loads with 296 leave me with the impression of playing on the ragged edge for no advantage, and the chrono of such loads is not reassuring to me.
As a match director for IDPA, I answered this question about 20 yrs , "Legal but not advisable." After a person tried this and other questioned loads, I can say from observation that it will NOT give you the same performance as 2400. I use 296 for .410 shotgun and .357 full loads for hunting. Reduced loads with 296 leave me with the impression of playing on the ragged edge for no advantage, and the chrono of such loads is not reassuring to me.
Last edited:
Winchester 296
What I was attempting to do with 2400 was to duplicate the original factory .38/.44 ammo. I believe I did this with help from the information on this forum. I started with 10.2 gr. 2400 and my cast 158 gr. LSW bullets. I eventually worked up to 12.0 gr. 2400 with no problems whatsoever. I stopped there.
What I was attempting to do with 2400 was to duplicate the original factory .38/.44 ammo. I believe I did this with help from the information on this forum. I started with 10.2 gr. 2400 and my cast 158 gr. LSW bullets. I eventually worked up to 12.0 gr. 2400 with no problems whatsoever. I stopped there.
296 is a good powder for some calibers . There are other powders available that are better for what you are trying to do. Try something else or go to a couple gun shows till you find some 2400 and buy what you may need. I see 2400 regularly and have 3 or 4 of the old square metal cans from long ago. sealed even.
DWalt
Member
Why don' you try loading 296 about like 2400? I'd bet it would work OK. Just load a few rounds in the 12 grains range as a test.
Last edited:
Dennis2149
Member
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2022
- Messages
- 82
- Reaction score
- 102
For what it's worth, I've tried using 2400 at the levels mentioned in .38 special 158 LSWC for a 38/44. Too much unburnt powder for my liking. Stings my cheek at the shooting bench. Bullseye and Unique do better for me.
STORMINORMAN
Member
Which chronographed at (WHAT?) fps...
Cheers!
P.S. If it is up around 1150fps it is doubtful 296/H110 would be a prime candidate in 38 Special brass: there are other powders that might be more applicable, CFE-Pistol & possibly Longshot come to mind.
Last edited:
3rdgeargrndrr
Member
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2014
- Messages
- 1,162
- Reaction score
- 1,193
Couldnt agree more with this
I could run it in quickload for theoretical performance but thats not a suitable powder for 38 in general.
Perhaps loaded hot (above 38+p pressures) with a very heavy crimp and magnum primer but I presume there would still be lots of unburnt powder.
If you do run this powder make sure you mark it very clearly that its for use in a 357 chambered gun.
DWalt
Member
The way to find out how good or how bad 296 is, load some test rounds with the 296. I would do a program of loading at least ten rounds each at 10, 10.5, 11, 11.5, and 12 grains and fire for effect. It would best if you have a chronograph so you know what is happening. The original .38-44 loads produced a MV in the mid-1100s. That was probably from a 6" barrel. Note that all original rounds used metal capped bullets with a lead bearing surface to the rifling, not jacketed. 150 and 160 grain bullets were typical. I believe the best bullets to duplicate the original ballistics should be 158 grain lead SWCs. I would also suggest using either SR or SPM primers.
Last edited:
296 does not perform well at less than magnum pressure levels. Original 38/44 velocities were only about 1150 fps with a 158 gr lead bullet out of a 6 & 1/2" barrel. Easy to achieve with medium burn rate powders like Longshot and Power Pistol.
I do not think H110/W-296 would be a good choice for 38/44 HD. I know that since the panicdemic, 2400 has been nearly impossible to find, but H110/W-296 has an even slower burning rate than 2400 and 2400 is about the slowest burning powder one would want to use for 38/44 HD loads.
Model19man
SWCA Member
W296 may be dangerous in a 38 Special. I would not try it. Too slow.
DWalt
Member
Would you care to explain why you believe it is dangerous?
Model19man
SWCA Member
I have shot a lot of W296 in 357 Magnum. Unlike 2400 the loading manuals state for W296 "Reduced loads are not recommended".
There is no data for 38 Special because that would be unsafe.
I would think Unique would make a good substitute for 2400 in that caliber.
Model19man
SWCA Member
I agree, but there are lots of powders on the market that would work for that load. W296 is not one of them.
SGT ROCK 11B
Member
For what the OP wants I would go with Unique Powder. JMHO
