wc-844 ? what burn rate

[Bullshop]

I know I should have been paying atention but when the burn rate for wc-844 was posted my wife walked by naked and I was distracted for a bit. Yes kind of like the 9th grade so I missed it or them or anyway I need to find out about this powder. A kind traveler brought me a couple kegs from the other side, (see mercy visit post old board). I burned a bit today and for some reason had the idea it was close to AA-2230. The lot I have proved to be substancialy hotter at least in a 303 Britt case. What I want is a couple pins on the burn rate chart that put it on average between #? and #?. I think I remember Joe saying it was the cats meow in the 7.62x39. If so that might back up my limited testing. Thought it might give good dencity in the 303 Britt and the likes but my top loads look to be not more than 50%. Thanks to all for help, and no I wont trade any naked pictures for this imformation.
BIC/BS

[StarMetal]

Dan

844 is suppose to be like H335, but my lot seems a tad hotter or faster I guess you would say. I've used it in everything with pretty good results.

Get this, I just recently used a case full of it in my 22 Hornet and it worked pretty decent. No chance of a double charge there. It really does shine in my SKS. The surplus 4895 is pretty decent too.

Joe

[JDL]

Bullshop,
The 844 I have is lot #BAJ47683. I have shot 844 and H-335 that I have, using the same charges, and can find no difference. StarMetal is correct about it in the 7.62X39 as it works real well in mine, although I think his lot is faster burning than mine.-JDL

[TCLouis]

Bullshop,
The 844 I have is lot #BAJ47683. I have shot 844 and H-335 that I have, using the same charges, and can find no difference. StarMetal is correct about it in the 7.62X39 as it works real well in mine, although I think his lot is faster burning than mine.-JDL


I asked someplace else ad I'll try again here .. .
What bullet and charge weight in the 7.62X39?

Different sellers say different things but I think AA 2230 and H-335 are what most say. I always try to run a new milsurp powder across the Chronograph with lowest comparable loading first thing and then develop loading data from there.
Could the 303 issue just be a chamber/gun/long tapered case issue? It does seem to be on the fast end of a powder recommendation for that size case.

[StarMetal]

Tclouis

I use the lee 312155 which is a 155 gr bore rider sized to .313 over top 23 grs of 844. If you have a normal lot of this powder that burns just like 335 you can use little more. In fact I can use alittle more but that 23 grs seemed to hit my sweet spot in my Yugo SKS.

Joe

[EchoSixMike]

Since this seems to be the WC-844 thread, I'll ask here.

Anyone have any experience with WC-844 and the 45/70? Looking mainly for nice plinker(1300fps'ish) loads to be shot at 200 yd steel using RCBS 405's from WW but I'll take what I can get since I use everything from 330 Gould's to 540 Postells. Cast pics came up empty for 844 data. Thanks. S/F...Ken M

[JDL]

TCLouis,
I load 25 grains of WC-844 and a 165 grain boolit from Mountain Molds for a velocity of 1953 fps. This has produced an average of 8 groups of 1.449" out of my CZ-527.

EchoSixMike,
I'm going on memory here, understand, but several years ago I used H-335 in my .45/70 and 300 grain cast with unremarkable results. IIRC hangfires plagued me from weak pressure and poor combustion.-JDL

[sundog]

From experiments by Felix and myself, we have found that 844 (and more recently 2230-C and Data Powder 73) need some pressure to get good results. That testing was done in 32 Spcl and 30-30. 2230-C also works okay in M1 Garand jacketed loads. The loads on castpics were done by increasing charges a grain at a time until groups opened up, and then run across the chrono for the smallest group charge - and recorded as 'optimum'. I've tried it in a number of loadings with cast, but it seems to prefer the upper pressure reaches - not conducive for powder puff loads. sundoog

[9.3X62AL]

WC-844 was specifically developed for the U.S. Rifle, M-14, M-59 and M-80 loadings (150 grain bullet @ 2750 FPS, 50K PSI max avg pressure) and 46.0 grains powder weight. Match loadings (M-118) using a 175 grain FMJ--used 44.0 grains of WC-844 for 2550 FPS and 50K PSI max avg pressure. Other powders used in this caliber included IMR-4895 and IMR-8208 to gain the same performance, just used lighter powder weights. HTH.

