lo po h110 ?

[XWrench3]

i ran across some load data for the 44 rem mag, using reduced amounts of h110. i thought this was one of those powders that there is a possibility of it detonating when used in smaller doses. hodgdon only gives a 1 grain variance between start and top load for this. the dadt i found goes all the way down to 16g. hodgdon says 23 to 24. has anyone here used h110 in small doses like that? (240g lswc)

[MT Gianni]

No, nor would I. Hod & Win 296 both warn about going below starting loads.

[zxcvbob]

No, with 296 and H110 you are better off starting with a maximum load and working down instead of starting with a minimum and working up.

[44man]

H110 and 296 are the same powder with maybe a touch different burn rate.
What normally happens with a reduced load is the powder fails to light and will stick a boolit in the bore. If you don't catch it and the next fires, you have a pile of metal.
This can be very dangerous in a rifle because the powder COULD ignite after the boolit gets into the bore and sticks.
Working starting loads in the .454 with the SR primer has just shown the fire to go out and ONLY max loads would fire reliably. There are NO warnings about the .454 and every book lists starting loads that can fail. We solved it by either using cut down .460 brass or opening the primer pockets and using LP mag primers for more heat.
Either way, do NOT go below starting loads in other calibers even if a large primer is used. If your case uses a small primer, don't fool around, use a max load.
There are many other powders that will not work with reduced loads, even 4759 can fail to light off.
Fast pistol powders seem to have no trouble but as soon as you get into the medium to slow burn rates, follow the book no matter what the powder.
Even the gun will have an effect. I used a popular load of 4831 in my 6.5 Swede for years with extreme accuracy. Then both my friend and I had an S.E.E event that thankfully did not damage our rifles. We both had to increase the charge over the accuracy point but I found Varget solved the problem.
We were using 46 gr of 4831 with a 139 gr bullet and that is almost max but the long throats were the problem. The bullet came out and entered the rifling before ignition. This would not happen in a modern rifle with short throats.
Never take it upon yourself to experiment, even book figures can get you in trouble.
Only with experience can you read a problem and correct it before something bad happens.
I give out a lot of load info but ONLY AFTER THEY HAVE PROVEN SAFE. In 56 years of loading something, I have never damaged a gun with my loads. I damaged a S&W barrel with factory loads but it only cost $35 for a new barrel and a blue job after removing the nickle plating.
Heed what you are told here!

[mpmarty]

I was given about eight pounds of H-110 a year or so ago. It makes great fertilizer in the garden. I won't use either H-110 or 296. Years ago Winchester pulled 296s predecessor off the market for good reason, people were getting hurt. I find that 2400 and Power Pistol will satisfy my needs in medium to slow pistol powders.

[MT Gianni]

I was given about eight pounds of H-110 a year or so ago. It makes great fertilizer in the garden. I won't use either H-110 or 296. Years ago Winchester pulled 296s predecessor off the market for good reason, people were getting hurt. I find that 2400 and Power Pistol will satisfy my needs in medium to slow pistol powders.

It does work great in the 32 H&R, 357, 44 & 45 for full power loads.

[44man]

I would not shoot anything but 296 or second, H110.
The finest magnum powders ever made.

[Frosty Boolit]

As a new reloader I took the word of the guy at the gun shop and bought a jug of 296. I just used the start loads for 158 grain .357 mag loads and they produced wicked recoil, and especially with the 170 sierra. The primers were flatter than I've ever seen on any other round I ever fired whether factory or reload so I never tried it again and instead I use AA#7 for Mag loads. I know it won't get them going as fast but my thought was that it was not as sensitive to undercharges as 296 and as a new reloader that was a sacrifice I was willing to make.

Now 3 years later I tried some H-110 in .44 mag under 240 and 180 xtps and I must say that these are some of the most powerful loads that i have ever fired but I never worried because I am using a SRH which I understand is built for heavy mag loads.

[lylejb]

no, 296 is for the big boomers, and works well for that.

My favorite for 44 mag, but only at max knots per hour.

If you want mild or medium loads for 44, there's a whole bunch of faster powders that will do that. Without the fuss and worry.

I like unique for my mellow 44 loads.

[Ole]

I was given about eight pounds of H-110 a year or so ago. It makes great fertilizer in the garden. I won't use either H-110 or 296. Years ago Winchester pulled 296s predecessor off the market for good reason, people were getting hurt. I find that 2400 and Power Pistol will satisfy my needs in medium to slow pistol powders.

Congrats you just wasted good powder on your garden.

[lwknight]

I don't know where that folklore came from but , I hope it does not spread.
Oh well... maybe the garden will grow good anyway.

I've never gotten 296 even at 100% case capacity to show the pressure signs that I can get from 2400. Besides that , the big boom and flash are cool.

[lwknight]

Frosty Bullet , the primer flattening looks to be more than you are used too because the factory ammo is watered down. If you get some 1970s 357 magnums you will see a huge difference.

[cmkiefer]

No, with 296 and H110 you are better off starting with a maximum load and working down instead of starting with a minimum and working up.

Are you serious?

