WC820-Reduced Loads Using AA#9 Data

[alamogunr]

I know about the cautions against reduced loads using H110(WW296) but I don't know of any problem with reducing WC820. Mine is the lot that is close to AA#9. I'm not talking about extremely light loads but in the mid-medium range.

I realize that I could save this for heavy loads but I don't really care for max loads any more. I would like to use this powder since I have almost 16 lbs.

Any insights?

[5Shot]

Cartridge?

[alamogunr]

Cartridge?

Mostly .45 Colt but including .44 Mag and .41 Mag.

[MT Gianni]

Stick with heavy to medium heavy charges with heavy for caliber bullets and a stout crimp. IME the danger is not of an SEE but lack of a good burn with reduced loads leaves a high probability of sticking one in the bbl. Give it away or trade it for something you can use.

[Fernando]

My lot likes high bullet pull - even with the heavy's
I stick to the upper end and mid to upper weight projectiles.
Worked better in the 44mag and special than my 45.
Did some reading and am hoping to make it work for midrange rifle.

[lavenatti]

Listen to MT Gianni, I stuck one in the barrel with a mid range load a while back (.357 mag).

Oddly enough, I do not have this problem with 12 grains in a .223 with cast boolits.

[Lloyd Smale]

wc820 is aa9. Accurate arms make there start in the industry by buying surplus powders and repackaging them. When that surplus ran out they had more made to the same specs. You can get away with downloading any powder for a while MAYBE but it is not safe to drastically download aa9/wc820. If you doubt it give it a try in the 45 colt or 44mag. When you get down below book load recommendations your velocity extreme spreads will increase drastically. A mag primer helps but doesn't cure it. Use a chronograph and work slowly downloading until your extreme spreads get to just under 50fps and stop there. Theres just to many GOOD powders for doing this like unique and 2400 so theres just no good reason for pushing your luck. Steel in the face probably doesn't feel to good.

[alamogunr]

wc820 is aa9. Accurate arms make there start in the industry by buying surplus powders and repackaging them. When that surplus ran out they had more made to the same specs. You can get away with downloading any powder for a while MAYBE but it is not safe to drastically download aa9/wc820. If you doubt it give it a try in the 45 colt or 44mag. When you get down below book load recommendations your velocity extreme spreads will increase drastically. A mag primer helps but doesn't cure it. Use a chronograph and work slowly downloading until your extreme spreads get to just under 50fps and stop there. Theres just to many GOOD powders for doing this like unique and 2400 so theres just no good reason for pushing your luck. Steel in the face probably doesn't feel to good.

I never go below start loads from the manuals. In this case I was planning to start there and not go all the way to max loads. It is a narrow range but as stated, I don't care for the heavy recoil any more.

Thanks for the advice.

[runfiverun]

if your staying within it's recommended range you should be fine.
you'll have to adjust slightly for the slightly different powder of course but that's what we as reloaders do anyway.

[Lloyd Smale]

be careful. Even at 18 grains with a 250 cast in the 44mag I saw some pretty good velocity swings. on the other hand 2400 can be loaded down to a 1000 fps without problems.

[MT Gianni]

I stuck one with a 240 gr 44 Mag using starting loads from Accurate book 1. Heavy crimp and heavier bullets along with an avoidance of the bottom of the starting loads is my standard for this powder. I also use it problem free in 30-30 with 160+ gr bullets.

[leadman]

I have both WC820 and AA#9. No way are these the same powder. The size of the individual grains of my WC820 is about 1/2 the size of #9. I have to put a new seal in my Lee Pro Auto Disk measure when using it or it will leak out. It is also a lighter tan color versus the gray of #9. Charge weights of WC820 are also lower for the same velocity versus #9 in the same cartridge and bullet/boolit.
Maybe there are different lots of WC820 that are closer to #9, but mine sure is not.

[454PB]

I have also compared AA#9 and WC820 visually, and they are different. However, they both seem to be about the same burn rate (comparing velocities over my chronograph) and have the same problems if downloaded too much. I've managed to create hang fires, failures to fire, and boolits stuck in the barrel with both of them.

[runfiverun]

does the 820 seem to have a burn deterrent on it [the grey stuff] or is it just a smaller size?
[#-9 is pretty fine stuff]

[alamogunr]

A link to some info on surplus powders is here: I trust the source even though he is gone now.

http://www.castbulletassoc.org/forum...50&forum_id=23

There is some info on 4 different lots of WC820. I have seen lot numbers listed with these same characteristics but couldn't find it now. If someone wants, I will look at my jugs and get the lot # tomorrow. I know that based on information that I had at one time, my lot was like(similar burn rate, not appearance) AA#9.

[runfiverun]

if Molly wrote it you can pretty much take it to the bank.
he was a big loss to the shooting community.

[Lloyd Smale]

If you read my post youd see that aa used military surplus and pull down powders when they first got into business. When they couldn't get enough to satisfy orders they had powder made to the same specs (burning rate) as the surplus they sold. It may not look the same but you wont find a lick of difference between the burning rate of the slow wc820 and aa9. 80 years later they might use a different chemical to coat it but it burns the same. At least it has in my guns producing velocitys + or - about 20fps when shot side by side in 44 mags and 45 colts and 475 and 500 linebaughs. That's a normal swing for just lot to lot variations in powders like 2400 or 110. Back it off to lower pressures and both start giving problems at the same level too. Sorry but its the same powder. Some want to call 110 and 296 different too but there the same thing. Any difference is in your head not the gun your using it in.

[leadman]

Lloyd, I know there are different lots of the WC820, and mine must be the fastest of the bunch. In my 30 carbines it takes a couple more grains of #9 to get the same velocity as my lot of WC820. I'm only using 11.5grs of WC820 with a 120gr boolit and getting right at 1,900 fps.
The WC820 is a very fine, as in small grains and will leak out of my Lee Pro Measure if I do not install a new seal before using it. Even then I do get a small amount of leakage. It will bind some in my Redding measure as it works it's way between the body and drum. this does not happen with AA#9.
If one is cautious there should be no problem.
My lot number is 47277. I have had it for about 15 years now.

[alamogunr]

I almost forgot. My jugs of WC820 are Lot# 47320. I really don't know how long I've had it. I would guess 15+ years.

[454PB]

does the 820 seem to have a burn deterrent on it [the grey stuff] or is it just a smaller size?
[#-9 is pretty fine stuff]

WC820 is black in color and very fine grained. AA#9 is more gray in color and not a fine grained. My WC820 was bought about 20 years ago, I bought four, eight pound containers. As I recall, it was $56 per container. I also bought the same amount of WC860.

This was back around the time Bill Clinton was pushing the assault weapons ban and proposing that primers have a "shelf life". I won't even mention how many primers I bought, but I haven't had to buy any since then.