[EchoSixMike]

OK, guess I'm sorta stuck with IMR 3031 then. Not that I had any problems with performance but long stick powders are a PITA. I was hoping a surplus powder would work.

Anyone try W-820 or anything else? S/F...Ken M

[BCB]

EchoSixMike,
My lot of WC-844 is approximately 1 grain slower than H-335. I have shot both powders side by side with the same cartridges and the chrony indicates what I have just said. My lot number is 726. That is the number that is on the 8-pound jug I got from McDonalds a couple of years ago. In all actuallity, I doubt that is the original lot number. It might be a number that McDonald uses as a reference for himself. I use it in the 7-30, 30-30 and the 223. Good-luck...BCB

[EchoSixMike]

OK, jumped in with both feet. Got 8pdr's of WC844, IMR4895, WC820 and WC680 coming. Intent is to try the 844 with moderate lever gun loads and 405gn commercial cast(they were free) bullets and see what develops from the 1886. I'm also going to use that up for 223 with 50gn condums on P-dogs, so if it doesn't work for 45/70 it's no big deal.

BCB, thanks for the info regarding your WC844 being a touch slower than H335. Different lot work ups for sure, but it's nice to no they're not giving you complete fantasy data either. The local Jr team folks bought a bunch of AA2200 data powder and killed a few AR's using that stuff and 69 and 77 gn bullets. S/F...Ken M

[Scrounger]

OK, jumped in with both feet. Got 8pdr's of WC844, IMR4895, WC820 and WC680 coming. Intent is to try the 844 with moderate lever gun loads and 405gn commercial cast(they were free) bullets and see what develops from the 1886. I'm also going to use that up for 223 with 50gn condums on P-dogs, so if it doesn't work for 45/70 it's no big deal.

BCB, thanks for the info regarding your WC844 being a touch slower than H335. Different lot work ups for sure, but it's nice to no they're not giving you complete fantasy data either. The local Jr team folks bought a bunch of AA2200 data powder and killed a few AR's using that stuff and 69 and 77 gn bullets. S/F...Ken M

They still have it? I love that stuff in my .223s. I'd buy it if the price is right.

[EchoSixMike]

I think it's all gone but I'll ask next time I see the guys. It worked fine with the little 55gn pills, but just too fast for the heavy match bullets. S/F...Ken M

[Bullshop]

For those that were concerned for my safty with the wc 844 in the 303 britt I went to wc 846. At 46gn with a cci 250 mag and the fat 30 at .314" I found sweet music. A real good shooting full power hunting load that looks to be about at least 90 percent dencity. Promis to update with chrono info ASAP. Seems my lot of wc844 is a fast lot and my lot of wc 846 is way on the slow side like 4350 slow. I did seem to get better results with both wc powders with mag primers. BTW wc 846 is also courtesy of a friendly traveler, aint folks nice. Nighty night BIC/BS

[BruceB]

I have a minor puzzlement here. Although many of us say that 844 is "the .308 powder", I find that Bartlett, for one, says that 846 is actually the powder he salvages from 7.62 NATO ammo. This is the case right now on his website, and regarding 844 he only mentions its use in 5.56mm ammunition.

If 844 is in fact H-335 speed, then I already know that it won't work in my Garand. I had consistent hangfires in the .30-06/H335 loads I tried, with JACKETED bullets.

Bartlett and Widener's now have a batch of surplus 4895. Ben1025 gave me some 4895 from an earlier surplus batch, and it was fine stuff. HOWEVER....both Jeff and Widener's want $80/8 lbs, or $10.00 per pound (who says I can't do math????) This is of course the price FOB their shops. Now, adding the hazmat for Bartlett's stuff (NO hazmat if six jugs are ordered, but still...) and then adding the shipping charges doesn't make a whole lot of sense to ME. I'm in the fortunate position with my local Ace Hardware store that Hodgdon's 4895 only costs about $15.00/pound and it's always available ten minutes from home. I'd bet that buying a keg will reduce that a bit. (I just got 5000 CCI #34 Military primers from them on special order for $18.00/1000 and NO shipping charges. I think that's a deal!)

I can see that 7383, WC860 etc might make SOME economic sense, and I may try that route yet. For any of the surplus powders which come as close to Ace's price as this latest 4895...I don't think so.