[sagacious]

I would not shoot anything but 296 or second, H110.
The finest magnum powders ever made.
W296 is great stuff, indeed. Never had a stitch of trouble with it. Folks just need to follow the directions, that's all. Used properly, W296 is the champage of magnum powders.

[bigboredad]

I love 296 and its brother h110 I've found the recoil of full house loads much friendlier than a full house load with anything else including the beloved 2400.

[fryboy]

my first foray into pistol reloading was for the 357 mag and while i had loaded rifle for years i approached it cautiously , i bought new win primed brass new win bullets and of course win 296 ... i also followed the then current loading data ( from winchester of course) 2 shots ...wow holy moses , open the cylinder and looked at two very very flat primers hmmm went to eject and they were sticky..... ie; every sign of being overloaded , keep in mind that i weighed every charge ,made sure i had good crimp and all that , my mind said " this aint right" so i stuck them on the shelf until i got a tc contender , oddly enough the primers werent as flat when fired from the 10" barrel vs. the 6" barrel of the revolver , btw ? the first two blew the primer pockets in the wheel gun .... i still recall the charge and will never use it again, fast forward a couple of years and tried h110 per manual's recommendation..shot fine - go figure , i do believe that 296 and h110 are very closely related and in modern manuals list mostly identical data but it hasnt always been so ( pouring thru old manuals will confirm this ) i also came across older data that had more than the 3% reduction that is currently listed at least for h110 ,never dropped below listed start data but i'll never again try a load that the manufacturer list as " use exactly as shown" it mite be safe in ur gun it mite not be but i'd much rather not blow new cases with the first firing and as they say " your mileage may vary"

[44man]

my first foray into pistol reloading was for the 357 mag and while i had loaded rifle for years i approached it cautiously , i bought new win primed brass new win bullets and of course win 296 ... i also followed the then current loading data ( from winchester of course) 2 shots ...wow holy moses , open the cylinder and looked at two very very flat primers hmmm went to eject and they were sticky..... ie; every sign of being overloaded , keep in mind that i weighed every charge ,made sure i had good crimp and all that , my mind said " this aint right" so i stuck them on the shelf until i got a tc contender , oddly enough the primers werent as flat when fired from the 10" barrel vs. the 6" barrel of the revolver , btw ? the first two blew the primer pockets in the wheel gun .... i still recall the charge and will never use it again, fast forward a couple of years and tried h110 per manual's recommendation..shot fine - go figure , i do believe that 296 and h110 are very closely related and in modern manuals list mostly identical data but it hasnt always been so ( pouring thru old manuals will confirm this ) i also came across older data that had more than the 3% reduction that is currently listed at least for h110 ,never dropped below listed start data but i'll never again try a load that the manufacturer list as " use exactly as shown" it mite be safe in ur gun it mite not be but i'd much rather not blow new cases with the first firing and as they say " your mileage may vary"
296 and H110 are EXACTLY the same powder but Hodgdon got a different burn rate then WW did depending on how a batch tested.
Normally, H110 needed 1/2 gr more powder.
Neither powder has been a problem with pressure spikes and I have tested many loads over max.
Yes, your gun might create high pressure and is why starting loads are listed. Either powder can be used at less then max as long as you don't think less then that is better.

[zxcvbob]

No, with 296 and H110 you are better off starting with a maximum load and working down instead of starting with a minimum and working up.

Are you serious?
Yes. These powders usually give the best accuracy at or near max loads, and they are not prone to pressure spikes if you overload them.

[Lloyd Smale]

heres my take on it and you can argue it if you want. Ive allways had my best luck with mag primers using 110/296 and ill even go so far as to say that the only primer i use with it anymore is a cci 350 and ill even lump wc820/aa9 in on that. There probably isnt a more stable powder for high end loads then 110/296 and for ruger level and beyond loads there is no better powder. Unlike some ive had decent luck downloading it. Not to extreamly low levels but it will stay stable in 44s and 45s for the most part down to 1100fps with a 250 and a 1000 with a 300 or larger bullet. The trick is again to use a cci 350. When the pressure gets a bit low its tougher to light off and theres no better pistol primer for lighting off slow burning ball powders in handguns then 350s. I know 44 mag has decent luck with standard primers using it but he doesnt live where it gets real cold. Ive had squirrely readings on the chrono even with full charges of it using 250s and standard primers. Seems like the 300 grain bullets will work exceptably with standard primers and full charges but its not worth the bother to me to even use them when i have 350s. Like him ive ran into a few instances that stad. primers outshot mags but add or take away a grain more powder and the results will usually change. So anymore i just work up my loads till the 350s give me good accuracy. That way i know my loads will work in warm or cold whether there full power or slightly reduced. Bottom line is that for years about every loading manual has recomended mag primers for use with it and theres good reason. Like i said the same goes for aa9/820. You can talk to me till your blue in the face about the fact that brain pearce said there ok or aa says there ok but ive actually seen more fluxuation in velocitys using stad. primers with those powders then i have with 110/296 and have even had a number of squibs when using slightly reduced loads. Bottom line is the mildest primer i would even consider with them is a ww and anymore its either fed mags or cci mags and i lean toward about exclusively using the cci 350.

I too have a bunch of 454 loaded with 350s and 460 brass. Ive been to busy shooting deer with rifles to have the time to test them but have no doubt its the way to go. That been said I shot quite a bit of 454 in the past and hands down the best primer ive found for accuracy and consistant chrono readings is the ww small rifle. I dont know if its a bit hotter or not but substituting cci small rifle stand or feds and my accuracy usually goes to hell. Especially in cold weather.

350s are something i just cant be without. Where it be the 44 or 45 or the linebaughs or even the beowulf. You may get a bit of accuracy advantage with a certain load using a standard or another mag in the heat of the summer but how many guys work up loads when its 70 plus degrees out and then load a couple boxes for hunting season and find themselves in 30 degree or colder weather. Do some testing and youll see the drastic differnce a load with a ball powder will change when the weather gets cold and your primer is marginal.

[44man]

Lloyd makes some good points and I won't disagree.
I have hunted in very cold weather, below zero, without a problem. I can only agree that if it gets REAL cold, the mag primer should be used. I have used the Fed 150 in the .44 for over 31 years and is why I did so good at IHMSA. A missed target was 100% my fault.
The .454 is a strange puppy and SR primers will drive a guy nuts. Even at max loads I had large swings in ES's. I tried all primers and my last loads for a friend's Freedom used my cast boolit and the Fed SR mag primer. I could get 3/4" at 50 yards.
Now what I have not solved are fliers, every now and then I would get one or two even with factory loads. I don't know if it is the grip or not since I hate anything that looks like a Bisley. :veryconfu I had a SBH Bisley Hunter for a while and sold it because of the same flier problem. I just can't maintain a perfect enough grip with them and is a solid reason I will never buy a Freedom. The rubber grips on them do help but not enough for me.
I made a cutting tool to cut LP pockets in .454 brass and it works like a charm, cheaper and easier then .460 brass. Flash holes are still the right size so nothing needs done to them.
I don't have the Freedom here any more so will have to work with Whitworth's little .454 that kicks worse then his .500 JRH. [smilie=s:
If you want to see something, watch him shoot his little .500 Linebaugh---I really need to take movies of that!

[MT Gianni]

I had an early Blackhawk only load for 357 w/296 that specified a mag rifle primer. I no longer use it but got great accuracy for a 180 gr boolit.

[bearcove]

[QUOTE=44man
I made a cutting tool to cut LP pockets in .454 brass and it works like a charm, cheaper and easier then .460 brass. Flash holes are still the right size so nothing needs done to them.
QUOTE]

I've thought of doing that. Any chance I could see a picture of your cutter.

[XWrench3]

i had a couple of instances where i had trouble lighting off my 44 mag as well. i started using federal magnum pistol primers, and the problem disapeared completely, so that is all i use now. the advice many of you have given is pretty much what i had thought. if i want slower, do NOT mess with h110 for this. i dont have any problem doing that at all. i have 4 other powders, and have loaded them down to the point that i actually did stick a bullet in the bore. but that is a whold diferent story, and there is no mystery to why it happened. anyway, thanks for reinforcing what i was thinking, i will save the h110 for real full power loads which will be mostly for actual hunting, or hunting practice. as for accuracy, things would have to go pretty screwey before i would notice. with my eyes and open sights, i have to limit my shots to 25 yards in order to keep it in a realistic realm for hunting. i have no problem with that, i have rifles with scopes for anything a bit further out. some day, i will have to buy a scope for this. then maybe i will be able to use it for longer distances.

[44man]

[QUOTE=44man
I made a cutting tool to cut LP pockets in .454 brass and it works like a charm, cheaper and easier then .460 brass. Flash holes are still the right size so nothing needs done to them.
QUOTE]

I've thought of doing that. Any chance I could see a picture of your cutter.
Yes, I used a shortened no. 5 drill bit so no flutes go in the stop collar. I flattened and sharpened it. The stop collar is just brass with a setscrew.
I chuck the case and cut to the stop, then a twist with a pocket uniforming tool.
The no. 5 drill is just a tad small but a no. 4 is too large so the uniformer helps get a perfect primer fit. It doesn't really cut, sort of rubs the sides, at least I don't see chips.

[redneckdan]

H110/296/enforcer all have a place on my reloading bench. I use them for full power loads in the .357 and .44 magnum. I have done some work with the contender in .357 loading the 215gr LSWC that lyman used to offer. I've had chrono velocities exceeding 1400fps. This is all with data lyman put out some years back for the contender only. I've never had flattened primers or case failures due to these exceedingly heavy loads. Muzzle whip is impressive with the chopped 6" barrel and I have set the sound reduction curtains on fire in the basement range at tech....:holysheep

[lwknight]

357 magmun
215 grain bullet
6" barrel
1400 fps.
OH-Kay
I'm thinking you meant that the 215 grainer was in the 44 mag.

[bearcove]

The 215 was a mold for 357max, sounds doable in a contender. Thanks for the picture and the drill size 44man!
Rod