[StarMetal]

Bruce

Couple things. One I have the "Black Rifle" book. It's gets pretty extensive into the M16 and covers the development of powder pretty well for it. It says that 846 was made for the M16 round after initial results with the IMR tube powder didn't perform satisfactory. Nowhere is mention of 844. Kind of confusing since in most reloading books for 223 H355 is a very recommended powder.

Two, I bought some of that 4895 from Wideners (I only live 30 minutes from them) and it's great stuff, super stuff. Smells and looks very fresh too. I'm totally satisfied with it.

Joe

[felix]

Joe, I think Bruce is correct. The 844 is meant for the 223 rounds and the 846 for the 308. I think I remember that some heavy boolit 223's did use some lots of 846, probably the faster ones. And, I also think some 308 versions used some 844's, and there probably the slower ones. Or, the vendors or the books we read may have them mixed up too. Anyway, it does not matter because we all know (by now) that some of these lots can be off by at least 2 grains worth from what was intended. All this is probably because the machines doing the loading work by volume, and there is probably a velocity tolerance to boot. Interesting, but who really cares in practice, right? We treat each lot as an independent lot without regard to the contract number. Sundog and I did a speed test not too long ago between the various 844's/846's, with labels like AA223C and Data73. The latter was really 2 grains faster than the former in the 32 winnie special. ... felix

[StarMetal]

Felix

That would make sense that the 846 was two grains faster then the 844, because like I said according to that M16 book 846 was "the" powder then were talking about. Furthermore we're talking in the early sixties when no heavy bullets existed for the 5.56, they were strictly talking powder for the 55 gr FMJ. So that would make sense to me that the 846 would be faster then 844 and not as likely used over a slower powder in the 308.

Will have to do some investigation on this. You're right it doesn't matter, but I don't like it when a book is wrong, or is it?

Joe

[StarMetal]

Felix

Read this http://www.alpharubicon.com/leo/arloads.htm

This just adds to the confusion.

Joe

[felix]

Good article, Joe. Thanks for the heads up. There appears to be confusion there too. However, no lots Sundog and I have are dirty enough to be called dirty. We are probably getting newer versions. ... felix

[StarMetal]

Felix

I gave you site to just show you the web is full of stories on those powders, not to be a smartbutt. God knows what the truth is. I know Jeff Bartlet knows about alot about the military surplus stuff like brass, bullets, powder, etc and probably gets alot of inside scoop. Maybe when they first canistered those powder they were used differently. Funny being how the 223 is alot smaller then the 308, but they share more then one powder together.

Joe

[Bullshop]

Felix

That would make sense that the 846 was two grains faster then the 844, because like I said according to that M16 book 846 was "the" powder then were talking about. Furthermore we're talking in the early sixties when no heavy bullets existed for the 5.56, they were strictly talking powder for the 55 gr FMJ. So that would make sense to me that the 846 would be faster then 844 and not as likely used over a slower powder in the 308.

Will have to do some investigation on this. You're right it doesn't matter, but I don't like it when a book is wrong, or is it?

Joe
Joe
Your saying here that 846 is faster than 844 but this week with the two lots I have and in the 303 britt case, mag primer, 190gn fat 30 it took 10gn more wc-846 at 47gn to equal 37gn wc-844. As I said earlier my lot of 844 seems especialy fast while my 846 seems very slow. The 846 I got from Bartlet in the early 90s was much faster and was my favorite 45/70 powder. This more recent lot of 846 is less dence and cant get enough in the case to get to speed. Way different color too. The fast lot was gray like pyrodex and cource grain while the new slow lot is a shinney flat ball type.
Nuf ta drive ya goofy ha !!!
BIC/BS

[Slowpoke]

Cartridges of the world 7th addition under US Military ammo shows loads using 846 in both .223 and 7.62.

For the .223 it says it was used in the ball M193, 55 gr. for use in the M-16, and M16E1
also shows it was loaded in the Ball M 855A1 which is a 62 gr for use in the M-16A2 and M249 .

WC 844 is not listed

For the 7.62, 846 is listed as being used in the Ball M-59, 150 gr. for use in the M-60, M-73 and M-14.

Also listed in the AP M61 and the M 80 ball for the same weapons.

And then for the M14 National match ammo M118 it is listed with a 175 gr. bullet

Again nothing with WC 844

Good luck

[GONRA]

Years ago, GONRA uses a lotta WC-844 in 5.56x45 62 grain green tip grain ball
and orange tip tracer reloads Just Fine.